DHS/ICE just dropped a recruitment ad that doesn’t read like “public service.” It reads like 

A snowy “frontier” landscape. A lone rider. A stealth-bomber silhouette overhead. And the line:

Not “we’ll enforce the law.” Not “we’ll improve the system.”

And on Instagram it’s not even a still image.  It's a Reel scored to “We’ll Have Our Home Again” (Pine Tree Riots), a track reporters have described as circulating in ethno-nationalist / Männerbund-adjacent online scenes. That pairing matters, because it turns policy into identity theater.

Is DHS shifting immigration from a solvable policy problem (capacity, process, enforcement priorities) into a membership/legitimacy story (“the home was taken; join us to reclaim it”)?

I’m not saying borders shouldn’t be enforced. I’m saying this recruiting frame selects for grievance + conquest vibes, not constitutional restraint.

If the goal is lawful enforcement, recruit around authority + due process + accountability, not “take the country back” aesthetics.

Yes, immigration enforcement is real work and the system is strained. But the fix is boring governance, not a “reclamation” anthem.

If this exact ad (same words, same vibe, same soundtrack) came from a private militia… would you call it dangerous? If yes, what makes it acceptable with a federal logo?

Politics_And_Law

*DHS/ICE just dropped a recruitment ad that doesn’t read like “public service.” It reads like **reclamation**.*

A snowy “frontier” landscape. A lone rider. A stealth-bomber silhouette overhead. And the line:

**“We’ll have our home again.”**

Not “we’ll enforce the law.” Not “we’ll improve the system.”

*Home. Again.*

And on Instagram it’s not even a still image.  It's a Reel scored to “We’ll Have Our Home Again” (Pine Tree Riots), a track reporters have described as circulating in ethno-nationalist / Männerbund-adjacent online scenes. That pairing matters, because it turns policy into identity theater.

Is DHS shifting immigration from a solvable policy problem (capacity, process, enforcement priorities) into a membership/legitimacy story (“the home was taken; join us to reclaim it”)?

I’m not saying borders shouldn’t be enforced. I’m saying this recruiting frame selects for grievance + conquest vibes, not constitutional restraint.

If the goal is lawful enforcement, recruit around authority + due process + accountability, not “take the country back” aesthetics.

**Here’s the machinery:**

- Slogan sets the moral premise (“stolen home”).
- Aesthetics supply the myth (frontier + airpower).
- Music supplies the subculture (signals who this is for).
- Recruiting converts vibe into manpower.

Yes, immigration enforcement is real work and the system is strained. But the fix is boring governance, not a “reclamation” anthem.

**If this exact ad (same words, same vibe, same soundtrack) came from a private militia… would you call it dangerous? If yes, what makes it acceptable with a federal logo?**

-----

## Sources

1. **DHS/ICE Instagram Reel** (shows the audio: Pine Tree Riots – “We’ll Have Our Home Again”)
https://www.instagram.com/p/DTTeFQriTb1/?igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
1. **JWeekly (2021)** – reporting that discusses the song as associated with Männerbund / ethno-nationalist circles
   <https://jweekly.com/2021/01/21/by-blood-and-sweat-well-get-there-yet-from-california-to-dc-disparate-far-right-factions-are-unified-by-anger/>

SourcesSources