MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘immigration’

Send in the Marines!

Posted by M. C. on June 16, 2025

“One would certainly expect the state to crack down on people engaging in violent acts in public. However, the US government, broadly defined, has scores of police forces – federal, state, and local – that would be far better suited to intervene than soldiers.”

“Twenty-plus years of war and occupation in Afghanistan prove that they are not a force capable of restoring civilian order.”

https://mailchi.mp/libertarianinstitute/this-week-at-the-libertarian-institute-olhmx6gn9t-5848831-7hv9eay4br-5851093?e=de2d0eded6

-Kyle Anzalone & Will Porter

The Trump administration is sending 700 troops to LA to put down immigration riots.

The Wall Street Journal reported:

“Marines are deploying to the Los Angeles area to protect federal buildings and personnel in the wake of weekend protests over immigration that have already led President Trump to federalize National Guard troops, defense and congressional officials said.

The troops [. . .] won’t engage with protesters, the officials said.”


The deployment came amid heated protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has carried out thousands of raids to deport illegal migrants living in the US since Donald Trump returned to office.

The protests have devolved into chaos across several LA districts. In some cases, demonstrators hurled objects and launched fireworks at riot cops, who responded with flashbangs and rubber bullets. Similar protests have erupted in San Francisco, Seattle, Dallas, Louisville, Atlanta, New York and elsewhere in recent days.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

The State Is Not Your Friend!

Posted by M. C. on August 10, 2024

Once a person frees himself from the delusion that the government is here to help, it’s much easier to make sense of its otherwise inexplicable behavior.  Think of the State as a ruthless conqueror interested only in taking everything you own.

Our governments do not care about free speech, free markets, self-government, or world peace. Why would they? Such lofty ideals only detract from their power and authority. On the other hand, censorship, regulation, bureaucracy, and constant war provide the State everything it needs to rule in perpetuity.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/08/the_state_is_not_your_friend.html

By J.B. Shurk

Right now, the United Kingdom is barreling toward totalitarianism.  After a second-generation immigrant reportedly murdered several children in a vicious stabbing attack last week, native Brits took to the streets to denounce their country’s criminally dangerous open borders.  If these outraged citizens had been members of Antifa, the press would have compassionately framed their actions as “mostly peaceful protests” deserving of praise.  Instead, because the public’s fury is directed toward one of globalism’s sacred cows — mass migration — angry parents have been condemned for fomenting “violent riots.”  Protecting children from serial killers and sexual predators, it seems, is not “politically correct.”  Of course, anyone familiar with the Rotherham grooming scandal already knew that

The problem, according to the ruling Establishment, is not that open border immigration policies have led to marked increases in violent crime and cultural hostility, but rather that ordinary citizens have begun to express their displeasure.  Commie Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has announced a two-pronged solution for combatting public dissent: (1) increased social media censorship and (2) widespread implementation of facial recognition technology to beef up the U.K.’s already robust mass surveillance.  

This exercise in raw tyranny follows Big Brother’s favorite playbook.  First, the government creates a problem that harms ordinary citizens.  Next, authorities pretend that no problem actually exists.  Eventually, citizens are forced to take matters into their own hands.  Finally, the government uses public outrage as an excuse to expand its own powers.

As in America, there is overwhelming public support in the U.K. for secure borders and controlled immigration.  Just as in the United States, both sides of the U.K.’s political Uniparty have ignored citizens’ wishes and instead flooded the country with illegal aliens who cannot easily assimilate into Western society.  After violent crime and community conflicts predictably rose, U.K. authorities were more willing to ban knives than to admit that they had put the public in serious danger.  And now that regular Brits are pushing back against the government’s criminal enterprise, the Marxist prime minister has chosen to use the crisis as a pretext for increasing mass surveillance and banning free speech.  Somewhere on a whiteboard in a Deep State dungeon, this blueprint for erecting a new world order dystopia has long been planned out.  Government officials have the blood of innocents on their hands.

Such ruling-class treachery is nothing new.  Similar blueprints for erasing freedoms and expanding government power abound.  For instance, there is the classic welfare state gambit: (1) move blue-collar jobs overseas, (2) tax and regulate citizens into poverty, (3) buy the votes of impoverished citizens desperate for handouts, and (4) keep the public dependent upon the government’s continued “generosity.”

There is the central bank funny money gambit: (1) give a small cabal of filthy rich bankers the power to print money as they see fit, (2) fund extravagant government programs with loans from the money-printing bankers, (3) artificially inflate the value of Wall Street assets while devaluing the meager savings of the working poor, (4) prop up unnatural economic bubbles with government interventions, (5) transfer all real property from the poorest to the wealthiest, (6) leave the majority of citizens in the precarious position of borrowing all their lives from rapacious creditors, (7) wait for the economy to crash like a house of cards, and (8) force all the desperate peasants into a system with central bank digital currencies that supervises their transactions in real time.  

There is the global apocalypse gambit: (1) indoctrinate citizens with the false message that hydrocarbon energy is killing the planet, (2) heavily regulate all market activity for the public’s safety, (3) tax citizens for using unapproved energies, (4) launder windfall profits to “green energy” cronies, and (5) strictly monitor all citizens’ carbon footprint from cradle to grave.  

There is the WWIII gambit: (1) promise Russia that NATO’s military alliance has no intention of expanding toward its borders, (2) spend the next three decades expanding NATO’s military alliance right up to Russia’s borders, (3) blame any Russian response on its secret desire to conquer Europe, (4) provide the European Commission with an excuse to erase national borders and build a pan-European military, and (5) give Western nations an opportunity to send able-bodied young men off to battle before they can turn their attention to matters closer to home.  

Finally, there is the global health emergency gambit:

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Other Immigration Question: Should People from Wealthy Countries Migrate to Poorer Ones?

Posted by M. C. on September 28, 2022

The problem is not that people from poorer countries are migrating to the West, but that few Westerners relocate to poor countries with their know-how and institutions.

https://mises.org/wire/other-immigration-question-should-people-wealthy-countries-migrate-poorer-ones

The immigration debate has polarized societies across the Western world. Objectors assert that the influx of migrants has corroded social relations, and defenders argue that immigrants release a dose of entrepreneurial dynamism. Debates will persist because it’s unlikely that people can be discouraged from migrating to rich countries in the West. Migrants will continuously flock to places like America and Canada, since they provide better opportunities.

Besides offering immigrants more options to build wealth, rich countries in Europe and North America also attract many through their well-endowed welfare systems. Researchers contend that welfare acts as a magnet that lures migrants to prosperous countries. The allure of welfare is so potent that limiting benefits can reduce the net flow of immigrants to host countries. Also, benefitting from higher incomes in developed countries affords immigrants the opportunity to experience a superior quality of life.

Economist Michael Clemens has opined that migration to the United States is the best strategy to lift Haitians out of poverty. For many in the developing world, migrating to a stable country with effective institutions is the most plausible avenue for self-advancement. Migrating can also lead to favorable health outcomes and improved well-being because developing countries have inferior health systems. Not only is healthcare better in rich countries, but in Europe and North America people are more likely to receive subsidized healthcare.

Living standards are substantially better in Western countries, so it’s understandable why people would endanger their safety to enter America or Europe. But perhaps the current debate is misguided. Instead, policy makers should be making the case for people in Western countries to migrate to the developing world. Human capital is pivotal to economic growth, and poorer countries suffer from lower levels of human capital.

However, human capital is not the accumulation of information but rather the application of expertise.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Massive immigration: humane or an invasion at the end of the Empire?

Posted by M. C. on April 19, 2022

by Jon Rappoport

Untangling the core values of America from the Empire of America is made all the harder by tons and tons and tons of physically and mentally destructive drugs coming up through open borders, and by many of the migrants who are coming here and overloading the system of public services, gaming the system, and voting for the system.

If you can’t see that, look harder.

The American Immigration Council reports that, as of 2019, there were 44.9 million immigrants living in the US.

In case you’ve been living in a cave, the Biden administration is trying its best to make the southern border a sieve.

But of course, this is a humane act. It has to be. Otherwise, it’s a plan to overwhelm public services, ramp up the Democratic vote, and generally stage a soft invasion whose result will be catastrophic.

For many people, 44.9 million immigrants—or the other figure I found a few months ago, 50 million—are not nearly enough. 44.9 million reflects nothing more than stone cold indifference to suffering.

“Humane” and “caring” mean there must be NO CEILING on immigration. No end to it.

In fact, you can find churches across America whose pastors and parishioners will tell you exactly that. These proud people are evidently tuned into a special broadcast by God or a special edition of the Bible.

How THEY FEEL is the most important factor. To them. Beyond that, no thinking is necessary.

Any suffering of any kind anywhere in the world that might be mitigated by living in the US has one remedy: open borders.

And I’m not even talking about the hordes of American Lefties for whom virtue signaling is a profession. For those credentialed people, life itself IS unlimited immigration.

As I’ve written before, and will write again, open borders is an elite operation, and one of its purposes is supporting the transport of drugs into the US—a trillion-dollar business involving the washing of money through major banks.

The drugs ruin and kill huge numbers of people here in America. The drugs are extremely effective weapons of war. Those who physically survive do so with addled minds.

If you need to bring yourself up to speed on this, talk to an honest DEA agent who has seen the effects up close and personal. Or someone who has lost a relative.

Drugs are taking down America. This has been going on for 50 years.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Continuing Fictitious Struggle › American Greatness

Posted by M. C. on June 2, 2021

Antifascists also blame the real or alleged Right for what its own protected groups do. Thus, when Muslim enthusiasts attacked Jews wearing Kippoth in Berlin during the recent clash between Israel and Hamas, German politician Manfred Weber (who belongs to the onetime conservative Christian Social Union) blamed the Alternative für Deutschland and the French Rassemblement National for these regrettable assaults. Weber denounced the very parties that have consistently warned against the reckless admission of Muslim migrants.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/05/30/the-continuing-fictitious-struggle/

By Paul Gottfried

Breitbart last week published a commentary about homosexuals who were demonstrating against the Israelis and calling themselves “Queers for Palestine.” The commentator reminded the activists that while the Israelis are quite tolerant of gays, the Palestinians treat them rather brutally. This may all be true but is also irrelevant for why gays, Black Lives Matter, and other groups on the intersectional Left have taken the side of the Palestinians (really Hamas) against the Israelis. They are siding with what they imagine to be a permanent revolutionary Left, all the parts of which form a harmonious whole. 

According to this enduring myth, which finds expression in, among other sources, Mark Bray’s The Anti-Fascist Handbook, the current Left is a continuation of the Communist-led Popular Front of the 1930s, while the unchanging enemy is fascism. While the fascist enemy may vary, depending on what the self-described Left decides to crusade against, the Republican Party and the Israeli government are now stand-ins for Hitler, the former apartheid government in South Africa, and other villains of the Left. 

What happens politically or culturally must be understood through these ideologically shaped lenses: Antifascists believe they are still in a struggle that erupted between Right and Left almost 90 years ago, and whomever they designate as “fascists” become the heavies in this morality play. 

There are two problems with this game. First, the Right—or what is designated as such—keeps changing so that it ceases to resemble what it once was. Second, the antifascist, pro-LGBT, feminist Left is not the equivalent of the old interwar Left. The fascist enemy, one may be led to believe from reading Bray or Jason Stanley, the author of How Fascism Works, is white, male, Christian, and a sworn enemy of Third World immigration, gay marriage, and other current sacred cows. 

Among their other enormities, fascists are also occupying land that nonwhites or Muslims are now claiming. The Israelis, for example, are surrogates for the hated Christian West, who keep postcolonial Muslim revolutionaries from taking back Palestine, where presumably they would erect an antifascist state. If there is a connection between Hitler’s Third Reich and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we may have to leave it to antifascist luminaries to explain it to us.

It is also hard to figure out how immigration restrictionists are fascists, since fascists were typically expansionists, not people who wanted to close their borders and hang out with their own kind. According to Jason Stanley, “Fascist opposition to gender studies flows from its patriarchal ideology.” It may be difficult to pin this on the interwar Right since the present feminist movement with its list of demands (for lesbians, the transgendered, etc.) did not exist in the 1930s, except as a very marginal presence. It is hard to imagine any political faction in the 1930s, whether on the Left or on the Right, coming out for “gender studies” that advocate sex-change operations and declare gender differences to be social constructs. 

Antifascists also blame the real or alleged Right for what its own protected groups do. Thus, when Muslim enthusiasts attacked Jews wearing Kippoth in Berlin during the recent clash between Israel and Hamas, German politician Manfred Weber (who belongs to the onetime conservative Christian Social Union) blamed the Alternative für Deutschland and the French Rassemblement National for these regrettable assaults. Weber denounced the very parties that have consistently warned against the reckless admission of Muslim migrants. By some peculiar logic, parties that issue such warnings are necessarily fascist or at least right-wing extremists and therefore responsible for anti-Semitic outbursts committed by groups favored by the Left. 

Even more significantly, the Left in the past, and especially Communists, were guilty of all the extreme rightist attitudes that antifascists now level against their opposition. Communist parties and leaders were explicitly homophobic, opposed Third World immigration as a danger to the indigenous working class, and in the case of leftist icon, Che Guevara, mocked the black race

The intersectional Left is mostly a contemporary phenomenon and its exaltation of Communism and other past Lefts is based largely on an effort to manufacture for itself a venerable genealogy. When the Spanish Left, which is now in power, claims as antecedents the Communists and Anarchists of the Spanish Civil War, it is giving itself a questionable past. Spanish Communists in the 1930s did not celebrate homosexuals or the transgendered; nor did they welcome to their country Muslim fundamentalists to express their antifascism. Barack Obama might have imagined that the Castro brothers, whom he fawned over like a puppy during his visit to Cuba, previewed his own radicalism. But unlike American leftists, Cuban Communists have not glorified homosexuals; they’ve imprisoned and tortured them. 

Antifascist polemicists and others on the Left like to believe they represent a side that has been struggling against the same Right for almost 100 years. But there is little evidence for this assumption.

About Paul Gottfried

Paul Edward Gottfried is the editor of Chronicles. An American paleoconservative philosopher, historian, and columnist, Gottfried is a former Horace Raffensperger Professor of Humanities at Elizabethtown College in Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania, as well as a Guggenheim recipient.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Left and Right, Many Are Turning toward De Facto Secession—and That’s Not a Bad Thing | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on March 14, 2020

Fewer Americans feel at home in this country now. On the national scale, not even commercial events like the Super Bowl can unite us at the most superficial level.

In less than eight months, the presidential election cycle ends. That used to signify a day of national relief, no matter who won. Our political warring was over at last.

Anyone remember that country?

Murray Rothbard points out that the federal minimum wage law is a “protectionist device” weaponized by northeastern industrialists against their southern competitors, who have access to cheaper labor. He also cites “safety” regulations from the central government that essentially block the transportation of goods from one region to another.

https://mises.org/wire/left-and-right-many-are-turning-toward-de-facto-secession%E2%80%94and-thats-not-bad-thing?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=0c62c6ecbc-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-0c62c6ecbc-228343965

Secession is less of a dirty word these days, but how it might actually work is a mystery. Fortunately, unless you’re a politician, there’s almost no downside. It’s a win for nationalists, open-borders advocates, and, most especially, for everyone in between.

New York splitting into two or three states, Illinoisans ditching Chicago, West Virginia welcoming in Virginia’s conservative counties, and northern Californians establishing their own State of Jefferson are a few recent campaigns.

These aren’t radical proposals, but rather a leveling up of what’s already common practice in the US. Mass exoduses from California, Illinois, Louisiana, and New York draw attention to the problems of these particular states, but why relocate if enough of your neighbors support simply redrawing state boundaries?

Immigration, abortion, gun rights, healthcare, and all the other issues that 330 million Americans bitterly fight over can be worked out in a decentralized fashion. Even the economy stands to improve if states partition into smaller units or even if they leave the US.

Aside from the frenzied “but this will cause another civil war” nonsense, the most unfounded concerns surround the economy. The fussbudgets are afraid that states will erect trade barriers, whether they ostensibly remain in the union or not.

Certainly some states will prefer different immigration policies, but barriers to trade among the states are mostly made possible by the federal government.

Murray Rothbard points out that the federal minimum wage law is a “protectionist device” weaponized by northeastern industrialists against their southern competitors, who have access to cheaper labor. He also cites “safety” regulations from the central government that essentially block the transportation of goods from one region to another.

Ryan McMaken observes why immigration restrictionists may be inclined to favor free trade:

If goods and services can’t move across borders, then people are more likely to move in order to reach those goods and services.

Plus, as free trade raises the standard of living for both sides, economic migration is that much less likely.

An increase in smaller states and more representatives in Congress threatens to effectively nullify much of the federal government’s unconstitutional activities. And for those concerned about the nation-state’s integrity, a leaner Washington, DC, may be a factor in newly formed states deciding to stay attached to the union.

However, the future of America could also be a collection of hybrid state-nations, as opposed to a large nation-state.

States running their own immigration systems apart from any national policy is now the norm, as sanctuary cities and states such as California show. States are also encroaching on foreign and monetary policy with efforts to withhold their national guard troops from unconstitutional wars or proposing that gold and silver be legal tender.

This decentralization of society may be necessary considering the deeper implications of this newfound, widespread interest in secessionist solutions.

Fewer Americans feel at home in this country now. On the national scale, not even commercial events like the Super Bowl can unite us at the most superficial level.

In less than eight months, the presidential election cycle ends. That used to signify a day of national relief, no matter who won. Our political warring was over at last.

Anyone remember that country?

We don’t live there anymore, and we won’t this November 3, either.

However, the losing side can be expected to push talk of secession to an all-time high. Thankfully, centralization is losing popularity among some rising demographics, including Hispanics, who support secession at a rate of 36 percent, and those aged 18–29, 47 percent of whom favor decentralization.

At a time when polarization is leading to radicalization on the left and right, it’s reassuring that so many are now open to a strategy that offers compromise.

Although secessionists may generally talk of “taking back” some rights or way of life, they follow this up with willingness to let others go their own route, even to the point of giving up geographical reach for their new state or nation.

Social cohesion is declining under the status quo, as institutions that traditionally hold the social fabric together are failing, from traditional churches to civic community centers. Under centralization, politics freely usurps these cultural vacancies.

Tragically, that leads to violent street clashes between activists, many hopelessly seeking a sense of purpose from the mob.

The year 2021 offers a political environment in which frustration at national politics can be positively directed toward local officials. Over a dozen major cities will hold mayoral elections, and countless other municipalities and neighborhoods will be holding elections or hearings in which nullification and secession can be raised, not to mention that there are state legislatures taking most of their action in the early months of the year, when secession talk may be trending on social media.

Public discussion need not be charged with partisanship. In fact, issue-based campaigns and coalitions can transcend ideologies, so this could be a great opportunity for someone not attached to a political identity to lead the charge.

Good fences make good neighbors, Robert Frost wrote. Americans are more severely divided than ever before, but redrawing some boundaries just might help form a more perfect reunion.

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Great Replacement in Switzerland – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 21, 2020

 A study by the Zurich university of sciences came to the conclusion that 21% of young Muslims living in Switzerland consider that sharia law is superior to Swiss law.

As in other European countries, the Gulf monarchies have been accused of flooding Islamic cultural centers with money.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/01/no_author/the-great-replacement-in-switzerland/

After the article on the Great Replacement in Belgium, I present you the following translation of an article by Polémia on the situation in Switzerland. The Swiss situation is unique, if only because of the country’s objective excellence and exceptional quality of life, and the extraordinary practice of direct democracy. Thus we have the rather rare situation of citizens actually being allowed to vote on whether and in what conditions new people should be allowed into their country.

Make no mistake: the scale of demographic change is also tremendous in Switzerland, but mainly because of European immigration and even Europeans find it very difficult to accede to Swiss nationality (there is no birthright citizenship). Thus Switzerland provides a model how people might preserve a nice country in the future: a highly-selective, citizenist little republic founded on gentrified democratic localism.

* * *

Switzerland has experienced very significant immigration over the past decades. This immigration is a source of fears or even rejection on the part of a portion of the Swiss people. These fears concern basically two issues: competition on the labor market by Europeans and the challenge to the [Swiss] cultural model posed by non-Europeans; all the more so in that, recently, the integration of the non-European population is failing to be realized.

In the face of this, the Swiss authorities’ responses oscillate between openness and firmness. A firmness which is occasionally demanded by the people in the form of the referenda which are regularly organized in Switzerland. Selective immigration is not an empty slogan in this country, even if a part of the political opposition would like the government to go much further on this issue….

A growing immigrant population

The foreign population is constantly increasing in Switzerland. It rose from 14% of the total population in 1980 to 25% today. The Swiss Confederation is among the countries with the highest proportion of residents born abroad

European immigration

Competition on the labor market between foreigners and citizens as well as the scale immigration have been criticized both with regard to European and non-European immigration. Several agreements on the free movement of EU citizens have been signed between Bern and the European Union since 2000, but they remain contested, in particular by the SVP (Swiss People’s Party). This party has, for many years, sought to annul these agreements. This has raised concerns among people living across the Swiss border, notably many Frenchmen.

Non-European immigration

While non-European immigration concerns only a minority of the population in Switzerland, several warning signs are showing that integration is proving difficult or even a failure for a portion of immigrants.

  • A study by the Zurich university of sciences came to the conclusion that 21% of young Muslims living in Switzerland consider that sharia law is superior to Swiss law.
  • At the extreme of radicalization, a Swiss central Islamic committee has been established with some 3,500 members. The organization has been accused of encouraging its members to engage in polygamy and female genital mutilation. Its members are also being sued for supporting Al Qaeda.
  • Islamic proselytism has occasionally occurred in Swiss schools. Thus in Winterthur, teachers have complained that Muslim students are encouraging non-Muslims to fast during ramadan.
  • As in other European countries, the Gulf monarchies have been accused of flooding Islamic cultural centers with money. One of the authors of Qatar Papers [a book detailing Qatari financing of Islamic activities in Europe] explained in Geneva: “The goal is to take in charge every Muslim individual living Europe from cradle to grave.” The funds of the World Islamic League based in Saudi Arabia “are apparently financing mosques and organizations preaching a Wahhabi form of Islam” according to a professor at the University of Bern. Turkish mosques [in Switzerland] are apparently being financed by [Turkey’s] Directorate of Religious Affairs, a report from which asserts that Islam is superior to Christianity and Judaism, and that religious dialogue is unacceptable. One could enumerate many more such examples. Though Islamism is spreading in Switzerland, the country has many effective “watchdogs” who are active both in documenting these realities and in initiatives aiming to ban or at least reduce them.

A questionable integration

Whether in terms of welfare, crime, or social behavior, many statistics and incidents show that the ‘integration’ of a part of the non-Europeans is an empty slogan…

The consequences are apparent: whereas the number of asylum claims is exploding in France, they decreased in Switzerland between 2017 and 2018. More and more rejected asylum-seekers are fleeing Switzerland for France, this especially concerns Eritreans.

In the face of significant migratory flows, the Swiss government has taken measures aiming to increase standards relative to immigration, to reduce immigration, and to defend the natives’ way of life.

The Swiss can, thanks to their democratic system, make proposals and express themselves on issues subject to referenda. They most recently affirmed their rejection of mass immigration. If the concrete measures to actually fulfill the popular will can, on some occasions, be disappointing, the referenda have enabled tougher policies to be adopted.

Paul Tormenen, 28/09/2019

Notes

[1] In these statistics, “Asian” seems to mean “Asians other than Turks.” – Guillaume Durocher

[2] Prison director Franz Walter observes: “Unfortunately a substantial number of the Maghrebis come from the banlieues of France.” – GD

Be seeing you

Never_Give_Up

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Brexit “Surrender” Strategy: Winning Ugly – Mish Talk

Posted by M. C. on September 30, 2019

Jeremy Corbyn will scrap controls on immigration and hand foreign
nationals the right to vote in future elections and referendums if
Labour wins power.

Sound familiar?

https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/brexit-surrender-strategy-winning-ugly-mREBsB1SiEugMa1-Pr9h9Q/

Mish

by

Boris Johnson and his political strategist Dominic Cummings have labeled the efforts by Parliament a “Surrender” act.

Surrender Act

Boris Johnson labels the acts of Parliament to stop No Deal a “Surrender Act”.

This is correct, of course.

If you take away the EU’s incentives to negotiate, they are less likely to do so.

It’s not a complete white flag as Johnson has other, albeit undisclosed options, in which he proclaims two seemingly contradictory ideas.

  1. He will abide by the Benn legislation seeking an extension
  2. He will not ask for an extension

Incite Violence

As noted by the Guardian Live blog, Amber Rudd says Boris Johnson’s language ‘Does Incite Violence’

The claim is preposterous.

The Labour MP Jess Phillips says she has received more threats after an incident outside her constituency office on Thursday when a man allegedly tried to smash her windows. She showed Sky News a message that said: “Unless you change your attitude, be afraid, be very afraid.”

The Labour MP David Lammy has criticised the columnist Brendan O’Neill after he said on BBC Politics Live that the delay to Brexit should have sparked riots. It came after the Times quoted an unnamed senior cabinet minister today who warned the country risked a “violent, popular uprising” if a second referendum overturned the result of the first.

Why Violence Picked Up

Violence has picked up, but “surrender” has little to do with it.

Rather, it’s the very nature of this heated campaign, fueled mostly by Remainers, commentators, and even official Labour Party policy that had led to violence.

Scrap Controls on Immigration

Please note Labour to Scrap Controls on Immigration and Hand Foreign Nationals the Right to Vote

Jeremy Corbyn will scrap controls on immigration and hand foreign nationals the right to vote in future elections and referendums if Labour wins power.

The Labour leader will head into the next election promising to extend freedom of movement to migrants around the world, along with abolishing detention centres, under plans approved on Wednesday.

Despite Mr Corbyn’s team being privately opposed to the plan, delegates at Labour’s annual conference in Brighton unanimously backed a motion which commits the party to “free movement, equality and rights for migrants”. The motion commits Labour to oppose any future immigration system which includes caps on numbers or targets, and which assesses a migrant’s suitability based on their income or usefulness to businesses.

And it requires Labour to commit to the proposals in its next election manifesto – meaning a complete reversal of its 2017 pledge to end free movement after Brexit…

The key overall point is whether or not the “Surrender” campaign is working. I believe it is.

Let’s return to a key idea that was easy to miss: “Tory fundraising has skyrocketed. September was their best month ever. There is a lot of support for him from business.”

Brexit may be ugly, but Corbyn is even uglier.

One of Corbyn’s proposals is to require businesses to give 10% of their shares to workers. Corbyn also wants to renationalize rail, water, energy and Royal Mail, increase corporation tax and the minimum wage, and extend workers’ rights.

For details, please see Forced Distribution: Labour Proposes Workers to Get 10% of Shares

Businesses may not want a hard Brexit, but they want Corbyn even less!

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

HOW POROUS SHOULD AMERICA’S BORDERS BE? THOMAS JEFFERSON’S THOUGHTS ON IMMIGRATION

Posted by M. C. on July 27, 2019

“[N]o endeavor”, he said, “should be spared to detect and suppress” this sort of im- migrant. (2) So much for blind liberality. Not every immigrant is a friend of America. Jefferson was no fool. He had other concerns too.

https://proconservative.net/PCVol5Is272FarrellImmigrationInsecurity.shtmlBy Steven M. Farrell

You and I are “melting pot” people; citizens, that is, of that country set apart by Heav- en to receive those in search of the good life–those from from every nation, kindred, tongue, and people. As such, we, of all people, ought to recognize the value of a liberal [generous, not strict] immigration policy.

President Thomas Jefferson, a descendent of immigrants, presiding over a nation of immigrants, thought so. In his first annual message, dated, December 8, 1801, he asked of those who thought to impose an extremely arduous course to citizenship for the im- migrant (a 14 years residency requirement), a few probing questions:

    “Shall we refuse the unhappy fugitives from distress that hospitality which the savages of the wilderness extended to our fathers arriving in this land? Shall op- pressed humanity find no asylum on this globe? The Constitution, indeed, has wisely provided that, for admission to certain offices of important trust, a resi- dence shall be required sufficient to develop character and design. But might not the general character and capabilities of a citizen be safely communicated to eve- ry one manifesting a bona fide purpose of embarking his life and fortunes perma- nently with us?” (1)

The advocates of today’s liberal immigration policies, or of far more radical proposals for open borders, might feel inclined to thus quote Jefferson, and feel justified.

Yet they had better do so with caution. President Jefferson also suggested that America balance her open arm policy “with restrictions, perhaps, to guard against the fraudulent usurpation of our flag; an abuse which brings so much embarrassment and loss on the genuine citizen, and so much danger to the nation of being involved in war”.

“[N]o endeavor”, he said, “should be spared to detect and suppress” this sort of im- migrant. (2) So much for blind liberality. Not every immigrant is a friend of America. Jefferson was no fool. He had other concerns too.

In his Notes on the State of Virginia (1787), Jefferson reflects:

    “It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize as much as possi- ble in matters which they must of necessity transact together. Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent.
    “Every species of government has its specific principles. Ours perhaps are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe. It is a composition of the freest principles of the English Constitution, with others derived from natural right and natural reason. To these nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of abso- lute monarchies. Yet from such we are to expect the greatest number of emi- grants.” (3)

Jefferson warns, nearly prophetically:

    “They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an un- bounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In pro- portion to their numbers, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its directions, and render it a heterogeneous, in- coherent, distracted mass.” (4)

There is theory; and then there is reality. Jefferson was schooled in both. He knew that, to every liberal law, there were some reasonable limits.

We need artisans, he admitted, but not enemies. We want true freedom seekers to come, but without “extraordinary encouragements.” (5)

What would Thomas Jefferson, therefore, think of an immigration policy today that, with flashing lights invites the non-working masses of the world to come–to come from countries that hate us, to a feast of “free” food, “free” health care, “free” education, “free” social security benefits, and free and instant voter registration cards? It is hard to see Jefferson calling it anything but extraordinarily unwise, and extraordinarily rev- olutionary. Jefferson would have proposed something better–a policy liberal in its ex- tension of the blessings of liberty to those who desired it, and conservative in its eco- nomic and political common sense.

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

How to Turn America into a Shit-hole Country in 4 Easy Steps | The Daily Bell

Posted by M. C. on April 19, 2019

https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/how-to-turn-america-into-a-shit-hole-country-in-4-easy-steps/

By Joe Jarvis

Opening up the floodgates of immigration to people from shit-hole countries would not actually be a problem if America was a free country.

If people were free to keep what they earn instead of having it redistributed, free to defend themselves and their loved ones wherever they went, free to become entrepreneurs without impossible protectionist regulations, America would absorb and assimilate any number of immigrants and refugees.

That’s what happened when Ireland, Italy, and Scotland were shit-hole countries where my ancestors emigrated from. The Irish were poor as dirt, fleeing a famine. The Italians brought the murderous Mafia.

And according to Thomas Sowell in his book Black Rednecks, White Liberals, the Scottish immigrants started the southern redneck culture, ready to fight and kill at the tiniest insult to defend their “honor.”

But a lot has changed since then. You can’t leave your home without breaking a law, so American policing agencies would have to spend a lot of time, energy, and tax dollars beating the ‘Merica into new immigrants.

But why blame the immigrants instead of the system?

1. Tax the citizens’ wealth away (or just steal it outright)

Elizabeth Warren has proposed a wealth tax as part of her campaign platform for President 2020.

This would tax the entire net worth of individuals worth over $50 million, every single year.

This eventually guarantees that no one worth over $50 million lives in the United States. At which point the tax will creep down to the middle class as it always does (especially if inflation makes millionaires of all of us)… Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »