Bryan Caplan and the Open Borders movement

I find it remarkable that the image below is what the U.S. Chamber of Commerce thinks passes for a pro-immigration image.
In the meantime, the quasi-libertarian economist Bryan Caplan is demonstrating that he can’t follow the basic logic of domestic free trade or understand the consequences of the free movement of international labor as the Open Borders movement searches for a logo.  Steve Sailer has compiled a number of them that are nearly as bad as the Chamber of Commerce’s entry.

“The Open Borders movement seeks a symbol that embodies the spirit of
free migration. To achieve that goal, we are sponsoring a logo contest.
The winner of this contest will get $200 and their design will become
the official logo of the Open Borders web site.”

Lacking any graphic talent, I shall refrain from attempting to create one myself, although I would certainly encourage the Dread Ilk to do so if anyone is so inclined.  Instead, I would invite Mr. Caplan to attempt to rebut my argument that an Open Borders regime will force the international emigration of more than 40 percent of Americans before they turn 35.  I should also like to see him address the fact that this forced economic migration is desired by influential statists specifically in order to “undermine the “homogeneity of its member states”.

It is very important to understand that Open Borders movement seeks nothing less than the destruction of the nation-state in the name of the global economy.  This extreme Free Trade doctrine necessarily requires the end of the Jewish state of Israel, the end of the U.S. Constitution, and the demolition of the chief structural obstacle to global dictatorship. Open Borders and the Free Trade argument can be best understood as the European Common Market scheme writ large; it is the economic bait for global political integration.

The current immigration reform bill is the completion of the American national suicide that began with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 and was proposed by the grandson of Jewish immigrants, sponsored by the grandson of Irish immigrants, and publicly championed by another grandson of Irish immigrants.  Thus demonstrating that even when they are superficially integrated, second- and third-generation immigrants tend to act against the interests of the nations their parents and grandparents invaded.


Opposing predictions revisited

You may recall that after the mass shooting of dozens of larval Labor politicians in Norway, there was a discussion of whether this would turn the Norwegian electorate to the right or to the left.  Many predicted an anti-nativist backlash that would strengthen the ruling Norwegian Labor party and support its vision of a multicultural, multiethnic Norway. I, on the other hand, predicted that Breivik’s action would eventually be seen as a harbinger of Norway’s belated move towards the ethnic nationalism that is sweeping across most of Europe.

I believe we can safely conclude that the verdict is now in:

Norway will be holding elections for Parliament on September 9, just two weeks before Germany votes. If polls taken over the last year are accurate, the eight-year-old Labor-party government of Jens Stoltenberg is headed for a landslide defeat.

Normally, you would think it would be a shoo-in for reelection. Labor’s social democrats have long thought of themselves as the natural party of government — Labor has been the leading party in Norway for all but 16 of the last 78 years. While much of Europe is wracked by recession, Norway’s economy grew by 3 percent last year, and the unemployment rate is only 3.5 percent. Norway’s GDP per capita is now over $60,000 a year.

But Norwegians appear likely to elect a conservative coalition government for the first time in over a decade. Polls show the Conservative party leading with 32 percent of the vote, which should give it 58 seats in the 169-seat parliament, a dramatic increase from 2005, when it won only 23 seats. The Labor party has about 30 percent of the vote, and its left-wing allied parties are floundering. The Progress party — a populist party that supports low taxes and stricter limits on immigration, and that worries about Muslim extremism – has about 16 percent of the vote, and it and the Conservatives, together with their smaller allies, look to have a clear majority in the new Parliament.

Charles Martel, William Tell, and Winston Churchill are all seen as national heroes for their violent opposition to foreign immigration and occupation, so while some might find it very hard to believe now, it will not be terribly surprising if Anders Breivik is one day revered by Norwegians for his murderous stand against the invaders and quislings of his homeland.


Boehner prepares his latest betrayal

It amazes me that John Boehner is still the head of the House Republicans after single-handedly saving the Obama administration by raising the debt ceiling.  Now it looks as if he is preparing to mortally wound the Republican Party in the short term and permanently segregate the American two-party system in the long term:

While House Speaker John Boehner is keeping a tight lid on his personal position on immigration reform, conservative activists and lawmakers fear the Republican leader may rubber-stamp Democrats’ controversial legislation in a backroom deal with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Boehner declined to answer whether he supports what many on the left have come to term a “pathway to citizenship” for illegal immigrants during his appearance on CBS News’ Face The Nation on Sunday morning. For conservative lawmakers, that does not assuage fears that he and his deputies House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Whip Kevin McCarthy, and Budget Committee chairman Rep. Paul Ryan could be working behind the scenes cut a deal with Reid and President Barack Obama to achieve amnesty for illegal immigrants in America.

“We are scared to death of what we figure is already Boehner’s end game,” a senior congressional GOP aide told Breitbart News. “There are so many forces within the GOP establishment pushing for their interests that it’s hard to conceive that Boehner will not cave to them.”

By adding tens of millions of new Democratic voters who are, for the most part, to the left of the Democratic Party’s center, more whites are going to gravitate towards the Republican Party than has been seen since Nixon first successfully launched his Southern Strategy.

Few “anti-racist” white liberals tend to remain that way once they are surrounded by  vibrant neighbors and find themselves living in the diversity they once supported so enthusiastically from afar.  Remember, “white flight” is mostly an urban liberal phenomenon.


The map is still not the territory

Notice how the New York Times is always afraid for Muslims in non-Muslim countries, while remaining mostly indifferent to the plight of non-Muslims in Muslim countries:

After decades of peaceful coexistence with the Buddhist majority in the
country, Muslims say they now constantly fear the next attack. Over the
past year, they say several violent episodes across the country led by
rampaging Buddhist mobs have taught them that if violence comes to their
neighborhood, they are on their own. “I don’t think the police will protect us,” Mr. Nyi Nyi said.

The neighborhood watch program, a motley corps of men who check for any
suspicious outsiders and keep wooden clubs and metal rods stashed
nearby, is a symbol of how much relations have deteriorated between
Buddhists and Muslims in Myanmar, formerly known as Burma.

About 90 percent of the country’s population of 55 million is Buddhist, with Muslims making up 4 to 8 percent… The root of the violence, which has left around 200 Muslims dead over
the past year, appears partly a legacy of colonial years when Indians,
many of them Muslims, arrived in the country as civil servants and
soldiers, stirring resentment among Burmese Buddhists. In recent months
radical monks have since built on those historic grievances, fanning
fears that Muslims are having more children than Buddhists and could
dilute the country’s Buddhist character….

Some Muslims with means have fled to Malaysia or Singapore. Muslim-owned
businesses are losing Buddhist customers. A growing Buddhist movement
known as 969 that has the blessing of some of the country’s leaders is
campaigning for a boycott of Muslim products and businesses and a ban on
interfaith marriages.

I imagine the Burmese people have remembered what Americans and Europeans have forgotten. They have observed the examples of Nigeria, Paris, and Londonistan. They have learned the lesson: the Paynim always comes to conquer, however humbly he may enter.

“The suggestion that Muslims leave the country has been a common refrain
during the violence, which bewilders many Muslims who have always
considered themselves Burmese. Mr. Khin Maung Htay, his father and his
grandfather were all born in Myanmar.”

What of it? This merely shows the intrinsic falsehood of the multicultural mantra, which is that nationality is determined by government bureaucracy and geographic location.  After three generations Mr. Khin Maung Htay is not considered to be Burmese by the Burmese people because the map is not the territory and there is far more to cultural integration than filling out the necessary paperwork.


What could go wrong

Germany suddenly realizes its new arrivals are not going home anytime soon and are threatening its cherished social order:

Schools filled with children who do not speak our language. A surge in crime. Social benefits abused’: Now GERMANY admits mass immigration threatens ‘social peace’

Seriously, who thought trying to push multiculturalism on GERMANS was a good idea? They’ve solidly established that once an unwanted minority reaches a sufficiently irritating level, they’re capable of performing ethnic cleansing with the expected Teutonic efficiency.


Conservatives are still stupid

John Hawkins took a poll of right-wing bloggers concerning the immigration bill. They mostly had enough sense to oppose it, but this was the pair of questions that revealed the irrational position of conservatives on immigration:

6) On the whole, which of these sentiments best describes your thoughts about illegal aliens?
B) They make America a worse place to live? 88.6% (31 votes)
A) They make America a better place to live? 11.4% (4 votes)

7) On the whole, which of these sentiments best describes your thoughts about legal immigrants?
A) They make America a better place to live? 88.6% (31 votes)
B) They make America a worse place to live? 11.4% (4 votes)

Most conservatives genuinely believe that the legality of an action determines the qualitative nature of it.  This is why they so often blithely support whatever evils that the previous generation of progressives have managed to slip past previous conservatives.

It doesn’t matter if 100 million Nigerians and 300 million Chinese enter the country legally or illegally next year, they will substantially change what America is by virtue of their entry.  The legality or illegality of that entry will have no effect whatsoever on the impact they will have over time on American society.

For all their supposed reverence for the Founding Fathers, conservatives have forgotten their wisdom on these matters:

The opinion advanced in the
Notes on Virginia [by Thomas Jefferson] is undoubtedly correct, that foreigners will
generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have
left behind; to the country of their nativity; and to its particular
customs and manners. They will also entertain opinions on government
congenial with those under which they have lived; or if they should be
led hither from a preference to ours, how extremely unlikely is it that
they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential
to real republicanism?”


Diversity is the death of the republic

This isn’t a thought that is new to me; HongKongCharlie reminds us that the Founding Fathers knew it very well:

“The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common
national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the
exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that
love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely
connected with birth, education, and family. The opinion advanced in the
Notes on Virginia [by Thomas Jefferson] is undoubtedly correct, that foreigners will
generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have
left behind; to the country of their nativity; and to its particular
customs and manners. They will also entertain opinions on government
congenial with those under which they have lived; or if they should be
led hither from a preference to ours, how extremely unlikely is it that
they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential
to real republicanism?”

-Alexander Hamilton, From the New York Evening Post: an Examination of the President’s Message, Continued, No. VIII, 1802″

Those
who advocate diversity and immigration are not merely foolish, or
ignorant, they are as actively and effectively anti-American as the most
antipathetic individuals who are consciously attempting to destroy what
is left of traditional, constitutional, civilized, European America.

So,
do keep this in mind:  The rabbits and pinkshirts loudly proclaim that
my opinion is outrageous, offensive, and intrinsically unworthy of
debate… despite that opinion being, in the words of Alexander
Hamilton, “undoubtedly correct”.


Mailvox: illegal immigration isn’t the problem

It’s not the illegals, as this younger restrictionist has good cause to recognize.  It is the legal immigrants, and the fact that there have been far too many of them from too different cultures:

Most people are stunned when I say I’m for lower legal immigration. I know with most it would paint me as a bigot and I don’t give a damn. It’s not that I fear what I don’t know. It’s that I speak several foreign languages, have been extensively south of the border in different countries, and see what is going to happen to us.

Just as actual proximity to diversity and vibrancy tends to reduce positive social contact, actual familiarity with other societies tends to reduce enthusiasm for immigration from them.  In general, the more enthusiastic about diversity and immigration a white American is these days, the more parochial they are.  If they so much as mention food with regards to the issue, you can be certain that their experience of other cultures is essentially limited to restaurants.

It’s not the culinary spices that are the issue here.  I speak three languages and have a basic smattering of two others.  I’m not recognizably American anymore; on our recent trip to Rome, I discovered that “American” isn’t even the second guess of people I meet these days.  And it is my experience of transitioning from one society to another, and of witnessing others do so and fail to do so, that informs my opinion.  It is that experience that makes me certain that the large scale immigration of the last fifty years from the Third World is going to have dreadful consequences in Europe and America alike.


Rubio fails to follow the logic train

The Republican Senator doesn’t think through the logical implications of the accusations he is directing against the Obama administration:

“So in the span of four days, [there were] three major revelations about the use of government power to intimidate those who are doing things that the government doesn’t like. These are the tactics of the third world. These are the tactics of places that don’t have the freedoms and the independence that we have here in this country.”

They are the tactics of the third world.  They are, unsurprisingly enough, the tactics of a president who is himself an immigrant and a third worlder.  They are the tactics of a place that no longer has the freedom and independence and population that it once had. And yet, even as he laments this, Rubio is actively campaigning to legalize millions of third worlders who illegally settled in the country and add tens of millions more to their ranks.

Welcome to Third World America.  This is merely the smallest taste of what it is going to look like.


GOP contemplates electoral suicide

Any Republican supporting the proposed immigration amnesty must be considered a RINO by definition:

The immigration proposal pending in Congress would transform the nation’s political landscape for a generation or more — pumping as many as 11 million new Hispanic voters into the electorate a decade from now in ways that, if current trends hold, would produce an electoral bonanza for Democrats and cripple Republican prospects in many states they now win easily.

Beneath the philosophical debates about amnesty and border security, there are brass-tacks partisan calculations driving the thinking of lawmakers in both parties over comprehensive immigration reform, which in its current form offers a pathway to citizenship — and full voting rights — for a group of undocumented residents that roughly equals the population of Ohio, the nation’s seventh-largest state.

It’s telling, is it not, how if the majority responding to a poll favor the legality of homosexuals playing marriage, this is indicative of an urgent moral imperative, but when there is an even stronger shift against LEGAL immigration, it is simply ignored.  Such is the power of the media narrative.

“A just-released Fox News poll finds 55 percent of voters think fewer
legal immigrants should be accepted into the U.S.  That’s up from 43
percent in 2010.

Majorities of Republicans (67 percent) and independents (53 percent)
as well as a plurality of Democrats (47 percent) want to decrease legal
immigration.

But the latest push for amnesty demonstrates the intrinsic bankruptcy of the longtime conservative and Republican position that the immigration problem was rooted in its illegality.  The legality or illegality has never been the issue.  The issue has always been what it has been since the Israelites first immigrated to Canaan; the quantity.  Mass immigration transforms the invaded nation in keeping with the culture of the newcomers and leads to the dissolution of the old structures and their replacement with new and different ones.

Both liberals and conservatives can say goodbye to American ideals, traditions, and even modes of thought.  There is no picking and choosing about what will be saved and what will be thrown out.  This is not a controlled process. For those progressives who supported immigration because they hated their traditional society, this was the equivalent of trying to hold up a liquor store by setting off an atomic bomb.

There are certain things upon which no society can compromise and hope to survive. One of them is the quantity of permitted immigration. Since Americans foolishly abandoned their pre-1965 laws against immigration, they have assured themselves one of two outcomes: partition or mass ethnic cleansing.  Or, as history suggests is more likely the case, some combination of both.

And don’t blame the separatists and ruthless nationalists for their inevitable actions. They are the consequence, they are the symptoms. The responsible parties are all of those individuals, on both the political left and right, who bought into the myth of Ellis Island and welcomed tens of millions of alien invaders into the USA.

Perhaps I’m wrong. Perhaps this time it will be different and unlike every other reasonable historical analog I can recall. If you live there, you had certainly better hope so. What happened in Boston last week isn’t even the smallest taste of what is likely on the way.

UPDATE: It took her long enough, but Ann Coulter has finally figured out that the problem isn’t ILLEGAL immigration, but excessive legal IMMIGRATION.