The left's open borders insanity, caught in a single email
I woke to a British (I think) reader complaining about yesterday's piece on the insane media reaction to Donald Trump's immigration restrictions. Judge her comments and my answer for yourself.
Based on your emails to me and comments on the Stack, many of you think the "no person is illegal" crowd has a grand plan to overrun the United States with migrants who will forever live on welfare and vote for the Democrats who let them in.
I don't.
First off, I don’t generally believe in big, world-changing conspiracies. (I believe in mistakes that go unchecked and metastasize, in confluences of interest, and in the bureaucratic power-seeking that Eugyppius writes about so brilliantly.1)
Second, if that was the plan, it failed. Spectacularly. In fact, unchecked migration was a crucial factor driving the heart of the Democratic Party - working-class black and Hispanic voters - towards Donald Trump. Losing the Presidency and Congress definitely will not help the left establish a one-world socialist paradise.
So what’s really going on? Why are these folks so insistent on open borders?
This morning, after my piece yesterday about the left’s hysteria over Donald Trump’s plans to carry out his campaign promises by tightening the borders and deporting illegal migrants, I woke to an email that perfectly encapsulates the moral panic that drives the left on this issue. It’s worth reading - and dissecting.
(To see it - and my response - become a subscriber. Or wait 72 hours. Yes, it’s bonus content for those of you who pay the bills! Trust me, you’ll want to read this one.)
Working-class people correctly see unskilled migrants as competing for their jobs and driving down wages while increasing housing costs, a neat double whammy.
But the “knowledge workers” at the core of the new Democratic Party don’t have those economic concerns. To them, mass immigration spells cheaper childcare and more cool new ethnic restaurants (honey, have we ever taken Jasper to that Laotian place? We should! He’s four, it’s time!)
Yet, somehow, these folks never admit (or, perhaps, even recognize) the very real economic benefits that low-wage migrants offer them. Instead, they frame migration in moral terms: we must help the wretched of the earth, by giving them our wealth and jobs. It’s only fair.
To wit, this email, from Alison D. (whose “.co.uk” email address suggests she is British). If you missed yesterday’s piece, it included this line, about a Mexican migrant who had figured she could claim asylum for herself and her “four small children” and be let into California as early as this week:
I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be cruel here, but there is no other way to say this: Maura Hernandez and her four small children are not my problem, not your problem, not America’s problem.
Here’s what Alison D. had to say:
—
Note the style here: ad hominem, screechy, and throwing in a random unrelated issue (of course, she incorrectly assumes that I am anti-abortion, because, well, I must be).
It’s not about a grand plan to destroy the United States. It’s about feelings, Alison’s feelings.
To the extent her email contains a coherent thought, it is this: You are rich, America is rich, this woman is poor. Therefore you have a moral obligation to fix her life on whatever terms she demands.
As then-New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said, equally stupidly, on March 20, 2020: If everything we do saves just one life, I’ll be happy…
Unfortunately, part of being an adult - maybe the most important part - is realizing that life is complicated, life is a series of trade-offs, no one gets away clean.
Letting Maura Hernandez and her four kids make a bogus claim for asylum may feel good in the moment, but it fundamentally disrespects the law and all the unnamed legal migrants who expect the United States to follow its own rules.
Letting in a million, or ten million, Maura Hernandezes in will seriously hurt the people who are already living here.
Charity begins at home.
—
My response:
—
I haven’t heard back.
And sometimes in small conspiracies too. Very small conspiracies. Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead.
Like all liberal women everything is about “feelings” it’s all fine and dandy until it affects her directly. If she feels so bad why doesn’t she take in the women and her four kids. Oh that’s right it’s not really her problem!
No doubt. There is no clearer sign of a declining civilization than when you have open borders and a welfare state. One is bad enough. Adding both together is like dumping gas on a forest fire.
That said, imo, the most daunting tasks is not cleaning up the mess created by politicians trying to win the Woke Olympics. Rather it's to clean up the mess that "created" these types of politicians.
It's not even worth debating.
These people are just a bunch of anoetic automatons that eat up their shrink-wrappped curated propaganda provided to justify feelings - no matter how detached from reality their daily serving is.
We're better of unrelentingly mocking them.
They don't understand logic because they've never reached a conclusion/position based on anything other than emotions....usually fed to them in a constant main-line drip feed.
I mean it might be tough to get someone who took an experimental vaccine, without questions, for a donut to see the seen and unseen, etc.etc.
And the individuals shooting the loudest "guns" are the ones who are going to have the biggest "buck". It will be devastating for them when their worldview is exposed as a delusional hallucination.
They're empty vessels. They are weak. Their bloodlines are weak. And history will forget them.
There's nothing like a midwit holding onto a dead position. They're not even aware the zeitgeist has changed because they derive their ego externally.
I say don't let the pendulum hit you on the way out the door