No, It's Not Racist to Pause Third-World Immigration
Donald Trump never does anything halfway.
That's particularly true when he makes an opening gambit in a negotiation. He always demands the world, and usually settles for only a continent or two.
I feel confident that Trump's declaration that he will institute a permanent ban on immigration from third-world countries is likely not going to be the final word on the policy that will be put in place, but rather is a marker he has set down that will result in a necessary dramatic reduction in the legal net migration from countries whose citizens, when they move here, create net drains on the public purse and undermine our social cohesion.
First things first: once you get past the fuzzy-brained claim that it is wrong to make the assertion that some migrant groups are net positives to a society and others are net negatives, let's clear something up: this is a statement of fact, and has been well documented by European studies in Nordic countries that have calculated the costs and benefits of migration.
In the Netherlands, for instance, Somali immigrants on average cost the taxpayers and the economy on average a million Euros in public support, and their children cost even more and contribute less than their parents. Immigrants from European Union countries and the United States, on the other hand, contribute on average 500,000+ more than natives from the Netherlands.
In other words, immigration is not one thing; some immigrants are net contributors, while others drain resources and increase social instability and reduce social trust.
Go figure. It's not like we couldn't figure that out based on common sense.
Nordic countries have done a 180 on immigration in the past couple of years for this reason. Once the most generous in granting asylum from s**thole countries, to the extent that Swedes and Norwegians opened their own homes and extended generous welfare benefits, they are now working assiduously to kick out the migrants, and even paying tens of thousands in bonuses for those who leave voluntarily.
Unless liberals want to believe that Sweden went from being the most welcoming country in the world to one of the most restrictive on immigration because the population suddenly woke up one day and realized they were white and migrants were not, they should concede that perhaps something—in this case experience—changed their minds.
BREAKING Denmark just showed the entire West how you stop the flood of third world migration. They cut asylum seekers by ninety percent because they refused to end up like the UK or France. They made life tough for illegal migrants. Longer residency process. Discouraging housing. Even seizing valuables to pay their bills. Finland and Sweden also dropped their numbers hard. Meanwhile the UK and France almost doubled asylum applications. This is the choice. Either protect your country or watch it collapse. The West must save itself.
Here in the United States we are still going through the "It's white supremacy" bulls**t, and it is so tiresome. When Mark Kelly pretends not to know what a third world country is and why importing large numbers of people from those countries is a bad idea, he is gaslighting us.
It's not the skin color Mark. It's the fact that these are third world countries with fundamentally broken cultures.
Democrats are the most racist people I have ever met. All they ever think about is race, sex, how you have sex, and whether you are mentally ill enough to vote for them. Character? What's that?
And no, it's not due to colonialism. China suffered from colonialism and went through a societal collapse. Korea—the Japanese devastated and essentially enslaved the population, and it's doing great now. Some of the most prosperous nations in South East Asia were colonized.
Third world countries are third world because their political and social cultures undermine the prerequisites for development.
Which is why, for instance, we have the Somali fraud problem here in Minnesota. We have barely scratched the surface, but a trend is so obvious that only a liberal could refuse to see it:
Aimee Bock, by the way, was the white woman who helped coordinate with the Democrats here in Minnesota.
One of the interesting things the immigration studies done in Europe show is that migrants who come here to work and climb the economic ladder tend to become net contributors, and their descendants do as well. People coming who seek asylum are the opposite. That isn't by itself a reason to open the floodgates for economic migrants, but it is a data point that we should keep our eyes on when reforming (for real) our immigration policies.
Ironically, the Biden policy was to maximize the asylum seekers, who cost the most and contribute the least (or who, writ large, are destructive to society).
It may be the case that third world countries are filled with so-called "brown" people, but unless you are restricting immigration because of their skin color, that should prove no barrier to restricting immigration from failed societies.
Current experience shows that people who migrate from low trust societies import the behaviors they were forced into in those low-trust societies. Somalis likely saw how easy it was to commit fraud, and also saw that corruption was the way up the economic ladder in their own country, and believed they would be idiots not to take the money and run.
It's how things are done, right?
For those who point out that the United States is a "nation of immigrants," what they leave out is that at no point in American history has the population of migrants been higher, even during the great immigration waves of the 19th and early 20th century. And those took place before we were a welfare state.
After those waves of immigration the flood was shut down, with good reason. The country couldn't digest an unlimited flow and remain America.
And most of those migrants were not from cultures fundamentally alien to our own. That is not true of the current wave.
If we are going to have a rational conversation about how to create an immigration policy that works, we need to drop the cries of "racism." We are at this point because liberals have created a crisis, and a backlash was inevitable. It happened in the Nordic countries, and is happening in the rest of the West.
If diversity were really our strength, it wouldn't be happening.
