Friday, June 29, 2018

The Migrant Invasions

Writing on PJ Media Michael Walsh gives us a compelling essay on what he considers a migrant invasion. Europe is now up in arms against the invaders while, in America, the armies of the compassionate left are fighting for open borders. 

It’s a culture war, Walsh suggests, a war against national sovereignty, but also a war against the more successful civilization, that of the North. If Southern civilizations cannot compete against the North, they can invade and deconstruct their supposed enemies.

Walsh begins by noting the extent of the media propaganda effort on behalf of the invaders:

The media is presenting what amounts to a slow-rolling invasion of the hemispheric North by the South as a "crisis," and it is, just not the way they'd have you believe. In the greatest concerted propaganda exercise in history, newspapers, television outlets, and the internet in both America and Europe are filled with pictures of crying children separated from their "parents" (maybe), and Africans bobbing helplessly on dinghies in the Mediterranean -- as if some great natural disaster had occurred.

The left wants to live in one world, a world without borders, a world that embodies Immanuel Kant’s vision of universalist cosmopolitanism. Walsh continues that the migrants are not seeking refuge, but are invaders. They do not work; they commit crimes; they rape local women; they collect welfare benefits.

As has often been noted on this blog, the invaders have no intention of adopting local customs. They are trying to exploit weakness:

Under the buzzword cloak of "migration" -- a word especially chosen to remind Americans of their legal immigrant forebears, and Europeans of their collective lack of "diversity" -- is a relentless assault on national sovereignty and political borders. It's cudgeled by "racism" and blessed by "tolerance" in order to achieve the Left's goal of One Worldism in its purest form -- a cultural-Marxist endeavor to improve the self-esteem of the Third World by bringing the industrialized, civilized the First World down to its nasty, brutish level.

Migrants are using the rule of law to their advantage. Especially in America, where your presence on American soil guarantees you Constitutional protections. Migrants and their leftist enablers are attacking what Walsh calls: “the soft underbelly of Western compassion:”

In the meantime, they mean to swamp the legitimate immigration and asylum systems of both continents, render them helpless, and break them. Structures that had been put in place to deal with individuals, or with persecuted groups of people, have suddenly been targeted as the soft underbelly of Western compassion -- the Cloward-Piven strategy writ large.

Social welfare systems acted as a magnet. Why work for a living when you can live off of America’s bounty. Besides, the intelligentsia in South and Central America believe that America’s success was purchased at the cost of exploiting the South.

As the Left became culturally ascendant in America, and the social welfare benefits expanded accordingly, the great American magnet grew ever stronger, luring not only those fleeing the dysfunction and corruption of their own countries, but a sizable criminal element as well, symbolized by the lethal presence of the MS-13 gang -- Salvadorean, by way of Los Angeles -- on Long Island.

Walsh considers that Angela Merkel has been defeated by her own open arms policy. Today, however, she seems to have struck a deal with other European nations, though the deal involves building refugee centers in North Africa. 

Italy and Spain have closed their borders to migrants, and Eastern European nations, led by Austria and Hungary are definitively closed:

In Europe, Angela Merkel's disastrous decision three years ago to allow (beg for, really) more than a million Muslim "migrants" into her country, has put the Old Continent's postwar certainties to the test, and has pitted its secular liberalism and social-welfare system against a group of largely inimical cultural aliens, whose "faith" has been challenging once-Christian Europe for more than a millennium, and which now sees a way to accomplish by infiltration what it never quite could by force of arms. Only in Eastern Europe, with its long experience of Islamic accoupation and, more recently, Soviet communist occupation, was there a realization from the start the future of Europe depended on keeping Muslims on their side of their bloody borders. Otherwise, there will be no Europe.

Muslims have invaded Europe in the past. They have occupied Eastern European countries. Those nations have had a better understanding of the stakes in the current soft invasion.

The tide has now turned on migration — in Germany and across Europe. Those making the case for an open Europe are haunted and chastised. They are losing elections. Italy’s new coalition of left- and right-wing populists is a fiesta of political contradictions, but they share one simple goal: to stop the migration population from growing. They have little sympathy for Merkel and feel no obligation to offer help in her hour of need. As far as the Italians can work out, the verdict is in: Merkel was wrong and she’s lost.

The war is ongoing in the United States. The armies of the idiot left are attacking President Trump mercilessly over his policy. Nazi-baiting has become a national sport. It takes a special form of stupidity to attack the Trump administration for being Nazis when the American left is increasingly aligning itself with anti-Semites.

To be fair and balanced, we would be happy to see the administration handle the situation more adeptly… from a communications angle and from a policy angle.


Sam L. said...

Media propaganda: Whatever the Left tells them to spread.

David Foster said...

In the US, at least, most of the immigrants *do* work...don't know about Europe...and work very hard in many cases. But to the extent that they are hostile to the host culture...and such hostility is being encouraged both by ethnically-based organizations and by much of the American media and academia...and immigrate in very large number over a short interval of time...the situation remains problematic for the US even in the case of hard-working immigrants.

As an analogy, most of the settlers who displaced the American Indians were hard-working people, many of them could legitimately have been termed Refugees. But this wasn't much consolation to the Indians.

I don't want to push this analogy too far: the economic models of the settlers and the Indians differed a lot more than in the case of present-day Americans and immigrants...and today's immigrants do not have an organized military force behind them...but I think it is suggestive.

Walt said...

I agree that most of them do work but most of them also want to create in America the failed socialism they fled....or, worse, the theocracy they left. And then what happens when, through automation, globalization or cyclical recession, the jobs go away. How do we deal with a swollen population? Interestingly, Emerson wrote about this the 1850s.