Immigration gets on the public radar

Kevin MacDonald


An important aspect of immigration has been that for the most part it has occurred under the radar. Despite importing over a million mainly poor people every year and all that implies in terms of need for housing, infrastructure, welfare benefits, and medical care,  immigration and refugee policy in the US is on auto-pilot, with the pro-immigration forces steadily removing every obstacle. Most White Americans do not experience it first  hand and have no idea about the elaborate infrastructure that the pro-immigration forces have erected.

It’s probably not true that a frog will allow itself to be boiled alive if only the heat is raised slowly enough, but it’s an irresistible image nonetheless.

However, the anti-borders forces — on the left and the right — have counted on such passivity among the public to incrementally erode the American people’s ability to decide who gets to move here from abroad.

They have devised endless opportunities to appeal deportation decisions, prevented the implementation of needed control measures, pushed relentlessly to pierce numerical caps, and created strong incentives against government functionaries saying “no” to those who want to come. The motto over the doorway of the immigration office might as well be “It ain’t over til the alien wins.” (Mark Krikorian, “Hitting the boiling point over the border“)

American are passive because immigration, especially legal immigration, is rarely in the news. The same goes for refugee policy. According to Refugee/Resettlement Watch, the process of importing refugees is a “very quiet effort” rife with corruption (e.g., leading to chain migration of relatives; see their fact sheet). It is also thoroughly incentivized so that it’s a very lucrative business for organizations like the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society and the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (which describes the children pouring in from Central America  as “gifts,” perhaps because the job of overseeing their recruitment pays $214,000 in salary and benefits supplied by US taxpayers ["Lutherans: “The children are a gift” and we need a second lobbyist in Washington to make sure the gift keeps giving ]).

immigants_640But the crisis in Texas has brought it all to the public’s attention and it’s quite clear that quite a large section of the public are not at all happy with it, to the point that, as Krikorian notes, illegals are not being resettled in states where Democratic senators are facing tough reelection campaigns. And they are being transported in the least conspicuous means possible, hoping the public won’t notice.

But the public is noticing. There have been vocal protests in a number of communities, such as Murrieta, CA, Boston (!), Tennessee, and elsewhereRead more »


Observations - The Occidental Observer Blog
Lords Feldman and Finkelstein: Guiding the Tories to Oblivion

In 2009, a British broadcaster made a simple prediction:

Pro-Israeli organisations in Britain look set to see their influence increase if the Conservatives win the next election, a film scrutinising the activities of a powerful but little-known lobby warns today. At least half of the shadow cabinet are members of the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI), according to a Dispatches programme being screened on Channel 4. The programme-makers describe the CFI as “beyond doubt the most well-connected and probably the best funded of all Westminster lobbying groups”.

Inside Britain’s Israel Lobby claims that donations to the Conservative party “from all CFI members and their businesses add up to well over £10m over the last eight years”. CFI has disputed the figure and called the film “deeply flawed”. (Pro-Israel lobby group bankrolling Tories, film claims, The Guardian, 16th November 2009)

Why is an important organization like CFI “little-known”? Because it’s dangerous to scrutinize Jewish power: people who do so lose their reputations, their careers and sometimes their liberty too. But the prediction made by Dispatches has come true. In 2014, supporters of Israel are very powerful in the Conservative party. It has not one but two Jewish chairmen: Lord Feldman and Grant Shapps. But I would question their conservative credentials. When ordinary Tories opposed gay marriage and membership of the European Union, Lord Feldman was widely reported to have called them “swivel-eyed loons.” His work in the party seems to involve funding its elite, not safeguarding its traditions:

Lord Feldman: Cameron’s “money man”

Lord Feldman: Cameron’s “money man”

Read more »