“The wage and employment rules have far-reaching, deleterious effects for workers and the US economy. H-1B workers are underpaid and placed in substandard working conditions, while US workers’ wages are depressed, and they lose out on job opportunities. Rather than fixing a market failure, the rules significantly distort the market and its price signals. It lowers incentives for workers and students to enter certain fields and reduces job mobility in sectors key to driving innovation in a regional economy. In sum, instead of fixing market failures, the H-1B program does just the opposite. It creates new market failures and exacerbates existing ones.”— Ron Hira and Bharath Gopalaswamy

“Under the new rules, employers experiencing a long-term need for a larger workforce could completely avoid the demands of the domestic labor market by serially employing H-2B workers to meet this long-term need. This would drag down wages and working conditions for workers in the industry or region as a whole. The combination of self-attestation, the elimination of the state workforce agencies, and the broadened definition of “temporary” will further depress wages in the industries in which the H-2B program operates, to the detriment of U.S. workers. And, because there is an endless supply of citizens of foreign countries willing to work in the United States … employers have little or no economic incentive to meet the economic demands of U.S. workers seeking a better wage.”—Associate General Counsel of the AFL-CIO, Lynne Rhinehart

“The financial sector has succeeded in depicting itself as part of the productive economy, yet for centuries banking was recognized as being parasitic. The essence of parasitism is not only to drain the host’s nourishment, but also to dull the host’s brain so that it does not recognize that the parasite is there.”—Michael Hudson

Labor’s share of income has continued to decline, and even in the corporate world, finance is an overgrown tumor. In 1985, the financial sector earned less than 16% of domestic corporate profits, whereas by the early 2000s it was over 40%. This is not coincidental, as the US continues to orient itself along a FIRE (finance, insurance, real estate) axis, which comprises the rent and interest paid by debtors and rent payers. As Gottfried Feder wrote, “Only labor is productive.” In a debt-driven economy, one predicated on an exponential growth model, extensive lines of credit, and the creation of new markets both in terms of consumers and goods and services, the entire apparatus is increasingly being built on a house of cards. The economy is basically a Ponzi scheme, one where all of the benefits accrue to the top (wildly disproportionately Jewish) 1%. When we see things like the self-created housing shortage in Britain corresponding exactly to the number of immigrants who arrive every year, when “conservatives” scream about a 2% inflation rate from the Federal Reserve, when the entire globalist establishment decries tariffs and “nativism” in favor of “free trade” and open borders, it’s not difficult to see what the angle is here. Per Michael Hudson:

When we say “people worry” about inflation, it’s mainly bondholders that worry. The labor force benefitted from the inflation of the ‘50s, ‘60s and ‘70s (my note: which is also why the populist movement of the late-19th century, led by William Jennings Bryan, advocated a move away from the gold standard). What was rising most rapidly were wages. Bond prices fell steadily during these decades. Stocks simply moved sideways. Inflation usually helps the economy at large, but not the 1% if wages rise. So the 1% says that it is terrible. They advocate austerity and permanent deflation. And the media say that anything that doesn’t help the 1% is bad. But don’t believe it. When they say inflation is bad, deflation is good, what they mean is, more money for us 1% is good; we’re all for asset price inflation, we’re all for housing prices going up, and we’re all for our stock and bonds prices going up. We’re just against you workers getting more income.[1]

Now obviously inflation is to be differentiated from hyper-inflation—the kind that occurs when you steal Whites’ land and drive them out of the country, as happened in Rhodesia, and which is now set to commence in South Africa and probably Namibia in the near future. Cultivating Community in Portland tries to set up refugees from Africa with their own farms in Maine, which is a fool’s errand, considering over 60% of the arable land in Africa lies uncultivated, and when in Rhodesia, for example, the White farmers were dispossessed of their land, “the Breadbasket of Africa” fell apart so quickly its currency was insolvent within a few years and it went from a food exporter to a food importer. To top that off, Maine has notoriously acidic soil, so only a local and/or a truly expert farmer is going to get much out of the land. Therein lies the rub with regards to sustainability—only locals and/or people who are otherwise expert know their land or their oceans well enough to have good crop yields or catches that do not deplete resources and destroy the ecosystem. Neo-liberalism does not allow for that. What it does allow for in its exponential growth model is, as Hudson illuminates:

If the economy is growing, people want to employ more workers. If you hire more labor, wages go up. So the 1% always wants to keep unemployment high—it used to be called the reserve army of the unemployed. If you can keep unemployment high, then you prevent wages from rising. That’s what’s happened since the 1970s here. Real wages have not risen, but the price of the things that the 1% owns has risen — stocks, bonds, trophy art and things like that.[2]

This is precisely why, despite over one-third of eligible Americans not participating in the labor force and increasing automation making certain jobs redundant, immigration continues to rise. The infamous New York Times article about how Maine “needs” African immigrants includes a section where these newcomers are expected to become lumberjacks in the Great North Woods, which is curious, since, as a recent Washington Post piece notes, northern Maine has been “battered by the closure of its lumber mills.” Coinciding almost exactly with the opening of the immigration floodgates into America, beginning in the early 1970s, wages essentially remained stagnant in this country until recently, where by some indicators they are on the decline for the majority of American workers, which makes total sense. Similarly, the very conditions which drive away the young and suppress birthrates are of course never discussed; instead, we must import enough “diversity” to drive down wages, increase alienation and consumption, lower trust, and make cross-cultural communication and thus labor organizing impossible. This is despite the clear disingenuousness of the vested interests declaring a “labor shortage” in the third-most populous country in the world. As David Seminara:

Economists have found no evidence of a labor shortage in the occupational groups that constitute the bulk of H-2B employment. George W. Bush was a vocal advocate for guestworker programs. In 2004, Bush proposed a new guestworker program that, had it been enacted, would have tripled the number of visas issued to seasonal workers. On January 18, 2009, his administration published new regulations that significantly reduced oversight of the H-2B application process and extended the definition of “temporary” in the H-2B context from 10 months to up to three years. The H-2B visa was created in 1986 (the same year of Reagan’s illegal alien amnesty), as part of the Immigration Reform and Control Act, which split the H guestworker program into an H-2A visa for agricultural guestworkers, and an H-2B visa for non-agricultural guestworkers. The popularity of the H-2B program for temporary, seasonal, non-agricultural guestworkers has soared from just 15,706 visas issued in 1997 to an all-time high of 129,547 in 2007. American companies filed petitions to request nearly 300,000 H-2B workers in FY 2008. Use of the H-2B program has morphed from its original intent to help employers that need seasonal and/or temporary workers. The majority of the program’s current users are neither small nor seasonal employers, but rather mid- to large-sized companies and recruiters that petition for H-2Bs to work for 10 months out of the year, year after year. Many of the businesses filing H-2B petitions for foreign workers are “body shops” that have no actual “seasonal or temporary” need for labor. Body shops can petition for large numbers of workers and then essentially sell them off to companies that either could not get their own H-2B workers or did not know how to do so.[3]

This is very clearly not a partisan issue; the entire Establishment, political and private sector, is in total agreement that more non-White immigration is always beneficial. Whether the labor is “specialized”[4] or not is irrelevant. We’ve also discussed the transformative role H-2A visas play in Maine’s targeted demographic transformation, and now the United States has offered to triple the number of H-2A visas issued to Guatemalans “to reduce the pressure on the Southern border”—which will in no way incentivize more to come. This comes—like Reagan’s amnesty and the creation of the H-2B visa, the “invade the world, invite the world” ethos of the neo-conservatives, and so on—under a “conservative” regime. As Charles Eisenstein astutely observes:

In opposing redistributive policies, conservative governments seem to see concentration of wealth as a good thing. You might too, if you are wealthy, because concentration of wealth means more for you and less for everyone else. Hired help is cheaper. Your relative wealth, power, and privilege are greater. Governments serving the (short-term) interests of the wealthy therefore advocate the opposite of the aforementioned distributive policies: flat-rate income taxes, reduction of estate taxes, curtailment of social programs, privatized health care, and so forth.

From the US Chamber of Commerce on down, this is seen as a good thing indeed. The Maine State Chamber of Commerce has become a leading voice in supporting an increased role for immigrants in the workforce. Republicans are happy to do their part; Jewish Republican State Senator Roger Katz:

Sponsored LD 1492, an Act to Attract, Educate and Retain New Mainers to Strengthen the Workforce…The bill in its original form would have established a state office for “new Mainers” to carry “out responsibilities of the State relating to immigrants in and into the State.” The bill also would have funded a second immigrant welcome center for the state, located in Lewiston and modeled on Portland’s New Mainers Resource Center, which receives $75,000 a year in state funding. Katz’s bill included funding for vocational and workforce training and English-language training, too. All told, the projected 2018–19 costs were $825,000. …“What has changed (about the immigration issue) is that as our workforce challenges have grown—you are hearing an outcry from the business community,” says Katz. “Because we need more workers, the voices in the Maine Legislature have changed from the usual social justice advocates. They are now being joined by chambers of commerce and business men and women from around the state (my emphasis). That’s starting to really shift the attitude.”[5]

Rachel Peric, Jewish executive director of the Soros-backed immigration advocacy group Welcoming America, concurs, and she uses Baltim0re, Maryland as one example of an immigration success story. The Partnership for a New American Economy (discussed in a previous installment) and their financial backers and corporate partners—Google, Intel, Microsoft, United Fresh Produce Association, Jewish venture capitalist and Managing Director of the Foundry Group Brad Feld, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, American Farm Bureau Federation, the US Chamber of Commerce, American Immigration Lawyers Association, Pinterest, Society for Human Resource Management, the Council for Global Immigration, Western Growers, and eWIC—agree: think of the GDP growth! Also in agreement are Vaishali Mamgain of the University of Southern Maine and Karen Collins, formerly of Catholic Charities Maine Refugee and Immigration Services in Portland: it appears only “white supremacists” object to “policies to facilitate refugee resettlement in Maine.” According to David Brenerman, “a Democratic member of Portland’s City Council who is Jewish” and Chair of the Economic Development Committee, and Julie Sullivan, Senior Advisor to the City Manager:

Immigration is an important part of this city’s economic growth strategy and improving immigrant integration is critical to ensuring Portland’s work force and vitality… The Committee’s research and public input seem to point to creating an Office of Economic Opportunity and Immigrant Integration…to also improve economic opportunity for youth, people of color, and other disadvantaged populations… There would be a Director overseeing the Office, with a Program Manager implementing the Immigrant Integration efforts and a Program Manager implementing the Inclusion and Equity efforts focused on people of color…[plus] proactive, consistent and systematic outreach to employers to identify jobs that are difficult to fill and subsequent partnering with Portland Adult Education, Southern Maine Community College, and the University of Southern Maine to provide those skills…The Director would work on the more macro level issues and would convene partner organizations, build the intern/apprentice/mentor programs, oversee the data tool development, and link with funders.

Who would this matrix of partners and funders include? Among those proposed were: Catholic Charities Refugee and Immigration Services, Coastal Enterprises, Inc. (CEI), the University of Maine Law School, Immigrant Legal Advocacy Project (ILAP), Maine Access Immigrant Network (MAIN), Maine Equal Justice Partners, New Mainers Resource Center and Portland Adult Education, Pine Tree Legal Assistance (PTLA), and the State of Maine Office of Multicultural Affairs. PTLA receives funding from the Sam L. Cohen Foundation, the Harvard University Consumer Project, and the J.T. Gorman Foundation, among others.[6] One of the JT Gorman Foundation’s primary financiers is the Jewish Burton Sonenstein, and the Investment Committee Chair is Maggie Keohan, who “advises high net-worth individuals and institutional clients throughout New England from Goldman, Sachs & Co.’s office in Boston.”

Maine Business Immigration Coalition advocates for immigration “from a business and economic perspective,” though not without the essential ingredients of ersatz compassion and humanitarianism; its partner organizations include: Barber Foods, Ready Seafood, Coastal Enterprises, Inc. (CEI), MaineHealth, Maine State Chamber of Commerce, SIGCO, several seafood companies, and of course the Partnership for a New American Economy (NAE). Also partnered, in one of the great ironies of this whole affair, is the Portland Buy Local campaign. Ready Seafood:

One of Maine’s largest lobster-processing companies, now has a workforce of more than 200 in Portland and Scarborough that’s more than half foreign born. … Ready Seafood has now developed a pipeline for new workers, making the time-consuming task of recruitment easier. … Ben Waxman, co-owner of American Roots, the Westbrook clothing manufacturer, echoes Skoczenski’s comment about the importance of immigrants to his company’s survival, … To make it easier for businesses to connect with immigrants and to help coordinate services, the city of Portland created the Portland Office of Economic Opportunity in 2017. Run by Julia Trujillo, its mission is to help integrate immigrants into the economy so that businesses can connect with potential employees. … Skoczenski points to the office as the source of Ready Seafood’s recruitment success: “Julia is the only reason this program is working for us.”[7]

If all of these businesses thrive on cheap labor, well of course it makes sense for them to donate to so-called philanthropic organizations which advocate for “immigrants’ rights” and open borders—they do their dirty work without any direct accusations of “dirty money” and lobbying efforts.

What we know is that for both ideological and economic reasons Maine finds itself “suddenly” in the crosshairs of the globalist establishment. From Time to the New York Times to The Christian Science Monitor to the Huffington Post,[8] we are told in unison that Maine is too old, too White, and in dire need of Haitian nurses, Guatemalan blueberry rakers, Somali who-knows-what?, and all the rest of it. As this sudden media blitz is totally organic and definitely not coordinated at all, enter Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post stage left: In “‘This will be catastrophic’: Maine families face elder boom, worker shortage in preview of nation’s future,” written by Jeff Stein (you can’t make this stuff up), the neo-liberals show their hand to anyone paying attention:

Across Maine, families like the Flahertys are being hammered by two slow-moving demographic forces — the growth of the retirement population and a simultaneous decline in young workers — that have been exacerbated by a national worker shortage pushing up the cost of labor (my emphasis). … The disconnect between Maine’s aging population and its need for young workers to care for that population is expected to be mirrored in states throughout the country over the coming decade, demographic experts say. And that’s especially true in states with populations with fewer immigrants, who are disproportionately represented in many occupations serving the elderly…“As the oldest state, Maine is the tip of the spear — but it foreshadows what is to come for the entire country.” (my emphasis) … Experts say the nation will have to refashion its workforce …. The results of not doing so fast enough are already visible in Maine…Care workers in Maine were paid about $11.37 an hour in 2017, according to an AARP report, with a 2019 minimum wage of $11 an hour. …“Even Dunkin’ Donuts pays you more.”…The rising demand for care is occurring simultaneously with a dangerously low supply of workers…“There are simply just not enough people to go around,” [Mary Jane Richards, chief operating officer at North Country Associates] said. “We try to elevate our wages, but then the nearest facility brings theirs up.”[9]

Oh, the horror of having to pay workers a living wage! Also of note in this piece is the commentary by mass non-White immigration advocate and senior fellow in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute Howard Gleckman. Gleckman is not Jewish.

Just kidding, of course he is! Gleckman makes the seemingly apropos-of-nothing argument that, “With climate change, towns get burned down, or people die in fires.” We’ve talked about climate alarmism before—in addition to the monetization of carbon emissions and the creation of a new financial market, “climate change” and open borders are synonymous—because “climate change causes migration,” we need to accept any and all (non-White) comers who will increase their consumption while we are expected to confine ourselves to matchbox-sized apartments, sterilize ourselves for the environment, and eat soy and maggot sausages, all while remaining great consumers in our own right, just in different ways, from the cradle to the grave.

Reposted with permission from The Anatomically Correct Banana.

---

[1] https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-slow-crash-the-shrinking-of-the-real-economy/5532131

[2] Ibid.

[3] https://cis.org/Dirty-Work-InSourcing-American-Jobs-H2B-Guestworkers

[4] “In practice, virtually any white-collar occupation qualifies as a specialty occupation for the H-1B program. It is used by employers to fill a variety of occupations, from accountants to reporters to school teachers to salesmen to software developers. There is nothing particularly special about the ‘specialty occupations’ as defined in the H-1B program.” https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/images/publications/Reforming_US_High-Skilled_Guestworkers_Program.pdf

[5] https://pinetreewatch.org/help-wanted-the-immigrant-opportunity-immigrants-can-greatly-help-fill-maines-workforce/

[6] https://ptla.org/sites/default/files/2015%20Audited-Public.pdf

[7] https://pinetreewatch.org/help-wanted-the-immigrant-opportunity-maine-employers-look-to-immigrants-to-fill-severe-gap/

[8] The HuffPo article was written by Jewish filmmaker Yael Luttwak (also affiliated with the Maine Jewish Film Festival, catalogued in Volume V): “We need to show that diversity works. With one million immigrants making their home in the United States each year, it’s urgent that those who believe deeply in America and the notion of diversity as a core American value, find ways to push back against the rising tide of discrimination against “the other.” The challenge for all of us now is to look, state-by-state, at how our communities are responding to immigration, and find the good news stories that epitomize the value of immigration and the bridges that have been built between immigrant and non-immigrant communities. A good place to start is Maine—one of the whitest states in America. Since 2015, I along with our documentary filmmaking team, have been following a group of female students—some new immigrants— some not, in South Portland as they navigate life in a public school. I co-directed, along with [Jewish] Abigail Tannebaum Sharon, the new documentary, “Maine Girls” which just premiered at the 2017 Camden International Film Festival and is now on the festival circuit and picked up for distribution by Kanopy – follows immigrant girls from the Congo, Jamaica, Somalia and Vietnam. What’s inspiring about these girls is that, even in this anti-immigration environment, teenagers will be teenagers. Through hip hop, culture, and common experiences in a Maine public school, the American and immigrant girls develop trust—with the help of a school curriculum built around tolerance and acceptance who end up enriching life in South Portland.”

[9] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/this-will-be-catastrophic-maine-families-face-elder-boom-worker-shortage-in-preview-of-nations-future/2019/08/14/7cecafc6-bec1-11e9-b873-63ace636af08_story.html

“Neoliberalisation and globalisation generate and utilise the mobility of both capital and labour. Meanwhile, labour migration is presenting a challenge to the observance of labour rights. Present-day methods of capital accumulation rely on the search for cheap labour and the relocation of production to territories that do not protect workers’ rights.” —Piotr and Pawel Zuk

It is a well-documented but much-ignored phenomenon that parts of the rural Midwest have been totally transformed due to meatpacking companies’ employment of almost exclusively Hispanic migrant labor to drive down labor costs. The effects were already stark in the early stages of America’s “browning”:

Meatpacking wages fell sharply after peaking in 1980. In Iowa, the average hourly earnings of meatpackers in 1981 was $11.33, 50 cents less than the US average $11.83. Wallace Huffman of Iowa State University noted that real meatpacking earnings fluctuated between 1963 and 1988, but were lower in 1988 than in 1963. … An INS agent in 1995 estimated that almost 25 percent of the workers in 222 meatpacking plants in Nebraska and Iowa were illegally in the US. …  According to meatpackers, there is very high turnover among 10 to 30 percent of the work force, so that a plant with 500 employees may issue 1,000 to 1,200 W-2 statements at the end of the year. Some critics of the meatpacking industry argue that the companies encourage high turnover to keep most workers at the low end of the wage scale. … In Albert Lea, Minnesota, city officials were not sure that they wanted a meat packing plant employing 700 that was closed for a year reopened. According to one official, “a meatpacking plant can butcher public budgets as well as hogs.” One study found that, despite new payrolls, per capita income declines in some small communities that attract meatpacking plants.[1]

From 1990 to 1996, many Midwestern localities witnessed their Hispanic populations grow anywhere from 200% to 500%, largely at the behest of major meatpackers and other corporate interests facilitating their new labor force’s re-settlement, though not without substantial assistance from the government, social advocacy groups and law firms, and religious charities. The movement of huge numbers of alien peoples into formerly high-trust, tight-knit communities might help companies’ bottom lines in terms of labor costs and general product consumption, but it splinters and ravages these communities—which is also by design. The Democrat Party benefits from a bumper crop of new voters, the religious charities get to feel righteous, the Chamber of Commerce gets its profits, and the assorted “social advocacy groups” get to act out particular ethnic grievances—often via the witting or unwitting accomplices in the Christian charities—under the guise of humanitarianism. The list of winners definitely does not include the locals:

Given their small populations, rural towns can be transformed almost overnight by immigration, leading to issues that range from an inability to communicate with public authorities to non-English speaking children in school. Lexington, Nebraska went from a population that was five percent Latino in the 1990 Census to nearly 45 percent Latino in 1994, on a Census re-check. The growth of the Latino population is attributed to IBP, a meat packer that employs 2,500 workers, and has a $58 million annual payroll, in a town of 9,000. The transformation of Lexington has drawn mixed reviews. On the one hand, business, especially in the downtown area, is up. However, some established residents complain that Spanish-speaking meatpackers and their families drive old cars without licenses and insurance, and that the needs of their children lower the quality of the schools. The crime rate in Lexington has doubled. … According to one Nebraska police chief, “where you have the meatpacking plants, you have an immigration of Hispanics, and you are seeing an increase of gangs.”[2]

This phenomenon has been replicated across the country in different industries, from Wisconsin’s dairy industry[3] to Georgian poultry.[4] In Maine, it is the blueberry, broccoli, forestry, egg, seafood, and apple industries.

Let us consider tiny Milbridge, Maine, home to the Mano en Mano organization first profiled in Volume III, as a starting point. Hispanics first started to come to the area when a sea cucumber processor used a labor contractor to hire migrant labor in 1997; sea cucumbers are similar to starfish and their meat is highly-prized in Asia. The first workers were former blueberry rakers, and network hiring subsequently led to more Hispanic migrants. Consequently, Milbridge, a town of 1,300, is mostly White, but 24% of the student body is now Hispanic. Wild lowbush blueberries in Maine are “raked” from barrens in the coastal forests of the northeastern (“Down East”) part of the state. Cherryfield Foods, Inc. is one of the largest blueberry producers in Maine and provides free housing to its predominantly Mexican workers. Cherryfield is owned by Oxford Foods in Nova Scotia, Canada. Maine produces about $85 million worth of blueberries a year. Throughout the 1990s and well into the 2000s, most of the seasonal harvesters were Hispanic immigrants or migrant laborers complemented by Micmac Indians from Maritime Canada. According to Maine’s Department of Labor, 18% of farm workers in the state are migrants, defined as those who traveled too far from their usual residence to return at the end of the workday. Ed Flanagan, president of Jasper Wyman and Son, a berry harvester,[5] told the Washington Post on April 10, 2006 that Hispanic workers are “like migratory birds. I mean, we don’t have to do much and they show up every year.” Washington County had almost no Hispanics in 1990, but today they dominate the harvest crews that “rake” berries from their bushes, not to mention the labor force of Aroostook County’s major broccoli farms, the coastal seafood processing plants, and other agricultural or seafood-related industries. The initial batch of migrant workers showed up because, “They say that they left California or Texas to enjoy the higher wages and better benefits associated with fewer newly arrived Mexican workers.”

The increased use of farm labor contractors is another major factor in the increased use of migrant Hispanic, mostly mestizo, labor in Maine’s agricultural industries, but the presence of advocacy groups such as Mano en Mano which are, in their own words, “working hard to alleviate impediments to settlement in the region,” is also a contributing factor to be considered. All of the laborers’ (and their families’) health care (including dental, eye care, and psychological care), transportation, and translation needs are provided for by another 501(c)(3) called the Maine Mobile Health Program, Inc. (MMHP), which is focused on “equitable healthcare and social justice.” Do you get free housing, healthcare, transportation, and psychological support through your job? MMHP gets a small subsidy from the US Department of Agriculture, and, according to the most recent financial statements I could find, over $1.4 million from the US Department of Health and Human Services. It was recently announced that MMHP—along with twenty other organizations, many of which we have covered such as MEJP, MIRC, and the like—would be receiving a $1.17 million grant from Maine Health Access Foundation.

In a joint project between Mano en Mano and Colby College entitled, “From Sojourner to Settler,” published in April 2017, we learn that when Mano en Mano conducted its first HUD-designed (Housing of Urban Development) needs assessment in 2011, “The organization found that 78.5% of the respondents of the HUD survey were born in Mexico; 89% self-identified as Hispanic/Latino. In that year, 93% were employed in farm-work.” Further, from the joint study conducted by Mano en Mano and Colby itself:

When asked, 98% of all respondents identified the town in which they live as “home” implying these sojourners have in fact become settled…[of respondents] under the age of 18 years. … 87% of these were born in the U.S. … Eighty percent of respondents to our survey identify as Latino or Hispanic. Eighteen percent identify as having two or more racial identities and 1% identify as White. Forty-three percent of respondents report speaking only Spanish in their household, while 45% report speaking both Spanish and English. Nine percent of households reportedly speak English only at home (my note: this is not “diversity,” this is an ethnic enclave)…22% of households don’t feel comfortable interacting or calling with police (my note: we can probably guess why).

What we can see here is that “documented” or not, the migrants are putting down roots and becoming settled, which is an ominous sign for Maine’s demographic future. The workers surveyed are already averaging over three children per family, which is well over the US average, but only slightly higher than the local average of 2.7. It doesn’t take much imagination to see where this is going, however.

One by-product of the reliance on predominantly Mexican-mestizo labor is that these families have coalesced into communities with a shared culture and language—which has made their ability to organize and demand better working conditions, benefits, and higher wages much easier, especially as, 1) their only competition locally is Whites who would demand even more and greater protections, and 2) there is a paucity of readily-available scab labor to replace these workers. In the late-1990s and 2000s, we began to see push-back against serious labor abuses as Mexican workers started to understand their rights and interface with local groups about unionization. Let’s use the saga of Jack DeCoster, farm magnate, as a filter, with a timeline combined from UC Davis’s catalogue Rural Migration News and Marler Clark’s website:

·         1996: DeCoster was fined $3.6 million for health and safety violations at the family’s Turner egg farm, which then-Labor Secretary Robert Reich termed “as dangerous and oppressive as any sweatshop we have seen.” Regulators found that workers had been forced to handle manure and dead chickens with their bare hands and to live in filthy trailers.

·         1996: In Turner, Maine, Mexican immigrants dominate the work force at the DeCoster Egg Farm, the largest brown-egg producer in the US…was fined $ 2 million by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration for violations of health and safety laws. This fine and publicity resulted in boycotts of DeCoster eggs, and a law approved in Maine that permits workers on large farms to unionize under state laws. Most farm workers are not covered by the NLRA.

·         1997: In December, the NLRB announced that it would issue complaints charging that DeCoster unlawfully interfered with workers engaged in union activities, spied on workers and fired union supporters; the United Paperworkers International is attempting to organize DeCoster workers. The charges were filed against the two successor companies, Maine Ag and Quality Eggs of New England. DeCoster paid $2 million to settle a $5.8 million federal fine for health and safety violations, and split into two companies…In the 1980s and 1990s, DeCoster was fined repeatedly for violations of workplace safety laws.

·         1999: The company paid $5 million to settle wage-and-hour claims involving 3,000 workers.

·         2002: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration fined the family’s Maine Contract Farming operation $345,810 for an array of violations. The same year, DeCoster Egg Farms of Maine paid $3.2 million to settle a lawsuit filed in 1998 by Mexican workers alleging discrimination in housing and working conditions. Afterward, DeCoster subdivided into eight smaller firms on 1,300 acres near Turner.

·         2008: Maine Contract Farming LLC of Turner, Maine, the successor to DeCoster Egg Farms, was fined $150,000 by OSHA for ordering workers to retrieve eggs from a building with a partially collapsed roof.

·          Jack DeCoster’s Turner and Winthrop Maine egg farms were sued in August 2011 by a plant manager who alleged that DeCoster treated Mexican-born as “virtual slaves.” The manager said that DeCoster told him to “get rid of the gringos” because Mexicans accepted his authority.[6],[7]

These abuses are just from DeCoster’s Maine farms; his farms in Iowa were shockingly worse.[8] What you’ll notice is that the suits and fines, with the one exception of the plant manager in 2011, have seemed to dry up over the last decade. Is it that DeCoster suddenly became a responsible and ethical human being, or is it that as the 2000s progressed, Hondurans, Guatemalans, Haitians, Jamaicans, and sub-Saharan Africans started arriving in Maine in appreciable numbers? The uniform ethnic make-up of the migrant workers in Maine throughout the 1990s and into the 2000s allowed the workers to band together and attempt to unionize as well as file class-action law-suits. Clearly this is not beneficial for the agricultural industry, so a more diverse work force had to be imported. Each success wave breaks the bargaining and organizational power of the group that comes before and keeps wages low. It also harms the domestic population for the aforementioned reasons. I’ll say it again: this has nothing whatsoever to do with humanitarianism.

The Mexican enclave in and around Milbridge will not last. Already Mano en Mano is listing Haitian Creole alongside Spanish for the translation services offered, and you will find large numbers of guest workers along the coast from Jamaica and Eastern Europe. This is before considering the huge influx of sub-Saharan Africans or the other mestizo groups from Central America. The Maine Department of Labor has started to organize job fairs targeting African immigrant communities in Lewiston and Portland, bringing together translators, NGOs, and prospective employers. From the “Immigrant and Refugee Integration and Policy Development Working Group Final Report” for the City of Lewiston, December 2017:

According to the 2017 Maine Chamber of Commerce report, new immigrants and their children are anticipated to account for 83% of growth in the U.S. workforce between 2000 and 2050…However, as the writers of the report indicate, to incentivize immigrant participation in the Maine economy, “we need to be receptive to the fact that many of the people who will grow our population, workforce, and economy will look different than most of us and have different backgrounds and cultures.”… Several area employers, including Staff Management, Aramark, L.L. Bean, Barber Foods, Pionite, Labor Ready, Central Maine Meats, Commonwealth Poultry, Cozy Harbor Seafood, the Harraseeket Inn, Clover Manor, Conform, St. Mary’s Regional Medical Center, HW Staffing, Central Maine Medical Center, TJ Maxx, J.C. Penney, Kohl’s, Lowe’s, Home Depot, BJ’s Wholesale Club, Wal-Mart (both retail and distribution), K-Mart, Hannaford, Shaw’s, Belanger Farms, Pineland Farms, and Goodwill, have adopted practices and policies to hire and support a diversified workforce.[9]

What all of this really means is that each successive wave of immigrants breaks the backs of the organizing attempts of the collected group before them, but the power brokers seem finally to have grasped that if you can’t even understand or communicate with the person working next to you, you sure as hell cannot propose unionizing to them. Thus, the more diverse a workforce, the less likely it is to be able to take collective action, and this is before considering long-standing ethnic grievances in addition to linguistic and cultural barriers. When they say “diversity is our strength” they mean “diversity is their strength,” for they envision a state of unlimited immigration from every nook and cranny of planet earth keeping things perpetually in the black.

Reposted with permission from The Anatomically Correct Banana.

---

[1] https://migration.ucdavis.edu/rmn/more.php?id=126

[2] Ibid.

[3] “Some Wisconsin dairy farmers, claiming that 40 percent of hired workers on dairies are immigrants, were quoted as saying: ‘If E-Verify passes, it will kill the dairy industry in Wisconsin.’ John Rosenow of Rosenholm-Wolfe Dairy asserted that ‘60 percent of the milk that’s harvested is harvested by immigrants, and the vast majority are probably undocumented.’”

[4] “The Washington Post on April 3, 2006 profiled immigration to Gainsville, Georgia, the self-proclaimed ‘poultry capital of the world.’ Between 1990 and 2005, the city’s population almost doubled to 32,000, while the number of Hispanics quadrupled, so that the town is now 50 percent Hispanic. Gainsville’s demographic change was induced by poultry processors such as Fieldale Farms, Koch Foods and Pilgrim’s Pride. About 3,000 of Fieldale’s 4,700 workers are Hispanic and earn $10 an hour. About 70 percent of the pupils in Gainesville Elementary are Hispanic, and 90 percent qualify for subsidized meals.”

[5] Berry farm Jasper Wyman and Sons paid $118,000 to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency in November 2010 for failing to properly complete I-9 forms on the 900 seasonal workers hired each year.

[6] https://migration.ucdavis.edu/rmn/more.php?id=250

[7] https://www.marlerblog.com/case-news/wright-county-egg-owner-decoster-seems-to-be-one-bad-egg/

[8] “In 2001, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that DeCoster was a “repeat violator” of state environmental laws, citing violations involving the family’s hog-farming operations. The family was forbidden to expand its hog-farming interests in the state. Also in 2001, DeCoster Farms of Iowa settled, for $1.5 million, a complaint brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that DeCoster had subjected 11 undocumented female workers from Mexico to a “sexually hostile work environment,” including sexual assault and rape by supervisors… n 2003, Jack DeCoster paid the federal government $2.1 million as part of a plea agreement after federal agents found more than 100 undocumented workers at his Iowa egg farms. It was the largest penalty ever against an Iowa employer. Three years later, agents found 30 workers suspected of being illegal immigrants at a DeCoster farm in Iowa. And in 2007, raids in Iowa uncovered 51 more undocumented workers.” https://www.marlerblog.com/case-news/wright-county-egg-owner-decoster-seems-to-be-one-bad-egg/

[9] https://www.lewistonmaine.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8885/REPORT—ImmigrantandRefugeeIntegrationandPolicyDevelopmentWorkingGroupFinalReport

There is a saying, “Shit rolls downhill,” and when considering the “refugee re-settlement” business—and it is in no small part a business—this saying is very apropos. Starting with the United Nations at the top, the nine major contractors in the US then “farm out” these refugees (most of whom are anything but) to approximately 350 sub-contractors to “seed” the refugees across the country. Most are settled in overwhelmingly white areas with high-trust and social cohesion under the auspices of humanitarianism and economic necessity. There is certainly an economic imperative for mass immigration on behalf of the Money Power, one which I will continue to illustrate, but there is also a very clear ideological motivation as well. As immigrants largely cluster in major cities, migrants must be artificially pumped into rural and/or less-“sexy” destinations by NGOs, the government, businesses, or some combination thereof. Migrant labor has been one of the primary drivers of the demographic transformation of areas in states from Oregon to Kansas to Georgia, but the vast network of re-settlement organizations, often with ample governmental or extra-governmental assistance, are able to pin-point and target areas to be totally “re-made.” These areas are always overwhelmingly white and generally unprepared for their diversity enema.

The state of Tennessee has pushed back against the federal government’s re-settlement overreach on Tenth Amendment grounds, and this is great, but unfortunately even in victory this would change little. As previously evidenced, many of these “charitable organizations,” such as Catholic Charities, do in fact receive substantial government (i.e., taxpayer) funding, and are thus beholden to the government as a kind of shareholder—though only in principle. The Six Degrees of Separation between the federal consortium of agencies and the private voluntary agencies (VOLAGs) and subcontractors provides tremendous latitude for “discretionary” re-settlement should the government, as it has under President Trump, decide to lower the refugee cap. This provides for a sort of humanitarian end-around where the Vatican or other globalist groups can wire money to groups on the Mexican side of the US border and facilitate refugees’ or, even better, “asylum-seekers’” passage to the American side, where the VOLAGs and subcontractors then provide transport to places like Maine. The asylum loophole is especially insidious.[1]

Under former Governor Paul LePage, Maine actually withdrew from the federal refugee re-settlement program, which should have ended the flow of refugees to the state, but—libertarians rejoice!—with the increasing privatization of “refugee re-settlement,” the well-intentioned decision has actually been counter-productive, which we’ll get to in a second. Canada’s provision for privatized refugee sponsorship, which is in addition to (read: above and beyond) governmental policy, has resulted in the highest rate of refugee re-settlement per capita in Canada of any Western country, presently over seven times that of the United States according to official figures.[2] This is of course nowhere near enough for the anti-White ideologues or for the special interests who want it fully privatized. The US and other countries are being pressured by the private sector to move closer to, and ultimately beyond, the Canadian model, although we are already in many ways in a state of de facto privatization. In the present American model, according to the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR):

If a State chooses to withdraw from the Program…ORR may select one or more other grantees, typically private non-profit organizations, to administer federal funding for cash and medical assistance and social services provided to eligible refugee populations in that State.

In Maine, Catholic Charities has become that organization, and given what we’ve discussed in previous installments about Catholic Charities, it is little surprise the demographic transformation of the state has only accelerated. The number of refugees in Portland alone has doubled from the year 2013, much of that number coming since LePage’s withdrawal of Maine from the federal re-settlement program. As many migrants arrived this past June as in the entirety of 2013. Fifty-one percent of the refugees admitted to the United States are from Africa, but a near-totality of refugees and asylum-seekers arriving in Maine are from sub-Saharan Africa, with a sprinkling of Middle Easterners. Regarding the Refugee Re-Settlement Industrial Complex, insert “Hotel California” joke here. As Don Barnett writes:

No state has ever been allowed to exit the program completely, though that was clearly the intent of the state of Maine. … It is the 1994 regulation (45 CFR 400.301), not the statutory 1984 Wilson/Fish Amendment that allows for the federal government to bring in a private contractor to run the program when the state has exited the program. The Wilson/Fish statutory amendment does not grant authority to either HHS or ORR to fund an alternative program as a way to establish or continue an initial resettlement program in a state when that state has withdrawn from the federal program. It unintentionally provided a framework and funding that is more advantageous to the contractors. That is why it is the preferred mode of contractor operations when a state has withdrawn from the program. Ironically, what was meant to reduce costs and ensure accountability became a boon to the contractors, which together with regulation 45 CFR 400.301, allowed them to bypass any state influence and impose even more costs on the states where they operate…It was instrumentalized to the advantage of the very entities it was meant to control.[3]

In other words, it functions exactly as it’s supposed to. It should be clear why it is advantageous for law firms, corporations, banks and other financial institutions, big agra, and other businesses to partner with these refugee re-settlement organizations; this “economic impetus” to humanitarianism is central to the Woke Capital model. This more than just a branding exercise, although “woke washing” is certainly a lucrative marketing tactic—it’s about curating a particular kind of consumer base, ensuring a steady supply of cheap, disposable labor (with private citizens often unwittingly padding the bottom line through confiscatory taxation, further aided by government corporate tax cuts or tax breaks), and a pliable, easily-“sold” population. You can’t ask questions if you don’t know what to ask.

This is not to say that the state isn’t at least partially involved—it is, more as a conduit than anything else, though. Labor is taxed at twice the rate of capital, which accelerates the accrual of capital to the top 1% and steepens the divide between haves and have-nots. It’s part of the reason someone like AOC has a base—they’re dimly aware that they’re being exploited, but given their lower IQs and critical thinking faculties—plus the sheer amount of programming—they simply regurgitate what they’re told: “White people.” Therein lies another benefit to trading Whites for Blacks and Browns. Think about all of the golems you hear screeching about “white supremacy” while Jewish interests act with impunity.

There’s another shrewd tactic here: by “allying” with “social justice,” corporations can then rhetorically attack the “nativist” Right and, with the Left now totally subverted, erode the final barrier to open borders and cheaper labor. Their rhetoric is then internalized by consumers to TAKE ACTION, either in the form of purchasing more products like the Kaepernick Nikes for social approval or literal action, which also involves purchasing products like milkshakes to hurl at anyone who isn’t officially-sanctioned ideologically. Speaking of milkshakes, it is empirically-accurate to state that the current groups flooding into the West do not prioritize wellness. Thus the Medical-Industrial Complex is also well-situated to make serious money. Unhappy with how society is? Here, take these pills!

As you can see, these things are all interrelated even if they aren’t always working in direct conjunction. We’ll get more into asset privatization specifically in the Nestlé/Poland Springs context in a future piece, but for our purposes here, I’ll simply state that the deleterious effect non-Whites (or certain other exceptions like Northeast Asians) have on their surroundings then “necessitates” privatization as corporations have preemptively consolidated resource control and may then mark it up for major profit. Consider the conditions of public drinking water in places like Flint, Michigan, and then consider the newly-created need for bottled water.

There’s another bonus here, too. When sufficient numbers of Blacks and Browns have moved to an area, and when elevated crime, ruined social capital have caused White Flight have driven down property values, the process of gentrification may begin, and enterprising developers stand to make a killing re-selling Whites and “model minorities” a facsimile of what they had before diversity. You may even have a situation like that in Detroit with Dan Gilbert (Quicken Loans/Rock Ventures/Cleveland Cavaliers/Temple Beth Israel) and his Bedrock Detroit project—the anarcho-capitalist wet dream. As an added bonus, local taxpayers will contribute $618 million to be eventually priced-out of their own homes. But as always—think of the GDP!

The smoke-and-mirrors is all meant to direct attention away from the primary cause of what is, indeed, White genocide: the profit motive. You see, the banks and the multi-nationals are run by people who despise you—some Jews and some Gentiles—but your destruction is less about this raw hatred, especially for the Gentiles involved, and more about removing you as an obstacle to greater profits. You would likely demand pesky nuisances like lunch breaks, weekends, and a livable wage. You wouldn’t have an eighth child you couldn’t afford to care for. You might question why, exactly, you should have to pay almost double your home’s value by the end of a thirty-year mortgage. By creating a snake oil “academic” framework through which to lend cultural credence and legitimacy to concepts such as “privilege,” the private sphere is given carte blanche to dismantle the obstinate White population and sell their nations for parts—with ample government assistance in the interim stage, as the state is run by and for the financial institutions and corporations until it, too, can be dismantled and discarded.

Jewish hatred of the Gentile, especially Whites, is vital to understand, as is their wildly disproportionate share of personal and professional influence over socially and morally corrosive institutions. But without first grasping the profit motive and the economic forces behind White replacement, you cannot combat Jewish use of power for privileging their in-group and acting out their millennia-long hatred of Whites. They would not be able to do this without the means to do so, or without willing White collaborators motivated by greed and class-based disdain for lower-, working-, and even middle-class Whites. Their dumb golems are useful, too, as they work to erode nationalist sentiments among all groups of people with the exception of themselves. Neo-liberalism is the vehicle, and it must be destroyed.

Reposted with permission from The Anatomically Correct Banana.

---

[1] “In FY 2019, the United States expects to resettle up to 30,000 refugees, as well as processing more than 280,000 asylum seekers.  They will join the over 800,000 asylum seekers who are already inside the United States and who are awaiting adjudication of their claims.” https://www.state.gov/refugee-admissions/

[2] “Provisions for the Private Sponsorship Program were introduced as part of the Immigration Act of 1976. It was recognized at that time that in addition to a planned government effort to help refugees, Canada would benefit from a mechanism that would allow private citizens and corporations to become involved in refugee resettlement. [What was originally viewed as a very incidental part of the system of refugee intake, if it were ever to be utilized, quickly became the most imaginative innovation in refugee resettlement with the massive intake of Indochinese refugees beginning in 1979 and 1980 in which, during an 18- month period, 32,000 refugees were sponsored by the private sector.]”  “Private Sponsorship of Refugees Program” Discussion Paper, Refuge, Vol. 12, No. 3 (September 1992).

[3] https://cis.org/Report/Do-States-Have-Say-Refugee-Resettlement-Program