Mass Migrations, Politicians, Hypocrisy and Hard Choices

MigrantsDo you believe that your President and Congressfolk are honest with you? Obamacare provides better care cheaper and you could keep your doctor, right?

We blundered into Fox News and regretted it. It was a propaganda piece full of deceit and short of logic and facts. Just like, in other words, the other media outlets these days. Perhaps a bit less relentlessly Democratic in out look, as though that excused the flimflam.

The subject was the currently omnipresent ISIS and related mass migration into Europe and now the U.S. by special invitation of the President and the leading Democrats and Republicans. It was revealing mostly of the low ebb of U.S. journalism.

President Obama was reviled for claiming that ISIS is “contained” just before the Paris murders. The Prez was further criticized for having failed to make ISIS disappear. Both complaints are specious in the extreme.

We note that first, ISIS is a result of Bush policies and second, that it is indeed contained; it is now losing territory. Sending a few thugs to Paris as a distraction does not reverse that geographic fact.

Second, those decrying the President’s policy do not explain either their different preferred solution nor how they would pay for it. Admittedly, the Prez has not explained how he intends to finance his more modest approach. All is bombast.

Mr. Trump is the only voice presently recognizing that flooding the U.S. and Europe with foreigners, let alone Moslems who absolutely reject Western culture, is a problem. For that, he is reviled though it is truth, if an unpleasant one. Senator Cruz tries to follow more circumspectly so as not to lose too many Latino votes.

In history, no effective difference has existed between ‘mass migration’ and ‘invasion’ from the standpoint of the locals. The result is the same. New Mexico has extensive ruins of now vanished pueblo peoples who inhabited the area until the arrival of migrating Athabascans from the north, who are now the indigenes known as Navaho. It is a common pattern.

So when locals who have invested, built up and enriched a territory face masses of new arrivals who have no local roots and no source of support, those locals must stop and think or be overrun to their cost, by needy arrivals.

To that end, all countries have laws controlling admissions and enforcement apparatus to apply those laws. The rationale is to limit invasion to economically and culturally manageable levels. But E.U. and U.S. leaders are ignoring those laws and excluding those subjects from the debate and worse, the media are supporting that profligacy with taxpayer wealth.

None are discussing how many ‘refugees’ may be received, put to work, provided welfare, educated and so on given available resources. None discuss the miscibility of such alien cultures as those involved, nor the probable result of massive admixture. The public hears only propaganda, appeals to emotion.  The political leaders are so corrupt that they no longer even attempt to fulfill their responsibilities. Nor are their constituents much better.

We have made a fine mess in the Middle East and now, we are supposed to choose between drowning our children in it, or having the sailors of our ship of state cut off the hands of drowning folk trying to climb aboard after we sunk their rickety vessel. And it’s all to be someone else’s fault …

The bottom line seems to be: Giving up what we have made to – maybe – save some refugees (if they are refugees) appears a version of sending good money after bad. Pointless, and destructive. To us, if not to the fortunes of our elected leaders.

So, it’s really just one more reason that we need new leaders. (Who will come, if they come, with no guarantees …)

It’s not very nice, but the refugees and we have made it. Things won’t improve by pretending.





About Jack Curtis

Suspicious of government, doubtful of economics, fond of figure skating (but the off-ice part, not so much) Couple of degrees in government, a few medals in figure skating; just reading and suspicion for economics ...
This entry was posted in Ecomomics, Goverrnment, Politics, Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s