Mass-Immigration Meme Spreads

Nearly a year ago, I posted: “Immigration Armageddon” and described the modern level of legal immigration as “mass immigration.” Since then, legal immigration has not become a political issue; illegal immigration is a big issue of course, but hardly anybody even mentions legal immigration.

Just recently, I was surprised to come across a couple of mentions of “mass immigration.” So, the meme is spreading. And my eyes almost popped out of my head when I saw the commercial below from Progressives for Immigration Reform on MSNBC. Their slogan:

“Tell our leaders to reduce mass-immigration until all Americans are back to work.”

That sounds like something Pat Buchanan would say, right? But this commercial is from a left-wing group. I am amazed by this outbreak of common sense because I’ve had a lot of conversations that go like this:

Green: “We must protect the environment from the sprawl.”
Me: “Yes, reducing immigration would be a great way to do that.”
Green: “Oh my god! We can’t do that! We’re a nation of immigrants!”

I once knew an artist who was photographing a rural county as it was being paved over. He was outraged at the housing developments being built. Yet he lived in one of those houses, and he was an immigrant. And many of the people moving into the new houses were also immigrants. When I pointed this out to him, he just stared at me. In his circle, mass-immigration was never questioned.

Of course, environmental impact isn’t the only consideration when trying to calibrate immigration levels. Mass-immigration has delivered a crushing blow to working-class Americans. In one of the conference videos on their website, Leah Durant, Executive Director of PFIR said that some of the wards of Washington D.C. have 40% unemployment rates. Do those areas need more people? I don’t think so.

As we speak, large numbers of middle-class Americans are being turned out of their jobs at IBM in favor of low-paid immigrant workers. The truth is that mass-immigration only benefits the oligarchs by reducing their payroll costs.

President Obama brought in 1 million legal immigrants per year during the Great Recession when unemployment was our biggest problem. That alone may cause him to be turned out of the White House.

Larry Kudlow is a Declinist

For some reason, at Monday night’s presidential debate, CNBC’s Larry Kudlow was carrying on about President Obama being a “declinist” – meaning somebody who accepts the USA’s declining power in the world.

At 4:25 into the video below, Kudlow says:

“There’s the Group of 20, and there’s the United States. Does Obama want us to be one of the Group of 20, or does he want us the be the #1 world leader in economy, military, foreign policy, democracy?”

However, Kudlow is a hard-core globalist and approves of the USA’s membership in the World Trade Organization. And guess what? We only get one vote in the WTO, and we don’t have veto-power like we do on the United Nations Security Council.

In Kudlow’s pet WTO, we are only 1 of 157.

And it is our membership in the WTO that is stripping us of our superpower status.

Note to Kudlow: We most certainly are in decline, and you and your globalist pals are responsible.

What is Colob?

I heard people talking about what sounded like “colob.” But when I googled it, a bunch of weird stuff came up. Turns out that the proper spelling is “Kolob” and Kolob is a Mormon star or planet; they don’t seem to be agreed upon which.

Since there is a Mormon running for president, Mitt Romney, I’m guessing that there will be quite a few people typing “What is Colob?” into Google. And if you just did that, try it again with a “K” or just go straight to the Wikipedia Kolob page.

Mitt Romney is a Redistributionist

After Romney’s infamous “47%” video came out, the Republicans responded with the Obama “redistributionist” video. However, there are more ways to redistribute income than just the tax code. And one of those ways is globalization.

Think of a plant before Romney sends it to China. The American workers there are receiving income. After the plant is moved to China, a small sliver of that income is redistributed to the Chinese workers. And the bulk of it is redistributed straight into Romney’s Cayman Islands account.

This form of “inverse redistribution” is what globalization is all about.

Note to democrats: if you support globalization, you are helping to build the oligarchy.

IBM – A Threat to American Sovereignty?

In a post discussing IBM’s cavalier attitude toward US immigration law, Robert X. Cringely wrote:

“IBM has no fear of the U.S. legal system.”

To that, I would add that multinationals also do not respect the laws of mere nation-states like the USA. They look at our laws as the result of hayseed provincials who just don’t understand the global economy, and how “god’s work” is really done.

Consider this quote from “Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power” by Steve Coll:

“Exxon’s far-flung interests were at times distinct from Washington’s. Lee Raymond would manage Exxon’s global position after 1989 as a confident sovereign, a peer of the White House’s rotating occupants. Raymond aligned Exxon with America, but he was not always in sync; he was more akin to the president of France or the chancellor of Germany. He did not manage the corporation as a subordinate instrument of American foreign policy; his was a private empire.”

Questions to ponder:

1) If IBM is a sovereign power, and it is stripping the USA of middle-class jobs, do you consider it to be a friendly power, or an enemy power?

2) Do you think it is wise to allow multinationals to grow more powerful than the federal government? To the point where they no longer feel the need to obey US law?