Daily Events Top

The benefits of invasion

The benefits of invasion

“Cui bono!  Who benefits?  Follow the money!”  These are often-repeated battle cries when trying to figure out the true reasons behind some seemingly inexplicable catastrophe.  Big things don’t happen unless somebody benefits from them, especially if one suspects the Big Thing in question has been deliberately staged.

Who benefits from the invasion spilling across our southern border?  “Invasion” is the only way to describe it now, especially if reports that the already agreeable Mexican government is now actively participating in the mass migration from Central America hold up.  There certainly didn’t seem to be a lot of frustrated amnesty-seekers piling up on the southern border of Mexico before now.  We already knew the flood of “migrants” was set to increase dramatically over the coming months.  This thing is just getting started.  If Mexico actively assists the assault on the U.S. immigration system, you’ll be astonished at how far it goes.  It will end up on lists of the largest, fastest population movements in history.

So the Mexican government can be counted on the list of invasion beneficiaries, not only because they don’t want the migration waves stalling out and settling in Mexico, but because the human tide sweeping into America will produce changes in American law they find salutary.  The governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Belize, etc. are also beneficiaries.  They don’t mind having a release valve for their excess unhappy population, and they can eventually look forward to American dollars flowing home from those who get whisked along the “pathway to citizenship” in the U.S.  Believe me, if those Central American governments wanted to stop the migration wave, they would do so, swiftly and brutally.

Obviously, the border violators themselves benefit from their actions, or they wouldn’t do what they’re doing.  One cannot blame them for seeking a better life, especially when they know the system in the U.S. has been rigged to let them stay indefinitely.  They have every reason to make the journey, and no reason not to.  How anyone could be honestly surprised that large number of people would respond logically to this cost/benefit analysis is baffling.

That’s the understanding behind the description of illegal immigration as an “act of love” by open-borders advocates.  Is handing a small child over to violent gangsters for a dangerous journey of over a thousand miles an “act of love?”  I gather we’re not supposed to ask that.  But we do need to ask who’s coming in, along with the unaccompanied alien minors, who get all the headlines, but actually comprise less than half of the migratory wave.  Back in May, when most media outlets were still pretending Obama was some sort of deportation fiend, Bloomberg Businessweek advanced an interesting theory:

To secure U.S. borders and win Republican support for immigration reform, President Obama stepped up deportations of unauthorized immigrants, especially those with criminal records. Whether the border is now more “secure” is debatable.

For the nations of Central America, these policies have been a disaster. An influx of displaced deportees has fed crime and violence that were already out of control—spurring more El Salvadorans, Guatemalans, and Hondurans to seek safety in the U.S., which has led to more asylum requests and deportations.

The U.S. government has a strong interest in stopping this perpetual mayhem machine. Central America’s instability and weakness have helped make it a transshipment point for 80 percent of the cocaine entering the U.S. From 2000 to 2010, the number of Central American migrants to the U.S. rose by more than 50 percent; after Mexico, the three countries that produce the most unauthorized immigrants to the U.S. are El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. What did the U.S. expect would happen when it dumped more criminals into countries already notorious for their high homicide rates, thriving made-in-the-USA gang networks, and weak judiciaries?

With the overwhelming majority of murders—as many as 95 percent of them—going unpunished in the three countries, it’s no wonder the number of Central Americans filing U.S. asylum claims based on “fear of return” more than doubled from 2012 to 2013.

Now, what Businessweek isn’t telling you is that hardly anyone was actually getting “deported” – on the contrary, even aliens with criminal records are routinely released back onto American streets when their time in detention centers ends.  The people they’re referring to were mostly repelled at the border.  Obama began counting those as “deportations” to make himself look tougher, a classic numbers con.  So what they’re really saying is that a large number of very bad people were trying to get across the border, and failing.  But now the border is open, and they’re succeeding.  There have been reports of smuggling rings renting children to anyone who wants to join the flood of “families” into the United States.  The Border Patrol has also said the savage MS-13 gang is actively recruiting new members right out of the Nogales processing center in Arizona, using the same phone banks set up by the Red Cross to help unaccompanied minors locate family members in the U.S.  Comforting, isn’t it?  We must count outright criminals as big beneficiaries of the invasion policy.

There’s also an interesting piece from Joseph Lawler at the Washington Examiner that suggests it’s actually improving economic conditions in some regions that are financing this massive movement north: “Faster development south of the U.S. may have decreased Mexican immigration by narrowing the income gap, while it may have increased Honduran immigration by reducing poverty and making travel affordable for families who previously lacked the means to come to the U.S. but still would benefit from the greater opportunities and higher income potential.”  Lawler also notes that the war-zone conditions of violence commonly cited for inspiring the exodus are more true in some Central American countries than others, and even in hyper-violent Honduras, 2013 might actually have been a relatively good year.

The legal citizens of the United States are not, at any rate, under any moral or legal obligation to hold the border open for even the best-intended migrants.  In fact, our government is legally and morally obliged to stop this, immediately.  The Administration has simply decided not to, and is prepared to do vigorous battle with anyone who tires to force it to do its duty.  Every Obama immigration policy was deliberately designed to summon the people who are now arriving, and make their arrival easier.  In fact, Texas Gov. Rick Perry charges that the Border Patrol has been held forty-five miles back from the actual border, to ensure that incoming travelers are on American soil, and therefore an American legal problem, before their first encounter with border agents.  Perry called for the deployment of effective forces to repel the invasion.  President Obama could do this tomorrow, but he won’t.  This, again, would not be happening unless there was some benefit for those who manufactured the crisis.

Business interests in search of cheap labor are all in favor of mass illegal immigration, of course.  That’s why the amnesty caucus has a strong Republican component.  You will note that none of these business magnates or “compassionate” billionaires live on the border, or have announced plans to let illegal aliens live in their homes.  This leads to an important point about uncontrolled immigration: the people who pay the costs are almost universally against it.  Have you seen a lot of major media interviews with the people who live in border communities that illegals tend to pass through?  No?  There’s a good reason for that.  The mainstream press is not at all interested in letting you hear what they have to say.  But people who are complete insulated from the negative effects of mass migration can get all the air time they want.

Bill Whittle made this point in a recent installment of his “Firewall” video blog, after an ominous observation about the centralization of power which comes after legislatures vote themselves into irrelevance:

The same questions could be asked of the latest round of billionaires who teamed up to demand amnesty.  Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and Sheldon Adelson are completely and totally insulated from the negative effects of uncontrolled immigration, and so are their families, for generations to come.  Even if they don’t have plans for big personal profit from crashing the American workforce, it’s very affordable moral posturing to demand “comprehensive immigration reform” when you personally won’t experience a single one of its negative effects.  What do they care, if a bunch of working-poor American citizens can’t find jobs, or some ranchers near the Rio Grande get killed during the next amnesty stampede, or mean streets they will never visit are teeming with imported MS-13 gangsters?  It’s easy for them to demand policies that other people will pay for.

Which, of course, is the driving principle of Big Government in general, so it’s no surprise that open borders are intellectually sympatico with redistribution enthusiasts.  The key to understanding why the Cloward-Piven strategy of manufactured crisis guided Obama’s destruction of American immigration law is to appreciate how much socialists gain by overloading various systems – beginning, but hardly ending, with the immigration system.  Of course the prospect of permanently altering the electoral landscape with millions of new Democrat voters is important – it’s so obvious that it’s considered extremely vulgar to say it out loud.  But there are more gains for the Left beyond fresh voting muscle.

Mass immigration will make Obama’s transition of America to a part-time, easily-controlled workforce much easier.  The great thing about the part-time workforce is that it’s a numbers game, just like the one Obama ran when he was pretending to be a two-fisted deportation maniac.  All that really matters to the mainstream media, when a Democrat is president, is the total number of jobs.  The horrifying June unemployment report was universally reported as a stunning success, even though it said we lost half a million full-time jobs and replaced them with 800,000 part-time jobs.  Only a week later are analysts starting to reread the triumphalist reports and see things the way I did on the day the report came out.  A workforce reconfigured to accept part-time work will be much easier to placate with headlines that claim lots of jobs have been created, without reading past the fold to see what kind of jobs they were.

Both Big Government and Big Business benefit directly from the shift of the American lower middle class into part-time employment.  Part-timers are more dependent upon government benefits, and less attached to both free-market capitalism and the companies they work for.  A massive influx of low-skill people with modest salary demands is just the ticket to complete that transformation.

Those who wonder if Obama might have shot himself in the foot by creating this massive crisis are completely missing the point of how Big Government gets bigger.  Here’s a bit of grim news from CBS today:

The Homeland Security agency responsible for removing immigrants who are in the country illegally will run out of money by mid-August unless Congress approves President Barack Obama’s emergency request for $3.7 billion to help deal with a flood of child immigrants crossing the border illegally without their parents, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson says.

Additionally, Customs and Border Protection, whose 20,000-plus Border Patrol agents are responsible for arresting illegal border crossers, will be out of money by mid-September at the “current burn rate,” Johnson told the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday as he defended the president’s emergency budget request.

Johnson said if Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol run out of money, the Homeland Security Department “would need to divert significant funds from other critical programs just to maintain operations.”

Wow, look at that!  Government agencies responding to a crisis by declaring themselves broke and desperately in need of more money!  If you didn’t see that coming, you’re a few moves behind in a chess tournament where your money and freedom are the prize.  Do you see any evidence, anywhere, that this border crisis is hurting the Leviathan State or its advocates?  The whole thing is turning into an irresistible, moralist demand for more money.  It’s not as if they’ll be forced to rob any of the Left’s other favorite constituencies to get the cash.  It’s far more likely to become part of the rolling “deficit spending today, tax increases tomorrow” con we’ve been suffering under for decades.

Who benefits from the invasion?  It should come as no surprise to learn that the answer is, “everyone who caused it.”

 

 

Sign Up
DISQUS COMMENTS

FACEBOOK COMMENTS

Comment with Facebook