Immigration: The Refugee Scam

SellwynThumbby Selwyn Duke8/27/15
Jeb Bush has called illegal migration “an act of love.” And all over the West we see nations being loved to death, with endless human waves from Third World countries washing ashore. The results were predictable and are now plain: balkanization, riots, ethnic and racial strife and no-go areas in European lands. Yet we’re told that accepting what are “refugees” is a humanitarian imperative. Yet no one, it seems, points out an obvious fact, something that really is the crux of the matter.

If a stranger in need happens by your area and you’re a charitable sort, you may take him in for a time, feed him and provide other basic necessities.

You don’t generally make him an official part of your family and empower him to help decide on finances, what products to buy, how your kids will be educated and what values will prevail within your home.

The point? At issue in the current “refugee crisis” is not charity and the humane treatment of refugees. This isn’t only because most of the migrants in question may not even be refugees.

It’s because the issue is granting uninvited guests citizenship.

People talk about the financial burden of accommodating Third World migrants, largely because money (as opposed to national integrity) is all a demoralized and denationalized people think to discuss and because finances are a politically correct subject. But a national family can recover from devastated finances. It can’t recover from a destroyed national family.

I have pointed out again and again and again that the groups represented by virtually all illegal migrants and refugees — and 85 percent of legal immigrants since 1965 — vote for socialistic candidates between 70 to 90 percent of the time upon being naturalized. Related to this but also generally overlooked is that the people make the culture and government. Replace a Western people with Muslims or Mexicans and you no longer have Western civilization. You have Mexico Norte or Iran West.

Unfortunately, the granting of aid and the granting of citizenship have been so melded into one amorphous, superficially homogenous blob of bad policy that most people don’t even recognize they should be two distinct and separate issues — as they had been for most of history.

Of course, this serves the Left’s ends. The Refugee Crisis™ debate is framed as a battle between compassionate liberals responding to desperate pleas and coin-counting, callous, conservative reactionaries. But charitable motives animate the Left little, if at all. Liberals are notoriously tightfisted with (their own) charitable dollars; even more to the point, when a shipload of Jews fleeing Nazi persecution wanted safe haven in the US, leftist icon FDR turned it away. It’s one of those curious coincidences in history that the Left’s attitude toward refugees changed precisely when leftists discovered they could import voters who would empower them.

And does attaching something as a rider — citizenship — to charity aid the cause of charity? Are people more or less likely to offer charity to a person if the act begins and ends with charity, or if they must grant the individual some decision-making power in their home as well? That’s a package deal only a masochist could love.

So there’s an easy way to uncover liberals’ true motivations and whether they’re serious about charity for refugees. Make a simple offer: you’ll give bona fide refugees safe haven, and you’ll do your best to ensure they’re treated well. But there’s no citizenship. Ever. And they’ll be expected to eventually return to their homelands. See if the leftists bite…anything but your extended hand.

But liberals have already tipped their hand. Andrew Neather, a former adviser to ex-British prime minister Tony Blair, admitted in 2009 that one of the goals of the mass immigration authored by his Labour Party was “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.” Barack Obama said in February he was “pretty optimistic” that because immigration was making the US “more of a hodgepodge of folks,” conservatism would be drowned out. Even more incredibly, there was this report, which tells us that “Obama’s amnesty plan is to use illegal aliens as ‘seedlings’…[who will] ‘navigate, not assimilate,’ as they ‘take over the host,’ create a ‘country within a country’ and start ‘pushing the citizens into the shadows,’” as I wrote in March. And a refugee scam is part of this: in order to get around immigration law and maximize Third World migration into the US, the Obama administration is categorizing as many people as possible as “refugees.”

This brings us to a contradiction here. On the one hand, liberals sometimes point out that despite doom-and-gloom prognostication, we live in the most “peaceful era in human history.” And they cite statistics backing up the assertion. On the other, they claim we must suddenly accommodate endless troves of “refugees” fleeing persecution. Question: if the world is unprecedentedly peaceful, why now do we have a supposedly worse refugee crisis than in more warlike times?

There’s another contradiction. We’re told that prosperous countries have a moral responsibility to the world’s poorer nations. So why then are wealthy Asian Tigers never asked to absorb any “refugees”? Japan, in fact, has virtually no immigration whatsoever despite having an extremely low birthrate and shrinking population. Moreover, since many refugees are Muslim, why aren’t Saudi Arabia, Qatar, The United Arab Emirates and the other oil-rich Arab nations taking them in? Wouldn’t it seem a natural fit? (Then they could stop importing the Filipinos and others they use for domestic help.) Maybe they know something we don’t.

In a sense, most of the world could be said to comprise would-be economic refugees. After all, how many people in Asia, Africa and Latin America wouldn’t want to emigrate to the West and enjoy the welfare state? And how many should, and can, the West absorb? One billion? Two billion? Three billion?

There undoubtedly are people in this world facing serious persecution. As to this, the West in general and the Obama administration in particular have done nothing to aid, for instance, the Christians being slaughtered in Muslim lands. But the bottom line is that the “refugees” are coming to the West simply because the West is nicer than where they come from. And they will keep coming until they’ve turned the West into where they’ve come from — unless we change course.

There’s much talk today about anchor babies, but that’s only part of our obsession with granting citizenship to foreigners. Workers should be expected to work and go home. Guests should be expected to visit and go home. For whether or not you believe charity begins at home, for certain is that conflating it with family status is robbing us of our home.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to • (1177 views)

This entry was posted in Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Immigration: The Refugee Scam

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    It all goes back to The Camp of the Saints. Liberals are suckers for a sob story, especially when the sobbing person is likely to support them anyway. The possibility that the story might be a lie is irrelevant. And if the refugee is in fact a criminal, so what — as long as the liberals making the decisions aren’t the victims.


    Exactly – immigration is destroying this country more surely than any other poisonous concoction of the Left possibly could.

  3. Steve Lancaster says:

    During the fifty or so years Ellis Island was focus of immigration into the US some 12 million people passed through its halls with the largest numbers pre WWI and post war. They were no richer than those coming across our borders today. However there is one critical difference the bulk of them came here legally. They obeyed the laws on immigration and for the most part became assimilated into America. The idea of a hyphened-American would be utterly un-comprehendible. They came here to be Americans not something foreign in America.

    I have no problems with immigrants who desire to obey the laws. It is the vast numbers who believe that they have some sort of right to squat and be recognized as citizens with the rights of citizens. They must go back and wait in line with the millions who have been waiting, some for years, to come here legally. Perhaps we could expedite the process by letting in say 10 who have been waiting years for every one who is deported.

    No one, IMHO, is entitled to any government support until they have proven that they can get and hold employment for 5 years and they must be a citizen.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      One thing that helped in assimilation is that the ethnic communities were much smaller than the barrios in many major cities today, and didn’t have quite so large a push to grow from continuing mass immigration. The fact that most of the Latin American immigrants speak Spanish helps retard the process of assimilation, and this is intensified when ethnic activists and their political allies deliberately seek to maintain this separate ethnic/racial identity to maximize their political influence.

      • Steve Lancaster says:

        One of the thoughts that Eric Hoffer presents in the True Believer, is that the immigration waves of the 19th and 20th century created a new person on the world stage, the American.

        Many of these immigrants were from southern and eastern Europe with names full of consonants, thus on arriving at Ellis Island Muller became anglicized to Miller, Greenstein became Green, and almost anything ending ski was shortened or became Smith. The important thing is that with a new name came a new persona this is not happening now with immigration. The goal seems to be grab as much as you can from the crazy gringos, and they are.

  4. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Here’s an article worth reading: Mass Legal Immigration Will Finish Conservatism.

    Predictions for the future:

    + Conservatism is all but dead

    + Christianity will fade into an unrecognizable thing

    + Canada could reap a boon of migratory Americans looking for a way out of this morass. American cities will become even bigger havens of crime. Within a decade, fires and rolling riots will be the norm.

    + Capital will flee this country and America, once considered the safe haven for investment, we’ll slouch toward Gomorrah, economically and morally.

    + American universities will also be aflame.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Yes, I saw that and commented on it. (Some of the comments were by people expressing surprise that NRO would actually include such an article today.)

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Yes, it was surprising for NRO to include an article that wasn’t funneled through the delusions and PC-talk of Establishment Republicanism. Remarkable.

        And do I sound too pessimistic? I really don’t think people have any idea what kind of shitstorm is coming. America is like a basket in which one thread after enough has been removed. At some point the contents will fall out the bottom.

        The kind of shallow “nice but not good” Progressivism being indoctrinated has created a passive boob who will give a bye to the oligarchy that is forming all around us. Just as it has become illegitimate to criticize anything female, homosexual, or black, it will become illegitimate to criticize anything that is of government. And with the masses truly acting like masses — more concerned with collecting tattoos than safeguarding their liberties — there will not be any kind of electorate minding the store.

        Which is very close to where we are now. Yes, we’re frustrated that we voted the Republicans in and they haven’t kept their promises. But this is the new norm. There is no changing that. It is one-party rule in the guise of a two-party system.

        What I won’t do is pretend otherwise. Yes, there are some good men and women here and there. But they are a minority spitting into the wind. The future of America as an idea is bleak.

        What many here will not be surprised at is the truly Leftist/Communist initiatives that will be rammed down our throats in the next decade. Obama has opened the floodgates for the very idea and habit of bypassing the rule of law and any kind of restraint. If you don’t like some universities trying to eradicate “he” and “she” from the language, you ain’t seen nothing yet. And the problem is that with the Progressive indoctrination, there is no principled stance against this. All one can do is say “Whatever.” No one really knows what moral issues could energize the moral and intellectual obtuse yutes (and their parents, and often their grandparents) of today.

        Rush says about the only thing that gets yutes hot and bothered is having to pay their phone or cable bill. Look for that to become socialized in the very near future. There will be no holding back. Equal wages. Equal educations. Equal automobiles. Equal living abodes. And it’s all “fair.” It will be, and is becoming, Communism.

        There is no hope for America. We are being overrun by a third-world nation and not only do people not object, they think its commendable (even “compassionate”). It’s possible that other countries such as Canada, Australia, and a few others will avoid our fate. But if we can’t find the gumption to throw the illegal bums out, how are we ever going to politically throw the home-brown elected bums out?

        We’re neutered as an electorate. We’re dumb, blind, shallow, short-sighted, vulgar, and apathetic (unless its about shams such as global warming). In many respects, we’re going to deserve the fate that we’re building.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          One possible example of where this sort of thing can be found in the dystopian Agenda 21 books by Glenn Beck and Harriet Parke (who had the original idea). I just read the second, and I may do a review of it.

          • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

            Sounds like an interesting, and possibly depressing, book.

            I find the problem with this stuff is not that people come up with stupid ideas and try to force their stupid idea upon us. It’s that we’ve become a bunch of eunuchs and cowards. And we instead of noting our surrender and admitting to it, we call it “nice” or “tolerant” or “compassionate.” We’ve become an civilization unable to stick up for a good or a better idea.

            And that’s fatal. We have thus left ourselves open to the rule of the most unscrupulous. And that will have consequences.

            • Timothy Lane says:

              I haven’t read the first book (I got the second in the discount pile at Books-A-Million last Friday), but the second involves escapees from the camps set up for the population.

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          It’s possible that other countries such as Canada, Australia, and a few others will avoid our fate.

          I like the Australian P.M. who clearly stated that if immigrants don’t assimilate, Australia doesn’t want them and they must return to their own countries.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            There is some intelligence in Canberra, and even in Ottawa. Unfortunately, there’s nothing in Versailles-on-the-Potomac except low cunning in accumulating wealth and power.

  5. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Having exterminated several million Jews, apparently Angela Merkel wants to finish the job: The Migrant Conquest of Europe by Gilbert Sewall.

    I supposed Hitler would be pleased. Islam was an ally of his back then.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      The sad part is that she probably just doesn’t want to realize where her actions will lead. Then, too, Germany (like the rest of Europe) breeds at well below the replacement level, and will therefore need immigration from somewhere to keep its economy running at its present level. And, unfortunately, most of the potential immigrants are Muslims. So they’re selling their birthright for a stable economy.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Rush was talking about the “refugee” problem yesterday nothing that many in Germany still have guilt over Nazi Germany and noting the “radical” Islam was an ally of Hitler, so how long will the guilt go on?

        Europe is committing cultural suicide. It’s amazing and a bit scary to watch. And what are you going to do if you’re a Muslim? They can hardly believe their good fortune. You have Europeans allowing Muslim countries to commit conquest via immigration (under the disguise of “refugees”). And Saudi Arabia is even offering to build 200 mosques in Europe.

        At some point you have to ask, “How stupid can the multiculturalists be”? Apparently there is very little limit. Talking about selling them the rope which which to hang themselves.

        As that article notes:

        Europe is allowing itself to be colonized out of a sense of shame over the way it treated its Jews. The ultimate irony is that there will be many among those it admits who will listen to sermons in Saudi-financed mosques and try to finish the job the Nazis started.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          The only important difference I find between The Camp of the Saints and current Western weakness is that there is a lot of populist opposition to that elite fecklessness, which wasn’t reflected in Raspail’s book. The closest equivalent he had to Hungary and Slovakia was Switzerland.

          • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

            We’ll see if opposition to an Islamic take-over of Europe trumps the current impulse of worrying only about eating, drinking, and being merry for the day. It’s one thing to have “populist opposition” to the Islamification of Europe. It’s quite another to take action against it — at the ballot box or otherwise.

            More and more (including in America) we have become a population who declares that we don’t like this, that, and the other thing…while continuing the practices that bring us those very things. We’re a schizophrenic lot.

            • Timothy Lane says:

              Well, that’s where parties such as Marine Le Pen’s National Front come in. A lot of European elites are very worried about such groups. They aren’t very conservative overall, but I hope they shake things up there. Too bad we don’t have anyone (yet) to do that here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *