Category Archives: IMMIGRATION

Updated: 'M' Is For Moratorium (& Moron)

Any policy maker not a moron or a traitor will know what to do with respect to immigration, at a time of record unemployment among Americans. Since our representatives are almost all morons and certainly no patriots, the reality is that “Legal Immigration has Increased (YES—INCREASED!) During The Recession”:

“Any sane policy would reduce immigration as American unemployment rises. But Washington is not doing it. In the post-Crash year of 2009, the U.S. issued 1,130,818 green cards—an increase, from 1,107,126 in 2008 and 1,052,415 in 2007. In contrast, during the Great Depression from 1930-1939, we issued only 699,375 during the entire decade.

The 2009 total is the fourth highest number of green cards issued since 1914—behind 1990, 1991, and 2006. (And it is worth noting the bulk of the green cards issued in 1990 and 1991 were not given to new legal immigrants but to illegal aliens granted amnesty in 1986—so in terms of new arrivals, 2009 was actually higher.)

But most immigrant workers only create economic growth in so far as they lower labor costs for employers, possibly causing them to further invest. This effect is always much smaller than the jobs and wages immigrants take from Americans, to say nothing of the government services spent on them. However, with our record unemployment, even these marginal economic benefits disappear.

And in 2009, as always, most of the legal immigrants are low-skilled. Immigrants of exceptional ability, with advanced degrees, or investors make up a measly 8% of all immigrants combined. No doubt this has much to do with the system’s ongoing bias toward Third World immigrants through its ‘family reunification’ mechanism. Only 9.3% of all new green cards went to Europeans. In contrast, 14.6% went to Mexicans alone.

The obvious solution: a moratorium on immigration. …”

[SNIP]

To dilate on the last point about exceptional-abilities visas, read my VDARE article, “Why Aren’t The H1-B Hogs Satisfied With The O-1 “Extraordinary Ability” Visa? Oh, Wait A Minute…”

Update (April 22): Vrye Denker’s point is well taken. Refugee status or some other compassion-based visa should apply to all ethnic white South Africans. Farmers are certainly needed here. Farm workers too. However, US immigration policies—the family unification aspect—privilege Third-World “minorities.”

Update II: Famine Afoot: ANC To Nationalize ‘Productive Land’

Africa, Crime, IMMIGRATION, Private Property, Racism, Socialism, South-Africa

The South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR), a respectable think tank, has a hard time seeing convincing proof of crimes of racial hatred in the mutilated, violated remains of thousands of rural white South Africans (scroll down to Update III). The SAIRR is, thankfully, prepared to disbelieve the ANC when it warms of the impending nationalization of productive land, and then quickly retracts the rumor:

“Earlier this week the Institute’s new Unit for Risk Analysis described the proposed nationalisation of agricultural land in South Africa as a potentially cataclysmic event for South Africa’s economy. The Government has subsequently denied any intention to nationalise private property. We have reason to doubt their assurances and warn again that the nationalisation of agricultural land is now a published government proposal, that it follows a trend that saw the nationalisation of both mineral and water rights, and that it follows previous efforts to introduce far reaching expropriation legislation. The likelihood of the Government adopting this policy proposal is therefore something that South Africa’s domestic and foreign investors should be very aware of.

In a statement released to the media this week the Unit for Risk Analysis warned that the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform had proposed two future land use models for South Africa in their Strategic Plan 2010-2013. The precise wording of their proposals is as follows:

“To facilitate this discussion, the Department is proposing two options: all productive land will become a national asset and a quitrent land tenure system either with perpetual or limited rights is envisaged. This may require an amendment to Section 25 of the Constitution. All tenure legislation will be subsequently reviewed and brought under a single national land policy framework. Option two will focus on a review of current tenure policies and legislation in order to maintain the current free-hold title system but within the ambit of a land ceilings framework linked to categorisation of farmers. Option two will also investigate a State Land Management Board to facilitate the management of State owned agricultural land and leases.”

On the first model, which proposes declaring all productive land as a national asset, we commented that, ‘Inherent in the proposal is that ownership of the land will [then] rest with the State. The State would then have the authority to declare who could work the land, for what purposes, and under what conditions.’

The second model suggests placing a ceiling on how much land individual farmers can own while maintaining a freehold land tenure system for South Africa. Regarding this proposal we warned that, ‘Commercial agriculture in South Africa depends on significant economies of scale to remain competitive. Undermining that efficiency via limited land holdings risks many serious repercussions, such as a steep reduction in agricultural investment and a commensurate fall in agricultural employment which will in turn drive up levels of rural poverty and provide an impetus for greater rural to urban migration.’

Relevant to both proposals we added that, ‘Government assurances that the proposals were merely a mechanism for taking failed farms back from black farmers were a red herring to conceal the State’s more plausible intention to wrest control of agricultural production from white commercial farmers,’ and that, ‘It is ironic that the Government would use its own failed land reform programme to justify the seizure of remaining productive land in the country.’

We forecast that if either of the proposals is adopted, South Africa will experience repercussions that will damage the commercial farming industry in South Africa.

The Government and the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform have responded to our warnings by saying that there is no plan to nationalise South Africa’s farms. The Government has further stated that it respects private property rights and that this will not change. We have little confidence in these assurances and believe them to be an effort to mislead the public and the media.

In part, this is because the Government’s assurances are so obviously contrary to their own written and published plan. While various government officials in the last 48 hours have said that the plan does not talk about ‘nationalisation,’ it does talk about private owners ceding control of their land to the State which will then lease that land back to the farmers. The Government’s proposal also identifies the need to alter Section 25 of the Constitution which deals with and guarantees private property rights.

A second reason to doubt the Government’s assurances is that this latest policy proposal appears to follow an established trend of the State seizing control of what it regards as important ‘national assets.’

In 2002 through the Minerals and Petroleum Development Act, the Government took custodianship of all mineral rights in the country thereby ending private ownership. Mining companies had to re-apply for those rights in order to continue mining. This legislative step did significant harm to the mining industry in the country and to investor sentiment, particularly in the mining sector.

Similarly, the Government took control of all water resources in the country through the National Water Act of 1998. The previous distinction between public and privately owned water was eliminated, making all water a ‘public asset.’ Water allowances were imposed and the Government handed itself the authority of managing the country’s water resources.

What we are now seeing in terms of the Government’s proposed land seizure scheme is therefore a logical progression of government policy that has sought to bring under state control what it regards as important ‘national assets’.

The third reason to doubt the Government’s sincerity is that this latest proposal appears to be a continuation of a pattern of thinking that gave rise to the Expropriation Bill of 2008. The Institute published extensively on the bill, which would have given the State the authority to seize any fixed or movable property ‘in the national interest’ without paying compensation. Ahead of the 2009 elections the Government declared that the controversial Bill would be shelved.

The Government has recently admitted that 9 out of every ten land reform projects that it has managed have failed. Under these circumstances it is unlikely that this same Government will be able to successfully manage South Africa’s entire commercial farming industry. This is particularly so if they erode the capital value in agricultural land, which is important collateral that farmers have against which to raise loans to run their businesses.

We are therefore of the view that if either of the two proposals goes ahead then South Africa will experience a steep reduction in agricultural investment. This will translate into a commensurate fall in agricultural employment which will in turn drive up levels of rural poverty and provide an impetus for greater rural to urban migration.

Further we expect that South Africa’s ability to meet its food needs will be undermined. This will see knock-on effects on downstream food processing industries with corresponding falls in employment and investment. Upstream supply industries will see their markets shrink as demand for their products falls. South Africa will be forced to import a greater portion of its food needs, placing pressure on both the current account deficit and on food price inflation.

The above repercussions will see more poor rural people flocking to urban areas. The Government’s ability to meet service delivery demands will be compromised even further than it already is. In an environment of escalating protest action against Government on the peripheries of large urban settlements, this will pose a further challenge to the hegemony of the ANC.

It is uncertain to what extent the Government and the ANC identifies these risks. Certainly sentiment within the Government and the ANC ignored similar warnings on skills, mining, health, education, security, electricity, and labour market policy for which South Africa paid a heavy price. It is quite possible that the Government may therefore proceed with this scheme only to try and reverse the policy as its negative effects become more apparent.

It is also possible that the Government may identify these repercussions but proceed regardless in order to achieve what they may see as the more important end of breaking the back of white commercial agriculture and handing farms to black farmers. On this score the ANC leadership’s recent support for incitements to shoot and kill white Afrikaans farmers is pertinent. Certainly the Government’s attitude to white skills in the civil service suggests that they are willing to sacrifice performance for racial ideology.

We must also warn against regarding the second of the two proposals as a lesser of two evils. Destroying the economies of scale that make South Africa’s commercial agriculture sector viable will result in precisely the same consequences as we have spelt out above. Keep in mind that when Zanu-PF in Zimbabwe commenced its land reform programme it also commenced with a proposal of ‘one farmer, one farm’.

We therefore warn our readers and subscribers to take this latest policy proposal seriously, to identify the likely consequences of the proposal, and to prepare for the eventuality of the State going ahead with seizing all or part of South Africa’s agricultural land holdings. We caution strongly against taking Government assurances to the contrary to heart particularly when viewed against the track record of that same Government in nationalising mineral and water rights and in proposing legislation to seize any fixed or movable property without paying compensation.

* Frans Cronje and Catherine Schulze

Update I (April 19): Plans for the collectivization of farms are underway amid the carnage. Every online news page is full of death and suffering. Here are two additional news items that appeared alongside the story Conrad posted:

* Gruesome attack on F State family
* Two held for farm attack
* Elderly lady dies in grisly attack

You follow a link and with it more gruesome findings:

Farmer shot in bed (“nothing was taken”)

Update II (April 20): Vrye Denker writes:

Please help us. It’s all good and well that we intellectualize this issue in the comments section, but I am afraid we need more “tangible” aid. I want to get out of here but I don’t have the money or skills to leave.

Getting the word OUT is not merely intellectualizing. Most Westerners have no idea of the reality of life in sainted Mandela’s South Africa. Many of my South African readers, on the other hand, prefer to write to me personally. To which I say: why do you want to discuss life in that country with someone who already knows the awful facts? I’ve committed to keep the facts alive and current on this blog (despite a lack of time and resources) with the hope that the more public they become the greater the awareness of the need for a solution to the assault on ethnic white South Africans.

Search this blog (under South Africa) and you will find that I have discussed the options of immigration. I have also covered Canada’s courageous landmark granting of refugee status to a repeat victim of black South Africa. The gentleman in question was without resources, but was resourceful. I cannot recommend a course of action. All I can do is provide information. See the following posts for examples:

Exodus From SA to Israel

Advice to South Africans Pondering Emigration

What about Argentina for South African farmers, who are among the best in the world?

I am still awaiting my friend activist Dan Roodt’s call to action. It is his to make: He (not I) lives in the heart of darkness. However, and I say this cautiously, the white minority under assault needs to begin to organize. Think: How organized is the criminal enterprise renamed the South African Police Service—a mostly illiterate, ill-trained force, riven by feuds, fetishes, and factional loyalties? This lot is seizing fire arms from law abiding citizens and selling them for profit to other criminals.

A Dog Died on The Border

Crime, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION

What was the name of that dog that died on the Arizona-Mexico border, presumably defending his rancher owner from a marauder who vanished into Mexico? Does anyone know? Put a face or a name to Robert Krentz’s faithful companion, and liberals, who really care for dogs, may come to care for their keepers, battling as they do, day-in and day-out, to keep criminal aliens off their property and away from their live stock.

The martyred dog’s owner was gunned down by a criminal alien whom he had gone to help. Arizona Rancher Krentz had raised cattle in the area of Cochise County for decades; his family had farmed along the Arizona-Mexico border for over a century.

Michelle Malkin has more.

This from “That Spot Of Bother On The Border”:

“In 2004, Time magazine described in detail how illegal aliens rushing the southern border commit property crimes and despoil the environment”:

When the crowds cross the ranches along and near the border, they discard backpacks, empty Gatorade and water bottles and soiled clothes. They turn the land into a vast latrine, leaving behind revolting mounds of personal refuse and enough discarded plastic bags to stock a Wal-Mart. Night after night, they cut fences intended to hold in cattle and horses. Cows that eat the bags must often be killed because the plastic becomes lodged between the first and second stomachs. The immigrants steal vehicles and saddles. They poison dogs to quiet them. The illegal traffic is so heavy that some ranchers, because of the disruptions and noise, get very little sleep at night.

Via Digger:

In February [2002 Krentz’] … calf was butchered by illegal alien trespassers. Two men responsible were caught. They were tried. They were found guilty. They served a total of 51 days in jail. They were also ordered to pay $200 in restitution to the Krentz ranch. The Krentz ranch has not seen a cent of that money; and, of course, our best guess is they will not because these people have been released. They either came back into the population up here in the U.S.A. or returned to Mexico.

Border animals are suffering. The four-legged creatures need your help, miserable liberals.

Updated: Netanyahu Wants To Retain Israel’s National Character

America, IMMIGRATION, Israel, Judaism & Jews, Nationhood

Benjamin Netanayu doesn’t suffer any blind spots when it comes to the very real potential of Third-World refugees flooding Israel and transforming his country for the worse, for ever (Via VDARE.COM):

“Infiltrators cause cultural, social and economic damage, and pull us towards the Third World,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a Manufacturers Association assembly, reports Tani Goldstein of YNet News:

“We suffer from a problem that actually stems from Israel’s economic success,” he said, explaining the problems that arise from the breached border with Egypt.

“We have become almost the only First World country that can be reached by foot from the Third World. We are flooded with surge of refugees who threaten to wash away our achievements and damage our existence as a Jewish democratic state.”

He went on to say, “Anyone walking around Arad, Eilat, or even south Tel Aviv today, can see this wave, and the change it is creating, with their own eyes. They are causing socio-economic and cultural damage and threaten to take us back down to the level of the Third World. They take the jobs of the weakest Israelis.”

Netanyahu noted that the government plans to work to construct a physical barrier between Israel and Egypt to prevent this “flood” of migrants.

Addressing the members of the Manufacturers Association, he said, “You will not like this, but we plan to legislate strict laws and enforce them with a firm hand against the illegal employment of infiltrators and foreign workers.”

The Hotline for Migrant Workers was enraged by the prime minister’s remarks, and issued a response saying: “The danger to the Jewish state is not the refugees, but the many Jews in key positions who have forgotten that their parents were refugees, and who besmirch the persecuted in order to whitewash their submission to the manpower corporations.”

As first reported on Ynet, the prime minister made similar statements in the session in which it was decided to build a stronger barrier at the Egypt border.

“This is a strategic decision, that will ensure the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel,” he said at the time, while promising that, “Israel will remain open to war refugees, but will not allow its borders to be used to flood it will illegal foreign workers.”

The prime minister has been extensively addressing the problem of the breached border in recent weeks. A number of plans to properly close the border to infiltrators have been raised in the past, but have not been executed, mainly due to budgetary reasons.

Besides the construction of the fence, the defense minister was tasked with pushing a bill calling for harsher penalties for Israelis who transport and accommodate illegal immigrants.

This bill, which calls for aggravating the sentence of offenders from two years to a minimum of three years imprisonment and heavy fines, is already in legislation phases.

[SNIP]

If only Bibi’s spectacularly stupid American Jewish supporters had his smarts (and marbles). I spoke about this contingent’s characteristics in “Beck, Wilders, and His Boosters’ Blind Spot.” They never shut up about the horrors of the practice of honor killings and genital infibulation among the American Muslim immigrant population, but are mum about the perils to American society of the thing that brought such deviance to our shores: mass, third-world immigration.

Update (March 31): ISRAELI VS. JEW. Why would rational beings conflate the Jewish-American with the Israeli, unless he was in the habit of reading too many of the revolting Jewish-American columnists/bloggers advocates for Israel, whom Israelis themselves would find as alien as creatures from Deep Space. Never the twain shall meet. I’ll dilate on why this is so at another time.

For now, take it from me: Israelis have little in common with their diaspora American Jews. But on the face of it, why would Bibi, an Israeli PM, have the views of Jews in America? Has not this mistake of collapsing distinctions between Jew and Israel arisen because somehow you don’t think of Israel as a sovereign country like any other?

From the article excerpted, you can glean that Israel even has its open-border organizers who deploy the same emotional, factoids that our “nation-of-immigrants” sophists wield. These people rail against the common-sense pronouncements of the patriot Bibi. Israel, of course, was founded, swamp up, by Ashkenazi Jews (read white), who died in droves at the hands of Arab nomadic marauders and the inhabitants of the abutting Arab states.

Yes, Israel was a desert. Young people, idealists, settled it. They were educated, but abandoned all for the ideal of farming the land of their ancestors. They used to patrol their newly built villages and orchards, but these were raided often nightly by nomad who slit throats and slaughtering women and children.

The pioneering people wanted to become strong and proud. Many lived with mothers or fathers who awoke screaming at night from the memories of the camps, but they wanted to focus on LIFE. They wanted to build, not whine; they resolved to fight back, and they concentrated on actions, not words. (There is a word in Hebrew, “Dugri,” it means direct. You speak bluntly and directly.) This is in stark contrast to the way the American Jew carries on.

Above all, in contrast to the American Jew—the columnists, commentators, bloggers and vulgar vloggers—the sabra (Israeli born) did not wish to indulge in the Holocaustism that you hear non-stop from the American Jewish cohort.