Default
Economist Watch: Treason Lobby-Approved Clichés On The Amnesty Bill
Thumb derb
July 07, 2013, 04:09 AM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF

Once again, the news magazine for the carriage trade (issue dated July 6th, pp. 12-13) expatiates on the Amnesty Bill, all in Treason Lobby-approved clichés (my boldface, my brackets):

The Senate bill, were it to become law, would go a long way towards fixing America’s broken immigration system.  It would increase the number of visas for skilled workers [associate degree in COBOL programming from Farukkhabad Community College], grant visas for entrepreneurs and establish a guest-worker programme for manual labourers [we already have one].  It would give the estimated 11m illegal immigrants in America a chance to come in from the shadows: after paying a fine and back taxes [what does “back taxes” mean when you’ve been working off the books for 10 years?], working hard and staying out of trouble, they would eventually be eligible to apply for citizenship [which, once legalized, they have no particular reason to want].  And in a last-minute deal the bill added another $46 billion (up from $8 billion in the original version) to fortify the Mexican border, which is already bristling with fences, armed guards and drones, and to beef up systems for checking that firms do not hire illegal workers . . .

More highly skilled immigrants would make America more innovative [just like we were in 1960 when skilled immigrants were pouring in!]  More foreign entrepreneurs would create jobs for the native-born [sluggish drones who are not much good for anything but wage slavery].  More young, energetic newcomers would slow the rate at which America is ageing [so that while other advanced countries figure out how to adjust to postindustrial demographic collapse, we can go on ignoring it—for ever!].  More immigrants would mean more connections with fast-growing places such as China [but read the article “Returning Students: Plight of the Sea Turtles” on p.41] and India [pumping up revenues for Infosys, perhaps]—connections that would accelerate trade and the exchange of ideas [they get W88 specs, we get fengshui].  The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Senate bill would raise GDP [let’s see: GDP of Bangladesh—$305.5bn; GDP of Luxembourg—$42.2bn; quick now—which country would you rather live in, Bangladesh or Luxembourg? . . . BOING—too slow!], reduce the budget deficit [by less than two percent a year over the next ten years, God willin’ an’ the Creek don’t rise] and slightly increase the wages of the native-born [though not until 2025, God willin’ etc., after a decade or so of de-creasing them].  Countries built on immigration tend to be rich and dynamic: think of Australia [built, to First World standards of liberty and prosperity, on the White Australia Policy], Canada and Singapore.

The Economist is still not publishing any reader rebuttals of their immigration flannel (sorry, British usage, meaning no. 4b here: “nonsense; humbug; empty talk”) in their Letters columns, but they do have a gem of a letter on p.16 from Nils Muiznieks, Commissioner for Human Rights at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg.

Sir — I fully agree that “Greece needs a more robust anti-racism law . . . But I do not agree that banning the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn political party [not exactly a lunatic fringe: they hold 18 seats in the 300-seat Greek parliament—JD] “could be counter-productive” and may be contrary to the right of freedom of association . . .

I have urged the Greek authorities actively to prosecute individual members of Golden Dawn and others who have engaged in hate speech or violent racist attacks.  Under international human-rights law the Greek authorities would be within their rights to ban Golden Dawn as well.  The right to freedom of association is not absolute and may be restricted to protect the rights of others. Greece is bound by the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, article four of which calls on states to ban racist organisations . . .

The International Convention on what?  Yes, it’s real.  Ye gods!

They’ll be coming for us.