Progressives on Immigration

Tucker Carlson is absolutely right when he says there is absolutely no other reason to object to the Canadian-style immigration system than a desire to have a permanent supply of cheap, obedient, voiceless slaves.

The progressives’ rage against the English proficiency requirement for immigrants is due to the fact that they want us to nod and smile but never talk back. A mouthy, opinionated immigrant (e.g. me) is endlessly annoying. Such an immigrant doesn’t feel abjectly grateful to progressives for their efforts to defend her from intersectional grievances. “Shut up and go clean some toilets, you peasant, while I tell the world how much I suffer on your behalf!” is the progressive position towards immigrants.

I noticed this a long time ago and have been writing about it on this blog for a decade. But I never thought I’d hear somebody say it on TV. This is very gratifying.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Progressives on Immigration”

  1. ” there is absolutely no other reason to object to the Canadian-style immigration system ”

    From the point of view of the destination country, maybe there is an argument to be made that skills-based immigration amounts to the first world poaching talent from the countries where it’s most needed. Way back in the early 90s a friend was talking to an American consular official who was in charge of a program trying to convince wealthy and skilled Poles to come to the US.
    When asked about what this would do to Poland, at a very vulnerable time, the answer was essentially “We don’t care”.

    Again my personal preference is values-based immigration (a good label for you and N who were/are alienated from their birth cultures but that’s essentially impossible to put in effect. Many skilled immigrants are not at all alienated from their birth cultures even when those seem wildly dysfunctional to outsiders… which is why you have crap like this there:
    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/zunera-ishaq-niqab-ban-citizenship-oath-1.3257762

    Like

    1. Currently, it’s what, 60% of legal immigrants on welfare? Or is it 70%? I agree completely with the value-based part but we are talking about people who are not managing to inscribe themselves economically.

      There is this truly weird bit widespread belief that folks who didn’t manage to make ends meet in their own country where they speak the language, know people, understand how everything works, have networks of support, etc are destined to be super economically successful in unfamiliar societies. It’s insane, and it never works that way. There are rare exceptions but those who were economically inept at home don’t get magically competent because they move to an unfamiliar place.

      Immigration is hard no matter what. But at least let’s not drag around people who are both culturally alienated and economically inept.

      Obviously, economic success is no guarantee of a cultural assimilation. In the Russian-speaking (meaning, 99% Jewish) immigrant community in North America, everybody is doing fine economically but people are very alienated culturally.

      Like

      1. “let’s not drag around people who are both culturally alienated and economically inept”

        It’s insane that this position (which is rational and in line with human nature) is now regarded as reactionary and extreme. People aren’t interchangeable widgets (or as you put it – potatoes) but all of modern orthodoxy is devoted to the idea that they are.

        Like

        1. There is an enormous degree of contempt underlying this approach. Proponents of this ideology can’t fathom the possibility that people in other cultures are attached to those cultures and wouldn’t want to shed them easily. If you think they live in such atrocious hellholes that you need to extract them from there asap, you have to realize that the culture that makes these places what they are will travel with the people. Because culture is people. What else can it be? The landscape?

          The question should be, what’s the point of immigration? To save everybody on the planet from poverty and violence by transporting them over here? That’s patently nuts.

          Like

  2. Well, as I keep explaining, US economy depends on low wage work and not all of it can be done abroad. So this isn’t a poor-them attitude toward immigration. And then there is the asylum question, from countries that are effectively our colonies. Canada’s whole situation is different.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.