Skip to main content

On Migration

It's not that complex. It is very hard to speak about openly in public. This is a strong signal something corrupt is going in at the state level. 

The state, always has been, and always will be root cause of problems related to immigration. Because the state deliberately stands in the way of labour by blocking it from starting its own business and freely starting to work. It achieves this via private property in land and taxation of earned incomes.

If the state choses to import labour, then it must get out of the way of the labour it imports when they arrive. Else it will wreak havoc as is observed every time. The state will be harming the immigrants first and foremost. And subsequently harming the natives.

To all intents and purposes, when the state stands in the way of labour it is effectively 'attacking' both the new arrivals and its own people. 

So what is the biggest effect of a state which stands in the way of labour? It is poverty, unemployment, bankruptcy and ultimately great recession in a grand hierarchy of systemic destruction. 

A supplemental effect will be to deliberately divide groups of people culturally, using an establishment driven disinformation campaign in an attempt to cover up its own destructive policy of standing in the way of labour. 

Its not clear if the state is aware of its rampant destruction because it's constantly looking for a scape goat and does not seem to care who and how many suffers harm from this activity though it does have a two tier preference which is highly visible to the common person, new arrival or not.

To cover up the underlying root cause, which it caused in the first place, the biggest scape goat the state creates is an image of the nation as being anti immigrant. Rather than digging deep to rediscover its own root cause, standing in the way of the new arrivals security and prospects.

Now, if the state had made the wise choice to simply get out of their way, these new arrivals would be helping the nation to reach new heights notwithstanding their cultural differences - diversity would finally be the nations strength rather than its present weakness. 

The principle policy of every nation is founded in the two things which would would otherwise make equality of opportunity and outcome a moot and amusing historic comedy - that is:

  1. private property in the fruits of nature
  2. and taxation of earned incomes

Why is it so hard to speak about this in public? 

Because it makes all members of these groups recently and deliberately divided by the state complicit in the problem. Nice work!

And any maverick who makes a stand and points at this too directly and in a way the common man can understand, will certainly be marginalised until they stop speaking about it. There is no limit to the brutal means this marginalising will often need to take to stop them speaking. We're starting to witness this already in the United Kingdom, in the most grotesque ways imaginable.

Of course, the effects of the state standing in the way of labour is equally devastating to the indigenous population too, even if new arrivals decided not to come. After all, a local person is just as much a human being as a new arrival in every important way. 

So to say that immigration is either good or bad for a nation, is to deliberately choose to remain ignorant of the essential and deliberate root cause delivered by the state of every nation. And leads to all sorts of silly ideas about other humans who come from foreign lands as we're presently observing. 

The state, always has been, and always will be root cause of problems related to immigration. Because the state deliberately stands in the way of labour by blocking it from starting its own business and freely starting to work. It achieves this via private property in land and taxation of earned incomes.

Popular Posts

PETITION: Government to indicate countries of the UK are open to accede to the US

Sign the Petition A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States Executive Summary This initiative seeks to foster a formal dialogue regarding the potential accession of the countries of the United Kingdom , to the United States , as individual states.  Simply put, this petition is asking the government to start a conversation about the benefits of leaving the UK and joining the United States. The objective is to evaluate the benefits to citizens and stakeholders, encouraging a constructive discourse on the political, economic, and social implications of such a union. If Wales , Northern Ireland , Scotland , or  England were to leave the United Kingdom, it would end their system of constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy . Instead, if they joined the United States as separate states, they would govern themselves under the U.S. federal system while receiving its protection. This proposal recognises that immediate change is unlikely but urges a serious con...

Who Said There Was Anything Wrong With a Worldview?

Who Said There Was Anything Wrong With a Worldview? I didn't. But it's when I believe my worldview, is truth, that I become violent without realising it. This is extremely hard for people to accept as possible. The resistance to seeing it and the temptation to escape from looking, is built into its foundations. So, I never said worldviews are bad for us. I did say that when I believe my worldview is a fact, then "I" become root cause of the worlds problems. Thought creates an image of the world. Then thought worships the image that thought created. I am scared of death. So I create an existential worldview about immortality - an image. This can be a God, a political ideology, scientific religiosity, atheism, planet saving activism, anything which my fear of death can hide behind. So if I do 'good' through this image I created, I will ultimately get a 'seat on the right hand side of God' , or whatever the image I created has defined as heaven. Then I w...

Facing Draco, Mining Dorado

This is a proposal to show how the 18.6 year real estate cycle is a hang over from times where the mechanics of the lunar month were used by high priests of the time to forecast ancient agricultural cycles - what we would today call a business cycle culminating in a financial crisis or a great recession. The 18.6 year period is governed by the intersection of lunar and solar eclipses. It is known scientifically as the Saros Cycle. Where all 3 harmonics of the orbit of the moon coincide once every 18.6 years. The ancient scholars knew this. And the politicians of the time used it to signal the day when the economy would be deliberately reset by fiat. This reset was necessary because this period was about how long the people of nations could abuse the economy before it was too late to recover on its own and much worse effects would have emerged. So it was the wisdom of the leadership of the time. As the aeons went by, the meaning and rationale of this policy became normalised - people an...