The Open-Borders Conspiracy

Front Page Magazine ^ | July 15, 2002 | Robert Locke

[SlickWillard]

As Nathan Glazer reports in his study of the movement's formative years, "the most striking characteristic of Communist Party membership throughout the 1920's was that it was overwhelmingly composed of recent immigrants. Probably only one in ten of the members was a native American." (The Social Basis of American Communism) These immigrants came to this country in the great wave from 1890 to WWI, and therefore the New Left, which two generations later grew out of the intellectual and social milieu these communists created, is yet another baleful indirect consequence of immigration.

Even Mr. Locke isn't being completely honest here. The intellectual underpinnings of the international communist movement have a very strong ethnic jewish, albeit atheist, coloring. The socialist movement in this country owes a great deal to the great wave of Jewish immigration from 1890 to WWI [native American socialists, like William Jennings Bryan, Theodore Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson, notwithstanding]. I wonder whether Glazer is honest enough to confront this in his study.

If you bother to reply, please don't call me names like anti-semite, facist, or Nazi. Thank you.

[Black Agnes]

Interesting immigration analysis.

[FITZ]

It is, we're importing poverty at very high rates and someone must think they'll benefit by it. Not the taxpayers who have to pay for all the programs.

[x]

Fascinating article. Well worth reading. The main engines of immigration have been the drive for cheap labor and the immmigrants' desire for a better life, but it's inevitable that Communists will try to exploit the drastic changes that immigration brings. It's the old, "the worse things are the better they are," immisseration of the proletariat, capitalism as the midwife of socialism idea.

[CecilRhodesGhost]

Bush Warns of 'New Kind of Protectionism'


Reuters
May 7, 2001
By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON (May 7) - President Bush warned Monday the drive to attach labor and environmental standards to trade deals represents a "new kind of protectionism" that is hampering his ability to pursue open trade.

In a nine-minute speech to the Council of the Americas, an influential business group, Bush urged Congress to give him the trade negotiating authority he needs to pursue a free trade agreement among North and South American nations.

Bush said the concerted effort, which has been led by Democrats and labor unions, to attach labor and environmental standards to free trade agreements represented a threat to free trade that the previous Clinton administration and Congress allowed to gather strength.

"By failing to make the case for trade we've allowed a new kind of protectionism to appear in this country. It talks of workers while it opposes a major source of new jobs. It talks of the environment, while opposing the wealth-creating policies that will pay for clean air and water in developing nations," Bush said.

"It talks of the disadvantaged even as it offers ideas that would keep many of the poor in poverty. Open trade is not just an economic opportunity. It is a moral imperative. Trade creates jobs for the unemployed," he said.

Bush praised what he called "fresh new thinking" among some members of Congress on how to handle labor and environmental standards -- an apparent reference to proposals to fine nations that fail to uphold agreed-upon standards, rather than levying sanctions against them.

"They recognize that 'one-size-fits-all' policies can't succeed. They know we need a toolbox equipped to match diverse tools with diverse problems, and I agree," Bush said.


Fast Track Died Under Clinton

Under the trade promotion authority, also know as "fast track," Congress can vote up or down, but not amend, trade deals negotiated by Bush.

Bush's father had the fast track authority during his presidency, but it expired in 1994 under President Bill Clinton and has never been renewed as lawmakers spar over how to handle labor and environmental issues associated with trade.

Bush cited "the inactivity of the American government" in letting fast track lapse. he said one of the casualties has been uncompleted trade talks with Chile.

Demonstrators against free trade and largely in favor of labor and environmental protections have played havoc with a number of international gatherings including the 34-nation Summit of the Americas in Quebec last month.

The president is to make his formal request to Congress to give him the authority later this week. It faces an uncertain future on Capitol Hill.

"One tool I must have is renewed U.S. trade promotion authority. I urge the Congress Restore our nation's authority to negotiate trade agreements, and I will use that authority to build freedom in the world, progress in our hemisphere, and enduring prosperity in the United States," he said.

Bush pointedly praised Taiwan and managed a dig at communist China in talking about countries where democracy is flourishing, propelled by free trade.

"Look at our friends Mexico and the political reforms there. Look at Taiwan. Look at South Korea. And some day soon, I hope that an American president will end that list by adding, look at China. I believe in open trade with China because I believe that freedom can triumph in China," he said.

At the Summit of the Americas, Bush told regional leaders he was confident he would get trade promotion authority "before the end of the year" and promised to kick off the debate by outlining a set of principles when he returned to Washington.

Democrats generally want strong protection for labor and the environment as part of trade pacts, while Republicans are leery of including such provisions, fearing they could become obstacles to trade.

The standoff has prevented action on a U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement negotiated by the Clinton administration.

[Illbay]

The CPUSA supports immigration because it believes that this will enable it to solve the fundamental problem it faces in America: a materially contented working class.

Whether the Commies believe this or not, it's a complete ludicrous theory.

How about all those Latin American countries, who have a working class that is ANYTHING but content? How well has Marxist ideology worked there?

And don't tell me "it's the forces of reaction and counter-revolution." The Marxists have terrorized and killed far more of the abject poor in those nations where they operate than the government forces have, because the Marxists KNOW they have to cow the populace to even get them to cooperate. It's not as if they're eagerly falling in line for the Long March here.

Now, I'm not saying that "open borders" is okey-dokey, not by a long shot. But I think that if the radical Left want illegal immigrants here, it is for VOTE FRAUD, not to foment this silly revolution that's now about seventy years late.

[ZeitgeistSurfer]

The commanding heights in this particular battle (immigration) are all controlled by the enemy. As time goes on, and things get worse and worse, it will be clear that this country needs another revolution. We are heading down the road to a fractured 'nation in name only'. Another aspect of this is the reparations debate which will be used by black nationalists to radicalize a large percentage of the black population. The combination of foreign and homegrown terrorists and Mexican and black nationalism will kickstart the centrifuge that ultimately will split the country apart.

[Seruzawa]

The main problem with this is that closed borders is a fairly recent invention. The Russians undar Czar Nicholas tried to close their borders to poltical agitators. Passports were instituted. Prior to this people moved fairly freely about Europe, granted that it was herder to move around back then.

This idea of passports and visas was a stupid idea that simply did not work. Since it is a stupid unworkable idea most governments immediately adopted it. This system has never thwarted an invasion or even daunted those who export violence.

Closed borders? Look at the countries that have tried it. Do we really want that sort of fascist/socialist state here?

[Red Jones]

bump

[FITZ]

The other problem though is our social welfare system is also fairly recent, free food and healthcare and housing is bound to attract many of the wrong types.

[FITZ]

that if the radical Left want illegal immigrants here, it is for VOTE FRAUD, not to foment this silly revolution that's now about seventy years late.

If we cut off social spending and the welfare checks and food stamps didn't get sent, we'd have some serious rioting and burning in no time.

[Redbob]

"If you bother to reply, please don't call me names like anti-semite, facist, or Nazi. Thank you."

Wouldn't dream of calling you a "facist"; I have no reason to believe you judge people solely on their facial appearance.

[Ben Ficklin]

Not to discount this article, but it would be better to read the chapter on Cultural Marxism in Pat's new book.

[SlickWillard]

You're right; make that fascist [and again, please don't call me it].

[First_Salute]

The arrogance of the American cheap-labor lobby serves the will of the Red Chinese cheap-labor lobby.

[DoughtyOne]

The guy is right, but too few will listen. I firmly believe the majority of people on this forum don't even get it.

[traditionalist]

Closed borders? Look at the countries that have tried it. Do we really want that sort of fascist/socialist state here?

The US had closed borders from 1924-1965, and we were a hell of a lot less fascist/socialist during that time than we are now.

[Tancredo Fan]

This article hits the nail right on the head. Many immigration reformers have been correctly pointing fingers at the Ford Foundation, the highly corrupt Mexican government, and the scurvy likes of MALDEF and La Raza (and other anti-American gangs like them) for years.