Mark Steyn on US Establishment (right and left) vs. Middle America

[Trigger warning: Includes references to Trump]

Here:

I’ve spent the last fortnight in a country [Australia] where on illegal immigration everyone electorally viable is a hard-ass. That’s to say, there’s a bipartisan consensus that anyone attempting to enter the country without authorization should be warehoused in a detention camp – not in Australia but offshore, either on Nauru, a pile of guano that fancies itself a nation-state, or on Manos Island, which belongs to Papua New Guinea. It’s the equivalent of Trump imprisoning Mexicans in a camp in the Dominican Republic. After years in detention, the migrants are generally either returned whence they came or resettled in a third country. Whatever squeamishness the Aussie Labor Party might feel about this is subject to the compelling political arithmetic that the voters are overwhelmingly at ease with it.

In America, by contrast, there is a cozy bipartisan consensus between the Democrat Party and the Donor Party that untrammeled mass unskilled immigration now and forever is a good thing. The Dems get voters, the Donors get cheap labor. The Dems have the better deal, but over on the GOP side the Stupid Party is too stupid to realize that suicide in slow motion leads to the same place as one swift sure slice from Isis.

So it was obvious that the moment someone proposed to rupture this corrupt and squalid arrangement that there would be takers for it – particularly among America’s downwardly mobile lower middle class who, as a price for supporting the Donor Party, are supposed to put up with stagnant wages and diminished economic opportunity as a permanent feature of life. More.

Reality check: My regular reader (thanks, Marion!) will have heard me say this before: A nation state that cannot control its borders or enforce its laws or prefer its people and its customs to those of other entities is not a state at all. It is at best a nice wilderness. (Especially nice if one is raking n a big salary for pretending to be the government … )

The best-known alternative to the nation state is the ethnic state, where membership in a tribe is the basis of rank, rights, help, and protection. The rise in North America of ethnic identity groups that make clear that their allegiance is really to that group and not to the country as a whole correlates with the waning power of the nation state. Why be proud to be an “American” or a “Canadian” if national governments go out of their way to provide public relations for terrorists who harm or kill us? Plus, there is always the insidious threat of action taken against those who speak out too loudly. Story for another day, but underlying this is the fact that the establishment, left and right, can prosper on foreign labour and automation, irrespective of how the working North American fares.

For working North Americans, all votes for the establishment are wasted votes. But, in situations where there is no real choice, some votes are more wisely used than others.

See also: How U.S. conservatives failed Trump supporters

and

Disney workers forced to train foreign replacements are not an anomaly Disney, “liberal” or otherwise, does not need Americans anymore. It’s the other way around. Liberal (progressive) Americans believe they need Disney.

  • mauser 98

    ……….yikes!
    38% of Florida voters believe Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz could be the Zodiac Killer.

    http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2016/02/26/Poll-38-of-Florida-voters-believe-Ted-Cruz-could-be-the-Zodiac-Killer/4771456519542/?spt=sec&or=on

  • Go Trump. I love seeing the talking heads explode.

  • simus1

    When the today’s elites in the first world look at 19th century India and consider how about 2000 Brits were in overall control backed by a huge if restive native bureaucracy and military with perhaps 10% British and other totally reliable native soldiers within, their mouths must water. When the ordinary Indian might see one white person in a decade if that and have no concept of how that related to anything.

    The Indian railways were built in spite of all opposition to expropriation, even to being declared haram by the muslims and unHindu by the Hindus, so the result was they were run by Brits at first, with mostly Bengalis in system and customer support and firstly maintained by Eurasians (half-castes). As time went on, the success of such a leap to modernity in goods transport and public patronage carried all before it. Then the cry went up to stop hoarding the good jobs among those first to the table who had been the only ones willing to take a chance at what was on offer.

  • Brett_McS

    Steyn is right, but I think that there is generally a more positive sentiment in the US towards invaders immigrants than in Australia; it’s not just a fringe group of the hard left of the US population – as it is in Australia – that supports open boarders; there are many normal people who have bought into the idea, giving cover to the left and the elites. Hopefully that will continue to change.