"...I don't think anyone really knows what the effect of those immigrants on our economy has been. It's a very politicized question. There is no doubt whatever, however, that the growth in that population has been a political catastrophe. I think it was probably the single biggest factor in alienating a big segment of our native population from the leadership of both political parties, neither one of which tried to do much about this situation before 2016 (and certainly not by cutting immigration). Donald Trump was the first major candidate to run on intolerance of illegal immigrants, and he wiped out establishment Republicans easily and won a close election as President...." DK (my underlining)
I talk a lot about globalization here. It has been the cornerstone of the liberal West's globalist foreign policy ideology initiative since WWI.
It is important to see all immigration, refugee status, migrations, guest worker programs, expanding trade and governance entities like the EU, etc., and foreign trade and investment generally, as all connected with the problem of globalization.
They are often also connected with wars and instability, of course, but even these are associated frankly with globalization as well...........
They are often also connected with wars and instability, of course, but even these are associated frankly with globalization as well...........
The effect on our so called domestic economy (now an oxymoron) has not been nearly as important as the larger process of globalization, of which inbound immigration here has been merely one small, but very painful and destabilizing, aspect.
The very, very, very much more important effects of globalization have had to do with the long process of substitution of domestic native workers by foreign workers living abroad, widespread and permanent domestic deindustrialization, and eventually to the outright large scale offshoring of actual plant and equipment and massive foreign veresus domestic investments as well, which really expanded later in the 20th Century, not here. NAFTA was a typical example of innumerable trade deals the Presidency engaged in, since WWI, with or usually without Congress approval, or even, frankly, without its clear awareness (Congress never has clear awareness of anything, frankly; that would be a category error.)
This process has been going on at the same time as the history of immigration which DK recounts, and is intimately related to it.
The reluctance to hire negroes, and the willingness to warehouse them in prisons, was just one small extra goad to longstanding efforts to find alternative and ever expanding sources of cheap labor abroad, with the added advantage of playing into the executive need to engage in carrot and stick diplomacy regarding opening America's market to cheap foreign goods, especially after the Cold War heated up.
The reluctance to hire negroes, and the willingness to warehouse them in prisons, was just one small extra goad to longstanding efforts to find alternative and ever expanding sources of cheap labor abroad, with the added advantage of playing into the executive need to engage in carrot and stick diplomacy regarding opening America's market to cheap foreign goods, especially after the Cold War heated up.
Terms search, eg: trading American Interests
No comments:
Post a Comment