By

John Wright

Recently I read an email exchange between two women, one of whom is my friend. She often sends out political emails to a variety of acquaintances and I don't recall ever noticing any of the recipients doing a "reply all" with a rebuttal. The subject in this instance was immigration control, with one side taking the position that terrorism is a valid reason to tightly control immigration, while the other side pressed for considerate behaviors based on our great nation's history of welcoming and benefiting from accepting immigrants.

I thought about replying. Then I reconsidered. The truth is I have no interest in joining an argument that to me starts in the middle (pardon my metaphor) of a stew instead of properly going back to take a hard look at the ingredients and the recipe. As is so typical in religion, politics, personal life philosophy and like personal areas we usually consider only our own life experiences, perhaps along with some things learned via formal education, to form conclusions that are in fact lacking the solid basis needed that requires beneficial input of a lot of additional relevant facts. Indeed, said facts may appear to have nothing to do with the immediate subject ... yet they do, and I will provide examples in this article. Two things tend to happen to our detriment in communications. First, there is the possibility of the absence of essential information. Second, we interpret what we do encounter through a values filter developed as part of our individual life experiences.

The nature or medium of any given communication between two or more people can introduce yet a third weakness. In the world of emails and social media there may be room for people to express foundations for some beliefs and admit to exceptions, but most often this is not found. Instead we encounter compressed zingers and terribly incomplete, one sided coverage of most any politically charged commentary. Finally, we can be misdirected via lying and dissembling, and most of us lack the personal experience to recognize a lie, unless it is something utterly obvious. Thus, we have to resort to using debunking web sites like Snopes® to get adequate background and an assessment of veracity and validity. And note that we certainly cannot rely on any form of mass media for objective and sufficient coverage of any politically charged subject. So in one sense we are like children running home to ask Mommy if there really is a giant bad man made of bubble gum who will grab us and take us away!

I wonder how many of us realize that we take on the strengths and weaknesses of any commentary we decide to pass along to other people? Yes, this means we as individuals create our personal responsibility for the quality and accuracy and overall content of that which we decide to communicate. I am most reluctant to pass on material that I cannot verify, particularly politically or religiously charged material, but also material about technical subjects. In the case of immigration we have a perfect example of a detailed subject with a long history that appears to be ill considered relative to the short form and obviously opinionated commentary found. Now, what if I decide to provide, by example, a more thorough description of some harsh realities of immigration? Let's take a deeper look at this subject and also, especially, at the human weaknesses that undermine accurate communications.

For example, consider the very act of allowing immigration. We had a serious need for labor during the massive growth of the USA due to land/settlement expansion in the mid 19th century and especially to gain workers in support of the industrial revolution. Now we do not. Let me repeat that statement for later consideration. Now we do not! Immigrants coming from countries with poor economies and/or oppressive class structures were welcomed primarily on the basis of the essential labor they would perform ... cheaply, I might add. We could have cared less about their source cultures or beliefs, and we wanted them solely for labor, provided they were obedient and productive. We provided no supports other than the job and whatever income it yielded. That is a whole lot different from the immigration issues of today, yet some of us continue to live in an idealized fantasy world that never did exist, that of the USA as a giant helping hand to the poor and downtrodden.

My basic point is that most of us have poorly formed beliefs, due primarily to having wrong starting points in our considerations and thus in most of our fundamental beliefs, cosmic and otherwise. Add to that very limited personal life experiences that by their very narrowness make the outer world that we have not seen, presently or historically, seem not to exist. Yet that world does or did exist and it is quite relevant to discussions of any non-trivial subjects now. I am the multi-generational product of the culture into which I was born, molded first by the beliefs of my parents, however those beliefs were formed, and then by the larger society into which I matriculated, my peer group and my teachers, and later my employers and my government(s). This definition of societal reality was where I would find my place and also either success or failure. So it is all over the world, today and throughout history, for all people. So I am both supported in knowledge by the culture into which I was born, and also limited in many ways by the same culture.

The realities that I have just described, and the chronic problems intrinsic to them, were the most fundamental reason that I decided to write my book, Destiny, many years ago. I was, and I still am, appalled by the level of human ignorance parading as knowledge. Thus, I was trying to consider the recent email exchange and how to make exactly the point that both sides of the argument were narrow and weak, with the participants locked into beliefs that neither are likely to change even in the face of obvious facts ... and also in the consideration, lacking, of some more powerful facts about human history and the nature of the seemingly invariant behaviors of humans and other animals. We believe, to our detriment, that we are logical and complete in our thinking.

I chose a title for this article that was used historically as the name for what we eventually called polio. The 1940's symptomatic description of the disease was quite accurate, and the later name pretty much inherently meaningless, but different from all other disease names, thus making it specific, in an assigned way, to the problems from one microorganism ... a specific virus. In this present instance, I am calling unchangeable immaturity on the part of adults of any culture or from any hardnosed set of beliefs, Infantile Paralysis, for their thinking is infantile and they are paralyzed in that having formed hard conclusions on some apparently logical basis they will not even consider moving their belief structures. Once polarized via a values filter, people characteristically ignore any fact that does not support their beliefs. Indeed, in certain circumstances we see people devolve into rage instead of elevating themselves towards reason.

So, at this point, I am now taking the opportunity to look at immigration from my perspectives. You should rightly question my bases, and I caution you in advance to be prepared to be angry, in fact you may already be angry with me for my earlier statements in this article. But I consider the immigration subject, especially the conventional arguments for and against, to be as meaningless as the idiotic arguments about abortion ... those that fail to identify and focus on the real problem, which is conception, not abortion. Locking the barn after the horse has been stolen is, in fact, proof of stupidity. Introducing external values based on religion is flat out inappropriate for a similar reason, in that case the world of the unproven and most likely unfounded.

So it is with immigration. Our starting points in our thought processes pretty much display whether or not we are logical. The best historical example is unwilling immigration, something few people consider in the correct light. I am talking about slavery that brought conquered black people to the USA to provide "useful labor" for life, without freedoms and without decent compensation. I need not belabor the subject. To point, the slaves did not belong here, they did not want to be here, and the idiots who "imported" them for virtually "free" labor were and are (departed or not) the underlying bastards who are responsible for our "racial" issues now. Let me be very clear about this point. The conquered people were not able to carve out a secure space in their areas of origin. Now they are here, having reproduced in very large numbers, with most still unable to carve out a secure space without massive socialistic intervention. Do you, perhaps, see a problem with that? I do.

Now let's look at some other, earlier and concurrent and later "immigrations." How about the British and the French and the Germans and the Dutch, etc. who "colonized" this continent from the 1600's into the early to mid 1800's? Or earlier, the Spaniards who "colonized" the West Indies and a bit of Florida, plus Central and South America. All of those folks encountered indigenous peoples, and they pretty much destroyed the existing "cultures," whatever they happened to be, due to military superiority and hunger/greed for land and other natural resources, not to mention the special interest in gold in the case of the Spaniards.

Why yes, immigration from Europe in the 1500's was just great for the West Indies, Central and South America, right? Not! And later, from the 1600's all the way to the late 1800's, we killed American Indians, now called Native Americans, which is categorically wrong as virtually all of them emigrated from Asia and/or Central America. Native? The very idea of native and anything one might assign as a perpetual right resulting from place of birth is a silly thought, considered to be important only by those possessed of shallow thinking. No one owns anything permanently, anywhere, any time, period. Alas, the most obvious point is that all of we "immigrants" committed genocide to possess that owned by indigenous peoples, which means nothing, more or less, than that group of people we found in place when we made our initial land discoveries. The conclusion ... Immigrants are Colonists with the hidden and sometimes not so hidden goal of taking over the lands into which they immigrate. Sometimes they come by force, sometimes by weakness, but always with an underlying goal of domination, of carving out the best for their tribe, at the expense of other tribes. Yes, tribalism is alive and well, as it has always been. But it evolves through time in a more modern society like ours to become groups of people who do not necessarily have the same racial or ethnic background, but instead common economic interests. Why do we insist on deluding ourselves about a melting pot? The personal opinions and values of the immigrants didn't melt, with or without intermarriage. Indeed, why do we proclaim equality for all when we know that is impossible due to varied levels of genetically based abilities for individuals within or without any racial or ethnic group? And no, because of wealth differences and political influence we are not even equal in the eyes of the law ... not even close to that idealized garbage.

Moving on, I am building a case here to identify recent immigrants as trouble makers in the sense that immigrants always want to reshape and control the areas into which they immigrate, and to milk those areas of desired resources. Thus, the Islamic people who openly declare their abhorrence of our culture, and who are poison to it, are no different than we were a few centuries ago relative to the wellbeing of the American Indians. The only difference today is that we currently have the economic and military and police state superiority within the USA ... But not elsewhere, and that is an essential and very important point for some later discussion that will not be part of this article. As for the illegal immigrants from Mexico and other Hispanic countries who pick crops or do other menial labor, they are living hard lives but they are also gradually taking over as majority populations in some states, while milking the existing welfare systems created to support our own economically weak people, who in turn are descendants of willing or unwilling immigrants.

Do you grasp the essential fact that immigration is colonization when it happens by choice? Do you realize that forced immigration, as characterized by the disgusting practice of slavery, has actually created damaging colonization as well as benefits from the most productive of those "immigrants?"

One of the very large problems today is the pap that is promoted to USA citizens about the reasons for promoting immigration. Land of opportunity? Give us your tired and your hungry (and homeless)? Give me a break! The only reason we permitted immigrations from Europe during the 19th century was to obtain cheap labor, and we abused the hell out of each group ... from Ireland, from Italy, from eastern Europe, etc. If you weren't British or German or in some instances French, and well entrenched economically, you were looking at at least a whole generation of being the equivalent of indentured servants. Most often, a lot more than a single generation was affected, as sub-societal groups formed around the areas of their respective occupations and religions, and in fact extended the time necessary to become immersed and absorbed in the dominant societal groups in the USA ... initially the British and the Germans. I think, by example, of eastern European immigrants who were Catholics coming into a Protestant society, who became mill workers and coal miners, ergo laborers, and who were sequestered by force, economics and later by choice, forming subcultures that promoted stasis rather than growth, mostly for mutual security, social acceptance and retention of cultural identity. That behavior was perfectly understandable and thus, within those sub-cultures, quite reasonable. Assimilation, however, was retarded precisely because of irrational fears and improper behaviors on both sides.

I would be remiss to fail to consider Jewish and Asian peoples. Now, let's be honest. Can you name even one example of Jewish people "colonizing" a country without becoming quite successful within that country? Could it be that cultural and ingrown religious practices combined with the survival requirement of high raw intelligence gave them a leg up on ordinary "immigrants" as well as on existing citizens? How is it that Asians who immigrated into the USA in the 20th century were so quickly successful compared to other earlier mass immigrations? Might it be again a product of wise cultural practices and raw intelligence? Oh, yes, my friend, get used to that idea. These groups are strongly motivated, they possess a great work ethic, and they bask in success wherever they go, until the "indigenous" population becomes aware of their own comparative cultural and intellectual and motivational weaknesses. Well, isn't that a hoot? A good strong work ethic, an integrated set of cultural and religious beliefs, genetic intelligence advantages and voila! Success! Also a formula for disaster, a.k.a. Hitler. And let us not forget the many historical pogroms in Europe and the Middle East regarding Jews. Nor should we forget the mistreatment of Chinese laborers during the building of our own transcontinental railroad.

Alas, today we have self-styled egalitarian socialists in large numbers and in positions of power in the USA and other countries, as seen in politics and the performing arts and in certain academic environments. Also, let me not forget the recipients of socialistic practices with distribution of tax revenues, for they are exceptionally well motivated to stay on the dole. I cannot blame them for being realistic about their inability to compete for good income jobs. And one can shout about racism endlessly and it essentially means nothing. Why? Because it is and always was a hollow complaint noun for those who lost wars of all kinds and thus their individual freedoms and respect, including self respect, not to mention economic disaster, due to inability to compete successfully. Note that those who can and do compete successfully as individuals do quite well economically and socially, regardless of race or country of origin. Note that those who have historically competed well as a group or race or nation don't pull out the race card! Well, I am very pleased to note that all races and ethnic groups have some individuals who excel and who deserve both success and respect. Then, there are the rest, a continuum from productive to useless, regardless of race or ethnic group, who have less ability and through time less motivation in an environment of socialism and also in an environment of ever increasing intelligence requirements for one to be seen as important to the future of humanity.

You will note that I have segued from the topic of immigration to the fallout effects of previous immigrations combined with the now most potent force of societal change, that of the impact of science and applied technology, which items combined have gradually but surely made most citizens non-essential in the creation of essentials like food, shelter, clothing, transportation and medical services. Ditto in areas like higher education, especially those areas concerned with mathematics and the physical sciences, which are in fact the only presently effective forces leading humanity into the future.

We have a growing misfit between the bulk of the people who are here and whose needs and behaviors are fundamentally the same now as their ancestors were thousands of years ago, vs. the intellectual requirement to be able to contribute to the continued evolution of human society to make us ever more powerful and functional as a species. This misfit dwarfs any concerns about immigration.

Thus, immigration is a subject of tertiary importance. Our best interests are in assuring that we are not overrun by those whose need to eat is not equaled by their ability to contribute. Existing abilities to readily automate what the illegal immigrants can do could and does invalidate all arguments related to their current place in USA society. I realize that is a tough conclusion. It really means our agricultural businesses prefer the economics of a modern version of slavery, and that is disgusting and in the long run very harmful to our nation. So we need to reverse that behavior, tough or not. It is the only sensible conclusion if we are to avoid creating additional billions of people, especially globally, who will consume but who will contribute essentially nothing towards the future of humanity. So let us focus on avoiding excessive conception and reduce the size of our current immigration and cultural issues, globally. We might even save the physical environment of our planet. Our footprint has grown to become unreasonably large and damaging to our planet. As of now it is clearly a product of overpopulation ... of all people who want to enjoy the fruits of technology, and who all deserve, at least as children, equal consideration.

This aspect of increasing populations is a direct byproduct of modern medicine and modern methods of agriculture, and it is promoted by governments to support their Ponzi schemes related to socialism. Immigration now becomes migration from areas of less resources and seemingly perpetual war as inhabitants fight over limited resources. It sounds a bit like all of the historical immigrations of people unwanted in their homelands. And, as usual, humans, like other animals, reproduce to excess until the demands of the people exceed the resources. So far in history it is a never ending story, and one that should cause all of us to pause in our thinking, in consideration of the future of humanity.

In the interim we remain participants in Infantile Paralysis of the mental and social variety. Our thoughts really aren't all that important, or necessarily valid, except to ourselves as individuals. And they are certainly not complete in considering enough relevant variables for any serious subject. I know that hurts. It also applies to me and it hurts my feelings too. But the reality of our marginal thinking is unavoidably true. I guess that makes me a hard case, for I find me kicking myself in the ass as well as those of you who have not heretofore seriously considered and communicated about the more important points in this article ... the ones that address preparing ourselves for the future, not the past or the present.