When I see a crying child on my screen, I know somebody is trying to take advantage of me. The same is true about every appeal to my basic human instincts, whether it is a naked female body or a dead baby. Instead of convincing me, such a cheap trick calls for immediate rejection. I know that this voluptuous body will not land into my hands even if I buy all Coca Cola in the shop. The sight of dead babies will not convince me to do something against common sense, for it is manipulation. In politics, I want a Socratic discussion, not emotional persuasion. If you can’t persuade me by words, do not try to do that with pictures. However, they try and often succeed.
Words can be pretty inflammatory, but pictures are stronger stuff. In order to kill the flower of English youth at the tranches of Verdun, pictures of German brutes roasting Belgian babies on their bayonets were used; pictures of Jewish commissars raping an Aryan blonde pushed the German lads to premature death at the banks of Volga River. You can’t argue pictures with words, saying that there is a simple way to avoid the calamity: do not start war, and the German brute will have to satisfy his ravings by roasting a bratwurst, and the Jewish commissar will just subscribe to the Playboy to view an Aryan body.
This is the case with #Trumpbabysnatcher. It is heart-renting to see a picture of small kids beyond the bars. But there is a childishly simple way to avoid separation and incarceration: do not cross the Rio Grande without a visa.
Picture pushers are dishonest and they do not care a fig about kids: Madeleine Albright famously thought it is worth while to kill half a million of Iraqi children. Hillary Clinton unleashed hell on Libyan and Syrian soil, killing and dispossessing hundreds of thousands of children. All the US Presidents have been hugging and kissing Israeli rulers, who habitually detain, torture and kill Palestinian kids. Our friends in the alternative media (Counterpunch etc) who joined these ladies and gents waving kiddie photos are of weak mind or dishonest or they think that anything goes to achieve their goal, getting rid of Trump.
The wonderful Diana Johnstone wrote recently that the immigration issue splits the German left. Indeed support for free immigration is suicide for the Left. But this issue does split the whole Western world. On one side, believers in the world without borders, in the free movement of people. It sounds great, until you understand that this is a way to destroy the native working class, abolish the welfare state, ruin social structures and at the same time undermine donor countries, in short, to destroy the world as we know it. On the other side, people who want to preserve the world they live in work to keep the walls up.
What we need is some sincerity and honesty, as opposed to manipulation. If you think mass immigration will return us to new Dark Ages, say so. If you think it would be better to remove borders and to unleash a new Volkswanderung, just say so, but please do not show us baby pictures.
On a personal level, people for open borders are those who are certain their jobs aren’t threatened by any migrants; for them, a new Mexican arrival means a new Mexican restaurant or a new Mexican field worker or builder or house cleaner, cheaper than what they have had, not a competitor for job and housing. People for preservation of the world are aware that they are vulnerable, that new people can make them unemployed. In other words, the former are upper classes or their sycophants, the latter are working classes and people who feel solidarity and compassion towards them.
“Why don’t you say that the former feel compassion towards refugees and immigrants”, you’d ask. Because they do what is profitable for upper classes. They feel zero sympathy for suffering Palestinians, and this is the sterling proof that they lie.
Do you remember the picture of a poor drowned Syrian boy on the seashore? This picture moved a million Afghans, Iraqis, Gypsies and even some Syrians to Europe. Indeed it is terrible, that the drowned child’s father endangered lives of his family for no valid reason. He lived in safe and prosperous Turkey for a few years; he preferred to go to Canada; Canadians refused him a visa, so he sailed the dangerous Mediterranean Sea and lost all his family. Awful; but why this personal tragedy should influence any decision beyond caution: do not sail the sea in unseaworthy vessels. It is better to live in Turkey as 80 million people do than to die at sea.
A few days ago we saw Palestinians – men, women, children, – being shot at by Israeli snipers because they wanted to leave their concentration camp of Gaza. Did the people who love immigration say anything in their support? No, they know better that their Jewish organisers won’t approve that. And the Jews weren’t impressed at all. “Let them all die” – they wrote in their social networks. As a rule, Jews are visually challenged, and excel verbally. This allows them to remain unmoved by pictures, while spreading the kiddie pictures to impress Gentiles.
Israelis are divided about African migrants: the wealthy want more of it, the working classes want them out. Netanyahu’s government is rather populist and it deports the migrants, though Soros types try to block deportations. However, the wealthy and the workers, Jewish left and Jewish right are of one anti-native mind: they do not want to allow native Palestinians to roam the land. Jews are anti-native by definition; this defines their attitude to human trafficking.
Migration is not all that different from the slave trade of old (the trade Jews excelled in). Recently a video from Libya has been delivered to Europe: the Coast Guard soldiers whip the black migrants to the rubber boats and push them into the sea. Those who remain in the camps are sold in the auction, women – for sex, men – for hard work. This video came at a very opportune hour when the struggle for and against the new slave-trade swept the world from the US to Italy and Germany.
Libya is one of main slave trade markets. Once it was a relatively prosperous country, and a reliable block on the road of African migrants to Europe. The Africans could and did find jobs in Gaddafi’s Libya. But in 2011, the country was destroyed by Obama and Clinton. Since then, it has become a poor ruined country with slowly simmering civil war. Libya has oil, but now many Libyans have discovered the African slave trade. Like in 17th century, the African blacks once again make some Arabs and Europeans wealthy.
Many millions of dollars are earned by Libyan militias this way. They take money from both sides – from Africans rushing to Europe from their ravaged countries, and from Europeans who pay the militias to stop refugees.
The man captured in a video with a whip in the hands, the leader of the brutal gang of slavers is a former rebel against the ‘bloody dictator’ Muammar al-Gaddafi, a friend of democracy and European values, Abd al-Rahman al-Milad, a commander in the Coast Guard. The boats, in which he sends Africans to Europe, are bought with European money. Two hundred million euros a year is paid by Brussels, but the slaves bring much more income. Europeans appreciate Milad – a year ago he was invited to a refresher course in Rome, where he spent a fruitful month in a classy hotel at the expense of the European Union.
Milad’s rival Al-Dabbashi sends boats by night from the beaches. The competitors remove the engines from the boats of rivals, and leave the refugees to die at sea. The turnover is huge: one and a half million blacks have passed through Libya on their way to Europe, thousands have died en route, but the human resource has not dried up. Other Libyan militants, who once liberated their homeland from bloody Gaddafi, operate in the African outback and drive tens of thousands of Africans through the Sahara into Libya, to new slave markets and to Europe.
The European NGO’s pick up rubber boats with migrants sent by Milad, take the migrants on board and deliver them to Europe, making a very decent profit. These “rescuers” directly cooperate with Milad and other slavers, they receive exact instructions from the “senders” where to pick up the boats, and they take a considerable share of the profit. They earn grants and donations of the compassionate Europeans, who do not understand that they are being manipulated by slavers.
For several years this business flourished without hindrance, until the Italian people got tired of accepting hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, and elected the “populists”, a coalition of the right-wing League of the North of Italy and the left libertarian party M5S of the South of Italy, and they shut the traffic down. Matteo Salvini, the Interior Minister, banned a ship with its black cargo from entering Italian ports, and after several days of disputes, the ship Aquarius went to Spain. If the Italians remain steadfast and put their foot down, they will eliminate the second leg of the traffic scheme, the “humanitarian NGO” vessels that made the whole slave trade possible.
The Spanish government accepted Aquarius, and two more boats, sailing under the Dutch flag, which the unruly Italians had blocked from entrying their ports. The French administration of Macron sided with Brussels, Germany and Spain, and promised to receive the refugees from the Aquarius. But in Germany a riot is brewing – the Minister of the Interior Horst Seehofer gave an order to stop accepting illegal migrants. Chancellor Angela Merkel did not agree with him. She can fire Seehofer, but then her coalition will collapse.
Hungary placed the fight against migration at the top of its agenda. So the split is not Left vs. Right, but between those who want to end illegal immigration and those who want to replace the expensive and spoiled European population by unpretentious, obedient and cheap migrants .
There is a correlation between the attitude to migration and to Russia. Those for open borders are anti-Russian, those pro-native are rather pro-Russian. This is not a 100%-dependence, as Poland is anti-Russian and anti-migration at once, but as a rule, in social networks, the Russians are supportive of anti-Soros forces in Europe, and those forces look to strongly nativist Moscow with hope.
The Russian government does not intend to interfere with European (or even less, American) decision-making in this sphere. Russia is not specially welcoming to migrants, and despite Russian involvement in the Syrian war, the country has received very few Syrian refugees, if at all. Opposition to Mr Putin, be it from the Communist Party or the nationalists of Mr Zhirinovsky, is strongly anti-migration, while the government allows labour migrants from Central Asia to come in and work. However, since the Rouble depreciated against Dollar, the waves of migration abated, for in Russia, in Europe and in the US migration is chiefly economic migration.
Its solution lies in treatment of Africa, Latin America and other immigration donors. There should be a law stipulating positive balance of payments, including financial transactions and debt repayment, between these countries and the prosperous West. Money should flow to Africa, not from Africa, and this will end the Libyan traffic.
Mass migration is an ugly phenomenon, encouraging human trafficking and slave trade, beefing up profits of nasty smugglers and ruining the donor and receipting countries. It is good to stop it. And no pictures of crying babies should interfere with decision-making.
Israel Shamir can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org
This article was first published at The Unz Review.