Elite nation-building thought process
One reason the New York Times subscription is worth it is for the window into the thought processes of the elites. “Over 75,000 Job Openings in Iowa Alone. Millions of Refugees Seeking Work. Make the Connection.” (NYT, 2/2/2023) is a great example. Excerpts:
Across the globe, 32.5 million refugees are seeking safety, many of them adults in search of work. At the same time, severe labor shortages in the United States and many other high-income countries have left businesses clamoring for workers.
The United States can help address both problems (and more) through bipartisan immigration reform — and states can be part of new solutions with innovative ideas that could act as the foundation for immigration federalism.
Creating a pathway for individuals to live and work in Iowa and other states would ease the burden on America’s asylum system.
One of the pillars of modern elite thinking is that, instead of being organized by cultural affinity, a cohesive human society can be built by assembling people who did not like wherever it was that they were previously. That’s the basis of open borders for asylum-seekers. Native-born American taxpayers will fund apartments (in a building owned by a member of the elite!) for (1) person who says that he/she/ze/they was at risk of being killed by a gang in El Salvador and speaks only Spanish, (2) someone who says that he/she/ze/they was a domestic violence victim in Haiti and speaks only Creole, (3) a migrant who says that he/she/ze/they was a victim in Syria and speaks only Arabic, and (4) a former police officer from Somalia (based on occupation, automatically eligible for asylum?) who speaks only Somali. Though they share no common language, these four folks can bond over… something. Thus, a thriving neighborhood is born. (Maybe they bond over their shared hatred for life in the respective countries of their birth?)
What’s new from the New York Times is the suggestion that these migrants get allocated by a central bureaucracy of elites to states in which there are (elite-owned) businesses whose offered wages are insufficient to attract native-born workers and existing immigrants. So not only will an asylum-seeker be in a country that he/she/ze/they may not have wanted to live in, but the asylum-seeker will be in a state that he/she/ze/they did not want to live in. (Remember that asylum-seekers are “fleeing” from somewhere. They’re involuntarily in the U.S. because this is the only place that they can be safe. It may be that the asylum-seeker dislikes and disagrees with everything about American culture and values, but the alternative was death.)
From Amana, Iowa: 75 years of communal living, a couple of photos of what awaits welfare-dependent migrants from a conservative Islamic society:
(Why will they be welfare-dependent? If they’re in a low-skill low-wage job, especially if they have children, even working 40 hours per week they will be eligible for means-tested programs such as public housing, Medicaid, food stamps (SNAP/EBT), and Obamaphone.)
Full post, including comments