The Free Market is Not a Suicide Pact
By Daniel Greenfield
SultanKnish.Blogspot.com
Immigration has become the third rail of American
politics.
At
a time when the labor force participation rate has
fallen to 62 percent and the employment growth for
the last 15 years has gone to immigrants, opposing
the Super-Amnesty of 12 million illegal aliens is
still considered an extreme position… in the
Republican Party.
So when Scott Walker merely suggested that Congress
should make immigration decisions based on
“protecting American workers and American wages”, he
was denounced for it by… Republicans.
Walker’s belief that immigration should be based on
“our economic situation”, rather than an ideological
mandate for open borders, has become an “extreme
right” position. And yet this scary “extreme”
position that foreign workers shouldn’t be brought
in to displace American workers is part of our
immigration law. It’s just one of those “extreme”
parts that, like the illegality of crossing the
border, is being ignored. It’s not just being
ignored by Obama. It’s also being ignored by the
Republican Party.
Scott Walker’s common sense immigration populism was
met with two sets of attacks. The first set came
from senators like McCain and Portman playing the
old song about all those “jobs Americans won’t do.”
(Not that they’re given the chance to do them.)
Senator Hatch claimed that, “We know that when we
graduate PhDs and master’s degrees and engineers, we
don’t have enough of any of those.”
America has no shortage of engineers. Companies
aren’t bringing in Third World engineers on H-1B
visas because of a shortage, but because they want
to fire their American workers and replace them with
cheaper foreigners. American IT workers are forced
to train their H-1B replacements before being fired.
And that’s when the free market argument kicks in.
Walker was denounced for betraying “free market
principles” and for “immigration protectionism”. But
if lowering the rate of one million immigrants
already arriving each year while Americans can’t
find jobs is a violation of free market principles,
then why have any limitations on immigration at all?
A poll showed that 13% of the world’s adults or 150
million people would move to the United States if
they were allowed to. If 1 million immigrants can’t
fill all those jobs that Americans won’t do, let’s
try 150 million immigrants.
It would be a violation of free market principles to
prevent the 37% of Liberians (genocide in the 80s
and 90s), 26% of Dominicans (their last reported
unemployment rate in the US was double that of
Americans) and 24% of Haitians (Cholera, 14% of the
country’s households had a rape in two years) from
moving to your town or your city.
Just think of all the cholera, unemployment, rape,
welfare and genocide that could be enriching the
fabric of our country and your neighborhood right
now if it weren’t for all that pesky protectionism.
Clearly we do believe in some form of protectionism.
Even Obama hasn’t welcomed in a quarter of Haiti,
yet, but the year is still young. The free market
isn’t a top-down ideology whose principles require
open borders and when it acts as a rigid ideology
insisting that its pure application will lead to
positive results while ignoring the problems, then
it becomes no different than the ideological
centrally planned economies destroying themselves.
If freedom is to mean anything, it has to mean
the freedom of individuals, not of systems. Like
Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Religion, the
American free market is nothing if it is not the
right of Americans to freely do business with each
other.
That right unfortunately no longer exists. Americans
are less free to do business in their own country
than foreign countries are to dump subsidized
products or surplus populations in the United
States.
What does exist is a mantra of free trade that
obligates the United States to accept products
dumped from subsidized economies such as China and
Japan in the name of free trade, to accede to the
outsourcing of American jobs to foreign countries
that aggressively develop and protect their
industries and to the Third World immigrants
displacing American workers to labor at extremely
low wages while their real salaries are paid for by
American workers in the form of food stamps and
other social benefits.
None of this promotes free market principles.
Instead free market principles are exploited to
undermine our own free market. The right of
Americans to freely trade is under attack from mass
migration.
Not only are the new immigrants much more likely to
vote to the left, but the mass destruction of
American jobs is expanding the ranks of the poor who
become much less likely to vote Republican.
In the last presidential election, the under $30K
group was a wall of Obama voters. This group is
twice as likely to identify as Democrat rather than
Republican. It’s had the sharpest drop off in
Republican identification. In Pennsylvania, Bush won
39% of these voters while Romney took 24% of their
votes.
Does electing Democrats promote free market
principles? Does reshaping the electorate so that a
Republican in the White House becomes an impossible
phenomenon serve free trade?
Free market principles, like any others, must be
reducible to the individual. Can importing millions
of people who reject free market principles
individually be in accordance with free market
principles?
Only collectively, and collectivist free market
principles are a contradiction in terms and a
suicide pact. This collectivist version of free
market principles destroys our ability to implement
any form of free market in the future. The
perversion comes from viewing the free market as an
abstract idea expressed through our entanglement in
a global network. The free market isn’t a global
policy. It’s how we live. It’s our freedom to engage
in commerce as we choose. It exists only as long as
we are free. Scott Walker hasn’t abandoned free
market principles. His critics have.
True free market principles derive from the
individual, not from national policies that import
millions who collectively reject those principles.
Protecting American workers who believe in the free
market also protects a free market which, along with
our other freedoms, would cease to exist without
them.
Freedom is a covenant that comes with rights and
responsibilities. Our fundamental responsibility to
any freedom is to support and protect it. Those who
reject a freedom should not be able to benefit from
it.
Europe is in a state of growing civil war with
Muslim immigrants because European leaders refused
to understand that extending rights to those who do
not accept them and do not reciprocate creates
rights without responsibilities. A right extended to
those who reject it is a failed effort at
appeasement.
Freedom isn’t global, it’s local. It does not come
from policies, it comes from people. It can’t be
implemented internationally by creating hollow
organizations and pretending that its member nations
are free. International organizations of the left,
such as the UN, have already proven it through their
failures, but international economic organizations,
such as the WTO, have proven it as well.
We can sacrifice the American free market to a
non-existent global free market, or we can protect
the American free market while letting it serve as a
model of domestic economic freedom for other
nations.
Immigration
has an important place in American life, but it can
never become more important than American life. It
is not an unlimited good and its implementation must
flow from what is best for Americans, not from
warping the freedoms that we believe in until they
become an abstract ideology that destroys the people
who practice them.
Scott Walker is not betraying free market principles
when he contends that immigration should be based
around the needs of Americans, he is practicing and
protecting them.
Senator McCain warned that anything but open borders
will end all hope of Republicans winning the Latino
vote. Republicans won’t win the Latino vote by
recreating the conditions of cheap labor and cheap
votes that made Mexico what it is, but through an
economy where workers have the opportunity to earn a
dependable living so that they don’t turn to the
left for their economic salvation.
Our economy should not be a machine for importing
cheap votes and cheap labor, because cheap labor
feeds even cheaper votes. Republican senators trying
to help their donors fill those “jobs Americans
won’t do” are turning red states blue. They’ve
already cost the Republican Party, California. Now
they’re working on the rest of the West.
Republicans who are still uncertain should ask
themselves who has a better vision for the future of
the party; Scott Walker or John McCain.