A few days back Germany and France urged Italy to open immigration centres (so that immigrants can be registered) with all due haste. As this is nothing but political posturing and politician A does not like politician B to “tarnish” their reputation, a duly political reply was crafted. The attack was spearheaded by the Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Paolo Gentiloni. In an interview by Corriere della Sera – Italy, he had the following sage words to say:
“There are three crucial issues…”
“… establishing a European right to asylum… The immigrants arrive in Europe, not in Italy, Greece…”
“… establishing legal immigration channels towards Europe: we need legal immigrants with skils.”
“… distribute the burden fairly among the various countries.”
If you are interested in the complete interview, head to the above mentioned newspaper and search for “Gentiloni: Immigration Not Just Italy’s Problem”.
BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT AND MORE BULLSHIT
Let’s begin our “critique”… yeah… let’s call it “critique” by saying that we have already written ad-nauseum regarding this topic. See for example Immigration Policies Are The Ultimate Monopoly. However, that article was a neutral one. One that does not do finger pointing. The purpose of this one, on the other hand, is to try to show you what happens when idiotic and stupid ideas are placed in practice. A shit storm of unimaginable bullshit ensues. To task.
RIGHT TO ASYLUM
The fact that people need asylum is due to… government action! Almost all the asylum seekers are running away from wars and/or other disasters duly executed by governments! Think about it. What is the typical reason accepted by asylum granting countries? Political persecution.
It is not economic hardship or family reunion or health issues. It is Political persecution. Now, who persecutes people due to their political views? Corporations? Neighborhoods? The local bingo association? No. Governments.
The fact that asylum seekers exist in droves is mostly due to government action.
Now let’s analyze this “right to asylum” thingy. Why would a person not have a right to asylum? In order to answer this question, we need to ask ourselves what is asylum or, more precisely, what does it entail?
Asylum is the “right” to stay in a country given to asylum seekers by the government of such country. Fair enough, but where does the right to deny asylum come from? Governments. Why? Because they own a country… no… hold on… governments do not own the country. People do, or at least this is what it is claimed by “democratic” systems. But if governments do not own the country, this means that an asylum seeker is talking to the wrong people! Think about it. If a complete stranger wants to get into your house, it should ask for permission to you, the owner. It is irrelevant what your neighbor thinks about this issue and how many “rights of entry” he issues. At the end of the day it is your house. Your neighbor has no ownership rights to your house.
Ah… you say. But governments represent “the people” and as such they have the “authority” to act in their behalf. Oh, really? There is a very simple rule in law which is pretty much universal. The rule states that “he who can the most can the least”.
If governments are simply representatives of the people, this means that people actually own the country. People have rights of property and governments only have privileges and privileges can be cancelled by right owners at any time. This means that if you wish to go to a public park and claim a portion of it to grow carrots just because you feel like so doing, there is absolutely nothing a government can do to stop you because you are the rights holder and they are only the privilege entitled ones. Right. Do you actually believe that this is a realistic scenario? Of course not! If you would attempt such a thing you would be fined and possibly dragged in front of a judge for “damaging public property”… ironically… you are being punished for “damaging” your own property. Therefore, governments do not represent the people. They represent themselves.
Basically, governments have stolen peoples’ right to their own property! A country is most definitively not government property. And if this is the case, governments have no right whatsoever to limit who enters or stays in peoples’ properties. Owners do.
However, asylum seekers are not asking property owners but thieves to let them in. Think of it like this. You live happily in your home when suddenly it is invaded and taken over by a band of thieves. When the bell rings they open the door and welcome their friends for dinner. In your house. Are you really going to tell us that they have the “right” to do so? Of course not! It is still your house. Yet, this is exactly what governments do.
There is no such thing as a “right of asylum” but simply a request from one person to a property owner to remain in that property. Speaking about such a “right” is ridiculous and disingenuous.
THE “RIGHT” IMMIGRANTS
The second point of Gentiloni deals with barriers to entry. You see, dear reader, Italy only want the “right” immigrants, the “skilled” ones, the “good” ones. Not the “other” ones.
This is, again, plain stupidity and it only shines a light to the degree of ignorance such politicians (well… all of them) exhibit.
Let’s begin by saying that almost all modern statistics show that the maximum benefit a country can exert from immigration is to have a random assortment. No filtering. The idea that a country can progress through a selection of “skilled” immigrants is statistically incorrect. A country needs all kinds of people and it is impossible to say a-priory (in advance) what will the country need in the future. Any country attempting to filter people by skills is shooting themselves in the foot. Twice. With perfect aim. Using a shotgun. Filled with explosive ammunition.
Got the idea?
What countries need are entrepreneurial people and this cannot be filtered by “skill”. How do we know this? Because if this would be the case, our “society” would be filled with entrepreneurs. Think about it. Why would you want to work for fixed wages if you could simply take a course on “entrepreneurship” , start your own business and become a millionaire? Of course, any such notion is downright ridiculous!
But then we also have the “economic” side of it. You see dear reader, immigrants cost a lot of taxpayer money to the government. Immigrants are a “burden” (Gentiloni’s words, not ours). Except… that most reliable statistics indicate that, on average, immigrants pay more taxes than locals! Gosh! Darn! How dare those filthy immigrants generate more wealth and pay more taxes than the locals! Those bastards!!! Oh… wait…
Lastly, as we all know, immigration is a burden to a country. Because they pay more taxes… oh… wait.. Because they are more entrepreneurial and driven… oh… wait… Because they enrich our culture… oh…wait… Because … they are ugly and they don’t speak the local language! That’s it. Finally the truth has surfaced and the light has begun to shine…
Unless they use their language for entrepreneurial purposes… which they do…oh…whatever.
Let’s just agree that immigrants are a burden to “society”, that they are evil, that they started WWI, WWII, assassinated Kennedy, produced global warming and are most definitively the origin of bird flu. There! That’s better….
The reason why idiotic politicians always use the “B” word when referring to immigrants is because of government services’ costs to support such immigrants. It is true that typically when an immigrant arrives into a highly socialized country, it costs money to the government. However, as time goes by, the amount of wealth that such immigrants produce is far larger than the original expenditure. Except… when a country is so socialistic that it continues to “support” unemployed immigrants through “welfare” thus creating a toxic dependency on government for subsistence.
We have all heard about entire families living off government money for generations. This is a reality in many “advanced” and “socialistic” countries. Of course, this is exactly how politicians want it because in so doing they have bought all the votes they need to stay in power. They have addicted generations to “free” government money. See for example Socialism - The Most Addictive Drug.
The fact that immigrants are a “burden” to governments is, again, due to government action! Remove the government and the burden of “supporting” this people disappears. It does for two reasons. The first one is because there is no more government, but the second is because of the side effects of not having governments. This is, the free market takes hold and everybody prospers! Including so-called immigrants!
Presto! Problem solved.
The issue of immigration is a non-event. It exists only because governments exist. It is a circular issue. The more governments try to legislate immigration the worse it becomes. It is a catastrophe produced entirely by governments and the only solution is to remove the root cause: governments.
Don’t believe us? Just ask an immigrant how hard was a simple trip from geographic location A to geographic location B due to government action. You will be surprised. But not positively.