We are being overwhelmed by an influx of newcomers in the UK, I for the first time in a long while took public transport and I gradually became aware there was not one language being spoken around me that I understood. It was a very isolating experience.
If the dems/liberals of western countries were sincerely concerned about native national populations, their top platforms would not be the obsessive support for abortion, without limit, and their demands for environmental everything in their gaia religion of worshiping the planet would make these mass movements of people repellant to them.
These two issues being at the top of their public political and regulatory priority run in direct contradiction to the well-funded international global population movements we are seeing today. These peoples are not self-funding their travels. This is being sponsored by NGOs globalists and the UN.
Something else is going on. We should consider that whatever is labeled conspiracy! is in fact true.
Same here, in the space of 10 years, half the shops on the main street of our little town in Sweden are arab. The town square on sunny days looks like marocco.
The issue is not about immigrants it's about new comers adopting a mind set of Liberty vs government control/dictatorship. During my life I have witnessed the influx of people from around the world, Mexicans, Canadians, Vietnamese, Japanese, Pacific Islanders, South Africans, Chinese, Thai, Russians, on and on. The U.S has been the most welcoming country on this planet and offered the best opportunity for financial independence in the history of the world. No other country offers the Opportunity to become know as a full fledged member of that country other than the U.S. A black man can't go to China and become Chinese, A white man can't go to France and become French. An Indian can't go to Germany and become German, only America has offered the opportunity to become an American and millions have done so during my lifetime and the results have been that all who have arrived are better off than where they came from and I'm glad they are here. The only requirement was accepting the ideals enshrined in our Constitution, the same Constitution our delusional leaders are now destroying by spending money like drunken sailors and telling Americans that they should hate they very people who welcomed them in the first place.
How come you and I can think of a trazillion different mixtapes of "in their own words" that could be run nonstop as campaign ads for them other guys and yet we don't see them running anywhere?
The thing is, mass migration of young men (which is what it mostly appears to be) doesn't seem to help anything very much. From my own observations, most of those young men don't actually end up being doctors or lawyers or plumbers or farmers. They end up in dead-end jobs in Amazon warehouses or delivery food to fat people but mostly they seem to end up on the streets knifing each other or robbing passersby. Am I missing something? Does being a Deliveroo driver pay so much that they get taxed at 40%? Surely the sensible approach to an aging population is to keep people working longer? My neighbour retired at 50 and has spent 25 years living the life. I don't think anyone objects to people who want to "become" British or American or whatever and who want to have a career and raise a family. These men and boys arriving illegally aren't interested in doing that so how are they a benefit?
Of course they don't want the middle/upper classes noticing, so yes it's mainly lower paid jobs. This keeps the middle/upper classes' soy lattes and avocados on toast stay cheap. It keeps inflation lower.
Plus a growing population means more things consumed which equals a growing GDP. A growing GDP means growth and the ability to borrow more. Even though these growth figures per capita are terrible.
The illegal immigrants are minuscule in the scheme of things (compared with all immigration), so are probably allowed in to whip up a bit of anger and so tarnish the whole immigration debate.
Bravo for finally saying it out loud. People are so afraid of being called names "racist, xenophobic, intolerant, etc", that verbalising the very public plan that has been in place globally for a few decades now, is a terrifying social gag.
We have had declining birth rates globally for decades. Government's have known that they need to keep immigration occurring, despite public push back, for population reasons. That just one of the 3 reasons.😉
They also need immigration because these populations are more inclined to accept UBI.😐🤨
The government's need UBI to be accepted, for multiple reasons, but mostly because the pension funds are gone, the financial system is in a controlled collapse, and they need to implement UBI to maintain control.😐🤔🤔🤨🤐🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
On Thursday, the Court handed down a 6-3 decision, on a party-line vote, that could render a simply astonishing array of federal laws unenforceable. As Justice Sonia Sotomayor writes in dissent, “the constitutionality of hundreds of statutes may now be in peril, and dozens of agencies could be stripped of their power to enforce laws enacted by Congress.”
The dispute in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy turns on whether a hedge fund manager accused of defrauding investors is entitled to a jury trial to determine whether he violated federal securities law, or whether the government acted properly when it tried him before an official known as an “administrative law judge” (ALJ).
The charges against this hedge fund manager, George Jarkesy, are civil and not criminal, which matters because the Constitution treats civil trials very differently from criminal proceedings. While the Sixth Amendment provides that “in all criminal prosecutions” the defendant is entitled to a jury trial, the Seventh Amendment provides a more limited jury trial right, requiring them “in suits at common law” (more on what that means later).
SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function.
Congress, moreover, has enacted a wide range of laws on the presumption that many enforcement proceedings may be brought before administrative law judges and not juries. According to one somewhat dated review of federal law cited by Sotomayor, “by 1986, there were over 200” federal statutes calling for trials before ALJs.
Chief Justice John Roberts’s majority opinion in Jarkesy leans heavily into the kind of remedy available to the SEC if it prevails in a suit before an ALJ. Like a suit before a common law court, the SEC sought monetary damages from Jarkesy, and thus this case resembles a suit at common law in that way. As Roberts writes, “money damages are the prototypical common law remedy.”
"SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function." That will likely helpfully rectify political and economic reality quite a bit. Much distortion of the federal laws by the federal agencies themselves has been permitted by the administrative law system. Hard to bring the agencies to task for arbitrary, self-serving, and illegal behavior when the administrative courts implicitly have the agencies' backs.
Thanks for this excellent article. I've always thought illegal immigration was vital to keep real inflation lower than it already is.
The government doesn't just lie with their official CPI statistics, they tell massive lies. Inflation has been higher than we've been told for decades. They can't hide it as much today ... but they are still trying to with these preposterous inflation reports (for example: 1 percent food inflation in the last 12 months or 3.3 total inflation).
Immigration, automation and out-sourcing - plus shrinkflation and "substitution" - all conceal real inflation.
BTW, When was the last time the federal minimum wage was increased?
Ivor, thank you for being solid in this battle from the beginning. I remember coming across your audio presentation in 2020 about the "Casedemic" and how Covid was seasonal, and it was such a relief to hear someone talking sense. I also appreciate your regular compilation of articles, and how you're highlighting different books on your Substack. Is there a way I could provide you with a copy of my book that was just released by Brownstone Institute? It's titled Mechanisms of Harm: Medicine in the Time of Covid-19, and is a layperson's overview of these four aspects of the official Covid response: 1) Suppression of cheap, already approved FDA meds for treating Covid, to make way for 2) Ineffective expensive Emergency Use Authorized meds to treat Covid, while waiting for 3) The not safe not effective "vaccines," and 4) How the pandemic manipulation was a trial run for what the authorities plan to do again in the face of some other "emergency." Please let me know if you would like a complimentary copy. Thanks again for all your good work!
Oh, haha! Sorry about that, I conflated you with Ivor's The Fat Emperor. Well, I'm a paid subscriber to your Substack, which is great. I am able to send a PDF or EPUB version of Mechanisms of Harm to your email, if you would be so kind as to contact me. My email is lweintz@comcast.net. Thank you!
Remember white citizens are being replaced. But the immigrants will be replaced also by immigrants and this is the ultimate goal. A perpetual replacement with people owning nothing in these countries.
Allegedly, they're trying to solve a temporary problem with the financial system (paying for the care and pensions of the Baby Boom generation) by permanently altering the demographics of European countries but without the people's consent. They could have solved this problem with a guest worker programme where the workers go back after, say, 3 years, to be replaced with new ones, i.e. they never become settled citizens. In the meantime, they could, like Hungary, have promoted the indigenous birth rate. Once the Boomers die off the problem becomes less acute and is manageable plus you would still have an ethnically homogenous society intact. There is no reason why a population has to grow to the sky. We need a financial system which can cope with periods of decline.
Given that the problems could have been solved in other ways, I'm less inclined to believe that this is the main reason for the mass immigration which actually stated after WWII when demographics weren't an issue, i.e. births were booming and millions of men were being demobbed into the civilian labour force. All the evidence I see points to a visceral hated of white people amongst the liberal elites and their army of NPCs, like this journalist, which can only have been put there deliberately for some reason by some element of the "elite".
Everyone wants to turn a blind eye to what is being done to the West, but it cannot be ignored. Countries like Hungary and Russia have resisted this call to allow mass migration, instead incentivising higher birth rates among their own native populations. I believe Poland has similar sentiments, but also doesn't want to become a pariah state in the EU like Hungary?
Either way, the UN's 2000 Replacement Migration Recommendation was as a result of their 1998 report on declining populations in the west. It cannot be racist, or xenophobic, to point out what the UN recommended, and what all our western governments are allowing to happen, despite all the protestations of their own populations, can it?
We are being overwhelmed by an influx of newcomers in the UK, I for the first time in a long while took public transport and I gradually became aware there was not one language being spoken around me that I understood. It was a very isolating experience.
If the dems/liberals of western countries were sincerely concerned about native national populations, their top platforms would not be the obsessive support for abortion, without limit, and their demands for environmental everything in their gaia religion of worshiping the planet would make these mass movements of people repellant to them.
These two issues being at the top of their public political and regulatory priority run in direct contradiction to the well-funded international global population movements we are seeing today. These peoples are not self-funding their travels. This is being sponsored by NGOs globalists and the UN.
Something else is going on. We should consider that whatever is labeled conspiracy! is in fact true.
Same here, in the space of 10 years, half the shops on the main street of our little town in Sweden are arab. The town square on sunny days looks like marocco.
The issue is not about immigrants it's about new comers adopting a mind set of Liberty vs government control/dictatorship. During my life I have witnessed the influx of people from around the world, Mexicans, Canadians, Vietnamese, Japanese, Pacific Islanders, South Africans, Chinese, Thai, Russians, on and on. The U.S has been the most welcoming country on this planet and offered the best opportunity for financial independence in the history of the world. No other country offers the Opportunity to become know as a full fledged member of that country other than the U.S. A black man can't go to China and become Chinese, A white man can't go to France and become French. An Indian can't go to Germany and become German, only America has offered the opportunity to become an American and millions have done so during my lifetime and the results have been that all who have arrived are better off than where they came from and I'm glad they are here. The only requirement was accepting the ideals enshrined in our Constitution, the same Constitution our delusional leaders are now destroying by spending money like drunken sailors and telling Americans that they should hate they very people who welcomed them in the first place.
One more reason to love Tucker. That young woman was an embarrassment to her country and profession.
https://odysee.com/@ziffel:6/The-truth-about-Tucker-Carlson:6?fbclid=IwAR143EMuRcJViuahoTNoKpJkjTbRHl0B3hF4PU0_pixK3F5g-rKgcxrYt04
I liked the Great Replacement Theory's original name - "Demographics is Destiny".
I can even remember the Democrats chortling over the anticipated benefits to their party.
They were quite proud of the entire plan until the "far-right" started talking about it, too.
How come you and I can think of a trazillion different mixtapes of "in their own words" that could be run nonstop as campaign ads for them other guys and yet we don't see them running anywhere?
Republicans are the Washington Generals of the Uniparty -- there only to play-act as the opposition while constantly losing.
How come there's not enough fuss and prophylactic measures being taken about this neutering pandemic all around us?
Bingo! 1 party, 2 names, and the tuck alwaya plays his part!
https://odysee.com/@ziffel:6/The-truth-about-Tucker-Carlson:6?fbclid=IwAR143EMuRcJViuahoTNoKpJkjTbRHl0B3hF4PU0_pixK3F5g-rKgcxrYt04
The thing is, mass migration of young men (which is what it mostly appears to be) doesn't seem to help anything very much. From my own observations, most of those young men don't actually end up being doctors or lawyers or plumbers or farmers. They end up in dead-end jobs in Amazon warehouses or delivery food to fat people but mostly they seem to end up on the streets knifing each other or robbing passersby. Am I missing something? Does being a Deliveroo driver pay so much that they get taxed at 40%? Surely the sensible approach to an aging population is to keep people working longer? My neighbour retired at 50 and has spent 25 years living the life. I don't think anyone objects to people who want to "become" British or American or whatever and who want to have a career and raise a family. These men and boys arriving illegally aren't interested in doing that so how are they a benefit?
Of course they don't want the middle/upper classes noticing, so yes it's mainly lower paid jobs. This keeps the middle/upper classes' soy lattes and avocados on toast stay cheap. It keeps inflation lower.
Plus a growing population means more things consumed which equals a growing GDP. A growing GDP means growth and the ability to borrow more. Even though these growth figures per capita are terrible.
The illegal immigrants are minuscule in the scheme of things (compared with all immigration), so are probably allowed in to whip up a bit of anger and so tarnish the whole immigration debate.
Bravo for finally saying it out loud. People are so afraid of being called names "racist, xenophobic, intolerant, etc", that verbalising the very public plan that has been in place globally for a few decades now, is a terrifying social gag.
We have had declining birth rates globally for decades. Government's have known that they need to keep immigration occurring, despite public push back, for population reasons. That just one of the 3 reasons.😉
They also need immigration because these populations are more inclined to accept UBI.😐🤨
The government's need UBI to be accepted, for multiple reasons, but mostly because the pension funds are gone, the financial system is in a controlled collapse, and they need to implement UBI to maintain control.😐🤔🤔🤨🤐🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
#golook4yourself #wearemany #wearememory #wewillnotforgive #mistakeswereNOTmade #thereareNOmistakes #getlocalised
Net migration is a lie-stat.
It's gross migration i.e. Westerners out PLUS tribal cultures in that shows the change in westerness!
ALERT: The Supreme Court just lit a match and tossed it into dozens of federal agencies
https://www.vox.com/scotus/357554/supreme-court-sec-jarkesy-roberts-sotomayor-chaos
On Thursday, the Court handed down a 6-3 decision, on a party-line vote, that could render a simply astonishing array of federal laws unenforceable. As Justice Sonia Sotomayor writes in dissent, “the constitutionality of hundreds of statutes may now be in peril, and dozens of agencies could be stripped of their power to enforce laws enacted by Congress.”
The dispute in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy turns on whether a hedge fund manager accused of defrauding investors is entitled to a jury trial to determine whether he violated federal securities law, or whether the government acted properly when it tried him before an official known as an “administrative law judge” (ALJ).
The charges against this hedge fund manager, George Jarkesy, are civil and not criminal, which matters because the Constitution treats civil trials very differently from criminal proceedings. While the Sixth Amendment provides that “in all criminal prosecutions” the defendant is entitled to a jury trial, the Seventh Amendment provides a more limited jury trial right, requiring them “in suits at common law” (more on what that means later).
SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function.
Congress, moreover, has enacted a wide range of laws on the presumption that many enforcement proceedings may be brought before administrative law judges and not juries. According to one somewhat dated review of federal law cited by Sotomayor, “by 1986, there were over 200” federal statutes calling for trials before ALJs.
Chief Justice John Roberts’s majority opinion in Jarkesy leans heavily into the kind of remedy available to the SEC if it prevails in a suit before an ALJ. Like a suit before a common law court, the SEC sought monetary damages from Jarkesy, and thus this case resembles a suit at common law in that way. As Roberts writes, “money damages are the prototypical common law remedy.”
"SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function." That will likely helpfully rectify political and economic reality quite a bit. Much distortion of the federal laws by the federal agencies themselves has been permitted by the administrative law system. Hard to bring the agencies to task for arbitrary, self-serving, and illegal behavior when the administrative courts implicitly have the agencies' backs.
Thanks for this excellent article. I've always thought illegal immigration was vital to keep real inflation lower than it already is.
The government doesn't just lie with their official CPI statistics, they tell massive lies. Inflation has been higher than we've been told for decades. They can't hide it as much today ... but they are still trying to with these preposterous inflation reports (for example: 1 percent food inflation in the last 12 months or 3.3 total inflation).
Immigration, automation and out-sourcing - plus shrinkflation and "substitution" - all conceal real inflation.
BTW, When was the last time the federal minimum wage was increased?
Ivor, thank you for being solid in this battle from the beginning. I remember coming across your audio presentation in 2020 about the "Casedemic" and how Covid was seasonal, and it was such a relief to hear someone talking sense. I also appreciate your regular compilation of articles, and how you're highlighting different books on your Substack. Is there a way I could provide you with a copy of my book that was just released by Brownstone Institute? It's titled Mechanisms of Harm: Medicine in the Time of Covid-19, and is a layperson's overview of these four aspects of the official Covid response: 1) Suppression of cheap, already approved FDA meds for treating Covid, to make way for 2) Ineffective expensive Emergency Use Authorized meds to treat Covid, while waiting for 3) The not safe not effective "vaccines," and 4) How the pandemic manipulation was a trial run for what the authorities plan to do again in the face of some other "emergency." Please let me know if you would like a complimentary copy. Thanks again for all your good work!
If you have a pdf copy of your book that would be great! I'll certainly add it to the book section. I'm not Ivor btw!
Oh, haha! Sorry about that, I conflated you with Ivor's The Fat Emperor. Well, I'm a paid subscriber to your Substack, which is great. I am able to send a PDF or EPUB version of Mechanisms of Harm to your email, if you would be so kind as to contact me. My email is lweintz@comcast.net. Thank you!
I think you meant he laughed derisively, not despairingly 😂
both
Remember white citizens are being replaced. But the immigrants will be replaced also by immigrants and this is the ultimate goal. A perpetual replacement with people owning nothing in these countries.
Tucker for president!
Allegedly, they're trying to solve a temporary problem with the financial system (paying for the care and pensions of the Baby Boom generation) by permanently altering the demographics of European countries but without the people's consent. They could have solved this problem with a guest worker programme where the workers go back after, say, 3 years, to be replaced with new ones, i.e. they never become settled citizens. In the meantime, they could, like Hungary, have promoted the indigenous birth rate. Once the Boomers die off the problem becomes less acute and is manageable plus you would still have an ethnically homogenous society intact. There is no reason why a population has to grow to the sky. We need a financial system which can cope with periods of decline.
Given that the problems could have been solved in other ways, I'm less inclined to believe that this is the main reason for the mass immigration which actually stated after WWII when demographics weren't an issue, i.e. births were booming and millions of men were being demobbed into the civilian labour force. All the evidence I see points to a visceral hated of white people amongst the liberal elites and their army of NPCs, like this journalist, which can only have been put there deliberately for some reason by some element of the "elite".
Everyone wants to turn a blind eye to what is being done to the West, but it cannot be ignored. Countries like Hungary and Russia have resisted this call to allow mass migration, instead incentivising higher birth rates among their own native populations. I believe Poland has similar sentiments, but also doesn't want to become a pariah state in the EU like Hungary?
Either way, the UN's 2000 Replacement Migration Recommendation was as a result of their 1998 report on declining populations in the west. It cannot be racist, or xenophobic, to point out what the UN recommended, and what all our western governments are allowing to happen, despite all the protestations of their own populations, can it?