You’re boiling the frog too fast! He may leap from the pan before cooked! That essentially is Hillary Clinton’s and John Kerry’s message on European (im)migration, which they both recently warned must be curtailed.
As for Clinton’s uncharacteristic comments, Zero Hedge’s Tyler Durden reports, “In an interview with the Guardian that has infuriated the ‘new face’ of the Democratic Party that Clinton once purported to lead — ie, those ‘Democratic Socialist’ millennials who celebrated the rise of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — the former secretary of state and senator from New York said Western Europe needed to do something to lessen the flow of migrants from the Middle East and North Africa.” As Clinton put it, European leaders need to send a stronger signal that they’re “not going to be able to continue to provide refuge and support.”
Never one to be original, though, Clinton was merely echoing what Kerry said a week before. As Daily Wire wrote Friday: “Former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry admitted last week during a trip to Europe that the continent has been ‘crushed’ by a transformation that has taken place due to immigration.”
So have notoriously left-wing Clinton and Kerry had an epiphany and jumped on the Trump train? Hardly. To now quote the rest of Durden’s earlier-cited line, what Clinton said was that Europe must curtail migration “if it wants to stop the surging support experienced by anti-establishment and eurosceptic populist parties that have seized power in Hungary, Poland, Austria, Italy and elsewhere.”
Kerry had warned likewise at a Guardian Live event at Central Hall in London. The crushing “transformation” had nothing to do with the migration’s culture-rending effect. Rather, as he put it, “‘In Germany, [statist] Angela Merkel is weakened. Italian politics is [its statists are] significantly impacted,’” Daily Wire related.
As for Clinton, she was one of three high-profile, political-loser leftists the Guardian interviewed on the rise of the “populist right.” The other two, ex-British prime minister Tony Blair and ex-Italian prime minister Matteo Renzi — both of whom had to resign from leadership — also expressed realpolitik migration warnings.
As a reminder, Europe has been roiled by an influx of more than 1.8 million mostly Muslim migrants since 2015. This has led to culture shock and crime and has prompted “an anti-establishment backlash and straining [of] social services at a time when stagnant economic growth and simmering debt crises were already contributing to record youth unemployment and stagnant growth throughout much of the Continent,” writes Durden.
Nonetheless, it’s only the backlash troubling the Guardian fellow travelers. As the paper’s title reads, “Hillary Clinton: Europe must curb immigration to stop rightwing populists.”
Nor do these leftists acknowledge that there could be good reasons to oppose Third World migration. Citing ex-Donald Trump advisor Steve Bannon as an “avatar” of the patriotic Western movements, Clinton claimed that he reflected the movements’ alleged strategy of keeping people “riled up” and appealing “to their prejudices.” Matteo Renzi chimed in, claiming the patriots created a “climate of hate” and saying, “This is the problem of the new generation — they are educated to hate and to envy.” (Actually, Renzi’s problem with the “new generation” is that it ousted him from power.)
But where does the prejudice truly lie? Recently in the news was the story of how the Sentinalese — a stone-age tribe occupying India’s North Sentinel Island — rained arrows down upon an American missionary who ventured onto their shores, murdering him. Not only can no charges be brought, since these primitives are purposely kept isolated, but no leftists inveighed against their rather, let’s say, stringent illegal-migration policy.
Nor do we hear how they’re “xenophobic,” “hateful,” or “racist,” and that they need to be “strengthened by diversity.” The point? If primitives in a dense jungle are overrun by outsiders threatening to dominate them, anthropologists will scold, in essence, “This is cultural and demographic genocide!” But when it happens in the West?
Then it’s “diversity” and the glories of multiculturalism.
So question: Are Westerners the only people in existence with no right to their own culture? If so, why?
It’s interesting. Were we Westerners to say that a given tribe must cede its own culture and accept our foreign ways, we’d be called bigots. Yet when we Westerners say we don’t want to cede our own culture and accept others’ foreign ways, we’re also called bigots.
Clinton reflected this in the Guardian interview, attacking President Trump and saying, “The use of immigrants as a political device and as a symbol of government gone wrong, of attacks on one’s heritage, one’s identity, one’s national unity has been very much exploited by the current administration here [in the U.S.].”
This is projection. The only reason the Left “loves” (im)migration is because it’s a “political device” through which they gain power; note that upon naturalization, Third World migrants across the Western World support statists by wide margins.
Leftists admit this during honest moments, mind you. For example, ex-Tony Blair aide Andrew Neather revealed in 2009 that the previous years’ massive Third World migration into the United Kingdom was no accident. Rather, it was by design, intended “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date,” as he put it.
So as for the aforementioned internecine Democrat Party conflict between the openly socialist Ocasio-Cortez wing and the closet-socialist Clinton wing, the disagreement isn’t over the direction of the change, only its rapidity. Neither likes the frog (video below); Clinton just worries about rousing it to action
The moral of this story? Don’t be a frog.
Photo of Hillary Clinton: Gage Skidmore; photo of John Kerry: LBJ Library