Thursday, January 11, 2018

On Immigrants from "Shithole" Countries

The Dumb Statist is at it again.

The New York Times sets the scene:
President Trump on Thursday balked at an immigration deal that would include protections for people from Haiti and African countries, demanding to know at a White House meeting why he should accept immigrants from “shithole countries” rather than people from places like Norway, according to people with direct knowledge of the conversation.

Mr. Trump’s remarks left members of Congress attending the meeting in
the Cabinet Room alarmed and mystified. They were there discussing an emerging bipartisan deal to give legal status to immigrants illegally brought to the United States as children, the people said, speaking on condition of anonymity without authorization to discuss the explosive proceedings of the private meeting.

When Mr. Trump heard that Haitians were among those who would benefit, he asked if they could be left out of the plan, according to the people familiar with the conversation, asking, “Why do we want people from Haiti here?”...

When the discussion turned to African nations, the people with knowledge of the conversation added, Mr. Trump asked why he would want “all these people from shithole countries,” adding that the United States should admit more people from places like Norway.
In other words, Trump is on the right-wing central planning committee, versus the left-wing central planning committee.

I have written many times that although I believe racism is goofy. I really don't care who others want to associate with or not, or who they want to ban from their properties. Personally, I think it is nutty to ban someone based on their color or the fact that they may come from a "shithole" country but I am not big about intruding on other people's tastes and desires as long as they are not intruding on my tastes and desires.

But the Stable Genius does not think this way, he wants to central plan everything in America. He wants to intrude everywhere.

He asks, “Why do we want people from Haiti here?" What is this "we" all about? Maybe some people want Haitians here to do work, likely dirty work.

Once more, here is my video discussing why many may want immigrants to do the dirty work.

And as far as Norwegians, in the late 1800s, they were in many ways viewed the way Trump views Haitians today.

Terje Birkedal writes in the Norwegian-American:
[I]n the 1880s when the United States started experiencing a rising xenophobia as immigration by all groups, including Norwegians, was on a steep upswing. Suspicion of foreigners continued to increase into the 1890s and then grew to a feverish intensity in the first two decades of the 20th century. American xenophobic nativism reached its peak just after World War I and then began to slowly ebb during the rest of the century.

In the 1880s many states began passing laws that banned the use of foreign languages in the schools or even in places of worship. Norwegians and Germans joined their voices in protesting the Wisconsin Bennett Law of 1889, which required that courses in the schools could only be taught in English. Many Norwegian communities of the time had schools where Norwegian was the main language of instruction. In the late 19th century, Norwegian immigrants also found out they could not get some of the basic services that were offered to native-born Americans, like life insurance. This is one reason behind the founding of Sons of Norway in 1895. As a fraternal organization, Sons of Norway offered insurance and financial assistance in times of need to Norwegian immigrants who could not otherwise obtain protection.

Politicians and “yellow journalism” newspapers particularly attacked Norwegian-language newspapers and magazines as veiled engines of anti-Americanism...

During this period many Norwegians changed their names to appear more American (for example, from “Thorstensen” to “Thompson”). A number of the Norwegian-language publications, if not shut down by the government, lost their readers and went out of business...
And  Sons of Norway report on Norwegian immigrants of the 1800s:
 Like other immigrant groups throughout history, Nordics were selected for the most difficult and dangerous jobs that other workers didn’t want. Specifically, Norwegian immigrants worked in shipping, fishing and logging; later many Finish immigrants found work in the logging camps and mines of Northern Minnesota and Michigan; and a mainly Swedish workforce in Minnesota built James J Hill’s railroad empire. In fact, Hill, a legendary tycoon, was so fond of his cheap Swedish workforce he once said of them, “Give me snuff, whiskey and Swedes and I can damn well build a railroad down to hell.” Some native-born Americans viewed the new workers from across the sea with resentment, calling them “squareheads” or “scandihoovians.”

Then, in the period around World War I America was stricken by a pandemic of anti-immigrant hysteria. Immigrants of all nationalities were ridiculed in public and the press by intolerant “nativists” who felt that America belonged only to them...[In] Duluth, Minnesota, in 1918. A group of vigilantes calling themselves the “Knights of Liberty” lynched a Finnish man, Olli Kinkkonen, from a tree in Duluth’s Lester Park, just blocks from where I grew up. Believing him to be an anti-war agitator the mob dragged Kinkkonen from a boarding house, tarred and feathered him, then hung him from a tree.
No libertarian should celebrate Trump's shithole country comment. It is about how he desires right-wing central planning versus the central planning of the left. Libertarians should be in favor of any immigration where immigrants have a place to go on private property---and they should be prevented from having access to government services. The shithole comment is just crude Trump unfamiliar with the history of why people immigrate, even the immigration of his beloved Norwegians.

Oh, and btw, the current per capita GDP of Norway is twice that of where Trump's wife is originally from, Slovenia.



Like I said, Trump is a dumb statist.


  1. --- What is this "we" all about? ---

    Statists and Trumpistas always refer to their great ideas in the first person plural because they prefer to believe they're not alone in their insanity.

    I always ask them "What's with this 'we' business, Kemosabe?"

    --- No libertarian should celebrate Trump's shithole country comment. ---

    Not because he believes it --he can believe anything he may very well want--but because he justifies his idiotic policies on superficial and banal bigotry such as that.

  2. I largely agree.
    One exception would be unlimited immigration of Slovakian Women (with reasonable minimum requirements met).
    Other Eastern European women in most cases as well.
    Quality matters.

  3. The president has come out through Twitter to deny referring to Haiti as a 'shithole' country. Which is good to know, because according to all sources (including Fox News) he didn't refer to Haiti as a 'shithole'.

    No, the reporting claims he refered to *African* countries as 'shithole' countries. He didn't deny this in his tweet. He only reassured us of his love towards Haitians (I was waiting for him to say "and some, I assume, are good people"). He also used his Tweet space to remind everyone --ignorant peasants all-- that Haiti is a very poor country.


    The anchors at his favorite morning news show, Fox & Friends, spend a very good part of the morning to explain Trump's interesting choice of words as evidence of his frustration with the Senate because they're not bringing the kind of deal on immigration he wants. We should feel his anger! They didn't say if this means he wants a deal that would bring more Norwegians to the US. Thw president did say "bring more from Norway", which suggests he thinks that immigration means the US "brings" people from other countries, not that immigrants make a personal choice to migrate to the US voluntarily.

  4. Breaking News:

    Democratic senator Dick Durbin has come out to confirm rhat Trump did indeed say disparaging things about Haitians and African countries, exactly as reported by the WaPo, and that he said those things **repeatedly**.

    Trump send a Twitter denying he used that kind of language. However even Fox News confirmed he did say those things. Even so, Fox & Friends (the Fox News morning talk show) made what I considered superhuman efforts to shoo away his words and their implications and did lots of "lookie here, instead!" gestures. This is the first time I witnessed a normally-oblivious Rachel Campos-Duffy being very nervous and uneasy while trying to parse the president's words (she was co-hosting this morning.)

  5. At least now the white supremacists can stop this pretense that the hostility towards immigration is based on economic considerations without feeling so alone.

  6. 1. The President has denied using the phrase sh*thole. So far, this allegation only comes from 2 anonymous sources.

    2. Haiti & Africa are sh*thholes.

    1. What a liar you are.

      Dick Durbin confirmed he said it. Lindsay Graham confirmed it.

      And Africa is a Continent, you Trumpista.

    2. Neither Graham or Durbin said he used that word. Purdue & Cotton say he didn't say it.

    3. Re: Marmite,

      No, Purdue and Cotton said they "don't remember" the president using those words, not that he didn't say them. Such brave men.

      And Durbin said the reporting is accurate.

  7. Wenzel is definitely a left libertarian.

  8. The real question is why isn't Haiti & Africa as rich as the West? According to the left its because the evil whites exploited their wealth. According to the right its because they are 'low trust' societies i.e. the values of the people are its ok to bribe, steal and cheat. If that is true how would we get closer to a PPS by importing 60 million of them since 1965?

    1. To ask the last question is to answer it, but you can't get libertardians like Torres or others to honestly admit. Where are the African, Middle Eastern, or even Chinese founders of an enlightenment or anything on par with Mises?

  9. Before Xmas, Trump said "everyone in Haiti has Aids" - according to the NY Times. He denied it as did others at the mtg. The NYT has since abandoned the claim. The media is just statist propaganda. How can we libertarians fix that?

  10. In this non PPS immigration policy is a difficult issue. Advocates of a PPS might want to have solutions to deal with the current situation where governments dictates policy. The will of the people has an impact on government immigration policy but I find it difficult to determine how much.

    Other than the problem with governments sticking their noses between individuals ability to associate with each other, the main problems with immigration policies are the possibility of immigrants taking more than they are giving in the redistribution of wealth game and immigration of those that vote for policies and candidates that lead to less freedom. I have not checked statistics to see if immigrants to the USA have been or likely will be guilty of these things.

    For the foreseeable future the only way to deal with these problems is to influence the government to use its force to stop such immigrants form participate in welfare programs and having the ability to vote. Even with the unlikely elimination of welfare programs this will result in the diminishment of freedom. There will require additional restrictions to travel, additional requirements for identification, and additional requirements for employers to enforce laws. Go ahead and add to the list.

    Until we have a PPS our choices are between the possibility of immigrants voting for less freedom and more wealth redistribution, or for the government to use their force to keep these immigrants out of the country or out of welfare programs and voting booths. One way or another we will be subjected to government violence. Which way will be worse is debatable.

    For those that get involved in trying to direct government policies they risk the possibility of breaking the NAP. An argument for violation a the NAP in this circumstance is that some aggressions lead to less loss of freedom than others.

    1. --- our choices are between the possibility of immigrants voting for less freedom and more wealth redistribution, or for the government to use their force to keep these immigrants out of the country or out of welfare programs and voting booths. ---

      The difference is that the first is your assumption, since I dont believe you are omniscient, while the second is assured at least by the existence of actual policies and thugs dressed like soldiers, who claim are the "authority".

    2. Alex:

      Never mind immigrants, there are plenty of citizens who are on welfare and who habitually vote for less freedom; in fact, that's how we got here (we've had big, tyrannical government when we didn't have Third World immigration, such as under Lincoln, Wilson and FDR). If one is going to argue that we need the state to stop these types of people from participating in society -- which is laughable, because these people are the very sustenance on which the state grows in power (nicely depicted in "The Matrix") -- then one should also be arguing for the state to arrest and expel these citizens.

    3. Francisco, I agree with your statements on both of the choices I included. But I do take issue with your questioning my omniscience; believe.

      I did indicate that I had not check stats on immigrants voting for less freedom and more wealth redistribution, which is one reason I called it a possibility. From what I have read, but not verified, this possibility is a probability. As NAPster indicated this is a probability for not only immigrants but current US citizens. But the stats I have seen say that immigrants collect more welfare than current citizens.

    4. NAPster, yes that is how we got here. Now that we are here my comment was posted with the hope of generating some thought from advocates of a PPS toward solutions. Admittedly I have very little to offer for solutions.

      IMO it is a bad idea to let the state take freedoms with the expectation that additional aggression from the state will result in more overall freedom.

      The best I have is advocating for less government power via advocating for PP rights and the NAP via educating people of the legitimacy, benefits and ethics of PP rights and the NAP.

    5. Alex, I don't disagree. In my view, we ought to strongly advocate secession, and also constantly ridicule the state and try to make it less relevant in our lives. Some more specific ideas: support alternative education to breed a more NAP-respecting younger generation; continually and publicly point out all the absurdities of the state to heighten people’s skepticism (have them looking for an alternative solution) and to try to persuade people not to work for the state in any capacity; advocate for state-level nullification of federal legislation, and advocate for, and engage in, jury nullification; use non-state alternative products when feasible (private security or home self-defense vs. state police, private mediation vs. state courts, private residential communities vs. municipalities, FedEx instead of USPS, Uber instead of state-licensed taxis, gold or crypto-currencies instead of fiat money, etc.); and peaceful civil disobedience (ignore state regulations depending on one’s risk tolerance, and/or support quality businesses which do so too).

  11. I'm doubtful Trump put it at that way, but it' true. We do not need trash from any of those countries. There are some bright Nigerians and such, but even they won't say there now, will they?

    For those crying 'da rasis', would you renounce your citizenship to move to any of those countries? There is reason why those places suck. Low trust society is one reason, and this is among their own somewhat.

    No one has provided any evidence that these cultures are equal to Anglo Saxons or other Europeans in any way.

  12. I am really amazed at the immediate belief of any reports regarding Trump considering the lies that have been proven thus far.
    On another note, would any of the libertarians (or really anyone) who is upset about the 'shithole' comment be willing to live in any of the countries in Africa? Of course not.
    How well do we really think a 16 year old kid raised in Mogadishu is going to fit in in an American city... Probably not well.

    1. Re: Rob,

      --- I am really amazed at the immediate belief of any reports regarding Trump considering the lies that have been proven thus far. ---

      I'm really amazed at the capacity of Trumpistas to prevaricate and obfuscate about their prevaricating and bigoted fearless leader.

    2. Torre, answer the question. Would you move to any of those countries and become a citizen? Don't be a 'da rasis' now. Rob made some valid points.

    3. No different than an Italian fitting in New York city 100 years ago. Regardless, it is not government to decide.

    4. Re: The Lab Mismanager,

      --- Would you move to any of those countries and become a citizen? --_

      Oh, I'm sorry, Mismanager, I guess you didn't realize by now: I don't answer loaded or irrelevant questions.

    5. Re: Rob,

      --- How well do we really think a 16 year old kid raised in Mogadishu is going to fit in in an American city... Probably not well. ---

      Despite the fact that Africa is a huge continent and Somalia is not the only country in Africa, you are quick to make assumptions about people you don't know by pointing out to a single case as if it was representative.

      Whenever anti-immigrant zealots talk about "integration" they never want to clearly define what it means. This is, of course, a ploy to better argue against foreigners on the basis of an unwillingness to "integrate", which they never explain. When asked, the first thing that comes to their minds is "they should speak English", oblivious to the fact that almost all immigrants from overseas do speak English. What these immigrants may NOT do is speak English when they're trying clothes at Macy's, or picking up prescriptions at CVS. That is what irritates most Trumpistas, not so much that foreigners don't "integrate. For evidence, just look at YouTube videos of bigots berating innocent people who dare speak their own language at Walmart or Target. Trump's particular bigotry and ignorance about people who don't look like him is shared by many a Trumpista.

    6. What's irrelevant. Show me that any of these countries have any citizens worth taking. You are here only to be an ignorant troll and contribute nothing.

  13. So far as I can tell, Trump (perhaps unintentionally) made two separate points, which everyone seems to be intertwining. One, that some or all of these countries are in an awful state, and two, that the US government should be entitled to say who can go where. I don't think there is anything inconsistent in a libertarian agreeing with the first (which is a factual matter) and disagreeing with the second (which is a philosophical matter).

    1. In a PPS, if the existing property owners decide who to invite, do you see that as a NAP violation?

    2. If A, a private property owner, invited C to come onto A's property, then C coming onto A's property would not be a NAP violation. But A could not legitimately consent to C coming onto B's private property (unless B granted A the right to approve visitors), and thus if A invited C onto B's private property without B's consent, it would be a NAP violation if C entered B's property.

  14. Hmmm... who would choose having their neighborhood have an influx of Haitians versus an influx of Norwegians? If you choose Norwegians, which I'd guess 100% of the readers of this site would, then you're a racist.

    1. The Norwegians would be ok as long as they can't vote. The Haitians would just make another Haiti.

    2. Precisely. Anyone offended by Trump's (supposed) remark simply has to ask themselves which they'd prefer in their neighborhood: a block full of Norwegians or a block full of Haitians. If they say Norwegians they are racist. If they say Haitians they are liars. Which is it?