Tuesday, May 02, 2006

The True Impact of Yesterday's March

After thousands of people who went to great effort to escape their socialist and lawless crappy homelands and sneak into this one protested that our country isn't socialist and doesn't ignore laws on the International Day of Communism, the real impact is summed up in a single image.


The impact would have been a net positive if the illegals actually dropped out of our country for a while day.

Let the backlash begin. Build a wall, and punish the companies who exploit poor workers who can't seek legal protection. Tyson Foods didn't close their plants because they actually give a damn about "illegal immigrant rights" - they did it because they desperately want to keep their cheap labor.

(And by the way, where are all the "labor and justice" liberals who are all fired up about the plight of the worker?)

This is the most capitalist, and as a result, the most successful, country in the world. We have a culture and tradition I am very, very proud of. I'm proud that millions of people desperately want to be part of it, and I welcome them (to come legally). It's a better, more successful culture and tradition than Mexico's (or any of the other places illegals come from) which is why they come here in the first place. If they're truly here to become Americans, let's at the very, very least honor that by ensuring it's still America that they're coming to.


SirWhoopass said...

I think I missed something.

I understand the significance of May 1, and have no doubts that many of the profesional protest organizers have socialist leanings.

I do not see, however, the where the implication comes from that makes socialism a specific desired outcome of the protest. Every interview I've read indicates that protesters want to live and work in the US legally.

Hardly a strike at capitalism. If anything, it is a protest in favor of capitalism. Free movement of labor is very laissez-faire.

Orrin Johnson said...

I rely less on interviews (what else are they going to say?) and more on all the Che T-Shirts, the constant references to Cesar Chavez as a hero of the movement, the signs demanding benefits, the fact that illegals USE many of these benefits, or the fact that it was largely organized by International ANSWER and other socialist groups.

They already have basically infettered free movement of labor. They want amnesty and citizenship so they can take advantage of more government benefits. The movement is being pushed by far left leaning groups, because they know that if they can vote, they'd vote for far socialist lefties.

Who the professional protesters are matters.

SirWhoopass said...

I think then, that it hurts your cause to paint the protesters with too broad a brush. I seriously doubt that all one million were there for socialist causes. The difference between interviews with the "average man on the street" and the goals of the professional protest organizations should be telling.

The press frequently fails to make any distiction between legal and illegal Mexican immigrants (and Mexicans who have gained US citizenship). Chavez protested against the hiring of illegal immigrant workers.

The socialist groups are counting on the idea that all Hispanics will be grouped together. It artifically inflates the "support" for their cause. They used the same tactic during the US labor movement of the 1930s.

All politics are local. Few migrant workers, trying to scrape together a living, are concerned with national political organizations. They just want a better life.

Some protesters were there for immigration, some were there for socialism, some were there for reuniting the US southwest with Mexico. Lumping them all together does not help. It forces a group solidarity, when they do not have the same cause.

Cato said...


We don't have "basically unfettered free movement of labor" between the United States and any of these nations. That would require a very liberal guest worker regime, as opposed to the fairly tight one we've got in place.

Orrin Johnson said...

Cato, whatever statutes now exist on paper, the fact of the matter is that immigration laws are not enforced, and illegal laborers can move around our country at will. Let's be realistic.

If you march at a protest organized by socialists, expect to be painted with that brush. Who you associate yourself with matters. I wouldn't excuse someone who marched with the Illinois Nazis who claimed to not hate Jews, but were merely supporting interstate highways and states rights.

That's why there will be a backlash, and that's why the party in this country that finally gets aggressive about illegal immigration is going to significantly increase their votes, not the least of which among LEGAL immigrants.

Since there were only a million protesters nation wide, and many thousands of them were American students and organizers, that means that there was only a very small percentage of the bona fide illegals in this country who were marching. I don't think it's a big stretch to think the ones actually marching are asking for more than to simply be left alone.

And even those who AREN'T marching for socialism ARE marching (at the very, very least) to insist we sanction lawlessness in this country. Whatever their cause, it will (a) be bad for this country, and (b) have the effect of greater socialism in this country by necessitating more government spending on welfare, crime prevention, education, health care, etc. for a people who will, even if here legally, be paying little or no taxes.

That's why I want to see vastly increased worker quotas. Bring the laborers - I'm fine with it. We benefit from them. I just want them to do it legally, to not demand full "citizen rights", and if they want to stay, I want them to learn English and integrate into our culture. And more, I agree with you that even most illegal aliens want that. I'm simply rejecting that most of these MARCHERS want that, based on their slogans, their associations, etc.

Cato said...


I mistook your point. I thought you were stating that our policy was free flow of labor. I think that defacto free flow through lack of enforcement has different consequences than free flow by policy, which I think is probably in line with the point your making about increased guest-worker programs.

"Illinois Nazis? I hate Illinois Nazis."

PubliusRex said...

Sorry, if the illegals don't want to be associated with communists, they shouldn't march in protests organized by communists on a communist holiday.