A CURE FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

One of the most volatile subjects today—particularly in the southwestern United States—is illegal immigration. Nerves are being rubbed raw, and the economic and social fabric of many areas is being strained. This issue should be front and center in the debate for Election 2000; yet with the exception of Pat Buchanan, none of the other presidential candidates will frankly discuss the issue. And in the case of the two major party standard bearers, both Al Gore and George Bush are actually welcoming illegals with open arms.

Serious people, though, are attempting to address the issue--but usually, sad to say, within certain parameters dictated by the Establishment media and others in the "Thought Police." It’s time to put aside the scripted debate between "left" and "right" over how to stop the flood of illegal aliens into the United States. The workable solution is right under our noses—if the people demand it.

"Liberals" with their naive, misguided Marxism and dreams of a utopian multi cultural world tell us that illegal immigration should not be considered a problem at all. In fact, most say, it’s America’s duty to feed, clothe and provide health care for anyone and everyone who sets foot in America—citizen or not. The welfare systems of individual states involved are to be a bottomless pit for such people, with no questions asked. And if you disagree, they warn, you must be a racist.

The liberal position is the one, of course, championed by the Establishment (and now apparently embraced as well by the 2000 version of the G.O.P. platform.) Thankfully, though, a growing minority of clear-thinking liberals and progressives is catching on to the harm done to the environment, educational systems and the employment chances of minority workers in particular who are already U.S. citizens.

"Conservatives" should have no trouble addressing the liberals, but they do. The more cowardly ones—frightened by their own shadows, let alone of being called such a despicable name as "racist"—often say "let’s make the illegals legal." In so doing, they have not addressed the problem to the United States at all; they have merely added a few procedural items.

The more blunt—and lazy—conservatives tell us that we should put thousands of troops across our southern border and use this force to keep illegals from coming into the U.S. from Mexico. While some embrace this "solution" it is actually not one at all.

WHY ARE THEY COMING?

Most of this "debate" has failed to address one fundamental question: Why do illegal aliens from Mexico—or other people using Mexico as a highway to America—want to come here in the first place? The answer for most of the sad nation’s people is the same: Simply put, the worst that America has to offer is better than a life of poverty and decay in most parts of Mexico.

At one time, Mexico was an economically strong, proud nation. Its military was at one time formidable enough to constitute a major test for the U.S. forces. Its people lived in a relatively hospitable environment, and—as Americans once upon a time—were largely self-sufficient.

This was before the Global Plantation got a hold of Mexico (and most other developing nations, for that matter.) With each bubble-and-bust cycle created by speculators—who constitute one aspect of what I have dubbed The New Imperialism of debt and international finance—the people of Mexico have seen their manipulated national economy weaken. Its destiny has been incrementally removed from the hands of that nation’s citizens and handed to despots and puppets charged merely with keeping order while the speculators collect interest payments or otherwise reap the financial rewards of taking advantage of another people’s land, resources and labor. When the busts occur—as the last one in 1994—the economy itself becomes even sicker. Then the "austerity" prescribed by such utterly worthless organizations as the International Monetary Fund make matters worse—usually tightening money, raising interest rates, and doing pretty much the opposite of what needs to be done.

If you were living in this nightmare as so many Mexicans are, wouldn’t you want to get the hell out of there too?

WHAT IF. . .

What if the simple solution to this problem were implemented—a truly nationalist monetary system for Mexico? One that would be free from the dictates of the international plutocracy, and run based on the needs of the Mexican economy and people; one that recognizes the real purpose of money?

What if Mexico—and other nations captive to the international usury-based banking system—regained control of their economies in such a way, reinvigorated their people, regained their pride and sense of purpose—and told the I.M.F. and money-center banks to go pound salt?

A proper understanding of money and a just monetary system have been the subject of innumerable books, essays, articles and other works. None, however, matches the chapter on "International Finance" penned more than a generation ago by the Englishman William Joyce in his book Twilight Over England. In stark contrast to the notion that capital must be controlled—both as to volume and price, or interest rate—Joyce uses the following analogy to demonstrate that these "priorities," while they serve capital well, are the opposite of what money is for.

"Suppose that in some very backward island," Joyce writes, "a shell standard of money existed [when people used shells as money]. Assume also that some malicious or half-witted creature managed to acquire half the shells in the island and to drop them into the water beyond recovery. The chiefs and witch doctors would have to hold a council of emergency.

"But if the rulers of that island decreed that because half the money of the community had been lost, hunting and fishing and tilling must now be reduced by fifty percent, there would be a hot time in the old town that night. In such a simple state of society, the criminal absurdity of the proposal would be obvious to the meanest and most untutored intellect. Yet a policy which the most undeveloped savage tribe would reject as nonsense has been accepted by the British people (and the West generally) for many years."

What Joyce refers to is the doctrine in finance today that man must serve money. A consequence of this where Mexico is concerned is that her people are in a form of financial bondage to international financiers and multinational corporations, who have decreed that--in order for them to reap the largest rewards from their "investment" in the country--Mexico’s people must suffer. The Mexican government’s conduct of what remains of the country’s own monetary structure must conform to what will make this invasive foreign capital happy--and not to the needs of its own people.