January 22, 2025 Anno Domini
Irish capitalists are to blame. Capitalism brings in a foreign workforce to replace Irish workers to drive down wages and working conditions to profit the rich. Capitalism is the enemy of the Irish working class.—ML
The argument that unfettered immigration to capitalist lands is fueled by untamed growth of capital does not stand up to scrutiny.
Count on anti-capitalists to grasp at anything in an attempt to discredit capitalism and aid the Sovietization of the world. They are trying to appeal to conservatives and those opposed to the mongrelization of Western nations by blaming capitalism. We can infer, then, that some non-capitalist system must be the solution, namely some form of socialism/collectivism. This proposition becomes all the more appealing when said conservatives are strategically oriented to perceive Communist countries like China and Russia as being racially homogeneous (which is not true, except for China, because no one wants to live there). There is a co-ordinated propaganda campaign online to portray Soviet Bloc countries, especially Russia, as white, Christian ethnostates. This is Soviet propaganda aimed at Western conservatives.
Prior to the 1960s, the decade in which the Kalergi Plan (deliberate unfettered third world migration to white lands) was set up in all Western nations as policy by our treasonous Judeo-Bolshevik-compromised governments, capital grew without the need for immigration from the third world. It was only after that mainly corporations began to exploit the new government policy of unfettered third world immigration for cheap labour, which does displace local workers. But this would not have been possible without a change in government policy. The general misconception here is that business growth somehow necessitates immigration, when in actuality population growth is what necessitates more business (see The self-perpetuating nature of unfettered immigration).
Previous to the ’60s, Western business had to grow within the confines of a mainly restrictionist immigration policy. In order to grow, workers had to be hired locally, and if none were available, they could be sought from out of state/province/county. This did not mean, however, that product exports or services were limited, but labour was limited to one’s own country. Behind the scenes during this time, a predominantly European stock was being brought in via immigration. Immigration was restricted to white Europeans so as not to disrupt the ethnic, social, and economic cohesion of Western nations. This was an ongoing colonization process that was beneficial to everyone (see The case for colonialism). Population came first, then more business resulted—not the other way around.
One unintended but beneficial outcome of labour shortages, when they did occur, was innovation. Companies that couldn’t grow as much or as fast as they desired due to labour shortages were forced to find ways to grow without the need for, or with less, labour. This usually required technological or methodical innovation (Henry Ford’s assembly line, for example, which was both technological and methodical advancement). Eventually, they could innovate enough to continue their growth. Regardless, government restrictionist policy kept everything in order. Everyone could still profit, regardless of the speed of their growth. The desire for healthy profits keeps things functioning as efficiently as they can—that is the beauty of capitalism. However, companies don’t need to continually grow in order to profit, unless their expenditures become unbalanced. Again, this is where innovation comes in and reigns in disproportionate balance sheets.