By Timothy Fitzpatrick

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.

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
November 3, 2022 Anno Domini

Leftists today argue that immigration is absolutely necessary because of a mass die off of baby boomers and increase demand in labour.

The mass die off of boomers wouldn’t be a problem for the maintenance of the overall population of Western nations had not social engineering disturbed the natural cycle of Western reproduction (parents having two or more children to replace themselves) through their Satanic schemes of abortion; the queering and oversexualization of both men and women, but especially men; miscegenation (promotion of race mixing); increase in artificial environmental sterilants—all of which unnaturally perpetuate the endless cycle of mass immigration.

Increasing demand in labour is correlated, in general, to expansion of the population. The more people there are, the more demand there is for goods and services. As a result, growth of the economy is required to accommodate the added demand, as is the labour to produce the extra goods and services.

If a nation’s population growth stagnates or only grows very modestly, the demand for goods and services can easily be accommodated without the need for much, or any at all, immigration. In the case where there might be an immediate shortage in labour, it can be argued that temporary labour could be drawn from other Western nations of same host race stock or by encouraging married couples to have more children. Ideally, a well-planned population would foresee any significant demographic shifts and implement measures to avoid potentially troublesome scenarios (no, I don’t mean a planned economy).

These are reasonable arguments that are completely absent from the immigration debate today, if there ever even was one allowed in the first place. Instead, we are told that we must open the borders and let in everyone, no matter the stock, so that we can meet labour demand. End of discussion. Any counter argument is dismissed and rendered racist, bigoted, and foolish. Arguments from the controlled opposition alternative media and “conservative” mainstream media, like Fox News, tend to focus on the problem being “illegal immigration”. They all ignore the elephant in the room that nobody has the balls to address, through cowardice, selfishness (being bought off), or ignorance. Immigration is a problem itself. It is not as necessary as they make it out to be—certainly not the way they propose.

So, we have opened the borders to everyone (thanks to ethnic displacement schemes like the Hart-Celler Act, the devilish spawn of the Jewish Kalergi Plan) and, you guessed it, demand has increased commensurately with the expansion of the population. But it doesn’t stop, because the borders never close. Demand continues to rise and rise. More and more labour is needed, and justification for more immigration is given to the bewildered masses to the point where it becomes an unsustainable self-perpetuating cycle.

Eventually, the system will collapse under its own disproportionate weight, and the nation will become dysfunctional and eventually die (and be conquered). This could happen even if the population expansion maintained the homogeneity of the host nation. But dysfunction is even more likely if the population expansion were to take in foreign stock, as multi-culturalism has never worked in human history and never will.

While unfettered economic growth might be good in the short term for corporations and their shareholders, selling their cheap, Chinese-made garbage products, eventually the host nation will begin to implode and with it, the corporation; although, it could simply pack up and find another host nation to exploit. But eventually, the supply of fresh host nations will run out (sort of like today) and where does that leave the fate of corporations? One could argue that this is what could lead the corporate trajectory to nationalisation and collectivism, which is where we seem headed now.

In contrast, small businesses are not so much focused on growth as they are on service, innovation, and quality. Growth, then, is a bonus, not an end itself. The West was built on the backs of small businesses. Small businesses are more connected with the communities they serve and, thus, have a vested interest in the health of those communities. The international orientation of corporations seems to detach them from this important responsibility, and so, corporations fail to see or don’t care about the hazards of unfettered immigration. They just go along with the agenda, so long as their earnings continue to rise. “Deal with the fallout later”, the irresponsible refrain goes. Or they don’t see a fallout at all.

I have said it before and I will say it again, the key element to securing the implementation and worldwide acceptance of one-world Communist anti-Christ government is demographic change. The international Kahal know that the American-British stock is too strong to accept slavery disguised as the workers revolution, thus the need for massive immigration. The answer is not legal immigration but immigration restriction. Also, Westerners need to get comfortable again with a smaller, more manageable economy. One can still make profits and advance in a smaller, small-business-dominated economy. In such an environment, corporations would dwindle, as their shareholders wouldn’t tolerate diminishing profits and would have to innovate to find ways of putting their capital to better use.