Hundreds of migrants have showed up at the U.S.-Mexico border.
They’re part of a “caravan” that includes about 5,000 people from Central America. The rest of the caravan, as far as we know, is still in central Mexico. But make no mistake. They’ll show up at the border any day now.
And no one can agree on what to do with these people. Some say we should just let them into America. Other people, including President Trump, think we should keep the migrants out. In fact, Trump recently called the caravan an “invasion.” Not only that, he deployed thousands of U.S. troops to the border to keep these people from entering.
In short, it’s very controversial. So I called Doug Casey earlier this week to see what he thinks about this...
Justin: Doug, the migrant caravan has captured the attention of the mainstream media as well as Donald Trump. Why’s this such a big deal?
Doug: There are several things going on here. One is that the leftists believe that nation states shouldn’t exist. Now, I’m not a believer in the nation state either. It’s only been around since the 17th century; it’s not inscribed in the cosmic firmament. There are better ways to organize a society.
The United States, for one, is way too big to be a single country at this point. I’m pretty confident that over the next couple generations, the U.S. is going to break up into several different countries. But that’s a different question. The last thing it needs is another alien group trying to forcibly insert itself into the mix.
The Democrats and the leftists don’t really believe in freedom of movement and travel. That’s no more than a talking point, to make them seem righteous. They believe in State control of almost every area of life. Since when has the freedom to travel and cross borders been important to them?
Personally, I believe in freedom of movement and freedom of travel – but that doesn’t mean you can violate others’ property rights. If you have one person requesting legal entry, that’s one question. But if a group of 1,000 or 10,000 is looking to illegally and forcibly cross into a different political area, it’s a different question entirely.
The people abetting this migration are purposefully trying to force a confrontation.
Justin: Why make such a long trek?
Doug: Apparently, they presume that the U.S. government will roll over, and put the migrants up when they arrive. That’s not an unreasonable presumption. It’s well-known the U.S. government has no guiding principles.
The groups financing them are, I would say, trying to make a moral point with the gullible U.S. public. “These are poor helpless immigrants, like your own ancestors. So you have to do the right thing, and take care of them.” Of course that’s a lie from start to finish – except for the poor part. But it’s effective psychological warfare in today’s world.
They’re also trying to demoralize the Trump administration, showing they have no real power or support.
The migrants themselves are acting stupidly. I don’t mean they necessarily have low IQs – although the caravan certainly isn’t full of rocket scientists and brain surgeons. Nor am I using the word “stupid” in a necessarily pejorative way. A definition of the word that applies here is “an inability to predict, not just the immediate and direct consequences of an action, but its indirect and delayed consequences.”
What do they really think is going to happen after they leave Mexico, and try to enter the U.S.? They’ll be arrested, fingerprinted, and charged with a crime. Which means they’re not likely to ever get legal entrance to the U.S. in the future. The poor fools are just tools being used by the people organizing and financing the migration, to prove some points.
It’s very bold for thousands of migrants to show up and ask to be fed, sheltered, and clothed. But also occupied, employed, given medical treatment, and have their children cared for. They’ve done zero to deserve any favors. But it’s not only an economic problem. It’s a moral problem.
These people – or those who are encouraging them – think they have a right to impose themselves. And the U.S. government, and the U.S. public, never even question the ethics of all this – so they’re foredoomed to failure. The Americans, idiotically, just say it’s against the law. But laws are arbitrary, and can change. It’s really a question of what’s right and wrong. The leftists, however, cleverly say that they have morality on their side.
It’s said that these people are from Honduras and El Salvador. But who knows? The quality of reporting in the media is so poor, that you can’t really know where they’re coming from or who they are. It’s said that they’re “families fleeing from violence.” That’s irrelevant. But from looking at video feed, they seem to be mostly young males, with a few women and children for cosmetic purposes. One report I’ve heard, from a man that was actually there, is that over 90% are young men.
The whole sideshow is full of unanswered questions. How is it that these people from Central American countries were able to cross the southern Mexican border? Did the Mexicans try to keep them out? How do poor people expect to march all the way up Mexico? We’re talking well over 1,000 miles. Who’s paying for their food? Are they just sleeping in the bushes on the roadsides every night? What happens when one of them gets sick? These are questions that need to be answered. The whole thing is crazy.
Justin: Do you think the migrants might be receiving outside help or funding? It wouldn’t be the first time that something like that’s happened. Non-governmental organizations [NGO] have transported migrants by the boatload from Africa to Europe.
If so, who might be helping them? And why?
Doug: Well, if I was really that interested, I would get on a plane, fly to Mexico and start interviewing these people to find out what the facts are. But there are about a hundred other things that are more important to me. That’s the job of a reporter, or a news organization. Where are they? They should be all over this. But whether you could trust the reporting is another question.
But the big question is how did these thousands of people get the idea that they could leave their homes in Honduras and El Salvador, walk up through Mexico, and enter the U.S.? Did they expect to be received with open arms, and get free food, shelter, and clothing for however long? Where did this idea come from?
I hate to bring up George Soros, who’s justifiably the bête noire of the right wing. But he, along with Hillary Clinton, has been quoted as saying that it’s time for a “Purple Revolution” in the U.S. “Purple” comes from a merging of the red and the blue. A Purple Revolution in the U.S. might be similar to the Arab Spring revolution and the colored revolutions of Eastern Europe – very unpleasant, with unpredictable results. Perhaps it’s already underway; there’s plenty of antagonism, actual hatred, and irreconcilable views in evidence.
I believe the migrants are being led and financed; they have to be. It takes money to turn theory into practice. Whether it’s Soros and his NGOs or a bunch of other NGOs is irrelevant. Elements of the Democratic Party could be financing this stuff, helping the peasants organize, and just seeing how much it embarrasses Trump. It’s definitely not a spontaneous movement.
But suppose this is just a test run. If 5,000 – what’s guessed as the current number – people show up at the border, you could stop them. What if 100,000 well-financed and well-organized people show up at the border next time? How are you going to stop them? You couldn’t, unless you shoot them. They’ll just walk across as a human wave.
It’s the same problem that Europeans are going to face with the Africans in the years to come. Over the next generation or two, the population of Africa is set to double and triple. At the same time, Europe’s population is shrinking and getting very old. More important, Europeans no longer have any backbone, or belief in the value of their civilization. When the Africans – mostly Mohammedans – show up it won’t be just 100,000 or 200,000 as was the case a couple summers ago. We’re talking about a million… two million… or tens of millions. It’s going to change the whole character of the continent.
Justin: So what do you make of Trump’s handling of this situation? He’s reportedly sent more than 5,000 troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to defend what he’s calling an “invasion.”
Doug: As I mentioned a moment ago, embarrassing Trump is undoubtedly one reason why this march was organized and financed. They realize that it presents Trump with a real conundrum. What are the troops going to do? Are they going to be issued live ammunition? And at what point will they be given the orders to fire? Rifles don’t even have bayonet attachments anymore. Will it just turn into a pushing and shoving contest?
What the caravan may do is put their token women and children up front because it’s very bad PR to shoot or club women and kids. Perhaps they’ll try to push the fence down and then walk across the border. More likely they’ll try to walk through the border station, where hundreds of cars are lined up.
How are you going stop them? Well, if there are only a few thousand, you can arrest them. But then they’re in the U.S. And you don’t want them in the U.S. Now, you have another problem. How are you going to get rid of them? In any event, soldiers are completely ineffectual and unsuited for the job.
How can you get them back into Mexico, once they’ve crossed the border? At most of the California official crossings, there’s a “no man’s land,” a neutral zone. You’re out of Mexico, but not really in the U.S. The Mexicans don’t want them back. So, either the U.S. will have 5,000 people milling around, or it’s going to have to incarcerate them. Then they’re definitely in the U.S.
Justin: What would you do if putting troops on the border isn’t the answer?
Doug: I’ve said before that two things could solve this problem.
Number one, there should be absolutely zero welfare benefits to anyone. Ideally that includes U.S. citizens – however that’s totally impossible at this point. But certainly for non-U.S. citizens, so there’s nothing to draw these people in. Benefits draw in the wrong kind of person. That’s the most important difference between today’s migrants, and the legitimate immigrants of the past. Before the 1960s, they had to pay their own way to get here, and support themselves once they arrived.
Number two, all property in the U.S. should be privately owned, so there aren’t any bridges for them to sleep under, or unowned sidewalks where they can panhandle. No government-owned parks where they can camp out. If you can’t pay the rent for wherever you are, or if the owner of the sidewalk or road doesn’t want you on it, you’ve got to go elsewhere. That would solve the problem. But neither is feasible in today’s America.
It should be up to individual property owners to defend their property. In other words, they should be the ones making the decisions. And if they need to use force to defend their property, that should be perfectly acceptable and within the law. Of course, you want to minimize the use of force. But we simply cannot let people, in effect, confiscate your property.
What I’m saying is this shouldn’t even be a government problem. The government is no better at solving this problem than they are at solving any other problem. As a result, it’s just going to get worse.
I suspect this caravan is just a trial balloon. The next time they’ll make sure there are 50,000 or 100,000 people at the border. We’re not going to be able to keep them out. And once they’re in, unless you just let them go anywhere they want, they’ve got to be incarcerated. And once they’re incarcerated, what are you going to do with them? You can’t send them back across the Mexican border. The Mexicans aren’t going to want them. How are you going to sort them out and fly them back to whatever country they came from? I doubt any of them have passports.
The present system is totally incapable of coping with the problem of mass migration, and the problem will get bigger. Once Trump is out of office in 2020, some hardcore leftist will be elected. Presumably they’ll welcome these people. Or maybe not. They’ll see them as a real welfare burden – penniless, devoid of skills, and unable to even speak English. On the other hand, they’ll be a boon to MS-13 and other gangs.
At that point, we’re going to witness a major change in the demography of the U.S. We’re already in the middle stages of the transformation. As late as the ’60s, the U.S. was about 85% people of European extraction, and 15% “other.” Now it’s 60-40. Soon the U.S. will be truly multi-ethnic and multi-cultural. They’ll all be voting, to garner bennies for their own groups, at the expense of others. It will make for a highly unstable situation, with lots of resentment. Explosive, actually.
Justin: Doug, I read that the bulk of the caravan is in Mexico City now and headed for Tijuana next before crossing into San Diego.
Do you find it interesting that the caravan would head for California rather than taking a more direct route into Texas? Supposedly, this is the safest route available.
But I can’t help but wonder if California was chosen because it might be a more welcoming environment. What are your thoughts?
Doug: That’s an interesting point. I suppose it ties into Trump’s idea of building a wall, because there is actually a serviceable fence at Tijuana. My guess is that they’ll attempt to get arrested at the Customs and Immigration booths and get into the U.S. that way. California won’t use the state troopers to arrest them, nor will the local municipality use their police. It will be up to Washington.
It would be too hard to have this motley crew of migrants try to walk through the Mexican desert to swim across the Rio Grande. Which is why they aren’t choosing Texas, New Mexico, or Arizona.
Maybe their intention is just to go through the actual border crossing, and just push their way through there. I can’t wait to see what their strategy is. Again, it’s a sign of how bad the reporting is that no news man, no journalist has gone down there to ask these questions and get the answers from the horse’s mouth. All we can do is speculate.
But look at the bright side. This is free entertainment.
Justin: Thanks for your time, Doug.
Doug: You’re welcome.