Theme: Governance

BRITISH ADVOCACY OF ENLARGEMENT WAS STRATEGIC. OPEN BORDERS WERE FOLLY

—The UK campaigned for enlargement of the EU. Before enlargement, ask for by the UK, there was no issue with open borders.—@ghg @William Thayer Sr

(RE: Enlargement)

The US/UK partnership is still the only meaningful military of the west – and the USA(Air/Sea/Oil), and UK(Credit Markets) have a worldwide perspective on protecting western interests.

In the “Enlargement” the Anglo hope was to increase market size and collective security. Open borders became a problem only when the strategic expansion, market expansion, and monetary expansion, was not accompanied by mobility limits.

There is no need for the conflation of family commons, local commons, national commons, civilizational commons. In fact, that is that’s the problem.

We could certainly use expansion to bring capital to people (good), but not people to capital (bad). Why? Because the family, local, and national commons are consumed rapidly by the migration of people. Whereas the movement of capital to people preserves if not expands the family, local, national commons, but EXPORTS it from where it is, to where it is needed.

The difference in the economic performance of states is almost entirely the product of the behavior of its people and the institutions produced by those people.

Open borders is a very bad idea. Look at the damage it has done to Americans. Americans who will have their own ‘exits’ in rebellion against the (catastrophic) error of universalism.

Do you want to know the painful science behind our success? The dirty secret of the 21st century? The west was the most eugenically suppressive civilization in history both because of our climate, farming techniques, manorialism, delayed marriage, aggressive hanging of half of a percent of the population by year, and constant culling of the underclasses by tribal, civil, and aristocratic warfare. Those regions of Europe that adopted bipartite manorialism as early as the 700s are today still the most prosperous. We can predict economic productivity by the Hanjal Line: where it was enforced. Holland objectively has the best genes because they’ve spent the longest eliminating the bad ones.

Without similar processes, the fate of Europe under third world invasion, will be the fate of India having failed at controlling reproduction, the fate of Islam from immigration and inbreeding with African slaves, the fate of Greece, southern Italy and southern Spain, and the fate of south America because of asymmetric reproduction of the classes.

That’s the painful truth of it.

And British moral dandyism is just post-empire status signaling evolving into a fetish. One can shame another by demonstrating British ‘high minded moral perfectionism’, as little more than the magician’s ‘prestige’ is used to hide his slight of hand.

Both British false-moralism and the magician’s prestige are signals that are meant to obscure that the Briton does nothing to protect the accumulated western commons from consumption, and the magician does everything to believe he is performing magic, rather than a parlor trick that takes advantage of human cognitive biases.

Nations, like good families, matter.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine