Mass Migration Threatens Civilization, But No One Seems to Mind

President Trump recently signed an executive order to pull the United States out of the Global Forum on Migration and Development (GFMD). Affiliated with the United Nations’ Global Compact for Migration, GFMD was one among countless organizations devoted to promoting “the right to migration.” In a written statement, Trump’s spokesman Tommy Pigott explained, “For too long, international organizations have fueled an endless flow of mass migration and have sought to compel Americans to accept the same destructive agenda.”

In light of the current challenge facing the developed world, this was the right move to make. The reality of mass migration has been a disaster for the West and has done little to address the problems it purports to solve.

Although welcoming poor immigrants into the developed world might seem compassionate, recent history demonstrates how it results in rampant economic and sexual exploitation, spikes in crime and disorder, and the proliferation of unassimilated slums dependent on government assistance.

As for the supposed economic benefits of mass migration, these benefits almost exclusively apply to those least deserving: the farmer wanting indentured servants for picking his crops, the factory owner wanting compliant coolies toiling in a meat packing plant, the politician wanting uninformed mobs exchanging their votes for public benefits, the NGO director raising vast fortunes on an issue he will encourage, and an army of otherwise useless bureaucrats charged with processing all the related paperwork. Meanwhile, everyone outside this group of beneficiaries can expect to see the price of everything increase, their wages go down, and watch their quality of life deteriorate even as their taxes continue to rise to cover the cost of the new arrivals.

But the real argument—and doubtless the guiding principle of an organization like the GFMD—is that the West owes it to the rest of the world to open its borders. The implication is that the failures of these countries driving their people to emigrate is caused by the success of Western nations. The poverty and strife that prevails in the Global South is somehow the fault of the wealth and order of the Global North. To support this notion, proponents of this view vaguely point to the legacy of colonialism and imperialism holding back the developing world.

All too often, this framing is merely assumed as a given despite the lack of logic. Because some Westerners at some point took advantage of their technological and cultural superiority through political occupation, economic outsourcing, and resource extraction in the developing world, this somehow entitles the inhabitants of these places to immigrate to any country in the West—immigration is now a positive right.

Even assuming that a problematic power imbalance exists, a kind of geopolitical version of the #MeToo movement, how exactly is this resolved by the superior culture being held accountable by taking in immigrants indiscriminately? It would make far more sense to end all interaction with the victimized people and leave them free to run their own countries (i.e., decolonization) or to help lift the conditions of the victimize people through direct administration, management, and education (i.e., colonization). And if there are predators committing abuses against people in the developing world, they would be charged with a crime and punished (i.e., justice).

But, as with the actual response to the sexual predators of #MeToo, the response to the power imbalance between the West and the Third World has been to eliminate power altogether. In the case of #MeToo, Hollywood atoned for their sins by discriminating against white men and prioritizing women and racial minorities (i.e., going woke). The power imbalance between film executives and aspiring actors was “fixed” by eliminating a meritocracy and imposing a kind of affirmative action for underrepresented demographics in the entertainment industry. As a result, Hollywood is now saturated with mediocre individuals who have collectively lowered the quality of its films and diminished Hollywood’s cultural and financial power in turn.

Mass migration works off the same dynamic. To atone for their sins, Western elites will open their borders and welcome foreigners at the cost of native residents’ wellbeing. While this has done nothing for poorer, dysfunctional countries shedding their excess population, it has brought down the quality of life for people in the West and dissolved the cultural standards that enriched these host countries in the first place. Consequently, formerly First World nations, like Canada, the United Kingdom, or Sweden are slipping into Third World dysfunction and are becoming less and less recognizable. 

This transformation and the underlying attitudes that allow it make up the core argument of Jean Raspail’s notorious book The Camp of the Saints. He hypothesizes what would happen if a million people from the Third World immigrated en masse to France. In his opinion, leftists in the media, government, and even the Church would fall over themselves to let them in without any resistance, believing this will balance the uneven scales of cosmic justice. Predictably, once the horde makes it to the coast of France, they (along with the other impoverished immigrants they inspire) wipe out civilization without a second thought and turn France and the rest of the West into slightly better versions of the places they fled.

Although some have considered Raspail’s novel prophetic, capturing today’s reality, this exaggerates today’s current struggles with immigration and fundamentally misunderstands the novel. Its real criticism is the delusional, Marxist-inspired logic of open-borders advocates. Whether it’s the atheist philosopher, the weak-willed president, the conniving pundit, the liberal pope, or the bleeding-heart celebrity, they all see the inundation of the developing world as inevitable and thus morally justified.

Overall, Raspail suggests that it is more fatalism than nihilism motivating such people who are all too ready to substitute common sense and charity for happy talk and virtue signaling. Naturally, the fruits of such thinking are invariably corrupt and destructive, leading to ever more civilizational and spiritual decline.

This is why President Trump and his administration deserve the utmost commendation and support in opposing mass migration. In doing this, they oppose the strong temptation to surrender to what so many people consider inevitable and even desirable. It is not a stretch to say that they bear the cross of civilized humanity on their shoulders. The rest of the Western world can either help them bear this cross in order to bring about a global revival of faith and excellence or they can add their weight to the burden and foolishly bring about their own demise.