The current Mexican immigration to the USA is historically unprecedented. In 1920, the two largest immigrant groups—Germans and Italians—totalled only 24 percent of the immigrant population. Among men, about one in 20 U.S. workers is now a Mexican immigrant; in 1970, that was less than one in 100. In the past, immigrants could not call home, e-mail relatives, fly back and forth, wire money, and maintain connections to their native land to extent they can today. They did not have education and social services in their native language. Liberal economists swear that legal immigrants to the USA bring in $25 billion in net revenue annually. More skeptical statisticians conclude that aliens cost the United States over $40 billion a year. Other studies suggest that the average California household must contribute at least $1,200 each year to subsidize the deficit between what immigrants cost in services and pay in taxes. New reports suggest that there may be not 8 million, but almost 20 million illegal aliens in the United States.
The USA has the most powerful armed forces in the history of mankind. What’s the point of that, if millions of people can simply walk across the border and colonize entire regions? Isn’t the idea behind a military defense to uphold national integrity and sovereignty? More concerning is the fact that Islamic terrorists are taking advantage of this situation, and bypass increased airport security by entering from Mexico. The lax border control is thus a major security risk, as the terrorists are trying to obtain WMD to smuggle into the country's vast unprotected borders. Legislation developed as a result of the 9/11 Commission called for an additional 2,000 Border Patrol agents, but the Bush Administration's 2006 budget asked for just 210 new agents.
Although illegal immigration is causing frictions in the US, the situation in Europe is much more volatile. The USA is a nation of immigrants in a sense that Europe is not. When Europeans dig into the ground for archaeological remains, they find traces of their own ancestors. Europeans are in a sense their own Indians, and live in distinct nation states. This makes Europe less suited to absorb large amounts of immigrants. On top of this, Europe also receives a kind of immigrants who are not at all interested in fitting in: Muslims.
Anthony Browne of the London Times claims that almost all arguments used to justify mass immigration don’t add up. Britain doesn’t have a declining workforce, and immigration is no solution to an aging society since migrants age too. There is no shortage of unskilled labour, with four million people out of work wanting to work. It may boost the economy, but doesn’t boost GDP per capita. While the economic benefits are marginal, the costs are great: it leads to massive overcrowding and congestion, overstretched public services, imports poverty, crime, increases social tension and creates parallel communities. It is hypocritical to profess belief in democracy, then deny people any democratic control over immigration policy. The pro-immigrationists are effectively trying to abolish nationhood, denying a country the right to sustain its own culture.
In 2000, the then president of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, was asked by the Los Angeles Times how the country was going to feed, clothe, house and employ the expected doubling of her population by 2050. She replied: “We’ll send them to America. Globalisation in its purest form should not have any boundaries, so small countries with big populations should be able to send population to countries with big boundaries and small populations.” This isn’t migration at all, it should rather be labelled “population dumping”.
Tory leader Michael Howard wants to pull Britain out of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention as well as certain commitments in the European Convention on Human Rights: "Immigration has more than doubled since Mr Blair came to power. Britain's population will grow by six million over the next 30 years of which five million will be due to immigration." Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK, supports the idea of withdrawing from the Convention on Human Rights. Western states, which are bound by their own laws, are forced to admit hundreds of thousands of unwanted immigrants every year, simply because well-briefed lawyers invoke the convention on asylum on their behalf. Most of these immigrants stay even when their claims to asylum are exposed as bogus. The result is a demographic crisis in Europe that threatens to rock the foundations of its society.
The Spanish government has launched a programme granting legal amnesty to up to 800,000 undocumented immigrants. Spain's 3.5 million immigrants now represent 8 percent of the population, coming largely from Africa. The number of immigrants in Spain has tripled to almost three million in less than five years. Appeasement PM Zapatero came to power after an Islamic attack on his country, and only months later he issued residency permits to hundreds of thousands of Muslims. When Spain decided to regularise illegal workers, other European countries were worried that this policy would affect them, too. The EU is an open market, with free movement of people and goods. Once immigrants are accepted into one nation, in this case Spain, they have the right to move anywhere within the EU. Schengen is a border-control system under which incoming travellers are checked by officials only at an outer frontier of the EU. A Ukrainian family travelling west by car would be checked by Polish officials at the border. Then they can drive unhindered across nearly all Western Europe, and nobody will ask for their passports. This makes it a monumental task to control drug smuggling, human trafficking, and illegal immigration. To the southeast and southwest, outer border countries like Greece, Italy, and Spain have an almost impossible task in controlling their sea borders. Monitoring the new external border of the EU which stretches over 5,000 kilometres from Kaliningrad to Croatia, passing through Belarus, Ukraine and Serbia-Montenegro, will not become any easier.
Simply put, the EU has weakened border controls in Europe at the same time as a population explosion in Muslim neighbor regions is threatening to spill over, potentially causing a succession of civil wars in Western European nations. It is an act of criminal negligence of political leaders on both sides of the Atlantic to maintain such porous borders while Islamic groups are waging a war against our civilization and are working to obtain the worst weapons known to man. The combination of multiculturalism and massive immigration threatens to undermine the cohesion of Western nations to the point that they will no longer have the ability to withstand the Islamic aggression. Unless this problem is dealt with, and soon, we could be in more trouble than we realize.