Tuesday, September 27, 2016

This election is about the First versus the Third World

I watched the first debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump last night, in the company of a few friends and fellow bloggers.  I wasn't wildly impressed by either candidate.  I'd score it a draw as far as its effect on the election is concerned.  I think most voters have already made up their minds by now.  Those that say they haven't won't find much in last night's debate to sway them, IMHO.

What did strike me was the contrast between the candidates' approaches to the rest of the world.  Donald Trump was emphatic about protecting American jobs and our national economy, if necessary by renegotiating international trade agreements, restricting immigration, etc.  Hillary Clinton was much more globalist in orientation, looking to admit more refugees, work together with other nations (whatever that means), and so on.  She basically saw the United States as just one nation among many, whereas Donald Trump saw it as the 'first among equals' with the right to put its own interests first.

I think that's the key to this election.  If you look at what's happening in Europe, with literally millions of refugees streaming into the continent from the Middle East and Africa, parts of it are rapidly taking on the character of the Third World from which they come - complete with Third World problems.  The ever-increasing sexual assaults on women?  That's the result of Third World attitudes, where women are possessions, first of their fathers, then of their husbands, and have little or no say in the way they're treated.  Third World men are treating First World women in the same way they treat their own women - and the First World is shocked and disgusted . . . but why?  Anyone with two brain cells to rub together would have understood that this was inevitable.  Merely admitting someone into First World borders doesn't wave a magic wand and transform their thinking and their attitudes.

In the same way, demands for benefits, welfare, etc. are stretching to the limit European social support structures and systems that were set up to deal primarily with the needs of local citizens.  No-one stopped to think that an influx of refugees would overwhelm them.  I'm not being racist when I observe that matters so simple as how to use a flush toilet are proving to be serious issues in certain nations and cities where Third World 'refugees' congregate.  These people have never had the opportunity to use such facilities before, and no-one in Europe could conceive of the need to teach adults how to use a modern toilet.  The result has been a sudden surge in broken, clogged and otherwise damaged sanitary facilities in the camps set up to house these people, and in the accommodation provided for them once they've made it through processing.  The European taxpayer is, of course, footing the bill for repairs.

This also ignores the fact that Europe is importing its own next generation of economic problems.  Unemployment among younger people in Europe is already extraordinarily high.  Spain reports a youth unemployment rate of 43.9% as of July this year.  Italy's at 39.2%, Greece is 47.7%, and France is 24.4%.  Germany, by contrast, has only 7.2% youth unemployment.  With nations already struggling to find jobs for their own younger people, how on earth are they going to offer employment to so many 'refugees'?  (Of course, they're mostly not 'refugees' at all.  They're economic migrants, using the fiction of being refugees to seek a better life elsewhere.  Unfortunately, they'll do so at the expense of the people of the countries they're overwhelming with their numbers.)

If Hillary Clinton becomes President, I think her policies - as expressed in her election materials, and during her comments last night - are almost guaranteed to bring more of the same problems to this country.  (They're already here, of course, in the millions of illegal aliens infesting our land;  but that problem is still manageable at present levels.  It won't be if the influx continues, and if the present infestation is not cut back drastically.)  Donald Trump, on the other hand, appears to be firmly against that, and wants to reserve American jobs for Americans.  I strongly support that perspective.  Sure, some immigration will be necessary.  I'm an immigrant myself, and I'm very grateful to this country for offering me the chance to make a fresh start and find a new home.  However, I brought with me skills that this country needed;  I entered legally;  and I've supported myself.  Illegal aliens don't do that.  Many come here with no skills at all.  They're a net drain on the economy, when you factor in health care and other support costs.  We can't afford that.  It's that simple.

The tide of economic migrants from the Third World to the First World is ever-increasing, because the populations of Third World countries have increased so drastically that they have no expectation of anything worthwhile if they stay there.  There will never be enough jobs, enough social support structures, enough housing, enough health care, to meet their needs:  so they're trying to move to a place that can offer them those things.  Unfortunately, by seeking to leech off the American or European taxpayer, they're imposing an impossible burden on us - one that's completely unsustainable.

That's what this election is all about.  If we allow Hillary Clinton's policies to prevail, the Third World will be all around us within a few years (it already is, in some parts of this country).  America will be dragged down - economically, socially, and in due course politically - to the level of most of South America.  If Donald Trump's policies prevail, the tide may yet be stemmed, and even, perhaps, reversed.  I'm not at all sure that Mr. Trump will make a good President;  but I am sure that in this area at least, the policies he's expressed are light years ahead of his opponent's.



Jonathan H said...

I completely agree - I'm not a big fan of Donald Trump in many ways, but I believe that he is the best option for our country. At his worst he will keep things the way they are; at his best potential he will improve the country in many ways.
In contrast, Hilary Clinton, at her best (restrained by Congress and the courts) will keep things the way they are, but if she has half a chance she will implement many liberal dreams that will cause multitudinous more problems for the country.
His stated goal is to make things better for the country and to restore the American dream - her stated goal is to make us like Europe, with all of the social and economic problems they have now.

Anonymous said...

Another key issue for this election is personal freedom vs. more control from the government over what we say or do.

C. S. P. Schofield said...

The only problem with your analysis is that while The Donald may very well mean his policy statements, we can probably assume that Shrillary doesn't. Oh, she may follow them, if her focus groups tell her that's the way to get reelected. She would advocate roasting babies on the same basis. Like her husband, Shrillary is all about getting power and then selling power, access, and indulgences. Unlike her husband, she has no native smarts to tell her when she's pushing the envelope. She is probably the most corrupt politician to achieve world stature since the Borgia Popes, and she is also ostentatiously stupid, in the way that only overeducated Progressives can be.

So, what Shrillary says is no indication of what she will do.

Timbo said...

I took a motorbike trip across France last year. The state of the restrooms in the rest areas was something to see. In one picnic area the highway workers were cleaning the bathrooms with high pressure hoses. They don't seem to get the concept of toilet paper and washing your hands...

deborah harvey said...

timbo, my gran always took toilet paper when travelling.
i suggest a small spade, also, for digging a hole for excrement and covering it when finished.
i also take babies wipes and medical exam gloves.

Gail said...

The only clear choice for me is Trump. He may have me fooled but he does seem to care about our nation first.

I see a nation where my forty-something year old children cannot make a good living...they have in the past. My grandson is employed part time which means almost no work even if it is with a solid company...UPS. Yes, there are benefits but you have to wait a year and be a full time worker. Even we as a retired couple are feeling the economic pinch. I fear for our nation.

So my conclusion is the unknown is a far better choice than the known criminal Hillary is...and I'm from Arkansas.

Timbo said...

I should have been more clear in my comment. The bathrooms were filthy due to the Mid East people's toilet habits; wads of wet toilet paper all over the floor and sinks; bottles of water everywhere. I have seen Port-a-toilet cabins at a week long festival in better conditions.