Jan. 4, 2018 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
10:04
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| Well, welcome to 2018, the year in which America decides its fate, whether the Republic will continue or whether it will devolve into a Venezuelan-style third-world hellpit of isolated communities ringed by high walls and a massive sea of people lamenting their choice to move towards socialism. | |
| And it really comes down to this DACA question, right? | |
| So for those, I'm sure you're up on all of this stuff, DACA was a program that was put in, or I guess a sort of forgiveness or deferral program that was put in by Obama to allow The children of illegal immigrants to stay in America. | |
| And, of course, there are about 800,000 of them and they're portrayed as, you know, wonderful additions to American society, valedictorians and serving in the military and fluent in English and just amazing people. | |
| And this is, it's despicable as a whole. | |
| That the left would use this. | |
| It's inevitable. They've lost the war of ideas since the 1960s, so they've been trying to stuff the voting ballot with immigrants instead of trying to engage in the war of ideas because socialism has been so thoroughly discredited in both theory and practice over the last hundred years. | |
| And this 800,000... | |
| There is, of course, going to be a deal, or a deal that is talked about, which is that they'll say, well, the 800,000 can stay, but... | |
| There needs to be a wall and there needs to be an end to chain migration. | |
| And the question, the moral question fundamentally is, do children get to keep the assets illegally obtained by their parents? | |
| Well, that's the fundamental. Like if your dad robs a bank and gives you a million dollars, do you get to keep the million dollars when what he did was illegal? | |
| Well, of course not. Do Bernie Madoff's children get to keep the profits of his Ponzi scheme? | |
| Well, no. I mean, it all has to go back, right? | |
| So there is this general moral principle, which is the children do not get to keep assets illegally acquired by their parents and residency in the United States. | |
| If it's illegal, then it's an asset, a value that is illegally obtained by the parents. | |
| And so offering it to the children, free and clear, it's the very big question of sentimentality. | |
| Sentimentality versus morality. | |
| You know, the thief who cries, well, you want to let him off the hook. | |
| And there is this sentimentality that is really going to be the death of the West unless we confront it and basically find a way to eliminate it from our vocabulary. | |
| The sentimentality, like empathy and sympathy and so on, it is not a commanded moral absolute, like you just do it no matter what. | |
| It is a relationship. | |
| And this idea that it's just an outward pushing command no matter what, that empathy and sympathy and people are upset so we're going to appease and accommodate them despite the law, despite morality, is a fatal thing. | |
| Like if you run an online business and people send you 50 bucks and you ship them a widget, well, if they send you the 50 bucks, you should ship them the widget, right? | |
| But you don't have this commandment that just says, I ship people widgets, whether they pay or not, whether the check goes through or not, and so on. | |
| So morality is a relationship, and abstracting morality into just some kind of universal commandment. | |
| You know, who do you owe moral consideration to? | |
| Well, you owe moral consideration to those who have shown moral consideration towards you. | |
| Morality is a relationship. | |
| It is not an absolute that must be enacted regardless of consequences or regardless of the behavior of other people. | |
| And so, this question of these 800,000 and so on, well, of course there's a lot of propaganda involved in it. | |
| The idea that you get a wall and an end to the chain migration, well, If the left wants the 800,000 to stay, it's because they know what happened, right? | |
| So Reagan gave amnesty to a whole bunch of people in California, and that was supposed to solve the problem of illegal immigration forever, and there was never going to be any need for any more reform or any more amnesties and so on, and of course it didn't. | |
| What it does is it encourages, right? | |
| If you let people off the hook for their illegal actions, you encourage more illegal actions. | |
| If you let people, and reward them in a sense, For gaining and keeping a value illegally, then you simply incent more people to attempt to gain that value and, of course, California has fallen to the Democrats and will not be recovered because of demographics, because the overwhelming majority of Hispanics, of people from Mexico and so on, they vote for the left. | |
| They vote for big government because, you see, they've escaped a big government corrupt country and they end up wanting to recreate that big government corrupt country in their new country for reasons of IQ in general that I have talked about many times before. | |
| So the basic facts Is that if you allow 800,000 people to gain a path to citizenship, studies are pretty clear that everyone from Mexico who gets citizenship sponsors 6.38 more people from Mexico to come and live in America. | |
| So we're not talking about 800,000. | |
| We're talking about 5.1 million. | |
| 5.1 million people coming into America, or staying in America, who Will overwhelmingly vote for the left, who will overwhelmingly vote for bigger government and Democrats. | |
| This is the only reason why Democrats don't care about Hispanics. | |
| They care about power, and the Hispanic vote is how they get and maintain and achieve power. | |
| And if there is a path to citizenship for the DACA recipients, you can say, oh, well, we're going to end chain migration. | |
| Oh, we're going to build a wall or whatever. | |
| It doesn't fundamentally matter because this can all be undone. | |
| Even the DACA stuff, and I've talked about this before, you know, when it comes to family reunification, there are so many hardship clauses and so on that basically they can bring anyone in who they want. | |
| And there is a genuine and general frustration in America about is the damn law going to be enforced or is the law merely a political inconvenience for the transfer of power to more and more corrupt groups? | |
| So when it comes to the actual facts about DACA, Fluency in English is pretty key to upward mobility in the United States. | |
| The Center for Immigration Studies has recently estimated that nearly a quarter of the DACA-eligible population fall into the functional illiterate category. | |
| And another 46% have only basic English ability. | |
| It's better still that the Syrians who are pouring into Europe, two-thirds of whom are illiterate even in their own language, But here we have almost three quarters, almost three out of every four of these DACA people functionally illiterate in English. | |
| How's that going to work? What upward mobility is available? | |
| Now, you see all of this, oh, well, this DACA was a valedictorian at the high school and so on. | |
| Well, no. Despite the fact that the average age of a DACA recipient is 25, the oldest is in their late 30s, fewer than half of the DACA population has actually graduated from high school. | |
| Now, I should put the word graduated in air quotes because graduating from an American high school, particularly if you're an ethnic minority, is more a function of promote and pray rather than an actual assessment of intellectual skills. | |
| Now, you hear of all of this military service, well... | |
| 900 DACA recipients have actually served in the US military. | |
| That's one tenth of one percent. | |
| One tenth of one percent. | |
| Out of 800,000, there are 900. | |
| So it just comes down to this. | |
| Do you want to have the capacity for smaller government? | |
| If you want to have the capacity for smaller government, then a path to citizenship for DACA recipients You will never achieve it. | |
| You will never achieve it. | |
| You have about a million people pouring into the United States, the majority as a result of chain migration, unvetted, unassessed, no basic reality as to their economic functionality. | |
| And what happens, of course, when massive numbers of people pour into America From third world countries, then taxes go up, services go down, and it is a population displacement because massive amounts of money are taken from the domestic population, transferred to the new population, which means the new population can afford to have more kids than the domestic population. | |
| We cannot afford to have more kids or sometimes any kids. | |
| And so it is a massive demographic replacement. | |
| And if this goes forward, you need to be clear on this, because I'm going to absolutely give up on politics if the demographics prove arguments irrelevant, right? | |
| The replacement of first world populations with third world populations is to make politics irrelevant. | |
| And you simply get ethnic in-group voting preferences, and the lower IQ groups end up voting for more and more resources from the higher IQ groups, and then you end up transitioning from Argentina to Brazil, straight on down to Mexico. | |
| And even worse down, I would argue, to Venezuela. | |
| So... The only point to talk about politics is that we can actually have a debate based on ideas. | |
| If there is simply an in-group preference and a voting for the left based upon ethnicity and demography, then there is no debate that is possible. | |
| It is simply a predatory civil war fighting over ever-shrinking government resources. | |
| So I'd love to continue to talk about politics. | |
| I'd love to continue for there to be a debate. | |
| But if the demographic replacement occurs, well... | |
| The time for arguments, then. |
Export Selection