There's a rather curious phenomenon especially in Europe, where the amount of terrorist attacks and rampant violent criminal activity seems to be quite directly correlated to the amount of immigration. If you look at the European countries with the least amount of immigration and the smallest proportion of non-native inhabitants (such as Hungary, Poland or Finland) you'll most usually find the least amount of terrorism and violent crime, while the converse is true for countries with the highest amounts of immigration and proportion of non-native inhabitants (such as Sweden, the UK, France and Germany). Some of the former countries are so peaceful that there hasn't been a single terrorist attack in them for the past 50 years.
The same phenomenon also happens locally inside those countries with high immigration: Cities and towns with very low proportions of immigrants tend to be much safer and with significantly lower violent crime rates than cities and towns with high proportions of immigrants. And this even when the population sizes are comparable. In fact, town after town, and small city after small city, one after one, in many of these countries, has experienced the exact same phenomenon: What used to be a very peaceful and safe town where violent crime was almost non-existent, sees a very quick and sharp raise in crime statistics immediately when a flood of immigrants starts pouring in. Towns where for the past several decades people, especially women, could just walk peacefully alone in the streets even at night with not a worry in the world, can no longer do that, often not even in bright daylight. In fact, this often happens within the same large city, when comparing different suburbs and neighborhoods within it. Immediately when the flood of immigrants starts pouring in, crime statistics go up, and safety, peace and living standards go down.
There's one rather curious thing happening in these countries with the vast majority of politicians, journalists, academics and other prominent influencers of society who are stench advocates of unrestricted mass immigration: Look up where they are living, inside the country.
Do they live in the towns, cities and suburbs with the largest numbers of immigrants, or do they live in the parts of the country with the least amount of immigrants? Do they live in the parts of the country with the highest crime rates, or the parts with the lowest crime rates?
The vast, vast majority of these politicians, journalists and other advocates live in the richest parts of the country, in the richest cities and in the riches suburbs within those cities, which pretty much always have the least amount of immigrants living in them (and are, thus some of the safest parts of the country).
This means that none of these people ever get to experience, in person, what it is to live in an area with a high number of immigrants. They never personally get to see them, or interact with them, and thus they can safely close their eyes from them.
The only immigrants they ever get to personally interact with are the model immigrants: Those who have fully integrated into society, who have high-paying high-profile jobs and who provide for themselves by working in these jobs. (After all, there's a reason why they can afford to live in these rich neighborhoods which usually have outrageous living costs.)
And these are precisely the immigrants that they are so proud to showcase around. "See? See? Look at all these model immigrants! They contribute to society, they work, the leave peacefully, and they are so nice, educated, intelligent, and are truly part of our society! Immigration is so perfect!"
Of course there's nothing wrong with those immigrants. The problem is that the politicians and journalists are only seeing the best ones. These politicians and journalists never need to walk alone at night in the high-immigration suburbs that are ridden with violent crime.
It's easy to preach from their high pulpits about the virtues of immigration, when they don't have to themselves live among the immigrant masses that they have helped bring into the country. They can live isolated in the safety of their ivory towers, where those immigrant masses have no access to, and not bear the consequences. The working class, however, are the ones who pay the bills, both with their tax money and their personal safety.
The same phenomenon also happens locally inside those countries with high immigration: Cities and towns with very low proportions of immigrants tend to be much safer and with significantly lower violent crime rates than cities and towns with high proportions of immigrants. And this even when the population sizes are comparable. In fact, town after town, and small city after small city, one after one, in many of these countries, has experienced the exact same phenomenon: What used to be a very peaceful and safe town where violent crime was almost non-existent, sees a very quick and sharp raise in crime statistics immediately when a flood of immigrants starts pouring in. Towns where for the past several decades people, especially women, could just walk peacefully alone in the streets even at night with not a worry in the world, can no longer do that, often not even in bright daylight. In fact, this often happens within the same large city, when comparing different suburbs and neighborhoods within it. Immediately when the flood of immigrants starts pouring in, crime statistics go up, and safety, peace and living standards go down.
There's one rather curious thing happening in these countries with the vast majority of politicians, journalists, academics and other prominent influencers of society who are stench advocates of unrestricted mass immigration: Look up where they are living, inside the country.
Do they live in the towns, cities and suburbs with the largest numbers of immigrants, or do they live in the parts of the country with the least amount of immigrants? Do they live in the parts of the country with the highest crime rates, or the parts with the lowest crime rates?
The vast, vast majority of these politicians, journalists and other advocates live in the richest parts of the country, in the richest cities and in the riches suburbs within those cities, which pretty much always have the least amount of immigrants living in them (and are, thus some of the safest parts of the country).
This means that none of these people ever get to experience, in person, what it is to live in an area with a high number of immigrants. They never personally get to see them, or interact with them, and thus they can safely close their eyes from them.
The only immigrants they ever get to personally interact with are the model immigrants: Those who have fully integrated into society, who have high-paying high-profile jobs and who provide for themselves by working in these jobs. (After all, there's a reason why they can afford to live in these rich neighborhoods which usually have outrageous living costs.)
And these are precisely the immigrants that they are so proud to showcase around. "See? See? Look at all these model immigrants! They contribute to society, they work, the leave peacefully, and they are so nice, educated, intelligent, and are truly part of our society! Immigration is so perfect!"
Of course there's nothing wrong with those immigrants. The problem is that the politicians and journalists are only seeing the best ones. These politicians and journalists never need to walk alone at night in the high-immigration suburbs that are ridden with violent crime.
It's easy to preach from their high pulpits about the virtues of immigration, when they don't have to themselves live among the immigrant masses that they have helped bring into the country. They can live isolated in the safety of their ivory towers, where those immigrant masses have no access to, and not bear the consequences. The working class, however, are the ones who pay the bills, both with their tax money and their personal safety.
Comments
Post a Comment