Editor’s Note: It’s no secret
that Donald Trump wants to put 2,000–4,000 troops on the U.S.–Mexico border.
And that’s because he believes that the “security of the United States is
imperiled by a drastic surge of illegal activity on the southern border.”
We love hearing Doug
Casey’s take on these controversial issues, so we’re sharing Casey Daily Dispatch editor Justin
Spittler’s conversation with him on the topic.
Justin: What do you
make of this, Doug? Will deploying thousands of troops to the border curb
illegal immigration?
Doug: Well, it looks
like what could have been a crisis has been temporarily defused. What might
have been thousands of migrants rushing the border has apparently dwindled to a
few stragglers. A non-event.
But
troubles on the Mexican border have a long and colorful pedigree. Especially
starting from around 1912–1918. For one thing, one of my favorite authors,
Ambrose Bierce, went to join Pancho Villa’s forces in 1913. He was in his 70s,
and it was his way of checking out.
There were some great
movies made about that time and place, as well. Vera Cruz, with Burt
Lancaster. The
Professionals,
with Burt Lancaster and Lee Marvin. And possibly my personal all-time
favorite, The
Wild Bunch,
with William Holden. There’s even a fun comedy about the era, Three Amigos, with Steve Martin.
In
those days the border was a more fluid concept. In 1917, Pershing lead 5,000 US
cavalrymen deep into Mexico, chasing Villa after a raid he made into the US.
That was about the time of the famous Zimmerman telegram, where the Germans
promised help getting Texas, New Mexico and Arizona back to Mexico, if the
Mexicans declared war on the US. That was one reason the Americans entered WW1.
No matter… the Mexicans will get that land back without a formal attack.
Justin: Interesting
indeed. But back to the current situation…
Doug: Right. Pershing
and horse soldiers are long gone. Let me start by saying that the national
guardsmen Trump proposes are basically weekend soldiers. These guys would
rather be at home. They’d rather be working their day jobs. They’d rather spend
time with their families. They’re not going to be happy about this.
Plus,
they’re unlikely to serve any useful purpose. Think about it. If they’re
confronted by a large group of migrants, how are they going to stop them? Is it
going to turn into a game of Red Rover? Or maybe a pushing contest?
The
only way they could stop a big group of migrants crossing the border is with
real violence. But they won’t do that. That won’t happen.
In
other words, a large group of say 10,000 to 20,000 people, in unison, could
easily walk across the border. Plus, understand that the people behind this
mass migration aren’t stupid. They understand the dynamics. They know that a
hundred migrants would just be a nuisance, to be rounded up and put in jail.
You need the military principle of mass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Next time, maybe they’ll show up to the
border with 50,000 people. That would be the equivalent of the Goths at
Adrianople. That was 378 AD. After that, the barbarians totally inundated the
Roman Empire from every angle. And in a generation they controlled every aspect
of the Empire.
If I wanted to collapse the US, that’s
how I’d do it. Who needs the risks and expense of a conventional war? It would
be neither hard nor very expensive to get a couple hundred thousand
Salvadoreans, Hondurans, and what-have-you—not to mention Mexicans—to just
human wave across the border. That would show the US is incapable of stopping
anybody—except harassing some polite European tourists in airports, or polite
Canadians driving across by car.
Of
course, there’d be a counter reaction. But things could easily spin out of
control.
Justin: And who do you think is behind all of this?
Doug: Non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) are certainly behind these migrants crossing the border.
Poor peasants from Central America, or wherever—poor people and miscreants will
show up from all over the world once the cat’s out of the bag—can’t act en
masse. Today these people couldn’t cross the American border on their own. Or
at most in onesies and twosies.
Migrants don’t have the resources to support themselves. So they’re
obviously getting help and funding from outside sources. I suspect it’s coming
from NGOs. These people are politically and psychologically committed to
destroying Western Civilization. And the average American or European has become
so guilt-ridden, self-effacing, and philosophically corrupt that they welcome
them.
So,
again, what they’ll try is sending 10,000, 50,000, or 200,000 people across the
border. You couldn’t stop that many people. I don’t care if Trump puts up the
National Guard; that will just add to the embarrassment. They’d just walk
across the border, unless they’re machine-gunned. But the Guard is obviously
not going to do that.
I’d
also gather as many pregnant women into the migrants as possible, both to
create sympathetic photo-ops for the invading mob, and so their children could
act as anchor babies. It would create chaos, which is exactly the desired
effect.
Most
people don’t realize that the invasion that followed the Battle of Adrianople
brought the Roman Empire to its knees within 30 years… They think that Rome
fell in 476 AD, but that’s actually a meaningless date. It collapsed 60 or 70
years earlier, when the migrants totally washed everything away. Rome was just
a shadow of its old self by the late Third Century. The army was mostly
foreigners. Being a citizen no longer meant much. The government was bankrupt.
The old values were being replaced by a new religion. There’s much more to be
said. I suggest you look at a long article I did on this in December 2013 here.
That
exact same thing could happen in the States. And I don’t doubt that someone’s
planning that already.
Justin: Yeah,
I’ve read a lot about NGOs doing the same thing in Europe. They’re literally
moving Africans by the boatload to Europe, specifically Italy.
Doug: These
people have to be getting assistance. It’s not like they possess outboard
motors, sails, or the skills to cross the Mediterranean. That’s serious
business. So, they’re obviously getting help. But this has been happening for
years.
But who’s behind all this? Where’s the money coming from? We
need to ask ourselves these questions because NGOs are destroying Western
civilization. They’re run by busybodies looking to create chaos. And it’s in
the interests of “charity.” Giving them money makes you a “philanthropist.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Justin: Why
would they want to do that?
Doug: It’s
mostly a question of psychological aberration. Combined with perverse and bent
philosophies. Universities today are filled with Marxist professors who despise
Western civilization. Despite the fact Western civilization has brought us
almost all the good things in life.
It’s
responsible for basically 100% of the world’s great literature, and 100% of the
world’s great music. Free markets. Individualism. Liberty. The concept of human
rights. The rule of law. Philosophy. Science. Technology. Almost all the noble
ideas in the world. There are, to be sure, a few worthwhile things from other
cultures. It’s been said that East minus West equals zero, but that’s going too
far. I’m a fan of yoga, Taoism, and Oriental cuisine.
Why
would anyone want to destroy it? It’s a complete mystery to me. I don’t know
what’s going on in these people’s heads. But I’ve spoken to people who hate
Western civilization, and they’re apparently sincere about what they’re doing.
So,
maybe they’re just stupid. Look, I don’t care what their IQ score may be. These
people are stupid on a very basic level.
Justin: What do you
mean by that?
Doug: Well, we first
need to define the word “stupid.” As I’ve said before, the best definition is
an unwitting tendency to self-destruction; that’s what these people suffer
from. Why? Perhaps they’re really very unhappy with themselves, but don’t have
the courage or enough honest introspection to just put a gun to their heads.
Hmm… maybe that’s another reason they’re universally antigun.
There’s also a difference
between intelligence and wisdom that’s lost on most people. Wisdom is the
ability to calculate not just the immediate and direct consequences of actions.
It doesn’t take much wisdom to make that calculation. The average six-year-old
can do this. It’s not very deep.
But you also must be able
to contemplate the indirect and delayed consequences of your actions. And the
people who run these NGOs seem incapable of that. They have absolutely no
wisdom.
That
makes them stupid in my book. You could also say that they’re evil. But that
word has also been discredited. A lot of religious types like to bandy it about.
Their idea of “evil” is whatever goes against their god.
But
I’ve read the Bible. I’ve read the Quran. And I don’t think what passes for
evil in those religious texts washes, quite frankly. To me, evil is being
purposely destructive. And that’s what a lot of people who join these NGOs are.
Sure,
they pretend to be nice. They act like they’re doing all these wonderful things
but they’re destroying civilization. They just can’t see it because they lack
wisdom.
The
people populating NGOs and governments aren’t necessarily evil—even Mao, Pol
Pot, Hitler, and Stalin felt they were good guys, doing the right thing.
They’re just thoughtless and stupid.
Justin: What about a desire for power
control? It seems like that’s why a lot of people get involved in government
and organizations like NGOs. They believe they’re best suited to shape society.
Doug: You’re absolutely right. And they
take control of society in many ways. They’re much more interested in
controlling other people than they are in controlling physical things, however.
Many of these same people naturally find
their way into government. They enjoy pushing their fellows around. But,
surprisingly to me, anyway, the average person seems to want that. They want a
strong leader. They like hierarchy. They don’t mind being under the control of
other people.
All these socialists,
social democrats, liberals, Democrats—their names are legion—think they’re
doing the right thing. They think they’re being moral. And you can’t convince
them otherwise. Intellectual arguments are useless against these people. It’s a
psychological problem, not an intellectual one.
You can’t make an
intellectual argument to a mob.
Justin: Thank you for
taking the time to speak with me today, Doug.
Doug: You’re welcome.
Editor’s Note: If you can’t
get enough of Doug’s controversial, brutally honest insights, check out his new
book: Totally Incorrect, Volume Two for more.