The primordial beginning of "Great Reset" authoritarianism was the international elite deciding, decades ago, that citizens of advanced nations have no right to control their own borders or enforce requirements for permanent residence.
No one is allowed to question this "consensus" or vote against it. No matter how loudly the people of any given country demand border security, no matter how hard they vote for it, their will is consistently subverted. If that's not authoritarianism, then nothing is.
The open borders "consensus" of the elite is not open for discussion. The desires of the proletariat are irrelevant. The Little People are subjected to limitless crime and expected to shoulder endless costs for mass migration without complaint, lest they be called xenophobes.
Open borders was among the first issues to be "elevated" beyond the reach of democracy. You simply are not allowed to vote against the sacred Consensus. If you manage to vote in legislators who take the border seriously, they are corrupted or subverted by the permanent State.
Organizing against mass migration is extremely difficult, because no good-faith disagreement with The Consensus is permitted. If you don't like endless waves of illegal aliens, or you object to paying the costs, you're a xenophobe and your political organizations are hate groups.
Meanwhile, the open borders Consensus has vast resources, titanic sums of political money, unlimited freedom to organize. In this way, the husk of "democracy" is propped up as an illusion, but if only one side can organize or expect the State to respond to its votes, it's a sham.
A good deal of political correctness or "woke" totalitarianism is about preventing dissenters from organizing. The hard Left understands the power of creating permanent political organizations with huge financial resources, symbiotic with the mega-State they champion.
You might have some (increasingly limited) ability to express contrary opinions on social media or among friends, but if you cannot organize to effect change by voting for representation and lobbying the administrative State, you have no power.
And in the case of open borders extremism, the elite Consensus supported by well-funded and powerful lobbying groups is a direct assault on the electorate, a nakedly obvious effort to engineer the electorate, making it even harder for anyone to organize against the ruling Party.
The first step was to erase good-faith disagreement with the Consensus by painting dissenters as unthinking racist brutes, and make it all but impossible for dissenters to organize. If dissenters won elections anyway, their votes were nullified by administrative fiat.
How can anyone fail to see this as authoritarianism? Because it uses idealized caricatures of migrants as political props? Is it really that easy to disable all of the safeguards that protect representative democracy and national identity, which are inextricably linked?
Maybe that's the first thing we were tricked into forgetting: no national identity and no borders means no nation, and no nation means no restraints on elite power, no sense of duty to their citizens interfering with the ambitions of politicians.
The increase in elite political arrogance since the beginning of the open borders Consensus is palpable. Their lust for power and money grew exponentially, as did their disregard for large swathes of the electorate, who could be looted for funding but ignored as "deplorables."
Is there a single politician on the Left today, in any Western country, who would agree with the proposition that they have more responsibilities to legal citizens of their own countries than to migrants or international organizations? They would all sneer at that notion.
Years of this snowballing arrogance invariably affects the opposition, which is desperate for representation and organization. It's Martha's Vineyard times 100,000 every day in border states, but unlike blue-enclave elites, they're not allowed to complain or take action.
There are more elite Consensuses coming our way - more issues where democracy must supposedly be suspended or subverted, where dissent is silenced and effective political organization is not allowed, where elections become puppet shows. Open borders was a successful test run.
Never surrender the legitimacy of dissent. Never allow the political class to rewrite the rules of debate, political organization, fund-raising, and bureaucracy to make effective opposition to their agenda illegal. Freedom is transitory without the bedrock of nationhood. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
