UN Supreme Soviet set to mix nations in the name of a better world

The United Nations has launched a migration report under the title: Making Migration Work for All.¹⁾ During a session, UN Secretary General António Guterres delivered a speech, followed by an accolade from Louise Arbour, Special Representative of the Secretary General for International Migration. The other participants chipped in with their submissive praises. The whole UN agenda has also been released under the title of Making Migration Work for All.²⁾

In his speech the Secretary General said among others (emphasis added):

Let me emphasize: migration is a positive global phenomenon. It powers economic growth, reduces inequalities, connects diverse societies and helps us ride the demographic waves of population growth and decline. (…) Authorities that erect major obstacles to migration — or place severe restrictions on migrants’ work opportunities — inflict needless economic self-harm, as they impose barriers to having their labour needs met in an orderly and legal fashion. Worse still, they unintentionally encourage illegal migration. Aspiring migrants, denied legal pathways to travel, inevitably fall back on irregular methods. (…) The best way to end the stigma of illegality is (…) for Governments to put in place more legal pathways for migration.

The comment posted below is a dissenting voice of an East European.

There are powers that have planned for us our future, our bright future, with global happiness, world peace and brotherhood of men (oops! and women of course, and those who do not identify as either). The designers of our future feel way above us, the commoners, and they know what is best for us. They live in respectable neighbourhoods, look groomed, smart and elegant, they have graduated from renowned universities and are having the time of their lives. They might be the envy of each of us, the commoners.

Just take a closer look at them. A distinguished representative of Turkey or Ireland or whatever other country boards a plane and flies business class to various destinations around the world where he or she is or they (the singular they) are received with full honours, accommodated in luxurious hotels, entertained at parties and invited to UN sessions to read from a piece of paper a ghostwritten text for approximately three or ten minutes, full of devotional sighs and devout ejaculations. They raise their minds to whatever gods there be and recite on and on a litany of platitudes by means of which they address challenges, fight for human rights, are concerned with dignity of human beings, indulge in joint or shared responsibility, look forward to new approaches, design sustainable development, generally make valuable contributions or take active part (or, depending on the scripted version) participate actively in providing better opportunities for all and each one irrespective of (yes, you guessed it right!) gender, race, nationality and religion, they set their sights on countering xenophobia and racism and derogatory or exclusive language, and so on, and so forth. Angels incarnate.

I know such rhetoric from experience. I listened to or read the speeches delivered by the comrades of communist slash socialist slash workers’ parties in Eastern Europe. They, too, fought for world peace and progress and internationalism and they, too, – mind you! – were merely advocates of the inevitability of the allegedly irreversible historical and global processes. I remember it very well: at that time, too, there really was no alternative. You had to conform (or at least keep your mouth shut) or else you landed up on the trash heap of history. If you were lucky, that is. If you had decided to resist, then the goodness of the do-gooders would have steamrolled you thin and flat. You were the enemy of the people.

I’m getting a strong sense of déjà vu. The powers that be acting through the United Nations or the European Union leave no alternative. You either conform or you’ll be branded a nationalist, a far-rightist, a racist and these are derogatory terms in their mouths. You are not allowed to say no to migration: you are only allowed to discuss how to manage it. Even the use of language in reference to migrants is prescribed. Certain words are out, others are in. You must accept the changes wholeheartedly. Resistance will be punished. And you’d better obey those who know better. And make sure you toe the party line. Well, you will have to live in the new reality, but they…

They are the lucky ones. Once in the club of gurus and saviours of humanity, they fly first or business class, they visit now Ankara, now Lisbon (now Dublin, now Marseilles), they stay at top-notch hotels, try out different cuisines (the favourite activity of the intelligentsia worldwide) and then they attend a session where their only task is to read out loud a prepared text and clap hands in approval of foregone pro-migration conclusions, resolutions and declarations. They are the lucky ones. They really are because, apart from pleasing themselves to the full, imparting an aura of importance and receiving a handsome remuneration, they have the unique privilege of living off the fat of the land for the possibly noblest purpose there is: the happiness of humankind!

Such are the people engaged in the worldwide program concocted to mingle races and nations, creeds and customs. Such are the lucky front-men and front-women pre-selected by the powers that be, who have been entrusted with task of transforming the world. Such are Rousseau’s, Diderot’s and Voltaire’s apprentices; such are Marx’s, Trotsky’s, Popper’s disciples; such are the students of the Frankfurt School, of Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi’s books, advocates of globalism.

What do they want to bless us with? They want to bless us with safe, orderly and regular migration. Why do they want to bless us with safe, orderly and regular migration? Because it is, as they assure us, inevitable and beneficial. Who is it beneficial to? It is beneficial to the receiving countries, to the sending countries and to migrants themselves. To all. How do they want to go about this inevitable and beneficial worldwide migration? By making states sign a global compact on migration, meaning governments will recognize human mobility as natural and will therefore manage migration which means that they will facilitate it rather than stop it. Why should governments sign this global compact on migration? Simply because migration is a panacea for human ills, such as inequality of income, population explosion or aging, economic underdevelopment and violation of human and gender (yes, you heard it right!) rights.

To put it bluntly, their plan is to do away with nations, creeds and races. Then, as they believe, we will have world peace and sustained (one of their most favourite words) development. Is this their genuine plan or rather sweet attractive declarations. What are they up to? What’s behind the scenes? It’s like in a theatre. The man in charge of the drama that is being played sheds light on certain section of the stage, leaving the rest in darkness. The audience focuses its attention where the spotlight is. Obviously. Meanwhile the theatre crew are busy changing the props in the recesses of darkness. The incredulous viewer is in for a big surprise.

They say migration is the benefit to us all. Why then must people be convinced of the beneficiality of the benefit? Hey, cars, computers and mobiles spread like wild fire and nobody wastes his (oops! their) time convincing people of various backgrounds, living under various latitudes of their usefulness. Haven’t you noticed? If migrants were such a treasure, governments would vie for them, nay, they would hunt for them across continents so that international pro-migrant bodies would be forced to impose maximum rather than minimum migrant quotas on particular countries. Don’t you think, you distinguished representatives?

So they want to bless us with migration and sustained (I really love to repeat this word, it’s sort of sticky, infectious, contagious) development (and equality, and human rights and all the rest of the well known litany of ejaculations).

There is but one small snag. What if there are some, like myself, who do not wish to have any part of this future world? What if I don’t care about the sustained development and all the benefits that migrations supposedly will provide me with? What if I’d so much rather live in a state that is homogeneous in terms of race, nation and creed? What if there are millions of like-minded people (and you may rest assured, there are millions)? What will you do with us, to us, about us? Will you have us psychologically brainwashed? Will you have a psychiatrist treat us with hormones?³⁾ Will you make life harder for us, thwarting our careers? Will you publicly single us out as fair game? Will you ridicule us, fine us, throw into dungeons or… ? Yes, I know you are against the death penalty, but then when push comes to shove…? We all know the fate of those who did not appreciate the blessings of the French, of the Bolshevik, of the many other revolutions worldwide and throughout history.

You know what, you, distinguished or special representatives, you, excellencies (by the way why do you use all those aristocratic forms of address, you champions of equality?)? You know what? I have a right, a human right if you wish, to want to, to prefer to, to desire to live among my own kith and kin, and reject your agenda. Are you going to deny me this right?

************

Original article

ER recommends other articles by Gefira