Support for market economics is rare; immigration from the third world smothers it. By Hunter Ash.
In humanity’s long past, socialism and sharing within the tribe was the norm. We are genetically socialist. Stagnation ruled until the agricultural revolution, which changed everything. With agriculture, natural selection favored societies with private property and the great motivation it provides to be industrious and inventive. We learned that the inequalities produced by private property and markets made us all wealthier and better off, and most of us learned to be relatively relaxed about it. In the last couple of centuries, we even broke through the Malthusian limit (at least for now).
But, like many other human traits, the genetic and cultural predisposition towards private property and market economics is not evenly distributed. It is really only strong among whites (and even then, apparently only half the population). It is patchy or almost non-existent elsewhere. So, what happens when mass immigration is inflicted on white societies, duh?
Many economists have a weird blindness to this: immigrants don’t just come and participate in our system. They also change the system.
All major immigrant groups favor more socialist policies than White Americans. Whatever marginal economic gains citizens enjoy from immigration would be totally dwarfed by the cost of enacting the policies immigrants say they support (on average).
Even when a particular group of first-gen immigrants is very anti-communist, like Cubans or Vietnamese, we see the second gen revert to socialism.
Support for market economies is extremely rare globally. If we lose power here, it’s a catastrophe.
The reason the migrant generation ‘aren’t socialist’ it’s because they experienced it directly … their baseline genetics will always favor it because they aren’t W.E.I.R.D… hence the quick and immediate reversion to baseline.