“The fact is, we need people,” wrote Russell Wangersky in his column for Aug. 24 decrying “anti-immigration rhetoric.”
“Go to many restaurants and fast-food outlets,” wrote Mr. Wangersky, “and you find whole crews of temporary foreign workers doing jobs we can’t fill otherwise.”
That latter might be almost the whole problem: Newfoundland’s economy wasn’t first built by owners of restaurants and fast-food outlets but by primary producers who deemed their way of life worth bringing children of their own into to continue it. The best thing we can say about an economy of restaurants and fast-food outlets is that it also supports jobs for reporters and columnists: men and women who apply their minds to far more important thoughts than those of earning money, when they have anything topical worth writing about, though their output rarely rises to the level of genuine poetry such as that to which an economy of primary producers often gives rise.
While people don’t deem their way of life worth having children for, they will have nothing to offer any immigrants who don’t have even less than that.
It might be that our ancestors’ adherence to the Christian religion was what made their way of life worth their living it, and perhaps devotion to Islam might render our current economic system tolerable for Muslim immigrants while they wait to implement Islamic law and forbid the usury which largely supports our current system.
Our businessmen-employers perhaps don’t so much care about that as about maintaining an “optimum level” of employees and customers in a large number of small families constituting a greater population than an economy of self-supporting primary producers would need to be properly “sustainable.”
I fear that telling most people where to go to work for them is what our bosses really mean by “controlling our population.”
Most businessmen are generally only organizers of producers rather than productive on their own account, and the productive ought to hire their own organizers when they really need these.
The real question, of course, may be whether a country’s inhabitants are making such use of her land as to deserve to live upon it and whether prospective immigrants are similarly devoted to that way of life and are willing to forgo entry, or to join in forbidding further entry to others, so as not to mar that pattern of citizens’ deserving from a country what is good for them.
Port au Port