Flashback: Charlie Kirk Has Been Shilling for Mass Migration for YEARS

  |  
Mar 11, 2020

A source close to BLP brought attention to Charlie Kirk’s previous book Time for a Turning Point, which he co-authored with Brent Hamachek. The book was released in 2016 and outlines Kirk’s vision for free markets and limited government.

Apart from the generic Boomer conservative talking points about limited government that the book covered, it did approach the topic of immigration. However, Kirk’s vision for immigration did not align with any principle that America First advocates push for.

In fact, a significant portion of his immigration section consists of a plan to install a two-year probationary period which would allow an unspecified number of immigrant workers to live in America with a guaranteed permanent status provided that they commit no crimes. In one paragraph, Kirk gushed over the economic potential that his migration scheme could bring about and talked about how an “invisible hand” would guide immigrants under this hypothetical scheme.

Kirk has previously talked about how America has the “capacity” to bring in more immigrants. In the same Culture War speech, he even said that America should have an unlimited amount of “genius visas” and “merit visas” that could potentially accommodate 30-40 million immigrants that match the supposed skill criteria.

Before embracing any of Kirk’s ideas we have to ask several questions.

What does he have to say about giving citizenship to migrants?

If Kirk is so adamant about “small government”, he should start looking at macrotrends, specifically voting patterns and immigrant voter views on fundamental political questions such as the role of government in society and the right to bear arms. On both issues, Pew Research found Hispanics to be well to the Left of the American populace. Even Hispanic Republicans were to the Left of the average Republicans on key principles of the Historic American Nation. Continuing the mass migration policies of the last 50 years will only guarantee that the U.S. becomes more statist and hostile to basic civil liberties.

Kirk, like a lot of conservatives and economically reductionist right-wingers, views immigration through an exclusively economic lens. He doesn’t take into consideration the cultural and political impact of mass migration. Researchers like Jason Richwine have demonstrated that Third World migration patterns come with negative multigenerational effects on crime, economic performance, and capacity to assimilate. It’s not enough to look at just the first wave of migrants. Their progeny’s performance as both economic and social actors demonstrate many of the second and third orders effects that are capable of undermining the nation. The impact of immigration policy must take into consideration the impact that is seen decades, if not centuries further down the line.

Is skill-based migration all that it’s cracked out to be?

Talking about skilled workers also misses the point. Skill-based migration systems attract an overclass from certain geopolitical rivals such as China, who could easily form Fifth Columns within the U.S. and undermine the country internally through corporate espionage and university infiltration. Immigration is multi-faceted and cannot just be viewed from an economic perspective.

Unfortunately, our short-term oriented society does not value such type of thinking. It looks for quick fixes or boosts to the GDP. The undeniable fact is that immigration has historically come in waves with certain pauses — legislative or natural — taking place in between. With the passage of the radical 1965 Immigration Act and subsequent amnesties, the U.S. is long overdue for an immigration moratorium.

What Kirk put forward is a typical constructive Republican alternative proposal (C.RA.P), which is positioned as a “rational” alternative to otherwise radical leftist proposals. However, such a migration scheme only compounds the problems of mass migration albeit in a unique way.Right now, the only discussion on immigration policy should be centered on efforts to promote zero net migration to the U.S. Any other policy that does not reduce migration only adds to the problem.

Pressure from the Groypers, an upstart America First faction, made Charlie Kirk reverse course from previous comments where he stated he would like to “staple green cards” to diplomas. That said, we cannot expect true immigration reform coming from the likes of Kirk.

After all, this is a person who opposed Trump during the primaries (when Trump was at his most nationalist on immigration policy) according to BLP reports. Now, he’s clearly jumping on the Trump bandwagon and exploiting the Trumpist aspect of the Trump movement to position his organization (TPUSA) as the leading voice of the MAGA movement, while ignoring the America First principle of limiting mass migration that got Trump elected.

Young America First advocates will have to look elsewhere for student leaders who want to actually restrict migration and restore some sanity to America’s immigration system. Kirk’s vision only serves the donor class who love cheap labor. It also perpetuates mass migration diversity tropes that academic institutions, business, and bureaucracies have been promoting during the last few decades.

Our Latest Articles