Immigration Foes Morons

tea partyRudimentary evidence has supported the premise that most immigration foes are mostly selfish morons, incapable of following simple logic, amoral  at best and primarily interested in keeping everything for themselves and not sharing. As the immigration difficulties in the US have escalated, research into the problem has revealed most foes of balanced, humane measures are simple minded creatures who fail to take in basic concepts and understand historical precedents and are, by and large, a white, racist group at their core. UCSD Professor Claude Farfel has investigated several of the recent incidents involving both organized resistance to current immigration policies as well as the separate actions of individuals involved and says, “Most members are white, less intelligent and prone to believe that their way of life is crumbling when, in fact, they live in a time of unprecedented prosperity.” Farfel, speaking in regards to the current incident taking place in Murrieta, CA where groups of protesters are interrupting the transfer of suspected illegal aliens to processing centers noted, ” Watch the news videos and pay attention to who the protesters are, their race, age and actions. They are of European descent, mostly older and their actions are like those of a lynch mob.”

Farfel went on to explain that his research concluded that the intellectual abilities of these groups are below average after enlisting several of his graduate students in an internet experiment that looked into the websites and chat rooms where the opponents hung out. “We acted as sympathizers but slipped in simple questions like, ‘ If you were starving, what would you do to survive?’ and ‘If you were the biggest chimp in the cage would you hoard all the bananas or share some with the other chimps?’ “. Farfel’s students also made comments regarding the historic policies of many European countries forbidding the emigration of their citizens, the world wide difficulties many countries face as the population explodes, the teachings of several major religions advocating fellowship and assistance of the less fortunate and how laws, borders and morality has changed as time and circumstances have shifted. He found that, “For the most part, logical arguments fell on deaf ears.” he said, “The people involved mostly stuck to the same drumbeat of building walls and keeping people out even though most of them would say they would do whatever they could to keep their own families from suffering, or would offer aid to a stranger in need. It may not seem logical but the people we spoke with didn’t feel it was hypocrisy,  they just couldn’t see the connection.”

Farfel is the head of Global Socio-Economic studies at UCSD and also the Director of a think tank called to the EveryStep Foundation that encourages policy changes that lead to equitable treatment of people worldwide.

Leave a Reply