Are those opposed to globalisationism and mass immigration "bigots," or are those pushing them morally vain, elitist, greedy and nihilistic?

Transatlantic Immigration
(American Conservative Blog) -- by Philip Giraldi --

If you think the heap of abuse being piled on Arizona is unique to America’s ethnically fractured politics, you should take a look at England. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who is running for reelection, encountered yesterday a 66 year old woman who asked him why so many immigrants from Eastern Europe were receiving government benefits when so many Brits experiencing difficulties were unable to receive any assistance at all. She also asked why there were so many foreigners attending British universities, making it difficult for children like her own grandchildren to attend.

I don’t know the extent to which EU residents can claim British benefits when unemployed, but certainly the woman’s first question was a reasonable one, without any racial overtones about immigrants, and the comment about foreigners at taxpayer supported universities would also seem to be within the realm of polite discourse. Brown apparently did not agree. Not knowing that his microphone was still on, he muttered about how the woman was a “bigot” as he returned to his car.

For me the problem is one of government accountability. No one in government has ever asked the British people whether they want large scale immigration any more than anyone in Washington has ever posed that question to Americans about our 8 to 22 million illegals. Every major political party in both countries reflects the elite consensus view that immigration and “diversity” are good. Opinion polls reveal, however, that the elite view is far from popular, with up to 80% of the indigenous population in both countries opposed to large numbers of immigrants. For the average Brit as for the average American there is, unfortunately, no recourse. If you vote for one of the candidates who is actually likely to win in an election his position on immigration will likely be identical to that of his opponent.

In the essentially two party system prevailing in Britain and America, even when you vote the bum out you are just as likely to get another bum. If you voted for a Democrat or a Republican (or Conservative or Labour) in 2002 you still got a war with Iraq in the following year just as everyone’s vote will be irrelevant if America’s elites decide to go to war with Iran and the British poodle goes along for the ride...LINK
-------------------------

Related:

Labour let in migrants ‘to engineer multicultural UK’
By Daily Mail/ 24th October 2009

Huge increases in immigration over the past decade were a deliberate attempt to engineer a more multicultural Britain, a former Government adviser said yesterday. Andrew Neather, a speechwriter who worked in Downing Street for Tony Blair and in the Home Office for Jack Straw and David Blunkett, said Labour’s relaxation of controls was a plan to ‘open up the UK to mass migration’. As well as bringing in hundreds of thousands to plug labour market gaps, there was also a ‘driving political purpose’ behind immigration policy, he claimed. Ministers hoped to change the country radically and ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity’. But Mr Neather said senior Labour figures were reluctant to discuss the policy, fearing it would alienate its ‘core working-class vote’...MORE...LINK
-------------------------

Chris Moore comments:

What’s going on in this country is essentially the same thing as in Britain: Western-hating, Marxist-indoctrinated yet shallow, money-worshipping and materialistic “elites” who see themselves as the vanguard of internationalism looking to drive down wages by flooding the country with cheap immigrant labor, looking to gain political power by assembling the various immigrant ethnic blocks into a left-statist coalition, and looking to wipe out the vestiges of “bigoted” Western Civilization as quickly as possible.

Of course, all this is being helped along by globalizationist Corporatism.

“Bigots” is just one of those fashionable terms employed by self-righteous, overly materialistic elitists living in gated communities to justify their nihilistic vanity and greed.

Fran Rossi comments: "@ Chris Moore, you do realize that both conservatives and liberals employ the cheap, immigrant labor to which you refer in your comment. Conservatives just prefer to demonize them instead of their employers, hence their flocking to the Left. Immigration is no more an anti-West, Marxist plot (you make me laugh) than is off shore oil drilling."

Yes, I know Corporatist conservatives and Statist liberals both seek to exploit immigrants for their own ambition, vanity and greed. Did you not read my post?

And if you don’t believe there is a political goal behind mass immigration, you must not have read the blurb I posted and linked to on how Labour “Ministers hoped to change the country radically and ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity’” via mass immigration, and to “plug labor market gaps” (Read: drive down the price of labor.)

Don’t you find it ironic that a party that advertises itself as advocating on behalf of “Labour” seeks to drive DOWN the price of labor via mass immigration?

These globalization-pimping “elites” are all hustlers, swindlers and cads.