How the Left Abandoned the Environment: Immigration

America is More Than Full

“CARRYING CAPACITY” refers to the number of people a region can sustainably support without degrading the environment. As most liberals will admit, Americans use way too many resources for their share of the earth’s land. In fact, the U.S. has the largest ecological footprint in the world. 

The carrying capacity for the U.S. is 200 million — with the current population at 319 million. By 2050, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates the nation’s population will be 439 million — more than double its carrying capacity. Yet the Left won’t give up its sophistic arguments for increasing the U.S. population. 

The U.S. takes in roughly 1 million immigrants a year. The top countries of origin for immigrants are Mexico, India, China, the Philippines, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Vietnam, South Korea, El Salvador, and Iraq, based on 2013-2014 data — all countries with much lower resource use than the U.S. And these immigration numbers don’t even include asylum seekers, refugees, and illegal aliens. Another important aspect to consider is that these populations have many more children than the average native-born American, which further increases the country’s population track. 

The Left admits that these immigrants move to the U.S. to improve their standard of living. But try engaging any of them in a conversation about immigration’s negative impact on the environment, and you’ll be met with cries of “racism” and accusations that the White man is just trying to keep all of his inventions for himself. Isn’t it strange how they’ll say that Westerners need to have fewer children to help the environment, but think it’s racist to want fewer immigrants, especially those from populations with high birth rates?

According to one paper, an immigrant from Vietnam to America will increase his energy consumption 9,249 percent. An immigrant from India will increase his CFC production 11,025 percent. An immigrant from the Philippines will increase his car usage 7,700 percent; from India, 32,350 percent. 

Yet there is no slowing down. Although immigration generated just over half of U.S. population growth in the last 50 years, immigration will be responsible for 75 percent of U.S. population growth in the next 50 years.

All this means that “past gains in efficiency and protection have been largely canceled out by population growth,” according to the September 2016 report “U.S. Immigration and the Environment” by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

Former Wisconsin Governor Gaylord Nelson, founder of Earth Day, said “it’s phony to say ‘I’m for the environment but not for limiting immigration.’” Dave Foreman, co-founder of Earth First! said, “Those environmentalists who think we can double or triple U.S. population without wiping out wildlife and scalping our last wildernesses, are living in a fool’s paradise.” Bringing in more non-Westerners — who dramatically increase their consumption when they arrive in America — hurts the environment. If the Left really cared about the environment rather than just virtue-signaling, they’d be pushing for more people to return to third-world levels of consumption, not the other way around. 

Immigration: More Americans = Disaster for the Environment

The most notable Leftist group that sold out environmentalism for corporate money is the Sierra Club. Founded in 1892 by preservationist John Muir, it’s become one of the most powerful environmental lobbies.

“It is obvious,” the Sierra Club said in 1980, “that the numbers of immigrants the United States accepts affects our population size and growth rate,” even more than “the number of children per family.” At the time, and through most of the 1990s, the Sierra Club supported limiting immigration to the U.S. The logic is sound: Americans purchase and discard immense amounts of goods, eat vast quantities of pollution-causing meat, use carbon monoxide-emitting cars and planes, produce tons of trash, build houses requiring loads of resources, and Americans use more water than people in any other country.

Then the Sierra Club received a $100 million donation from Jewish hedge fund billionaire David Gelbaum who told the Los Angeles Times, “if they ever came out anti-immigration, they would never get a dollar from me.”

The Sierra Club never said another word against immigration. As Ann Coulter noted in Adios, America, they instead mounted a campaign to label board members still against immigration as racist and White supremacists. The SPLC’s Morris Dees even got involved. By 2012, Coulter said, “Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune announced that the Club officially supported mass immigration — amnesty, no borders, more legal immigration, the whole nine yards.” It’s obvious the Sierra Club sold out for money. Today’s totalitarian Left now insists that liberals agree with every one of their platform issues, especially being pro-immigration. The corruption has even filtered down to the fake environmentalist Green Party.

* * * 

Source: based on an article at Aristocrats of the Soul

Previous post

White Female Torn From Vehicle, Stomped in Street by BLM During Riot in York, Pennsylvania

Next post

The Lawmaker Provoked Them

Notify of
Inline Feedback
View all comments
24 June, 2020 12:06 am

It is a war, what the left (Jew-enemy) thinks, does not matter, you are not going to change it.

James Clayton
James Clayton
24 June, 2020 7:48 am

Taxes, mortgage-usury, and insurance extorted by those who are worried that “unfunded liabilities” (their retirement income) isn’t going to he there.

Perpetual Growth: The Next Dragon Facing Biology Teachers (1994)

Myth of Perpetual Growth is killing America
Published: June 12, 2012 at 12:03 a.m. ET
Paul B. Farrell
Commentary: Everything you know about economics is wrong
SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. (MarketWatch) — Yes, everything you know about economics is wrong. Dead wrong. Everything…

24 June, 2020 8:19 am

The entire world is WAY past carrying capacity, 8-9 billion naked apes are at least 7-8 billion too many.
I remember when Green parties first popped up in the mid-1970s and actually stood for ‘green’ issues – clean water, healthy food, sustainable agriculture, less pollution, etc.
Like many other similar groups, they were very quickly infiltrated and corrupted and are now nothing more than 5th columns for the anti-White enemy pushing the Kalergi Plan for a worldwide favela.

Arvin N. Prebost
Arvin N. Prebost
24 June, 2020 9:29 am

The guiding principle of the Left and Jews is simply to destroy and degrade European civilization. Everything else is window decorations. They will turn on a dime to do this.

24 June, 2020 9:38 am

The apostle of growth at any cost is economist (((Julian Simon))). He wrote that more people are a resource and that Malthus was proved wrong during the 19th and 20th centuries. I have tried to point out to his conservative/libertarian followers that the period when Malthus was proven wrong is when high IQ Europeans dominated the planet and created the technologies to feed more people and developed the energy sources to power this technology. Now, Europeans are a diminishing part of a global population now dominated by low IQ populations. Even among Europeans, IQ seems to be in decline. It also helped that the agricultural lands of Australia and the western hemisphere were exploited.

They never respond.

24 June, 2020 11:46 am

So many women in my age group were propagandized about the “population explosion”. We were encouraged to have very few children, even better no children. We needed to think about the planet. Well, years later we find out that the population explosion was only a problem in black and brown countries. White countries actually had a declining birthrate. What did we get for our efforts to limit family size? Nearly unlimited immigration from black and brown countries into the U.S.! And the environment has suffered because of it. If I had known then, what I know now, I would’ve had ten kids.

Reply to  Karen
24 June, 2020 2:25 pm

The same ones that told us that economic growth was bad for the planet now tell us that without immigrants, the economy will stall and retirement system will become insolvent.

James Clayton
James Clayton
Reply to  Karen
26 June, 2020 11:37 am

(((Paul Ehrlich))) trained as an entomologist and therefore a population biologist as are microbiologists such as my friend and neighbor Garrett Hardin. Ehrlich also is co-author of The Birder’s Handbook. I read his The Population Bomb in 1968 and had his and his wife Ann’s textbook, Population, Resources, and Environment in an undergraduate field biology class. Ehrlich remains hamstrung by his own genetics. -JEC Mar 20, 2020 Paul R. Ehrlich: A pandemic, planetary reckoning, and a path forward The COVID-19 pandemic is bringing environmental destruction and the deterioration of social and cultural systems into sharp focus. But we can learn from this. .. . This seems wildly optimistic in a world that has not even recognized its problems of overpopulation and overconsumption or the impacts on health and well-being… Read more »

25 June, 2020 8:34 pm

In every place I’ve lived, I’ve seen the impact of mass immigration. In Europe — kebab stands replace pubs and cafes. It’s mostly Muslim women pushing prams. In California — good luck finding a housekeeper, gardener, or dog sitter that speaks passable English. Now in Florida, where I currently live — tiny beige boxes called houses sell for $400k (if you don’t want to be in the ghetto), schools are 67% Spanish speaking students, and service/labor jobs are going to Hispanics. Our hospital emergency rooms are overrun with uninsured illegals, our car insurance is 2x what it should be because 40% of our drivers are uninsured. I walk into Bank of America and I’m greeted with ‘hola’…. I’m Austrian for God’s sake, and not just a little, my father still… Read more »