As a general observation, people are more susceptible to fundamental lies than to those of pedantic trifles. If you broke line in front of a stranger explaining that he doesn’t really exist and if he did his ancestors probably broke in front of someone else, he would bristle without even giving your theory a fair hearing. And yet every minute of the hour various drones, courtesans, and turncoats offer this same advice to whole western societies who collectively nod in grave contemplation. When conveyed with single-lane morality or statistical legerdemain, the effects are nearly uniform: intuition poorly shovels bullshit.
Though in regard to the counterintuitive deployment of statistics, you won’t be surprised to learn the Cato Institute says they unequivocally prove immigrants lower crime rates. That’s heartening news given the asteroid belt of them presently showering us. I personally wondered if mass immigration from the federal supermax prison system would also ameliorate the petty crime rate in Cato Institute offices–but the study doesn’t say. On principle, we’ll assume yes.
But the linked liberaltarian article doesn’t disappoint in reporting on immigration. Surprise conclusion: the more the better! This predestined result was reached by comparing crime rates in American cities of both immigrants and natives. The immigrant violent crime rate appears to be equal or lower wherever sampled. In fact, the more immigrants the lower the crime rate. So that’s really that. If a person decamps from one location to another, crime decreases incrementally at the destination. QED. Ipso facto. Que Sera, Sera. Goodnight and Netanyahu tear down this wall.
But what is a crime rate anyway? It’s not a gross number, but rather a per capita figure. Can anyone imagine how the alchemy of mestizo immigration might reduce this in a way that may be disingenuously reported? The first obvious question is: who are the American urban natives whose crime rates are being diluted by the Mestizo infusion? Let’s take a look.
Does this clarify the whole enterprise? As a city becomes proportionally more brown than black, crime rates fall. This, of course, having nothing whatsoever to do with whether a human being moved from point A to B–other than as a tool of sophistry.
The authors are helpfully indicating that medium-rate mexicans (while not ideal) are less criminally productive than high-rate blacks. Thus–they urge you to extrapolate–low-crime rate white towns could each use a few thousand Hondurans. This is how clever liars do their work. And so imported Guatemalans can lower the high crime rate of New Orleans, while simultaneously doing what to Reykjavik? Surely the same thing–it’s immigration!
Though if an argument were had, Cato can also reasonably point out that in a population of you, me, and Chairman Mao, the addition of Pol Pot would lower the genocide rate. Just as adding Donald Trump to us and Bill Gates would lower our average net worth.
Statistics are amazing. And so is immigration.