Meet the New Semites, Same as the Old Semites

Long before the rise of Islam, the Middle East was a very different place. Not only were some Middle Easterners of the time, such as Levantines, more closely related to Europeans genetically, but the area as a whole was more diverse both religiously and culturally. This diversity, which was almost been entirely eliminated by the ravaging waves of Islamic Arab armies, proved a challenge for the empires of old, such as the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911-609 BC, centered in modern-day Iraq), that wanted to dominate the region. How could the empire subjugate and impose its will on conquered territory without fomenting a rebellion in these diverse and hostile lands?

Conquered people generally didn't enjoy being lorded over by foreign regimes who worshiped bizarre gods, spoke a strange language, and held divergent beliefs on morality and culture. Because of this inborn hostility to alien cultures, a prominent trait in the Middle East that has managed to persist even to this day, most tribes and lands would naturally rebel if given the chance.

So what was the Neo-Assyrian Empire's response? The simple solution was to pacify and disarm subjects via mass immigration. The Assyrians would erase the conquered people's identity and replace it with a new one, thus making them susceptible to both political and economic domination by the Assyrian elite.

The first step was to replace the religion of a conquered area. Instead of the local gods of that land or tribe running things, the Assyrians would usurp them claiming that the King of Assyria ruled over both the conquered territory as well as the conquered peoples' gods. The Assyrian King became the de facto "leader" of every religion that his empire had control over. This not only dissolved the legitimacy of the local religious leaders, it imposed a new sense of hierarchy on the local populace. Because religion was the sole source of morality in those days people then had to accept not only a new leader, but they had to accept a new morality and culture as well. In turn, this led to them being culturally assimilated by the Neo-Assyrian Empire through a process known as "Assyrianization."

As client kingdoms were turned into provinces, peoples and deities were no longer tied to a particular place but now belonged to the empire. In breaking the traditional nexus of people, place, and gods (divine rule), the Assyrian elite dissolved the basis for existing national and ethnic identities and ascribed to the subjugated peoples a new identity. Deportation was a mechanism for breaking old and constructing new identities, since peoples from various locations were mixed in new settlements. Thus deportation achieved two complementary goals for the central administrations: it dissolved national and ethnic identities, and it legitimized the movement of labor within Assyria to locations where it could be economically exploited.

"Dissolving national identities"? "Mixing people in new settlements"? Exploiting cheap labor? Does any of this sound familiar to you? If not, it should. The exact tactics of the Assyrian elite almost 3000 years ago are being used by the Western globalist elite right now. Although in the past mass immigration or "deportations" were used for things like work projects, today it is used mainly to keep down wages.

You can see here the fruits of the 1965 Immigration Act in the US slowly taking their effect on wages over time.

Immigration—along with its concomitant strategy for decreasing wages, outsourcing—is a key factor in allowing the elite to perpetuate their destructive war on the middle class. Since this is such a destructive economic practice it wouldn't seem to be hypothetically easy to enact.
After all, wouldn't the middle class see what is happening and fight back for their own economic interests? Wouldn't they want to keep up their own wages? Again, the Neo-Assyrian Empire had a very simple solution to this:

...once a territory was incorporated into the provincial system, the Assyrian claim was that the territory and people now belonged to the Assyrian Empire. This then became the ideological justification for the deportations, since the subjugated peoples were informed that they were now, after a fashion at least, "Assyrians" and that they now lived in "Assyria" so they could legitimately be moved anywhere within that realm without ever leaving "their" territory and even take their gods with them.

As you can see, people's identities began to shift. No longer did they see themselves as a unique people; rather they became generic "Assyrians," except with none of the rights or privileges of actual Assyrian citizens. They became nameless faceless tools of the elite, but with no ethnic identity of their own and therefore no ability to unite and act in their own self-interest as a group. In essence, subjects of the Assyrian Empire were ethnically castrated. Again to quote:

There was an economic spin-off from this. As new agricultural lands, including some in quite marginal areas in northern Mesopotamia (successful crops two in five years), were opened up much of the labor that could be best utilized on projects (usually agricultural projects, although there is evidence for building projects such as royal cities) that served imperial needs. This concern with the efficient use of labor was sometimes couched in terms of political expediency: people had to be moved from their homeland to quell rebellion. However, these people were usually those deemed to be less economically productive and so were put to use in fertile agricultural areas (for example, urbanites who had been using the local surplus; Arameans, Chaldeans, and other pastoral nomads who were not sedentary agriculturalists and who were settled to become such). Their status was not the same as that of "ethnic" Assyrians, however. The legal status of these deportees was not "slave" but "dependent labor" since they were tied to a particular estate.

The Neo-Assyrians could thus economically dominate and exploit workers of conquered territory by "changing their identity" into one more suitable for the ruling Assyrian elite. In the West today, this "new identity" that most benefits our elite could be the globalist-endorsed label "citizen of world", within the ideology of secular humanism where all humans are allegedly "one big happy family." This is even seen in how terms of nationality are used: anyone who becomes an American citizen is called "American"; anyone with French citizenship is called a "Frenchman." The very language with which Whites refer to themselves as distinct groups is being distorted and used against them.

This ideology, conveniently for the Western elites, posits that all religious, genetic, ideological, and national divisions are bunk and that you can replace any group of people with another. This, again, conveniently means that you can import millions of low-wage workers into good First World countries without a single negative consequence. These "citizens of the world" believe there are no ethnic groups, at least not for Whites, and as a result feel no threat whatsoever from being ethnically replaced and flooded by people who just so happen to be willing to work for pennies on the dollar compared to the people they are replacing. Not only, then, are Whites being destroyed economically and socially, but they don't even have an ethnicity to advocate for. Essentially Whites, in this view, simply don't exist. But not only are Whites getting beaten down—everyone is getting beaten down.

As you can now see, mass immigration is an economic tool used by empires to pacify territory and exploit labor. Locals are convinced to adopt a "new national identity"
that makes them more docile and willing to serve a new system. In Assyria this new identity was "Assyrian" but with the caveat that they weren't on the same level as actual Assyrians. Today immigrants from the Third World are welcomed into the West and called "Westerners" and "consumers" but with the caveat that they are there to be paid low wages. Nothing illustrates this better than the H1-B program in the United states,
where foreigners are let into the country where companies pay them a fraction of what a native worker makes. The best part for the company is that under the H1-B program, if the new foreign employee ever asks for a raise, he can be fired and replaced quickly. Billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg fawn over this practice and endlessly call for even more H1-B visas every year.

Immigrants in the Neo-Assyrian Empire may have been brought in in order to work and build things, but in the West today immigrants are invited mainly to serve two purposes for the Western elite. First, as stated above, they undermine wages wherever they go; a higher supply of labor, all things being equal, will always diminish wages as a natural economic law. Secondly, more immigrants means more demand in an economy. This higher demand means that immigration inevitably drives up prices. From a clear perspective, immigration can in this context be seen as a crushing two-pronged attack by the Western elite on the middle class. Not only are wages undercut by immigrants, but prices are driven up enormously, making living and working in the West a near-impossible task unless you're part of the 1%. Not only are jobs low-paying, but the price of goods is ever increasing. This means big profits for large corporations and CEOs that have already "made it" and are entrenched in the economy, usually with plenty of government aid, but anyone trying to start from the bottom and progress in society will have a much harder time of it today than, say, when the Boomers were growing up in the '50s and '60s before mass immigration.

Another convenient economic effect is that immigrants, due to their lack of economic knowledge, are prime targets for bank loansharking. Not only are they easy to con with payday loan scams, it was in fact immigrants, largely Hispanic immigrants, that fueled the sub prime housing bubble. Loose lending standards and mass immigration are great for banks because immigrants are such easy marks to give bad loans to. And in the inevitable event the immigrants fail to pay back their subprime mortgages, and the banks are stuck with debt, the government will just bail the banks out anyway. The loser in this case is not the bank or the immigrant, but the American citizen who must deal with these skyrocketing home values caused by loose bank lending and immigration.

Note the almost exponential rise in housing prices since the Immigration Act of 1965.

Unsurprisingly, since the rise of mass immigration in the West in the '70s, the middle class has been decimated. Fittingly though, it's the banking and financial sector that has flourished. While manufacturing has been suffering a long, protracted death, mainly due to immigration and outsourcing, banks, thanks to the importation of millions of new customers every year, are seeing outstanding profits. The equation is as follows: more people means higher prices; higher prices means more debt; more debt means more interest payments to banks and record profits for Wall Street.

The parasitic FIRE Finance, Insurance, Real Estate sector gobbles up the productive manufacturing sector.

The result is an economy not based on production, but instead based on usury. This destruction of the manufacturing sector has predictably led to the destruction and demoralization of White middle-class society itself, as described by Charles Murray in his book Coming Apart.

Today White death rates are accelerating at a frightening speed, as working and family formation are replaced with recreational drug use and debauchery.

Another key aspect of the Neo-Assyrian Empire was that the elite had their own special brand of nationalism or "identity" that only they were allowed to be a part of. The rest of the people in their empire were second-class citizens at best.

This is not a cohesive ideology that spreads vertically through all classes of the "nation," since Assyria was too hierarchical a society, unlike the Greeks, whose nationalism "was dependent on rough equality and a measure of political democracy." It was only the Assyrian upper class- nobility, landowners,merchants, official-that, together with the army conceived of themselves as belonging to the same nation.

[. . .]

The Assyrian ruling elite looked on subjugated peoples and territories differently from the way they looked on Assyria and "ethnic Assyrians...This ideology was diffused throughout the empire, at least at the level of elites.

As you can see, while the Assyrians absorbed conquered peoples into their empire and called them "Assyrians", in reality these conquered peoples were still a lower class and treated as such. There was no equality. Even though these people had their entire ethnic identity erased so they could become "Assyrian" they were still of a lower status in Assyria and treated as such. This same principle is working out today with our own elites who erase all national identity while still keeping everything as hierarchical as possible with an exclusive "ingroup" cut off from the "non-elite".

In other words, the West has replaced European-style egalitarian nationalism with a Semitic "nationalism" where only the elite are part of a privileged ingroup while the non-elite are considered to be divided, disposable, foreign, low-class human cattle that exist only to be economically exploited. This, then, is the aim of immigration today as it was in the past. Not only will the Western elite destroy the ethnic character of the nations of Europe, but they will turn the populace into disunited "citizens of the world" with no identity beyond that of a "consumer" that exists to benefit the international financial system, while ensuring no "nationalist" uprising, that might improve the quality of life of the middle class, could ever take place.