Ceuta is a tiny Spanish enclave on the Moroccan coast. And recently, a real drama has unfolded there. An interview with a local resident, who went out to protest against the dominance of illegals, went viral online. She described an interesting dynamic: once the guys who sailed in from Morocco realized that the Spanish state had no intention of handing out legalization and documents on a silver platter, the vast majority left the city. It would seem that bureaucracy won? Far from it.
The most sane people left. Those who wanted to work honestly, did not want problems with the law, and were looking for a normal life. But who stayed? Aggressive psychopaths, thugs, and degenerates, of course. They don’t care about legal status, the police, or the laws. In the end, normal people left, and concentrated crime settled on the streets. Now, Spanish women are simply afraid to leave their homes after sunset.
It turned out to be a classic, crystal-clear example of the law of negative selection. But let’s step back a little to understand how Spain even reached this state of affairs.
The Spanish authorities have been complaining for years about the demographic pit, about the fact that there is no one to earn pensions. And that means mass legalization of hundreds of thousands of migrants is urgently needed! But why did this hole form in a warm, fertile country? Because the state has suffocated its own population with care and regulation. Incredible tax pressure, a bloated state apparatus, draconian labor laws (where hiring a young man is a lifelong risk, because firing him later will cost you more), insane housing prices due to urban planning restrictions. And on top of that—thousands of absurd laws about victimless “crimes,” turning the average citizen into a perpetual neurotic and potential lawbreaker. A person lives in permanent stress under the microscope of a bureaucrat. And as any biologist knows, animals in captivity simply do not reproduce.
And now let’s see what happens when the state begins to clumsily “fight” immigration using its usual prohibitive methods.
If a person is a normal, sane hard worker, then he respects private property and personal boundaries. Yes, he might have crossed the strait illegally in search of a better life. But if he is told that he won’t be allowed to work legally here, that he will have no rights, and that deportation awaits him at the slightest stir, what will he do? He will go somewhere where there are chances, or return home. He has something to lose: his own safety, his reputation, the prospect of a stable income.
And who has nothing to lose? A completely broken sociopath. He deeply doesn’t care about residence permits, employment contracts, or the police. The police didn’t scare him in his homeland, and they won’t scare him here (especially knowing the toothlessness of European justice). He had no intention of integrating into the economy. His craft is robbery and violence.
By banning or making legal stay as difficult as possible, the state builds a barrier that filters out the cautious, the moderate, and the constructive. But only predators step over it. This works exactly the same as with gun bans: when authorities ban pistols, they disappear from law-abiding citizens but do not go anywhere for bandits. When the state bans drugs, it does not destroy demand – it simply hands the market over to bloody cartels instead of civilized pharmacies. And when the state bluntly “bans migration” instead of making way for free trade, private hiring, and strict protection of private property from encroachments – it is guaranteed to result in streets overwhelmed by a wave of violence.
In the end, we get a weeping simple woman from Ceuta, who cannot walk to the store in the evening. First, the stationary bandit stripped her of taxes and deprived her fellow citizens of a future, and then created a perfect sanctuary for those who recognize no rules at all. However, there is nothing new: any state intervention always only makes things worse. Even where it hypocritically promises to “restore order”!
