Malaysia Defends Its Borders, While the West Declines

The Islamic government of Malaysia doesn't play games with regard to illegal immigration. Tired of a surplus of illegal migrants in the country, the government has ordered them out.

The deadling allowing undocumented foreigners [PC-speak for illegal aliens] to depart without penalty expired at midnight (1600 GMT).

Thousands of illegal immigrants queued at ports and airports, hoping to leave before the operation started.

Illegal workers are now liable to long jail terms, fines of thousands of dollars and whipping with a cane.

Thousands of police and civilian volunteers have been drafted into a campaign to round up foreigners without the right papers.

Officers will be inspecting building sites, plantations, factories, restaurants and even private homes with domestic servants to try to arrest them.

The article notes that illegal immigrants are blamed for "rising crime" in Malaysia, which probably accounts for the willingness of "civilian volunteers" to join in the effort. Notice that the Malaysian government's decision is not being decried as racist, tied up in endless litigation, or denounced in mass protests. The Malaysian government decided to enforce its immigration laws and punish those who break them - and has put muscle behind the intention. No muddle-headed multiculturalism ties the hands of Malaysian authorities, who see no need to make excuses for their actions. Of course, multiculturalism is an ideological disease created by discontented Western intellectuals to mask their desperate, puerile hatred of Western civilization. The Malaysians rather like their country and are intent on improving it. Hence, they are free to devise sensible immigration policies - designed ti enchance Malaysia's interests - and enforce them. The Japanese act similarly and face little international criticism for doing so, and virtually no internal criticism at all. But then, like the Malaysians, the Japanese like their country too.

Americans (and Europeans) may want to ask their leaders why Maylasia can enforce its laws and protect its citizens while the US (and Europe) cannot.

On a side note, consider Malaysia's array of criminal punishments. People fear Malaysian prisons with good reasons, and caning (whipping with a reedy pole) represents a tangible and painful means of punishment. It would be interesting to study whether the threat of caning acts as a better deterent to criminals than prison sentences. Especially in regard to relatively minor offenses. The current US system of incarcerating minor criminals has proven a dismal failure. The criminals don't fear prison, and when they emerge after a few months or years, they have often been "hardened" by the experience, more likely to return to crime and fear prison even less. Would the application of painful - but not permanently disabling - punishment serve as a better alternative to prison sentences for minor offenses, particularly among younger criminals? If anyone knows of studies comparing crime rates in societies employing corporeal punishment with those which don't, please let me know.