A rift has opened between the ‘tech Right’, which wants to import skilled workers to the U.S., and ‘America first’ MAGA loyalists. Which side will Trump take? The Telegraph has more.
To glance at Donald Trump’s feed on his Truth Social platform this weekend, you would be forgiven for thinking all was well in MAGA world.
The soon-to-be 47th president has been serving up his normal diet of provocation and self-promotion: railing against the Democrats’ alleged financing of celebrity endorsements, for example; reposting a dig at Joe Biden’s fitness for office; plugging a Newsmax interview with his wife Melania. All fairly standard Trumpian fare.
Zoom out to the wider Republican sphere, however, and the picture is somewhat different, with a row taking place so vocal and bitter that it threatens to rip apart the coalition that swept Mr. Trump to power only eight weeks ago.
The question of visas for skilled tech workers may seem relatively arcane as a political issue.
However, over the past few days it has brutally exposed a fissure at the heart of contemporary Trumpism.
In essence, it is a rupture between Mr. Trump’s longstanding base, the traditional MAGA right, and the loosely described ‘tech Right’, headed by Elon Musk, which, despite being late to the party, proved so consequential in the run-up to November.
For the latter, the issue is simple: the U.S. does not produce enough of the highest quality tech workers, meaning that to stay competitive and prevent China taking a lead, the country must import them from abroad.
For the longer-standing MAGA loyalists, however, the issue is equally simple, but in the opposite direction.
‘America first’, the philosophical driving force of Mr. Trump’s original White House bid, means just that: the jobs, where possible, should go to Americans.
The disagreement has prompted a nasty war of words, including accusations of censorship and some pretty flagrant racism.
For several days, Mr. Trump stayed out of it. But on Saturday night, he apparently felt he could no longer stay on the sidelines and backed Mr. Musk, telling the New York Post he “likes” the H-1B visa at issue, and has many people employed on them on his properties.
With his belated intervention, Mr. Trump may hope to end the debate. But the fissures revealed between the man who bankrolled his election victory and the anti-immigrant section of his coalition threaten to overshadow the 47th (and 49th) president’s inauguration next month.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Back when petitions against covid folly and evil were more of a thing, and I signed a few, I always found it extremely depressing to see how few other people had signed most of them and often saw other petitions that called for the government to sort people lives out or prohibit X or Y that seemed like trivial rubbish in comparison – those had 10 or 100 times as many signatures. “Our” petitions were mainly about the government doing much less. Nothing I’ve seen since has given me much cause for optimism.
‘Startrek’ the originator of tv’s most famous split infinitive. To boldly go.
Just absolutely insane what is happening in Ottawa. A school has been given a directive to instruct staff to treat all pupils as nonbinary and use ridiculous pronouns when referring to them, so the sensible and concerned parents, regardless of faith, are rightly uniting to fight this lunacy. There’s an 8min video which shows what’s happening. And why is it always the trans radical nutters that wear face nappies? Speaks volumes I think.
”In an unprecedented display of unity, Christian and Muslim communities joined hands with concerned parents in Ottawa in opposition to the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board’s (OCDSB) plan to force non-binary pronouns on all students.
The directive, issued to all staff, advised the use of ‘they/them’ pronouns for all students until their preferred pronouns were expressed. The move, viewed as an overreach by many parents, triggered a protest attended by more than 250 individuals.
The email directive sent out by the OCDSB, aimed at fostering “inclusivity and belonging” according to spokesperson Darcy Knoll, met with considerable backlash. Anonymously speaking, one Ottawa mother, formerly associated with the OCDSB, expressed her shock, remarking that the emails from the board sounded more like “LGBTQ propaganda.” It was not a stand against inclusivity, she clarified, but against the erosion of open discussion and the propagation of a radical stance that silences any expression of doubt or differing opinion.”
https://thecountersignal.com/muslims-and-christians-unite-against-school-board/
I don’t know where you found this Mogs but it is excellent.
The assault on humanity cares nothing for our religions except in so much as they can be used to foster divisions so this coming together, particularly Christians and Muslims in Ottawa will definitely not be to the Davos Deviants liking. Let us hope this is a sign of a slowly forming united opposition.
Speaking of religions, hux, I think you’ll like this as it is excellent news. It also reminds me of the Christian teacher recently featured on here, who was sacked because he refused to buy into the Woke bollocks and use a kid’s preferred gender pronouns as opposed to the sex they actually were. I hope that guy now has a solid case off the back of this doctor’s success.
”A Christian doctor sacked by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) for refusing to use hypothetical transgender pronouns has been vindicated by the General Medical Council (GMC) following a fitness to practise self-referral.
Dr David Mackereth, 60, had been an practising doctor for 26 years when he lost his job with the DWP. He told the DWP in a training session that in good conscience as a Bible-believing Christian he could not identify clients by their chosen ‘gender identity’ instead of their biological sex.
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said: “David Mackereth’s case challenged the sanity of our society, and our society was found wanting.
“We welcome the official conclusion by the GMC, but the freedom to hold a belief but not express it is no freedom at all. More must be done to recognise and protect the freedom of professionals with Christian and gender critical beliefs on these issues to use their professional judgment without fear of severe and unjust ramifications.
“Dr Mackereth chose to sacrifice his distinguished professional career rather than compromise on the Bible and his conscience. The requirement to use transgender pronouns defies common sense and Christian faith. It serves no useful purpose except filtering out firm Christians and men of principle such as Dr Mackereth.
“If we tolerate this as a society, if we give in on the essential freedom of thought, conscience and religion, no other freedom is safe. We are determined to fight all the way to secure justice in this case.”
https://christianconcern.com/news/christian-doctor-fit-to-practise-after-trans-pronoun-self-referral/
Thanks Mogs. Well done to all concerned.
Is anybody here seeing a duplicate of this article on the home page? DS dropped a newer article about heart failure deaths at lunch time but it isn’t visible, I only happened to see a link to it on Twitter. Wondering if the problem is at my end or are others not seeing the newest article either?
Two links to this article on the homepage for me.
And yet I saw this via a Twitter page;
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/06/10/heart-failure-deaths-in-may-hit-44-higher-than-pre-pandemic-why-is-government-refusing-to-investigate/
How strange….
If we sell the Crown Jewels the family that currently has call on them gets thrown in for free.
It would be good to see a list of petitions that are approved, but get a very small number of signatures showing how wacky everyone else thinks the idea is. I remember seeing one a few years ago calling on the government to give ancient trees rights, but can’t remember what rights the petitioner was calling for. Maybe the right to vote or self declare their gender identity.
“Split infinitive apart” indeed!
Nothing wrong with split infinitives in most cases. The obsession with them comes from times when Latin (whose infinitives cannot be split, consisting as they do of a single word) was the sine qua non of scholarly language – it being considered uncouth, consequently, to split the English versions, which of course consist of two eminently splittable words. Split away! No harm done!