The general idea behind pathological altruism is that people will take altruism to such an extreme that it becomes self-destructive. In other words, the utility provided by helping others is severely outweighed by the costs. Giving $2.00 in change to a homeless person living on the streets is seen as a reasonable contribution because others will do the same and it adds up. However, taking out a loan and selling all your worldly possessions in order to entirely fund that homeless person’s life would be total madness regardless of how “nice” it appears to be. An example that is more prescient would be to examine the issues that countries like Sweden and Germany have had with mass migration. Taking care of refugees that are victims of war is a noble cause. However, when you displace your own people, spend hundreds of billions of dollars housing, feeding, and accommodating people who more times than not have lied about their refugee status in the first place, you end up with a situation where altruism, taken to the extreme, has become so detrimental that it threatens to completely destroy a whole country in just a few short years. Countries like Sweden and Germany will never be the same again because Chancellor Angela Merkel decided to unilaterally open up the borders of Europe to the mass migration of men from North Africa, South Asia, Sub Saharan Africa and the Middle East because there is an ongoing war in the country of Syria. When asked why she would do such a thing, she responded with the following:

“We should have the courage as Christians to enter a dialogue then, and while we are talking about tradition, maybe please go to church every once in a while, or become a tad more versed in the Bible and maybe be able to just explain a painting in the church.”

Here, she explains to a group of confused reporters that it is Germany’s duty to take in muslim men because it is their duty as Christians and as Germans. She suggests that Germany can really prove itself by just barely squeezing in a third disaster to inflict upon Europe just in time for the 100th anniversary of World War I.

Pathological altruism very well explains why citizens will support mass migration at least until it comes to their own backyard. However, this doesn’t fully explain why politicians will unilaterally decide to declare national suicide by displacing their native populations with an outside group that, in general, will despise and take advantage of their every weakness. Their reasoning, many times, is far more cynical. As former Prime Minister Tony Blair described in Britain, the mass importation of antagonistic peoples was a huge mistake because of the short sightedness in which this plan was constructed. The Labour Party of Britain believed that they could maintain power in opposition to a resurgent Conservative Party by importing people that they assumed would become a willing voter base that they could take for granted. They believed that by importing hundreds of thousands of people, setting them up with housing, giving them welfare and healthcare, that they would be thankful for the Labour Party spoon feeding and housing them in a kind of extended infancy living in Britain on the public dole; the condition being that they are expected to show up on election day and vote for the Labour Party. Not only did this not work out as expected, it has had a catastrophic impact on the lives of the millions of people that live in the areas they took over.

Entire neighborhoods were taken over and the migrants that inhabit these neighborhoods treat these places as if it is colonized territory. Outsiders are harassed, sharia law is enforced by religious patrols, and extremist ideology has spread like wildfire. Islamic schools, as hidden camera footage has shown time and time again, are more like islamist indoctrination centers for young British muslims. They are taught to hate Christians, Hindus, gays, trans, and Jews; anti-semetism has increased in places in France, Britain, and Sweden to such a high degree that they are leaving Europe for Israel to escape violence. They are told to avoid friendly contact with Westerners as they view them as the enemy. They are taught to completely denounce western culture and everything we stand for as a civilization. Now this seems absolutely unconscionable. How could anyone have the audacity to be invited to live in a literal paradise on Earth, given money just to exist and all the opportunities that come from living in a country like Britain, then go on to declare hatred and a desire to destroy the country that let them in and the native people along with it from the inside?