Nothing any political body says can be taken at face value. On that point I doubt many would demur. In days gone by when the state had a large measure of control over information flows, this was only to be expected and was easier to do. In modern times, this is a bit harder to pull off and requires ‘spin’ and other psycho-media exercises in obfuscation to muddy waters, confuse issues, bamboozle and generally misdirect people from politically inconvenient facts. Nevertheless, in this information rich interconnected world in which we now live, one can but marvel that some political creatures seem to act as if they operate in a universe in which the official pronouncements carry the same weight they did in, say, the 1920’s.
A remarkable and even bizarre example of this is the summary which has been attached to the factual European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia‘s report on anti-semitism in Europe. This EU publication comes out against the screamingly obvious backdrop of Islamic youths running rampant in some communities in many countries. And the summary of this report states what exactly?
The largest group of the perpetrators of anti-Semitic activities appears to be young, disaffected white Europeans
Huh? I mean, did they expect that no one would actually read the actual main text? The report clearly says that by far the major source of ‘anti-semitic’ (meaning anti-Jewish) violence is other semites… Muslim ones. Now back in the bad old days when I used to spend time whiling away the hours in the offices of a management consultancy, I recall during one large project the company’s managing director urging us to use particular care crafting the six page executive summary of what was a consulting report that stood about three feet high when stacked on a table, because “in reality, no one who matters will ever read the report, they will just skim the summary” (the client, by the way, was the BBC).
Perhaps this baleful ethos has now become the received wisdom in the EU’s administrative corridors as well, thus motivating the political masters who oversee such things before they are released to conclude that if they spin the report’s summary to direct ire at the usual darlings of the collectivist left (which is to say the collectivist so-called right), no one will actually read the report and realise that a tiny marginalised group of politically invisible shaven headed moonbats with an Adolf Hitler fetish is not the main problem.
To anyone actually reading the whole report its should be clear that the problem is a far larger group of politically highly visible Muslims who are hypersensitive to criticism, even when it is just a statement of demonstrable truth. My suspicion is that the reason for this odd official behaviour is that once the true nature of the problem permeates the consciousness of the pan-European tabloid reading public, entire rickety networks of axioms lovingly constructed and nurtured by several generations of moral relativists could come crashing down like two falling skyscrapers colliding with ugly reality. The issue at hand is not just the small minority of violent Muslim youths, but a broader Euro-Muslim society from which they spring which always suffixes its own criticism of anti-Jewish acts with “but…”.
However confronting that would imply that hard political choices lie in the not so distant future. Furthermore, it suggest accepting that whilst races may be equal, societies are certainly not. The two divergent strains of western social evolution are reaching the point at which the differences cannot be papered over. The old blood-and-soil volk is thankfully dead and either we are moving towards a series of legally enshrined cultural ghettos defined by collective rights (multiculturalism) or we are moving towards an melting pot culture of eclectic individual styles and preferences revolving around an emergent common social core (cosmopolitanism). This is not the sort of stark discussion many people want to have amongst either the Paleo-Conservative right or Transnational Progressive left.
Now at first flush, the ‘Transnational Progressives’ should not see cosmopolitanism as a bad thing, what with their ‘let’s all come together and sing Kumbayah’ ethos. That is until you realise that the whole Tranzi value set is about coming together within the context of a series of mediated political collective ‘cultures’ and not an individual roll-your-own approach to culture. People who come together but insist on singing ‘Rule Britannia’ and then think nothing of watching a St. Patrick’s Day Parade followed by a nice Vindaloo Curry not only do not compute, they are dangerous if they actually define themselves that way: they (we) are Marx’s hated ‘rootless cosmopolitans’, free from the predictable and ostensibly stable sociological stasis that societies which make a fetish of custom have.
What is more, the cosmopolitans are the evolving expression of the post-tribal extended order about which Hayek wrote. Cosmopolitans, far from being an unintelligible social babble to each other in reality revolve around the same core social values, the same ones which have enabled capitalist trade and several property to flourish. It is the extended order’s ability to foster trust and exchange amongst strangers from outwardly dissimilar people’s which so threatens the mediated collectivist social model, the same mediated collectivist social model leads to such absurdities as an inability to harshly criticise the Muslim and Euro-Muslim culture which even according to the body of the EU’s own report spawns violence against European Jews, not to mention other wider issues such as high unemployment due to an unwillingness to assimilate.
That admission that some cultures are simply less advanced and of less objective value, unable to provide either liberty or affluence, throws into question the whole concept of both relativism (clearly some cultures are not as successful at dealing with reality as others) and collective rights (if some collectives are based on monstrous assumptions, enshrining collective rights enshrines monstrous assumptions) upon which the Tranzi edifice is constructed. That is not a path for discussion which many of the people who preside over regulatory statist systems feel comfortable going down. The real but tiny fascist lunatic fringe has been designated the scapegoat of choice a la the fictional ‘Emanuel Goldstein’ in 1984: the target of officially sponsored hate. Moreover, any attempts to just use objective social reality to figure out what is going on has to be discouraged or where will it end? Perhaps people might stop believing what they are told by the establishment! I am open to alternative explanations of this strange institutional behaviour however.
Obfuscation is the most holy of holies !!
It’s true that the EUMC’s report is ridiculous, but your words imply that you put every Muslim in the same bag.
I would also like to see a report on anti-muslim behaviours in the US and Europe. Anyone knows if there is one out there?
That said, I agree that the European governments should do more to protect people from racist or xenophobic behaviours (against Muslim, Jewish or any other).
And hiding the truth in this report for some obscure political reason is not helping.
Something doesn’t make sense, though:
– Why make a study with a predictable result and then try to hide it?
– And why only the summary was biased, if the purpose of the study was to say that there is no anti-semitic feeling among Muslims (or at least less that young, white, disaffected Europeans)?
Every word that proceedeth from their mounths is suspect.
Every word that proceedeth from their mouths is suspect.
It very much looks as though the ‘Powers that Be’, those Grand Panjandrums of all that is powerful, are finally getting the message that all is not wonderful in the their Socialist Dreamworld.
The validity of that saying, ‘You can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time’, is being proven once again. The people of Britain, France and Germany have been bamboozled since the 1950’s, Dishonestly playing on memories of the second world war, spin was placed on every fresh wave of immigration, any dissent was decried as racist, stupidity, or the favourite, – Fascist! ‘Watch out for that Bogey Man in the cupboard.’
Intelligent debate was stifled, and honest reputations were destroyed.
Now it seems that it is only white Europeans who can be guilty of hate crime, and punished for it. The blindness to the rioting and destruction in the suburbs of Paris, incidentally, the same behaviour as seen in the Middle East, (just how much assimilation has happened here). Blindness to the open hatred spouted by the Mullahs in Britain, all being allowed the freedom of speech denied to disaffected white Europeans. Just how much of the recent arrests is window dressing, is to be seen..
That the summary of this report would appear to differ substantially from the findings it contains, surely implies that it not expected to be read by many, least of all by writers in the formal media, and that the data it contains is written in such a muddled way, that no one point could be made out to be a focus point for non-believers.
Is there a smell of fear in the halls of bureacracy?
Most Anti-semitism in Europe from Muslims? Some of it maybe, but certainly not most.
I guess the neo-nazi gangs in France, Germany, and England have relaxed their admission standards and have started admitting Muslims? and the likes of Le Pen in France and Haider in Austria are supported by hordes of Muslims?
Visit the Anti-Defamation League website and you’ll see that anti-semitism has been a problem in Europe for centuries…way before any Muslim stepped on European soil. After all, Ayatollah Hitler…isn’t quite so catchy.
The blame mainly lies in the extreme right wing parties across Europe, who are racist and xenophobic, but hide under the guise of nationalism.
Muslims might be responsible for extremism, but don’t start blamming them for all of societyies ills. Next I’ll be reading that they are responsible for mad cow disease. Common…lighten up the hatred.
Btw, there is an annual report put out by the US FBI about ‘hate crimes.’
try
Federal Bureau of Investigation – Uniform Crime Reports
quite revealing reading, i’d say.
From the FBI link…
hate crime “ ….not only is it an attack on one ’s physical self,but it is also an attack on one ’s very identity.”
Could we consider the documented attacks on those protesting the anti-war protests as a hate crime?
A review of the 4,393 offenses
motivated by racial bias showed that
67.5 percent resulted from an anti-black
bias,20.2 percent resulted from an anti-
white bias,and 6.1 percent resulted from
bias against Asians or Pacific Islanders.
This sounds broadly in line with US population figures as does this…
known offenders associated with 7,462 bias-
motivated incidents.(See Table 1.)Of the known offenders,61.8 percent were white,21.8 percent were black,1.2 percent were Asian or Pacific Islander,
and 0.6 percent were American Indian or Alaskan Native.
So from this we can broadly assume that no race is more racist than any other.
Now religion wise I can’t seem to find offenders by race, that would be an enlightening matrix…
The blame mainly lies in the extreme right wing parties across Europe, who are racist and xenophobic, but hide under the guise of nationalism.
A perfect example of the Left decrying all and sundry as xenophobes, (just what is wrong with that?), and racists, and disallowing, and criminalising, any discussion on the subject.
As Rob Read suggests, maybe the real hate crime is against the majority of people who are NOT against immigration in small manageable numbers, but object to being swamped by large numbers of strangers who have no intention of integrating, and who openly declare that they are here to change the very nature of European society.
Sure, anti-semitism has been around for a long time, and had largely been overcome, the modern mainfestation is being stoked by the Muslim fanatics and, the wonderful, ‘can do no wrong’, socialists, such as the academics who refuse Israeli students, people like Galloway, Tonge and Ripley, Pilger et al. I am sure they are thrilled to know they are part of the extreme right.
Your rhetoric is as out-dated as your thinking… f.y.i. – it is now 2004, not 1964!
Perry,
I was struck by your reference to a “core” of values that underlies Cosmopolitanism. I have a metaphor that I like to use in matters such as this: the rules in a free and open society are foundational, they provide a stable base from which all avenues of expansion can be explored. The rules in a closed society serve to define all of the players in the society, but in defining, they also constrain, because any expansion becomes a threat to the definition and all political structures dependant on the definition.
P dH,
When you are good, you are very, very good, but when you are ………
Your best yet.
Revolutionary blogger wrote: “I guess the neo-nazi gangs in France, Germany, and England have relaxed their admission standards and have started admitting Muslims?”
Don’t know the status in Europe, but in the US, radical Islam and neo-Nazism are the best of friends, old bean.
Louisianian David Duke, former Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan, was cleaning up doing lucrative “lecture tours” of Arab countries before he got convicted of a tax offense and tossed in the slammer for a couple of years. When he gets out I’m sure he’ll resume his vocation.
And William Baker, a prominent US neo-Nazi, has been invited to numerous Islamic “interfaith” events in Canada and the US to discussion the friendship of Christians and Muslims.
In Sweden, Radio Islam, a prominent anti-Semitic hate site that the Swedish government seems to be unable to shut down, often prints neo-Nazi writings.
Just a few examples off the top of my head.
Odd. “Cosmopolitan” used to be old-style nationalist anti-Semitic code for Jewish. Foreign sympathies y’know, old man.
I’ve always thought of being cosmopolitan as rather a good thing (though an aspiration, not an achievement in my own case)–that the capacity to move freely over the face of the earth and be at home in a wide range of social millieux was a desirable state for a human being. I’d never thought it would be applied to those who want to standardise the world and make every part like every other. A quite reverse connotation of civilised sophistication and variety was packed up in former usages, even in the pejorative unwelcome johnny-foreigner one.
“I’ve always thought of being cosmopolitan as rather a good thing (though an aspiration, not an achievement in my own case)–that the capacity to move freely over the face of the earth and be at home in a wide range of social millieux was a desirable state for a human being.”
Except this is the very thing that has allowed vast numbers of Muslims into the West in the first place. We are cosmopolitan. They are not, and they use this against us. This is where Perry’s argument falls down. Both extreme cosmopolitanism and leftist multiculturalism are part of the problem. A society of open boarders is a society with no defense against an aggressive militantly missionary/jihadist ideology that intends using sheer numbers to move into and overwhelm Western nations. All the nice little libertarian laws and cultural memes in the world wil not matter one whit when they outnumber us ten to one. They will simply take over, and the Tranzi-Right’s open boarders form of libertarian society will be swept away.
Western society is in crisis, and we need to take serious measures to avoid total defeat at the hands of our enemies.
Close the boarders. Deport without trial all Muslims who preach, encourage or practice violence, hate or jihad. Restore the right to free association, including the right to volunatry racial seperation.
We are cosmopolitan. They are not, and they use this against us. This is where Perry’s argument falls down. Both extreme cosmopolitanism and leftist multiculturalism are part of the problem.
I have never seen cosmopolitanism as preventing robust self-defence. Yes, take action against any people who come to the UK who are inciting violence… and by all means allow people free association/disassociation.
In fact Britain proves most people get on fine with any ethic or racial minority who wishes to assimilate and join in the economy positively (one only has to look at the huge number of Anglo-Jamaican mixed marriages and how Indian corner shops have become an indispensable facet of daily life in Britain for so many)… and if others want be be racial bigots, well as far as I am concerned they should be allowed to go right ahead just so long as I can use my right of free association to stay the hell away from them.
No doubt there are lots of muslims who are anti-semtic in Europe, there is no argument about that. But don’t let that minimize a general sense of anti-semitism across the continent. In a recent survey, close to 1/3 of French and German respondents stated that jews had too much “influence” over society. Europeans across the board regard Israel, not Al-Qaeda as the “greatest threat” to world peace. Anyone think these views are least not bit influenced by anti-semitism?
The views are not just a reflection of older generations. In a survey in Russia, 2/3 of women in 18-25 group stated that their parents would not approve relations with a jew, in France it’s close to 10%. In fact in Ukraine, the discredited “Protocols of Zion” are still being published and sold as fact.
The truth is, you could deport every muslim from Europe, and anti-semtism still wouldn’t desappear. It wasn’t Hezbollah that operated Treblinka!
Anyone who thinks anti-semtism was a thing of the past and that Muslims are the sole source of it in Europe, I’ve got some bonds in Enron and Worlcom I’d like to sell you.
Ernest Young — I recommend you look at this site to look at what a right wing party from the not so distant past did to the jews Remember.org
The problem with Revolutionary Blogger’s point is that the non-Muslim European anti-semitism he describes does not come primarily from the far right, it comes from the left. It is leftist anti-Israel attitudes that are contributing to the rise of anti-semitism. It is primarily leftist activists and opinion mongers who are creating a climate of hate against Jews. And in fact what Europe and the West now face is not a threat from the far right, but a threat from the alliance between the radical left and Islam.
RB – The link doesn’t work, as to be expected….I noticed you had no comment re the anti-semitism of the academic left, prefering to hang the ‘racist’ tag on those who disagree with your out-dated viewpoint.
Do I have to remind you that the Holocaust was largely the act of a Socialist Party, (the National Socialist Party) – or isn’t socialism considered to be Left these days, and that the academic left in Europe gave much support to the Nazis’s in the 20’s and 30’s.
The same is happening now – the ‘cloud cuckoo’ left, joining hands with fascist factions, to persecute, not just Israel, but Jews wherever they are. Typically siding with dictators against the only democracy in the Middle East.
The so-called ‘intelligentsia’ leading, or should I say, spurring on, any convenient mob. Wasn’t this a planned tactic of Lenin and Marx?.
p.s.
RB,
I’ve got some bonds in Enron and Worlcom I’d like to sell you.
More fool you for being so greedy and gullible…. and was that supposed to be the fault of Jewry?.
EY-
“Do I have to remind you that the Holocaust was largely the act of a Socialist Party, (the National Socialist Party) – or isn’t socialism considered to be Left these days”
National Socialist Party (NAZI)—a party of the left? I needed CPR when I read that. Please post a warning before posting such huge lies. You could kill someone from laughter. I’m sure Hitler is turning in his grave right now for this. I would love to hear you tell a Nazi that he is a leftist. I’m going to drop this, because it would be unfair to target the weakest part of your argument. I know you are smarter then that.
Maybe you are not understanding this, so I am going to tell you this like I would tell this to a 5 year old.
First of all, muslims are a source of anti-semitism in Europe, and that’s a fact. Second, there are other sources of anti-semitism that stem from both the right and left, the right better at manipulating this through nationalism and xenophobia. (haider in Austria and the Fatherland Party in Russia as prime examples) No doubt the left is guilty of antisemitism as Shawn pointed it out very well.
Therefore, like I pointed out before, you could deport every muslim out of Europe, and Anti-semtism will still exist and grow. It existed way before they were here and it will continue if they are gone. Don’t place all the blame on them. It’s easy to find a scapegoat to all of Europe’s troubles, I know you are intelligent so don’t find an easy target to blame for.
By the way, I don’t own any of the bonds I mentioned, that was sarcasm if you didn’t realize.
Hatred of Jews and Muslims takes root in France
Amusing as it is to watch people attacking one another for things they did not say. I have another bid – Hitler claimed to be not left or right but of the extreme centre.
RB,
“National Socialist Party (NAZI)—a party of the left?”
Yep. As Hitler himself put it in his May Day speech of 1927:
“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”
He was a nasty piece of work, but he was always commendably honest about where his economic policies. Apologies for the detour, folks…
Nuno – “behaviour” is a collective noun. The non-word “behaviours” is gibberish. Don’t try to elevate the importance of what you’re posting by pretending to a Sociology 101 phony jargon. It’s like saying “sheeps” to make the number of sheep appear to be weightier and of more consequence.
Collective noun. Geddit?
Verity:
“Behaviours” is probably OK as a technical word for ethologists. It just doesn’t mean the same as “behaviour”, and those who think it does ought to be sent to the same island as those who talk about “methodology” when they mean “method”.
Can’t think of a way legitimately to double-pluralise “sheep” though. Maybe there’s something in Biblical English. Wasn’t there a parable of the oves and the fishes?
Guy
I hope you’re feeling a little sheepsish after that!
Anyone else heard of a ‘right wing’ socialist party?
Just shows what distorted crap is being taught theses days….
Collectivism = left (bad), capitalism = right (good).
That Communists and Fascists fought and hated each other, does not mean that they are opposites, just that they are disagreeing over the details, in typical socialist manner.
(RB) Try getting some facts from books, rather than pamphlets….
Perry, very good post.
Seems anti-Semitism comes in (at least) three flavours:
1. The old, traditional, nationalist-religious (Christian) type. This has been discreditted and combatted a lot, but is still alive (Mel Gibson, his father … skinheads)
2. The new, nuanced, refined, leftist-intellectual type which pretends to be mere anti-Zionism, or anti-Israel.
3. The Muslim type, venomous, rabid, hateful and lethal, equally anti-Jews and anti-Israel, making no distinction between the two. (actually they hate Cristians too, and bundle all non Muslims together.)
Seems the EU report (which I didn’t read) denounces the first and tries to hide or minimize the third, because this third flavour is very close to the second one, about which they are in total denial.
“Behaviours” is a collective form having the virtue, if required, of categorising dissimilarities under one heading. “Method” is by no means a subsititute for “Methodology”, the latter implying layers of compexity or perhaps a certain subtlety or opacity the presence of which might otherwise be lost to the reader.
As a general rule, word selection is more significant in contracts and poetry that in blogging, but then bloggers have busy lives and many other rewarding things to do.
Guessed and Ernest – Behaviours reeks of specialist jargon made up in sociology departments to make their practitioners sound as though they’re in a real profession.
Revolutionary Blogger, f.y.i.
(Link)
Any comment?…..