We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Peace? I wandered through the aftermath of the anti-Israel, anti-Bush, anti-Blair demo in Parliament Square last Saturday afternoon, late on. I had my camera with me, and snapped one of the many placards still on view. It was not exactly what you would call a ceasefire call:
I can not help thinking that this guy is better at making photogenic placards than he is at military strategy. Unleashing armies would be like putting up other big signs, surely, saying: “Put your bombs here”.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Why were so many Lebanese flags allowed to be flown? Remember how those marching for liberty and (genuine) tolerance in London were forced to fold up their Danish flags?
This appeasement is sickening.
Little protests in the Uk are totally irrelevant to the events we are watching unfold in the Mid-East. This fight is not going to end any time soon. At the moment, Israel is winning – the evidence is Hizbollah’s failure ot follow through with its threat to attack Tel Aviv, which means that Syria and Iran have decided to get out of this fight while they can without escalating. The price is Hizbollah destroyed.
We are seeing Israel shatter Hizbollah with US/UK/French/Russian approval in a classic war of attrition. The smart Middle Eastern rulers have heard the message – that they will not obtain the protection of the major powers if they indulge in terrorism direct, or by proxy – indeed, that like Lebanon they will pay a terrible price for permitting these groups to grow on their soil. The stupid Middle Eastern rulers – read Baby Assad and Asmadasahatter – have failed to learn this lesson.
Iran and Syria will face a punishment even worse than Lebanon. One of these rogue states will attack Israel with WMD and the response will be massive. When the MSM starts complaining about massive civilian casualties, reflect on the opportunities both nation states had to get smart, not stay stupid.
Sad mixed-up middle class white boy grows a beard, dons a turban and finds solace in the “Religion of Peace”, and NATURALLY calls for the destruction of Israel. Looks like he was bullied at school and suffered from bouts of depression, but it’s alright now… he’s seen the light, he’s a converted Muslim. Yah Allah!
Bloody human trash.
Yep the guy looks like one of those prevert converts to me too!
Baider Meinhoff slips
into my mind.
Cant think why?
The ‘Muslim Armies’ of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Syria tried that in 1967 and look what happened to them. They tried again in 1973 and look what happened to them. In 1982 the Syrian airforce was on the wrong end of the most one-sided major air battle in history (either 80:0 or 80:1, depending on which account you read), being essentially shot out of the sky. The ‘Muslim Armies’ are really not that impressive.
The muslim armies stay close to home.
They’re the only protection a ME arab ruler has from revolt and insurrection.
I recall a spoof headline in Saudi in ’84:
“Saudi Arabia declares war on Iraq: South Korea gets the contract.”
Middle Eastern nations unleashing their ‘muslim armies’ would give a new meaning to “suicide bombing” and for a change I think Israel would be glad to help.
“Unleash the Muslim armies”?
He just called them dogs. That may be a compliment in Britian, calling soldiers hounds or whatever; maybe it has a macho sound, but it’s a pathetic faux pas in someone trying to pass a convert to about just any MIddle Eastern religion.
The guy looks like a proper loser. But then that is pretty much what Mark Steyn says about these folk: it is a loser culture. Alas, they can still do a lot of damage as they deal with their nihilism and self-absorbtion.
He may be a loser now, but just think of when he grows up a little and decides that being a member of a misogynistic death cult isn’t quite so cool anymore. Try to leave Islam and the trouble really starts.
I just watched the Jon (who me! Impartial!) Snow’s
documentary on What Do Muslims Want ( no dont just start pounding the keyboard, your not on the Rottie now! have some decorum).
Frightening. It seems the ZZ top brothers have a lot of fellow travellers and friends.
But a hell of a lot Snow spoke to (selected to speek to more like, I know first hand how TV works) were converts of some kind or another. Either staight western or Muslims who had had little faith but now saw the light.
This whole thing smacks of the hippie trail of the 60’s but with guns to me.
Those retards have existed for many a moon. They used to support the PLO and the Sandinistas now they support every Islamist going. One hopes they get to visit Afganistan or Sudan at their soonest opportunity. And one hopes they meet a failed martyr’s death as soon as possible.
The main impression I got from watching the Jon Snow Dispatches programme, was the reality that our Western societies are becoming more and more liberal as time goes by (relaxed attitudes to sex, equality between the sexes, acceptance of homosexuality, belief in free speech and free expression, secular none-religious life etc) and the Muslim youth living amongst us who are in fact turning away from our modern culture and are becoming more conservative and repressive. And thus more radicalized.
Unlike other previous immigrants to our shores, such as the Jews, Hindu Indians and the Afro-Caribbeans, they are NOT integrating, but are increasingly turning their backs on our shared national culture and liberal way of life. We are Godless infidels. Our men are drunks and our women are whores according to the Islamic pious types. I got the impression Jon Snow was suggesting in the programme that we should try to “understand” them better, and for our government/society should make compromises in order to alleviate any greivances that Islam has with our liberal Western way of life, like making new laws to repress our Freedom of Speech for example. After all, we mustn’t insult, make fun of, or criticize their sacred religious superstions. That wouold upset them and they might want to kill us. We must all curtail our democratic rights in order to appease them.
The simple truth is, as Jon Snow remarks, Islamism is on the rise amongst our Muslim youth. They are polarizing our society, segregating and ghettoizing their communities, and starting to create a form of self imposed apartheid. They even want seperate their children further from our society by wishing to send their children to Islamic schools. This will innevitably create a future divided and schizophrenic society at odds with itself, full of distrust and deep suspicion. And top that off with even more Islamist terrorism on our streets, and any fool can see this does not bode well for the future. If this unassimulation continues, with even further larger waves of Islamic immigration into Europe, in my life time, I strongly believe we will see civil war on our Continent. A big nasty one. To my knowledge, there are some twenty million Muslims living in Europe and that number is rapidly growing through birth rate and immigration. We may end up with another bout of religious wars in this continent, similar to the wars of the 16th century Reformation. We cannot live with this medieval, krypto-fascist, repressive religious ideology that is simply not compatable with Western Civilization and our very freedoms and democracies.
So the Muslim armies are unleashed. Then what? Next stop, gates of Vienna? I don’t think so.
any fool can see this does not bode well for the future
Indeed, and fools generally make the most noise. I’d strongly caution, as ever, against believing the analysis of the fanatics themselves: the “Muslim community” is far from coherent or homogeneous, even if some beliefs and attitudes are held in common.
The Channel 4 programme and poll are intriguing, but it is hard to discern what in the conscious separatism that is portrays is youth rebellion, what’s the populist appeal of pseudo-certainty, what’s unimaginitive idealisation (want to move to Saudi Arabia… really!?), what’s identity politics exacerbated by the rhetoric of the War on Terror, and what might be down to other causes, such as the class and cultural isolation of sub-minorities. All of those factors were evident. It is also very difficult to see how deep it is.
Channel 4 doesn’t provide proper details of the poll method, sample, and data, so hints of where research would have to go to answer those questions are lacking. But I disagree that Snow’s report made any suggestions express or implied as to what (if anything) should be done. Reporting something without comment is not the same as endorsing it.
What was missing, in the attitudes and beliefs survey in particular, was some sort of comparison of like with like. Were you to survey self-identified Christians from the largely black charismatic churches you might well find similarly wide variances from the norm on social values, and similarly high levels of belief in conspiracy theories.
Andrew Dodge’s point is very apt: the dangerous fanatics are the same people in every generation: spoiled middle-class brats who think their special (i.e. cult-conformist) insights into the world deserve recognition, and petty criminals ‘redeemed’ by finding a cause to which their latent psychopathy may be applied.
I’m always struck that interviewers don’t ask the questions I would like to ask, the fundamental, undermining ones: why be a Muslim? You’re free not to be. Why do you believe in God? Yes, I know, the answers are largely predictable and I can imagine the outrage and venom, but I would just like to see their reactions. I’ve not seen muslims’ most basic assumptions challenged. Who knows? The shock might make 1 in 100 think.
Also, when speaking to a veiled woman, instead of concentrating on the “it’s my choice, I’m not oppressed” aspect, why not point out that this violates fundamental social norms, namely hiding a vital channel of communication which augments speech, and inevitably evoking feelings of revulsion in others.
>> I strongly believe we will see civil war on our Continent.
Shouldn’t it be sooner rather than later, while there are only 20 million> I know it sounds unbelievably crass, but if it’s inevitable, the sooner the better. It would, of course, be horribly messy and destructive, but it would certainly concentrate minds, to say the least. I must admit, when the cartoons affair was at it’s peak I sort of hoped that it was beyond defusing and that it would lead to the big showdown. It seems to me that the present state of affairs is similar to the phony war pre WW2. Those who experienced it tell me there was a feeling of relief when war was declared and that at last people knew where we stood.
For a moment I thought he was calling attention to the fact that Muslims are responsible for more deaths of fellow Muslims than the Israelis or anyone else.
Then I realised he is just another crackpot.
Does anyone remember when the loony right in the US wanted to unleash Chiang Kai-Shek against “Red China”?
“Jon” Snow is part of the problem.
What he calls “liberalism” (drinking till you are sick in the gutter, having sex with anything that moves…. and so on) is what was once called being a “libertine”.
The liberty to do something, for example adultery without being stoned to death, does NOT mean that it is good to cheat on your wife (or whatever).
This is a parady of libertarianism – not the real thing.
No surprise that Jon Snow is not in fact an economic libertarian – he is a Welfare State man.
What he calls the “advance of liberalism” in Britian (adultery, drunkenness and so on) is nothing to be proud of – and if this is the “Western Civilization” that is presented to young Muslims it is no wonder that reject it with contempt.
The television programme repeatedly made the point that older generation of Muslims intergrated far more into British society than the younger generation are (I have made the same point myself – as have many other people).
But the society that the previous generations of Muslims was quite different to the present one.
The present one is one of endless controls and regulations covering every aspect of life (from “health and safety” to what someone can put on their house), and where the Welfare State is bigger (is all respects) than it has ever been before (as even some Labour party M.P.s such as Frank Field have pointed out).
Voluntary insistutions between individuals and the state have greatly declined.
Civil society is in terrible shape, and the only freedom is that of casual sex, drink and drunks.
“Sometimes as liberty declines, license increases”.
Both nonstate insistutions (such as the family) and basic self control are in serious trouble.
This is not “social change” or “social evolution” – this is the decline of civil society.
No wonder young Muslims are turning away from a civilization that is clearly in decline, back to their own (Islamic) civilization.
This is not just a matter of the various wars – it was there in the Salmon Rushdie dispute many years ago. It has just grown bigger with time.
I am not putting myself above a declining society – where are my children? what useful job do I do?
The Byzantine Empire was the heir to a civilization (that of Rome and Greece) that went back thousands of years. But the very word “Byzantine” has become a byword for insanely complex bureaucracy and endless (and vastly complicated) taxation.
In some ways we are worse off than the Byzantines – at least they had children (we tend not to), and their money was not a government (fiat-command) fiction, also their Welfare State was confined to the major cities – the idea of spreading it to the entire population would have struck them as insane (which it is).
“But we are more technologically advanced” – certainly, but the Byzantines had “Greek Fire” and clockwork (and lots of other things that historians used to claim were only invented much later).
Besides Muslims are not stupid – they can learn to build complex bits of technology (and they are so learning).
Believeing that people who commit adultery should be stoned to death, does not mean that someone can not learn engineering.
The West is not done for yet.
But if it has a future it may be with those much despised “Red Necks” of the American South and West.
There is a lot more to “Red Neck” culture than racism -as readers of James Webb’s “Born Fighting” will know.
Always prepared to fight (even if to fight means the risk of death), hard work, the capactity to produce things with ones own hands (whether as part of a factory – or, if things go wrong, in the back yard), faith in God (so the followers of another God have no advantage), and children in the home.
Certainly the culture has its bad side, but it has a future – our stirile dead end does not.
Of course British society may change back and recover itself – but I do not see this happening independently.
Britian needs an EXAMPLE – a society that comes out THE OTHER SIDE of the Welfare State (and the credit bubble financial system – where people play games lending out money that noone has saved).
If American “Rednecks” do not find favour, perhaps the people of Flanders will break away from Belgium and create something worth a look.
The Flemish Catholics value children and work as much as “Rednecks” do – and they make less noise.
I diagree with Paul that we need to emulate the “rednecks” which in the context of the UK would be becoming small “c” Mail readers.
The problem is not individual morals, it is simply state-coercion, re-distributive tax and the rampant PC sacred-cows that have become the mainstream in society. People are scared to say what they really think. Even “terrorists” Blair and Bush bend over backwards with their “Islam is the Reliogion of Peace” schtick. The state and its elected and non-elected agencies have created a double-speak. People speak and hold radically different opinions in public and private.
There is a load of guff about “equal opportunities” in a letter to The Times today from Keith Vaz – Chair, Labour Party Ethnic Minority Taskforce.
Yes, that Keith Vaz. Yes, that’s his official title.
When enough little boys laugh at the PC Emporer’s new FairTrade clothes we will end this nonsense. Perhaps then, Western leaders will be able to stand up and state that our enemy is a death cult based upon C7th Bedouin morals and not a wonderful thing abused by a few bad apples. Then we might start winning.
wow…yet again…I couldn’t agree more with you more, Paul. Except maybe your comments re: Britain, of which the particulars I am too ignorant to agree.
My indicators for the decline of society:
(1) here in the US the upper classes have fewer and fewer children in the armed forces. This is creating a kind of strange separation in our society and producing people of power and wealth that can only conceive of carrots in a land full of sticks.
(2) debt….yikes
(3) the gradual decay of complex social networks being replaced by collection of direct individual-state interactions, or individual-individual interactions that are heavily mediated by the state. (Consequence, people value other people and their property less and less.)
(4) loss of confidence in our culture. Moral equivalence being a parallel phenonemon. Decline of religion is a corollary, as well.
(5) declining birth rate…especiallly amongst the successful. While wealth can be redistributed, the culture of work, education, etc. that *created* that wealth is MUCH harder to redistribute. Families are the primary mechanism for cultural transmission.
ugh…there’s probably more…but this getting lengthy and depressing.
back to work with me.
One word sums up the decline of American life.
A “fraternity” used to mean (to most people) a group of adults who clubbed together both for social interaction and to look after each other (and each other’s families) in hard times or unemployment, sickness or old age.
Now (again to most people) a “fraternity” is a group of drunken college kids.
As for Britian – atomization (everything but the state and isolated individuals gradually going away – with even “voluntary groups” in fact being financed and regulated by the state) has gone even further than in the United States.
I doubt whether most British people have even heard of the term “friendly society” (the British term for a fraternity).
Sure Nick M is correct – it is government actions that have (over a very long period of time) changed situation.
But I do not think that it just the situation that has changed – I suspect that the population has changed to.
A different society influences how people develop (not in a deterministic way – but it is an influence).
If people have been taught from birth that only the state can do X, Y, Z and that before the state did X, Y, Z all was darkness and horror (and this is exactly what they have been taught by both the “education system” and the media) then they will not tend to think there is any other way – and social insitutions (from the family onwards) will decline – and will not just suddenly come back if the state collapses into chaos.
As for British “Rednecks” being Daily Mail readers – no the Redneck would not tend to read any newspaper at all (especially not the fanatically antiAmerican, particularly anti Red State American, “Daily Mail”) – he would be too busy cleaning his rifle to read a newspaper.
School is a place where they teach lies about the country and about your own people (college is, of course, for rich folks and ethnic minorities only), and the media (apart from, perhaps, Fox) is where the lies get repeated. Both in the serious shows – and in the entertainment shows (where people identified as Rednecks are always shown as both morons and monsters)
The so called Redneck is both a patriot and a rebel at the same time. Just as he tends to be both religious and wild at the same time.
This makes him very hard for a British person (especially the Germanic want-to-be types of the Daily Mail) to understand.
Parts of the sterotype are true, such as the lack of edcuation (although intelligence levels are often high, a lot of people are surprised by how intelligent “Rednecks” can be – and for some people this is the last surprise they ever get).
The tendency to violence is real to (see previous comment) – although (contrary to the media image) it is rarely “out of the blue” violence, something has normally be done to provoke it.
The endless tickering with machines is also often real. However there is often more technical knowledge than might be expected. Although this knowledge will not tend to be from books.
That an entire population could allow themselves to be disarmed and ordered about in every detail of their lives would seem very odd to the “Redneck”.
For all their poverty Rednecks have never been known for a great dislike for rich folks (this is one of the reasons the left have always hated Rednecks), but what they think of the present bunch of trust fund kids, who go from their expensive colleges to their nice jobs in the house-of-cards corportations I dread to consider.
I am sure that the average “Redneck” knows very little about the Federal Reserve Board and the rest of the financial system and its drip feed of funny money to the corps – but such people can normally smell a rat.
The old Northern (really New England) culture was nicer (from and English point of view) – it was based on thrift, hardwork and self denial.
Such people built the corporations when they were not houses-of-cards and the financial system was not the credit bubble joke it it today.
Such people could also handle themselves in a fight – although they tended to be slower to violence and to not boast about fighting (unlike the Scots-Irish culture – which is what the “Redneck” [regardless of genetics] really are).
But the Northern culture, although it can still be found in its original form in some places (New Hampshire springs to mind – although Deleware, certainly not part of New England, shows some of the old style Northern culture), has tended to mutate – they fell in love with “public service” (the state) – the “social gospel” and all that (Hillary Clinton is classic example of a government worshipping person – very much in a tradition that goes back to the “Progressives” of the early 1900’s – their is no distinction in her mind between “the people”, “the government” and “God”, they really are all the same thing).
I suppose it went full circle – after all the Puritians who landed in Mass were statists to the core, they only gave up their command economy ideas when they faced starving to death.
I notice that Guy Herbert is still denying that most Muslims believe what they say they believe (for example that 9/11 was either not done by Muslims, or was good thing – or both). Even though I (and many other people) pointed such things out to him long before the Channel Four programme.
It must be nice to know better what people believe than they know themselves.
Of course as anyone who does not agree with Guy (at least on this point) is a “fool” who simply makes a lot of noise, it is hardly worth replying.
True there is no great relevance to it, people should not be killed or kicked out of the country simply for what they believe.
People can only be punished for what they do – not for what they would like to do.
I remember watching Muslim security guards I had worked (on and off) with for years laughing as they watched the beheading of Western hostages in Iraq (they did not know I could see them, they had the images via their mobile telephones of all things).
That does not mean they should be killed (they should not be), but nor should they be trusted.
Britain is a divided place.
One should neither make too much of it (religious war seems unlikely) or pretend it is not so.
I remain convinced that our real problems are our own fault – and have nothing to do with the Muslims.
Indeed if the West would only return to being itself (give up all these “modern” statist ideas) then Muslims might respect us far more and relations be much better.
Remember the previous generations intergrated far more – it was a different society they were intergrating into back then.
The problem is of libertarian/marxists making.
Japan didn’t have mass-immigration and they don’t have Muslims preaching death on their streets, coincidence???
You blank slaters seems to believe you can invite any kind of nutcase into this country and once they become part of ‘The Economy’ (that magical almost religous entity) that they will automatically become indistinguishable from any other British citizen. Well almost every day we hear of a new report showing the blank slaters wrong and indicating big trouble in this country around the corner.
Ofcourse it doesn’t really bother you rich boys too much you can just hop on a plane to the US the moment the civil war breaks out.
I agree that the Muslims seem a special case when it comes to assimulation (i.e. they have not done so). Yet Blacks, Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Chinese and all manner of Europeans (from the Hugenots onwards) who have come in significent numbers have indeed assimulated and added greatly to our culture and economy, so clearly the problem is not mass-immigration, it is mass Muslim immigration. That is the problem.
No, the immigrants that came in the past were small numbers by comparison to what is happening now that is why they integrated more easily.
The main reason Muslims integrate less is because they are the biggest distinct group of immigants with a common alternative identity.
Could be another group in another situation. Look at North Ireland, even people with very similar culture and ethnic identity will fight for dominance.
In some areas of Spain and France the expat Brits don’t need to integrate if they are in a big enough expat community.
Its natural and its all about numbers, if you want integration you have gotta restrict the number of immigrants to a pace that allows time for integration.
Small numbers? Hindus? Afro-Caribs? IRISH? You jest! Blacks in particular arrived in large numbers and have now fitted in remarkably well and rates of inter-marrying are high.
The eastern Europeans arriving in droves right now are having very few problems fitting in. In fact they are probably the best possible immigrants: they are European in culture, are more likely to marry and have babies and also have very low levels of unemployment… they basically arrive and start working (my house has been hosting a bunch of Poles and Slovaks redoing the wiring and plumbing). It is really just the damn Muslims who have proven to be the ones we cannot digest with relative ease (I say relative ease because although Blacks are now quite well assimulated, I do not claim this was a simple or problem free process. In effect it took one generation).
What makes the Muslims different is their seperatness and unwillingness to inter-marry. The problem is Islam, not immigration. I suspect no amount of time is going to solve that problem.
And I see I’m not the only Brit here with insomnia.
Paul,
I notice that Guy Herbert is still denying that most Muslims believe what they say they believe (for example that 9/11 was either not done by Muslims, or was good thing – or both). Even though I (and many other people) pointed such things out to him long before the Channel Four programme.
No, I’m not. I’m denying that it means what you (and others) say it means, and that it is of the significance and consequence that you (and others) say it is.
It is quite plain that many Muslims believe some crazy and dangerous things, which should not be surprising since they all by definition believe in the crazy and dangerous conception of an omniscient interventionist God. What is not at all clear is the strength and uniformity with which such views are held, and whether it matters very much in the circumstances.
It is clear to me that adopting the view that militant Islam is a powerful, united, military and cultural threat is a step toward making that true. A competent grand strategy would be dividing Muslims from the Islamists, not forcing them to choose sides. I fear that the mirroring millenarian tradition of the west, and the desire for simple over-arching explanations for a democratic (read: mob-ruled) polity exacerbate what problems there are.
Panicked presumption is the worst reaction. I am reminded of those parents in the mid-twentieth century who, not comprehending the epidemiology of polio and the facts of sewerage, despatched their children to the seaside in summer for fear of their infection in town.
Make Love not War…
The couple in the background have got it right
Tony if they are Jew-hating morons like the guy in the front lets hope they don’t reproduce.
As someone said about the problem is not immigration it is immigrants who are Muslims. For the most part they don’t intergrate, don’t want to intergrate and really would rather that we all intergrated with them and become Muslim.
During 30 years in the Senior Service I never found the two mutually exclusive.
Another person who falsely accuses liberals/libertarians of believing that all humans are born with no inherited characteristics. How many times do we have to point out that the case for liberty etc is NOT predicated on that idea? Rather, it is based on the idea that people should be treated equally before the law precisely in order to bring out differences, many of which are to be glorified, not vilified?
I urge the author of the quote to go and read Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate. He will find no justification in that book for thinly-disguised anti-immigrant paranoia.
the crazy and dangerous conception of an omniscient interventionist God
Which is of course why we also have a problem with Methodist terrorists…
Face it. It’s only the muzzies that are the problem*.
We have a sizable fifth column of scum who follow a religion which has, as far as I can ascertain, no redeeming features and are prepared to act upon its evil designs – or support those who do.
I don’t blame them. They are merely obeying the psychology of the ant-hill. I blame the self-loathing multi-culti dhimmis who allowed this to happen.
* And before anyone brings up the Catholic nature of the IRA – that was a limited struggle which was essentially political in agenda. These fuckers are absolutely not gonna stop until (a) we all pray to Mecca 5 times a day, (b) we’re all dead or (c) they’re all dead.
Nick M, Guy Herbert is the same individual who recently posted an article here proclaiming that Islamist Terrorism was merely a figment of people’s imaginations, and nothing more dangerous than schoolboy bluster and playground bravado. And anyone who disagrees with this haughty (self deluding) belief is but a “fool”.
I could go on about the fact that militant Islam is on the rise again and how delicate and precarious Western civilization is. I could dicuss the fall in birth rates and demographic catastrophe happening in Europe that nobody wants to talk about. I could mention that By 2020, 50% of the people in Holland under the age of 18 will be of Muslim descent. What will happen to Hollnd’s pluralist, liberal and freedom loving way of life when half the populatuon takes its intructions form the Koran and believes in Sharia Law. We could talk about the fact that a great many Dutch people are LEAVING Holland with their young families for countries like Australia, Canada and the U.S. for fear of what may happen in the future. They sense the tensions arrising in their country, and the impending conflict, and want to get out.
Western Europeans are not having any babies in sufficient amounts. By 2050 it is predicted that the indiginous peoples of Belgium, Holland and France will become minorities in their own countries as the bulk of the population will be Muslim. There is a change happening in the very complexion of Western civilization in Europe that needs to be brought out into the light and discussed. It involves the replacement of Western Civilization and its freedoms and liberties with a different civilization with different cultural values….. Islam. What we may possibly see is the demise and replacemnt of Western Civilization within the European continent, to be replaced by a more repressive, religious, misogynistic, homophobic, antisemitic, Sharia Law loving, and freedom and liberty loathing ideology. The future up-and-coming indigenous European generations are going to be challenged by this impending problem, and the threat it will pose to Western Civilization and our very way of life. And they may have to stand up and fight for what they believe in. I, for one, don’t think the decline of our indigenous populations, and the subsequent decline of Western Civilisation, to be replaced by a more “Islamic” one, will be a “smooth” transition. And I still think we may see civil War in the streets and cities of Europe in my own life time. If we are not careful, turbulant times may lay ahead.
I’m sure what you say is true Samsung, BUT it doesn’t matter.
Immigration “ITS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY”
And it clearly is. Moreover it has also been good for the society up until the current Muslim phenomenon. As ‘Albion’ pointed out, the problem is not mass immigration, it is Muslim mass immigration.
Samsung,
I agree with you. If what you said was an accurate representation of Guy’s viewpoints he is deeply mistaken.
Perry,
I almost agree with you. For me the big problem is that our current multi-culti government and civil service actively discourages integration.
I’m not really sure if the issue is only based on integration… I think it’s also an issue of government policy towards immigration. Immigration to the EU (I am speaking quite generally since I really don’t know exactly what the policy is in the UK or other EU countries) is going to happen anyway as long as there are economic opportunities, because people in general want to improve their lives–regardless of their origins. However, I think governments should implement better ways of selecting skilled immigrants, particularly from countries with relatively low immigration rates to the EU
Has anyone heard of Diversity Immigrant Visa Program in the United States?
“The Act makes available 50,000 permanent resident visas annually to persons from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States.
The annual DV program makes permanent residence visas available to persons meeting the simple, but strict, eligibility requirements. Applicants for Diversity Visas are chosen by a computer-generated random lottery drawing. The visas, however, are distributed among six geographic regions with a greater number of visas going to regions with lower rates of immigration, and with no visas going to citizens of countries sending more than 50,000 immigrants to the U.S. in the past five years. Within each region, no one country may receive more than seven percent of the available Diversity Visas in any one year. ”
(quoted from http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1318.html)
Is there anything like that in the EU? I realize that there are differences between the EU and the US, but wouldn’t having a program that encourages more skilled immigration from countries that have low immigration rates to the EU be a good idea (more immigration from North America, South America, etc.). Perhaps something like this would offset the immigration from regions of the world that are simply sending too many people to the EU.
NickM,
It isn’t an accurate representation. But that doesn’t mean I agree with Samsung.
I have said that a lot of what is exhibited as evidence of the great danger presented by Islamist terrorism is schoolboy bluster and power fantasies – on both sides: see the ricin plot, osmium tetroxide on the tube, the red mercury plot, and the chemical jackets of Forest Gate…
Islamist terrorism plainly does exist. But the idea that it is a phenomenon of a sophisticated struggle with a great and rising Islamic power, a new Great Game, is the folie a deux of the Islamists and securocrats. There are no ‘Muslim armies’ of any significance to be unleashed.
Nick M,
For me the big problem is that our current multi-culti government and civil service actively discourages integration.
Absolutely. And all the dealing with “community leaders” rather than treating people as individuals who may speak for themselves and choose their own representatives, is part of the problem too. (A part which suits Labour in particular in delivering a solid client vote in many places.)
For all their substantive views are sometimes disturbing, the Muslim Public Affairs Committee are to be applauded and encouraged for promoting the idea that Muslims should participate political debate rather than festering as a group of resentful outsiders.
I take Guy Herbert’s point – i.e. I accept that I was getting his position wrong (that does not mean I agree with what he has written).
As for the genetic/cultural thing.
Well, the most recent genetic evidence is that the population of England was (till only a few years ago) overwhelmingly Germanic – the English are English (i.e they are mostly people who came from the Angles, Saxons and Jutes – different tribes that merged in a new land to become “the English”).
I write as someone who is NOT germanic (I am part Irish and part Russian Jew).
However, there are elements in the West of England that are Celtic (and pre Celtic), and even in the East there were such things as the “dark Fenlanders” who spoke their own language even in the Middle Ages (there is also the Norse blood of the North and East).
Such people became culturally English (even though they were not from any Germanic bloodline).
As has been pointed out above many other groups (although NOT very large compared to the general population of England also became culturally English over the centuries).
Now what I am about to say will irritate the “cutural change” or “cultural evolution” people, but I will say it anyway.
It is difficult to ask people (not just Muslims) to be become “culturally English” now that English culture is collapsing (which it is).
Also the social collapse of this land is not really caused by Muslim immigration (or any other immigration) – the collapse is internal.
Yes the cultural collapse is internal Paul but its because we are currently being ruled by drug taking blank slater home hating hippies from the 60’s and 70’s and if it wasn’t for mass immigration we would have had a blip and soon recovered our cultural identity.
Japan also has problems and dramatic falling birth rates which is projected to cause a substantial fall in population, but they will recover in a generation or so as if nothing happened, we wont! our leaders have seen to it that our problems will be much longer lasting.
So I don’t think you can say immigration isn’t a big factor in this.