felix qui possit rerum cognoscere causas
|
February 15, 2003
Saving the village
The comments to my earlier blog about Combating the Enemy Within have focused in part on the issue of immigration. The Netherlands isn't the US, a country whose very identity is inextricably linked to immigration. But the Netherlands has for many centuries been a safe haven for various refugees, some of whom then proceded to seek sanctuary elsewhere. Recent immigration to the Netherlands has however been different. There is no melting pot here. The current wave of immigrants from the North Africa and Turkey were referred to in the past as "guest workers," who had been invited here in the 1960's and 1970's to do the kind of dirty and menial jobs that the Dutch no longer wanted to do themselves. The idea was that they'd stay for a few years and then return to their native countries, having earned some hard cash. Since the whole arrangement was based on the idea that it would be temporary, no attempts were made to try to integrate or assimilate them. Why bother if they're gone in three or five years' time anyway? It did not quite turn out like that, and many of them did become permanent residents of the Netherlands and other parts of northern Europe. Add to that an insanely generous socialist welfare state and you have the makings of the parallel society that has sprung up. Even if they lost their jobs, they could continue to cash government checks. Paid for doing nothiing; why bother going back? The current situation is based on the serious mistakes of the past. Still we have to face the problem as it exists now, and there's no use crying over spilled milk. You have to understand why the milk containers leaked so much to avoid at least repeating the same mistakes. That realization is slowly dawning now. As for what to do about the problem, various commenters suggested draconian measures such as deporting large parts of the population. It may come to that, but I certainly hope that won't be necessary. The price we would pay for that would be enormous. After all, we do have a liberal, democratic constitution and throwing it out the window like that would be highly corrosive to our own standards and the ideals we purport to stand for. But it's that constitution that is under threat from the Islamofascists; whether it's the US Constitution, the Dutch or any European one for that matter, they're essentially the same in their goals and aspirations, and are viewed as being the same by the Islamofacsists. It's their goal to undermine our system of government and our liberties. The nightmare scenario I outlined previously is one where we have to face the choice between certain destruction of our way of life by the Islamofascists and inflicting considerable damage to our principles in defending these same principles. That's what I meant by having to destroy the village in order to save it. If we act now to stop the ring-leaders of Islamofascism it should still be possible to defuse the situation without compromising our own principles. But time is running out. And I return to a point I made earlier: those secularized, moderate Muslim immigrants who do live here must find their voice, and we must help them find their voice. If they don't (and we don't), then they too will be become the victims of wider anti-Muslim hysteria. That's where I differ from Hirsi Ali at this point; we need engage and encourage the moderate Muslim immigrants, not insult their religion. It's a disagreement about tactics, not the final goal of victory of Islamofascism. I think she can do a lot of good, but her public statements are not helping right now. In any war, you have to choose your tactics and strategy carefully; just shooting at anything that moves does not constitute a good strategy. I must disagree with the commenters who say that wholesale expulsion of immigrants is the solution. Advocating such a wholesale expulsion of a large part of the population, you are summoning up dark forces. Those are the same dark forces that are lurking under the surface now and feeding anti-semitism, for instance. If we ever get to that point, it's going to be very ugly time indeed in Europe. They're hardly likely to line up meekly to be sent off to the place where their grandparents were born. The amount of force required to implement any such solution would be horrendous. It takes two to tango, as they say. The assimilation of the current immigrant population can only happen if there is a willingness on both sides. This means that the Dutch government should stop any policies that allow people to live in virtual isolation by handing them welfare checks (although I advocate this as a general principle, and it should not be based on ethnicity). For those who continue to undermine our system, there are laws for treason and subversion. Those who advocate or commit violent acts should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. One of the problems is that the law and criminal justice systems in the Netherlands are outrageously lenient, and the law enforcement authorities are all but capitulating to criminals. This in turn is encouraging the street gangs, many of whom consist of immigrant kids. There is a serious danger coming from this fifth column within our own society, but as I said, we still have time to defuse it. And this is important for another reason as well: demographics. The Netherlands and Europe need more (young) immigrants in order to avert the demographic catastrophe that otherwise awaits us. Aging populations are a global problem, but Europe is particularly at risk. I'd rather not be around if the village ends up being destroyed while it's being saved. The rebuilding effort will be arduous, and you'll wonder whether it's worth rebuiding in the first place. Comments
I think the answer may be in an effort to force them to assimilate Dutch values. It may be necessary to pass a law for an official language. And it may be necessary to have civics classes in the schools. There was a time in the US when English was the official language. If you didn't speak it, you wouldn't be eligible for many jobs. If these folks are getting benefits from the government, you have leverage over how they behave. You may need to change the social benefits structure to adjust to the new situation. Posted by: Teri Pittman on February 15, 2003 03:31 PMWell, it's not just about language... Abou Jahjah speaks fluent Dutch, after all. Speaking of which, how realistic is it to presume that a Belgian national could become a political leader in the Netherlands? Finally, let me just say that I hope Europeans don't conclude that the only way to defeat the intolerant, insular Islamo-fascists is to become just like them. That would be sad indeed. Posted by: vaara on February 15, 2003 08:31 PMRead ">Oriana Fallaci for some appropriate commentary. Posted by: Reid on February 15, 2003 08:55 PMI concur that removal of despotic and dictactorial regimes in the Arab world, beginning with Saddam Hussein, will help the situation, in Holland, and elsewhere in the West. The Arab culture/mind responds to, and respects - physical power and accomplishment. Practical, real-world defeat of reprehensible Arab regimes, without shame or apology on the part of the west, will garner quiessence on the part of these immigrant populations. This will give time, the generations of time, that we will need to transform and convert their psychology.
The problem with solving Europe's demographic problems through immigration is that it ignores the problem of quality. Are the immigrants from a culture who values hard work and study? There is an institution in France who specializes in classes for working people wanting to improve their status, you can even get engineer degrees. While many Blacks, both African and Antillese attend it, there are very, very few Arabs. And there are more engineers and scientists in tiny Israel than in all the Arab countries combined. 2) Are they ready to integrate or are they from a culture who views itself as superior to all others and deemed to dominate the world? In the second case they are likely to remain apart from remainder of society and resist any attempt to take from their revenue in order to fund the retirements from people they consider strangers. 3) What is the level of violence in their society? If it is high and in addition their culture tells them they have the right to do nearly anything to the unfaithful then crime will likely be very high. Now check at dhimmi.org what sharia says about punishement of muslims who have committed crimes against non-muslims and the fate (death) of a non-muslim who strikes a muslim even in legitimate defense. Posted by: JFM on February 16, 2003 02:25 PMYou'll have to face it sometime, and sooner is better. You need to deport these totally unassimilable enemies of your society. They are not there to join you. They are there to take over your country. Posted by: Marcus Tullius Cicero on February 16, 2003 02:56 PMThe single most important factor in facilitating 'assimilation' is gainful employment. I can't see any culture adopting values to which it is not exposed. I suspect that generous 'welfare' policies in The Netherlands will perpetuate 'ghettos' in which an alternative culture thrives. Do Dutch Muslims have employment opportunities? Can they realistically aspire to an income level that allows them to ‘move up in the world?’ I can’t imagine that an employed majority will submit indefinitely to taxation for supporting an ever-expanding, unemployed minority, either. Posted by: ellie on February 16, 2003 04:27 PMOne problem with overly lenient law enforcement and the concomittant rise in crime is that the conterforce that arises is sometimes from the populace at large rather than the government legislature, i.e., vigilantes, death squads, hired private police/armies. Posted by: Douglas R. Chandler on February 18, 2003 10:11 AMIn exactly what respect does vaara worry that Europeans might become "just like" the "Islamofascists"? Does she have anything so literal in mind as insisting on rule by the Shariah? Forbidding education beyond elementary literacy to women? Stoning women for adultery? Cutting off the hands of thieves? Forbidding the construction of Christian churches or Jewish temples or synagogues? Requiring the Burka? Permitting polygamy to wealthy men? Reviving legal concubinage? Forbidding the importation of Bibles? How about outlawing public or private group Christian prayers? Forbidding Christian efforts to proselytize? Forbidding Christians or Jews to wear jewelry or clothing items calling attention to their faiths? Punishing apostasy from Islam by death? Murdering young women who have been dishonored by rape? Forbidding alcoholic drink and pork to anyone in the country? But surely not. Surely she knows there is no likelihood of any of this. Nor any likelihood that the mostly agnostic ex-Christians of Europe would do anything the least bit fuzzily analogous. I have heard many people express this very same worry … or alleged worry … that Europe (or America) would somehow “become just like them,” or “become just as bad as them.” But I do not believe for a moment that even one person who has expressed such concern is literally and truly worried about any such thing. Not for one single solitary second. So, is it just mindless fluff? What bearing does any of this have on the real questions of immigration control and deportation of hostile and dangerous (or potentially dangerous) aliens that are actually at issue? I would have thought the actually pressing considerations were (a) economic problems related to the alarming shrinkage of the ethically European portion of your population, (b) political problems related to any effort to stave off that shrinkage, and replace it with real growth, and (c) political problems related to organizing first immigration control and then large-scale deportation. These are very real difficulties. It would be hard for your country to increase the ethnic European birthrate, and to selectively close the immigration door to Muslims, and to initiate deportations. It is not even clear that the international institutions of the NWO would even permit you to do these things. Surely those real issues are worth exploring? But I suppose we still should ask. What did vaara mean? Posted by: marcus tullius cicero on February 18, 2003 09:15 PMMarcus! You the man! Posted by: Laura on May 20, 2003 11:43 PMPost a comment
|