The discussion this morning concerned this news story about the Australian government’s plan to import another ten million or so immigrants in the next forty years, despite the popular opposition to such policies. One of my correspondents said:
Yes, but then why did they vote for Kevin Rudd, their Zapatero? We have much cognitive dissonance in the world.
That started me thinking, and I replied at length with my own ideas about what’s happening. My response, slightly edited, is reproduced below.
This is the core issue, the essential paradox of the modern Western democracies. All of the evidence points to a persistence of the problem until the welfare state undergoes a complete collapse — which is beginning even now, as the major Western countries are forced to degrade their currencies to prop up the system.
Ordinary people in the West don’t want more immigrants, but they want something for nothing. They insist on the benefits that the state has been doling out for more than half a century, and to which they have become thoroughly accustomed. They consign to political oblivion any candidate who so much as thinks about reducing state benefits or increasing eligibility requirements. The current crisis in Greece is a good illustration of this dynamic at work.Politicians cannot get re-elected without promising (and delivering) a free lunch. They’ve been running up a tab for the last seventy-five years, and now the bill is coming due.
I believe that their insistence on more immigration — in violation of the sovereign popular will in every single Western country — has a twofold explanation:
- - - - - - - - -
| 1. | More immigrants means more people who will give their knee-jerk votes to the socialists, thus keeping the current bunch in power. | |
| 2. | The guardians of the system (or at least their hired economists) know that the welfare state cannot be expanded or even maintained without an increasing population. It is a classic Ponzi scheme, and it requires the recruitment of new suckers to provide the payouts for the earlier rounds of participants. The caretakers of the welfare state really believe that what they are doing is necessary and good in order to maintain the system as it is — with themselves running it, of course. |
It’s becoming more and more obvious that the scheme is not going to work out as planned. The new arrivals are not as well-educated, thrifty, and productive as the native population. They are not as law-abiding or industrious. And they are in the process of destroying the fragile social economy on which the whole house of cards is built.
From the Marxist perspective, that last consequence is perfectly welcome and to be desired. Thus, as Fjordman has pointed out, the mass importation of aliens serves the ambitions of the Marxists who would destroy traditional European culture.
However, their goal dovetails nicely with the needs of the technocrats and the managers, the career bureaucrats who require an unlimited supply of new warm bodies to keep the system functioning in its present state and to vote for the various socialist clones who will preserve the status quo.
This is what I have called the “Demonic Convergence”: the confluence of the Frankfurt School, traditional Socialists, and Islam. It will bear evil fruit in the West within the next five to ten years, at the latest.Inexorable economic forces would have brought the system crashing down eventually, within another generation or so. But the Marxists and the Muslims acting together are hastening the collapse, which is a good thing — the sooner it all falls down, the better chance we will have to preserve a substantial remnant of Western Civilization, and to craft something worthwhile out of the wreckage of the old order.
55 comments:
An absolutely correct analysis. In Australia, Britain, Canada and many European countries, the elites have struck the same bargain: multiculturalism and immigration in exchange for power and control. This is why the anti-immigration movements in Switzerland and the Netherlands are so important as is the immigration enforcement movement in the United States.
In the meantime, the elites and the left will use the mass of new voters to try and beat the middle class into submission.
We must resist all of these schemes by taking back control of Government at every level available.
What you are writing here about democracy of universal suffrage creating a Ponzi scheme is precisely the argument made by my friend Ohmyrus.
Fjordman --
Yes, I know the idea is not original with me. Besides Ohmyrus, Mark Steyn has said the same thing, and so have a number of others that I can't remember offhand.
It's really obvious, if you have at least half a brain, and examine the modern welfare state for more than a few seconds. After all, how could it be otherwise?
But my main point wasn't that the welfare state is a classic Ponzi scheme -- I kind of take that as a given.
My point is the Demonic Convergence. It takes more than just the Frankfurt School and the Muslims to destroy us.
There are many thousands of well-educated, dedicated, well-meaning people who are running the current system. People who think that the current plan -- importing the Third World into the West to prop up a failing system -- is a good thing to do, and the only right thing to do under the circumstances. Presumably they don't anticipate that their system will ever really become The Light That Failed.
Cynical, evil Marxists and brutal, barbaric Muslims aren't enough. It takes a large cohort of us to make the Demonic Convergence work.
Such people don't have to be bad to bring about our destruction. They just have to be deeply, tragically mistaken.
Besides some of them being mistaken, and naive, others among the elite actively seek the end of Western Civilization. They believe they are immune from the consequences of that event. Misguided and naive, to say nothing of stupid.
We cannot know what the final consequences will be of the collapse of Western Civilization. The last time it happened the learning of the Greek and Roman civilizations was wiped out. It took 1000 years to get back to that level of education and understanding.
Essencially even if we "fight off" these marauders unless we return to closed societies and bring up our natality we are still doomed. For closed societies i mean societies that are closed to mass immigration, western of not.
Failing to do that we would end pasturizated (meaning equalized i don't know if you use this meaning) and that is still very bad culturally.
Not that people could not move to Norway or Virginia, it only means that few people should be able too.
Very large nations should think if that's not good to have this inside aswell, not so tight but to restrain cultural destruction (like what is happening in Brazilian Southeast and South).
The problem in Europe is much worse, America can absorb the "latin" invasion, but it would make it's genetic quality decline, europe cannot, these people invading Europe are not even westernizied and do not have the will to do so (like the japanese in Brazil). Expell or die.
Then there are the natality. It's really a long term problem but it should be taken care. Even if it means forcebly. The last two centuries of people taking care of their only reproduction were bad to us as whole. This alone could lead us to a dictatorship, but not that's not necessary, a citizen road could be taken, to be a citizen men had to serve the army and women to be fertile, hope you have better solutions.
Be sure that this demonic convergence is happening in all western world, not only the rich countries, i know the situation in Brazil but Argentina and even Chile are not much behind it. There will be no place to run.
In hoc signo vinces
So who is at the top of that Ponzi scheme.
Over the last few decades the main advocates of immigration out with the government has not been the usual suspects but conservative business interests - the Confederation of British industry (CBI) slavishy importing people while they export jobs.
The destruction of democracy and welfare are the collateral damage not the cause of all our woes.
4Symbols --
There's no denying it that rich people profit from current immigration policies.
However, the principal benificiaries of government policies -- receiving well over 90% of the money extorted from the British taxpayers, billions upon billions of pounds -- are the people on social benefits of various sorts, plus the recipients of the dubious medical care provided by the NHS, as well as all the bureaucrats required to run the system. The people in that last group are not particularly fat cats, either.
The beneficiaries of any Ponzi scheme are always those who paid in earlier. People who retire now are cashing in their chits for jumping into the scheme early enough. A thirty-year old making his VAT payments will likely never collect at all. That's the nature of a Ponzi scheme.
Such people don't have to be bad to bring about our destruction.
True, while some parts of the Western elite are consciously involved in multicultural social-engineering, others have good intentions, the kind that usually pave the way to hell. They witness the native population aging, catastrophic birth rates and the ongoing exhaustion of the welfare/social protection system. That's why they came with the idea of importing millions of immigrants as fresh work force, in alliance with the big capital and corporate interests. What they forget to take into account is the difference between an industrious, law-abiding Dutch and a lazy, happy-go-lucky Pakistani along with his 3 wives.
Yet they should have realized by now the proportions of their tragic mistake. A few studies in the United States have demonstrated clearly that immigration costs much more than it is able to produce. The EU officials are frightened to admit the burden of immigration on taxpayers' shoulders, because in the moment they pronounce publicly the billion euros figures most citizens will start questioning the efficiency of their economic project.
My guess is that the ones with good intentions have started to realize the tragedy of their failed plan. But it's too late now to admit "We've been idiots.We've taken your trust, money, identity, and all we can give back is a wrecked country".
"Such people don't have to be bad to bring about our destruction."
Oh but they are bad... And they knew what would happen. Have you heard of Enoch Powell? To the reactions to his rivers of blood speech? The working class since day one was agaisnt immigration it just that they were ignored. I heard from a south african once that the last goverment true to afrikaners were in the 60's, in America when they come after the immigration law (of 1924?) the right warned what would happen. Be sure they knew from day one what would happen. They just didn't care.
"Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad."
INDEED.
Rocha --
I'm not saying that none of them are evil, but a lot of them -- possibly a large majority -- are not.
I know a number of people who work for the federal government in various agencies. Most of them are just doing a job, but when they think about it, they believe that what they do is in a good cause. They're good liberals, so they believe the actions of the federal government are inherently beneficial (except maybe the military actions, of course).
Perhaps it's different in Europe or Brazil, but that's the way it is here.
So where exactly is the problem located? Is it the welfare state? Or is it democracy?
Regards,
Snouck
Snouck --
In the end, they are one and the same. It's a systemic inevitability that a fully-functional democracy will sooner or later devolve into a welfare state.
The Founders warned about it back in the 18th century -- the electorate cannot resist the temptaion to vote itself the contents of the public treasury.
That's why I don't support democracy as such. I favor a decentralized constitutional republic, with well-defined limitations on the power of state institutions, a balance of competing power centers, and a limited franchise.
Another way of looking at it is this : basically, Westerners tried to import slave labour in order to prop up the welfare state (or, before the welfare state came into existence, in order to ensure a life of wealth and leisure for themselves -- which is the same thing).
Slave labour is a classic shortcut to prosperity (up to a point), and it has been used by many (most ?) civilisations throughout history.
However, in order for slavery to work (sort of), you need to be ruthless. Like Muslims, who routinely cut off the genitals of their male slaves, making sure they would not father a hostile population in their midst (most of them died in the process, but to Muslims, Blacks were only human chattel).
Americans, by comparison, were sissies, in spite of the horrors of black slavery. They now have to live with a structurally antagonistic, violent, retarded population in their midst.
As for the contemporary delusion that current Arab and African immigrants will somehow "pay our pensions" -- as an alleged "professor" has once more written in an op-ed piece in Le Monde --, it's beyond foolishness.
The lesson here must be : if you don't have the guts to be cruel bastards, don't even think of using slave labour, even if it comes in the guise of "multicultural enrichment".
There is no free lunch. Great civilisations come at a price.
Robert --
I take exception to the use of the word "retarded" to describe American blacks.
It is true that on average they have lower IQs than whites (who have lower IQs than Asians, who have lower IQs than Jews). But this does not mean they are retarded, not in the commonly accepted definition of the word, which is also now considered offensive.
As Thomas Sowell has pointed out, the average IQ of black people in America today is higher than the average IQ of white people a generation ago.
That can hardly be counted as "retarded".
Fjordman, I realized at like 13 when I was in 8th grade that universal suffrage is stupid when we were taught about my country's first Constitution which banned some from voting while those who could vote had different voting powers. It made a lot more sense than the one man one vote thing. If I would have to do things, only the ethnic people of a country who are in between 25 and 65 that are home or business owners that are net tax payer and are married with children.
Robert, the problem is that Americans liberated slaves on their own soil. Basically, they should have told blacks that they're free provided they go to Liberia. I can't believe my countrymen liberated the gypsies(and we didn't buy them, they attacked us and lost and we enslaved them lol) and let them stay.
Yes,the meme that high immigration benefits the nation has taken over here in Australia as well and there are many sectors of our society that see benefits from very high population growth,even though the country is mostly desert. However I wouldn't blame just left wing politicians for the hare-brained idea. There are many business groups that hope to profit from a larger population,the external costs of increased violence,welfare,failing infrastructure and law enforcement are not their problems.In general, I'll bet most of the social engineers who favor high population growth don't live anywhere near the front line-the inner suburbs of our cities where most immigrants live.
I belong to an organization that has advocated very low population growth for years and only recently has public opinion began to shift away from favoring mass immigration.
There is another pernicious idea-that we in the West have some sort of 'moral obligation' to accept mass immigration,we don't.
In hoc signo vinces
Why import an enricher and his 3 wifes to drive a bus full of 30 indigenous bus drivers to the local dole office.
To say that all of the 30 are too lazy to take the job or demand too high a wage is stretching credulity and is to take the anti-white worker propaganda of the MSM hook, line and sinker. Most of the indigenous unemployed were deliberately locked out of the economy.
Incapacity Benefit* was used to hide the claimant figures not only to conceal the unemployment count but the real policy behind those figures - to challenge the figures would have been to challenge the REAL policy, creative accounting first invented and used by the conservative government then utilized by the labour government.
This was not only about economic power this was about political power it was to destroy the confidence and moral of a large section of the British people I suspect a majority of the people marching as part of the counter-jihad movement have their roots in the old working class they would do well to remember the likes of Lord Pearson's contributions to their woes and the significant part he played in their downfall - out with the old in with the new.
Were all indigenous woman born in 1963 born barren were all children conceived to immigrant parents in 1963 born never to age past their working lives.
Incapacity benefit* claimants are not included in the U.K. unemployment count.
The Australian government must also be wanting a particular kind of immigrant, because recently they have evicted many British immigrants whose jobs have disappeared - without giving them a chance to secure further work. Also, I've recently found out that I cannot move to Oz, even though my brother is an Australian citizen, unless I can find permanent employment and a sponsor. So, do these 10 million new immigrants not need to fulfil any conditions?
I can only presume that the Australian government now has the same policy as the British government - to destroy their own culture in some multicultural experiment, which will enable them to stay in power.
creative accounting first invented and used by the conservative government then utilized by the labour government.
That's the paradox: the biggest betrayal of the Europeans and white Americans was not the work of the left (at least from the lefties you know what to expect), but of what we call today "right".
Two more things pushing the Welfare State.
Women's suffrage, brings Archtypical female attributes to shape policy. These promote and reinforce nanny statist policy.
Also Big Business, supports the importation of cheap labor...to drive down costs and increase demand.
What you say is true, Baron, the middle class welfare government bureacracies need new blood, to maintain their jobs and empire build, into an ever larger state, and thus the opportunity to advance and increase earnings, besides maintaining their cushy jobs...caring for the needy. They need the needy, economically (and they also derive pleasure from a sense of moral superiority/duty to help the poor/needy).
And the Welfare State, tends to create more dependency, generationally.
Its the perfect storm.
Baron -- I'm long past mincing words. Of course "retarded" is offensive if one happens to belong to the group being described, just like a Mohammed cartoon with a bomb in his turban is offensive if one happens to be Muslim.
If you agree that American Blacks have on average lower IQ's -- and that's exactly what I meant when I wrote, by way of shorthand, "retarded" --, well, then, we agree.
It's even worth remarking that contemporary American Blacks have a noticeably higher average IQ than African Blacks. Which suggests that IQ is influenced both by biology and by society.
However, even taking this into account, it shows that the founders of the United States, as a group, are historical losers because, at some point, they made the unfortunate mistake to practice slavery.
We're not talking here about a pissing contest over a few IQ points, which might induce Whites to boast about being a "superior" race relative to Blacks.
We're talking about deeply dysfunctional phenomenons which can't be denied : violence, fatherless families, academic underachievement, not planning for the future, indulging in resentment rather than responsibility, etc.
Of course, it's theoretically possible that those phenomenons have nothing to do with IQ ; but then, one comes across the same dysfunctions in Africa itself.
So maybe it's not "IQ", but something called "JP" instead which we still don't know about. But there's definitely something.
On the other hand, contemporary American Blacks, political discourse notwithstanding, are arguably historical winners (and should therefore, in theory, be thankful for slavery) : if their ancestors had not been deported to America, they themselves would be considerably dumber and poorer in Africa today.
I'm not saying that being intelligent or rich is necessarily conducive of happinness, and therefore always preferable. Arguably, as long as the basic necessities of life are met, it's better to be a poor and a simpleton within a loving family, in a functional and cohesive society where your values, culture, religion and history are shared and respected, rather than an affluent, neurotic smart-alec in a crumbling society whose values and culture you don't share.
However, I don't think contemporary Africa is functional and cohesive for Africans either. Why don't black Americans emigrate en masse to Africa ? There must be a good reason.
That's not to say the situation of a black American in America is necessarily easy, or pleasant, or spiritually fulfilling. History has a way to do bad things to everybody.
Basically, messing with people is... messy.
EscapeVelocity --
“Empire-building” — that’s the key phrase.
An administrative bureaucrat’s power derives solely from the number of people he supervises, plus their own subordinates in turn. No bureaucrat will willingly reduce the number of people he is in charge of.
That’s why, during the present cost-cutting measures in — say — education, you see no reductions in administrative staff. Personnel may be cut, but only at the margins — teachers’ aides, bus drivers, janitors, cafeteria personnel, etc. The core administrative cadres remain, and even grow in number.
It’s the very nature of bureaucracy. But what we have created is unsustainable, and cannot continue much longer.
As Lao Tzu said in Chapter 55 of the Tao Te Ching:
This is not the way of Tao.
Whatever is contrary to Tao will not last long.
4Symbols, you need an immigrant because the white person is too busy on welfare. The sad truth about the UK is that a couple that has three children can make more by living on welfare than by working. Actually, rationally for me would be to move to the UK and have 13 children. I would have the rent for a big nice house provided by the council and be taken care of. Also, any business that can't pay cash(so their employees can't work without a contract while also claiming benefits - I have British friends who could do this or do it). I don't see how someone can be locked out of the economy, except by the minimum wage law or other stupid regulations or collective bargaining agreements.
Luddite, that's entirely true. Labour in the UK kept working visas for Romania after we became a EU member state while importing Pakistanis. But again, Romanian emigrants are usually the kind that flee socialism and wouldn't vote for them.
Baron, I would like to know the study used by Thomas Sowell. Anyway, it's proven that 79% of intelligence within groups is genetic, while 21% is environemtn.
Robert, American blacks have a noticeable European admixture too. And yes, today blacks are historical winners of slavery considering Americans decided to keep them there.
Robert --
I agree with most of what you say. The appalling dysfunction of the black underclass may be cultural, may be due to lower intelligence, or may be a result of the racist welfare-state policies imposed from LBJ onwards. But I don’t think that IQ alone could account for the problems — as I said, black IQs are higher now than white IQs were in the 1950s.
And the Founders are not to blame — the slaves had been here for more than a century before the Declaration of Independence was even a gleam in Thomas Jefferson’s eye.
Importing African slaves was a grave error, for both moral and practical reasons. And here we are, four centuries later, still paying the price.
In evolutionary terms, I think IQ is overrated. If it is so all-fired important, why do high-IQ people inevitably reproduce themselves at a much lower rate than those of lesser intelligence?
In their role as the guardians of our priceless civilizational heritage, why do smart people impose policies that guarantee they will have fewer children whilst their intellectual inferiors can choose to be as fecund as they like?
We are quite willing to let the trailer parks fill to bursting, even as our own hallowed halls rarely echo with the patter of tiny feet.
In the larger scheme of things, these are not very intelligent evolutionary strategies, regardless of how well our people score on the IQ tests.
Sub specie aeternitatis, intelligence is overrated.
Rebellious --
The Sowell statistics were in a book of his I read a number of years ago. I don't remember which one. But he was (and is) a conscientious and thorough researcher, and documented the statistical sources for everything he said.
His point was that all IQs are rising over time, and that blacks are effectively lagging a generation behind whites, and have been ever since testing for IQ first began.
Japan never succumbed to this multicultural nightmare.They do not even accept the full quota of refugees they promised to resettle under the U.N.s refugee resettlement scheme. The way they are tackling this problem is automation, let the machines take the load and generate the wealth to pay for the ageing population. There debt load is high but it doesn't really matter because the Japanese still save much more than we do in the west and the interest rates are nearly zero. They will have no problem servicing there debt for the foreseeable future. We in the West have painted ourselves into a corner from which there is no way out Elservier a Dutch publication puts the cost of immigration at over 200 billion Euros, unfortunately 200 billion Euros is nothing more than a telephone no. to most people, they cannot grasp it. it is only when you look at percentages that the horror of the situation starts to manifest itself. Denmark has an immigrant population of approximately 4% which consumes 40% of all welfare payments. A one percent increase in the no. of immigrants as a percentage of the Danish population and an extra 10% of Denmark's welfare budget disappears into a black hole. The interesting thing is that this will have to be taken out of the amount paid to the Danes. The Danes now only receive 60% of what they pay into the scheme one wonders what they will have to say when they receive nearly 20%less to pay for the immigrants. Somewhere between 4% and 10% when theoretically the Danes will be paying for all the welfare and receiving nothing in return a halt will be called. Entitlements and the ability to pay will have crashed the system well before muslims have reached critical mass and brought about a civil war. By critical mass I mean when the Muslim population between the ages of 15 -25 equals the indigenous population of that age group. The precariousness of the situation in the Middle East does not look good for the future 60% of the worlds oil supplies comes through the Straits of Humus. A Nuclear Iran will be playing a serious game of chicken in a couple of years. Under a normal situation a lot of bottoms would have been smacked now. Unfortunately our leaders will be weighting seriously in the balance if they can survive a blockage or these straits. the world runs on oil, none will survive the collapse of their Governments if the straits were closed for 3 months and there economies collapsed. we are seeing a precursor of this in Greece at the moment. Cowardly Europe and who can blame them will try and throw Israel too be savaged by the Islamic pack. The result will be pre ordained when an immoveable object meets an irresistible force this means total annihilation. The Yids with the lids fully understand that Islam is an existential threat and if they lose just one war they are past tense. A crippled Israel facing annihilation will lash out. The world economy will never recover. Radioactive oil fields like Chernobyl are not a good investment. What Islam does not seem to understand is that while they might supply the oil the west supplies the food. unfortunately for them food production is based on oil and gas for every one calorie that we consume we also consume 10 calories of oil. Oil is the basis of fertiliser pesticides tractor fuel transport packaging etc. Without oil there was no green revolution.Cut off the oil too the West and food production nosedives. It will be interesting to see how they feed themselves. If you only have food for yourself there is no way you are going to send it too people who caused the problem in the first place. We live in interesting times
Baron at 4:53 PM
Amen brother.
If anyone is unfamiliar with or has not read it...
I highly recommend Theodore Dalrymples
Life at the Bottom: The Worldview That Makes the Underclass
This discusses the modern Welfare State System and Bureacracies and how they, expand and sustain the Underclass.
Im doing a Dalrymple suite right now...
Our Culture, What's Left of It: The Mandarins and the Masses
Which focuses on the intellectuals and how they have undermined Western Civilization and its Cultural propagation. A good companion book to this is The Intellectuals and the Masses: Pride and Prejudice Among the Literary Intelligentsia, 1880-1939 by John Carey.
Next up
In Praise of Prejudice: The Necessity of Preconceived Ideas
and then finishing up with...
Not With a Bang But a Whimper: The Politics and Culture of Decline
In hoc signo vinces
rebelliousvanilla,
You miss the point, in the elites mind you can never threaten them because you are not British despite all their talk of equality - To them Romanians are inferior therefore not a threat, the indigenous are equal to the elite therefore a threat and must be clamped down.
To work or employ someone while claiming benefits - is in fact crimminal I would choose my friends more wisely. Most benefit fraud is internal what the government do is add the internal and external sums together and blame claiments for all the fraud.
You and the neoliberals have something in common after all, you both want to destroy the benefit system on a false agenda, (I simply do not want to give them that victory) why do you think the government illegally handed out all those N.I. numbers to your Romanian friends and other assorted aliens.
Nothing false about my agenda to destroy welfare statist policies.
A poster above posted the old canard about 'slave labour', which is most likely based on the false idea that Mohammedan workers (provided they do work) can be employed for less than their Western counterparts.
"Westerners tried to import slave labour in order to prop up the welfare state"
This is nonsense. It might be true in America where Mexicans work for a few dollars and are then more or less exploited because of missing regulations.
In EUrabia, however, this is not the case because the Labour markets is highly regulated and controlled by multiple unions and government Gestapo. There are few employers who would risk hefty fines and imprisonment by paying less to illegal Mohammedans.
IMO, a very sinister plan is well underway. 100+ people at the very top of the food chain (Google Bilderberg Group) are actively trying to eliminate the basic human and civil rights guaranteed by Western societies. They are using mass immigration to create conflicts that spiritually and financially bankrupt the native populations. Whether the Western governments are toppled one by one or en masse, there will be no retrieving lost rights because governments will begin to RFID chip their people.
The welfare state will use extended benefits (like health care) as a justification to RFID chip people. If you want your benefits (and you will because there will be fewer and fewer private sector jobs available), then you will need to accept an RFID chip.
Once you are chipped, you are owned. The government will control your access to everything: money, travel, education, employment, health care, etc. If you upset the government, the government will turn off your chip, and you will be cut off from everything in society - including food.
To answer those above, the left and the right higher ups surely do think that the government can control the immigrants (and everyone else) via RFID chips.
Read the non-fiction book Spychips by Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre. The authors publish the patent information submitted about RFID chips and the plan to control humanity.
Sheik yer'mami: citing you.
In EUrabia, however, this is not the case because the Labour markets is highly regulated and controlled by multiple unions and government Gestapo.
You are right, but not completely. The mentioned regulation and control is highly selective. In most EU countries, for example, construction projects employ various mixes of illegals in dubious conditions (not just Arabs, it is also Ukrainians, Kazakhs etc.) and the bureaucracy silently tolerates it, as long as no one gets killed by faulty equipment etc.
The establishment is realistic enough to know that enforcement of the regulations would kill the construction industry - and new stadiums and roads look so good on election fliers, don't they?
BTW The same situation exists in Russia, where most of the menial workers are from Caucasus or Tadjikistan.
I made a post previously without reading the article that sparked the discussion. It wasn't quite appropriate as it repeated many things that were already said, and so I deleted it.
On the welfare state issue, Australia is unique among Western nations, in that we have a functioning welfare state, and very small government debt (and we're all keeping an eye on Rudd to see if he will try and get us back in the black, or if he keeps going for the red). It's a situation that simply doesn't bear out anywhere else in the Western world (except New Zealand, but they're our seventh state, so yeah).
The concept of population growth is opposed by many people, for the reasons stated in the article in the link. And yet, none of the politicians or the elite seem to care. Unfortunately, it's symptomatic. On so many issues, the elite think they know best. The monarchy. The flag. Immigration. Who should be in government (Toni Collette, an actress, said she would cut her wrists if John Howard were reeelected in 2004. He was, and she didn't). The list goes on. They don't take no for an answer (the 1999 referendum on the monarchy). They want Australia remade in their image.
Unfortunately, unlike our government's financial situation, this is a problem we share with the rest of the West. It's almost comic really (here's a link to a previous post of mine on my blog), if it weren't so serious. A lack of pride means we are not held in any esteem by others. One respects those (even enemies) who are proud, and have good reason to be. And in spite of the many bad parts of our history, there are more than enough good parts to make up for it. To only focus on the bad, as these people do, leaves them lacking in pride, and costs the West respect and the esteem of others.
We must educate people about the past - why things were the way they were, and how they really were. Unfortunately, good news doesn't sell as much newspapers as bad news.
And that's why it shall never be as we would like. But I'd prefer to give them one hell of a run for their money on dominating the media, and that's why our blogs are so important. Especially since we have only two news companies (News Ltd and Fairfax) printing papers.
In hoc signo vinces
@EscapeVelocity,
So rather than import slave workers you would turn the indigenous population into slave labour, this is the horizontal economic instrument of totalitarianism. In case you had not noticed we are no longer in the labour intensive condition of even half a century ago what else do you propose sterilisation and extermination for the indigenous work force is this now a war of who gets to play slave master. This is not the politics of the next centuries it is conservative romanticism.
The people of the U.K. tumbled Thatchers (neoliberal) socialism for the few and conservative romanticism for the many. That is why decades on with the most grotesque labour government the conservative party is still struggling to pocket an election victory.
Yours is the conservatism of the Scots tobacco barons of the Americas and the slavery of indenture contracts, meet the new slave trader same as the old slave trader.
Ive seen what the Welfare State does to generations of families.
It debases them and deprives them of their humanity.
Working/employment is not slavery.
"Be sure that this demonic convergence is happening in all western world, not only the rich countries, i know the situation in Brazil but Argentina and even Chile are not much behind it. There will be no place to run."
Okay, fear not my brethern (or however it is written)!
It seems that there are no forces countering the Demonic Convergence. The two main congruent parts of the West seem to be it's greatest advocators instead of the supreme defenders of the European Civilisation:
The European Union seems to spread a threatening light from Brussels:
France's empire is an evil one; It has controled England too. And thus all the British Isles have fallen under it. Then, because Germany is been putted down ever since the Second World War (even though I assert that it has made an incredible ressurection, since what happened in 1989 and then it's influence over the Ex-Yugoslavia).
The European Union evil empire thus control: France, England and Germany. As well as all the insignifcant in-between countries: The Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg; The English influenced ones: Scotland, Wales and both Irelands; And also the confused ex imperial Iberian countries are also affected, wanting so much to enjoy leftism and also to be, finally "European".
The European North, for its insignificance, seems to go with the wave, and due to its wealth and safe position, it seems to be more radical then one would expect. That other Germany, with the capital in Wien is in the same "dorment" state than the one whose capital is in Berlin.
Two contries remain with the potential to be independent: Switzerland, and Norway. Keep looking and influentiating them. Especially Norway.
And what about Italy? If there is an European country where a conservative will not be necessarily mocked, it will be Italy.
In North America it is different. The United States of America has entered in a long decadence, and I doubt it can save itself. It has such a power that it will drag Canada, as it has:
Canada was 2% non-white in the 70s, now it is 20% that.
The only solution in America seems to be that some people still preserve her spirit, and they may be living in certain parts of the country. So there's always the hope that the heavy empire will crumble:
And maybe, from the ashes of the decadent Roman Empire, we can see the rise of the Medieval and Rennascentist Italian city-states.
Will California be a Toscany, with Los Angeles as a new Florence?
I am heavily influenced by Conservative Swede, but we must bring down those filthy heavy empires:
- NATO
- THE EUROPEAN UNION
- THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
We have to focus on a greater localism. Without these three powers, Italy, Norway and Switzerland could find themselves again, as could be revitalised Civilisation in certain places of the American North.
(continuation)
And what about the rest? The Southern Cone seems to go under great threat:
A Marxist president in Uruguay,
Lula "blue eyed people are evil" in Brazil and great iminvasion towards the better half of Brazil and Argentina.
Not to mention Bolivarianism and the midnight scream of the ones like Che going trough the entire region.
In Australia and New Zealand. They are so far away from Civilisation... they are so fragile in their position...
Not only that, Australia will always be a follower, never a leader, and it will go along with whatever it is the West's fashion.
----------------------------------
But have you thought about the Eastern shores of the Baltic? Have you thought about Poland? The Czech Republic?
Have you seen a political leader like Mr. Vclac Klaus of Czech Republic?
And what about Putin and his new envigorated Russia?
We are not dead yet, and the truth is that there is indeed some European/Western States that still can counter the "Demonic Convergence". And that, my friends, seems to me to be Russia.
I'd thus argue for us to be like fifth columns inside our States in favour of our Nations.
Five columns that will be there if Russia or any other Eastern European entity (Vclav Klaus) opposes the Demonic Convergence.
Instead of demonising them, we should help them.
I think that, though not explicitly as the Communists did, we should be a fifth column that serves Moscow (or who else) because our Nations can potentially benefit greatly from it.
Baron, for the sake of you, your blog, and everything else, I think you ought to re-aloud the discussion over Russia here. It is needed. And frankly, I think we the commenters can behave well, don't you think?
"That's why I don't support democracy as such. I favor a decentralized constitutional republic, with well-defined limitations on the power of state institutions, a balance of competing power centers, and a limited franchise."
There's no way it can happened in the United States of America. Or should I say Sufocated States?
Sorry for the American bashing but if you were to abolish the country and create ten or five different Nations... and freedom was given to the people... maybe, I said maybe, maybe some of the States could try that.
And even if it couldn't be tried, at least the people would be governed from people "close" to them, and not suffocated by the Federal Government.
America has become too big and diferentiated.
And for those that claim that the Balkanisation of a country like the United States would benifit only China, the Islamic Super-State and India and Russia...
You could create, after abolishing NATO, an BPaANoRGOT!
Between Pacific and Atlantic, North of Rio Grand, Organisation Treaty! How cool would that be, Americans!?
And you would not be tempted to police the world, export democracy, no. You could easily live your dream and be concerned with the American affairs, first and foremost.
we should be a fifth column that serves Moscow
For starters, I'm thinking to place big posters of Vladimir Putin's image on my room walls, with the slogan "YES WE CAN".
Anti Americanism is running wild!
Down with the Imperialists, Long Live the Russian 5th Column!
lol
I know it sounded radical. And I'm not capable of putting it in reasonable words by now but, ... is it that much of a nonesense, really?
I think you all understood what "the spirit" was when I wrote that: If someone attacks our enemy, we should show up us friendly? Aren't they potentially capable of facing the Demonic Convergence?
Afonso, add the United Nations to that list of organisations that needs to be dismantled.
Of course Robin, The United Nations must be destroyed.
I just was more kind of focusing in eh... somewhat effective organisations.
(I knew there was one short)
Afonso, I understand that long term macro analysis can get to sounding a little bit kooky....and you obviously do as well.
I can see the Russians and the Eastern Europeans being strong allies with the US in a possible future....through some similar reasoning.
Afonso,
Don't be crazy. Despite seeing a U.S.A. as a lone superpower dangerous (see the 90's and this decade) the fragmentation of U.S.A. would only lead to more chaos and maybe military defeat to the west. We need superpowers on our side it's just that just one global superpower is a bad thing.
If the Soviet Union had survived for just one more decade the world would be more secure (don't looking in the moral side) as it would check U.S.A. while China, India and Brazil would be forming as superpowers. Even E.U. was a good idea it was just turned in a nightmare by the marxists and burocrats. If it was formed just after WWII when the ideas were different it could have worked.
We need more superpowers, as little nations could be militarlly defeated (Jugoslavia) or suffer economic suffucation (Iraq). Balance make people less safe and more cautious with their money and rights.
These superpowers don't need to be autocratic, U.S.A. still has more freedom today than Europe and Latin America for most of their history.
Ideally they would be Tough in the outside and soft in the inside. Like the U.S.A. is even today. Some tecnological advances should be taken in consideration (while took weeks even months to do business in another state in the early XIX century now it take just hours) so that if one state does permit abortion it dosen't trample as other states will (going to California to make an abortion and being back in the same day negates the prohibitation in Virginia).
A limitation on people moving would be good also (to limit what happens in europe when poor states enter the union) but nothing so bad as really forbid peoples from moving if they really wants (a low quota).
Even if USA and or Europe do not suffer a major uphavel in the next decade the world is changing, Brazil, India and China are there to be heard and if the first world do not take them in consideration they would find thenselves having much less power than they thought they had. I do not know how it's being published (or if it is being at all) but even not doing much Brazil is doing a serious damage to the U.S.A. contention of Iran right now.
In hoc signo vinces
@EscapeVelocity,
"Ive seen what the Welfare State does to generations of families."
No! You have seen what POVERTY does to generations of families not welfare. You confuse poverty with what perpetuates it - economically engineered and politically manipulated welfare systems - not welfare systems per se.
"it debases them and deprives them of their humanity,"
Again you confuse POVERTY with welfare if anything the welfare system in the U.K. despite its present form as a poverty cage has elevated some of the human debasement and deprivation of the poverty trap.
"Working/employment is not slavery."
Depends on the economic and political power of the contractors.
Work camps that tackled Depression
Actually I dont confuse Welfare Systems with Poverty. The Welfare Systems today most certainly prevent poverty, the Western poor are not really poor in the absolute sense. These populations are however debased as no standards are enforced.
And yes Welfare Systems can be managed in a way which promotes standards of successful behavior. The Leftist ideology of cultural and moral relativism has made them the generational debasing squalor machines that they are today.
I dont favor total dismantling of the Welfare State, but the severe limitation of them and their restructuring to promote moral and cultural standards of behavior which leads to individual success and the protection of the nuclear family.
I think that welfare should also be privatized so that people are not isolated from helping their fellow man...and thus feel that it isnt their problem.
Leftism is a foul collection of moral and cultural debasement, which leads to squalor and low civilizational standards. Its regressive.
Afonso, I just thought it important to mention Un since it is completely infiltrated and run by the muslims today. I want it destroyed before they impose all the hate speech laws and limits our rights to freedom of speech on all of us in the west.
For example, the idea that ANYONE newly arrived in the UK, with no skills and no intention of working, should be given free housing and unemployment benefits is ridiculous.
People who have lived and worked and paid into pension schemes for 40 years are starving and freezing, they really should come first.
Secondly, the idea that one can bring one's own laws and customs with one is outrageous. Respect of the host country’s laws was once an absolute, without which one was not given a residence permit, let alone a passport! As to customs and religions: Consenting adults is one thing, I am all for it, however, children must be protected from apartheid, misogyny and violence; both physical and mental.
Any relaxation of basic laws and rights on grounds of religious belief must be strangled before they become a precedent. And any naturalisation must be conditional upon obedience of these laws.
I am not suggesting that a parking ticket should cause you to loose your residency permit, but theft and/or any form of violence should.
None of this is racist, or anything-phobic - just good common sense. These rules and laws, which we have developed over the years for maximum cooperation and happiness, have produced the society that these people claim to want to live in.
Hm, too bad I come in so late in this debate. Baron, this is exactly what I have been saying in Swedish comments for a few months !
"Cynical, evil Marxists and brutal, barbaric Muslims aren't enough. It takes a large cohort of us to make the Demonic Convergence work."
Sorry, I ought to have edited this but I have no time just now. It's from a post in the Daily Telegraph from a week ago or so:
The goal of the extreme Left, which has actually been herding Labour in front of them, has never been just a social revolution. It has always been The Revolution. Full stop.
The evidence is all in History. Look at Lenins and Stalins Soviet Union with 100M victims. Look at Chairman Mao's China with at least 30 M victims. Look at Pol Pot's Cambodia with a mere 2 million, or Kim Il Sungs North Korea. And note that all through the 20th century there was always a choir of leftist "intellectuals" in all western countries to deny or at least "explain" the atrocities.
The Revolution has always led to a blood bath and vicious hunts for Capitalists and "the Bourgeoisie". And they have been found. Peasants, factory owners, monks and people wearing spectacles have all been ground into the dust. Literally. What did all that got to do with "transforming human nature"? No, it's all about a sense of inferiority and hate.
After the fall of the Berlin wall and the Soviet Union, many thought that the Cold War was over. But it certainly wasn't. The Left inside the West was still unharmed and hellbent on the final victory. It was too weak for an open confrontation, so it chose a strategic psy-op to be able to build it's strenght on the World Proletariat and create a situation in which the Revolution could be gained through a proxy ally - Islam.
How can we be so sure about that ? Simple. Radical Islam is nominally all that which the Left is not - or rather what it used to say that it wasn't. Radical Islam is sexist, racist against Jews and Blacks, anti homo-sexual, anti animal rights, "not very harsh on child abuse", religious (not least), and so on and so on. All of a sudden all these differences have been overruled by the newly formed alliance, just as in the 30's, and frequently abominal "isolated cases" from real life are "explained" to us as effects of a diversity of underlying causes other than religion. In fact, according to the Left nothing bad can come out of Islam. There is nothing to discuss. No hesitation. No issue. Not even among social "scientists". There is not even a single instance in which the extreme Left feels obliged to criticize Islam. Does that make the alarm bell ring, anyone?
How could these two seemingly different ideologies find each other? Simply because the co-operation had already begun long before the fall of the Soviet Union - under the same red flag, and because their enemy is the same, again as in the 30's.
Remember the tight co-operation between European radicals, such as the Rote Armée Fraktion, the Brigate Rosse, Action Directe, just to mention a few, and the PFLP. Many more were the "intellectuals", once again, who went to interview and write glorifying essays about the "freedom fighters". After the revolution in Iran, the Soviet-Afghan war and the fall of the Soviet Union these organisations in the Middle East simply dissolved in thin air and reappeared as Muslim organisations, as Hezbollah and Hamas and a revival of the Islamic Brotherhood. The contacts were still there. They simply needed a new ideological motif and context, which our "intellectuals" were ready to design.
Islam is the Left's Final Solution to the Bourgeois Question.
cont.
The first thing we have to do to start untangling this mess is to understand that the one dimensional concept of just Left and Right is a mind-block (yes, I too used the terms for conveniency). It's really a circle where the "extreme left" and the "extreme right" touch each other at the bottom, or a diagram, with Democracy-Totalitarianism on the Y-axis and Collective-Private ownership/solutions on the X-axis. How often do we see Fascists become "centrarians" ? Or Communists become Liberals ? We do see Socialists become Fascists (Mussolini) and we did see Communists and Nazis join hands, didn't we? Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini all favourably commented each others handling of their opposition, real or imagined. Today, in some places in Europe we have begun to see the few Nazis also ally themselves with the Islamo-fascists.
So, we needn't be afraid to move "too far to the right" as long as we keep well above the Democratic-Totalitarian "line of demarcation". It is not un-democratic to stop the willful destruction of a society. What use is democracy if it cannot defend itself? These were the same difficult questions presented to the German Social Democrat chancellor Helmut Schmidt during the red Baader-Meinhof terror campaign of the 70's, but on a much lesser scale.
Who, then, is the role model for a democratic stance against Totalitarianism in all its forms? Needless to say, it's Winston Churchill of course - a real conservative, a British national hero, and an utterly uncompromising fighter and democrat. He is a role model for all of the West for this is not just about Britain. The situation and the "underlying causes" are the same everywhere. Churchills thinking is really timeless, but if you really want to find some up to date inspiration, I can recommend Scruton. I haven't read any other Conservative thinkers. In fact, I didn't know that I was a Conservative until I read them. But that's what's left to believe in, the only ideology that is not compromised by recent history. We don't really want to call it an ideology, do we? Because it isn't about engineering at all. It's just about natural human functions, traditions and reactions. And of course, we talk about real Conservatism here, not about the present Conservative Party. But the party's policies can of course be changed. We will never give in.
The second thing we have to do, but I guess that has become obvious by now, is to understand that the words coming from those who will defend every atrocity commited by our enemies must not be mistaken for views. There is no reason to become puzzled, amazed or upset. Those words are not intended to help us finding the truth and to build us a better society. They are merely bullets fired at the roots of our culture, our self-esteem and our will to defend ourselves and to live on. So do not waste time and energy on brooding on how they can say such a thing or what they really mean. It won't lead you anywhere. Instead spend your time strenghtening the morale of your fellow citizens and your family to mentally prepare them for the onslaught that is coming.
Baron,
We should collect more proof, for our future historians (we will no doubt be in a position to write the future history), for the marxist manipulative internal warfare against our societies. And it is so very easy to find. How? Just check who those people are who have pressed the issue of immigration and "refugees" and "human rights" most. Who are they, then ? Well, a distressing number of them who now call themselves "social democrats", or even "liberals", have a background in the most extreme Marxist-Leninist parties, those parties who openly advocated The Revolution in the 60s and 70s. What are the chances that it is a coincidence ?
Post a Comment