Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Thilo Sarrazin vs. the Ruling Multicultural Oligarchs

The Fjordman Report

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.



Defeating EurabiaIt is true, as some observers point out, that many people make stupid choices and more or less freely vote for parties that insult them and take away their freedom and dignity. This is a very real problem and exposes some of the flaws of mass democracy. I don’t question that. The issue is whether there is also something else at work in the modern West in addition to this, and my answer to that is “yes”. As Bat Ye’or has demonstrated in her pioneer work Eurabia and I have confirmed in my own book Defeating Eurabia, the leaders of the European Union have been promoting Third World mass immigration, including Muslim immigration, as a long-term policy for decades. Similar policies are no doubt at work in North America.

The harassment of the popular immigration critic Thilo Sarrazin in Germany and the hostile international reactions to the referendum against Islamic minarets in Switzerland clearly demonstrate that we are also dealing with a self-appointed transnational elite in power throughout the Western world who are consciously and deliberately trying to dismantle Western nation states using international law combined with massive propaganda campaigns, “anti-racist” brainwashing of people of European origins and above all mass immigration.

Thilo Sarrazin

US writer Lee Harris is the author of the recent book The Next American Civil War — The Populist Revolt against the Liberal Elite and the previous title The Suicide of Reason, which I have discussed before. In his essay The Tea Party vs. the Intellectuals, Harris describes how the USA’s intellectual elite has become radically out of touch with the sensibility of a large chunk of their nation’s population. He notes the “mounting dissatisfaction at living in a society in which a small group has increasingly solidified its monopoly over the manufacture and distribution of opinion, deciding which ideas and policies should be looked upon favorably and which political candidates will be sympathetically reported.”

Tea Party 7According to Lee Harris, “The goal of such censorship is to create a population that has been so well trained and disciplined by the political elite that it will be incapable of even thinking forbidden thoughts.” Due to the existence of modern mass media of unprecedented power, especially the visual mass media such as television, “If the censors have the power to eliminate thoughts they find objectionable, what will prevent them from abusing their formidable capacity by imposing their own narrow agenda on the rest of society, and for their own selfish purposes? Indeed, what is to keep them from establishing a totalitarian regime that does not need to rely on terror or brute force simply because it has developed far more effective methods of obtaining the consent of the masses — namely, cultural indoctrination?”

A thematically related article about the “ruling class” of the USA, written by Professor Angelo M. Codevilla, appeared in the American Spectator in July 2010. He believes we are witnessing a clash between what he dubs “the country class” and a liberal, urban ruling class. Tensions arise because the majority “discovered that virtually no one in a position of power in either party or with a national voice would take their objections seriously, that decisions about their money were being made in bipartisan backroom deals with interested parties, and that the laws on these matters were being voted by people who had not read them.”
- - - - - - - - -
As Codevilla notes, the ruling class has grown and set itself apart from the rest by its connection with ever bigger government. They claim to be upholders of “science” and “reason” and that those who disagree with them and their views are ignorant and superstitious bigots. This arguably constitutes their weakest spot. If their critics can prove that these self-appointed elites have lied about major issues such as global warming, Islam or genetic differences between various ethnic groups they can strike a serious blow to their regime.

Author Christopher Lasch warned against such trends in his 1996 book The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy. While these examples are from the USA, very similar forces are at work simultaneously from Austria to Australia and from Sweden to Britain. In the case of Sarrazin the Multicultural oligarchs made many mistakes, above all by being too open with their censorship. This approach breeds resentment and anger and could potentially make the peasants look for their pitchforks. The elites are increasingly nervous and therefore increasingly sloppy, which is good. They have showed their hand and demonstrated openly that we live in an oligarchy, not a democracy. There is a theory that all alleged democracies are actually hidden oligarchies, since a few rich and powerful individuals, groups and families will control much of the propaganda flow and pull the strings behind the scenes.

The problem with the Western oligarchs is that they are actively hostile to the long-term interest of the white majority population. China is an oligarchy, too, but despite their numerous flaws the Chinese oligarchs today are arguably better at promoting the long-term interests of their people. At the very least they are not deliberately mass importing hostile tribes who immediately proceed to rape their daughters and stab their sons. Western elites do this on a daily basis. It would be interesting to analyze the motivations behind the evil actions of the Globalist Multicultural oligarchs of the West, but this has to await a later essay.

Multi-culti mathMulticulturalism is in some ways almost more totalitarian than Communism. We just didn’t realize this at first. In Norway, Khalid Salimi, a Pakistani “anti-racist,” complained about the fact that too many white natives peacefully enjoyed music at a festival together in their own country. This wasn’t “diverse” enough. Soon whites will literally be banned from congregating in separate groups. I no longer consider this a joke. The “conservative” President Sarkozy has said publicly that native Frenchmen have to mix with immigrants. It is thus mandatory in France to import Africans and breed with them. Not even Stalin did this. In the modern West, the state wants to regulate who we have sex with and from which ethnic group.

Communist societies were based on fear. So are Multicultural ones. The control mechanisms are normally more subtle, to be sure, but they exist. What happened was not that totalitarianism died with the Cold War, but that non-lethal means of manipulating and controlling the masses were perfected within the West. We don’t have a Gulag, but (white) people constantly live in fear that saying something “racist” could end their careers. Yet this “fear of being called a racist” is currently weakening. This means that the Multicultural oligarchs have to quickly manufacture new lies and come up with alternative strategies for keeping the masses in their place, or they will be forced to apply increasingly heavy-handed censorship, which will breed resentment, expose their rule and demonstrate that they have no real arguments in their favor. For critics of Multiculturalism, this can only be a good thing.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Exactly! Very distinctly put what I have struggled to say.

In the US this seems to work by getting widespread agreement on a general principle- things should be "fair", people should be treated with respect- and then making absurd extensions to get things like affirmative action and gay marriage.

Zenster said...

This means that the Multicultural oligarchs have to quickly manufacture new lies and come up with alternative strategies for keeping the masses in their place, or they will be forced to apply increasingly heavy-handed censorship, which will breed resentment, expose their rule and demonstrate that they have no real arguments in their favor.

All of which points towards preservation of the Internet as a Free Speech outlet and fact checking tool of unparalleled utility.

Second only to maintaining the right to bear arms; keeping the Internet open and free may be one of the few last, best hopes for human liberty. I dread to consider what my own level of political awareness might be if the Internet had not been available.

Much as America's original two party political framework has become a one party system of the almighty dollar, so has this world's elite become answerable only to itself.

Without loyalty to nation of birth, ethnic heritage, race or religion, the Multicultural Transnationalists are attempting to fabricate their own moral code.

It exists in a vacuum that is devoid of all familiar landmarks. Similar to Liberals, these Globalists employ a form of Magical Thinking™ that is determined to ignore reality and history.

This new millennial creed swears allegiance to no one. It deludes itself that wealth or survival can be divorced from all foundations of culture and genetics. Only a cocoon of political and financial power shelters it from the harsh elements of reality that normally dissolve such illusions.

The most fundamental delusion is that there will be any honor amongst these transcendent, oligarchic thieves. As if any of them will protect each other's families or property when push comes to shove. As if they will not hasten to feed upon each other's carcasses at the first opportunity.

They already feast upon our blood and treasure. It is only a monumental hubris that obscures any self-perception of the cannibalism they engage in.

As all concept of public service dwindles into insignificance, this world’s current political and financial leadership is merely distinguished by varying degrees of corruption. The total moral bankruptcy of Robert Mugabe, Kim Jong-il and Ferdinand Marcos differs only in shading from that of Hamid Karzai, Herman Van Rompuy or Barack Obama.

Old Atlantic Lighthouse said...

Great essay. The way to lose this fear is to write and speak. Making comments on a blog or in the comment threads of Washington Post makes a difference.

To say you want to end non-white immigration is hard to do even on an anonymous basis. One should take what steps one can, and not condemn those who have gone further and try to push yourself to go a little further.

Join NumbersUSA and write a comment in the PS. This is with your own name. Be polite at all times, but don't back down. Or if you do, bounce back. It isn't necessary to take large steps all at once or pressure others to. Small and steady steps work fine. You can lead others with them as well.

You don't have to have the same position with everyone. You can be a little more PC in some circumstances. Going from just reading to making a comment now and then is an important step.

Juniper in the Desert said...

Exceptionally well put!

As a former teacher, I am studying stuff that spews out of the EU education depts: all multi-culti propaganda, no mention of encouragement to think for oneself, concentration on subjects like global warming, equality, nothing genuinely useful or pertaining to the individual culture of each country, just brainwashing. In fact I found a UK GCSE paper which actually promoted an anti-Israel view on Gaza!

Elan-tima said...

Its always comforting to read that others have come to the same conclusions as oneself.

This world wide oligarchy seems to resemble the former Holy Roman Empire where a elite that was pre statehood ruled the masses and moved around the map based on self serving economic interest. Like Corporations of today they would marry and merge, expand and dissolve through conflict among themselves and their families, with little regard for which ever peasantry they came to control through feudalism. When the Liberal Humanists of the burgeoning business class became more powerfull they sought to replace the Aristocracy with a plutocratic oligarchy keeping the H-R-E model in tact. Unfortunatly the peasantry came up with Nationalism and the plan was delayed until after Nationalism was defiled by the utopics in WWII.

Another flaw in democracy which has expidited the current situation is its revulsion of "Draconian Law". Originally created in ancient Greece, the law was so named because a powerful family(Draco) was constantly lobbying the circumnavigation of law for their own--special interest--. Thus the Draco Law kept them and any other powerful non governmental entity from corrupting the system. Mondern lobby groups and many politicians cry "Draconian Law" when they believe special interest will be trumpt by unbending authority. Just another flash card to let us plebs know who the elites in government and the oligarchs are really looking out for.

1389 said...

'Human rights' is the new race card

penyghent said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
penyghent said...

Spengler's Decline of the West is prophetic - or rather it's an empirical study whose calculations are confirmed by reality.

goethechosemercy said...

I think it's about time we set up culturally specific schools for education in the Western Way.
I've had all I can take of the tyranny of multiculturalism that forces only the most superficial knowledge of the world onto students.
We need to start teaching the precepts, and they are systematized and they can be taught, of Western culture.
There should be no Muslim-Western dialogue until we can be sure that Westerners are taught their culture. They have to know what they're defending in the first place to defend it.

whtly said...

I reacall reading some good time ago John Sopel's biography of Tony Blair (written before he became Prime Minister) in which Blair said his long term goal was 'ethical socialism', a term coined (as far as I'm aware) by Oswald Spengler in Decline of the West, a comparative study.

For those that don't know the book, Spengler's thesis is the morphology of culture. He argued empirically that cultures (he was talking in terms of the 'high cultures', which he listed as the West, the Roman, the Arabic, the Egyptian, the Classical, the Inca, the indian, and the Chinese) are organic and have a definite lifespan and each follows the same course and goes through the same processes at the same stage in its life.

I am persuaded by his argument. It is a work of true genius and like every product of genius, blindingly obvious once you realise it!

Anyway, back to Blair - he was talking to his biographer Sople about his political ambitions. Clearly Blair had read Spengler and had been convinced. Spengler's investigation led him to conclude that at this particular period in a culture's life its defining spirit is 'ethical socialism'.

Spengler found that 'ethical socialism' is the destined state of every mature culture. And that as the West was approaching maturity it too would follow this course.

And it seemed to me that Blair used Spengler prescriptively in that he made a conscious decision to hitch a ride on the spirit of the age as defined by Spengler. And I think that Western elites whilst not necessarily doing the same also appear to be aware of the going down of the West in that they are busy building supranational lifeboats for themselves.

Anonymous said...

Elan, the idea that my vote is worth the same as someone's who is on welfare and doesn't do squat is preposterous. I don't get how so many people are into this idiocy that universal suffrage democracy is.

Hans Hermann Hoppe wrote about this in a brilliant way - in a democracy, since people are elected once in a while, it makes sense to import as many unproductive people. In a monarchy, the monarch acts like the owner of the country and wants to maximize the productivity of his country - so Muslims would normally be expelled.

The idea that people should elect their leaders and hold them accountable is a good one. The belief that all should have equal votes and everyone should be citizen and have voting rights though is a joke. The same principle agency problem created by monarchy is exacerbated under universal suffrage democracy.

Fjordman, the Chinese oligarchs act against the Chinese interests by subsidizing America. Normally, they'd cut the link to the dollar, dump treasuries and have a bad recession after which their economy would be brilliant. But that would get them booted out of power, so they need perpetual growth, at least in nominal terms. They have no other way to keep themselves in power, which is the opposite from our way. Here the elites just get elected and their performance in power is irrelevant. Also, since the Chinese oligarchs aren't elected and will be in power in the next 20 years, provided no revolution will take place, it makes sense for them to think long term. I'm honest about it, if I was a politician, I wouldn't care the less about what happens after the next four years. I would also disagree with finding multiculturalism more totalitarian than communism. We had the same things that the Pakistani guy complained about - it was just bad if people of a middle class background got together.

If you accept the universal egalitarian philosophy combined with individualism, you have no reason to object to Sarkozy's statement. Besides this, I think your article is brilliant, as usual.

Anonymous said...

whtly, cultures do have cycles. I forgot the one where the Chinese invited Indians to move into their country though. While all cultures rise and decline, the premises that each culture has will either give the people that created it a chance to restore the culture or not. Because if European people disappear, there will not be another West even if we brainwash Muslims and Africans with our beliefs, like some people want. It's not going to make a difference.

The way things happen is that cultures decline and are destroyed militarily. We are committing suicide.

Augusto Sousa said...

Look at the english and french in a little european country on the other side of the atlantic and you find a little war like the war of 1812, english building as many prisons' as it can for a little europe living all in one land. Multicultralism. How beautiful everyone gets along trying to overtake the others. End up in their jails to loose their lively hoods on false accusations. Creating a europe all in one land, and all one people, how they brag about how the streets are the cleanest in the world not because they are clean, because the win that sends garbage from one side of the city to the other and if and when it is not snowing. You don't have to post this if you don't wan to cause I'm at home in my country, with my people.

Hans-Georg Lundahl said...

Multiculturalism was - along with feminism - part of Social Democratic society in Sweden, at least after if not already during Olof Palme.

And Social Democrats were in some ways more totalitarian than Communists.