Kitman has distilled nine points from a television presentation given by Thilo Sarrazin, the well-known Islam-critic in Germany:
Thilo Sarrazin: Nine Conclusions Regarding Muslim Immigration
| 1. | No immigration policy, in whatever shape or form, is able to solve the key problem of our demographic development. | |
| 2. | Whoever believes that problems of integration can be solved through more education alone will compel us live a lie. | |
| 3. | All immigrants are not alike. So far immigrants from Eastern Europe, India, China, and Vietnam pose no integrational problems at all in their second generation. | |
| 4. | All the important economic and cultural problems of integration in Europe are concentrated around immigrants from Muslim countries. The successful integration of Muslim immigrants already living among us has to be given absolute priority over further immigration from Muslim countries. | |
| 5. | Muslim immigrants have a troubling tendency to form parallel societies and are almost entirely unable to intermarry with their new countrymen. | |
| 6. | It is the Islamic culture which is responsible for these problems, not the ethnic background. This culture is only marginally compatible with secular Western society. | |
| 7. | The problems in economic and cultural integration of immigrants from Islamic countries mean that they have an unquestionably negative impact on the host society. | |
| 8. | The European welfare-state model is not free of blame. Even without any employment, basic social security benefits far exceed the income Muslim immigrants could obtain in their home country. | |
| 9. | Immigrants who reject our culture, have no education, and are mostly attracted by the social benefits, and the prospect of bringing in large numbers of family relatives will cost our society dearly. |
The subtitled video and an accompanying transcribed text are below the jump:
Full text:
I have therefore summarised my main points as follows:
| 1. | No immigration policy, in whatever shape or form, is able to solve the key problem of our demographic development. Namely, that each generation is around one third smaller than the one that came before. And that within this declining number of children, the relative number of children stemming from uneducated households is constantly on the increase. | |
| 2. | Education is very important. But education is quickly becoming a new fetish of our society, and whoever believes that these problems can be solved through more education alone will compel us to live a lie. | |
| 3. | Immigrants are not simply immigrants. Immigrants from Eastern Europe, India, China, and Vietnam pose no integrational problems at all in their second generation. By that time, these immigrants have a higher level of education and a better employment rate than do indigenous Germans. 10-11 million immigrants in Germany, and their descendants have no integrational problems in their second generation. They constitute an economic and cultural benefit to Germany. | |
| 4. | All important economic and cultural problems of integration are concentrated around the 4-6 million immigrants from Muslim countries. The successful integration of Muslim immigrants already living among us has to be given absolute priority over further immigration from Muslim countries. When it comes to these immigrants, education and employment in the 2nd and 3rd generation is far below that of Germans, other immigrant groups, and their descendants. And nothing seems to support the case for any sufficient improvements over time in this matter. | |
| 5. | A troubling tendency to form parallel societies is evident. Only 3 percent of the 2nd generation of Turkish immigrants marry a German citizen, whereas 70 percent of Russian immigrants intermarry. | |
| 6. | As far as I can tell, these problems are not caused by their ethnic background. It is the Islamic culture which is responsible for the problems. This culture shapes the values and lifestyle of a large part of the Muslim immigrants, and is only marginally compatible with secular Western society. This is particularly evident in Great Britain, with the very dissimilar integration of immigrants from India on the one hand and Pakistan and Bangladesh on the other. These problems burden not just Germany, but all the European countries with a significant number of Muslim immigrants. | |
| 7. | The problems in economic and cultural integration of immigrants from Islamic countries mean that the economic and societal impact of immigration from these countries is unquestionably negative to the host society. As long as the cultural make-up of these immigrants does not undergo a fundamental change, they will create additional economic and social problems, not ease the demographic shifts. | |
| 8. | The German and European welfare-state model is not free of blame. The basic social security benefits for an immigrant family in Germany far exceed any realistic appraisal of the income they could obtain in, say, eastern Turkey or Lebanon without any family member being employed. The vastly improved integration of the same immigrant groups in the US, is mainly due to the fact that they there either provide for themselves, leave the country, or never arrive in the first place. | |
| 9. | The economic growth in later months and the increased demand for work has lead to a short-sighted debate about immigration policy. Is it not ironic? For the past 45 years our self-imposed demographic sinkhole draws closer. With the precision of clockwork, and the pace and weight of an iceberg. And now that this sinkhole shows itself in the labor market, everybody seems frantically astonished. The highest birthrate in Germany, was achieved in 1965. That generation is now 45 years old. They are at the peak of their career and productivity and are now entering the so-called “declining years”. Who will assume their duties? 1.45 million 45-year-olds in Germany currently, but only 950,000 20-year olds and 600,000 one-year-olds. Haste does not lead anywhere; reflection is demanded, and learning from our own mistakes. Immigrants who reject our culture; have no education; are mostly attracted by the social benefits and the prospect of bringing in large numbers of family relatives… They will in the long run cost our society more than they pay into it. Many people now want to implement a point-based system or use the American green-card model for immigrants. I am in favor of this. If Germany had had a system resembling that of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, or the US, with high barriers for the unskilled, and no social benefits for immigrants, then around 90 percent of the Muslim immigrants now living in Germany would never have come here. I would like to stress this point. |
18 comments:
Now, we're getting somewhere.... :)
Agreed,Sarrazin's nine conclusions are probably applicable to most Western countries. Points 1&3 are the keys to the solution.
The myths that mass immigration is a panacea and that the failure of Moslems to integrate is due to 'racism' in the host society seem to be widespread amongst our political elite.
With fine German precision Thilo Sarrazin hits the nail on the head.
Can the multicultural leftists accept reality?
Read about Islam’s’ “Crescent Curtain” at http://islamsfatalflaw.blogspot.com/ .
Brilliant.
Is it possible that if the Western democracies had not engaged in mass abortion over the past 50 or so years, we would have all the young, working-age people that we need, and there would have been no need for any immigration, especially from under-developed and backward muslim countries?
I agree exactly with his comments but his comments are exactly what muslim immigrants and their imams dont want.They do not want to become intermarried into our society and westernised.Hence the ban on muslim woman marrying outside of islam.Islam in europe is a floating jail to these woman.They move from their home country but on the whole nothing will change for them.
Islam's soldiers is not interest in integration. Why should they? They have worked out that the liberal (socialist) aided and abetted guilt tripping is doing the trick.
What is the trick? The trick is that we, non-Muslims, are having to integrate.
The true enemy is not Islam but Islamo-Socialism - euphemistical called Political Correctness /Multi-Culturalism - hate speech laws, immigration, asylumn laws and debt spending are some of the key elements that need to be eliminated.
What has Kitman done to his blog? All I get is "No Posts".
Isn't it ironic that an Islam critic is called Sarrazin? Ha!
I quite agree with John's point: it has come to this because of the abortions.
Although it is encouraging to listen to Sarrazin, I fear the PC/MC disease has not fully run its course, even with him:
"Immigrants from Eastern Europe, India, China, and Vietnam pose no integrational problems at all in their second generation."
Uh, maybe not, Thilo, but they are still slowly but surely REPLACING you.
Of course, maybe he is just being careful. If he were to complain about being REPLACED then he would be accused of a "hate crime" and put on trial like Geert Wilders and Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wollf.
I see no usefulness in Sarrazin's inclusion of such phrases as:
4... The successful integration of Muslim immigrants already living among us has to be given absolute priority over further immigration from Muslim countries.
6... This culture [Islamic culture] is only marginally compatible with secular Western society.
Does Sarrazin actually believe these to be true or is he just trying to appease the PC MCs? If the latter, he should know they will vilify him anyway; so what's the point? If the former, he's too asymptotic for my taste. He will be doing a fine job working toward the goal of Closing the Barn Door After the Wolves Have Gotten In.
Speaking of pushing memes, I advocate pushing the meme of total deportation of all Muslims. It is a seeming paradox that pushing the less robust Sarrazinist meme of curbing Muslim immigration may well tend to inhibit the more robust meme of total deportation (see my argument in the above-linked essay).
Is it possible that if the Western democracies had not engaged in mass abortion over the past 50 or so years, we would have all the young, working-age people that we need, and there would have been no need for any immigration, especially from under-developed and backward muslim countries? -- John in Cheshire
Indeed.
The number of illegal Mexican Nationals in the US is almost exactly the number of aborted children in the US for the last 40 years.
"It is the Islamic culture which is responsible for these problems, not the ethnic background."
Unfortunately, this is wrong. The Islamic culture is indeed responsible for non-integration, and this is all the more important since Islam crosses ethnic borders.
However, race is paramount. Races exist precisely because people tend not to mix across race boundaries, and for good reason. This is so obvious it is usually overlooked.
Mixing only with one's own is a matter of trust : it is conducive to safety and gives more chances of survival to one's offspring.
Who seriously believes that a black African, with a mean IQ of 70, more testosterone than Whites, a higher level of impulsivity and violence, a lesser ability to plan for the future, and no connexion to the written word except the one that was imparted upon him just yersterday by European colonialists, can easily integrate in a white, technology-driven Europe or America, even if he is Christian or animist ?
Islam is an aggravating factor. It's an ideology, culturally transmitted, that practically guarantees that integration will not occur. It's also violent, agressive and supremacist, meaning that Islam will try to integrate all other groups to itself -- not the other way round.
So, clearly, Islam is the worst case of the evils of multiculturalism : forcibly mixing human groups which have evolved separately for centuries, if not millenia.
It's also (let's be honest) politically expendient to focus on Islam, because it is a way of avoiding the lethal third rail of race, while explaining the dynamics of human groups -- and letting people connect the dots themselves.
However, the basic reasons which make it a folly to force Muslims into the non-Muslim world are the same which make it a folly to force massive numbers of racially different people into a given society.
To give but an example, yes, the Chinese or Vietnamese or Cambodians do integrate better into ethnically European countries, because they tend to be more intelligent than the natives, not have a violent behaviour and have a good work and family ethic ; but this should really only be used as a comparison yardstick.
The relatively harmless character of Chinese immigration is the proof that Muslim or African immigration is a problem in itself, and that this problem is not caused by "poverty" or "racism".
However, dumping large numbers of Chinese immigrants in Europe or America is not acceptable either, despite what Thilo Sarrazin may say.
If you change the ethnical character of a people, then it's not the same people anymore. And all your past, history, culture, values, knowledge, bonds and trust are gone. For ever.
It's genocide by other means.
It's as simple as that.
Mr Marchenoir is correct. Culture is an expression of race. It is a reflection of how race sees itself in nature. Even without Islam Muslims would still be Muslims, but just under a different name.
It's fine to be creative and speculate on what the population would be like without abortion. But it's mere speculation. I'll add mine: some of the women who had abortions were from dysfunctional ethnic groups, who would have ended up on welfare or in prison, as opposed to being workers. Other abortion clients would include progressive women, who would have given birth to more progressive social activists, not workers.
So many people forget how people handled birth control in the past. Back in the day, a king might have 50 children by several wives, slaves, concubines, etc. If the children weren't perfect, they were left outside to die of exposure. If a rival group won a war, all the sons would be killed, and the women would be carried off as trophies, to have children for the victors.
This was birth control in the old days. Why complain about abortion? It's effete, compared to the birth control of old.
In the good old days, people had a lot of children because most children died before adulthood. Large families nowadays are new and different, in that most children survive.
Due to people's religious convictions, they're making up out of context stories about then and now. If you actually read about then, now isn't so bad, especially WRT demographics and birth control.
And if we must ask what if...what if immigrants to the west weren't paid to have children? What if third world people weren't paid to have children, in the form of food and medical aid? Wouldn't the numbers of missing enemies dwarf the missing white people? In fact, wouldn't those hostile populations collapse right away? (I'm soft-hearted, though, I'd offer food to anyone willing to be sterilized, there is no reason for any cooperative enemy to starve.)
And why do I always have to be the one to remind us of this? Do the religious people who hate women's reproductive rights want to win their argument so much, they don't mention anything that doesn't support it?
If we didn't pay the poor to have children and mostly gave them alternatives (in other words, if Margaret Sanger's vision had been followed more closely), we would have neither the immigrants nor the masses of poor.
The purpose of the Cloward-Piven strategy is to overwhelm capitalist society with the costs of the welfare system. Without masses of poor, that would be impossible. The very people who are horrified by the idea of Medicaid abortions are the ones who enable our collapse under the weight of Medicaid babies.
Post a Comment