I posted last weekend about the bullying manner displayed by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan towards the Germans, as if Germany were his own personal fiefdom.
This excellent article from Politically Incorrect sheds additional light on the subject. It describes the craven behavior of German politicians, who compete with each other to pander to Turkish voters.
The Turkish vote is crucial at the margin, and is enough to swing an election. Catering to Turkish voters can only be effective if the Turks in Germany vote as a bloc, which they tend to do. Native Germans — who still enjoy an overwhelming majority — could counter this by voting as a bloc themselves, but this is unthinkably racist in the current climate. To make matters worse, there is no significant difference among the major parties on issues related to immigration and Multiculturalism, although that may be in the process of changing.
Many thanks to JLH for the translation:
How Politicians Cut Themselves Off At the Knees
by Kassandra Komplex
Many people wonder why Muslims are courted so much by German politicians. But the reason is clear. It has been quite a while since Muslims reached a numerical proportion at which they can and definitely do influence election results.
Former chancellor Gerhard Schröder had already recognized this potential. When his re-election was in the balance in 2002 he bet on the Turkish card. By promising the Turks to be a strong proponent of Turkish entry into the EU, he got the necessary majority. The Turks tipped the scales to assure Schröder’s re-election. His efforts and his loyalty to Turkey, as is known, continue to this day.
This example has not been forgotten. Since then, the number of immigrants has continued to increase. The role Muslims play in a democracy grows year by year with the demographic development. Thus, they have become a factor for politicians that must be considered in their planning. No one has summed up this thought process as well as Martin Neumeyer, the CSU integration officer of the Bavarian state government:
“In the medium term, we will win no more elections without Muslims. The CSU must be honest with itself about that. I think many Muslims are like CSU voters: conservative, religious and attached to their home. As a party, we must canvass the liberal Muslims.”
Without wishing to go into the somewhat aggrandized view of Muslims, it is the first sentence that is decisive: “In the medium term, we will win no more elections without Muslims.”
So, what to do?
You try to finagle the votes with little gifts and ever more extensive concessions. And this strategy seems spread across all fractions and applies to all major parties. The city of Munich offers a wonderful example, where the Muslim vote is being sought by offering the reward of the center for Islam in Europe. The construction seems to be a done deal already and any criticism of it and of its controversial imam is stubbornly ignored. Any criticism of Islam is criticized and made more difficult with more severe laws. Everything in Muslim terms. You do not want to scare away future voters.
On sober refection, it seems doubtful that this calculation will work out. Unconditional intervention for a minority at the cost of the majority makes for growing discontent in the latter. Most recently, since the Sarrazin debate, the social climate has changed noticeably and many citizens are no longer reluctant to address topics such as the demographic change in favor of the Muslims, and their failure to integrate. And although politics and the media have done everything imaginable to play this down, a process of social rethinking has begun, which could have a lasting effect on future voters.
Many citizens increasingly feel that they are more and more poorly represented by the mainstream parties and the general disappointment in their policies is growing — policies that have nothing to do with the population’s own interests. By one-sidedly currying favor with a minority to gain its votes, the parties run the risk of losing votes on the other side because many disappointed voters will defect to one of the new “right” parties. Following on the Sarrazin debate, polls have shown that interest in a new “right” party would persist if there is an alternative. So the nicely laid-out strategy of capturing Muslim votes could turn out to be a white elephant.
While the MSM are waxing enthusiastic over the democratic change on the Arabian Peninsula, Islam critics are more likely to regard this development skeptically, and the Pew Research Center’s study should at least cause some reflection. On the question of whether Islam should play a large role in politics, 95% of the Egyptians were for it, only 2% wanted a smaller role. Jordan came in last, where 53% were for a large role and 2% for a small role. Of special interest to us are the poll results in Turkey where 45% want a large political role for Islam and 26% a small one. Altogether, that means that 71% of Turks want Islam to play some role in politics.
Even proceeding from the optimistic assumption that the numbers are lower with German Turks, a certain tendency can be identified, which should make German politicians thoughtful. Because they cannot satisfy this basic need of the Muslim voters without betraying their own basic program.
In the long run, unbeknownst to themselves, the politicians are sawing off the limb they are sitting on. As their proportion of the populace increases, the Muslims in future will prefer new parties of their own, like the “Bremen Turkish Party (BTP),” “BIG” or the “Federation for Peace and Fairness”, which represent their interests better than the established parties. It is quite foreseeable that future parties will increasingly concentrate on the subject of Islam. The established parties will have less and less significance for devout Muslims. And when Muslims form the majority — which seems only a matter of time — the established parties will dwindle into insignificance, no matter how many immigrants they include in their ranks.
Unfortunately, such long-term considerations are not included in the calculations of politicians, few of whom plan beyond the next legislative session. And that is the error of reasoning adopted by Martin Neumeyer and many of his party colleagues, when they cast an eye on Muslim votes. With a growing Muslim majority, the Christian parties above all will be an absolute No Go for them, just because of the C in their names. And all the other parties will have only a tiny advantage if an Islamic party is available as an alternative.
It is not without reason that an Ibrahim El-Zayat assumes Muslims could elect the first Muslim federal chancellor by 2020. Developments seem to bear him out. When you consider what influence Muslims already have on policy, despite a comparatively small percentage of the population, this estimate is not at all unrealistic.
The lesson is clear: It is not only that Germany is doing away with itself — German politicians are doing the rest, prematurely doing away with themselves.
Hat tip: Etruscan.
12 comments:
As their proportion of the populace increases, the Muslims in future will prefer new parties of their own, like the “Bremen Turkish Party (BTP),” “BIG” or the “Federation for Peace and Fairness”, which represent their interests better than the established parties. [emphasis added]
Good grief! Just having the words "Muslims" and "Federation for Peace and Fairness" in the same sentence is idiotic enough. What in Hell is it that allows people to so thoroughly delude themselves that a majority voting block of Muslims will have anything to do with "Peace and Fairness".
Islam is diametrically opposed to every concept of "Peace and Fairness". Anyone who thinks otherwise should be deemed certifiable.
Sweden in 'historic' deal on immigration policy
http://www.thelocal.se/32374/20110303/
The West in general is corrupt and decadent. Let the Westerners get raped by the Muslims. Pathetic weaklings get what they deserve. Nature does not side with the weak. It kills them off.
Kassandra Komplex (great handle!) wrote: "It has been quite a while since Muslims reached a numerical proportion at which they can and definitely do influence election results."
I guess I'm going to have to play Polyanna Perspektiv in contrast to Kassandra Komplex here, because the numbers don't bear out this assertion. Germany is 5% Muslim. Only 45% of these Muslims have German citizenship. And since the Muslim population is considerably younger than the native Germans, only about 2% of the German electorate is Muslim. Muslim voters might indeed be decisive in a very close election, like when Schroder's SPD narrowly eked out a victory in 2002, but at the end of the day they are still only about 2% of the electorate.
KK wrote: "Since then, the number of immigrants has continued to increase."
Not true. The number of immigrants to Germany has declined dramatically since the turn of the century, and since 2008 emigrants have outnumbered immigrants. The number of emigrants from Germany to Turkey have outnumbered Turkish immigrants to Germany since 2006. And Spiegel tells us: "Statistics also reveal that over the past two years the number of people from majority Muslim countries who returned home significantly outstripped the number who immigrated to Germany."
Martin Neumayer, the CSU integration officer of the Bavarian state government, said: “In the medium term, we will win no more elections without Muslims. The CSU must be honest with itself about that. I think many Muslims are like CSU voters: conservative, religious and attached to their home. As a party, we must canvass the liberal Muslims.”
But his boss, Minister-President of Bavaria Horst Seehofer, has a much-less dhimmified opinion of Muslims: "It's clear that immigrants from other cultural circles like Turkey, and Arab countries have more difficulties. From that I draw the conclusion that we don't need any additional foreign workers from other cultures," he said.
He added that Germany should first "deal with the people who already live here" and "get tougher on those who refuse to integrate" before opening itself up to further immigration."
Baron Bodissey wrote: "To make matters worse, there is no significant difference among the major parties on issues related to immigration and Multiculturalism, although that may be in the process of changing."
This is partly true. Again from Spiegel: "The majority of Germany's politicians -- and presumably also the German people - are of the opinion that the country has already had enough immigration. There may be minorities such as Economics Minister Rainer Brüderle, employers' associations, the German Chambers of Industry and Commerce (DIHK) and the German Engineering Federation who are calling for new immigrants, but no one appears to be listening to them."
So there are no significant differences among the majority of Germany's politicians regarding immigration: They think that the country has already had enough.
But there are differences between the major parties when it comes to multiculturalism. Only Angela Merkel of the CDU has denounced the policy as an abject failure, only Horst Seehofer of the CSU has called for an end to immigration from different cultures, and only CDU/CSU youth groups have hosted Thilo Sarrazin's wildly popular book readings and signings. And now with Rene Stadtkewitz's new hardline Die Freiheit party threatening the CDU/CSU from the right, it's unlikely that they'll return to the mushy middle. Especially when the developing consensus amongst the German people is turning firmly against immigration and multiculturalism.
jeppo,
you are right that Muslims form only a small portion of the German electorate on a national level. However, on a local level, especially in the big cities like Bremen, Hamburg, Munich, Berlin etc. they are already a minority to be reckoned with. One must also consider that Bremen, Hamburg and Berlin are states ("Länder", that is) of their own and thus carry special weight. From your comment I take it that you are German so I guess I don't have to explain the details to you.
Besides, the number of 2% is a bit of an understatement if you work with newer numbers.
Then you say that the number of immigrants has not increased. But your view is too superficial, because you only look at the numbers of immigrants vs. emigrants. You do not consider the birthrates at all. And the muslims living in Germany have a much higher fertility rate than the natives. The Turkish in Germany have a fertility rate of about 2,2 while native Germans have a rate of 1,41. And the natality of muslim ethnicities other than the Turkish is even higher.
Next you say that Horst Seehofer is sooo critical about immigration. Bullshit. He is like the needle of a compass when you mess around with a magnet. He will say everything to get a few votes here and there, but will he act accordingly? Nope. He has a special reputation for being a hypocrite. What does "Fähnchen im Wind" mean in English?
And when you say that the majority of the Germany's politicians had enough of immigration, this is where it really get's all wrong. First of all, you only look at the CDU/CSU. What about Linke/Grüne/SPD/FDP? And then again, if Jerkel or some other politician of the CDU/CSU says that the continuing influx of muslims must be stopped, not one of them has EVER lived up to these "promises". They say one thing and do the other, business as usual.
Quote:
In the medium term, we will win no more elections without Muslims.
end quote.
And this is, of course, what the Muslims were counting on.
Prepare for a complete undoing of Western freedoms in Germany.
And all of it due to German stupidity.
Quote:
“Federation for Peace and Fairness”,
end quote.
Islam mocks these things.
I hope there us a notable upsurge in the writing of satire in Germany.
It may be the only way to save the Western soul of the Germans!
Kassandra Komplex wrote:
Many people wonder why Muslims are courted so much by German politicians. But the reason is clear. It has been quite a while since Muslims reached a numerical proportion at which they can and definitely do influence election results.
Once again, we see the implication that our Western politicians are either a) colossally stupid (in not knowing what we in the Anti-Islam movement can see so plainly), or b) evil (in supporting, for greed and power, what they know to be enemies of the West).
Neither of these hypotheses is permissible. While of course there may be a few evil politicians, without smoking gun evidence, we must assume that, in the West (unless you hate the West, which some in the Anti-Islam movement seem to) -- where politicians more than any other sociopolitical culture in the history of Mankind reflect the people's virtues and desires -- they are a small minority; and while of course there are some politicians who are a few teleprompters short of a press conference, again for the same reason as above we must assume they are the minority.
Once we have eliminated the untenable, we must pose the question anew: why are Western politicians courting Muslims? The answer must be that
a) the reasons are sincere
b) the reasons are intelligent
c) the reasons reflect the moral goodness of the West.
How can this be, with all we know about Islam and about Muslims?
Ah! If the person has stepped outside of his Box this far to ask these kinds of questions, he will perhaps begin to notice the massive air and sunshine of PC MC all around him, extending from Australia to California to Texas to Mississippi to New York to London to Paris to Rome to Hamburg to Oslo... even it seems to Moscow -- which holds a clue to the only reasonable explanation.
@Etruscan, I don't believe anything any politician ever says, anywhere, any time, ever. Never ever.
But, I am surprised that some prominent ones are now denouncing official multiculturalism, or even talking about ending non-European immigration altogether.
Maybe they're sensing a shift in the electorate and are responding accordingly, i.e. they're snivelling and grovelling for votes from the increasingly anti-multicult, "Islamophobic" and immigration restrictionist masses.
The Muslim share of the vote in the 2002 German election was probably less than 2%. Of course this number will grow even if net Muslim immigration to Germany remains roughly zero, or even slightly negative as has been the case since possibly 2006.
If Muslim birthrates remain relatively high, and more resident Muslims are granted German citizenship, then eventually the Muslim share of the vote might come to almost equal its growing share of the population, estimated by the Pew Forum to be 7.1% by 2030, up from 5% today.
Net immigration to Germany has been steadily falling for the past decade, until it's now actually net emigration, and this happened under the all the various ideological regimes: SPD-Greens, CDU/CSU-SPD grand coalition, and now the CDU/CSU-FDP. No major party seems eager to run on a platform promising lots more immigration, because the solid majority of the electorate is clearly leaning in the other direction.
If this recent trend toward zero net migration to Germany can be maintained, then this is a great victory for our side, and a huge defeat for the Third World invaders and their homegrown, nation-wrecking, leftist-globalist and fifth columnist enablers, and also a lesson in obtaining positive policy results vis-a-vis immigration for other Western nations to emulate.
If Germany is resorting to immigration to overcome its sad demographics, it should allow the descendants of Germans who immigrated to America to move back. I think you's find lots of willing participants.
Government statistics are baloney
When the government says that their is net emigration, it's a lie. Probably they count native germans leaving, and subtract them from muslim migrant coming. in this way, they can say that immigration has stopped.
More to the point, the EU has determined to let millions and millions of muslim migrants in, and the german government won't stop them.
The plan is to prevent muslim migrants from being stopped -- by claiming 'small minority' until the Muslim minority gets large enough for it to be too late to do anything peaceful about it.
Post a Comment