About the muslims overrunning Europe
OutOfBreath
Posts: 1,804
Here is a long piece that I found in a Norwegan paper, typed out for your benefit. It contains reviews of 4 books concerning the "muslim threat", and dispells some of the myths. I will part it in different posts, where the first concerns themselves with the various reviews, and a final post for the concluding bit. If you dont feel like reading it all, I recommend jumping to the "Final Arguments" post.
Enjoy!
Peace
Dan
”The enemy among us”
- In the new literature about ”Eurabia” one gets the impression that Europe is being colonized.
An essay reviewing the following books:
“While Europe slept – How radical islam is destroying the west from within” – Bruce Bawer
“Eurabia – The Euro-Arab axis” – Bat Ye’or
“The last days of Europe – Epitaph for a dying continent” – Walter Laqueur
“America alone – The end of the world as we know it” – Mark Steyn
Written by Andreas Malm (Swedish journalist)
The Muslims are here to take over. They have come with the goal of “establishing a caliphate in Europe”. They are attempting to “subdue and colonize” the entire continent and hoist the green standard over the Iberian peninsula and parts of Eastern Europe – just as in the middle ages. But first and foremost they are taking aim at areas they never before have succeeded in conquering – “Now, all of Western Europe is within their grasp”. And the Muslims will settle for no less than that you, the indigenous West-Europeans, “give them all power and let them oppress you”.
Where is this from? A best-seller, published at the world’s largest publishing house for English-language literature. “While Europe slept” was nominated for the prestigious American literary award National Book Critics Circle Award last year. The author, Bruce Bawer, is an American liberal as good as any – although with a somewhat right-leaning slant. He’s a cultural critic and essayist for, among others, New York Times Book Review and Christian Science Monitor, and has written critically acclaimed books on Christian fundamentalism and gay rights.
Now he wants to tell us the truth about Europe. At the end of the 90s, Bawer moved to the Netherlands, in hopes of finding a liberal paradise where homosexuality, prostitution and drugs were largely accepted. One day, the snake in the Garden of Eden appeared before him: By one of the canals in Amsterdam, Bawer was stopped by a “musculous, dark-skinned boy in his late teens” which demanded all of his money. And in the suburbs to his new paradise, Bawer discovered “waves of people floating along the walls, most of them dark-skinned; many of the women – that is to say most of them – wore the burqa. Everywhere there were road signs in Arabic – and children’s wagons.
After gazing into hell, Bawer travelled in a Europe where the flames were burning on every corner. He settled in Norway – the stay is richly illustrated in the book – and has furthermore been published by Aftenposten (major paper), Minerva (right-wing think tank) and Human Rights Service. Then Bawer started to realize that the decay of Europe was made manifest in another country. Namely Sweden. The “ground zero” of Europe. In Stockholm Muslim youngsters prowl about, they chase non-Muslims away from the swimming halls, they “terrorize the schools”, “attack firemen and ambulances” and love to wear t-shirts proclaiming “2030: We take over”.
“While Denmark made great efforts to get a hold on the problems of immigration, Sweden did nothing – and thus strode straight into hell. The crime statistics made giant leaps every year, and the number of ghettos increased rapidly”. The growing Muslim population is “unproportionally disposed to violence” and the murder rate is now “twice as high in Sweden as in the US”. The most rabid Muslims are in Malmö – there the “frequency of rape is 5 or 6 times higher than in Copenhagen, and the number of child rape is doubled in 10 years”.
One should just laugh this off: really roll over laughing, and then put it away, like a curious postcard from a hallucinating fool. But unfortunately one can’t do that, because the worldview that Bawer communicates is about to strike roots in the consciousness of the western world. One of many examples of this is the last 2 years flow of books with the same familiar theme: Our enlightened and highly developed western civilization, with it’s liberal values, is threatened by Islam. This literature is astonishingly hap-hazard in its treatment of truth and facts. Bruce Bawer’s book is a good example. Here is forwarded the most outrageous claims, without footnotes, without reference to sources. The methodological principle of the books seem to correspond to the following rule of thumb, formulated in 2006 by Mats Thuresson (then local representative for the anti-immigrant party in Sweden): “One must lie so that it sounds truthful”.
Thuresson’s claim was that “1 million Muslims in Sweden lives off welfare, at the same time it is attempted to impress on poor Swedes that it doesn’t cost anything”. In the age of neo-liberal imperialism, where the welfare state and Muslims are under attack both physically and in the discourse, it sounds truthful that a million Muslims are living off welfare and eating off Sweden’s resources. In reality, barely half a million of the country’s inhabitants have background from Muslim cultures, whereof perhaps 100.000 practice some form of Islam. How many of them “live off welfare” is uncertain.
At the same time Bruce Bawer can actually have his American and west-European readers believe that Muslims are going berserk in Sweden, a country that in this kind of literature is portrayed as a pure inferno. But no one I have spoken to has ever seen a t-shirt saying “2030: We take over”. The murder rate is 5 times higher in the US than in Sweden. Non-Muslims are not thrown out of Swedish swimming halls; in fact, 2 hijab-wearing Muslim women that were watching their kids by the side of the pool were thrown out from a swimming hall in Gothenburg in 2005 by the life-guards (The commune were convicted of ethnic discrimination in February this year). In this manner you can pick apart claim after claim, but this kind of books is based on fairy tales. Without any inhibition the writers recycle purely tall tales. About what Muslims do, what crimes they are behind, about their sick attributes and how they are attempting to get to power. And in a way that strongly resembles how one used to talk of Jews.
Enjoy!
Peace
Dan
”The enemy among us”
- In the new literature about ”Eurabia” one gets the impression that Europe is being colonized.
An essay reviewing the following books:
“While Europe slept – How radical islam is destroying the west from within” – Bruce Bawer
“Eurabia – The Euro-Arab axis” – Bat Ye’or
“The last days of Europe – Epitaph for a dying continent” – Walter Laqueur
“America alone – The end of the world as we know it” – Mark Steyn
Written by Andreas Malm (Swedish journalist)
The Muslims are here to take over. They have come with the goal of “establishing a caliphate in Europe”. They are attempting to “subdue and colonize” the entire continent and hoist the green standard over the Iberian peninsula and parts of Eastern Europe – just as in the middle ages. But first and foremost they are taking aim at areas they never before have succeeded in conquering – “Now, all of Western Europe is within their grasp”. And the Muslims will settle for no less than that you, the indigenous West-Europeans, “give them all power and let them oppress you”.
Where is this from? A best-seller, published at the world’s largest publishing house for English-language literature. “While Europe slept” was nominated for the prestigious American literary award National Book Critics Circle Award last year. The author, Bruce Bawer, is an American liberal as good as any – although with a somewhat right-leaning slant. He’s a cultural critic and essayist for, among others, New York Times Book Review and Christian Science Monitor, and has written critically acclaimed books on Christian fundamentalism and gay rights.
Now he wants to tell us the truth about Europe. At the end of the 90s, Bawer moved to the Netherlands, in hopes of finding a liberal paradise where homosexuality, prostitution and drugs were largely accepted. One day, the snake in the Garden of Eden appeared before him: By one of the canals in Amsterdam, Bawer was stopped by a “musculous, dark-skinned boy in his late teens” which demanded all of his money. And in the suburbs to his new paradise, Bawer discovered “waves of people floating along the walls, most of them dark-skinned; many of the women – that is to say most of them – wore the burqa. Everywhere there were road signs in Arabic – and children’s wagons.
After gazing into hell, Bawer travelled in a Europe where the flames were burning on every corner. He settled in Norway – the stay is richly illustrated in the book – and has furthermore been published by Aftenposten (major paper), Minerva (right-wing think tank) and Human Rights Service. Then Bawer started to realize that the decay of Europe was made manifest in another country. Namely Sweden. The “ground zero” of Europe. In Stockholm Muslim youngsters prowl about, they chase non-Muslims away from the swimming halls, they “terrorize the schools”, “attack firemen and ambulances” and love to wear t-shirts proclaiming “2030: We take over”.
“While Denmark made great efforts to get a hold on the problems of immigration, Sweden did nothing – and thus strode straight into hell. The crime statistics made giant leaps every year, and the number of ghettos increased rapidly”. The growing Muslim population is “unproportionally disposed to violence” and the murder rate is now “twice as high in Sweden as in the US”. The most rabid Muslims are in Malmö – there the “frequency of rape is 5 or 6 times higher than in Copenhagen, and the number of child rape is doubled in 10 years”.
One should just laugh this off: really roll over laughing, and then put it away, like a curious postcard from a hallucinating fool. But unfortunately one can’t do that, because the worldview that Bawer communicates is about to strike roots in the consciousness of the western world. One of many examples of this is the last 2 years flow of books with the same familiar theme: Our enlightened and highly developed western civilization, with it’s liberal values, is threatened by Islam. This literature is astonishingly hap-hazard in its treatment of truth and facts. Bruce Bawer’s book is a good example. Here is forwarded the most outrageous claims, without footnotes, without reference to sources. The methodological principle of the books seem to correspond to the following rule of thumb, formulated in 2006 by Mats Thuresson (then local representative for the anti-immigrant party in Sweden): “One must lie so that it sounds truthful”.
Thuresson’s claim was that “1 million Muslims in Sweden lives off welfare, at the same time it is attempted to impress on poor Swedes that it doesn’t cost anything”. In the age of neo-liberal imperialism, where the welfare state and Muslims are under attack both physically and in the discourse, it sounds truthful that a million Muslims are living off welfare and eating off Sweden’s resources. In reality, barely half a million of the country’s inhabitants have background from Muslim cultures, whereof perhaps 100.000 practice some form of Islam. How many of them “live off welfare” is uncertain.
At the same time Bruce Bawer can actually have his American and west-European readers believe that Muslims are going berserk in Sweden, a country that in this kind of literature is portrayed as a pure inferno. But no one I have spoken to has ever seen a t-shirt saying “2030: We take over”. The murder rate is 5 times higher in the US than in Sweden. Non-Muslims are not thrown out of Swedish swimming halls; in fact, 2 hijab-wearing Muslim women that were watching their kids by the side of the pool were thrown out from a swimming hall in Gothenburg in 2005 by the life-guards (The commune were convicted of ethnic discrimination in February this year). In this manner you can pick apart claim after claim, but this kind of books is based on fairy tales. Without any inhibition the writers recycle purely tall tales. About what Muslims do, what crimes they are behind, about their sick attributes and how they are attempting to get to power. And in a way that strongly resembles how one used to talk of Jews.
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Listen: In 1973 the Arabs stopped the sale of oil to Europe, and thus had a stranglehold on the entire continent. The Arabs presented tough demands to reopen the oil wells, and formulated a list of demands to the EU of the time, which immediately caved under the pressure. In this process, dictated from the Arab league, the organ Euro-Arab Dialogue (EAD) was formed. Never heard of EAD, you say? Exactly! Because since 1973 the EAD has coordinated top-level meetings between European and Arab leaders, arranged closed seminars in luxury hotels and lais it’s plans – behind closed doors. Thus the EAD has been able to rule Europe, taken control over companies, universities and media, let “a foreign lobby infiltrate the parliamentary systems”. At the same time, the organ has stayed “completely unknown to Europeans, in spite that its occult machinations have changed Europe irreversibly”.
The EAD is the true government of our continent, a kind of remote-controlled Arab occupational power, because Europe doesn’t really exist anymore. In line with the plans of the EAD, the European civilization is being dismantled in favour of a European/Arab hybrid. You may not have known, but you are living in Eurabia. Here the Arabs rule, which is synonymous with “the Muslims”. Europe has become “an appendix to the Arab-Muslim world”, and indigenous Europeans are degraded to dhimmi, the status which Islam has historically laid upon the conquered peoples. This means that Europeans have to accept Muslim laws and rules, in a “restrictive and humiliating subordination under a sovereign Islamic power”, in a “servile language” and with “subdued behaviour”. Like all dhimmi-peoples the Europeans must “walk on the left side of the Muslims, in the gutter, and accept violations and beatings to appease their Muslim masters”.
In the fight for dominance, the Arabs have several weapons: control of oil, control of banking, the threat of terror. But the very guarantee for victory, the invincible infantry of the Arabs, is the “millions of Muslims that have immigrated to Europe and built hundreds of mosques and mighty Islamic centres”. These hordes are exported to Europe, not to be integrated in it’s culture – a death sin for Muslims – but to “enforce their culture upon their host countries”. This Arab- and Islamizing process “was actually planned, at a Euro-Arab seminar at the University 28-30. March 1977”. Yes, it’s because a conscious – if reluctant – decision of the EU to abstain from all plans to integrate the Muslims to Europe, and instead adapt Europe to Muslim “uncertainty, crime and religious intolerance”. And so it goes on for nearly 400 pages.
Of course reasonable critics have compared Bat Ye’or’s completely fabricated version of modern European history with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion – the perhaps foremost conspiracy theory about Jewish power. Still, Ye’or has become the founder of a new genre of massive growth: the Eurabia literature. Again, Bawer serves as an example: He takes as his starting point the works of Ye’or – “The Grand Unified Theory of Euro-Muslim relations” as he enthusiastically calls it – and spins further on the conspiracy theory. Ye’or have been a guest at prestigious universities like Yale, Columbia and Hebrew University, and testified both before the US congress and the UN Human Rights Commission. She was the main speaker when European right-wing extremists were gathered for a “contra-jihad”-conference in Brussels in October last year. Ye’or’s concept of Eurabia has broken through in the western debate on Islam. In 2005, the TV-channel Fox News showed a series of reports from Europe, where Malmö were portrayed like a Mogadishu controlled by roving Muslim militias. And the heading for the series as a whole was “Eurabia”. According to an article in the liberal Slate Magazine, by Francis Fukuyama, there “can be no doubt that what is being called ‘Eurabia’ is a main problem for the democracies of Europe”.
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
A book of the opposite temperament of Laqueur is “America Alone” by Mark Steyn, one of those sanctimonious right-wing rabulists which are so popular in the US. Here sarcasm, cynicism and hate-humour reigns, but Steyn’s theses are the same as the others’. Our world is about to end – not because of global warming, which he just laughs off, but because there are more and more Muslims which go to war on everyone and everything. Like his compatriots, Steyn is possessed by demographics, which in the Eurabia discourse have the same function as racial hygiene has in anti-Semitism: “The deepest cause of 9-11”, he explains, “is that in the 70s and 80s the Muslims bred children, while we in the west stopped doing that kind of thing.”
And how is Steyn’s best-seller being received? Christopher Hitchens, one if the liberal neo-secularism’s most prominent crusaders, has praised the book and called it “a welcome wake-up call”. According to Hitchens, Steyn is right in insisting that we “supplicate the extraordinary by this threat, and that it potentially requires extraordinary measures”. But for the moment “the combination of demographics and cultural masochism ensures a bloodless victory for the Islamists”.
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
But what does the name Muhammed tell us? Nothing. A person with that name can be secular or orthodox, pious or religiously indifferent, hedonist or traditionalist, liberal or socialist, nurse or professor – Anything in the world – just like a person with the name Fatima or Ali or Aysha. But according to the Eurabia-writers, the body is tainted with a virus if it stems from a Muslim culture. A Muslim is a Muslim is a Muslim.
A Muslim can never be a good, loyal, reliable European. The Muslim is our polar opposite, unchangeably different, the utter negation of values like gender equality, tolerance and human rights. As a historical phenomenon and identity for over a billion people, Islam is one. The existence of moderate Muslims is a myth. Thus all integration efforts are doomed to fail, and the Muslims aren’t interested in that kind of thing either. To say it with Bawer: they are engaging in “willed self-segregation”. Bat Ye’or explains that “all Muslims hope that the Islamic state one day will cover the entire world”, since the Koran recommends “unceasing expansion through attacking ones neighbours”. Laqueur is warning that Muslims all over Europe are preparing to cease power “through mass violence” when the time is right. The French suburban riots – a watershed for the Eurabia-writers – were just a first attempt of conquest, “a first battle in a world-spanning war over territory” (Bawer).
But the dominance is already a fact. It is expressed in that Europeans no longer dares to criticize Islam, doesn’t dare to print drawings or put up operas after their own wishes, don’t dare to say, think or war as they wish. With Muslims hanging on the corners one can barely eat pig meat or celebrate Christian Christmas anymore. Europeans have internalized Muslim taboos in a self-erasing subordination to Islam which, according to Ye’or and Bawer, is the identifying mark of the “dhimmi-status”.
And all of these problems are because the Muslims are here, among us. A thorough solution must entail that the physical presence of Muslims cease. Thus, Bawer celebrates when he reads in New York Times that still more European mainstream politicians “argues that Islam is incompatible with European values” and surveys show increased hostility towards Muslims. An awakened Europe now sees the alternatives clearly: “total capitulation, or mass expulsion”.
But there are alternatives to mass expulsions. Mark Steyn has another solution – it has been attempted in Srebrenica, Prijedor and Banja Luka:
“Why was Bosnia the scene of the worst massacres in Europe since the second world war? In the 30 years before the collapse the Serb share of the population in Bosnia diminished from 43 to 31 per cent, while the share of Muslims increased from 26 to 44 per cent. In an age of democracy you cannot fight demographics – except with civil war. The Serbs understood this, just as other Europeans will understand in the foreseeable future: If we can’t breed faster than them, we have to just shoot them down.”
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Has anyone read it, even if you didn't feel the need to comment?
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
I will definitely read it. Looks very interesting. But right now, I need sleep
Peace.
naděje umírá poslední
This is a quote from the article which strikes me as hard to believe. I can't believe there are people out there who think like this. Apologizing for genocide is to support genocide. And that's something the author has to live with I suppose...but it really is unbelievable. War is the last resort, not the only.
(note- this was not an excerpt from the article, but a quote that the article posted addresses.)
I work with a Muslim lady (or girl, I dunno, she's 26 so whatever that makes her) and she is as ordinary of an American as I am.
The point of the article writer, and me, is to show how ridiculous these theories can be, how devoid of fact and full of emotional language, and how they best resembles how one used to write about the jews pre-ww2. Furthermore, I find it astonishing that they do no differtiating between "new" and "old" immigrants or their offspring. A muslim is always a muslim, no matter how many generations him and his family has lived in Europe. The muslims also have a "central command" which are sending all these people here in order to be ble to take over the countries when muslim populations reach critical mass. In total it adds up to theoretical support for mass genocide or mass expulsion, and spreading hatred towards muslim immigrants. That's not good.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
(I read this word for word, btw)
This is a subject that has fascinated me, perhaps moreso than the immigration of Latin Americans into the U.S., which has been in much greater numbers and mostly illegal. I take it that most folks from Muslim dominated counties who immigrate to Europe do so legally? Correct me if I'm wrong.
I recently read in Harper's Magazine that 120,000 Iraqis have been granted amnesty in Sweden. 3,775 have been granted amnesty in the U.S. The U.S. state department denies amnesty to any Iraqi that has paid any ransom to terrorist groups, which disqualifies a WHOLE LOT of Iraqis. I think this statistic alone proves the true intentions of the U.S. government.
I'm curious about what this means: "In reality, barely half a million of the country’s inhabitants have background from Muslim cultures". Because does that include children, born in Sweden, who have parents from Muslim cultures?
I just want to get the facts straight.
I also want to be clear. I don't really know how much Europe has changed as a result of increased immigration. The last time I was in Europe was in 1992, and that was in southern Norway (Dan, I seem to remember you referring to this as the Norwegian bible belt). Although, my sixteen-year-old self was surprised to see two East Asian girls who spoke perfect Norwegian. They became part of Norwegian society, and that's great. But I think it's a problem when sub-societies form within a larger society. Conflict is inevitable when this happens. Right or wrong, this is general human behavior. No amount of lecturing is going to change that. And I'm not blaming either side. People stick to their cultures when cultures collide.
I'm inclined to believe that European elites are deliberately planting the seeds of these conflicts by way of their immigration policies. Why? Well, I'd theorize it's to build support for a stronger European Union. Maybe they want an all-out clash of cultures, to justify their power. Maybe I'm getting paranoid... I dunno. I like to think out loud. But I can just as easily suppose these reviewers are correct when they say the charges against Muslim immigrants are exaggerated or even myths. Certainly, there has been problems. I've seen the videos of riots in Paris, Brussels and northern England, but these are sporadic incidents.
Even in Malmo, Sweden, where 27% of the population is foreign-born - the immigrants are from many different cultures, as shown from these stats I ripped off of Wikipedia:
Serbia (8,791)
Denmark (7,826)
Iraq (7,101)
Poland (6,008)
Bosnia-Herzegovina (5,637)
Lebanon (3,309)
Iran (2,958)
Hungary (1,845)
Germany (1,767)
Finland (1,678)
Afghanistan (1,606)
Romania (1,542)
Turkey (1,445)
Chile (1,305)
Vietnam (1,144)
So about a third are from Muslim countries. Most are European.
So the "threat" does seem exaggerated.
However, if Islam did somehow takeover Europe, I think this would be a tragedy. It took long enough for Europe to purge itself of it's own religious insanity... to allow another form of it to be imported, would be, well, stupid. But I really don't think that'll happen. I just hope violence is not seen as the answer.
120.000? Wow, that's alot for Sweden. Sure the number isn't exagerrated? Or that they are all allowed to stay permanently, or if the authorities just wait for some peace in Iraq to send them back?
I get that impression fom the article, yes. and the number sounds reasonable from what I know about Norway.
It certainly is great. Depends on what you define as southern Norway, but the bible belt is the coast from about Haugesund in the west and all the way round the southern coast, and almost up to Oslo.
Sub-cultures are abundant in society. But I agree that if they close themselves off to ghettos, integration will be more slow. And cultures collide everyday, and always have. The general human pattern is to take what it thinks good from the other and eventually incorporate it into it's own. That is also a fallacy with these theorists. Culture is viewed as a large unchanging entity that totally dominates the people in it. While that may be so for some hardcore individuals, most people are reasonable and adapts to what is required of them. Muslims do so no less than other cultures.
I dont need an elite conspiracy for this all to work. Fact is, 100-200 years ago, Europe were still in a population boom, and displaced alot of it's people in the muslim countries in north africa and the middle east. Now the European population has stabilized, but the population of the muslim countries are booming. Population booms drive emigration, and Europe also needs the labour.
Of course if there develops large disenfranchised groups, conflict is imminent, as in France. But it is then again important to note that the cause is economically depressed areas with increasing poverty and unemployment. Culture be damned. If one is poor among the rich, anger and resentment could lead them to revolt. Particularly the young who see no future, and hence nothing to lose. So look first at the economy of the situation, and then at the culture. The culture my be more in your face, but most times, the real reasons are economical. (This is why many historians are marxist, since thinking materialistically is quite necessary to get any grip on history)
Exactly. And focusing on that obscures what the real issues are.
And that fear IS exaggerrated. It is based on the premise that muslims and their children will all think and do the same (bad shit) because of their innate muslimness. That's racist bullshit reasoning.
For some real information on islam and the culture, I recommend reading Albert Hourani's "A History of the Arab Peoples". I am just finishing reading it myself.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Stop being so paranoid! :cool:
EV- 08/09,10/2008.06/08,09/2009
I disagree a little. The part on demography and immigration is sound, as is the part on poverty and unemployment. But things do not stop here. Local and national politics also seem to stimulate the conflicts. I'll take the example of France, because it's the only one i know correctly, here we have (mostly around Paris) large areas with important muslim communities, low incomes and high unemployment. This is the result of (for the most of it) segregation policy from previous local administrations. Since the riots, they seemed to understand there has been a problem and try to do something about it.
But recently - especially since the public coming of our new president (for which I would like to apologize) - there has been a development of 'communautarism' here on a national level (pushing for conflicts between abstract communities : christians vs muslims for examples). Our politicians seemed to create conflicts between different communities by throwing vast groups of people under one name : "muslims" or "christians" or "original europeans". This is kind of new (though it reminds a little of pre WW2 rethoric) and I think this where I agree with Kenny : this is deliberate on the part of our elites. And looking at the guy in the netherlands (winder, or wender), it seems it's happening in other european countries.
Great point that cultures collide every day and adapt. We are dynamic as individuals and as groups. We are not static and unchanging as you mention.
Thanks for this astute observation.
It's interesting to me that as we struggle to overcome our national egos and adapt to living as one on this planet, we in the western world will continue to believe our imbalanced ways of living and being are superior to other imbalanced ways. Ultimately, we'll take either the short route and and learn in theory that integration of all the best ways will bring about a more global and holistic mindset in our own best interests. Or we'll learn the long, drawn out conflicted way. Well, in actuality, it'll probably be many shades in between. Ultimately, though, the human developmental stages clearly indicate that it takes integration with ourselves and others before we can expand into our more whole selves, and to live in harmony with those around us, beyond fear.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
oops nevermind. i read the final argument part.
The way I see it there are two types of people who generally perpetuate such unenlightened views. There are those who do so for their own selfish gain, and sadly, there are those I see who are the majority who do this: those who are blinded by their own fear, bigotry, prejudice, etc.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
There will always be politicians that will seize opportunities like this to gain power. However, the division between "us" and "them" almost always has it's fundamental basis in material economic circumstances. If the society is affluent, noone bothers too much dividing. But if resources are more scarce, or very unevenly distributed, some way of dividing into "us" and "them" becomes more necessary and appealing in order to secure one's own part of it.
I still dont see the need for an elite collectively pushing for more conflict for their own gains and reasons. I think it's a lot more messy and unclear than that. I dont see what the elite gains from destabilization either, except perhaps the fringe elite now that can gain power from destabilization. As for the politicians, I see them more as opportunistically reactive, than architects of the mess.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
"those damn immigrants are taking our jobs" is the first type that comes to mind. Since a few years the dividing has been made towards faith, and that's not an easily identifiable group. I think that if elite's/politicians weren't pushing behind this division would have just died with time because it's more complicated than the basic racist thought "physically like me = good, not like me = bad". And it's not really local, it's happening in several countries. There are more and more books like the ones you quoted in the begining for instance.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
We should appease appease appease and let Islam (which has more in common with fascism then Judaism) creep into our communites become disenfranchised and bitter, due to their religion telling them not to adapt with their new surroundings, and then not expect there to be violence when they bust out so many babies that in 20 years they need to spread further into Western European countries.
No, these writers are right to sound the alarm. Some decisions need to be made in these countries so that we do not end up with democratically elected sharia law.
another different thinking Dan
— Socrates
Just out of curiosity, what would you have done about it?
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Were there supposed to be a comment attached to this?
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
It is a problem.
It certainly appears that more than just a few Brits have quite a problem with what's going on over there with these Muslims.
And I'm getting similar accounts from friends and family I have in Europe and in the UK.
Historically and tradionally this is what Muslims do when they venture out and migrate to live in the homelands of other cultures. Historically, the result ends up the same. A battle of cultures as Muslims attempt to choke off the indigenous culture and replace it with their Islam.
Certainly no different from what Christians did here in the USA and what Catholics have been doing for centuries. But in my opinion, Islam is a bit more dangerous, intrusive and facist than those other two.
yea maybe the first or second generation......but pretty soon the youngins will see what dad preaches is pretty silly....the sooner we integrate the better...
again, ....like rock, paper, sizzors...sex, drugs and rock n roll beat religious doctrine everytime.
Muslim women will get stronger, get careers, keep thier clits........and young Muslim men are as horny as white men.
Now if you fight and kill them..it just drags this whole evolution process on. Cheney and crew have pushed this back couple generations.......BUT Obama will take up some of this.....McCain..well we'll get the whole 2 generation penalty.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Seperate church and state. Islam works because of sharia law. Sharia law should be banned from being put into practice in any legal sense because it is a religious belief and not codified law (I would even go as far as to suggest that if any security threat is deemed all burqa are removed regardless). Sharia law exsists to prevent the kind of assimilation over a couple of generations that you hope will happen. With it Islam does not conform it stays as is until it has the numbers to take over. I don't think we live in a world where we can wait 40 years for the children born today to hopefully realize that they are europeans that happen to believe in Islam as opposed to Muslims. Maybe I am wrong.
— Socrates
By "Fight" do you mean resist them and their intrusive and oppresive bullying?
I think you both know I certainly don't advocate/support the war in Iraq or any attack on anyone who is not actively aggressive in attacking us. Whether through military might or unreasoanble swooping sanctions.
But that's not at all the subject matter at hand. This is not a discussion of Infidels attacking Muslims on their own land, in their own countries. This is a discussion/subject matter of migrating Muslims who go to other non-muslim countries and try to intimidate and bully those countries into Islamic law, while shunning, disrespecting and ignoring the cultures and laws of their host countries.
I do get tired of Muslims (and others) painting Muslims as some innocent bystanders who always get attacked or killed by other bullies; through no fault or action of their own.
Muslims have as much a history of oppression, invading, intimidating, bullying and perpetrating aggressive violence upon others (including infidels); for the purpose of spreading their culture (Islam), as anyone else has. And it is no secret Islam has been and continues to be used in a very intrusive, oppressive and discriminatory manner all over the world.
So let's stop talking like Muslims are poor, little lambs minding their own business.
What American foriegn policy, sanctions and Military have done over the years has often (but not always) been absolutely wrong. No doubt.
Again, that's not the subject matter, here.
You are not wrong.
Historically, that's exactly the way it has worked.
I always advocate protecting one's boundaries. I advocate not accepting rape, killing, etc. from any individual from any culture/religion, etc. If someone wants to look down on me, that's their business. If someone wants to act disrespectful, that's also their business. If someone hopes to overtake my country and my culture with their own. They have the right to do as they choose and again that's their business until they cross a line and take invasive, boundary-crossing action. I do not have authority as thought/morality police.
Besides those fine lines, I have to let life processes proceed as they do naturally. I have to deal with my fears and concerns without using them as an excuse to justify projecting them onto others and using them as an excue for my own poor adaptation. Things do not always go down optimally, especially when cultures or opposing sides of a coin clash. I do fully recognize the power of choice, and that such a power creates the outcome, positively or negatively. I can choose between actions that perpetuate conflict and maladjustment, and between actions that move into resolution and integration. I choose the latter.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!