The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Publications Filter?
VDare
Nothing found
 TeasersiSteve Blog
/
Europe

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
🔊 Listen RSS

In the New York Times, the recent U.S. Ambassador to Hungary, who is the daughter of a real estate developer in Sacramento who is a big time Hillary-contributor, denounces the barbarism of the Huns:

Hungary’s Xenophobic Response
By ELENI KOUNALAKIS SEPT. 6, 2015

SAN FRANCISCO — The scene at Budapest’s Keleti train station is returning to normal. Trains are running again, and most of the thousands of desperate people stranded there last week are on their way to other, more hospitable countries in Europe. Hungary, a country rarely in the news, is already fading from the headlines.

The challenges facing Europe from the largest refugee crisis since World War II, however, have only just begun. And the example of how and why the Hungarian government detained and harassed these people, mostly from Syria but also from Afghanistan and North Africa, should continue to be a worrisome factor.

To understand the logic behind the Hungary’s recent actions, it’s helpful to know something about its powerful leader, Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

Mr. Orban came to power five years ago in a landslide election, winning more than two-thirds of the seats in Parliament. I was the United States ambassador to Hungary at the time, and I witnessed the first years of his so-called Two-Thirds Revolution. My fellow diplomats and I watched as Mr. Orban and his Fidesz party voted in 700 new laws and adopted a new constitution. Laws governing virtually every institution — the media, the courts, universities, local government, religious institutions — were rewritten, most at lighting speed and with little or no input from opposition parties or civil society stakeholders.

Prime Minister Orban

The United States was the first country to raise concerns that the radical reform process was weakening the independence of Hungary’s democratic institutions, concentrating power in the hands of fewer people and eliminating important checks and balances. In 2012, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned Hungary against “democratic backsliding.”

Mr. Orban’s reaction was to double down. In a speech last summer, he declared that European-style “liberal democracy” had failed. Instead, Hungary would pursue “illiberal democracy,” he said, citing Russia and Turkey as role models. With this speech, Orban dropped all pretense that he valued the basic principles of Western-style democracy.

When I last visited Budapest, in June, I asked Hungary’s ambassador to Austria about the government’s proposal to put up a fence on the border with Serbia.

“It’s going to happen,” he told me with certainty. Being accustomed to the definitive way that Fidesz officials spoke about policy, I understood. If Mr. Orban had decided, it was done.

PM Orban

What is notable is how early Mr. Orban prepared for an influx of refugees. Three months ago, the government posted signs with messages like “If you come to Hungary, you cannot take the jobs of Hungarians!” Since the billboards were in Hungarian only, it was clear that this was a message not for immigrants, but for Hungarians. Mr. Orban was laying doing the groundwork to inoculate the Hungarian public against feeling sympathy for these supposed job-stealers. …

Through all the drama of the Hungarian refugee crisis, the biggest question was this: If Hungary didn’t want the refugees, why go to such lengths to detain them? Why not just let them go to Germany, which promised to accept 800,000 asylum seekers?

As an answer, Mr. Orban hid behind European Union protocols, which require member states to register asylum seekers at the country of entry. But the truth is Mr. Orban does not only want to keep these refugees out of Hungary. He wants to keep them out of Europe. If razor wire fences don’t work, perhaps intimidation and detention will.

“Let us not forget, that those arriving have been raised in another religion, and represent a radically different culture. Most of them are not Christians, but Muslims,” Mr. Orban wrote in an article published in Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. He went on: “Is it not worrying in itself that European Christianity is now barely able to keep Europe Christian? If we lose sight of this, the idea of Europe could become a minority interest in its own continent.”

If Mr. Orban’s method of dealing with Europe’s refugee crisis was limited to the way he is handling the situation in his own country, it would be worrisome enough. But far more troubling is the possibility that his political views could gain ground elsewhere in Europe.

Buoyed to power in Hungary through his nationalistic messages and policies, Mr. Orban is attempting to bring his star power to a much larger stage. And it’s not a message that reflects the fundamental values behind the European Union.

Mr. Orban argued in the Allgemeine Zeitung that “People want us Europeans to be masters of the situation, and defend our borders …”

In contrast to his muscular, aggressive tone, European Union leaders seem to be struggling to find a unified approach in dealing with the refugees, now numbering more than 250,000 so far in 2015. There has been a vacuum of leadership — not only to take action and provide aid, but simply to articulate a response. In what is clearly a state of emergency, the European Union as a body has appeared paralyzed, with outdated protocols and plans that fail to account for the enormity of the problem.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Junker is preparing to address the European Parliament this week, and lay out a plan. It is expected that its cornerstone will be a quota system to relocate asylum seekers throughout Europe. But Central European countries — including Hungary but also Poland and the Czech Republic — have already vowed to oppose this.

The question is what European leaders will do now. Can they work together, through the architecture of the European Union to devise a set of principles, and act in a cohesive and effective manner to deal with the humanitarian and political crisis gripping the continent?

Or will Mr. Orban’s xenophobic platform and his advocacy for harsher methods of dealing with refugees be allowed to fill the vacuum?

European civilization is being ripped apart by these cruel Eastern barbarians.

But perhaps love can heal even the Huns:

 
🔊 Listen RSS

With Muslim terrorists committing anti-Semitic massacres in France and Denmark earlier this year, and Middle Eastern and African youths routinely harassing Jews on the street in European cities, one might think that facilitating another massive influx of Muslims, along with all the chain migration to follow, would be considered not good for the Jews.

Some Eastern European countries have offered to accept persecuted Syrian Christian refugees, but not Muslims. You might think that would be considered a reasonable compromise good for the Jews, right?

But that is simply unthinkable to the current mind. The important thing is not to do practical things to help actual European Jews, the important thing is to stick to the Narrative and follow out its symbolic logic. Thus, from the New York Times:

Hungarian Leader Rebuked for Saying Muslim Migrants Must Be Blocked ‘to Keep Europe Christian’
SEPT. 3, 2015

Open Source
By ROBERT MACKEY

Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orban, was criticized online and in person on Thursday for writing in a German newspaper that it was important to secure his nation’s borders from mainly Muslim migrants “to keep Europe Christian.”

“Those arriving have been raised in another religion, and represent a radically different culture. Most of them are not Christians, but Muslims,” Mr. Orban wrote in a commentary for Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung, a German newspaper. “This is an important question, because Europe and European identity is rooted in Christianity.”

“Is it not worrying in itself that European Christianity is now barely able to keep Europe Christian?” Mr. Orban asked. “There is no alternative, and we have no option but to defend our borders.”

Before meeting with Mr. Orban on Thursday in Brussels, Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, which represents European Union leaders, thanked him for securing Europe’s borders, but took issue with the argument of Mr. Orban’s opinion article.

“I want to underline that for me, Christianity in public and social life means a duty to our brothers in need,” Mr. Tusk said as he stood alongside Mr. Orban.

“Referring to Christianity in a public debate on migration must mean in the first place the readiness to show solidarity and sacrifice. For a Christian it shouldn’t matter what race, religion and nationality the person in need represents.”

Mr. Tusk, a former prime minister of Poland, drew attention to his rebuke of the Hungarian leader on social networks, and his office posted video of his comments on YouTube.

Mr. Orban waited until the end of the day to respond to Mr. Tusk. At a separate news conference in which he faced reporters alone, he reiterated the theme of his article, that Europe was at risk of being “overrun” and had to shut its borders. The Hungarian prime minister argued that European countries had no obligation to accept most of the migrants, as “the overwhelming majority of people are not refugees because they are not coming from a war-stricken area.”

“Our Christian obligation is not to create illusions,” he said. …

Mr. Orban’s formulation echoed notorious remarks made by the poet T.S. Eliot in 1933, another moment in history when Europeans expressed fears of being overwhelmed by a “flood” of non-Christian immigrants.

The Real Enemy

The highest priority must always be to defeat the real enemy, T.S. Eliot.

Of course, you can’t stop T.S. Eliot in the past without getting a few more kosher supermarket shoppers and bat mitzvah security guards murdered by Muslim thugs in the future. But the deaths of these Jews will, apparently, be a small price to pay for not having to consider whether diminishing marginal returns have started to set in for our era’s dominant ideological obsessions.

Never forget: It’s always 1933.

Thus, from the New York Times once again:

Treatment of Migrants Evokes Memories of Europe’s Darkest Hour
By RICK LYMAN SEPT. 4, 2015

BUDAPEST — In Hungary, hundreds of migrants surrounded by armed police officers were tricked into boarding a train with promises of freedom, only to be taken to a “reception” camp. In the Czech Republic, the police hustled more than 200 migrants off a train and wrote identification numbers on their hands with indelible markers, stopping only when someone pointed out that this was more than a little like the tattoos the Nazis put on concentration camp inmates.

Razor-wire fences rise along national borders in Greece, Bulgaria, Hungary and France. Many political leaders stoke rising nationalism by portraying the migrants as dangerous outsiders whose foreign cultures and Muslim religion could overwhelm cherished traditional ways.

“It was horrifying when I saw those images of police putting numbers on people’s arms,” said Robert Frolich, the chief rabbi of Hungary. “It reminded me of Auschwitz. And then putting people on a train with armed guards to take them to a camp where they are closed in? Of course there are echoes of the Holocaust.”

Europeans are facing one of the Continent’s worst humanitarian crises since World War II, yet many seem blind to images that recall that blackest time in their history.

This migrant crisis is no genocide. The issue throughout the Continent is how to register, house, resettle or repatriate hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees, a daunting logistical challenge. But perhaps not since the Jews were rounded up by Nazi Germany have there been as many images coming out of Europe of people locked into trains, babies handed over barbed wire, men in military gear herding large crowds of bedraggled men, women and children.

At the same time, the images may reveal a deeper truth about Europe and its seeming unpreparedness for a crisis so long in the making: While extolling the virtues of human rights and humanism, it remains, in many parts, a place resistant to immigration and diversity.

As a result, some here are reacting in ways that recall some of the Continent’s darkest impulses.

“They must be oblivious because who would do that if they had any historical memory whatsoever,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “It’s amazing, really. Certainly those images of the trains can’t help but conjure up nightmares of the Holocaust.”

Rabbi Frolich was especially struck by the lies used to manipulate the migrants.

“They tell them that the train was going to Austria and then take them to a camp instead,” the rabbi said. “I don’t think the police got instructions from the government to do it this way, but it is very similar to what happened to Jews in the 1940s.”

Jan Munk, chairman of the Jewish Community of Prague, was inclined to be generous in his interpretation of the episode.

“I understand the reasons why the police marked migrants with numbers,” he said. “They are under a lot of pressure and stress and simply did not realize the connotations it would have. It was indeed tasteless and reminded me of the numbers at Auschwitz, but I know it was not done on purpose.”

But for others, the fact that it was not done on purpose was even more frightening, showing a puzzling historical disconnect in many of the very places that the Holocaust caused the deepest devastation.

“It may be correct that they didn’t know, but the insensitivity and the ignorance of the imagery their actions evoked is stunning; it’s just sickening,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, in New York.

The T.S. Eliot Menace is the important thing, not the future of Europe.

George Orwell famously stated: “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

But those who control the present may not actually get a future they will like if they are so focused upon symbolically smiting their enemies of the past that they blind themselves to learning from the present.

 
🔊 Listen RSS
Africa over Europe, with Libya as the plug

Africa over Europe, with Libya as the plug: you can’t fight gravity!

As you’ll recall, the 2011 destruction of the internationally recognized Libyan government by United States airpower in effect pulled the plug that had been bottling up 1.1 billion Africans from draining into Europe. Col. Gaddafi had contracted with Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi to limit transit through Libya of sub-Saharan Africans. But the murder-by-sodomy of Col. Kaffafee by roving bands backed by the U.S. military removed that impediment to the current mass migration.

With a demographic inundation of Europe by Muslims, Africans, and Muslim Africans looming (absent clear-eyed pro-European leadership), it’s worth listening to what a key international player — the President of the United States — has told us in his own words about his deepest feelings regarding Europe and Africa.

Thus, this passage from Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance by Barack Obama may be of historical rather than just literary interest:

I FLEW OUT OF HEATHROW Airport under stormy skies. A group of young British men dressed in ill-fitting blazers filled the back of the plane, and one of them–a pale, gangly youth, still troubled with acne-took the seat beside me. He read over the emergency instructions twice with great concentration, and once we were airborne, he turned to ask where I was headed. I told him I was traveling to Nairobi to visit my family.

“Nairobi’s a beautiful place, I hear. Wouldn’t mind stopping off there one of these days. Going to Johannesburg, I am.” He explained that as part of a degree program in geology, the British government had arranged for him and his classmates to work with South African mining companies for a year. “Seems like they have a shortage of trained people there, so if we’re lucky they’ll take us on for a permanent spot. Best chance we have for a decent wage, I reckon–unless you’re willing to freeze out on some bleeding North Sea oil rig. Not for me, thank you.” I mentioned that if given the chance, a lot of black South Africans might be interested in getting such training.

“Well, I’d imagine you’re right about that,” he said. “Don’t much agree with the race policy there. A shame, that.” He thought for a moment. “But then the rest of Africa’s falling apart now, isn’t it? Least from what I can tell. The blacks in South Africa aren’t starving to death like they do in some of these Godforsaken countries. Don’t envy them, mind you, but compared to some poor bugger in Ethiopia–”

A stewardess came down the aisle with headphones for rent, and the young man pulled out his wallet. “’Course, I try and stay out of politics, you know. Figure it’s none of my business. Same thing back home–everybody on the dole, the old men in Parliament talking the same old rubbish. Best thing to do is mind your own little corner of the world, that’s what I say.” He found the outlet for the headphones and slipped them over his ears.

“Wake me up when they bring the food, will you,” he said before reclining his seat for a nap.

I pulled out a book from my carry-on bag and tried to read. It was a portrait of several African countries written by a Western journalist who’d spent a decade in Africa; an old Africa hand, he would be called, someone who apparently prided himself on the balanced assessment. The book’s first few chapters discussed the history of colonialism at some length: the manipulation of tribal hatreds and the caprice of colonial boundaries, the displacements, the detentions, the indignities large and small. The early heroism of independence figures like Kenyatta and Nkrumah was duly noted, their later drift toward despotism attributed at least in part to various Cold War machinations.

But by the book’s third chapter, images from the present had begun to outstrip the past. Famine, disease, the coups and countercoups led by illiterate young men wielding AK-47s like shepherd sticks–if Africa had a history, the writer seemed to say, the scale of current suffering had rendered such history meaningless.

Poor buggers. Godforsaken countries.

I set the book down, feeling a familiar anger flush through me, an anger all the more maddening for its lack of a clear target. Beside me the young Brit was snoring softly now, his glasses askew on his fin-shaped nose. Was I angry at him? I wondered. Was it his fault that, for all my education, all the theories in my possession, I had had no ready answers to the questions he’d posed? How much could I blame him for wanting to better his lot? Maybe I was just angry because of his easy familiarity with me, his assumption that I, as an American, even a black American, might naturally share in his dim view of Africa; an assumption that in his world at least marked a progress of sorts, but that for me only underscored my own uneasy status: a Westerner not entirely at home in the West, an African on his way to a land full of strangers.

I’d been feeling this way all through my stay in Europe–edgy, defensive, hesitant with strangers. I hadn’t planned it that way. I had thought of the layover there as nothing more than a whimsical detour, an opportunity to visit places I had never been before. For three weeks I had traveled alone, down one side of the continent and up the other, by bus and by train mostly, a guidebook in hand. I took tea by the Thames and watched children chase each other through the chestnut groves of Luxembourg Garden. I crossed the Plaza Mejor at high noon, with its De Chirico shadows and sparrows swirling across cobalt skies; and watched night fall over the Palatine, waiting for the first stars to appear, listening to the wind and its whispers of mortality.

And by the end of the first week or so, I realized that I’d made a mistake. It wasn’t that Europe wasn’t beautiful; everything was just as I’d imagined it. It just wasn’t mine. I felt as if I were living out someone else’s romance; the incompleteness of my own history stood between me and the sites I saw like a hard pane of glass. I began to suspect that my European stop was just one more means of delay, one more attempt to avoid coming to terms with the Old Man. Stripped of language, stripped of work and routine–stripped even of the racial obsessions to which I’d become so accustomed and which I had taken (perversely) as a sign of my own maturation–I had been forced to look inside myself and had found only a great emptiness there.

Would this trip to Kenya finally fill that emptiness?

Has anyone ever asked the President if the main result of his Libya policy, the current Camp of the Saints in the Mediterranean, strikes him as a bug … or as a feature?

 
🔊 Listen RSS

From the New York Times:

Migrants Race North as Hungary Builds a Border Fence
By ALISON SMALE AUG. 24, 2015

TISZASZIGET, Hungary — Roiling everything in its path, a wave of tens of thousands of migrants and refugees — many fleeing wars in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan — has worked its way up the length of the Balkans in recent days.

Like a movable feast of despair, the mass of people has overwhelmed the authorities in one stop after another, from the tiny Greek island of Kos

I swam to Kos in May 2009. I didn’t swim the full 3 miles from Bodrum, Turkey to Greece, just the last couple of hundred yards. The Mediterranean in May is colder than I had expected and I was quite glad to finally fetch up on the rocky beach.

to impoverished Macedonia, which declared a state of emergency last week, and now the train and bus stations of Serbia, as they head north to their ultimate destinations in the richer nations of the European Union.

The next link on their route, almost inevitably, are towns like this one on the Hungarian frontier with Serbia. But Hungarian officials say they have a firm, if unwelcoming, answer to the slow-motion tide: a fence.

Still under construction, parts of it are already laced across fields and river banks or trace old railway tracks, and it will be as tall as 13 feet in some places, a patchwork intended to send a clear message that the migrants should not expect to move freely.

But the fence also stands as a much criticized and a very physical manifestation of the quandary of the migration crisis and the lack of cooperation among European Union nations as they struggle to deal with it.

As the chaotic flow through the Balkans has demonstrated, absent coordinated policies, each nation along the path of the migrants has every incentive simply to move them on. The migrants are registered or issued temporary transit papers, but not entered as asylum applicants, ultimately passing the problem to someone else.

In a third to a half of cases, that has been Germany, which has received more migrants than any other European Union nation, but where, too, the welcome mat is wearing thin.

After a weekend of demonstrations outside Dresden — both for and against the migrants — Chancellor Angela Merkel and President François Hollande of France met on Monday to discuss the issue yet again, urging a unified European response and underscoring the need to move as swiftly as possible.

Even before Monday, leading ministers in the German government have given rare public voice to complaints about their European colleagues, urging everyone to observe existing agreements guaranteeing humane shelter for all and to help countries like Greece and Italy cope with the influx.

Yet Thomas de Maizière, the German interior minister, notably demurred when invited to criticize Hungary’s fence at a news conference last week. If countries observed existing rules, he said, perhaps Hungary would not need to build one.

Paradoxically, far from deterring the migrants, Hungary’s fence may actually be spurring them on. In a dozen or so fractured interviews this weekend, many Syrians, Afghans and others said that word of the fence had accelerated their race to get north before all of the Hungarian border with Serbia — almost 109 miles — is cordoned off, a goal that the Hungarians have set for Aug. 31.

Experienced analysts say the fence will not stop the migrants, who travel in clumps of just a few to clans of dozens, often guided by Google Maps and Facebook groups on the smartphones that are vital to this modern migration.

“It’s just one more obstacle,” said one volunteer, Tibor Varga, who has been working with migrants in northern Serbia for four years. “They will find out how to get around, above, under it.”

Funny how that Law of the Universe doesn’t apply to Israel’s border fences.

A vast majority entered Macedonia from Greece after several hundred rushed across the border, bypassing a line of police officers and soldiers who used stun grenades and force in trying to keep them back.

After the episode, the authorities in the impoverished country, which has just 2.1 million people and a gross domestic product of around $11 billion a year, appeared to have given up on the idea that they could control the flow.

“They all want to go to Germany,” Mr. Lesmajster said. “Their ‘promised land.’ ” Nothing would prevent it, he said.

“If they can’t get through Hungary, they will go through Croatia,” he added. “The Hungarian fence cannot stop them.”

 
• Tags: Europe, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

un_population_projections_steve_sailer_2

To understand what’s at stake regarding the Mediterranean, here’s a graph I made from the numbers in World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision: Volume II: Demographic Profiles, which was published in 2013 by the Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat.

The United Nations’ population projections for the continent of Africa are on p. 10 of the paper document (p. 36 of the PDF); the data for the continent of Europe are on p. 23 (p. 49 of the PDF).

(Now, of course, these UN projections are based on the highly arguable premise that the emigration rate out of Africa will decline steadily. The million or so Africans currently massed in Libya waiting to set sail for the EU, where they will invite their relatives back home to join them, would probably not agree with that heroic assumption.)

P.S., I’ve created an updated graph showing the numbers from the U.N.’s new 2015 Revision. In it, I break out population forecasts for Europe, Middle East (North Africa & West Asia), and Sub-Saharan Africa.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Birthrates in Western Europe have dipped so low that they threaten to shrink the populations and undermine the European equivalents of Social Security. Europe’s Great and Good are increasingly looking to massive immigration by young Third Worlders to maintain the currentproportion of workers to pensioners. As reported in VDARE earlier, the French Minister of the Interior is proposing the European Union admit75 million immigrants. http://www.vdare.com/pb/eu.htm A recent United Nations report asserts that to maintain the same ratio of retirees to workers as at present, over the next 50 years Italy would have to take in 113 million immigrants – and Germany 182 million! http://www.un.org/esa/population/migration.htm

But is it wise to bet the continent on one radical and permanent change without individual nations first experimenting with other options? The decline in birthrates in Europe certainly deserves a serious response. But it is by no means clear what it should be – nor that itshould be the same for each country. Logically, each country should experiment. Just as centralized control of economic innovation fails, so does centralized control of political innovations.

However, flooding the historic nations of Europe with vast numbers of Third Worlders appeals to Europe’s leftist-centrist ruling class because it wants to swamp native patriots who currently resist its transnationalambitions. The appeal of transnationalism to ambitious European apparatchiks: fewer democratic checks on their power. In a republic where everyone speaks the same language, citizens can effectively monitor the government’s performance. In a multilingual polity with an activist state such as the E.U., however, it becomes impractical to follow what is going on. Thus, power flows to a multilingual elite. Hence the hysterical response by the European ruling class when the people of Austria threw out a cozily corrupt regime and democratically replaced it with a new government favoring cutbacks in immigration.

Republican nations turn into polyglot empires. It happened to Rome. It’s happening to Europe today. And to America tomorrow?

Some possible responses that individual European nations could consider:

1. Let the population decline.

Americans are always yammering about how we “need our space.” Thus new houses in America are 50% bigger than three decades ago,and there is twice as much retail space per capita. Well, there are a lot of Europeans who would like to live large too. Some Europeancountries like France are not terribly crowded. But others like Greece and the Lowland states are packed.

And birthrates are remarkably unpredictable. Once the lebensraum per capita reached a level closer to America’s, Europeans might starthaving more children again.

How could these smaller cohorts of young workers pay for Baby Boomers’ retirements? Well, the same UN report also noted in passing, “In most cases, the potential support ratios could be maintained at current levels by increasing the upper limit of the working-age population to roughly 75 years of age.” So, being overrun by Third Worlders is hardly an economic necessity. Over the next half-century, health care breakthroughs and less need for physical labor might well extend the average European’s productive years by another decade.

But even with a more moderate increase in the retirement age, Europeans could generate far more wealth per worker. All they’d have to do is get off their duffs.

Their unemployment rate is typically 4 to 10 percentage points higher than America’s. Also, Europeans work far fewer hours than we do. They enjoy 5 or 6-week government-mandated vacations. And many are not allowed to work more than 35 or 37 hours per week. In the Mediterranean, many government and unionized workers literally sleepthrough their official jobs so they can work all evening in their family’s tax-evading gray market firm. In Scandinavia, absenteeism is rampant. Furthermore, internal migration is limited. For instance, although booming Northern Italian firms are desperate for workers, thegovernment subsidizes Southern Italians to stay where they are in thumb-twiddling make-work jobs.

On those increasingly rare occasions when Europeans do show up for work, many are enormously productive. They tend to be mature,intelligent, and well educated. In a surprising number of Europeans, the welfare state has yet to fully grind down a traditional work ethic that contrasts rather favorably with America’s get-rich-quick ethic. Britain was “the sick man of Europe” until Margaret Thatcher unleashed its productivity. Equally brave leaders could do the same for the rest ofEurope.

2. Take in more foreigners, but choose them carefully

Europe is currently filling up with illegal immigrants and “asylum”-seekers. The general lack of internal border controls within the European Union means that any weak link in the E.U.’s external border lets in floods of outsiders who then spread throughout the E.U.Italy, with its long coastline and its incompetent and corruptible civil service, has become the prime gateway for illegal immigrants. But many move on quickly since Italy is less of a sucker for hard luck stories than the Northern welfare states.

With control of their borders, individual states could pursue more rational. more selective immigration policies. They could then choose to admit only those immigrants most culturally compatible or likely to pay the most in taxes relative to what they consume in government handouts. By being more selective, Canada has brought in on the whole a more productive and assimilable type of immigrant than most of the European states. (It’s set the numbers too high, but that’s another matter.) The Europeans have acquired large numbers of poorly educated Moslems, who huddle in sullen and resentful enclaves. Trust me, admitting even more Islamic peasants isn’t going to jumpstart Europe’s economies.

Many European citizens naturally feel that if they need immigrants, why not first try to bring back their overseas relatives? The Mediterraneancountries, with their huge diasporas, might well consider instituting a Law of Return modeled on Israel’s. Many Italian immigrants, for example, ended up in ramshackle South American republics like Argentina, which still have high birth rates. Although life in Argentina is improving, a lot of 3rd generation Italians in the slums of Buenos Aires just might be tempted to move to their ancestral homeland.

3. Have more babies.

The ultimate test of any civilization is: is it self-reproducing? Or does it contain a fatal flaw condemning it to extinction? It would be a terrible irony if the West’s great heritage of individualism inevitably destroys Western Civilization by leading to self-indulgence so great that people can’t be bothered to have enough children to carry on their lineage. Atthis point, the best that Western Europe can say in its own defense is that it has not yet begun to fight. Here are some ways to not go gentle into that not-so-good night.

* Crack down on street crime and/or encourage the growth of suburbs and gated communities. Europeans tend to live in urban apartments and traditionally let their kids play on the streets. This worked fine until the recent crime wave. Now, lots of Europeans figure that if they want kids, and don’t want them mugged, they’d better buy a suburban home far from the bad elements. The U.S. has already gone through this transformation, which is why the extraordinaryincrease in the murderousness of African Americans during the crack epidemic of 1985 to 1995 had so little tangible impact on whites.Europe lags the U.S. by a few decades in crime-proofing itself.

* Give huge tax incentives to couples who have babies. Offer larger breaks to mothers who have children in their twenties rather than their thirties.

* Start a campaign telling citizens it’s their patriotic duty to have more kids. Most Europeans are probably too self-destructively sophisticated to respond to this, but the Greeks might, since the Turks give them somebody to hate and fear.

* Start affirmative action for mothers, just like many nations offer favoritism to veterans. Offer mothers a G.I. bill guaranteeing them freeeducation and retraining.

* (This is radical). Cut way back on retirement subsidies. Tell young people that they’ll have to rely far more on their on their children to support them in their old age. Impossible? Well, that’s how the entire human race did it until Bismarck invented government pensions.

Experiment with different social systems. For example, the Swedes are committing race suicide more slowly than many other European nations. Perhaps lavishly funded feminism works. Or try the opposite tack. Outlaw abortion. Cut back on female employment by getting rid of most of the government pink-collar jobs.

Hell, try legalizing polygamy. Just try something.

It’s your survival that’s at stake.

[Steve Sailer [email him] is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and

movie critic for The American Conservative. His website www.iSteve.blogspot.com features his daily blog.]

(Republished from VDare.com by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Europe, Immigration, VDare Archives 
No Items Found
Steve Sailer
About Steve Sailer

Steve Sailer is a journalist, movie critic for Taki's Magazine, VDARE.com columnist, and founder of the Human Biodiversity discussion group for top scientists and public intellectuals.


PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation