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
/
Illegal Immigration

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

With my review currently up in Taki’s Magazine of Loren Stein’s terrific translation in English of Michel Houellebecq’s Submission, I think it’s timely to repost my version of Houellebecq’s scenario for how the the second place Muslim finisher in the French Presidential election of 2022 would form a grand coalition to defeat the first place National Front.

In Houellebecq’s telling, by offering to let the Socialists and Sarkozyites have the important ministries of Foreign Affairs and Finance, while the Muslim Brotherhood contented itself merely with Education, the wise and moderate Mohammed Ben Abbes disarms French Establishment concerns about the Islamists being imprudent. On January 8, 2015, the day after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter, I posted “How Plausible Is Houellebecq’s Submission?

I don’t see Muslims getting their hands on education policy right away. White people care a lot about their children’s educations. On the other hand, Muslim politicians in France getting their hands on immigration policy would be the more likely camel’s nose in the tent, as it were. After all, immigration policy is increasingly seen in the respectable world as a subject for moral grandstanding, while education is an area for nuance. …

Houellebecq, as he pointed out to an interviewer, largely left immigration policy out of Submission.

To make this more historically plausible, however, I’d stretch this political process out into a two stage process taking place over five years across two presidential elections, and combine Submission with Jean Raspail’s 1973 novel The Camp of the Saints (and Bertolt Brecht’s 1953 poem The Solution).

In 2022, Marine Le Pen easily wins the first round with, say, 40% of the vote. The mediagenic Muslim party candidate, who finishes fourth with 9%, announces that he will advise his followers to not vote in the final election, unless the coalition of Establishment parties give him control of one area of policy — but not of education as in the author’s scenario, but of immigration and citizenship as a moral rebuke to the anti-immigrant hatefulness of the National Front.

The establishment / Islamist coalition ekes out a 51-49 win over the National Front, helped along by some mob violence and election tampering. A secular centrist Frenchman becomes president. Marine Le Pen retires as head of the National Front in favor of her even more popular and charismatic daughter, who instantly becomes the frontrunner for 2027. The Internet is full of observations that Likud lost eight straight general elections before becoming the dominant party in Israel.

In desperation to stop the next onslaught of the FN in 2027, the combined establishment parties accede to the suggestion of their most brilliant young politician, Mohammed Ben Abbes, that to prevent the people from electing a new government in 2027, the government must elect a new people.

A media campaign of white guilt over French colonialism and the Crusades is ginned up. A ship loaded with illegal immigrants founders spectacularly in the Mediterranean on television.

Looking back from the fall of 2015, I’d say that’s not a bad guess, but the reality turned out that the precipitating media moment for The Campo of the Saints was not a lot of people drowning, but one child drowning. As Stalin supposedly said, “A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic.”

A new law is rammed through offering, in effect, open borders for four years to all countries victimized by French imperialism and the Crusades (in the fine print, populous Egypt is included for having suffered the indignity of the French building the Suez Canal). A one year residency requirement for voting is introduced. A senile Pope Francis issues an encyclical denouncing immigration restriction as the great Satan of the 21st Century. A few false flag operations whip up a frenzy of hatred against the FN.

The Camp of the Saints of course proves a vast disaster for France, which only intensifies establishment anger at dissidents for pointing this out. Muslim and/or African car-be-ques appear to be headed out of control, but Ben Abbes demonstrates an impressive ability to turn them off at his command. In desperation, the Socialists and Sarkozyites turn to Ben Abbes as the one man who can permanently end the FN menace, while also calming the street violence spilling from the banlieues to the arrondissements. Of course, after Ben Abbes takes out the FN, the French insiders reason, he can easily be squeezed out himself.

And so on January 30, 2027, a few months before the scheduled election, the sitting president resigns in favor of the temporary expedient of Ben Abbes as President.

Several weeks later the Louvre burns down. A retarded white soccer hooligan is arrested nearby holding a can of gasoline.

FN leaders are rounded up. A North Korean computer hack reveals to the world the names, addresses, and license plate numbers of FN voters, some of whom suffer rough justice for their hereditary guilt stretching back to the Crusades.

NATO leaders invoke Article 5 as applying to NATO member (since 2009) France and applying to an attack from inside the country by nativists. President George P. Bush, at the suggestion of U.S. national security advisor Prince Bandar, deploys the 82nd Airborne to the NATO base at Avord in central France to back the Ben Abbes government in maintaining law and order. Secretary of State Chelsea Clinton announces, “Lafayette, we are here!” as the U.S. sets up drone patrols over rural France.

In a magnanimous gesture praised in world capitals, President Ben Abbes announces he is not delaying the scheduled election. Although in preventive detention, after the first hour of vote counting in the primary round in April 2027, Mademoiselle Le Pen appears to be headed toward a smashing majority, making her President without a runoff. But a computer outage takes vote counting off the air for the rest of the evening and when the count resumes in the wee hours, it’s found that she only won 48% and must face two weeks later Ben Abbes, who is then anointed the defender of all that is right and holy in the multicultural modern era.

And thus we can pick up again with the story line in Submission.

Having finally read Submission, however, I can now see the genius of Houellebecq’s less plausible, more quietist version in which Islamist rule is accepted by the French people as a sort of Streamlined Catholicism. Houellebecq threads the needle of not offending too badly either Islamists, of the kind that murdered the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, or of the French leftist cultural gatekeepers, while creating an insidiously subversive fable.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Mystery child tells Finnish PM: “I look big, but I’m 17.”

From the New York Times:

Migrant Children Arrive Alone and Settle In Uneasily

By KATRIN BENNHOLD 5:34 AM ET

Many of Europe’s new mystery children are boys ages 14 to 17, sent by families too poor to pay smugglers for more than one journey. Others were separated from their parents along the way.

Distinguishing Minors From Adults in Migrant Tide 5:35 AM ET
PASSAU, Germany — Newly arrived migrants were lining up at the train station in this border town for their first registration one recent evening. In a group of young Afghans traveling on their own, Matin, from Kabul, said he was 17 years old.

A police officer laughed. “Yes, you and all your friends are 17,” he said. “You know how often I hear that every day?”

One of the hardest challenges in processing unaccompanied teenage migrants is to determine whether they are still minors. Their legal situation changes radically on their 18th birthday.

Migrants under 18 are considered “children first and refugees second,” giving them the same rights as German children, said Johanna Karpenstein of B-UMF, a Berlin-based charity focused on unaccompanied minor refugees across Germany. That means where possible they are fast-tracked into youth housing, German lessons and schools. Perhaps the biggest prize: If they are granted asylum, their families are allowed to join them in Germany.

Austria Looks Into Building a Border Fence 33 minutes ago
Ousted Australian Leader Urges Hard Line From Europe 3:27 AM ET

 
🔊 Listen RSS

From the Daily Mail:

Could your views on God and immigration be changed by using MAGNETS? Brain stimulation can alter beliefs, study claims

Scientists used magnetic stimulation to shut down parts of people’s brains

They specifically targeted the posterior medial frontal cortex associated with how the brain detects and solves problems and threats

Participants reported that their belief in God dropped by a third in tests

There was also a 28% increase in positive feelings towards immigrants

By VICTORIA WOOLLASTON FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 08:38 EST, 14 October 2015

Psychologists have discovered it’s possible to significantly change a person’s beliefs simply by targeting their brain with magnets.

Using what’s known as transcranial magnetic stimulation, the researchers were able to temporarily shut down the part of the brain associated with detecting and solving problems.

As Stalin might say if he were around today, No brain, no problem.

People who were subjected to this treatment reported that their belief in God dropped by a third following the stimulation, while there was an increase in positive feelings towards immigrants.

The study was carried out by Dr Keise Izuma from the University of York and Colin Holbrook from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA).

They recruited 38 participants with an average age of 21, to take part in the study.=

Each of these participants said they held significant religious beliefs, and the majority held moderate to extremely conservative political beliefs.

Political views were important because it suggested they were more likely to have stronger viewpoints on immigration.

Half of these participants formed part of a control group and received a low-level ‘sham’ procedure that did not affect their brains.

The other half received enough energy through transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to lower activity in the posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC).

This part of the brain, located near the surface and roughly a few inches up from the forehead, is associated with detecting problems and triggering responses that address them. …

Following the treatment, all the participants were first asked to think about death before being asked questions about their religious beliefs and their feelings about immigrants. …

To address their levels of prejudice, participants were asked to read two essays – one critical and one positive – written by an immigrant from Latin America about the US. …

After reading each essay, participants rated how much they liked the person who wrote the essay and how much they agreed with their views. …

The findings, published in the journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, reveal that people whose brains were targeted by TMS reported 32.8 per cent less belief in God, angels, or heaven. They were also 28.5 per cent more positive in their feelings toward an immigrant who criticised their country.

The investigators additionally found that the magnetic stimulation had the greatest effect on reactions to the critical author in the essay test.

‘We think that hearing criticisms of your group’s values, perhaps especially from a person you perceive as an outsider, is processed as an ideological sort of threat,’ said Dr Izuma.

‘One way to respond to such threats is to ‘double down’ on your group values, increasing your investment in them, and reacting more negatively to the critic,’ he continued.

‘When we disrupted the brain region that usually helps detect and respond to threats, we saw a less negative, less ideologically motivated reaction to the critical author and his opinions.’ …

The TMS group also rated immigrants higher than the control group

… ‘Whether we’re trying to clamber over a fallen tree that we find in our path, find solace in religion, or resolve issues related to immigration, our brains are using the same basic mental machinery,’ the researchers concluded.

So, there’s a light at the end of the tunnel for the donors to ¡Jeb!

Just use the Bush campaign’s megabucks to put these mind control magnets outside of voting booths in key primary states to turn off the brains of voters and your boy is a lock.

Having Americans trip over fallen trees more is a small price to pay for less skepticism about immigration.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Screenshot 2015-10-12 16.51.59

What with demand for Volkswagens soaring, German Chancellor Merkel’s decision to let in (literally) countless numbers of newcomers from the Muslim world is being hailed as an economic masterstroke that will counteract the deleterious wage-boosting effects of the number of working-age residents in Germany being otherwise expected to plunge from 49.2 million in 2013 all the way down to 48.8 million in 2020.

But, strange as it may seem from reading The Economist, the word “demographics” means more than just “age.” One of the more interesting aspect of demographics is the “consanguinity” rate, or percentage of all marriages that are between first or second cousins, a statistic which correlates strikingly with a lack of what Europeans consider civic virtues.

Professor Alan Bittles of the Centre for Comparative Genomics at Murdoch U. tracks those rates at his Consang.net website.

Interestingly, the Merkel Youth seem to come overwhelmingly from inbred cultures, which is probably not coincidental.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

The race among Republicans for Speaker of the House is important because the only thing keeping Congress from sending an amnesty bill to Obama’s desk was John Boehner’s invoking of the informal Hastert Rule that he wouldn’t call an amnesty bill for a vote since a majority of House Republicans were against it. But that’s the Speaker’s call.

The frontrunner to succeed Boehner, Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, CA, represents the crops-rotting-in-the-fields donor class of Central Valley landowners who like a constant flow of fresh stoop laborers from south of the border so they can privatize profits and socialize costs (emergency room care, public schools, prisons, etc.). McCarthy has a terrible record on immigration.

But now McCarthy has suddenly dropped out of the race. The New York Times doesn’t offer much of a plausible explanation for why this just happened. But Charles C. Johnson’s Got News has a detailed theory. I certainly don’t know if it’s true, but it makes more prima facie sense than the NYT’s story.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Screenshot 2015-10-05 01.48.59

Screenshot 2015-10-05 01.50.22

From NumbersUSA.

Commenter Lot says:

Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield is the favorite to become the next House speaker. He is an amnesty advocate. This is important, because right now, today, the majority in the House, 60+ votes in the Senate, and the President all support amnesty. The only reason that it didn’t pass is the “Hastert Rule” that says the Speaker does not bring to vote bills that don’t have a majority of Republicans in support, even if it has the support of the majority of the whole House.

It isn’t a hard and fast rule though. …

Importantly, however, [Boehner] DID NOT do this with amnesty.

I.e., Boehner kept the Schumer-Rubio amnesty bottled up in the House by not calling it up for a vote, where it likely would have passed.

… Jason Chaffetz of Utah, who beat an amnesty supporter in a Republican primary (Chris Cannon), is running against McCarthy. …

McCarthy is quite near the single worst House Republican on immigration. In fact, he scores worse than many California Democrat congressmen.

As we’ve seen with Merkel’s Boner, eternal vigilance is the price of keeping your country. One bigshot can make one seemingly technical change and set off a flash mob Camp of the Saints. Or set you on a drip drip drip erosion. Or both.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

From Yahoo News:

‘Finland’s no good’: Disappointed migrants turn back
AFP By Anne Kauranen

Tornio (Finland) (AFP) – Hundreds of predominantly Iraqi migrants who have travelled through Europe to reach Finland are turning back, saying they don’t want to stay in the sparsely-populated country on Europe’s northern frontier because it’s too cold and boring.

Migrants have in recent weeks been crossing back into Sweden at the Haparanda-Tornio border just an hour’s drive south of the Arctic Circle, and Finnish authorities have seen a rise in the number of cancelled asylum applications.

“You can tell the world I hate Finland. It’s too cold, there’s no tea, no restaurants, no bars, nobody on the streets, only cars,” 22-year-old Muhammed told AFP in Tornio, as the mercury struggled to inch above 10 degrees Celsius (50 Fahrenheit) on a recent blustery grey day.

He had already travelled from Tornio to the capital Helsinki almost 750 kilometres (465 miles) south, and then back up to the Tornio border again to return to Sweden.

… Another group of around 15 Iraqi refugees waiting at the bus station that Tornio shares with its Swedish twin town Haparanda also said they wanted to go back to southern Sweden.

“Finland is no good,” the men echoed each other.

Sweden may be just as cold as Finland, but Sweden has bigger immigrant communities because of a longer history of integration.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

In rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic news, from the New York Times:

European Union Ministers Approve Plan to Distribute Refugees
By JAMES KANTER SEPT. 22, 2015

BRUSSELS — European Union ministers approved a plan on Tuesday that compels member countries to take in 120,000 migrants seeking refuge on the Continent, despite strong objections from four dissident nations in Central Europe.

The plan to apportion the migrants, still only a small fraction of those flowing into Europe, was approved by home affairs and interior ministers of the member countries after a vigorous debate.

In a departure from normal procedures that emphasize consensus, particularly on questions of national sovereignty, the ministers took a formal vote. The Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia voted no. Finland abstained.

As a legal matter, however, the plan is final and must be carried out even if those countries oppose it. …

The crisis has tested the limits of Europe’s ability to forge consensus on one of the most divisive issues to confront the union since the fall of communism. It has set right-wing politicians, including those who govern Hungary, against Pan-European humanitarians, who have portrayed the crisis in stark moral terms.

“We would have preferred to have adoption by consensus, but we did not manage to achieve that,” Jean Asselborn, the foreign minister of Luxembourg, said after the meeting. He urged the countries that had voted no to comply with the decision. “I have no doubt they will implement these decisions fully,” he said.

Mr. Asselborn generated some confusion earlier on Tuesday when he said that the member states had agreed to take their allocations of migrants on a “voluntary” basis. Pressed on whether the countries that dissented would also have to accept the migrants, he responded, “Nobody has the right not to agree.”

Like in Orwell’s Newspeak, in EUspeak, “voluntary” means “Nobody has the right not to agree.”

It appears that one point of this manufactured crisis is to establish precedents diminishing national sovereignty. In other words, the “migrant crisis” is intended to facilitate an EU superstate coup.

Another factor that had been holding up a deal was the reluctance of a number of countries to hand over control of immigration to the European Commission, the Brussels-based executive agency for the European Union, which drew up the plans for the mandatory system.

 
And another graph that explains the migrant crises of 2016-2100
🔊 Listen RSS

Population 1950-2015-b

The demographers of the United Nation’s Population Division have quietly released their World Population Prospects: 2015 Revision report.

Above is a graph I put together from their new data that explains much about the “Migrant Crisis” of 2015.

As you can see, way back in 1950, the population of the Middle East was only 18% as great as the population of Europe, while Sub-Saharan Africa was only 33% as large. Even in 2000, the Middle East had only 49% of the population of Europe, while Africa had almost caught up to Europe with 88% of its population.

But from 2000 to 2015, the Middle East added 124 million people, making it now 65% as populous as Europe.

In this century alone, Sub-Saharan Africa has added 320 million people, making it 130% as populated as Europe.

Some of this information about the past is new. For example, the U.N.’s estimate of the population of the continent of Africa back in 2010 has grown by 13 million people, or over 1% between the 2012 Revision and the 2015 Revision. When it comes to population, the past just isn’t what it used to be.

But what about the future?

As a general pattern, the U.N. has found, the completeness of the counts tends to be worse in the fastest growing countries. Thus, the harder the U.N. has looked at Africa in this decade, the more people and more new babies it keeps uncovering.

It turns out that while the total fertility rate in Africa is falling, it’s falling quite a bit more slowly than the U.N. had expected before its disturbing 2012 Revision.

Sub-Saharan Africa simply isn’t behaving like the rest of the world:

Screenshot 2015-09-19 16.44.14

This U.N. map of total fertility rates can be found here. I reviewed the deep structure reasons for Sub-Saharan Africa’s anomalously high fertility here.

The upward adjustment in Africa’s population projections in the 2012 Revision of World Population Prospects came as a shock. But the 2015 Revision forecasts Africa’s population in 2100, about one lifetime from now, to be another 5% higher than the U.N. projected just back in 2012.

And here’s my full graph of the U.N.’s 2015 Revision numbers:

Population 1950-2100-b

Wow.

The U.N. now projects that, despite lower fertility in some Muslim countries such as Iran, the population of the Middle East will surpass that of Europe in 2045 and reach 937 million by 2100.

As for Sub-Saharan Africa, the U.N. foresees the population growing to 3,935,000,000 (3.9 billion and change) by 2100. (The total population of Africa and the Middle East will be 4,872,000,000.)

That’s probably not going to happen due to some combination of (A) intelligent self-restraint, (B) mass migration, and (C) Malthusian Nightmares (war, famine, disease, etc. etc.) keeping the population of Sub-Saharan Africa in 2100 from being more than six times as great as Europe, which would be an 18-fold increase in 150 years.

Keep in mind that there’s not a one to one relationship between population growth and emigration. In general, people try to assess whether the future at home looks brighter than the present. But people in Africa and the Middle East can see their countries’ futures will be more crowded and constrained.

Personally, I hope the reason that this graph doesn’t prove accurate is largely (A) intelligent self-restraint. But at present, white people don’t seem to be making much of an effort to facilitate and encourage reasonable family planning in Africa. Because that would be, you know, racist.

Which is the worst thing in the world, much worse than the U.N.’s population forecast.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

From the New York Times:

17,000 Migrants Stranded in Croatia by Border Crackdown
By DAN BILEFSKY SEPT. 18, 2015

A half hour ago, this headline began “15,000 Migrants.”

LONDON — As key nations tighten their borders, thousands of migrants and asylum seekers hoping to enter Western Europe are now bottled up in the Balkans, placing precarious new burdens on a region of lingering sectarian divisions that is exceptionally ill prepared to handle the crisis that has been shunted to it.

More than 17,000 migrants have entered Croatia since Wednesday, and were essentially trapped there, having been blocked from Hungary, sent packing from Serbia and unable to move on to Slovenia. The migrants have become a sloshing tide of humanity, left to flow wherever the region’s conflicting and constantly changing border controls channel them.

The shifting of the crisis to the Balkans has added a whole new dynamic to the crisis, threatening to reopen old wounds and distrust. The masses of migrants and refugees are struggling through the clutch of countries that once formed Yugoslavia, until the wars of the 1990s bloodily broke the former Communist state apart.

As hundreds of refugees continued to stream into Croatia on Friday, the government announced that it would close its borders with Serbia. Prime Minister Zoran Milanovic said his country was overwhelmed, and Interior Minister Ranko Ostojic had a message for the migrants: “Don’t come here anymore. This is not the road to Europe.”

The remarks were revealing of the tensions the migrants are now sowing among nations with weak economies, uncertain futures in Europe, creaking welfare states and deep wounds from the past. Those factors are hobbling the region’s ability to respond to a crisis that even richer nations in Europe have struggled to address. …

But after gaining independence, countries in the region have struggled to bounce back — the average gross monthly wage in Serbia is 518 euros, about $585, while unemployment hovers at about 18 percent, according to the government statistics office. …

President Tomislav Nikolic of Serbia on Friday railed at members of the bloc for their hypocrisy, selfishness and lack of leadership in the face of the migration crisis. He said it was “absurd” that Serbia respected European standards more than those who are members and who are now “almost out of control — without receiving any criticism, advice, or order from Brussels.”

In a region long plagued by bloody conflicts over land, it is hard enough to police borders where regional rivalries still remain. Slovenia, the first former Yugoslav nation to join the European Union in 2004, and Croatia, which joined in 2013, cannot agree where Croatia ends and Slovenia begins — a dispute that dates to Yugoslavia’s collapse.

Slovenia is part of the Schengen accord that allows freedom of movement among member states; Croatia is not. Macedonia and Greece have battled over who has claims to the name Macedonia.

Thanks, Germany!

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Here’s a transcript of the heart (from 0:49 to 2:16) of this high level discussion at the National Palace in Mexico City:

President of Mexico [to American Ambassador]: “First of all, and as you may know, we actually have many problems in Mexico. The most important are the economic ones: crisis, inflation, unemployment, social instability, and the violence originated by the organized crime. But I want to inform you that we are working very hard on these subjects. [Getting to the point] If you opened your border to all my fellows countrymen, we can do all kinds of jobs even the black people don’t wanted to do.”

American Ambassador: “Eh … I beg your pardon, Mr. President, I’m not quite sure I understand what you’re saying?”

President of Mexico: “I’ll make it clear for you, Ambassador, my government has a very interesting propulsion …”

Aide: “Proposition”

President: “Proposition to your President.”

Ambassador: “I’m listening, Mr. President.”

President: “That we, the Mexicans, we are waiting to do all the dirty jobs not even the Negros wanted to do. Actually, the Mexicans are better than blacks almost in everything.”

Ambassador: “Yes, well, I will report this news to President Obama and I’m sure he’ll be pleased at your offer.”

President [standing, wrapping up meeting]: Well, Mr. Ambassador, once again, ¡Welcome to Mexico!”

This is the opening scene from La Dictadura Perfecta, or “The Perfect Dictatorship,” a term for the Mexican government coined by Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas Llosa.

Directed by Luis Estrada, La Dictadura Perfecta was the highest grossing Mexican movie of 2014. (I reviewed Estrada’s first political satire, Herod’s Law, in 2003.)

After this scene, the film turns into a multi-Wag the Dog story as the President orders the monopoly television network to redirect attention from his embarrassment to a financial scandal involving a corrupt state governor (Damián Alcázar). In turn, the network executives offer the beleaguered governor their premium image management services.

You can watch the movie (with English subtitles or dubbed into English, your choice) on Netflix.

Here’s the historical inspiration for this scene: Mexican President Vicente Fox speaking in 2005:

 
🔊 Listen RSS

What’s going on in Europe is like a children’s game, such as Hot Potato or Musical Chairs. When Germany clamped down on its border with Austria, that sent the message that the northern European states were starting to come to their senses, which means that states further south are in danger of getting stuck with roving Muslim mobs whom they can’t move on through to the no-longer quite so delusional northerners. This has set off a ripple effect. Serbia is now worried that when the music stops it will end up with the hot potato.

The Guardian is starting to look like the Daily Mail. From the Guardian:

Clashes at border with Serbia as Croatia says it cannot take more refugees – as it happened

More than 7,000 refugees enter Croatia in the past 24 hours

Hundreds of people break through police lines at two border crossing between Serbia and Croatia

EU summit called for next week

Hungary says a ‘terrorist’ was among those arrested at border

Migrants push policemen during a stampede to board buses in Tovarnik, Croatia

Thursday 17 September 2015 14.06 EDT

Hundreds of people broke through police lines at two border crossing between Serbia and Croatia. Police at Tovarnik tried to stop people marching on the tracks towards Zagreb resulting in a stampede, which saw a number of people faint and one man suffer a heart attack. It was unclear whether the man survived..

Croatia’s Interior Minister Ranko Ostojic said his country cannot accept any more people after 7,300 people crossed the border in the last two days. Croatia’s President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic asked the army to be ready, if necessary, to protect its borders.

Calm has returned to Hungary’s border with Serbia a day after Hungarian police used teargas and water cannon to stop people crossing the sealed frontier. Serbia put on buses to help refugees to reach the Croatia border.

Amazingly enough, when a government shows itself willing to defend its borders from invasion, peace ensues.

Criticism of yesterday’s actions by Hungarian police have continued with UN’s human rights commission chief Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein describing it as callous and using disproportionate force, motivated by xenophobia and anti-Muslim views. The EU migration commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos also chastised Hungary, suggesting it was on the wrong side of history.

Have you noticed that people who say “the wrong side of history” a lot tend to be … evil?

The UN’s secretary general Ban Ki-moon condemned Hungary. “I was shocked to see how these refugees and migrants were treated. It’s not acceptable,” Ban told a news conference.

Slovenia has become the latest European country to reintroduce border controls. It informed the European Commission that from today its border with Hungary will be closed for at least 10 days. The country’s Red Cross said it expects 5,000 refugees to arrive in coming days, as thousands have poured into neighbouring Croatia.

Concerns are mounting about refugees straying into minefields in their search for ways round border restrictions in Balkans.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

The Western world has had relatively few national leaders who were unambiguously 100% Jewish in ancestry, upbringing, religion, and ethnic identification. The American presidency, for example, remains remarkably WASP-dominated.

But going back to Queen Victoria’s favorite prime minister, Benjamin Disraeli, who identified strongly as a racial Jew while espousing Anglicanism as his religion, there has been a growth in the number of national leaders who have some claim to being at least a little bit Jewish. Former French president Nicolas Sarkozy is representative of this broad trend: one of Sarkozy’s four grandparents was Jewish (he was raised in that grandfather’s house, and was closest to him).

As time goes by and there are more products of mixed marriages, a larger fraction of national leaders seem to have some Jewish roots. My impression is that in the 21st Century, part Jewish national leaders tend to be found more right-of-center than left-of-center, but I could be wrong about this.

An even fuzzier example than Sarkozy is the new Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull.

From the Israeli newspaper Haaretz tomorrow:

Jewish Australians Welcome New PM, Malcom ‘Moishe’ Turnbull

Turnbull, who deposed Tony Abbott as Australia’s premier on Monday, claimed in 2013 that he may have Jewish roots and has long been a staple at Jewish community functions.

Dan Goldberg Sep 17, 2015 12:02 AM

It was a balmy summer’s night in late February as a throng of Jewish guests gathered at a prestigious yacht club in one of Sydney’s most exclusive harbor-side suburbs. … it was Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull who stole the show.

His off-the-cuff speech was vintage Turnbull: charismatic, witty, and, as always, audience appropriate – in this case, with lashings of Hebrew and Yiddish.

“As you all know it’s a standard blessing when somebody celebrates a birthday … to say ‘Biz hundert un tsvantsik,’ which means for those whose Yiddish is not up to scratch, ‘May you live to 120’,” Turnbull said.

The audience lapped it up. He was holding court inside his own electorate of Wentworth, home to the largest Jewish population in Sydney. And he was speaking just down the road from his $50-million waterside mansion in Point Piper, a stone’s throw from shopping-mall mogul Frank Lowy and a coterie of Sydney Jewry’s A-list, many of whom Turnbull befriended.

“My birthday message to the Jewish News today is ‘Biz zvai hundert un fufzik – so that’s 250 years,” Turnbull quipped, before signing off with some Hebrew: “Kol Hakavod [congratulations] on this great achievement and I look forward to many, many more issues of the Australian Jewish News.”

The following morning the Sydney Morning Herald reported on the function, stating: “The event followed reports than Mr. Turnbull now has sufficient numbers to mount a challenge to Mr Abbott in the Liberal Party room.”

Fast forward seven months. On Monday night Turnbull, who claimed in 2013 that he may have Jewish roots, finally deposed his more conservative rival in a surprise coup. …

Turnbull, 60, was a Rhodes scholar at Oxford before successful stints as a journalist, barrister, merchant banker and tech entrepreneur. He first won his seat for the Liberal Party in 2004, and is a progressive who supports gay marriage and an Australian republic.

His net worth was estimated by Business Review Weekly at $186 million in 2010. Now he has the keys to the prime minister’s residences at Kirribilli House in Sydney and The Lodge in Canberra, which some media outlets have noted may resemble a downgrade in his lavish lifestyle.

His first major task will be to name his ministers. Josh Frydenberg, the sole Jewish MP inside the government, was an Abbott loyalist and, as parliamentary secretary to the PM, had little choice but to back his former boss. But some have speculated he may not be sacrificed when Turnbull declares his new frontbench this weekend.

Ironically, this week’s political drama was played out as most of the nation’s 110,000-plus Jews were celebrating Rosh Hashanah.

“There was a real buzz and an air of excitement,” Central Synagogue’s Rabbi Levi Wolff told Haaretz. “He’s a very, very dear friend and someone who has a huge amount of support from the community. He really does have an understanding and knowledge of Judaism that probably the average congregant doesn’t have.

“In my shul, he’s referred to as Moishe Turnbull.”

But a senior Jewish leader, who declined to be named, told Haaretz: “The rabbi gave him a huge rap in shul, as our very own Jewish PM – it’s bullshit,” he said.

The source, an associate of Turnbull, added: “I don’t think it’s in his interests to play his Jewish roots up. I don’t think it’s a line that should be pushed. He wasn’t brought up Jewish and hasn’t established connections with Jews because of his roots.”

A practicing Catholic, Turnbull claimed in 2013 he may have Jewish roots. “My mother always used to say that her mother’s family was Jewish,” he told the Australian Jewish News.

“There is no doubt that the strong traditions of family and the whole heimishe [homely] atmosphere of the Jewish community, which I’m sure some people don’t like, for me – as someone who is a good friend, but not part of it – I find very admirable.”

Turnbull last visited Israel in 2005, and has long admired Israel’s hi-tech innovation, dubbed Silicon Wadi, conceding that Australia was unlikely to catch up with Israel. “I don’t know that anyone can replicate the secret chicken soup of Israel,” he told the Australian BRW magazine in 2013.

A crucial policy issue for the future of Australia is preventing more Camp of the Saints flashmobs from influxing into the country, as is currently happening in Europe, and was happening under the previous leftwing government. The conservative PM whom Turnbull deposed, Tony Abbott, did a good job of building a humane but highly effective naval blockade to prevent illegal immigrants from coming to Australia by boat.

Australia in recent months has been a light unto the nations.

Nobody, however, seems all that sure what the new PM will do about that. Presumably, it’s not a big priority for him one way or another.

It would be tragic for the citizens of Australia if some cloakroom politics like this over other issues led, in a fit of absentmindedness, to a massive Camp of the Saints.

One reason to worry that Turnbull, a former managing director of Goldman Sachs in Australia, would be inclined to err in the direction of making Merkel’s Boner is because, coming from a fairly Jewish cultural environment in his wealthy home constituency, he’s likely to have been exposed to a lot of unthinking schmaltz about the glories of mass migrations into gentile nations.

That kind of lowbrow ethnocentric sentimentality shouldn’t be a major problem for setting national policy, except … that nobody is supposed to critique and satirize, or even notice, Jewish biases.

So, a lot of important people who haven’t thought hard about immigration policy assume that all this stuff you hear all the time about “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses” really is the Unquestionable Wisdom of the Ages instead of just being a simpleminded, obviously self-interested schtick that deserves eye-rolls and snickers rather than credulous respect.

Here’s a rare example of somebody with enough self-confidence on the ethnic front to make fun of today’s Reigning Schmaltz:

 
🔊 Listen RSS

This is the opening to the late Tory MP Enoch Powell’s 1968 speech endorsing immigration restriction:

The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.

One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.

Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: “If only,” they love to think, “if only people wouldn’t talk about it, it probably wouldn’t happen.”

Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.

At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

If Jeb Bush is elected President in November 2016, how fast would a migrant flash mob bearing signs reading “¡Acto de Amor!” form at U.S. border crossings? The day after his inauguration? Or, more likely, the evening of his election, allowing lame duck President Obama to announce “the People have spoken” and order the gates swung open to the horde of future Democratic voters?

 
🔊 Listen RSS

From the NYT:

A Migration Juggernaut Is Headed for Europe
SEPT. 15, 2015

Eduardo Porter
ECONOMIC SCENE

European leaders probably don’t want to hear this now, as they frantically try to close their borders to stop hundreds of thousands of desperate migrants and asylum seekers escaping hunger and violence in Africa and the Middle East. But they are dealing with the unstoppable force of demography.

Fortified borders may slow it, somewhat. But the sooner Europe acknowledges it faces several decades of heavy immigration from its neighboring regions, the sooner it will develop the needed policies to help integrate large migrant populations into its economies and societies.

That will be no easy task. It has long been a challenge for all rich countries, of course, but in crucial respects Europe does a particularly poor job.

Perhaps it’s not surprising, as a recent report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development found, that it is harder for immigrants to get a job in European Union nations than in most other rich countries. But that doesn’t explain why it is also harder for their European-born children, who report even more discrimination than their parents and suffer much higher rates of unemployment than the children of the native-born.

S0, immigrant resentment and hostility just gets worse in the second generation? Maybe Europe should plan for that, such as by letting in fewer fathers of future terrorists and welfare grifters?

Rather than fortifying borders, European countries would do better to improve on this record. The benefits would be substantial, for European citizens and the rest of the world.

Over the summer, as Hungary hurried to lay razor wire along its southern border and E.U. leaders hashed out plans to destroy smugglers’ boats off the coast of North Africa, the United Nations Population Division quietly released its latest reassessment of future population growth.

Gone is the expectation that the world’s population will peak at nine billion in 2050. Now the U.N. predicts it will hit almost 10 billion at midcentury and surpass 11 billion by 2100. And most of the growth will come from the poor, strife-ridden regions of the world that have been sending migrants scrambling to Europe in search of safety and a better life.

The population of Africa, which has already grown 50 percent since the turn of the century, is expected to double by 2050, to 2.5 billion people. South Asia’s population may grow by more than half a billion. And Palestine’s population density is expected to double to 1,626 people per square kilometer (4,211 per square mile), three times that of densely populated India.

You know, there’s a country close to Palestine that seems to do a pretty good job of stopping the “unstoppable force of demography.” Maybe Europeans could try to learn how the Palestinians’ neighbor does it.

… “With Africa’s population likely to increase by more than three billion over the next 85 years, the European Union could be facing a wave of migration that makes current debates about accepting hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers seem irrelevant,” wrote Adair Turner, the former chairman of Britain’s Financial Services Authority and now chairman of the Institute for New Economic Thinking.

In other words, Europe, lie back and try to enjoy it. But at the same time: dig faster!

Europe’s initial reaction to the flow has been mixed, at best. Germany, notably, has committed real resources to help cover the basic needs of hundreds of thousands of refugees it expects to welcome this year. But that is hardly the spirit across the board. And Europe is still mostly focused on steeling its borders, even to the point of closing many of its once free-flowing internal boundaries.

European countries are closing their internal boundaries because because the EU has done such a miserable job of closing its external boundary. (A serious question: Is this simple concept widely understood, or is it some amazing insight that I need to propound more often?)

Better options exist. The rich history of immigration around the world suggests that new migrant populations could be integrated into the European social fabric to the benefit of Europeans, the new immigrants and even the regions of the world they left behind. …

Rich countries with lower fertility rates and older populations benefit from young migrants of working age, who help rev up their slowing labor supply. From 2000 to 2010, migrants accounted for nearly two-thirds of European labor force growth.

Yeah, like in Spain, which took in huge numbers of culturally compatible immigrants in the 2000s from Latin America. How’d that strategy work out for Spain anyway?

Good news! Spain’s youth unemployment rate dropped from 48.9% in June to only 48.6% in July, and it hasn’t even been 7 years yet since the Crash.

Despite popular perceptions to the contrary, migrants are often highly educated, and they generally do not burden the public purse.

Especially when you just accept anybody with a smartphone and no documents.

But the overall task is greater, to eventually close the socio-economic gaps between immigrants and their descendants and native Europeans. “What matters is the integration of the migrants in receiving countries,” Mr. Scarpetta said. “This will not occur by itself.”

No, it will of course requiring hiring millions more soft major diversicrats to manage the process.

In the end, the choice is clear. Europe’s best shot at prosperity is to build upon the diversity that immigration will bring.

 
Almost 7 billion people live in countries poorer than U.S., 6 billion in countries poorer than Puerto Rico
🔊 Listen RSS

SevenBillion3d-g

Out of the 187 countries represented by spheres, highlighted countries from bottom left to top right include: Pakistan is the pink sphere, Nigeria black, India indigo, Indonesia dark red, China mint green, Brazil blue, Mexico brown, Poland purple, UK yellow, Germany green, and USA red-white-and-blue red.

It’s hard for Westerners to grasp how many people there are in the rest of the world, which is why we often treat frivolously data points that ought to be thought-provoking, such as the Gallup Poll’s finding that 640,000,000 adults want to immigrate. To increase awareness, here’s a graph I’ve created based on the International Monetary Fund estimates for 2015. It shows that almost seven billion people live in countries with lower per capita GDPs than America’s $56,000 (red sphere), most of them much lower.

On the vertical axis is GDP per capita (PPP), while on the horizontal axis is the cumulative world population at that GDP level or lower.

Each country’s population is proportional to the area of its disk.

The IMF doesn’t break out data for Puerto Rico, but it would fall on this graph between Mexico and Germany. One estimate of its per capita GDP is $29,529, while another is $34,938 (due to massive subsidies since the 1950s intended to persuade Puerto Ricans to stay home). In either case, over six billion people live in countries with lower per capita GDP’s than Puerto Rico. Yet, somewhere around 5/8ths to 2/3rds of all Puerto Ricans now live in the Fifty States.

And they’re still coming.

Poland, with a slightly lower GDP than Puerto Rico, represents a non-impoverished country that has been flooding wealthy London with jobseekers who underbid from Brits from the North. With Poland at least there’s some hope that the immigrants might actually return home someday. In contrast, nobody (except Puerto Ricans) seems to think Puerto Ricans will ever go home.

But the take-away lesson is that six billion people live in countries poorer than Poland and Puerto Rico.

By the way, Qatar, host of the 2022 World Cup, is literally off the chart at $144k per capita GDP, by far the highest in the world in the IMF tables. If helping out refugee Arabs is the world’s highest priority, why hasn’t the 2022 World Cup in Qatar been moved (to, say, 2010 host South Africa) and the $200 billion Qatar had budgeted to throw itself a party been freed up to help Qatar’s fellow Arabs and Muslims?

Under the fold is the data for this graph (downloaded from the IMF):

Country GDP Per Cap K Population (Mil) Cumulative Pop
Central African Rep. $1 5 5
Dem. Rep. of Congo $1 82 86
Malawi $1 18 105
Liberia $1 4 109
Burundi $1 9 118
Niger $1 18 136
Eritrea $1 7 143
Mozambique $1 27 170
Guinea $1 12 182
Guinea-Bissau $1 2 183
Madagascar $1 24 208
Togo $2 7 215
Comoros $2 1 216
Ethiopia $2 93 308
Burkina Faso $2 18 326
Kiribati $2 0 327
Sierra Leone $2 6 333
Rwanda $2 11 344
Mali $2 16 361
Haiti $2 11 371
Solomon Islands $2 1 372
Benin $2 11 383
Afghanistan $2 32 415
Uganda $2 39 454
Zimbabwe $2 13 467
South Sudan $2 12 479
Senegal $2 15 494
Vanuatu $2 0 494
Nepal $2 28 523
Tajikistan $3 8 531
Chad $3 12 543
Tanzania $3 49 592
Papua New Guinea $3 8 600
Lesotho $3 2 602
Micronesia $3 0 602
Cameroon $3 23 625
Djibouti $3 1 626
Kenya $3 44 670
São Tomé $3 0 670
Côte d’Ivoire $3 23 693
Marshall Islands $3 0 693
Tuvalu $3 0 693
Kyrgyz Republic $3 6 699
Cambodia $3 16 715
Bangladesh $4 160 875
Yemen $4 28 903
Ghana $4 27 930
Zambia $4 16 945
Sudan $4 38 984
Mauritania $4 4 987
Honduras $5 8 996
Pakistan $5 190 1,186
Nicaragua $5 6 1,192
Moldova $5 4 1,196
Tonga $5 0 1,196
Myanmar $5 52 1,248
Lao P.D.R. $5 7 1,255
Timor-Leste $5 1 1,256
Samoa $5 0 1,256
Uzbekistan $6 31 1,287
Vietnam $6 92 1,379
Nigeria $6 179 1,557
India $6 1,276 2,834
Bolivia $6 11 2,845
Cabo Verde $6 1 2,846
Republic of Congo $7 4 2,850
Guyana $7 1 2,851
Philippines $7 101 2,952
Armenia $7 3 2,956
Angola $7 25 2,981
Guatemala $8 16 2,997
Georgia $8 4 3,001
Swaziland $8 1 3,002
Morocco $8 34 3,036
Bhutan $8 1 3,037
El Salvador $8 6 3,043
Ukraine $8 43 3,086
Belize $8 0 3,086
Fiji $9 1 3,087
Paraguay $9 7 3,094
Jamaica $9 3 3,097
Bosnia $10 4 3,101
Sri Lanka $11 21 3,122
St. Vincent $11 0 3,122
Indonesia $11 255 3,377
Dominica $11 0 3,377
Egypt $11 88 3,466
Namibia $11 2 3,468
Ecuador $11 16 3,484
Tunisia $12 11 3,495
St. Lucia $12 0 3,495
Albania $12 3 3,498
Peru $12 32 3,530
Jordan $12 7 3,537
Grenada $12 0 3,537
Mongolia $12 3 3,540
South Africa $13 55 3,595
Serbia $13 7 3,602
Dominican Rep. $14 11 3,613
China $14 1,375 4,988
Colombia $14 48 5,036
FYR Macedonia $14 2 5,038
Iraq $14 37 5,075
Algeria $14 39 5,114
Thailand $15 69 5,183
Maldives $15 0 5,184
Turkmenistan $15 6 5,189
Costa Rica $15 5 5,194
Montenegro $16 1 5,195
Brazil $16 204 5,399
Libya $16 6 5,406
Venezuela $16 31 5,437
Barbados $16 0 5,437
Palau $17 0 5,437
Botswana $17 2 5,439
Suriname $17 1 5,440
Iran $17 79 5,519
Azerbaijan $18 9 5,528
Belarus $18 9 5,537
Bulgaria $18 7 5,545
Mexico $18 121 5,666
Lebanon $18 5 5,670
Mauritius $19 1 5,672
Turkey $20 78 5,749
Panama $20 4 5,753
Romania $21 20 5,773
Croatia $21 4 5,777
Uruguay $21 3 5,781
St. Kitts and Nevis $22 0 5,781
Argentina $22 42 5,823
Antigua $23 0 5,823
Chile $24 18 5,841
Gabon $24 2 5,843
Russia $24 144 5,987
Kazakhstan $24 18 6,004
Latvia $25 2 6,006
The Bahamas $26 0 6,007
Malaysia $26 31 6,038
Hungary $26 10 6,047
Poland $26 38 6,085
Seychelles $26 0 6,085
Greece $27 11 6,096
Equatorial Guinea $27 1 6,097
Portugal $28 10 6,108
Estonia $28 1 6,109
Lithuania $28 3 6,112
Slovak Republic $29 5 6,117
Slovenia $31 2 6,119
Cyprus $31 1 6,120
Czech Republic $31 11 6,131
Trinidad $33 1 6,132
Israel $33 8 6,141
Malta $35 0 6,141
Spain $35 46 6,187
Italy $36 60 6,248
New Zealand $36 5 6,252
Korea $37 51 6,303
Japan $38 127 6,430
Oman $41 4 6,434
United Kingdom $41 65 6,499
Finland $41 6 6,504
France $41 64 6,568
Belgium $44 11 6,580
Iceland $45 0 6,580
Denmark $45 6 6,586
Canada $46 36 6,621
Germany $47 81 6,703
Austria $47 9 6,711
Sweden $47 10 6,721
Australia $48 24 6,745
Taiwan $48 23 6,769
Netherlands $48 17 6,786
Ireland $51 5 6,790
Bahrain $53 1 6,791
Saudi Arabia $53 31 6,823
United States $56 321 7,144
Hong Kong SAR $56 7 7,151
Switzerland $59 8 7,160
San Marino $62 0 7,160
United Arab Emirates $65 10 7,169
Norway $67 5 7,174
Kuwait $71 4 7,178
Brunei Darussalam $72 0 7,179
Singapore $85 6 7,184
Luxembourg $93 1 7,185
Qatar $144 2 7,187
Syria
The Gambia
Kosovo
EndFragment
 
🔊 Listen RSS

Angela Merkel has second thoughts

Top story in the New York Times:

Facing Migrant Crisis, Germany Sets Emergency Border Controls

By MELISSA EDDY, RICK LYMAN and ALISON SMALE 44 minutes ago

Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière announced that Germany would impose temporary controls at its southern border with Austria, after thousands have crossed over in recent weeks. …

The move by the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel was seen as a strong sign — if not an outright message — to other European Union members that Germany was growing weary of shouldering so much of the burden for Europe’s largest humanitarian crisis in decades without more help and cooperation from other nations.

For others, though, the concern was that if even the richest and most powerful nation in the 28-member union was showing signs of hitting its limit, how would Europe be able to find a path through this seemingly ceaseless refugee emergency? …

Although one of the proudest European achievements of recent decades was passport-free travel between most member nations, the rules allow the reinstatement of border restrictions in cases of crisis and national security, he said.

Merkel’s suspension of Schengen rights for EU citizens is of course due to a largely self-inflicted crisis, a huge own goal.

It’s almost as if young male Muslims in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia respond to incentives and precedents. If Mother Merkel suddenly decides one day a couple of weeks ago to invite into the EU a huge mob out outsiders, is it really that surprising that the mob showing up this weekend turns out to be even vaster than was expected before her moral grandstanding move?

Granted, I’m some kind of crazed extremist who believes in outdated if not downright evil concepts like rule of law, prudence, moderation, responsibility, protection of lawful borders, orderly processes, careful selection, paying for refugees to be given refuge in lower cost countries near their home, and the maintenance of self-ruling national governments “for ourselves and our posterity.”

Here’s a simple concept I’ve long pointed out regarding Europe: secure external borders for the European Union and its Schengen system of internal freedom of movement are not contradictory: the former is a prerequisite for the latter to be sustainable.

It’s like in my house. My family members and invited guests enjoy a high degree of freedom to traipse all over within my house. I don’t need a Serena Williams-style Panic Room to retreat to within my own house. Why not? Because I have a reasonable system of locks, lights, and alarms guarding my external entrances. And my family members are in agreement with me that they aren’t going to, on a whim, invite a mob of young male strangers into the house.

In contrast, the Chancellor of Germany is now widely recognized to be a saint and a moral exemplar for suddenly tossing all those dubious concepts out the window. Except now, predictably, she’s temporarily retreated to her Panic Room within the EU, inconveniencing legitimate EU travelers.

But … it is enjoyable to say:

I told you so.

Here’s a music video explaining the baseball reference in the post’s title:

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Radio comedian Will Rogers is often said to have sagely advised, “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.” Western Europe has found itself in a hole over the last generation, having imprudently admitted large numbers of Muslims. Germany’s two-pronged solution:

- Double down

- Bully Germany’s eastern neighbors into the same mistake so German politicians don’t look so bad in comparison to the Eastern European politicians’ attempts to learn from the Western European politicians’ mistakes.

From the NYT:

Eastern Bloc’s Resistance to Refugees Highlights Europe’s Cultural and Political Divisions
By RICK LYMAN SEPT. 12, 2015

WARSAW — Even though the former Communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe have been asked to accept just a fraction of the refugees that Germany and other nations are taking, their fierce resistance now stands as the main impediment to a unified European response to the crisis.

Poland’s new president, Andrzej Duda, has complained about “dictates” from the European Union to accept migrants flowing onto the Continent from the Middle East and Africa.

Slovakia’s prime minister, Robert Fico, says his country will accept only Christian refugees as it would be “false solidarity” to force Muslims to settle in a country without a single mosque. Viktor Orban, Hungary’s hard-line prime minister, calls the influx a “rebellion by illegal migrants” and pledges a new crackdown this week.

The discord has further unsettled a union already shaky from struggles over the euro and the Greek financial crisis and now facing a historic influx of people attracted by Europe’s relative peace and prosperity.

When representatives of the European Union nations meet on Monday to take up a proposal for allocating refugees among them, Central and Eastern Europen nations are likely to be the most vocal opponents. Their stance — reflecting a mix of powerful far-right movements, nationalism, racial and religious prejudices as well as economic arguments that they are less able to afford to take in outsiders than their wealthier neighbors — is the latest evidence of the stubborn cultural and political divides that persist between East and West. …

Few migrants, in fact, are particularly interested in settling in Eastern Europe, preferring to head to Germany or Scandinavia, where social welfare benefits are higher, employment opportunities greater and immigrant communities better established. In that sense, migrants are aligned with leaders in Eastern and Central European capitals, who frequently argue that the 28-member bloc should focus first on securing its borders and figuring out a way to end the war in Syria before talking about mandatory quotas for accepting refugees.

But that’s not the point, the point is to use the Muslim influx to crush resistance in Eastern Europe.

But as often as not, the political discourse in these countries has quickly moved toward a wariness of accepting racial and religious diversity.

“This refugee flow has outraged the right wing,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “If you scratch the surface, why are they so upset? It’s not about jobs or the ability to manage them or social welfare. What it is really about is that they are Muslim.”

Unlike countries in Western Europe, which have long histories of accepting immigrants from diverse cultures, the former Communist states tend to be highly homogeneous. Poland, for instance, is 98 percent white and 94 percent Catholic.

“And the countries that have very little diversity are some of the most virulently against refugees,” said Andrew Stroehlein, European media director for Human Rights Watch.

But we have a plan for fixing that.

Even mainstream political leaders eager for closer ties to Brussels, the European Union’s headquarters, feel pressure to appeal to this growing nationalist wave.

“By toughening up their rhetoric and showing a strong hand toward the Roma minority, facing down the E.U. and refusing a common solution to the refugee crisis, they are trying to outbid the far right and keep the traditional political parties in power,” said Zuzana Kusá, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Sociology of the Slovak Academy of Sciences.

It’s called representative government.

In Hungary, Mr. Orban has taken a particularly uncompromising approach, demanding more help from Brussels in dealing with the tens of thousands who continue to enter his country while insisting that Hungary is under no obligation to endanger its traditional Christian values by accepting large numbers of Muslims.

Advice to Mr. Orban: When talking to the American media, don’t say “our traditional Christian values,” say “our traditional Judeo-Christian values.”

What exactly is all this frenzy to crush Eastern European dissent about, anyway?

Part of it, no doubt, is to inflict upon the East the bad decisions made in the West. The East can’t be allowed to learn from the mistakes of the West, because that would signify that the decisionmakers in charge in the West have made mistakes. And that would raise questions about whether they should be replaced with better decisionmakers. And we can’t have that.

If you are Japan, China, South Korea, or Taiwan, pay attention to what’s going on. You may think you are insulated, but, if, say, Hungary can be broken on the Wheel of Diversity, your time may come, too.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

The Gallup Poll reports based on surveying 452,000 people in 151 countries in 2009-2011:

150 Million Adults Worldwide Would Migrate to the U.S.

Potential migrants most likely to be Chinese, Nigerian, and Indian

by Jon Clifton

WASHINGTON, D.C. — About 13% of the world’s adults — or more than 640 million people — say they would like to leave their country permanently.

Of course, 640 million adults wanting to emigrate does not included their dependent children and dependent elders. So, that’s more like a billion or so.

Roughly 150 million of them say they would like to move to the U.S. — giving it the undisputed title as the world’s most desired destination for potential migrants since Gallup started tracking these patterns in 2007.

We’re Number One! We’re Number One!

Screenshot 2015-09-12 17.18.33

Keep in mind that America is the first choice of 150 million adults, but, presumably, an Open Borders policy in the U.S. unmatched by other Anglosphere countries would also lure in many of the 113 million whose first choices are UK, Canada, and Australia.

Of course, not all these people would show up, since life in America would get increasingly crummy the more the tens of millions of Third Worlders move in, so a balance would be reached where life in America isn’t better than back home in the Third World long before all potential immigrants arrive.

In addition to the nearly one in 30 adults worldwide who would like to permanently relocate to the U.S., large numbers are attracted to the United Kingdom (45 million), Canada (42 million), France (32 million), and Saudi Arabia (31 million).

Gallup’s latest findings on adults’ desire to move to other countries are based on a rolling average of interviews with 452,199 adults in 151 countries between 2009 and 2011. The 151 countries represent more than 97% of the world’s adult population.

Who Wants to Move to the U.S.?

Potential migrants who say they would like to move to the U.S. are most likely to come from populous countries such as China (22 million), Nigeria (15 million), India (10 million), Bangladesh (8 million), or Brazil (7 million).

… Gallup found that more than three in 10 adults in Liberia (37%) and Sierra Leone (30%) would move permanently to the U.S. if they had the opportunity. More than 20% of adults in the Dominican Republic (26%), Haiti (24%), and Cambodia (22%) also say the same.

In reality, that’s just the first wave. With Open Borders, there’s no limit to how many would come over time.* For example, something like 2/3rds of Puerto Ricans now live in the 50 states despite lavish subsidies intended to keep them at home.

* Except that the Third Worldification of the First World receiving country would eventually set a limit be reducing the receiving country to the level of the Third World sending country.

 
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