Articles

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Failed State Colonization - The Greatest Threat of Our Time

Let's compare two countries side by side. Country A has a sizable middle class and economy, social welfare benefits and a low birth rate. Country B is a failed state where thugs run amok in the street, a few families control the economy and the birth rate is off the charts.

Country A's citizens are taught that nationalism is evil and that everyone should get along. Country B's citizens are taught that they are the greatest people that ever lived and would be running the world if not for Country A. But despite all this, Country B's citizens all want to move to Country A. And Country A wants to let them. Because Country A needs new workers to subsidize its welfare state and voters who will vote for pro-social welfare parties.

Since Country B's workers want the social welfare benefits, they move to Country A. Country A ends up with a huge failed state population and dramatically increases its social welfare spending for them. Bankruptcy threatens, but change is almost impossible because the pro-social welfare benefits party has become very hard to beat. The pro-reform parties no longer tackle immigration, but try to get the immigrant vote. Their reforms turn into band aids. Country A slides toward the abyss. Country B continues shipping more immigrants every year who remain loyal to its culture and religion.

Country B is a failed state. But Country A is also turning into a failed state as it imports Country B's surplus population, along with its criminality, its political culture and its ignorance across the border.

Look at a map of the world, and what you see are successful states and failed states. This is a map that transcends ethnicity and race. It is not dependent on resources or the starting level of technology. It's not even dependent on wealth, or its level of distribution, Gulf petro-states with small populations can have rich subsidized per capita incomes, but they are still failed states dependent on a single resource and a vast army of foreign workers.

It was thought once that success would spread from the successful states to the failed states. That it was only a matter of passing along certain techniques, educating their leaders in modern universities and starting them off with some World Bank loans. But instead the reverse has happened. Rather than failed states becoming successful under the influence of successful states, successful states are failing under the influence of failed states.

Migration from failed states to successful states is leading the way to utter ruin. The Pakistanization of Europe and the Mexicanization of America are two examples of the phenomenon. But there are others. Cote d'Ivorie, one of the more prosperous African countries, has been taken over by Muslim migrant workers, with the armed backing of the UN. What happened resembled events in South Africa, but this time both sides were black. The difference was not racial, but religious. It is another example of an ongoing phenomenon. Failed State Colonization.

Failed State Colonization is the greatest threat of our time. It marks a major shift from the old era of colonization where successful states colonized unsuccessful ones. Now failed states are colonizing successful ones. Failed states have become a global plague through their population migrations, which spread terrorism, crime and bankrupt the social systems of successful states. And as the migration wave continues FSC is turning formerly successful states into failed states.

Failed states have higher birth rates and stronger group loyalties. That combination weaponizes their migrations into successful states with lower birth rates and weak group loyalties into a takeover. Failed State Colonization uses the disunity, tolerance and democracy of successful states to destroy them from the inside. It's not always a conscious act, but that doesn't make it any less destructive.

The grey squirrels didn't intend to wipe out the red squirrels in the forests of England. But the populations are incompatible and though the red squirrels may be a nobler breed, those very qualities that make them admirable, also make them less able to resist an incursion by a rougher breed. The high ground moralizing of successful states may also be admirable, but it is equally doomed in the face of an incursion by cultures whose only morality is the success of their own group.

Liberal immigration advocates cheer the destruction of our worthless culture as they look forward to a world state without borders. But there will be no world state without borders because the only people who believe in such a thing are wiping themselves out by importing migratory populations that don't think nationalism and patriotism are evils. Muslim and Mexican immigrants are not ashamed of their history. They don't think borders are a bad idea, so long as they're the ones who control where those borders are set. The left is destroying the West, but it is only the West that ever believed in a world without borders.

Conservative immigration advocates insist on a cultural exceptionalism that will absorb immigrants because of our innate superiority. And that can work in the proper ratios. Done correctly the host society ends up with some new ethnic foods, a few immigrant communities and some more loanwords. Done incorrectly, entire cities become no go zones and go bankrupt providing social welfare for all.

The difference isn't just in the numbers, though those are important, but selectivity. Immigration will almost always spike crime rates, but those go down as absorption takes hold. (So long as productive absorption is possible.) What you never do is import mass populations who think of your country as their own and want to take it over. In such a scenario the absorption will go the other way and then you end up with the likes of Taliban Terry, a former altar boy who goes around Dublin, with son Osama in tow.

The Western left has committed itself to multiculturalism, the Western right has committed itself to free enterprise-- and both positions make it hard to choke off the flow of migrants. The social welfare left and the anything for a buck right need more immigrants because there are jobs that the natives just won't do, like work without under the table without benefits while putting eight kids and two wives on the welfare rolls. The irresponsibility of corporations and social welfare lobbies inflates budgets and increases crime, while the blame gets passed around. And then you end up with cities that are No Go Zones, Imams preaching Jihad and Mexican flags waving at protests-- all because companies wanted cheap labor and left wing politicians wanted to build a constituency.

Failed State Colonization isn't an invasion by armed force. But then colonization by successful states often wasn't either. The natives lacked the will and unity to mount an active resistance, they didn't see the scale of what was happening until it was too late, the invaders took advantage of native hospitality and many of the natives collaborated with the colonists to gain some personal advantage. All three of these factors exist in Failed State Colonization. The West has failed to learn the lessons of its own conquests. And now it is falling victim to many of those same tactics.

The West is divided, the migrants are united. The scale of what is happening can only be seen on the ground or in a few mostly hidden statistics, but neither show the full scope of the phenomenon, and even if they did, most natives are conditioned to think of their countries as nearly invulnerable. When they learn otherwise, the shock is too much and they default to appeasement and collaboration. That's something the Incas could tell you about. Hospitality is lavishly extended to the migrants, but it's repaid with treachery and violence. Again something the Incas could tell us about. If their civilization was still around.

The difference between the successful state and the failed state is cultural. Successful states are successful to to the extent that they are democratic in that the agenda of the government mirrors that of the people. Failed states are successful only to the extent that their tyrants are competent, and even such competence has to be filtered through the culture of a failed state.

The successful state is dynamic, the failed state is static. The successful state is always getting things done, the failed state is just struggling not to fall apart. Where the successful state uses its resources and wealth to advance, the failed state locks them up or uses them to bribe its people. And when that fails it guns them down in the street. The successful state believes that hard work will give it a better future. The failed state believes that a turn of the wheel will put it on top of the world. The successful state blames itself for its failures. The failed state blames wicked conspirators who undermine it at every turn.

The greatest error of immigration advocates is the failure to understand that immigration does not just import a population raw for the mixing, but entire cultures with their own political culture. The migrating population of a dominant state imports its culture. The very element that made it into a failed state. 

The people of a failed state may work hard, but they don't believe that hard work will move them forward because the system is corrupt and rigged against them. Instead they either work mechanically or look for ways to beat the system. The black market is ubiquitous. Everyone cheats everyone else. Political leaders are not representatives, but patrons, linking the people at the bottom to the top, who can provide favors and make things happen. You don't vote for a politican to reform a system, but to get in on the good side of his party and his family, who may then help out when you have to deal with the tangle of bureaucracy. Nothing works without a bribe. Not even the simplest things.

The people love and hate their country at the same time. They go from wanting to tear their leaders to pieces with their bare hands, to proclaiming them as gods in the space of a day. They distrust all leaders and yet they worship them. They fear the secret police and are its eagerest informants. The only injustice they protest against is personal injustice. They don't mind when the regime puts a thousand people to the wall, so long as one of them isn't their relative. They talk amongst themselves of whom the regime should really be shooting instead. "Ah, if only I were in charge. I would line them all up against the wall." That is the flavor of their democracy.

As successful states take on the political culture of failed states, their ability to reform their way out of the situation declines. Their welfare states might function if they could hold a steady native birth rate in a population that was steadily employed. But the companies of a post-modern country in a global economy feel no loyalty to remain and give up the profits they could make by outsourcing production. And a population for whom life begins after getting their second degree and where two family incomes are the norm is not going to have the birth rate necessary to sustain the next generation of the whole setup. Pouring a migrant population into the mix is like trying to fix a structural defect by setting the building on fire.

The more the ruling party responsible for the mess alienates the working class population it depended on, the more it needs immigrants to replace them as a voting base. The liberal parties become foreign parties. The conservative parties abandon their constituencies and chase after the immigrant vote. After all who are the natives going to vote for, the feckless leftist atheists or the good traditional conservatives who are busy observing Ramadan and learning to deliver speeches in Spanish.

As the system breaks down, the leftist parties pretend that nothing is wrong and the rightist parties go for slash and burn reforms that ignore the root of the problem. Scrap the military, nuke Medicare, cut funding to this office and that office. As if the root of the problem is the amount of money being spent, rather than the way it's being spent. Failing companies often try to cut expenses, but ignore that the underlying problem is not in the budget, but in its culture. The company isn't going under because it's spending too much money, that is a symptom of its fecklessness. It's going under because it has lost all sense of mission, it has lost touch with its old program and its new program is a dead end, and no one at the top can think of a reason for it to exist, except to keep them employed.

Take an honest look at Western governments and that's what you come away with. Massive bureaucracies that exist to provide compulsory services run by people who can't honestly provide a reason for the continuing existence of these countries except as an interim phase until the EU or the UN comes to take over for them. They mouth the rhetoric of exceptionalism, but they don't really believe it. They have more in common with their counterparts in other countries, than they do with the people whose lives they mismanage. Like most collapsing companies, the executives are obsessed with the minutiae of bureaucracy, enforcing rigid control in between attending lavish cocktail parties. They fiddle, Rome burns.

Failed State Colonization would not be a threat, if the successful states had not locked themselves into this mess. As the successful states fail, they lack the two elements that would repel the invaders. A high birth rate and a nationalist leadership. Those are elements the failed states do have. And so the showdown is an uneven one. The disparity is not of force, but of a willingness to use it.

Successful states attempt to avert the catastrophe by trying to police failed states, sending planes to bomb Libya to keep the migrants out, trying to shore up the Mexican government with aid and advisers. But those are all dead ends that lead to further entanglement and migration. American efforts in Somalia, Iraq and Yugoslavia have accomplished one indisputable thing. They have increased the numbers of Muslim immigrants coming from those countries. Practicing Nation Building on failed states won't stop them from colonizing us. It only accelerates the process.

Failed State Colonization is the greatest threat of our time, but it too is a symptom of the intellectual failures of the successful states. As failed states continue their prolonged collapse, they send out migrant populations which accelerate the collapse of the formerly successful states. This colonization means there will be no gradual decline. That we will not sink into the sunset like Japan, instead we will be brutally overrun. There will be no decline, but a fall.

48 comments:

American Genie said...

Have you ever thought of going into politics? You amaze me with your understanding of the problems faced by our nation.

mindRider said...

What I found missing in your argumentation Sultan is the historic line that shows the reader that ALL successful states have shown this same curve with the same inevitable ending with as an exception so far us Jews who where forced by the diaspora into"portable"successfulness. We could never relax and start importing others to do work we thought that had become to hard or to "low"for us to do ourselves nor did we get much opportunity by the often hostile societies where we found temporary refuse to engage in lines of work that eventually required the use of "dumb"labor . We never, until in present day Israel, started to lay the basis of self-destruction by importing this "dumb" labor that slowly but surely hollows out the fabric of the importing society with all the good and pleasant it had created for the heirs of the founders and with it, inseparably the roots for it's own demise. How strange that getting persecuted and murdered also laid the foundation for the long term success as it honed the one thing the surrounding evil do-ers and jealous could not take away as long as they did not murder us all: the top asset we had: our brain's, honed to maximal entrepreneurship and maximal self reliance.

Ashan said...

Thanks, Daniel. Incisive observations well delineated.

These failed nations breed parasite cultures that feed off the guilt feelings of socialist "do-gooder" states. Something the US is becoming, if its conservative spine continues to be shattered by the alien Marxist diktats of the elites. Strong conservative, patriotic states with limited government and maximum freedom tend to control the infestation by parasites. Unfortunately, EU countries, most of which are socialist and whose populations have been driven to the brink by the influx of parasites feeding off the system and raping the population are moving not toward conservatism, but toward failure at the fascist edge. France's Marine Le Pen comes to mind.

Anonymous said...

You have just described the UK

Joe-k7 said...

The Aztecs were a warrior cult same as the Muslims. Levi-Strauss called Islam the "barracks religion". The Aztecs, Mayans and Muslims are all cults of human sacrifice. The Aztecs and Muslims aim is to kill their enemies to sacrifice to their respective bloody pagan gods. To my knowledge the Mayans merely sacrificed other Mayans. Today's Mexican invasion is by the Indians and semi-Indians of Mexico and Central America. Many of the Mexican invaders see themselves taking back old Aztec territories that today are Arizona, California, New Mexico, Texas, Colorado.

Banning the pagan tribes human sacrifice was the birth of Judaism. Judaism was a reaction to such evil and a human evolution above it. Plus the evil and stupidity of bizarre pagan sexual relations with beasts and incest and men+men. All that was out with Judaism.

Very good essay Sultan

HermitLion said...

"But instead the reverse has happened. Rather than failed states becoming successful under the influence of successful states, successful states are failing under the influence of failed states."

This is exactly what happened in Israeli schools with 'integration', where good students, bullied and harassed by violent idiots, were forced to fend for themselves, or change to fit in with the inferior culture.
Either way, this cruel experiment didn't 'uplift' the level of studies, like deluded social engineers had imagined.

You can mix gold with dirt, but don't expect to get more gold.

Anonymous said...

Yes, if you allow people with delusions of grandeur into your culture and denigrate your own culture, then this is what to expect.

There is an eternal law,Psalm 33:10-22.

When it's not taught anymore, the world will collapse. We're seeing that. kate b

noboat1 said...

Well Daniel as usual "you nailed it". As I was reading, two names kept flashing in my mind Keith Ellison and Luis Gutierrez.

What really scared me thought was when I tried to think of a conservative who could help save us from the fall my mind was "blank".

Anonymous said...

"Liberal immigration advocates cheer the destruction of our worthless culture as they look forward to a world state without borders. But there will be no world state without borders because the only people who believe in such a thing are wiping themselves out by importing migratory populations that don't think nationalism and patriotism are evils."

Touché! :)

Carty said...

Muslim minorities in the USA and Europe are wealthy. The first generation may have been ignorant, but they're not the only immigrants. East Europe and Russia too has many immigrants coming into west Europe, a lot are Muslim and they too make up in the 2nd generation at least.

There is a flaw in this article, though it's good, and spot on. That is, a lot of natives in Europe are converting too, hence it's wrong to link it with Islam as such.

My point is, the new generation of Muslims are wealthy and ambitious, Russia is already majority nearly Muslim.

Keli Ata said...

HermitLion


I know exactly what you mean! And I agree 100-percent.

KINANA said...

Russia is OIC member? I didn't know that, I also came across this,
when checking stats on the web, in a few years the Russian army will be Muslim majority? Or is pipes exaggerating? aLL THAT NUCLEAR POWER IN Muslonazi hands with Pakistan already a nuclear power is bad news

unless eyes are opened, this is where Europe is headed, and eventually us too.

Russian Army will be a majority Muslim Army by 2020

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/18530-russian-army-become-muslim-majority-army-2015-2020-a.html

Predicting a Majority-Muslim Russia

by Daniel Pipes
Sat, 6 Aug 2005
updated Tue, 23 Dec 2008

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Russia has a weak birth rate and too many Muslims. So it's a problem.

HermitLion said...

Keli Ata,

Thank you. I really appreciate that :)

revereridesagain said...

There is another flaw in this article, which is otherwise excellent as are all of the Sultan's. What is your proposed remedy for the perceived problem of "two family incomes"? You can't rationally assume that given the proper inducements the majority of American women would forego education and productive work, go back to the home, punch out a kid a year, spend their days at Starbucks with the other mommies, doing endless laundry, watching Judge Judy, and getting ready for The Man of the House to Bring Home the Bacon. Hello dear, did you have a hard day at the office? The dog has your slippers, here's a nice martini, the children are washing up for dinner. All 10 of them.

How did we manage when the immigrants coming to our shores were from China, Italy, Ireland, Germany, Japan, Russia, India? Some of them failed states, some of them thoroughly whupped former enemies. Why, despite the tut-tutting at the time over the wikkid furrin' ways of many of these immigrant groups, did we not find ourselves battling failed-state disease because of them? Massive Muslim and Mexican immigration is a relatively recent phenomenon, as is the elevation of the notion that failed-state conquistadors and sharia settlers should be indulged in their exercise of bad immigrant manners. Should we not consider a reversal of that policy before we start talking about stopping our childrens' educations at high school so they can head right into manufacturing jobs and sending them uppity wimmin back to the maternity ward as a solution to what is patently a political problem?

Would Bolton, Ryan, or West count as conservatives who are willing to start working on how to get us out of this? Because as it is, we are scraping the bottom of the barrel, and half of what we haul up either takes off running (Daniels), shoots itself in the foot (Gingrich, Romney), chatters incessantly with varying results(Palin), is from another planet (Ron Paul) is going nowhere due to lack of political experience (Cain), fixates on -- yep -- how to keep them uppity women in line (Bachmann), or just stops by for the publicity boost (Trump). There are better people available, the problem is getting the GOP to encourage them to run.

And I don't even want to think about how truly strange an all-Muslim Russian Army would look, let alone sound.

TartanMarine said...

Great article. I will share. Unfortunately, this is happening to the United States. And we are too politically correct to stop it.

Robert A. Hall
Author: The Coming Collapse of the American Republic
(All royalties go to a charity to help wounded veterans)

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Revere,

there's a difference between choosing to have a two income family and being forced to work due to economic realities. The socioeconomic factors in the decline of marriage are also part of that picture.

We did inherit some of the political problems of immigrants, but they dissolved. And American fertility was a great deal higher in the twenties or fifties than today.

No Bueno said...

Perhaps one of your best yet Daniel! There is no question we are being invaded by a parasitic nation called Mexico. Unfortunately, this invasion is being aided and abetted by the many La Raza sympathizers within our very own government, including Obama.

I'm not sure how this invasion reverses itself, since I do not see any candidate on the horizon with the sense of nationalism now required to thwart this invasion. However, it had better start soon or it will be too late to do anything about it, considering the reckless manner in which these people pump out their anchor babies.

Anonymous said...

New reader here - I enjoyed your article. As we say in the dog business, you can't breed gold to shit and expect bronze, you'll just get shit on your gold.

DEXTRA said...

One of your finest articles, Mr. Greenfield.

Very accurate obervations.

Anonymous said...

Yes, there is a difference between choosing to work, and having to work, because you can't afford not to.

Also, most womens' work, like lost mens' work, is not especially interesting, or even, in some cases, espcially productive: despite all the tut-tutting of the feminists about how work is so fulfilling for women, much of it consists of, "Yes, Mrs. Veeblefetzer, we do have your copy of "Love's Flaming Heartburn", "No, Mr. Tumdwiddy, the papers aren't ready yet, sorry, Mr. Tumdwiddy? Can I help you crazy person, mumbling to yourself at the back of the store? Sorry, Mr. Tumdwiddy, I'll have those memos out right away! Yes, I know it's all my fault! Can I help you return your copy of "Love's Firey Stud Muffins, Ms. Angry Crazy Person?"

Then you go home to---nobody, because you don't have much time or energy for a life outside of work, and you can't afford to go out, no, not even to Starbuck's, because, unless you're an executive, the pay in our new service economy is lousy! Or you have a husband, and one or two children (you can't afford anymore), but you're too tired to do anything with them; or you worry about your kids, because you dont' really like having them in the Happy Lil' Busy Bee daycare center 12 hours a day, but Mr. Tumdwiddy will fire you, if you don't work longer hours, becaue somebody's got to deal with all the Crazy, angry customers. . .

As for education. . a B.A. in liberal arts, or English, will prepare you for a job at----Starbucks. You can go into engineering, or science, maybe---and hope your job doesn't get outsourced, in which case it's back to working at Starbuck's, or Mickey-D's, again.

Look---work is good, and supporting yourself is good for your independence and self-esteem, but it's really a myth that work is ever so much more fulfilling for women than having children, or a home life.

/Iguana-Donna, Been there, done that.

HermitLion said...

I'd like to propose a round of applause for Iguana-Donna.

Those were strong words that not a lot dare express, and may I add that many men also do not get a real fulfillment from their work.
When two exhausted married people finally get back to their apartment at the end of the day, it's difficult to... well, anything!
And that's just wrong.

Anonymous said...

Many thanks, HermitLion!

And, yes, it is just wrong.

/IgunaDonna

DP111 said...

Right on cue

Obama and Cameron ask G8 partners to bankroll Arab Spring countries which embrace democracy

Nations could breed 'poisonous extremism' if not given financial aid, warns Cameron
The Prime Minister called on his fellow leaders to demonstrate they were 'on the side' of reforming countries such as Egypt and Tunisia.
'I want a very simple and clear message to come out of this summit, and that is that the most powerful nations on earth have come together and are saying to those in the Middle East and North Africa who want greater democracy, greater freedom, greater civil rights, we are on your side,' Mr Cameron said in a round of interviews.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1391071/G8-summit-Barack-Obama-David-Cameron-ask-allies-bankroll-Arab-Spring-countries-embrace-democracy.html

HermitLion said...

DP111:

Cameron should correct that statement to say: "some of the richest nations of earth have come together to bribe some of the most violent nations of earth, so they would not hurt them. We are on your side, now, please... no more wedgies."

Anonymous said...

Canada was at the G8. Our wise conservative Prime Minister said that no more money would be given. We have given enough. Now it's time to verify how that money is being spent.

gizmo54 said...

Excellent article, Daniel.

freshideaguy said...

I cannot come up with a word that properly defines the content of this article. Brilliant is as close as I can get.

My One Criticism: Couldn't you have kept George Soros from reading it?

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

sadly it's the other way around

Anonymous said...

One of the best analysis ever

Anonymous said...

mindRider said:
We never, until in present day Israel, started to lay the basis of self-destruction by importing this "dumb" labor that slowly but surely hollows out the fabric of the importing society...

This began with early Zionists employing their first Arab migrant laborers from the countries surrounding British Palestine, which encouraged further in-migration.

Talk about the article's described process on speed!

WH

Anonymous said...

Daniel, your analysis is correct. I also read your semi-humorous article regarding different Utopian ways the West could deal with Islam. But really, the Breivik incident, although horrible, raised a legitimate question - in view of our completely eviscerated political process and comparative demographics, what can we do to reverse this colonization, what course of action has a reasonable and realistic chance of success? Any ideas?
AG

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

step 1 is immigration

step 2 is shutting down access to the welfare state

Anonymous said...

Daniel,
Assuming there is enough bone in our political spine to shut down immigration and cut off the dole, Muslim and Latino demographics are still much, much stronger. In several European countries for example, the Muslims will have majorities within 2 generations. And if the Russian army goes predominantly Muslim (almost inevitable), Islam will have a much heavier military club than they were able to swing so far. In the southwestern US, many counties are already 50-60% Latino, and their birthrates are still more than double the average.
AG

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Demographics are not as fixed as people think, and they're partly dependent on the welfare state.

And take away the welfare state and you actually see emigration happening.

There are other ways to change the numbers as well. Birth rates are not fixed, they're partly a product of the economic and social environment.

Anonymous said...

Daniel,
Remember I said assuming we have enough political spine? Unfortunately, I am quite sceptical that the methods you proposed will be voted in anytime soon. In addition, the resulting changes in demographics and especially birth rates will take an extended period of time, which I am not sure some countries have. We are more likely to see more Muslim violence in Europe a la London/Paris/Sweden. In the US, the Latinos have been even more successful than the Muslims. Spanish is basically an official language, and one really doesn't need to speak any English to get along perfectly well. Since language is culture, the conclusions are clear. The only saving grace is that Latinos are part of the Judeo-Christian tradition, so they probably won't start killing the infidels. And who knows, maybe Muslim will eventually overtake Latinos in US and Canada; they certainly have better organization and leadership, very aggressive means model, which includes violence, and superlative long-term planning (see materials re: Muslim Brotherhood's 100 year plan). Please don't let me forget the riches from the only viable type of strategic fuel.
So I ask you once again - what is the course of action with REALISTIC chances for success?
AG

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

The political spine is evolving, but much depends on the rise of viable political movements, such as the Tea Party in the US or the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands.

Some of the northern countries are lost. But their birth rates were poor enough that they were lost anyway. Just as some countries in E. Europe are even without Muslim immigration.

This is the only realistic chance there is. Any other course gives in either to rash violence or despair.

Change means building a political consensus, that means activism in all forms, it means doing what the left did, by building influence, forcing a dialogue and using it to implement change.

It seems impossible now, but it is happening and it is doable.

Anonymous said...

Some less known history:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rjDTyeqXt8&feature=player_embedded

http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/thomas/slavery.html

Fanatical national/religious exceptionalism is the only explanation for the facts described in the above links. Today, while we are slowly evolving our political spine, this phenomenal force, already armed with cellular/internet technology, will very soon be armed with nuclear technology.

Perhaps you are right, Daniel, some northern countries must be lost, so that the rivers of blood seeping from under their borders might wake up the rest of the Free World (didn't happen when Hitler was killing the Jews in late thirties, and in entirely too many other historical instances). We can only hope that what is by then left of democracy will be able to prevail politically and physically/militarily. If Russia is lost, say hello to WWIII.
AG

Anonymous said...

Daniel,
Understood! Repetition is the mother of learning (A. Suvorov)
Clearly understood! You are at a loss. You can't answer my question without admitting that, most likely, political process will not work unless and until things will become unpalatable, ugly and bloody. Sincerely, I am not at all gloating.
I am sure, and here I will honestly admit being frustrated, that the slow pace of evolution of our political spine increases the ultimate cost and lowers the probability that the Free World will celebrate victory in this new global civilization struggle.
Your own articles acknowledge, and as a student of history, surely you realize that cycles must take their course. Unfortunately, historical trends are accelerated and amplified by exponentially evolving technology (weapons, communications, bio-science, etc.) And the increases in magnitude and speed do not necessarily bode well for planet Earth in general or for certain cultural viewpoints in particular.
To me, the above suggests that the success of FSC resistance depends only on the timeliness of the obvious realization that time itself is working against us relative to the balance of demographic and military power. Also, much like America's Liberty ships, Studebakers, canned food, and finally, the Normandy landing during WWII, outside factors, such as China may prove decisive.
Thus, the race is on. Essentially, it boils down to how promptly the Free World changes its adolescent attitudes relative to its quickly evaporating military and technological advantages.
Recently, Newt Gingrich (let's assume arguendo that he is historically correct) theorized that Lincoln analyzed the Civil War in the following terms:
Position 1 - Let the South go and do whatever they want. We don't need them anyway.
Position 2 - We are more industrialized, better armed, and vastly richer. We can handle the South anytime - bring it on!
Position 3 - We must use every effort and all available means to defeat, as quickly as we can, the proposition they stand for.
According to Newt, Abraham went for Position 3.
But this was before Rockefeller played his dirty, short-sighted and self-serving trick on the small and pitifully poor state of Delaware by spawning a virtual beast with superhuman characteristics, such as perpetual life and effortless addition or shedding of organs. Thus, the modern corporation was born. Soon, alarmingly soon, the beast realized that to accomplish profitable feats at home and abroad, what you called a buck at any cost, it needs to invest in politics. Examples of wars and other assorted injustices motivated by corporate economic gains are superfluous.
What makes large corporations particularly dangerous is that by the more directly and systematically they participate in a political system, the quicker they weave a symbiotic government system, which grows for its own sake, and whose support rests on generous corporate contributions.
In my humble opinion, there is no hope until the Free World deposes multinational corporate demi-gods, which so effectively poison political discourse by buying and selling its participants.
Your thoughts are greatly appreciated. Sorry for the rant.
AG

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

All these are aspects of the problem, not the problem itself. And the problem itself is one of survival.

For now we're still in Newt's 1 and 2 when it comes to Islam. What can change that is awareness. There will be a point where the majority will face the fact that conflict is inevitable. How they will react depends on how the groundwork has been laid to this point.

stardreamers said...

I am new to Daniel's blog, and I am deeply impressed with his insights and writing ability. Daniel tends to seek the universals in the particulars. I was sent here by Atlas Shruggs web site written by Pam Geller; that's an incredible site too. She knows great writers and those who are on the right side of the argument.

Still, this particular article--Failed State Colonization - The Greatest Threat of Our Time--is way off. America itself is the spawn of world emigration, the Puritans unwelcomed after the Glorious Revolution, the African Diaspora, the Euro Jewish Diaspora post WWI and WWII, etc. How can anyone knowing this knowledge not easily falsify the claim in this blog that immigration of idiots is our downfall? FYI, and Daniel knows this, most Jews entering America were not Einsteins but were peddlers from Shtetls in poor European neighborhoods.

More important facts that make for a great nation can be found in a great book titled "The Birth of Plenty : How the Prosperity of the Modern World was Created" by William J. Bernstein. He argues, more accurately than Daniel in this article, that great nations need 4 important attributes: the scientific method, capital markets, property rights, and transportation to deliver new technology, ideas, and products. The downfall of America is Writ Large (to coin the new usage of the old Socratic term) in the cause and effect relationship of the process that America obtained all 4 atributes and is now in the process of losing all 4.

First, witness the Environmentalists, PhD scientific greenies, ultra liberal ivory tower hate America pro Islamic tenured dictocrats and ponder if America is under the sway of the true Scientific method. The answer is NO! We have lots of smart folks abusing logic not adhering to it. Strike 1.

Witness the fall of the American banking system and ponder if we have any real honest capital markets. The answer is NO! It is so artificial, over regulated, dishonest, and short sighted that it exists only for long term evil instead of gain. Strike 2.

Property right, what does one say about the once sacred ideal of property rights in America. Well to start, property of our bodies is (free speech and true liberty) is out the window. Can a student in an American classroom argue against Islam without fear of expulsion? Can a gay man marry his male sweetheart? Nope! How about property rights of a commercial demeanor. Anyone trying to build a business knows how intrusive and abusive the government is in all of our activities. Strike 3.

Immigration is a non starter and only breeds hatred. The only reason immigration is feared is because we are a welfare state and we don’t want to share with any newcomers who steal and don’t contribute. If we were true to the “leave us alone” economics of true liberty, immigration wouldn’t be an issue except for a country sending over its criminals not its stupid or hard working.

Rethink this post, though it is a very old post Daniel for it is so offbase as to be dangerous. I wouldn’t be so intent on making these points if you yourself didn’t describe the problem as the most important of our age.

Best,
MLC

Anonymous said...

Islam is not an unstopable behemoth.
Birth rates are falling rapidly across the Muslim world.
Evangelical christianity is slowly but surely spreading among muslims in their heartlands but more so in their adopted countries.
Atheism/agnosticism more so...
Although neither group trumpets its views.
Don't panic guys...although I agree with the main thrust of the article.
'ex-missionary'

Anonymous said...

Islam may well collapse demographically or intellectually in its own countries. That will not save the West; and, unless the terroristic underpinnings of Islam are overthrown, it may not do much good in Islamic countries either, because the apostates will remain hidden and silent.

As for the strange claim (by Carty, 26/5/11, above) that Muslims in the West are wealthy and hardworking, the adjective "wealthy" applies to the relatively few, incredibly rich ruling-class Muslims from oil-rich countries, a small minority of the immigrants. The adjective "hardworking", not so much.

And, whether I am right or wrong, all of this is of no consequence in trying to counter Islam's spreading domination. Those wealthy Muslims and/or their relatives back home have been buying influence in Western governments, economies, and academia for decades. They now exert huge control over any decisions made.

Two ideas I have not read here:

1-- Educate others ourselves. Spread the word. a. If Muhammad's deeds and words become common knowledge, Islam's credibility and power will decline considerably. Many Muslims do not know how bad he was, and certainly many non-Muslims are misinformed.
b. If people hear the explanation in this article about Failed State Colonization, it will gain support among many. Models that explain that which needs explanation spread well.

2-- Challenge multiculturalism in our spheres of influence with culturism or variations on that theme. Attack an break down the taboos in this area in the same way the sexual mores that previously ruled our culture were broken down.

Anonymous said...

Very interesting analysis but one that has no historical antedecendant. I can only think of the Romans being over run by the barbarians they allowed into the empire without absorbing them. They remain intact, diistinct and apart. We see this today in the US and Europe. But does this not indicate that the future will mean the breakdown of national states into tribes? That the US will degenerate into competing factions just as Celyon, Yugoslavia and Africa have done?

Anonymous said...

I hope you don't mind i posted some of your articles on my Tumblr blog :)

www.blonde-on-a-mission.tumblr.com

BarryCuda said...

This essay is the reason why this is my favorite blog. This is why the Sultan is my favorite political analyst and sociologist. When the West crumbles and whichever mongrel race in charge is trying to piece together Western history and demise, they will read the Sultan and Larry Auster and then they'll understand.

Then, they'll wonder how this could happen.

How could a peoples be so f***ing stupid? How could an entire Civilization behave like some sort of drugged mentally retarded millionaire who allowed gangsters, crackheads and bums to turn his once-pristine and palatial mansion into a burned down s**t-stained wreck?

As a denizen of Mexifornia and an immigrant from the cesspool laughably called "The Republic of India," I can attest to the veracity of each and every assertion made herein. Moreover, I can confirm, without the shadow of a doubt, that, virtually, each and every Indian hates-absolutely hates, whites and white culture. In fact, they can only feel good about themselves when they are degrading whites.

What is true for Indians is doubly true for the demonic population of the septic tank called "the Islamic Republic of Pakistan" whose denizens being more aggressive than Indians have made significant gains towards realization of the non-white dream: degradation of whites. They have achieved the ultimate glory by turning white girls, most of them barely sixteen, into drug-addled whores.

The "grooming" phenomenon is as wide-spread in India as it is in Pakistan. In the West their target is, exclusively, whites because they envy whiteness. Knowing that they will never acquire such beauty, such elegance, such grace, they can do nothing but plot its destruction.
.

BarryCuda said...

The UK grooming gangs were allowed to degrade whiteness because the Constabulary was more concerned with allegations of "racism" than the welfare of under-aged white girls who were, initially, victimized by the very Welfare State that was created for their protection. This is more evil, more vile, more cowardly than middle-aged men gang-raping a fifteen-year old and then using her as sex-object in the most literal sense of the word. What kind of a Culture, what kind of Men, stand by in fear of an accusation of an imaginary sin?

There is a spiritual sickness at the heart of the West. The older generation, the generation which was aware of the peculiar hatred of the non-white population for whites and of the cowardice of non-whites, is gone. These men were able to hold British Undivided India with less than a hundred thousand white men under arms and less than a thousand Civil Servants including the Imperial Police Service and the Indian Civil Service. The Hindu and the Mussalman are cowards who can only strike when they heavily outnumber the opponent and when they are secure in knowledge that retribution will be minimal.

In the old days, white men were able to restrain these animals by the administration of swift, ruthless, and above-all, fair Justice. Not one Native had the guts to look a white woman in the eye. Nowadays, they buy and sell the most vulnerable white girls like chattel.

Part of the Sickness could be Hubris. The sheer arrogance of the average Westerner leads him to believe that the most vile and rude races can be Civilized. Unlike Macaulay, they believe that these races don't need to turn into colored Englishmen, or Frenchmen, but can remain Maghrebi, Pakistani, Indian, Mexican and still hold the values of the white race. This is the most egregious case of magical thinking and logical fallacies I've ever encountered. This isn't reason: this is Dogma. And it is continually reinforced by each and every man in the West who believes that his Country is "Exceptional."

BarryCuda said...

The "exceptionalism" bandied about is, horrifyingly, an assertion of being exempt from the ordinary, indisputable and ineluctable Laws of Nature. A rotten apple in a barrel of fresh apples turns the whole barrel bad. Blood is thicker than water. Generosity breeds resentment, not gratitude. Kindness is perceived as weakness. And Hubris leads to Death.

I cannot bear to think about a world where the white Civilization is not preeminent because a man like me cannot survive in a non-white world. I left precisely because Indian society has no place for a man who like to live like a Westerner. A man who doesn't pay bribes, litter, cheat on his taxes, cheat at work, gang up with his tribe against the other tribes, likes art, history, literature, wants an honest administration not one that rewards his tribe by punishing other tribes, and so on and so forth.

I am a theoretical pessimist and an operational optimist. I don't want to listen to my head, but my heart. My head tells me that the West is Doomed. Kaput. Finito. That non-whites will take over and turn the West into yet another gutter-Civilization that is either in a constant state of tribal war or utterly stagnant owing to an iron-cast Caste system that permit neither free-thought nor free-movement within Social Hierarchy.

My Heart says that it cannot happen. The race that is responsible for, virtually, everything that is good, noble and makes life worth living will wake up. That they will arise as if from deep slumber and, looking around in horror, will take a broom and pan, and will clean house, reversing "Londonistan" and "Mexifornia."

If my heart is right, and if the filth that has accumulated in every room of that palatial mansion is cleaned, it will be a tragedy of Biblical proportions. But there is no other way to save the West. It is the ultimate vindication of the Talmud's warning that "he who is kind when he should be cruel will be cruel when he should be kind."

At this point, I don't care if I am swept away when that happens since my death would be a small price to pay for the return of Western Glory to something resembling the world on Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee. Perhaps, if I have children, they will get to enjoy a world that was denied to my generation.

I don't know if there is a G-d above (or anywhere, for that matter.). But, if he exists, and he cares for Mankind, even as a strict father loves his wayward son, I only hope (and dare I say it, pray?) that while chastising his wayward sons, he saves them from ultimate destruction.

For ourselves and our children. Amen.

Post a Comment