Tuesday, March 12, 2013

A World of Refugees

The old paradigm that a country has the right to decide who enters it has been decisively overturned in Europe, it's under siege in such first world countries as America, Canada, Australia and Israel by the creed that says it's the human rights obligation of every nation to accept every refugee.

Given a chance a sizable portion of the third world would move to the first, a minority because of oppression and a majority because the opportunities and freebies are much better there. Even low ranked first world nations still find themselves swamped with refugees looking to move in.

International law does not assign any priority to a nation's citizens over any person who happens to stray across the border. At the ground level that means the end of borders and the end of citizenship which is why immigration isn't just a touchy issue in Arizona, it's a touchy issue in Sydney, Tel Aviv and Birmingham. You can hardly open a newspaper of the liberal persuasion without being treated to another group of refugees in some troubled part of the world walled up behind fences and trying to get over to London, Sydney or New York.

This sort of thing can't be called immigration anymore, it's a straightforward migration and it has no apparent limits. However many you take in, there will be more waiting and always burdening you with an unsolvable crisis.

One approach is to try and stabilize whatever crisis they are supposedly escaping from. Too many Libyans running away to Italy? Just bomb their dictator and they'll go home again. At least that's the theory, it doesn't work too well in practice. For one thing Libya is more dangerous and unstable than it was under Gaddafi. Stabilizing it would require an Iraq level investment of money and manpower, and Iraq isn't stable either. And London is still full of Iraqi refugees dating back to the 1980's.

The disparities that make migration aren't fixable, but nor is mass migration a viable option. There's a reason that the refugees are running away and they are often part of the problem. Every nation is troubled in its own way and mass migration imports those troubles. It's why beheadings have come north of the border and the Jihad has set up shop in countless Western cities.

The melting pot myth was that people leave their identities behind to join in a mass identity. That worked only marginally back in the day, it doesn't work at all today when the refugees are immersed in their Little Mogadishus, which have popped up in a frightening amount of American cities foretelling the day when those cities will become as violent and broken as the original Mogadishu.

In place of the melting pot is the No Go Zone, which is the inverse of integration, it sets up tribal encampments in major cities which run on the laws of the tribe. That sort of thing has always been around in one form or another and it is survivable in limited numbers so long as those zones don't also become factories of violence. That's the difference between Amish Country and a Muslim banlieue, it's also the difference between separatism and supremacism.

The United States has had its Fenian raids, its assorted wars being waged by immigrants from its soil, and the attitude toward those conflicts has been mixed, depending on whose ox was being gored. But there's a fundamental shift when those wars are being waged against it. That shift from immigrants using it as a conflict base to becoming the target of their conflicts is a somewhat recent one whose full implications have still not been absorbed.

Across the southern border it faces mass immigration from a country whose history is riddled with old scores to settle and whose politicians use it as a whacking post for their national troubles. And to the east and the west it faces mass migration from the Muslim world, which is operating on its own form of manifest destiny, settling Europe and European colonies, the way that European colonists once settled America.

The news is no better in Canada or Australia, it's certainly no better in Europe where the EU sees mass migration as a convenient way of completing its project of dissolving national identities. Encouraging separatism at the regional level is one way of doing it, but mass fragmentation of nations gets the job done even more thoroughly and comprehensively.

The EU is working off another melting pot model, much like the national governments who think that they can create a pliable left-leaning electorate by opening up the borders. What they actually end up creating is chaos and chaos eventually becomes order. The only question is whose order it will be. It isn't likely to be their order, which leaves few options.

If nations are meaningless, then national identities are equally meaningless. All that's left are clans, religious and ethnic groups in the borderless multicultural globe. A chaos that sorts itself out through the old reliable means of brute force, accompanied to dollop of deceit and coalition building. The coalitions that the left built up to consolidate its rule are being hijacked and used by the Brotherhood as the building blocks of their rule instead.

In a chaotic environment, tribalism and a compelling ideology can combine to carve out an expanding sphere of order. That is how Islam got its start, that is how it is operating now. In a fragmented environment, it has a leg up because it is organized and it has the money and vision to move forward, which is more than the natives or most of the other immigrants have.

To Islam, Europe, America and the rest of the non-Muslim world are all Mogadishus, they are the Dar Al-Harb, the realm of the sword, where the faithful are destined to bring order. Every social problem proves how much the infidel world needs them to bring order and the violence that they bring raises the stakes and drives everyone toward an inevitable conflict.

 Borders are created to keep things out, like invading armies and suicide bombers. The border represents security and ownership, and when you take away the border those are gone and the soft vulnerable territories within are up for grabs to the ruthless and the canny. If the borders are down, then why not go north where there's wealth and power up for grabs and take some for yourself.

National identity in the Muslim world is already weak, outmatched by religious identity on the one hand and tribal identity on the other. That set of conditions makes it quite difficult for them to build and maintain functional countries of their own, but leaves them quite well adapted to using tribal and religious ties to take over regions in a state of multicultural flux.

Islam is not built for competence, it's built for conquest. Its effectiveness lies in its ability to create chaos, rather than maintain order. And every suicide bomber, every plot exposed, every riot over a cartoon demonstrates the power of that chaos and how far the local and global authorities who try to maintain order will go to appease the causers of chaos.

A West that has become increasingly secular, where nationalism is suspect and ethnic identity for the natives is taboo, is frighteningly ill-adapted to such a conflict. It has thrown away the survival skills necessary to cope with the situation and the survival skills it has are built on adapting to change by submitting to a new state of affairs, whether it's a new set of ideas, a new set of forms or a new set of laws. Change and future shock have become the way of the West. Islam's past shock follows the same narrative and makes the same demands. Adapt, learn to recite the new truisms and get on with your life.

The West has learned to forget and it no longer knows the answer to the question, "Who are we?". Who are we beyond people in an experiment to create a new and better society and then spread that wonderful society to the rest of the world? And what exactly is that society we are spreading?

Muslims who know quite well what new and better society they are part of, have an advantage because they understand their role better than the natives. The ability to answer the big questions is a key factor in any struggle. Every battle begins with an army that has to be composed of men who have to be convinced to leave their homes and participate in a conflict that may cost them their lives. Getting them lined up and in good fighting shape is a lot easier if they understand why they are here.

They are better adapted to the end of the state, because they have never truly internalized the reality of the state, than the Westerner for whom the state has become the fundamental unit of existence.

Westerners have become the ultimate refugees, lost at home, refugees in their own countries, wanderers in their own cities. The same processes that have turned their countries into superpowers are now drowning them in their own effluvia. And the citizen of the first world often finds that he seems to belong less in his own country than the refugees flooding it. He has become a displaced person, a familiar enough feeling to many of his new neighbors who are also victims of ethnic and religious conflicts. But while the conflicts they have fled are official, his conflict is not. He is the victim of a nameless conflict that cannot be named, of a colonization that cannot be described as such and of the ethnic cleansing of his national identity and the theft of his future.


Anonymous said...

Another great article. I wold ask, though: which ethno-religious minority threw open the gates of American and refuse to let them be shut? Daniel, turn your big guns on organized Jewry or the problem will never be solved.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Which great minority threw open the gates of America?

The Germans or was it the Irish? Then came the Jews, the Italians and just about everyone else. The Norwegians of course were before that.

"Organized Jewry"? There are a hundred organizations that don't get along.

Naresh Krishnamoorti said...

I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with the loss of nationalism, since it is a fairly recent and not beneficent phenomenon. The more important issue is whether the new arrivals can be integrated into the social order. Even to ask that question, however, has become a luxury for the West, which is facing demographic declines, and is no longer able to support its generous pension systems with fewer and fewer young workers. So, what is to be done? The West will collapse one way or the other.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Perhaps. Pension systems are easier to correct than demographics.

ericcs said...

Why do the voting citizens of any Western country not have any control over immigration, an issue that effects their day-to-day lives? If a direct referendum were actually taken and acted upon, is there any doubt that a majority would not put an immediate moratorium into effect?

Who are TPTB actually in charge of all this?
How is it that they continue to stop real people from exercising real power?

I swear to God, this whole situation is nothing but endless madness and insanity.

Ex-Dissident said...

As I read your post, I thought of Lora Logan being raped by an endless sea of Muslim madmen.

momiss said...

Great post. AGAIN! Love your blog. You have a way of summing things up very well.

meema said...

A country is strongest when it is a fabric woven together. Even if all the threads are different, they each willingly do their part to make the whole solid. The differences in the threads contribute in positive ways, adding to, rather than subtracting from. When the threads do not wish to be counted in the whole, refuse to become the warp and weft, the fabric is weakened and compromised. When this happens everywhere, eventually nowhere is better than anywhere else. Perhaps that was the plan?

Anonymous said...

It is not just first world countries either. India, Burma and Thailand are all being overrun by Bangladeshi `refugees'. Russia is being inundated with refugees from the Caucasus. Malays are swarming Singapore. None of the countries are able to expel the illegal migrants. What you are seeing is the latest liberal experiment in creating `multiculturalism', and it is not limited to first world countries either.

Ironboomer said...

I agree with meema's comment. I would add that there must be a cause potent enough to bring about this positive effect. Perhaps the same cause that united the twelve Hebrew tribes is the same cause that brought love to the west during the Roman period and is the same cause that united the savages in Arabia in the seventh century. Considering that the Islamist dispensation is in its winter, the real spring must a new re-emergence for mystical forces. Now to find that model and seat of authority....

gsw said...

"the way that European colonists once settled America."
Nope, European colonists worked or starved or turned criminal and got shot - by people who were then thanked and not prosecuted by the Human Rights advocates of a different country.

Now the "colonists" come in, sit down and want to be fed, clothed, housed, educated and medically treated for free.

They call it Jizya, we call it legalised theft.
In the UK, men and women, who have paid a monthly contribution towards their pension fund for 40+ years, are now told that their money is spent but that the family of 7 who just arrived are not expected to work for a further 3 - 8 years, or ever.

I bet if the new colonists had to work to feed themselves they would not come!

IgorR said...

The foundation of Socialism is the abandonment of self-interest (for the masses, not the master class). As Socialism has spread to the West, along with the recriminations against those who have inflicted unspeakable horrors on the world in the name of nationalism, self-interest has become evil. What is then the force then that should compel the West to defend itself against the primitive, but highly motivated invaders? There is none. Until the horrors inflicted by the invaders and other consequences of abandoning self-interest as a motivating force manifest themselves to the point where the abandonment of self-interest is understood to be the root cause, the West will continue to self-destruct by not being able to even articulated the horrors inflicted on it by the invaders and by the pseudo-altruistic ideologies, all rooted in the lack of respect for self-interest.

Marcel said...

The UN is impotent or in collusion when it comes to Two Million Children in Syria face malnutrition,trauma because of the bloody religion of Islam

Babel confusion and psychotic rivers of dark insanity flow under the Globalist agenda.
They should change the name of the United Nations to Useless Nations.

Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket,and are regarded as a speck of dust on the scales;Behold, He lifts up the islands like fine dust.
Even Lebanon is not enough to burn Nor its beasts enough for a burnt offering.
All the nations are as nothing before Him,
They are regarded by Him as less than nothing and meaningless

Isaiah 40:15

Anonymous said...

I was at a grocery store last night observing Mexicans pulling out "get it for free cards". One had a whole portfolio of credit cards. I was one of the very few paying for groceries with money that I had worked for.

Anonymous said...

This is a problem which has continued for four thousand years. Some of the great people migrations ultimatey proved fertile, such as the migration of the Dorians into what became Greece, or the Hebrews into their Promised Land. Other migrations, such as the Huns, the Vandals and Visigoths were far less so. It was barbarian migrations which brought down the Roman Empire, and ushered in the Dark Ages, Manchus who brought down a Chinese Empire. Nobody discusses much the migrations of Bantu peoples in Africa. Though I consider the great migration of Europeans to the Americas a great advance, the Arawak, Inca, Mohicans and other indigenous peoples might disagree. The "right of refuge" or migration is counterbalanced by a right to possess what you already own. Squatter's Rights.

Anonymous said...

If this Right of Refuge and Migration were taken to its logical conclusion, it would mean that any, or all of us should have the right to invite ourselves in to Sally Quinn's condo, or Melinda Gates Estate, and they would then be obliged to feed us to their own standard. Please don't mention this to them, it would give them the idea, and they might seek laws to begin quartering a couple Somali migrants in each American's private home - except their own of course.

Edward Cline said...

"Even low ranked first world nations still find themselves swamped with refugees looking to move in." Yes, they want to move in, settle down, establish families, bring their problems and quaint customs with them, sign up for as many welfare state freebies they can, legally and illegally, and establish the terms on which they will deign to remain, such as demanding that the "host" nation defer to their customs and problems and look the other way when those customs violate the laws of that host nation and the problems spill over into the lives of the natives.

Inviting the unwashed and uncivilized in are brigades of do-gooders and multiculturalists and academics who hate the country as much as the movers-in do. Yes, their purpose is to erase identities, especially "white" identities. Any resistance to or protest against the invasion (or "migration") is met with charges of racism, bigotry, and/or religious or cultural discrimination. One of the terms that the do-gooders and multiculturalists don’t want to hear is "melting pot." Another is "assimilation." These are dirty words. For evidence of the efficacy of multiculturalism, they don’t point to Asians or blacks who don’t carry racial chips on their shoulders, or even second- or third-generation individuals of Mexican or Cuban origin whom one otherwise wouldn't know from Adam, but to tribes of tribalists who flaunt their origins and take an in-your-face attitude and dare you to laugh or criticize. If you do dare to laugh or criticize, you will either have your throat cut or be served with a lawsuit funded in large part by you from your tax dollars. Or your daughter will be raped or your son sent home from school for wearing an American flag on his backpack or for refusing to pledge allegiance to Mexico or Mohammad.

That's more or less what is happening in Europe, and it is happening here.

Lars said...

Too many Americans are playing the nice game,"he's such a nice guy". Yeah, but can he fight if needed? I guess we are gonna find out.

Lars said...

Any statistics about native Americans are useless: literacy rates, food stamp usage, etc.

Earlybird said...

Thank you Daniel for yet another great essay.

Bruce S. Thornton has posted a good related essay at City-Journal articulating what worked in the past and what has now gone wrong.

It's entitled "How Assimilation Works
—and how multiculturalism has wrecked it in California"

I hope it's okay to post a link and an excerpt.

" . . . whatever the degree of assimilation, most accepted a fundamental truth: that whatever affection they had for their homes, for their native tongue, or for their old ways and customs, those cultures had in some significant way failed them. Thus they had made a difficult, costly choice: to become Americans. If America’s core principles—such as individual rights, freedom of speech, the rule of law, and religious tolerance—conflicted with those of the old country, then the latter had to be modified or abandoned."


" . . . people understood that to have a nation composed of immigrants, there had to be a unifying common culture in the public sphere. Transmitting that common culture was the job of the schools. My mother’s mother came from Maschito, an Albanian village in southern Italy. Many Maschitans settled in Fresno, where every year they celebrated the feast of their ancestral village’s patron saint, Santa Elia. But I never heard a word about any of this in school. We were busy learning about George Washington and the Constitution, Valley Forge and the Gettysburg Address, the nation’s history and heroes, its virtues and ideals—and, crucially, those core American principles. It was at school that the immigrant learned American history and celebrated the leaders who had created the country, fought in its defense, and embodied its most cherished values. In short, he learned how to be what he or his parents had freely chosen to become: American.

This process has been compromised over the past 40 years as the ideology of multiculturalism has colonized schools, government, and popular culture. Today, immigrants learn to embrace a sense of entitlement and grievance and to demand that schools and government acknowledge and atone for America’s sins. School curricula have degenerated into ethnic cheerleading and feel-good symbolism. The effect is to divide, not unify, to pit group against group as each tries to out-victim the other in a zero-sum competition for political clout and slices of the public fisc." . . .


Just a common "tater said...

Thank you Daniel for summarizing the problem, and Earlybird for essentially summarizing the solution. How we ended up in this situation still puzzles me. The West, especially the US, had a system that worked, not perfectly, but maybe too well despsite its imperfections. It appears that the type of prosperity we enjoyed compared to the rest of the world lulled us into complacency and flawed thinking. At the same time, it always makes sense to follow the money. Who benefits most from this mess, or at least who THINKS they will? I see the US heading into an old fashioned oligarchy. The people at the top benefit when those of us at the lower rungs are too damned busy fighting for survival and fighting each other for the crumbs that fall from the table. We are too weak, fractionated, disorganized, and distracted to see the true source of the problems and unable to organize to make something better. Obviously, someone in the government or powers that be (whomever they are)seem to think that by demolishing our reasonably successful social system they will benefit. I see these forces at work here: vilify those that dare to call attention to the problem, disarm the populace, find a way to get large numbers of the populace dependent upon government largesse and fearful of losing the handouts. The current US leadership, regardless of party, seems to make it a point to find ways to weaken our economy, weaken our social system, and to make us into a country we were never intended to be. Instead of independent, self reliant, entrepreneurial, and moral we are to be mere functionaries. Do as told by those that know better or face the consequences.

IgorR said...

Let's face it: an unsuccessful minority will remain unsuccessful. The level of discrimination sometimes changes over time, but the level of success of a statistically unsuccessful minority population in pretty much any society will rarely, and even then very slowly improve over time. So the key is not to let in more of any currently unsuccessful minority population. Of course that's anathema to the multiculturists, but it's pretty obvious. And no Muslims because that's a different situation altogether: once they reach certain numbers both their successes and their failures are at the expense of everyone else.

FuzzyBear said...

It's always selfish hypocrisy. You know your own country sucks enough that you need to leave it, but can't respect your new home enough to adopt its customs. Why come here then? You show no respect for either your new or your old home.

Our refusal to make people accountable for their actions and lack of productivity is a rejection of what made America great. If this country hadn't been such a successful experiment, it wouldn't matter as much, perhaps, but considering what we once were, it seems a shame.

If we had a real leader(s) he'd ship out everyone not properly documented and name it The Purge. It's no man's responsibility to give up his own bread to feed others who won't work the fields.

Petzl said...

Q: What percentage of the worlds "refugees" are Muslim?
A: The major majority are! All created by Islamsince the days of Mohammad. Mainly because Islam is actually a violent political process, not a religion at all.
Islamic conquests have always been by infiltration, terrorist attack from within, eventually followed by surprise attack, followed by killing for killings sake. Once Moslems have foothold maintaining rule is held by continued carnage and ruthlessness.
Until it's recognized Islam is the problem nothing will change!

Post a Comment