Right Wiki
Where posts from the Politics Board live on in wiki memory
Half of people stupider than average!
Posted by luctruc on 30 Aug at 10:13PM
Finnish correspondent at the Eurabia blog covers some good ground here. Loooooooong post. The "Subject" line above is from the end of the post, when he starts getting crabby. Mostly it's about how much of the Finnish and Swedish media have stopped reporting on immigrant criminality, as it looks kinda bad, tolerance-wise. Since we're familiar with media mendacity, no news here.
http://eurabia.blogse.nl/log/multicultural-discourse-in-finland-and-sweden.html#more
What struck me about the post was a concise description of the Left's immigration strategy.
The newcomers are completely dependent on government handouts, which are traditionally on the agenda of the political left. Logically, the newcomers tend to vote the political force that guarantees that the generous handouts are left untouched. The political force that supports generous spending on handouts realizes that the newcomers’ vote guarantees them the opportunity to remain in power permanently.
And something that had not occurred to me, insufficiently cynical as I am,
From the Leftist point of view isolated ghettoes mainly populated by isolated immigrant groups are an ideal solution. Complete dependency on the political left makes the immigrant population loyal supporters of the left. Because the ghettoes are isolated, they only disturb the image of well-being in Sweden to an extent that can be covered up with effective media self-censorship and “education”. At the same time the dependence of the political Left on the ghettoes not only prevents it from taking any effective measures to stop the ghettoization (you cannot criticize your voters) but also makes stopping the ghettoization undesirable.
In other words, many in the bobo classes may not even be aware of the shape their country is in.
-- Reply
Posted by Esperanza on 30 Aug at 10:38PM
Great post. I'm convinced that is the idea with only slight variation behind not stopping unlawful immigration in the U.S. and related media coverage of the debates.
-- Reply
Posted by luctruc on 30 Aug at 10:52PM
Yep. Remember back when Al Gore was reinventing government? (This was before he invented the Internet.) One of the "streamlining" efforts, just in time for the 94 or 96 elections, as I recall, was to naturalize around a million immigrants in a hurry by skipping the criminal background check. Republicans disagree on the right recipe for immigration reform, but it should be clear that the Democrats, our version of Europe's socialist Left, simply cannot be trusted with the issue.
-- Reply
Posted by luctruc on 30 Aug at 11:01PM
And something that the MSM neglected to cover during last spring's Mexican demonstrations. The big turnouts were invariably accompanied by Dem voter registration efforts. Pictures of the recruiters all over the blogs; saw them nowhere in the big media coverage.
And you may recall the Dem candidate, in that special House election in California, advising illegals to try voting regardless.
How good is the words of France??
Posted by nekotdlog on 26 Aug at 11:58PM
From reading this alot of things come to light of why France sent more troops to Lebanon!
They didn't want another country in charge!
If any country could have settled such important details in advance it is France. It took the kudos for working up the UN resolution. It acted as spokesman for the Arab world within the permanent five members of the council. It insisted that the resolution should not be made under chapter 7 of the UN charter, which would have given the troops the right to impose their will by force.
The unclear rules of engagement derive directly from the ambiguity of the French-inspired resolution. But France has nonetheless used the uncertainty as an excuse for delay.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-2330259,00.html
democracy for the miz
Posted by luctruc on 25 Aug at 3:10PM
Ran across a couple interesting items today, one right after the other. The first was an excerpt from a 1956 interview with André Malraux, the novelist, freedom-fighter, gonzo world traveler, and cool guy. In what must have been a discussion of the war in Algeria, he offered some thoughts on Islam. I translated a little here.
http://lukemcgook.com/malraux.html
To the benefits that we claim to be able to offer them, they will prefer the future of their race.
Then I ran across a (short) March column by the excellent Canadian opinionista, David Warren. He is a supporter of our project in Iraq, but he has questioned the main premise of the project -- that Muslims can do democracy, or even the nation-state thing.
http://www.davidwarrenonline.com/index.php?artID=582
.. Mr Bush was staking his bet on the assumption that the Islamists were not speaking for Islam; that the world’s Muslims long for modernity; that they are themselves repelled by the violence of the terrorists; that, most significantly, Islam is in its nature a religion that can be “internalized”, like the world’s other great religions, and that the traditional Islamic aspiration to conjoin worldly political with otherworldly spiritual authority had somehow gone away.
*******
The question, “But what if they are not?” was never seriously raised, because it could not be raised behind the mud curtain of political correctness that has descended over the Western academy and intelligentsia. The idea that others see the world in a way that is not only incompatible with, but utterly opposed to, the way we see it, is the thorn ever-present in the rose bushes of multiculturalism.
He pulls up short of what seems to me the obvious conclusion. If the Iraq project is permitted to fail -- that is, if Islam once more prevails over humane and lawful government -- then we really have only one option left, if we are to survive as a civilization, and that is to kill a whole lot of Muslims. I say let's stay the course in Iraq.
-- Reply
Posted by luctruc on 25 Aug at 3:34PM
And I don't make myself clear. We have to enforce certain of the conditions necessary for lawful and consensual government and then see if the Iraqis can govern themselves, creating those psychic conditions that we can't do much to help them with. If it turns out that they can't govern themselves, that Muslims must always sink back into the 1500 year old slough of chaos, despotism, and corruption that is their "civilization," then we're entitled to do whatever else needs doing in order to defend ourselves.
-- Reply
Posted by BENSTER on 25 Aug at 4:13PM
Thanks for those 2 excellent commentaries.
It appears to me, this is a possible worst case scenario of Iraq: that the Shia and Sunni's escalate their conflict into a full, nationwide civil war, and reject democracy.
The reality right now, is that this conflict is basically confined to Baghdad and the Sunni triangle, and has been (naturally) greatly exaggerated by the media.
80% Iraq, is relatively peaceful, especially the Kurds in the north.
I don't know if the Shia and Sunni's will accept democracy or not (with or without a civil war), as a permanent status quo, but I do thnk it was worth trying, considering the alternative.
At the very least, the Kurds have appeaed to accept democracy, and they are overwhemingly thankful and friendly to the US and coalition forces. Terrorists and terrorists insurgents cannot take root in Kurdistan because the Kurds won't let them, thus no support.
As for Afghanistan, time will tell if democracy, and more important, liberty, takes hold there, but it is worth the effort to try to support liberty in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I. for one, will never believe our Troops, and coalition Troops, are dying and spilling blood for nothing.
These selfless Heroes are destroying and arresting terrorists around the world.
Terrorists that will never set foot on Western soil, and terrorists who will never harm another civilian man, woman or child.
We are safer because of the courage and sacrifice of these brav men and women.
-- Reply
Posted by luctruc on 25 Aug at 4:16PM
We are indeed safer because of what they've done.
And if Iraq doesn't work, or if the next step -- three little Iraqs -- doesn't work, it will not be for want of their trying.
Half of people stupider than average!
Posted by luctruc on 30 Aug at 10:13PM
Finnish correspondent at the Eurabia blog covers some good ground here. Loooooooong post. The "Subject" line above is from the end of the post, when he starts getting crabby. Mostly it's about how much of the Finnish and Swedish media have stopped reporting on immigrant criminality, as it looks kinda bad, tolerance-wise. Since we're familiar with media mendacity, no news here.
http://eurabia.blogse.nl/log/multicultural-discourse-in-finland-and-sweden.html#more
What struck me about the post was a concise description of the Left's immigration strategy.
The newcomers are completely dependent on government handouts, which are traditionally on the agenda of the political left. Logically, the newcomers tend to vote the political force that guarantees that the generous handouts are left untouched. The political force that supports generous spending on handouts realizes that the newcomers’ vote guarantees them the opportunity to remain in power permanently.
And something that had not occurred to me, insufficiently cynical as I am,
From the Leftist point of view isolated ghettoes mainly populated by isolated immigrant groups are an ideal solution. Complete dependency on the political left makes the immigrant population loyal supporters of the left. Because the ghettoes are isolated, they only disturb the image of well-being in Sweden to an extent that can be covered up with effective media self-censorship and “education”. At the same time the dependence of the political Left on the ghettoes not only prevents it from taking any effective measures to stop the ghettoization (you cannot criticize your voters) but also makes stopping the ghettoization undesirable.
In other words, many in the bobo classes may not even be aware of the shape their country is in.
-- Reply
Re: Half of people stupider than average!
Posted by Esperanza on 30 Aug at 10:38PM
Great post. I'm convinced that is the idea with only slight variation behind not stopping unlawful immigration in the U.S. and related media coverage of the debates.
-- Reply
Re: Half of people stupider than average!
Posted by luctruc on 30 Aug at 10:52PM
Yep. Remember back when Al Gore was reinventing government? (This was before he invented the Internet.) One of the "streamlining" efforts, just in time for the 94 or 96 elections, as I recall, was to naturalize around a million immigrants in a hurry by skipping the criminal background check. Republicans disagree on the right recipe for immigration reform, but it should be clear that the Democrats, our version of Europe's socialist Left, simply cannot be trusted with the issue.
-- Reply
Re: Half of people stupider than average!
Posted by luctruc on 30 Aug at 11:01PM
And something that the MSM neglected to cover during last spring's Mexican demonstrations. The big turnouts were invariably accompanied by Dem voter registration efforts. Pictures of the recruiters all over the blogs; saw them nowhere in the big media coverage.
And you may recall the Dem candidate, in that special House election in California, advising illegals to try voting regardless.
How good is the words of France??
Posted by nekotdlog on 26 Aug at 11:58PM
From reading this alot of things come to light of why France sent more troops to Lebanon!
They didn't want another country in charge!
If any country could have settled such important details in advance it is France. It took the kudos for working up the UN resolution. It acted as spokesman for the Arab world within the permanent five members of the council. It insisted that the resolution should not be made under chapter 7 of the UN charter, which would have given the troops the right to impose their will by force.
The unclear rules of engagement derive directly from the ambiguity of the French-inspired resolution. But France has nonetheless used the uncertainty as an excuse for delay.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-2330259,00.html
democracy for the miz
Posted by luctruc on 25 Aug at 3:10PM
Ran across a couple interesting items today, one right after the other. The first was an excerpt from a 1956 interview with André Malraux, the novelist, freedom-fighter, gonzo world traveler, and cool guy. In what must have been a discussion of the war in Algeria, he offered some thoughts on Islam. I translated a little here.
http://lukemcgook.com/malraux.html
To the benefits that we claim to be able to offer them, they will prefer the future of their race.
Then I ran across a (short) March column by the excellent Canadian opinionista, David Warren. He is a supporter of our project in Iraq, but he has questioned the main premise of the project -- that Muslims can do democracy, or even the nation-state thing.
http://www.davidwarrenonline.com/index.php?artID=582
.. Mr Bush was staking his bet on the assumption that the Islamists were not speaking for Islam; that the world’s Muslims long for modernity; that they are themselves repelled by the violence of the terrorists; that, most significantly, Islam is in its nature a religion that can be “internalized”, like the world’s other great religions, and that the traditional Islamic aspiration to conjoin worldly political with otherworldly spiritual authority had somehow gone away.
*******
The question, “But what if they are not?” was never seriously raised, because it could not be raised behind the mud curtain of political correctness that has descended over the Western academy and intelligentsia. The idea that others see the world in a way that is not only incompatible with, but utterly opposed to, the way we see it, is the thorn ever-present in the rose bushes of multiculturalism.
He pulls up short of what seems to me the obvious conclusion. If the Iraq project is permitted to fail -- that is, if Islam once more prevails over humane and lawful government -- then we really have only one option left, if we are to survive as a civilization, and that is to kill a whole lot of Muslims. I say let's stay the course in Iraq.
-- Reply
Re: democracy for the miz
Posted by luctruc on 25 Aug at 3:34PM
And I don't make myself clear. We have to enforce certain of the conditions necessary for lawful and consensual government and then see if the Iraqis can govern themselves, creating those psychic conditions that we can't do much to help them with. If it turns out that they can't govern themselves, that Muslims must always sink back into the 1500 year old slough of chaos, despotism, and corruption that is their "civilization," then we're entitled to do whatever else needs doing in order to defend ourselves.
-- Reply
Re: democracy for the miz
Posted by BENSTER on 25 Aug at 4:13PM
Thanks for those 2 excellent commentaries.
It appears to me, this is a possible worst case scenario of Iraq: that the Shia and Sunni's escalate their conflict into a full, nationwide civil war, and reject democracy.
The reality right now, is that this conflict is basically confined to Baghdad and the Sunni triangle, and has been (naturally) greatly exaggerated by the media.
80% Iraq, is relatively peaceful, especially the Kurds in the north.
I don't know if the Shia and Sunni's will accept democracy or not (with or without a civil war), as a permanent status quo, but I do thnk it was worth trying, considering the alternative.
At the very least, the Kurds have appeaed to accept democracy, and they are overwhemingly thankful and friendly to the US and coalition forces. Terrorists and terrorists insurgents cannot take root in Kurdistan because the Kurds won't let them, thus no support.
As for Afghanistan, time will tell if democracy, and more important, liberty, takes hold there, but it is worth the effort to try to support liberty in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I. for one, will never believe our Troops, and coalition Troops, are dying and spilling blood for nothing.
These selfless Heroes are destroying and arresting terrorists around the world.
Terrorists that will never set foot on Western soil, and terrorists who will never harm another civilian man, woman or child.
We are safer because of the courage and sacrifice of these brav men and women.
-- Reply
Re: democracy for the miz
Posted by luctruc on 25 Aug at 4:16PM
We are indeed safer because of what they've done.
And if Iraq doesn't work, or if the next step -- three little Iraqs -- doesn't work, it will not be for want of their trying.
Wiki Options
This page was last edited by luctruc at 9:04PM on 30 August 2006