* “…backlash in countries with little experience of mass assimilation.”
I hear this a lot from the MSM in relation to Europe’s problems with immigration. They keep saying that the USA has an advantage because we’ve had a history of assimilating immigrants and Europe has not. But they fail to acknowledge that our so called success with assimilating immigrants was largely in the realm of assimilating fellow Europeans, albeit with different languages and cultures. But they were still more similar to the existing Americans than what is coming today.
Therefore they blame Europe’s immigration ills to its lack of history of assimilating immigrants rather than the fact that the immigrants coming are so dissimilar. Even the USA has had a heck of a time assimilating blacks who’ve been in this nation for 400 years! Yet it is blacks and other non-Europeans who are being brought into the First World in record numbers, not similar fellow Europeans. Is it any wonder that they (we) are going to have problems?
* A liberal believes–hopes–that Islamic and black men will be tender and merciful when they become the majority. He hopes by his preemptive groveling display of appeasement and submission to forestall retaliation for all of the (largely imagined) sins committed by his forefathers to which he is heir. In an effort to exonerate himself he repudiates his history–but it won’t work. In the eyes of blacks and Islam, he is condemned by his color and religion, ironically, mirroring the very intolerance for which he condemns his Father.
Too late he will realize that solidarity was his spear and shield and that his adversary intends to show no mercy. Without his cultural milieu, a human being is as naked and vulnerable as a solitary baboon without his troop. He is doomed to be the leopard’s next meal.
* Europe was at its best when it was choc-full of some rather tough, unsavory and decidedly ‘illiberal’ regimes.
Think of the Romans. Think of how Britain rose to greatness at the same time as the ‘autocratic’ King George.
The softness and flabbiness, if not downright stupidity of modern Europe – as typified by that stinking pile of blow-fly infested shit, the EU-, is of the distinctively recent vintage.
As recently as the 1960s the French army and security forces had the cojones to routinely apply handheld electrical generators to the couillons of Magrehbi rebels.
Guillotining only stopped in France in 1977. The last public guillotining was as recent as 1936. In the early 60s, the French police – in the heart of Paris – literally massacred scores of north African protestors and tossed their bodies into the Seine. And the got clean away with it.
Virtually all the European nations were just as tough and ruthless right up to the 1970s when a certain shittiness – perhaps American ‘civil rights’ crap or Swedish style insanity crept in. For example the UK waged its last colonial wars in Aden and Malaya with ruthlessness.
So, sorry the ‘liberal’ craziness that you laud in Europe is really only a very recent – and decadent – phenomenon.
The corollary is that the ‘old beast’ is still there, waiting to be awakened.
* Multiculturalism has immobilized our society. There are many things we know need to be done such as tightening up immigration but because there is now a built in opposition to every sensible idea we need to go through this vetting process where everybody’s feelings get heard. We will never have 100% consensus on any topic ever again.
In 2015, I think the Japanese would have to bomb Pearl Harbor twice before America would go to war.
* Left/liberalism/progressive-ism is about power.
They used to talk endlessly about the poor. We need to improve the lot of the poor. Now, there is not enough grinding poverty in America to be a voting block. They care nothing about the remaining poor.
The new dissatisfied are racial groups, women (gender), idealistic young (capitalism is evil because there are rich people), inequality (envy).
They hope to ride to power, preferably absolute power, by playing the dissatisfied against whatever resists their power now. And they are willing to fan the flames of dissatisfaction.
Since money is power, progressives naturally favor a centrally planned, managed economy.
They got it in health care, where everything is dictated by Washington, including what procedures are done (by being covered, everything else is prohibited), prices, compensation, business success or failure (guaranteed existence to health care companies with a profit and loss limits imposed by law), etc.
They took over the bank capital markets – merely the threat of an indictment is the death of any bank and there are many lesser tools used to tell banks exactly what to do. The banks are wards of the state with free returns on excessive reserves which are in turn borrowed from the fed.
Federal subsidies allow them to dictate to any college or university that takes federal money; same for the states. They favor a 55 MPH speed limit but have no authority to impose such a thing – states adopt it or lose fed highway money.
Things other than the economy they want to dictate by edict: character of neighborhoods (covered extensively here), sex breakdown of occupations, the definition of marriage, ability to purchase or carry guns, weight and efficiency of your car, source of your electric power (expensive solar instead of inexpensive coal) content of your children’s education (home schooling discouraged), whom you associate with, political donations, change of citizenship (exit taxes and rules prohibiting corporations to reincorporate abroad), movement of money ($10,000 limit on cash carried out of the country, reporting of cash withdrawals of your money from your bank account), and many more too numerous to name.
