June 21, 2008

A Classic

Normally, I edit articles I post here down to just the good stuff, but I can't cut a word from this New York Times Magazine essay.

The New Pariahs?

By NOAH FELDMAN

Noah Feldman, a contributing writer, teaches law at Harvard and is a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

No country is wholly free of anti-immigrant prejudice, whether it is the United States, where illegal immigration was a hot-button issue in the Republican primaries, or post-apartheid South Africa, where economic migrants were recently burned to death. But in many Western European countries today, something new and insidious seems to be happening. The familiar old arguments against immigrants — that they are criminals, that their culture makes them a bad fit, that they take jobs from natives — are mutating into an anti-Islamic bias that is becoming institutionalized in the continent’s otherwise ordinary politics.

Examples abound. The Swiss People’s Party sponsors ads in which three white sheep push one black sheep off the Swiss flag — and wins 29 percent of the vote. In Belgium, the Vlaams Belang deploys a clever variation, publicly praising Jews and seeking their support against Muslims, whom it tellingly describes as “the main enemy of the moment.” Meanwhile, the Dutch politician Geert Wilders calls Islam “the ideology of a retarded culture.”

Even Britain, which has afforded Muslims a more welcoming environment, has had some worrying moments. A few years back, a Labor M.P. called for an end to “the tradition of first-cousin marriages” among Pakistanis and other South Asians in Britain. The basis for her suggestion was the claim that Pakistanis in Britain were more likely than the general population to suffer from recessive autosomal genetic disorders. Of course, so are Ashkenazi Jews, but you can hardly imagine an M.P. proposing to limit Jews’ marriage choices for this reason, especially given the historic Nazi allegation of Jewish genetic inferiority.

What is so striking about these forms of prejudice, which go beyond ordinary anti-immigrant feeling, is that they are taking root in otherwise enlightened, progressive states — states where the memory of the Holocaust has often led to the adoption of laws against anti-Semitism and racism. The reasons, therefore, must surely go beyond economic or cultural insecurity.

One factor that cannot be ignored is the threat of terrorism, so closely associated today with radical Islam. In London, Madrid and Amsterdam, terrorist acts have been perpetrated by Muslim immigrants or (more worrisome still) their children. Yet it must be remembered that Europe has also suffered homegrown terrorist attacks, motivated by everything from national liberation (in the cases of the Irish Republican Army or the Basque E.T.A.) to radical leftism (Baader-Meinhof and the Brigate Rosse). Europeans are, therefore, to a degree acclimated to terror, undercutting its power as an explanation. And in the U.S., which on Sept. 11 suffered much greater terrorist damage than any European country ever has, anti-Muslim bias does not have the political weight that it does in Europe.

Well-meaning Europeans sometimes argue that unlike the U.S., their countries are traditionally “homogeneous” and have little experience with immigration. Generalized anti-immigrant feeling, they suggest, has come to rest on Muslims simply because they are increasingly visible. In France, the specter of the “Polish plumber” undercutting French workmen’s wages played a role in recent votes, suggesting the possibility of an equal-opportunity bias. But hostility to Eastern European migrants, though real enough, still does not run as deep as corresponding hostility to Muslims.

The perception of cultural difference may help explain this disparity. Muslim immigrants are depicted in European political rhetoric as not merely backward but also illiberal, contradicting Europe’s now-prevalent commitment to tolerance of homosexuality and sex out of wedlock. At the same time, Muslims are thought to be forcing their children to maintain practices like the head scarf, which is banned in many French schools.

Certainly it is reasonable for free societies to encourage immigrants to adopt their own liberal values. A Dutch requirement that potential immigrants view a film depicting topless bathers and gay couples may seem a little childish, but it is not a human rights violation, and it may even help prepare immigrants for the different world they are poised to enter. Schools should teach the values of the surrounding society, including respect for different lifestyles. Nevertheless, a hallmark of liberal, secular societies is supposed to be respect for different cultures, including traditional, religious cultures — even intolerant ones. There is something discomfiting about a selective respect that extends to the Roman Catholic Church, with its rejection of homosexuality and women priests, but excludes Islam for its sexism and homophobia.

This leaves another, more controversial explanation for anti-Muslim attitudes in Europe: even after 60 years of introspection about the anti-Semitism that led to the Holocaust, Europeans are not convinced that culturally and religiously different immigrants should be treated as full members of their societies. European anti-Semitism between the world wars featured accusations of criminality, religious backwardness, genetic inferiority and, above all, the impossibility of assimilation. And it is no coincidence that significant numbers of the Jews in Western Europe were immigrants or children of immigrants from farther east.

The U.S. had its own terrible legacy of legalized racism in the form of the Jim Crow laws, which Hitler imitated for his own purposes. In the aftermath of World War II, however, we began slowly and agonizingly to come to terms with this past. Racial bias is still with us, but so is self-consciousness about our problems and how they must be overcome.

In Europe, by contrast, Hitler’s horrifying success at killing so many Jews meant that the burgeoning postwar societies of the continent never had to come to terms with difference, because it was to a great extent eradicated. Today, as the birthrate for European Muslims far outstrips that for their neighbors, it is as if Europe’s discomfort with difference is being encountered for the first time. In theory, Europe remembers the Holocaust. But the depth of that memory may be doubted when many Europeans seem to have forgotten that their continent was home to other outsiders well before the arrival of today’s Muslim minority.

See what I mean? If I'd put in a single ellipsis, you'd naturally assume that that's where I edited out the part where Feldman says, "Ha ha, just kidding, this is all a parody. Nobody could be living this far in the past!"

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

69 comments:

simon said...

Wow, Gramsci would be proud.

The difference between perception of Muslims and perception of other non-white immigrants is that black Caribbean Christians, black African animists, or Tamil Hindus may have their faults, but they do not appear to be trying to take over our societies and turn them into something else.

It turns out, we now realise, that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with our civilisation in a way that (eg) Hinduism is not. I didn't realise this until quite recently. I could never understand why the white British working class were so anti-Pakistani when they had no problem with Afro-Caribbeans, despite the latter group having much higher violent crime rates. I see now that they had an intuitive grasp of this incompatibility in a way that the middle class (or elite New York Times opinionators) don't.

Anonymous said...

Well first I have to point out that Mr. FELDMAN didn't mention Israel's many examples of not treating "culturally and religiously different people as full members of their societies?"

And since Mr. FELDMAN likes to point out examples of America's past policies of "legalized Racism," it should be pointed out that Israel is the only industrialized country to have similar laws today.

With that said:

Its becoming more obvious that the elites are starting to get nervous about the rise of European and European American political movement in response to the increase of non-European immigration.

In the years to come, Mr. FELDMAN will be using his influence to call for "Hate-Speech" laws that make it difficult for Whites to organize for their ethnic interests.

tommy said...

You're right, Steve. That was hilariously bad.

Feldman is even galled by the idea that anyone in "progressive" Europe would suggest banning first-cousin marriage. He doesn't see how the Neolithic values of Muslim immigrants might make Europe less progressive in time.

Henry Canaday said...

Just back from Brussels, where (largely French) truck-drivers and farmers shut down the main highway in protest against higher gasoline prices, thus forcing tens of thousands of their fellow Belgians to burn $10-per-gallon gas while crawling at 2 miles per hour, crammed on a web of country roads, for their daily commute. Now, the Dutch-speaking and other Belgians have grown accustomed to these charming ethnic habits interrupting their lives for a day or two every once in a while. They curse, shrug and wait for the next day. But I think they are beginning to realize that other diverse groups will bring still other innovations into Belgian life, and at some point the ability of the country to deal with all the sharp bits of the great ethnic mosaic will collapse.

Europeans are so cute when they try to write a Constitution.

rightsaidfred said...

Feldman and that piece are proof that brainwashing works. His re-educators must be proud.

John S. Bolton said...

It's also rather brazen to make intolerance of 1st cousin marriage sound like a slippery slope to mass murder, while being pro-diversity. If homogeneity is bad or not a value to defend, the analogy to inbreeding depression, would seem to be relied on. Feldman has no alternative, but to try a sly smear approach, since there is no rational argument for sizable immigration of muslinms into more civilized countries. Beneath the false gentlemanliness of tone, malice shows through, as one knows without asking that he does not wish Islamic immigration on Israel. There is not the least chance of honesty or consistency there. One-worlders are disloyal and untrustworthy.

Anonymous said...

Jews seem to be torn between a very strong (but recent) antagonism towards muslims (entirelly due to the Israeli situation), and their classic default response of always siding with a non-White minority against the White majority.
Certain prominent Jews have actually switched over to a stong anti-muslim, quasi 'white nationalist' position, but it seems that old habits die hard!!!

c23 said...

I would like to point out another article by Feldman:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/magazine/22yeshiva-t.html


It looks like this guy is a bigger pain in the ass to the Jews than he is to us, airing dirty laundry and publicizing aspects of Jewish particularism that most Jews would rather not publicized. He's probably a True Believer in this egalitarianism crap rather than an evil Jew out to ruin whitey like half of the comments on this post will likely imply.

Either way, the existence of this guy is just more evidence that the faculty of Harvard should be given more useful jobs, like picking spinach, and Harvard should be burnt to the ground and plowed with radioactive salt.

LemmusLemmus said...

Simon,

could you please name the European contries that Muslims are "trying to take over"? Thank you.

Vercingetorix said...

If you look past Feldman's sneering tone, he provides quite a comprehensive catalog of the perfectly proper reasons Europeans other than the dictatorial elite disfavor muslim immigration.

I find it interesting that Feldman doesn't try to deny any of the problems with the muslims, but rather, for each one, identifies some similar flaw in some other group previously found in Europe. He suggests, for example, that muslim sexism and hatred of gays is okay because some Catholics once displayed vaguely similar attitudes.* Muslim terrorism is okay because the Bader-Meinhof gang was okay(!). Isn't it wonderful to watch Feldman root around for comparisons? Muslims have flaws A,B,C,D, and E. Other group 1 has flaw A, other group 2 has flaw B, other group 3 has flaw C...

Feldman teaches us the the true meaning of tolerance. Even when you find a bunch of people who display at once all of the many flaws that you seek to correct when they occur singly in other folk (yea, even unto the flaw of committing violent crime against you), you must gather them to your breast. Indeed, if you do not, you are a Nazi and the world is your Jew.

*Personally, I don't think refusing to ordain woman priests is quite as sexist as forcing all women to wear bags over their heads and executing them for speaking with any men outside their immediate families. As for mistreatment of homosexuals, it now seems that most of the Catholic priesthood is gay so I doubt homosexuals are in much danger from the Church.

Outland said...

Sorry, I didn't finish the whole piece. I just can't so much concentrated stupidity.

It's just too much.

bythesea said...

The sad thing is that there are huge numbers of Europeans, including most of my friends, who would agree with Noah Feldman

Polistra said...

Even Orwell would marvel at the layers and layers of overlapping contradictions here.

Funny, I used to think that "Never Again" was shorthand for "We will never again allow anti-Semitism to become dominant."

Turns out that "Never Again" actually means "We will never again protect those pesky Jews from anti-Semites; instead, we will turn our society upside down to encourage the dominance of anti-Semitic Mohammedans."

rec1man said...

Incidentally in UK
a lot of hindus and sikhs vote for the BNP despite the anti-immigrant stance of the BNP, because on the street level hindus and sikhs are under attack from muslims and hindus and sikhs have 500 years of experience about islam and have no illusions of 3rd world solidarity with muslims

In Britain , the word asian covers
Indians and Pakistanis
Most of the crime and terrorism is done by muslim pakistanis and the bbc reports it as asian crime, maligning the peaceful hindus and sikhs

In 1965, Raspail, a French author in his book camp of saints, about 3rd world immigration , painted hindus as the villains

With the result, the french imported muslims for factory work

France even now has a few hindu migrants and they are all law abiding despite being of worker class

none of the above said...

One point worth noting here: I think people get a bigger reaction, the more different they are from the neighbors. People who are very different in appearance, in behavior and wealth and educational outcomes, in religion, and in language, sort-of max out the "them" reaction in the built in us/them circuitry we all carry around with us.

If white, Catholic Poles go cause a lot of trouble in France, that will be noticed. But those people will seem more like "us" and less like "them," sharing appearance and religion with the natives. Brown, Muslim Algerians causing a lot of trouble will be a hell of a lot more visible, and will probably get more response, since they're much more "them" than "us."

Rohan Swee said...

Bizarre. It'd be one thing if he were just mindlessly flapping around in condemnation. But it's as if the guy cannot even imagine that any European should or could have any cultural or historical self-understanding not fixed on Mr. Feldman's preferred historical lodestars.

I'll also remark this tossed-off falsehood, as I see variants cropping up with irritating frequency:

"...a hallmark of liberal, secular societies is supposed to be respect for different cultures, including traditional, religious cultures...

Utter bullshit, of course. Respect for and toleration of any and all comers, no questions asked and no boundaries set, has not been a feature, let alone a "hallmark" of any historical liberal, secular, culture. But I guess if you a priori define any example of liberal, tolerant cultures setting boundaries, as a violation of liberal, tolerant principles, you can spin around forever in the "war is peace, freedom is slavery" funhouse.

Anonymous said...

c23 -- I had the same take on this as you did, that Feldman is more wide-eyed and innocent than scheming and duplicitous. Every time I hear of another Chosenite marrying a black, the same thought passes through my head: aha, they drank the kool-aid as well. It happens. Produce enough kool-aid and some of your own will imbibe by mistake.

halfbreed said...

Steve -- How often does it occur to you that with your writing skills, if your last name were Tribal and you chose to spew PC crap rather than insightful honesty, you would not only have a major book contract, you might even have a bestseller? Who knows, you might even have a Harvard law professorship as well.

halfbreed said...

Look up "prejudice" in the cidtionary and it says "an adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts." This has to be the second most misused word in the English language (right after "racist"). Why is there no such word as "postjudice", meaning, "an adverse judgment or opinion formed after careful examination of the facts"?

Martin said...

"There is something discomfiting about a selective respect that extends to the Roman Catholic Church, with its rejection of homosexuality and women priests, but excludes Islam for its sexism and homophobia."

Yes, puzzling. And this couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the Catholic church is a 2,000 year old european institution, whereas Islam is an alien and hostile religion?

The diversity of which he speaks was imposed on the peoples of europe by their governments. It was not consciously invited.

"Well-meaning Europeans sometimes argue that unlike the U.S., their countries are traditionally “homogeneous” and have little experience with immigration."

This country was once homogenous too. To here idiots like Feldman describe it, the Constitution was drafted by the ACLU. I'm getting tired of having my people - the founding people of this land - being written out of the history of my own country.

Michael said...

Too good! And you're right, any ellipsis would have destroyed the effect.

My real hope here is that more and more Harvard people will come out with garbage like this. As the years go by, everyone will lose respect Harvard, and we'll finally be free of Harvard idiocy and status-consciousnesss.

kurt said...

Ralph Peters predicted this sea change in European attitudes towards Islam a few years ago in one of his NY Post columns. He was roundly criticized by both the Left and the Right for this at the time, which told me that he was probably correct.

testing99 said...

What is going on is the rather degraded, debased, decadent elite, which has held power based on pandering to various weak Oprah-like social notions, popular with women: social ostracism, Queen Bee-ism, fashion/fads, status, etc. as a substitute for traditionally effective policies of law and order, are coming apart.

The ruling post 1945 coalition was based on women being the slightly larger demographic slice, and enacting policies and politics they like, that empowers them by using such tools as ostracism, etc. which Feldman tries here.

That coalition is now under severe threat as the Muslims imported to be cheap labor are intent in turning Europe into variations of Iran or Egypt or Saudi Arabia. Which is provoking a populist backlash. Which will unseat the ruling coalition.

Hence the desire to preserve the coalition (feminists, gays, marxists, etc) by using the traditional tools of ostracism and "you're not cool." Which break down when the threat is obvious and only a physical response will work.

neon said...

The British working class a have huge problem with Jamaicans and all foreigners in general, including white ones. What planet do you live on? The saying is "Wogs start at Calais."

Right now the BNP's strongest area of support is in an area with few Muslims but huge immigration of non-Muslim Africans.

alex said...

Feldman interviewed Steven Pinker at a Jewish cultural center in New York as part of Pinker's presentation on the Ashkenazi IQ-Tay-Sachs study. Feldman didn't clearly state a position on the thesis but he clearly considered it a possibility. It's still incredible to me how people can come that close to the fact of group differences and still be completely clueless as to their implications.

Dedalus said...

"And in the U.S., which on Sept. 11 suffered much greater terrorist damage than any European country ever has, anti-Muslim bias does not have the political weight that it does in Europe."

Missing the point entirely,ie;

Of Course!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of course they bombed US and not the place that isn't afraid to show their "bias." The writer reveals the silliness of his point while in the middle of making it!

And why don't we have an anti-Muslim bias? Because we're tolerant and Democratic? Or because we've been force fed the inflexible, intolerant, autocratic, ideology of Political Correctness for over a generation?

An Ideology so corrupt, so dishonest, and ultimately so corrosive to Society in general and the Human Spirit in particular, that it masks its intolerance in "tolerance" and demonizes any and all opposition - in the name of Democracy!

But one should add, that this article is actually works to vindicate those on the opposition who have been accussed of paranoia when saying that many of the Liberal-Left-Neocon Leviathan hate Whites so much they would prefer a Muslim Europe and a Mexican America.
After this article it can no longer be considered paranoid to state that many of the Liberal-Left-Neocons, particularly those who are Jewish, will do ANYTHING to make sure the United States and Western Europe never again have a healthy, vibrant, well-organized and self-confident White, non-Jewish, Population.

Dedalus said...

"the existence of this guy is just more evidence that the faculty of Harvard should be given more useful jobs, like picking spinach, and Harvard should be burnt to the ground and plowed with radioactive salt."

I erupted in laughter after reading the above.

And ya gotta admit, the thought does have its charms.

grizzlie antagonist said...

Liberal and leftist Jews in general are a pain to me as a Jewish American, regardless of what is the subject under discussion.

I'm proud of my ancestry but ashamed of most of my contemporaries and don't wish to be associated with them.

SAVANT said...

It beggars belief that A Hravard Law Professor could have such unrealistic views. Hang on, let me withdraw that!

David said...

Nowhere does Feldman indicate that anti-immigrant views are factually false.

Readers may feel he implies it, but he doesn't.

Nowhere does Feldman argue against anti-immigrant views.

So, what do we have here? A case of "point and sputter"? Not exactly. The tone of the article is not particularly indignant. I would classify it as smug.

What the article represents is an ideologue entirely detached from reality, making a report of ideological divergence. No matter that the dissidents' views are (largely) factually accurate. No matter that the ideology has no answer to them. The dissidents diverged; therefore, they are wrong.

Or in the style of less atypical leftists: WRONG WRONG WRONG (evil!).

anony-mouse said...

1/ Noah Feldman says that no MP would limit the ability of Ashkenazi Jews to marry.

He's right. Because as he well knows well the Jewish community has set up programs to test its members for such genetic diseases as Tay-Sachs, and itself discourages carriers from marrying and having children. I know of no similar Islamic movement that discourages cousin marriage.

Fortunately Feldman has protected his offspring from such danger by marrying Gentile.

Apparently the idea of marrying one's cousins does not appeal to Feldman personally, only publicly.

2/ I'm surprised Steve didn't mention that Feldman was an advisor to Bremer's Coalition Provisional Authority, a tremendous success due to Feldman's deep knowledge of Islam.

3/ One part that Steve should have edited out was the alleged interwar belief in Jews' criminality, this being an occcasional to frequent topic of this blog.

c23 said...

I did a little more research on Feldman, and I found out that he's some intellectual big shot, not just a random columnist for the NY Times.

Shmuley Boteach:


"Noah Feldman was a brilliant, Orthodox Jewish Rhodes scholar who arrived in Oxford in my fourth year as rabbi there in 1992....Noah was one of the most accomplished young students I had ever met. He was valedictorian of Harvard, a Rhodes and Truman scholar, and completed his Oxford doctorate in about 18 months, which may or may not be a university record...We all marveled every Shabbat at Noah's incredible ability to read any section of the Torah at our student synagogue. "

He was also on a list of the most influential thinkers in some magazine: http://nymag.com/news/features/influentials/16922/

He's also a tenured Harvard Law prof, not an easy job to get.

I came to a realization several years ago that our best and brightest might as well be a bunch of morons. At least they're not trying to irrigate farms with Brawndo, the thirst mutilator.

Anonymous said...

Feldman is the guy writing the Iraqi constitution folks. He is married to Jeannie Suk, an Asian Law Professor at Harvard.

I cannot believe we are letting this guy write Iraq's constituion. He is a globalists par excellance.

Its easy for the elite to call for open immigration in the age of gated communties, private schools, private clubs, private golf courses, exclusive "tiny-towns", and private security. This man is as far removed from Watts and South Central LA as one can be, but thinks that a great deal more Africans, South Americans, Armenians, Russians, Pakinstanis, Indians, and Chinese would make South Central more cohesive and not less.................gimme a break. If all you look at is the Ivory Tower, the refextion must make you go blind.

rec1man said...

The British working class a have huge problem with Jamaicans and all foreigners in general, including white ones. What planet do you live on? The saying is "Wogs start at Calais."

--

A few years ago, when the PC authorities were trying to shut down BNP on grounds of racism, several hindus and sikhs offered to become 'associate members' of BNP, because the BNP is the only party willing to speak the truth about islam

The hindus and sikhs feel that it is virtually impossible for the BNP to actually win a majority in Parliament, however, at the local level, a BNP win would likely trim back the muslims

About 5 years ago, I spent 3 months, helping Nick Griffin of the BNP ( using emails ) decipher the koran and hadiths and muslim behavior patterns based on the Indian encounter with islam

Anonymous said...

LemmusLemmus, Muslims arent trying to take over per se. Its just the combined effect of their immigration, higher birth rates and the eunuchs in control of government policy in Europe. Obviously if Muslims ever 'took over' a European country they would soon destroy all the things that attracted them there in the first place. That doesnt mean they wouldnt do it.

I dont believe there is a Jewish conspiracy, its just that all things being equal they tend to behave in a manner that adds up to a degradation of the west, but makes them feel more comfortable. Even if that backfires on them in the long run.

Anonymous said...

Neon - "The British working class a have huge problem with Jamaicans and all foreigners in general, including white ones."

People seem to get on well with the Poles. They have fitted in far better in a couple of years than generations of Muslims.

Jamaicans, I think thats a numbers game. In big towns/cities in very black areas there might be a problem. Elsewhere, where there few Afro-Caribbeans ie there isnt a black 'community' they seem to fit in well with the indigenous working class.

Right now the BNP's strongest area of support is in an area with few Muslims but huge immigration of non-Muslim Africans."

Exactly, Africans not Afro_Caribbeans.

Bill said...

Feldman is the guy writing the Iraqi constitution folks. He is married to Jeannie Suk, an Asian Law Professor at Harvard.

The extreme arrogance of Feldman, a man who thinks he can, as a religious and ethnic outsider, formulate the supreme law of a foreign land, exposes Feldman's fundamental stupidity.

As I get a bit older, I am starting to understand certain elements of particularism, so I can see why Feldman's Orthodox fellows shun his reckless, ill-advised forays into unwelcome territory.

Hiring men like this to undertake such sensitive international matters is a serious mistake. America's national interests are not playthings for facile scholars with adolescent sentiments.

Anonymous said...

What is to be done with the "virtual caliphate"?

Some thoughts on the new paper published by the Centre for Social Cohesion over on the BrugesGroupBlog.

http://brugesgroup.blogspot.com/2008/06/what-is-to-be-done-about-virtual.html

Enjoy.

Pericles

Anonymous said...

"Feldman is the guy writing the Iraqi constitution folks. He is married to Jeannie Suk, an Asian Law Professor at Harvard."

The Iraqi Constitution was written (past tense) and ratified by Iraqis three years ago. Feldman was briefly an adviser to the Iraqis writing the constitution. He was one of several experts chosen by Paul Bremer for this job. Feldman is a Rhodes Scholar, former Supreme Court clerk, and law professor who happens to be fluent in Arabic (he studied the language at Oxford, after graduating from Harvard and before attending Yale Law School).

Regarding his NY Times article, I stopped reading when I got to the sentence about how 60 years after the Holocaust Europe still hasn't learned to deal with outsiders. By the time of the Holocaust, Jews had lived in Europe for over a thousand years, and in Germany, Austria, France, and most other central and western European countries, had been well-integrated since they were emancipated in the 19th Century. They were hardly outsiders at that point. France had a Jewish prime minister; Germany had had Jewish mayors, police chiefs, cabinet officials, etc. Many prominent German Jews were patriotic Germans, and maintained their affinity for German culture and faith in the German people even after the rise of Hitler (e.g., the Warburgs, one of whom, Eric Warburg, later saved the German city of Lubeck from destruction during WWII).

Any comparison with Muslims attracted by menial jobs and generous welfare who want to bring primitive practices like slaughtering sheep into Europe is specious.

Chaim

simon said...

lemmuslemmus - all of them, but notably Sweden, the Netherlands, Norway and Britain. Certainly Britain, since I live here and I see it first-person. Of course it can be hard to distinguish Muslim-led initiatives from cultural-Marxist led ones; when pork is banned by the University of Leicester or Dudley council bans depictions of pigs, these are done in the name of 'tolerance'. When the Imans say they're going to take us over or I see 'youth' on the street in 'Serve Allah' t-shirts it's less ambiguous though. Also low-level violence leading to ethnic cleansing has started in some areas, such as Stepney Green in east London.

simon said...

neon:
"The British working class a have huge problem with Jamaicans and all foreigners in general..."

I'd have thought that until I spent a couple of years amongst them ca 1998-2000, and to a lesser extent subsequently. The police traditionally have disliked Jamaicans - been 'institutionally racist' because of their high violent crime rates, but I was surprised by the complete lack of antipathy towards Afro-Caribbeans combined with a great deal of hostility towards Pakistanis. Incidentally I saw an Economist article saying the same thing a couple of years ago. This might have been different in 1970 but it's definitely the case now. If you look at the BNP website there is now pretty much no anti-black stuff there now, it's all anti-Muslims.

Simon said...

"Right now the BNP's strongest area of support is in an area with few Muslims but huge immigration of non-Muslim Africans."

Oh, I think this refers to Barking & Dagenham. As I recall the problem is that the local authority gives preferntial housing to immigrants over native whites who already have houses; the natives feel cheated out of the birthright they were promised after WW2 - "homes fit for heroes"; ie permanent government housing, either free (if you don't work) or cheap (if you do). Many of these African immigrants are middle class (eg) Nigerian Christians, they do work and are quite successful. Seeing their affluence the whites, who mostly don't work and live off state benefits, resent and hate them more than they hate eg Somalis, who don't work. So it's a direct result of the welfare state and the politics of entitlement.

Simon said...

none of the above:
"One point worth noting here: I think people get a bigger reaction, the more different they are from the neighbors."

That's true - Irish Travellers (non-Roma gypsies) cause a huge amount of violent and property crime here in the UK, but most people don't know this because they look and sound like the natives or like other Irish.

James said...

"That's true - Irish Travellers (non-Roma gypsies) cause a huge amount of violent and property crime here in the UK, but most people don't know this because they look and sound like the natives or like other Irish."

I think you'll find that there is a long helf distrust of the 'pikies' especially in the countryside. This is hardly a prejudice, since they really do act that way.

At the moment there seems to be a moaning about anti-'traveller' prejudice by certain agencies and bodies that you usually see complaining about racism.

Michael 'the Dago' T said...

rec1man: In 1965, Raspail, a French author in his book camp of saints, about 3rd world immigration , painted hindus as the villains

With the result, the french imported muslims for factory work



Hahahaha. Seems the rays of the sun are no match for the blinding powers of ethnic self-interest.

Yeah, recman, I just bet Raspail's banging his head against his desk thinking, "The Muslims, the Muslims, why didn't I write 'The Muslims'"!

Too funny.

Anonymous said...

"Its easy for the elite to call for open immigration in the age of gated communties, private schools, private clubs, private golf courses, exclusive "tiny-towns", and private security."

This is certainly true but allow me to add yet another facet to this ability of the elite to duck the inevitable results of their multi-culti nonsense. I frequent a policy wonk blog that deals largely with borrrrrrrrrrring subjects like transportation, development, education, health care, etc and which occasionally ventures into an area like illegal immigration, mainly as to how it affects one of the above subjects.

I was not surprised to see that many of these well-heeled and well-educated bloggers were fairly tolerant of illegal immigration because they had the resources to avoid most of the chaos that naturally followed massive unskilled immigration, legal or illegal. THEIR kids' schools weren't being affected. THEIR neighborhoods weren't being slummified. THEIR salaries weren't being depressed. But a couple of recent postings kind of caught me off-guard.

One of them ventured the fact that he was more or less putting together an escape plan in case the good ol' USA took a turn for the worse. Then others piped up that, yeah, they too were looking around as well. It seems that in addition to being able to avoid the local chaos that their stupid policies create, they at least THINK that they will be able to transfer their assets and then themselves to "a better place" in case they trash this one, this one being the entire USA!

They may be in for a surprise should this day ever arrive but this assumption at least explains their indifference to transforming the US into a third world country.....

headache said...

"alex said...
Feldman interviewed Steven Pinker at a Jewish cultural center in New York as part of Pinker's presentation on the Ashkenazi IQ-Tay-Sachs study. Feldman didn't clearly state a position on the thesis but he clearly considered it a possibility. It's still incredible to me how people can come that close to the fact of group differences and still be completely clueless as to their implications."

Alex,
I'm sure Feldman knows EXACTLY what group differences mean. Has he ever called for open borders in Israel, or mass immigration of Arabs to Israel? Its just he gives a shit if whites get swamped and gouged by Muslims and blacks. As long as the Tribe is safe. In fact I bet he is actively working towards a situation where European culture does not exist anymore. His type have a pathological hatred towards anything European.

LemmusLemmus said...

Simon,

"all of them, but notably Sweden, the Netherlands, Norway and Britain."

I live in Germany and I can assure you there is no "taking over" going on here despite a large Turkish population. The only thing I can think of that remotely fits your description is the recent case of a (female) German judge ruling that it was sort of o.k. for a Muslim husband to beat his wife because the Koran said so - which caused a huge outrage. (Her interpretation of the Koran was contested.)

In Germany, Turks are underachieving in school and underachieving in the job market; if they are taking over they are using a very creative strategy.

"Certainly Britain, since I live here and I see it first-person."

I lived in Britain 1997-98 and sensed nothing of the sort, but admittedly, that was ten years ago.

"Of course it can be hard to distinguish Muslim-led initiatives from cultural-Marxist led ones; when pork is banned by the University of Leicester or Dudley council bans depictions of pigs, these are done in the name of 'tolerance'."

I don't know these cases, but to me it sounds a bit like the problem is more that institutions are going out of their way to be politically correct. Which may be what you mean by "cultural Marxism"; I'm not familiar with the term.

"When the Imans say they're going to take us over or I see 'youth' on the street in 'Serve Allah' t-shirts it's less ambiguous though."

There are certainly some fanatic Imams (who have followers) who should be deported if legally possible. Whe had such a case in Germany. (The "hate preacher of Cologne".) But stating intentions is not the same as pulling something off. I wouldn't be more worried about "serve Allah" t-shirts than I would be about "serve Jesus" t-shirts.

I don't understand your last sentence.

Z said...

Why does he repeatedly (and I mean REPEATEDLY) compare modern anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe to Nazi era anti-Semitism?

It's a ridiculous and inapt comparison because it is meant to draw similarities between people who wish to protect their borders, cultures, and economies with the Nazi thugs of the past.

According to the NYT and so many other of these one-worlders, if you oppose millions of immigrants (many of them illegal) swarming in to your nation you are on the same level as the Nazis. So laughable.

simon said...

lemmuslemmus:
"I lived in Britain 1997-98 and sensed nothing of the sort, but admittedly, that was ten years ago."

I sensed nothing of the sort either until post-9/11, especially from about 2004 on. The Iraq invasion really helped it metastasise.

Having grown up in Northern Ireland where Protestants and Catholics struggle for dominance I probably have more awareness of ethno-religious dominance strategies than many western Europeans, most of whom seem incredibly oblivious, except for the politically powerless working class.

"In Germany, Turks are underachieving in school and underachieving in the job market; if they are taking over they are using a very creative strategy."

I don't know much about the German situation, but the usual tactics are demographic - breeding faster than rivals; violence and ethnic cleansing, and control of political institutions and media. This isn't unique to Islam, you see similar in many other cases of inter-ethnic conflict. Certainly these are all factors in Northern Ireland's sectarian conflict.

Anonymous said...

feldman married an oriental:
http://www.pdsoros.org/fellows.cfm?year=2001#Jeannie

he kind of looks like harpo marx...

so he must actually buy into it...

But seriously how can someone be so...stupid? blinded by idealogy? or knowingly telling the 'big lie'?

Anonymous said...

ps, look what scholarship his wife won:
Who is eligible to become a Fellow?

A New American is an individual who (1) is a resident alien, i.e., holds a Green Card; or, (2) has been naturalized as a US citizen, or (3) is the child of two parents who are both naturalized citizens.

The Program is open to individuals who retain loyalty and a sense of commitment to their country of origin as well as to the United States, but is intended to support individuals who will continue to regard the United States as their principal residence and focus of national identity.


get that? there's a scholarship for recent immigrants who retain loyalty to their country...old wasps like me aren't eligible. Isn't america great?

rob said...

individuals who retain loyalty and a sense of commitment to their country of origin as well as to the United States

That is very interesting, as anyone who is a naturalized citizen took an oath that the have no loyalty to their former country.

rec1man said...

michael dago said
--
rec1man: In 1965, Raspail, a French author in his book camp of saints, about 3rd world immigration , painted hindus as the villains

With the result, the french imported muslims for factory work


Hahahaha. Seems the rays of the sun are no match for the blinding powers of ethnic self-interest.

Yeah, recman, I just bet Raspail's banging his head against his desk thinking, "The Muslims, the Muslims, why didn't I write 'The Muslims'"!

Too funny.

---

The british, also due to closer religion, had a much better opinion of muslims than hindus, from Rudyard Kipling to Churchill
and so in 1950, as first choice for factory workers, the UK imported millions of pakistani muslims and they imported some sikh factory workers and almost no hindus. The Gujurati Patel hindus came in 1972 as refugees from Uganda where they held UK passports

Blode said...

In answer to your question, lemmuslemmus:
http://damp.mono.net/
"Many danes feel this strange, because Denmark has not have muslim government before- but we can assure you that everything will be better in muslim Denmark:"

(I'd love to get a Dane to tell me if the Danish on that site is as terrible as the English.)

"No drugs,no crime, peace, and humanity- instead of drug culture,immorality,possibly human rights crimes and violence which we have now."

(Yeah, right, I'm sure the Muslims will have no problem winning the @#%#! drug war without any human rights violations.)

Of course, the last time I argued that it was unfair for Muslims numbering over 1 billion to plan the annexation of a country numbering 5 million, the self-described Shi'ite cleric I was arguing with said it was okay because of what they did to the Muslims.

I asked exactly what the Danes had done to the Muslims. (This was before the Jutland Post cartoons.) He responded by talking about colonialism, of course ... carried out by countries other than Denmark. Not only are Euros being punished for what their ancestors did, but Euros are being punished for what other Euros did. White guilt knows no bounds of time or space.

Which doesn't even touch on the bizarreness of the fact that there are Muslim immigrants who evidently consider their mere presence to be a form of punishment. Something like, "Your ancestors wronged my ancestors, so it's your just deserts to have to live next to me! Ha ha ha!" Incalculable self-esteem problems?

David said...

rob said

That is very interesting, as anyone who is a naturalized citizen took an oath that the have no loyalty to their former country.

Nothing is more important to the United States than Israel. Israel's security is America's paramount mission. We've heard and read these statements by various American senators and representatives and diplomats, over and over and over - many of them have family ties to Israel, and/or are dual citizens.

Oath? Kol Nidre. Constitution? Just a g-d damned piece of paper. Disagree? You're a racist terrorist.

Thatz Amurica 2008!

Hey - what happened to my country?

free love and marxism said...

"It seems that in addition to being able to avoid the local chaos that their stupid policies create, they at least THINK that they will be able to transfer their assets and then themselves to "a better place" in case they trash this one, this one being the entire USA! "

Interesting, I keep trying to decide which state or group of states will be the last refuge giving up on alternate countries several years ago. From what I read, most Western countries have the same lousy record with 3rd world immigration and the increasing problem of the children of these immigrants not fitting into society. The state where I reside is going to be a total loss. Today I had a moment of hope as I watched tattooed, aging gang members (bulging veins in their arms and the beginnings of laugh lines were the clue) file into the used bookstore. Then I noticed they were all milling about in one area, the used movies, games and music section. The graphics arts books were strategically placed nearby, just in case anyone wanted to seek out a new tattoo design.

This demographic has become dominant in the past 5 years. There are still some depopulated states in the Midwest that haven't been invaded but that will change soon unless we have a depression. As far as another country in which to escape, are there any who don't have just another variation on our open borders for illiterate, unskilled and demanding hordes?

Anonymous said...

Simon,
The fact is that Nigerians living in Britain have a much higher rate of unemployment than do the indigenous population.
Secondly, Dagenham, as we know contains Europe's biggest socialized housing estate.I was built in the 1930s by ENGLISH workers for ENGLISH families.Yes, it was part of the post World War 1 compact from the British Government of that time to build good, cheap accomdation - available in perpetuity - to the men and their descendants who had suffered so grieviously in that war.
The New Labour government simply spis in the face of the millions of englishmen who died or were mutilated in that terrible conflict.

rec1man said...

anon said
--

LemmusLemmus, Muslims arent trying to take over per se. Its just the combined effect of their immigration, higher birth rates and the eunuchs in control of government policy in Europe.

---

Wrong, in every mosque the mullahs preach to outbreed the natives
The reason they keep their women illiterate is because illiterate women breed more

In India, mullahs give prize money to muslim women who breed too much

tommy said...

n 1965, Raspail, a French author in his book camp of saints, about 3rd world immigration , painted hindus as the villains

With the result, the french imported muslims for factory work


Do you have some evidence for this? The more likely explanation would be France's long colonial history in the Maghreb and its geographical proximity to the region. I don't get the sense French elites ever took Raspail very seriously.

Anonymous said...

Raspail's point was about what mass immigration would do to his country; not that the Hindoos, alone, were the ones to avoid bringing.

rec1man's just another ethnic activist, a Hindoo-booster in his case, which I guess is a pleasant enough change (for change's sake) from hispanics and muslims telling you how great they are for your county.

simon said...

anon:
"The New Labour government simply spits in the face of the millions of englishmen who died or were mutilated in that terrible conflict."

That's certainly true. It was true to a lesser degree of previous postwar governments also.

But I do think socialised housing and welfare have had a degrading effect on the British working class. One thing about council housing is that it's really hard to move house, once you're in, you're stuck. This makes it very hard to move to find work. And the viability of living off welfare for single mothers has destroyed two-parent families and had a degrading effect comparable to the African-American experience in the USA.

That does not mean that the working class inhabitants of Barking & Dagenham and elsewhere don't have legitimate grievances. They certainly do. A good example is Tower Hamlets, where housing policy was deliberately changed (from 'community' to 'need' basis) to promote the replacement of indigenous English by Bangladeshi immigrants, and now is being changed again to prevent the displacement of those same Bangladeshis by newer east-European arrivals.

simon said...

anon:
"rec1man's just another ethnic activist, a Hindoo-booster in his case..."

Well, he has a good case. I live in an area of London with a large working class Tamil Hindu population; and though they are not the most able of minorities, they are much better and less scary neighbours than the Muslims just up the road. They are not seething with hatred of us (luckily we're not involved in the Sri Lanka conflict!), back in the 2006 World Cup they were supporting the England team and even flying the England flag from their cars and houses; I still remember fondly the golden Ganesha statue in the window of a high street shop with twin England flags sprouting from its back.

Anonymous said...

Simon - a cynic would note that immigrants absorbing housing and displacing those already in the queue is only becoming a real issue now. Why? Because its the spectacle of white immigrants displacing non-white Brits. For the PC brigade fretting over that is almost as good as sex.

rec1man said...

Another positive aspect of the hindu tamils
From what I heard, they successfully liberated several muslim no-go areas in London, which the PC cops could not do anything about

I have also heard that in some areas, the sikhs keep the muslims under control

In India, the threshold for street violence is 30% muslims in a locality, whereas in the west, it is 5% muslims and bad things start to happen

Anonymous said...

"One thing about council housing is that it's really hard to move house, once you're in, you're stuck. "

And it's even worse if you work hard and actually buy the house. You will get to enjoy your retirement watching the estate being swarmed under a tide of chavs and 'BMEs'.

simon said...

For lemmuslemmus, one example of what's happening in east London -
http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/content/newham/recorder/news/story.aspx?brand=RECOnline&category=newsTowerHam&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newsnewham&itemid=WeED24%20Jun%202008%2011%3A24%3A52%3A017

Personally I'd like to punch the judge.

Anonymous said...

Simon - that link didnt work for me. Is this the story you meant:

"A DRUNKEN teenager who took part in a vicious gang attack on an Anglican clergyman has walked free from court.

Babul Islam, 19, was one of three Asian youths who assaulted Canon Michael Ainsworth in his churchyard at St George-in-the-East Church in Shadwell.

Father-of-four Mr Ainsworth, 57, spent 12 days in hospital after he was kicked and punched in the head in what was described at the time as a "faith-hate" attack on March 5 this year."

One wonders how that story would have played had it been 3 white youths attacking an Islamic cleric. Just the same of course...

simon said...

anon - yep, that's the one. I used to work in that area when it was Islamising but before the ethnic cleansing started. Glad I don't work there now.