Imagine Paris without the Eiffel Tower. Imagine Paris without the Louvre, the Arc Du Triomph, without Notre Dame. Try to imagine France without baguettes, or even the French language. These are all things which have historical and cultural relevance for French people, they belong to French people, they are what we think of when we think of France. The ancient Gaulic influence is still to be seen despite Gaul having been conquered by the Franks in the 5th century (around the fall of the Western Roman Empire). It became a separate country in the 9th century. If a case can be made for any country’s sovereignty, France is a fine example. But what is France, really? What is a country? Can’t we all just get along? Can any country be said to belong to the people who inhabit it, who have shaped it and been shaped by it? Is a national border a real and valid thing?
There are now Muslim neighborhoods in France that are impassable to French people. Clearly, they like borders and and multiculturalism applies to their host country, but not to them. They have not accepted and understood French people. Violence is decidedly one-sided, while French media continues to be “fair”. There are 66 million people living in France, of which 5.1 million are considered immigrants. Immigration numbers have held steady since 1970, but increasingly since the 90’s, immigrants to France are coming from predominantly Muslim countries; 31% from North African countries and smaller numbers from other Muslim countries. But massive protests are taking place now. Why? A Pew Research poll from 2007 found that 16% of Muslims in France support suicide attacks and other violence against civilian targets at least sometimes, including 6% supporting such attacks “often.” That was eight years ago and nothing has changed except the number of Muslims in France — six million, in fact. It has been said many times that not all Muslims are extremists, but that 16% percent represents hundreds of thousands of people in France who see the French as infidels, as all non-Muslims are infidels who need to be punished.
In her book, When Democracy and Islam Meet: Muslims in Europe and in the U.S. Jocelyne Cesari takes French people to task for taking issue with the lack of integration among immigrants. In the ideology of multiculturalism, assimilation and integration are bad words, because displaced people come from rich cultural backgrounds; they don’t want to lose that culture. Cesari says — and multicultural doctrine iterates — that French people are complicit in the Charlie Hebdo attack (and indeed all attacks from immigrants) because of their racist, imperialist attitudes, that if French people could be more accommodating to Muslims, things like this wouldn’t happen. As French people have become increasingly concerned about the loss of their own cultural identity, the same rules don’t apply. They are in no way to consider themselves entitled to the receiving end of multicultural ideals.
Dictionary.com defines multiculturalism as: “the view that the various cultures in a society merit equal respect and scholarly interest. It became a significant force in American society in the 1970s and 1980s as African-Americans, Latinos, and other ethnic groups explored their own history.” Is that deliberately obtuse, or is Dictionary.com written by middle-school teachers? It’s true that the U.S. has a longer history of diversity than other predominantly white countries, but multiculturalism’s ideas are 30 to 40 years old in Europe, Sweden, Canada… Consider that Doug Collins’ “Immigration: The Destruction Of English Canada” was written in 1979. In it, Collins quotes Norman Cafik, the Minister for Multiculturalism who in a letter to the Toronto Sun in February 1979 wrote: “(Canada’s) multiculturalism policy rests firmly on the foundations that there are, in fact, no founding peoples.”
It wasn’t that ethnic minorities in Canada began to look at their own history. In fact, Canada’s immigration policies changed drastically in the 1970’s. Multiculturalist ideas and new immigrants arrived at the same time. Immigration Watch Canada, showing restraint, calls Canada’s immigration policies “a social engineering experiment that is conducted on Canada’s mainstream population in order to make it a minority.” Canada’s immigration intake is the highest per capita in the world.
In an article in the Globe and Mail titled “Why Canada Needs a Flood of Immigrants”, Joe Friesen criticizes Canada’s low immigration numbers and states: “The nation’s great challenge will be to locate and attract the people Canada needs, give them rich opportunities and integrate them into communities, but also to understand and embrace the ways they will reshape this country.”
1.5 million Canadians are, in fact, looking for work. Many Canadians must compete with the “Employment Equity for Visible Minorities” programme. Job fairs are held for “new Canadians” to keep them in the country, while many Canadian nationals are giving up on job searches. Job participation for Canadian people is at an all time low.
England is suffering an onslaught of immigration widely opposed by English people. Fifty percent of British people believe that foreigners are coming to the country to claim welfare benefits, and think that immigrants should wait two to three years for benefits. Immigration has risen sharply in the last 15 years, and is at an all time high. As in other countries, the media reports on immigrant heartache and seems mystified by the attitudes of citizens. Penny Young, the chief executive of NatCen Social Research, said: “In an increasingly diverse, multicultural country, we might expect people to be more relaxed about what it means to be British, yet the trend is going in the opposite direction.” (The Guardian; British attitudes harden towards immigrants. June 17, 2014)
Well, the best official argument to reality is denial, as in last year’s heartrending story of 1,400 children, some as young as 11, in the town of Rotherham sexually abused and trafficked out of the city as prostitutes by a gang of “asian” men over a period of 16 years. In reality, all of the perpetrators were Pakistani Islamists. Police ignored or openly derided victims over the years. During an investigation, many police and other staff said that they were wary of investigating or were told not to by superiors for fear of being labelled “racist”. The rise in non-European immigrants and fear of being labeled a racist closely coincide. If you just replace Dolores Umbridge’s Ministry of Magic with the Magic of Multiculturalism…
…Then you get these headlines from Sweden, where reported incidences of rape have gone up 300 (three hundred!) percent: “Man, 27, acquitted of raping 13 year old girl because she looked ‘well-developed’” (independent.co.uk, Mar 16, 2015). “Gang-rape acquittal verdict rocks Sweden” — in which 6 teenagers kept a 15 year old girl in a closet; it was decided that she had not fought hard enough (zeenews.india.com, Oct 2, 2013). Also, 8 men rape a woman on a ferry and the court decides that she wanted to have sex with eight men at once. Or the Swedish woman raped on broken glass. The only country in the world with more rapes is Lesotho in southern Africa.
What’s really magik about the headlines is that all of the rapists are described as either “men”, “teenagers”, or “Swedish men”. The ferry rapists were Swedish citizens, but they were also Muslims. As immigration has risen, crime has skyrocketed, but the official line is that there is no connection. 25% of crimes are committed by people born overseas, while almost 20 percent are committed by those born in Sweden to one or two parents born abroad, with North Africa and the Middle East overly represented. Official explanations for the shocking rise is that women have become more willing to report rapes, because there has been a change in the definition of rape, and that Swedish men have begun feeling emasculated in the progressive Swedish culture. Magical thinking at it’s finest. Here’s a better headline: “Multiculturalism is Raping Women in Sweden” (thenewantifederalist.com Mar 4, 2015). You can say it: Voldemort has returned.
“Bulldozers worked throughout the night to clear away grass and to pull up trees to make the park ready to receive the large white marquees provided by the German Red Cross to house some… 2,000 refugees.” (“Residents wake up to find overnight, city park has been turned into migrant camp for 2,000” — Oliver Lane, Breitbart Jul 25, 2015). Stories abound for public consumption of the lives of immigrant women and families, but actual statistics of those living in the tent city tell a different story: 79.3 percent are men, 12.4 percent are women, and 8.3 percent are children. The German government is now admitting that they made a mistake in numbers of immigrants, that infrastructure and police are inadequate to the situation.
And more people are coming. Municipal buildings, schools, churches and even city parks in Germany’s great cities and small towns are being used as refugee centers. There is talk of housing refugees on ships. German people are frustrated and upset. And frightened; yet mainstream news headlines say things like this: “Dresden Anti-Immigration Protests Cause Tension In Muslim Community.” (NPR, Mar 06, 2015) In the transcript, Audie Cornish says, “By December, upwards of 25,000 people were marching in these protests against the so-called Islamization of Europe, even though Muslims make up less than 1 percent of the population of Dresden.” Perhaps, but they make up 18% of the country, taking in almost as many immigrants as the United States.
In an article titled “Massive Anti-Islam, Anti-Immigration Protests Sweep City” by Beenish Ahmed (ThinkProgress, Dec 23, 2014), Saxony Interior Minister Markus Ulbig is quoted: “We cannot label 10,000 people as right-wing extremists. That creates more problems than it solves” He calls them middle-class citizens and says that they are not neo-Nazis. It is the only I have yet found which acknowledges “the fear that national identities are being lost to waves of immigrants is being stoked across Europe… Nationalistic parties are also on the rise in Denmark, Austria, Finland, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Serbia.”
Somehow it will be different for the U.S… Right? We are trying so hard to be inclusive, to be multicultural and politically correct, to be socially sensitive. We don’t want to deport pregnant women, or children, or parents of children. Besides, we are a nation of immigrants; we have no culture and no history of our own. We are living in a country whose citizens are obliged to awaken every day into the hazy wash of guilt over it’s history of intolerance and unmitigated greed. The best way to atone for those sins is to change the way we think about ourselves, about the grand entitlements we were all born into, and to embrace other cultures. Of course, by “we” I don’t mean to refer to U.S. citizens in general, but the rules of engagement are that I can’t single anyone out. I do not intend to include anyone who doesn’t deserve it with the guilty, or to exclude anyone from the American diaspora – and by “embrace” I mean accept as valid, remove one’s own deeply rooted worldview from limiting any other worldview in any way, helping in any way you can; not actually embracing anything. In fact, one should keep a respectful distance to guard against any infractions, such as admiring a style of dress, thereby implying that such a person is not and never will be a “real American”. What does it all mean? How do we scale this wall of self-denial and carve out a place of respect and acceptance for all people? And by “all” I mean all. As in white Christians and men, too. Is there anything on the other side, or is it just a sheer drop into an abyss? We need an answer to this.
Immigrants accounted for 13 percent of the total 316 million U.S. residents; adding the U.S.-born children (of all ages) of immigrants means that approximately 80 million people, or one-quarter of the overall U.S. population, is either of the first or second generation. Everyone wants to point out that Mexican immigration is waning, so that we can focus on this one border and avoid larger issues, but annual immigration is holding steady at an all time high. (Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the United States, Feb 26, 2015; By Jie Zong and Jeanne Batalova; Migration Policy Institute).
I would like to bring this to a logical conclusion, but it’s not allowed. It is acceptable to discuss other countries and what has gone wrong there, but there is no way, no way to discuss real events in one’s own country, whatever that country may be. I should leave a vague specter hanging in the air like a cobweb for you to shiver at and brush aside.
Pew Research has estimated that immigration will cause the population of U.S. Muslims to more than double over the next two decades — from 2.6 million in 2010 to 6.2 million in 2030. This demographic change is entirely the product of legal admissions — that is, it is a formal policy of the federal government adopted by Congress. Add to that that very year the United Stated admits 70,000 asylees and refugees. Arabic is the most common language spoken by refugees (“Arabic: Most common language of refugees in America”; by Alex Swoyer, Breitbart, Apr 2, 2015). While Pew Research neglected to include the U.S. in its polling of Muslim immigrants’ opinions on sharia law, there is no reason to believe that Muslims in the U.S. have vastly differing views of sharia than immigrants to other countries. Muslims are seeking Sharia law in the United States in many states and on many issues. It is safe to say that we do not yet have problems as massive as France, Germany or Sweden. And we can breathe a sigh of relief to hear about legislation in Irving Texas and other cities to make sure that no laws, religious or foreign, supercede American laws and the Constitution. Perhaps it won’t be too little, too late for us.
Mayor of Beth Van Duyne of Irving, TX says of her legislative efforts: “Our nation cannot be so overly sensitive in defending other cultures that we stop protecting our own. The American Constitution and our guaranteed rights reigns supreme in our nation and may that ever be the case.” Of course there has been some backlash, but proponents of these measures feel vindicated when Muslims, in particular cry foul.
Portland’s mayor wants sharia friendly home loans. Many Muslims want sharia-friendly divorce proceedings.They want food banks to be halal-friendly and fast food restaurants to be halal certified. Many displaced Muslims say they would rather be back in their home countries; even American children of immigrants who have known no other country.
Interestingly, it’s this second generation that feels alienated in this country, and that experience can be a polarizing one. The search for acceptance for a displaced Muslim youth could lead them to the darkness of ISIS or something similar, and we have seen this happen. Here’s the key, and it was given to us by Muslims: Multicultural societies don’t work. It isn’t ethnicity that causes trouble; it’s culture. Americans do have a culture, with values, dreams, and laws that are envied worldwide. And it’s this little light in the darkness that gets in the way of us truly embracing some foreign ideologies over our own. We are a people. And historically, we’ve been world-class assimilators. We need to be allowed to do that. We need to remember that we have a culture worth belonging to, and we should demand that our immigration policies reflect our commitment to these ideals. The multicultural narrative is that we are a nation of immigrants, and that we have nothing of our own, that we are spiritually and morally and artistically bankrupt, that all of our inventions and historically were got at the expense of someone else, someone other, that essentially we have nothing. If we look to another culture for answers, we are guilty of trying to appropriate it.
If it’s historying we’re arguing, Gauls and Angles can be traced back to the horizon of prehistory. If it’s religion, Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity, younger than any other religion. If it’s culture, we’re the only country to have produced Michael Jackson. If it’s Imperialism, the Ottoman expansion of Islam was massive and brutal, by far uglier than the conquest of India by the British. This could go on for miles; I’m not saying we’re all perfect, but we are not less perfect than any other country and you know it, and we are worse off if we maintain otherwise. It doesn’t mean that we don’t continue our discourses while trying to be better people every day. But if we start every day in the red in spite of our best efforts, there’s no way we’ll get ahead. Perhaps with our newfound self-respect we’ll find the will to stand up to bullies in our own government and abroad so that our children don’t endure what Syria and Sweden are living through right now. It’s okay to do the right thing and not the nice thing.