|
“European” hate crimes and the “conservative” blindness to ethnic reality
In two separate items written within two days, two “conservatives” demonstrate exactly the same illusion about the causes of ethnic conflict. Columnist Diana West complains about group-think among successful Latino actors in New York who tout their ethnicity and their victimization in everything they do, and among Moslems in Britain who blame British “racism” when one of their community is arrested as an Al Qaeda terrorist, and who insist on his total innocence despite the bomb-making material found in his home. West writes about the group-think shown by these Hispanics and Moslems as though it were some free-floating quality that can afflict all people equally. The simple truth is that we are actively importing the group-think into the West by importing Moslems and other non-Westerners who do not share our Western style individualism. Yes, the group-think is being encouraged as well by leftist ideology and race-preference programs. But without the vast immigrant populations among us, the left would have had much less human “material” to propagandize and present as “victims.” In any case, Moslems required no Western multiculturalism to trigger their group-think, since they are already the most group-think oriented people on earth, believing that the community of Islam, the ummah, is literally identical with goodness and truth, and that all non-believers inhabit the realm of war where anything is permitted against them. The primary cause for the vast increase of group-think in our society is not our own supposed group-think (which is a phenomenon mainly limited to the left and the elites), but, to the contrary, our radical rejection of any group-consciousness, namely our commitment to universalist, race-blind individualism. In the name of pure individualism, we erased all cultural and national discriminations from our laws and our minds, and proceeded to open our borders to—no, not just to individualists (though some immigrants certainly are American-style individualists), but also to some of the most tribalistic people on earth, all the while refusing to see their tribalism for what it is because that would violate our belief that group differences don’t matter and that we should only look at people as individuals. If we want to lessen the group-think in our society, we must first of all identify the groups that the group-think comes from, and then stop and reverse the mass importation of those groups. In short, if we want to lessen the group-think presented by the non-Westerners among us, we must become more group-conscious ourselves. Along the same lines as the Diana West column, a well-known “conservative” blogger, linking to a Time magazine article on the increasingly violent Moslem attacks on Jews in Europe, headlines it this way:
PEACE-LOVING, LIBERAL EUROPE: Just chock-a-block with hate crimes and violence.The headline is meant to convey the idea that Europe’s pretensions to being peace-loving and liberal are a sham, because peace-loving, liberal Europe is committing these hate crimes. But of course it’s not Europeans who are committing the hate-crimes, but, overwhelmingly, Europe’s Moslems. The (formerly) Christian Europeans, out of a sincere belief in non-discriminatory peace and openness, permitted into their homeland millions of Moslems who hate Jews and who, as soon as their numbers become sufficient, wage jihad against all non-Moslems. It was genuine liberalism, not sham liberalism, that opened Europe’s doors to Moslem fanaticism. Today’s open-borders “conservatives” will never understand this staggeringly obvious point. For today’s “conservatives,” such phenomena as group-think and group-hatred are not group characteristics that may be associated more with one group than another, and that could be avoided by excluding the more group-conscious groups. No, group-think and group-hatred are simply errors that human beings qua human beings are prey to, and of which they can be cured by endless moral exhortation and guilt-tripping (if they are natives of liberal society), or by assimilation into liberal society (if they are immigrants). Thus, for today’s “conservatives,” there is and can be no connection between the massive increase of Europe’s Moslem population and the growing phenomenon of Moslem hate-crimes against European Jews. To think in such terms would be to believe that ethnicity and other group characteristics matter—a belief that remains, for today’s “conservatives,” the ultimate sin. Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 10, 2003 05:54 PM | Send Comments
Hate crimes? Violence? That’s just icing on the Muslim cake. They don’t even NEED to burn synagogues and (coming soon) churches. They don’t even need further immigration – all they need to do is to continue their demographic struggle for power. I fear that even if immigration were brought to a halt straight away it may well be too late to save us – at least as far as Europe is concerned. In an essay “Can Man Control His Numbers?” Charles Galton Darwin hypothesised some forty years ago that – after a few hundred generations – homo contracipiens might well become extinct, to be replaced by homo progenitivus. A few hundred generations? With something like 10% of the European population now Muslim, and a birth rate at least twice that of aboriginal Europeans, 10 generations should be more than enough to do the trick and dump our “fun societies” into the proverbial rubbish bin of history. And here in Europe we continue to debate such burning issues as the adverse health effects of passive smoking ….
“If I may be permitted so to put it, by the invention of contraception, the species Homo sapiens has discovered that he can become the new variety “Homo contracipiens,” and many take advantage of this to produce a much reduced fraction of the next generation. We have found out how to cheat Nature. However, it would seem likely that in the very long run Nature cannot be cheated, and it is easy to see the revenge it might take. Some people do have a wish for children before they are conceived, though for most of them it has not the strong compulsion of the two instincts. There will be a tendency for such people to have rather more children than the rest, and these children will tend to inherit a similar wish and so again to have larger families than do others. In succeeding generations there will be some who inherit the wish to an enhanced extent, and these will contribute a still greater proportion of the population. Thus, the direct wish for children is likely to become stronger in more and more of the race and in the end it could attain the quality of an instinct as strong as the other two. It may well be that it would take hundreds of generations for the progenitive instinct to develop in this way, but if it should do so, Nature would have taken its revenge, and the variety Homo contracipiens would become extinct and would be replaced by the variety Homo progenetivus.” The full text of the essay is online at: http://www.trinity.edu/lespey/biol1307/lectures/lect18/lect18.html Massive immigration cuts native birthrates even without contraceptive technology. See Mr. Auster’s “Huddled Cliches.” Indeed, it may be that massive immigration in the early twentieth century fueled the development and adoption of contraceptive technology in the U.S. by depressing the reproductive impulses of the established populations. Thus the causal relationship described by Mr. Copeland, in which contraception has accelerated Western decline, would actually be the opposite, development and use of contraception having been motivated by Western decline. Posted by: Bill on December 11, 2003 2:44 PM |