Musings Of An Indie Writer| « | The Little Guy |
»
|
|
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Madness not seen since Hitler.
It is madness founded on wishful thinking, utopian visions, and intellectual dishonesty. It is the madness, in short, of “diversity.”
Mr. Anfindsen, in his article cited below, argues that a certain amount of diversity in matters of language, culture, religion, and ethnicity is healthy but that too much of it can take society to the point where only very unpleasant measures will reestablish a unity sufficient for civil society.
My post below about the European immigration disaster barely touches on the chilling specifics of the mindless pursuit of diversity. Anfindsen focuses on the West’s intellectual troubles.
Interestingly enough, while the public is regularly brainwashed with slogans like “diversity is our strength”, diversity of opinion on issues related to multiculturalism is not always appreciated, to put it mildly. On the contrary, the ruling elite is still putting serious effort into preventing true, profound, rational, and informed discussion of these painful issues.
The result is an intellectually numbing consensus culture that makes sure we all march to the same tune of diversity. Diversity, that is, in those areas where our elites have decided that diversity is A Good Thing, but uniformity, conformity, and political correctness elsewhere. Europe is, simply put, in deep intellectual trouble, which in turn is bound to cause political trouble.
The prosecution of Geert Wilders illustrates the panicked reaction of pro-diversity elites to men who have the backbone to initiate that very discussion of the madness.
Other intelligent people are deeply concerned:
In June 2006 The Sunday Times reported that one of Great Britain’s most experienced military strategists, Rear Admiral Chris Parry, warned that the currently ongoing demographic development represents a threat to the West comparable to what made the Roman Empire collapse. We are simply unable to integrate, much less assimilate, the increasing flow of immigrants that are coming to Europe.
Would this be a clue that Adm. Perry is correct?
At this very moment, Europe is still an intact entity, though it is not possible to say that it is fundamentally intact. The reason it is not fundamentally so is that, like the water around the oft-cited frog in the cook pot, the circumstances of life for native Europeans are becoming daily ever more inhospitable, and no significant force has so far appeared to reverse the trend. Worse, those circumstances and that trend are something that only the bravest of private individuals attempt to confront.
It’s about time we replaced cheap propaganda with serious analysis. Is it the case or not that the above mentioned essential differences are growing out of control in Europe these days? What, if anything, is going to stop this growth? As far as I can tell, this can only come about if we rethink our entire immigration regime, but most of our politicians, as well as large portions of media and academia, seem to vehemently reject any such proposition.
The adherents of the multicultural project seem determined to ensure that their political Titanic continues full steam ahead, no matter what the future cost in terms of human lives and societal breakdown.
As the man said, all courtesy of politicians, academics, and the media. And the clergy.
Forces that historically worked to ensure societal integrity now actively undermine it and the best of our culture and laws are perverted to the same ends.
[“Islamists”] understand perfectly well that our diversity is their strength.
How much longer before we WTFU?
Is that too crude? Or is that crude, but the deliberate destruction of the West is refined?
“The deep crisis of the West.” By Ole Jørgen Anfindsen, HonestThinking.org, 5/19/07 (emphasis added).
Comments
I doubt that Rome’s collapse had anything to do with immigration.
Rome’s economy can be tracked by measuring the lead content of peat bogs in Spain. Those bogs show that Rome’s GDP (and probably other measures of its power) was well down from its peak even before Valens invited in the Visigoths. The barbarian invasions were a consequence of Rome’s weakness, not a cause.
It’s unlikely there were very many Gothic immigrants anyway, or at least not enough for much of a linguistic impact. The languages spoken in most of Western Europe are derived from Latin, not German.
Posted by Joseph Hertzlinger on 04/09/2010 at 02:25 AMGermans served in the legions without threatening the empire but there came a time when, perhaps, too many legions had too many Germans in the ranks (or leadership?). No student I of the collapse of the western empire but I think you are correct that more was at work than the presence of foreigners, however they came to be there.
That said, an image that has always stuck in my mind is the one painted in “How the Irish Saved Western Civilization” of the tribes waiting on the other side of the Rhine for the water to freeze. Why they were there in July has always escaped me but you can’t argue with historical facts that I report. They massed there opposed by inadequate numbers of Roman troops no doubt inadequately supported by Rome. When they water froze they poured across and the rest is l’histoire.
Without pretending to have my finger on the exact cause(s) of Rome’s collapse, I’ll hazard the argument that it was preceded by a period of Rome’s loss of cultural and political integrity. (I have my basic premise to defend after all.) Caesar’s takeover and the insanities of non-Republican governance led down many dark and expensive paths.
If immigration was not the fundamental cause of Rome’s collapse, the hordes pouring across the Rhine were a pretty convincing symptom of the underlying decay of Rome. Mr. Anfindsen’s article is a pretty persuasive treatment of the danger of allowing one’s country’s balance of the “essential differences” to get insanely out of whack. (Sorry for the technical jargon.) Which is exactly what all Western nations are now doing in vindication of some crazy guilt for our—apparently—never-before-seen-in-human-history “crimes.”
I think you are right about the countries where the Romance languages are spoken in Europe but those countries are not coterminous with Europe.
For example, Old English is also known as “Anglo-Saxon” and itself is a West Germanic language that is similar to Old Frisian, Old Saxon, Old Norse (and hence Icelandic). Also, it was influenced by Latin, Celtic, the pre-Celtic language, and Old Norse, which was spoke by the Vikings in the Danelaw, the area they controlled in the north and east of England. That snippet is cribbed from here.
Germany, the Netherlands, and the Scandinavian countries do not speak languages based on Latin.
It seems a stretch to infer Roman GDP from lead content in Spanish peat bogs. I’m not familiar with that theory, much as I hate to undermine my general knowitall life’s stance.
Posted by Col. B. Bunny on 04/09/2010 at 04:09 PM
Comment Form
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
