UN predicts continuing mass immigration into West
This UN report confirms what most of us already knew: The waves of migration that the Western world will be facing over the coming generations are far, far greater in scope and speed than those who brought down the Roman Empire. Can our democratic system survive this? Unless we take harsh measures, including military ones, to uphold our borders at all costs, our countries will simply be destroyed and will cease to exist because of this immigration, and Western civilization itself will collapse.An Indian living in the West writes:
They say that all “rich nations” will face mass immigration. BUT, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and even Malaysia are also rich nations. Immigration to those countries is close to zero.LA replies:
Our Indian friend has said it all. If the Western nations wanted to stop it, they could stop it like that. But, as I showed in my phantasmagorical entry, “When you gonna wake up? (II),” they don’t want to stop it. They only want to wring their hands about it. Handwringing is liberalism.
Indian living in West replies:
As an example, notice the hand-wring in the comments following this article in the Telegraph on the prospect of nine million more immigrants in Britain. It really cracks me up. Almost no one on that thread says, “There is nothing inevitable about it. All we’ve got to do is what Japan, Singapore or South Korea do and then its not a problem”. Instead they sit and wring their hands—some hope it will work out, some hope that they can escape or will escape, others simply look forward to it with complete gloom. If there was ever a picture of a society that has been completely finished, this is it. Even on a supposedly “Right-wing” newspaper’s web site, no one it seems, has the gall to suggest the simplest solution—just turn off the spigot! What is so difficult about it? You don’t have to discriminate on racial grounds or religious grounds, just reduce the annual quota to 1000 or 10000. Nothing illiberal about that. But they cannot contemplate even that! Westerners amuse me. Even the worst cowards in the so-called “third world” have more spine than this. And to think that the ancestors of these people once ran an Empire is almost unimaginable.LA replies:
I would also direct readers to the comments thread following a Times of London story about the latest in a steady stream of murders by and of black youths in London. in this case the shocking murder of a black youth who was chased by a gang of black youths though a well-to-do London neighborhood while many people looked on in fright, the kind of event that comes right out of South Africa. And of course all the blacks now in England are there as a result of the postwar immigration from Africa and the Caribbean that is still continuing and even increasing. But in the 185 readers’ comments that discuss, from almost every conceivable angle, this African-style mayhem in the streets of Britain, the words “immigration” and “immigrants” do not appear once.J. writes:
An Indian living in the West is usually very clear-sighted, but misses something with his comment that “no one it seems, has the gall to suggest the simplest solution—just turn off the spigot!” The mayhem occuring now in the West is the result of the large, unassimilated blocs of non -Western immigrants and their descendants already here. What does he propose to do, after the spigot is turned off? This, perhaps, is the real reason that the option remains off the table—it is only the first step. The West is already so adulterated that even the status quo spells endless internal conflict and decline. The second step (re-asserting European/Western cultural control, as you suggest, with the possibility of encouraging reverse immigration) is obvious but unthinkable, and therefore the first step remains taboo. Imagine—the fourth century Romans suggesting that the Germanic legions and foederates be encouraged to leave the Empire.LA replies:
The Indian living in the West is not an immigrant and plans to return to India. If J. goes back and reads his various comments at VFR over the last couple of years, he will see that he loves Western and particularly English culture, is in despair as he sees it destroying itself, and has the strongest views on the need for immigration control.J. replies:
Mr. Auster, you make a good point, but I didn’t intend to criticize ILW so strongly, or single him out for blame. As I said, he is usually very clear-sighted, and as you remind me has always been unabashedly pro-Western. So his disgust with the English over such an apparently easy solution to their problems was a surprise. But that made me think: If he can see the need to cut immigration, why can’t the English? The answer, I suggest, is that they can, but pretend not to, because they know that’s not the end of it for them. The English would still have to live with their existing situation, which is bad enough that it apparently paralyzes them. My thought was that ILW’s status as a non-Westerner was preventing him from seeing this angle—they’re stuck with the current problems seemingly forever, immigration cut-off or no, whereas ILW isn’t because he can return home. ( I had already been assuming that ILW was not a permanent immigrant). So, ILW is not at fault for failing to shoulder an English burden, just perhaps overlooking a reason for their spinelessness on the issue.LA replies:
Rather than removing your remarks, which might require further editing of your comment and would also require that I remove my comment as well, it’s easier just to post your present comment with the retraction. Thank you.ILW replies to J.:
The presence or absence of alien (in the ethnic sense) citizens in white nations is not the cause of the immigration mess. Even today, in most of Western Europe, 90 percent or more of the electorate is still white European. If the majority wanted a measure to pass, it would pass. It is that simple. In Malaysia, only 53 percent of the population consists of ethnic Malays. But no legislation that damages the interests of ethnic Malays could ever be passed because the Malay politicians would never allow it. There are numerous examples of this type that one could give.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at March 20, 2007 04:04 PM | Send