Wednesday, November 02, 2005

The Bells of Ys 2

Francis Fukuyama writes about the Paris riots in Opinion Journal. He says the enemy is us.

We have tended to see jihadist terrorism as something produced in dysfunctional parts of the world, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan or the Middle East, and exported to Western countries. Protecting ourselves is a matter either of walling ourselves off, or, for the Bush administration, going "over there" and trying to fix the problem at its source by promoting democracy.

There is good reason for thinking, however, that a critical source of contemporary radical Islamism lies not in the Middle East, but in Western Europe. In addition to Bouyeri and the London bombers, the March 11 Madrid bombers and ringleaders of the September 11 attacks such as Mohamed Atta were radicalized in Europe. In the Netherlands, where upwards of 6% of the population is Muslim, there is plenty of radicalism despite the fact that Holland is both modern and democratic. And there exists no option for walling the Netherlands off from this problem.

He might be right, but think about what the proposition does to his thesis of the inevitable triumph of liberal democracy: it locates the seeds of its destruction in the same place as its strengths. No longer is it possible to simply contain radical Islamism the way one would a cheap copy of 20th century Bolshevism and await the inevitable vindication of events. In order to survive against Islam, the West, at least its European branch, has to reform itself.

Two things need to happen: First, countries like Holland and Britain need to reverse the counterproductive multiculturalist policies that sheltered radicalism, and crack down on extremists. But second, they also need to reformulate their definitions of national identity to be more accepting of people from non-Western backgrounds.


The Opinion Journal piece illustrates [in my opinion] a theory in transition, a point of view being held together by a patch. Is it possible to "reverse the counterproductive multiculturalist policies that sheltered radicalism, and crack down on extremists" and then "reformulate their definitions of national identity to be more accepting of people from non-Western backgrounds"? Or isn't that rather like taking two aspirins prior to massaging your head with a claw hammer? Nevertheless, Mr. Fukuyama's article is a welcome sign that the "police action" policy towards radical Islamic terrorism is following the "earth is flat" theory into its final intellectual moments.

The events in France may turn out to have a greater strategic impact than September 11. French policies, however maddening, had the virtue of serving as the control case to the American experiment of attempting to reform the Islamic world. The latter acknowledged, however shyly, that it was facing an aggression which had to be met at the root; which had to be resolved by building viable societies in Islamic homelands. The former, and France in particular, maintained there was nothing that temporizing and appeasement, in one form or another, could not solve. What events in France have done is discredit the liberal recipe so badly that even those who are not prepared to admit that American policy may have been right must now root around for an alternative theory. Fukuyama's essay is a good step in that direction. Faster please.

More Commentary

More reading has made me more familiar with the purely 'social' aspects of the Parisian rioting, i.e. hidden French racism, the failure of its economy to efficiently create jobs, etc. Juan Cole, for example, sees events in Paris as a simple "race riot". Others see it as the consequence of the French social model. From that point of view, the "Islamic" aspects are purely coincidental or of minor importance in comparison to the 'real' causes.

One argument for derogating the Islamic factor has been the absence, so far, of any direct link to terrorist masterminds. It could be counter-argued that Islam figures more broadly by fostering a sense of apartness or entitlement, etc. which then provokes the resented discrimination. I'll leave these caveats as they are for the readers to think about, although I am personally unpersuaded that Islamic cultural factors are irrelevant to the disturbances in France.


Blogger ghoullio said...

i mean no disrespect, but isnt a part of this whole rioting due to the fact that they live in ghettoes? there have been many links to terrorism/extremism and poverty, it isnt neccessarily about Islam, though i do tend to agree with the rest of your post.


11/02/2005 10:30:00 PM  
Blogger NahnCee said...

Strongly recommend Dalrymple's essay "The Suicide Bombers Among Us" at for a further dissection of the disconnect between Western (British) culture and Muslim youth.

11/02/2005 10:31:00 PM  
Blogger NahnCee said...

ghoullio - bin Laden is/was a gazillionaire. Mohammad Atta, et al, were well-educated upper-middle class. Most the Saudi terrorists are also wealthy. Poverty gots nothing to do with nothing.

11/02/2005 10:32:00 PM  
Blogger NahnCee said...

ghoullio -- and the 4 London mujahadeen were also middle-class and one of them climbed out of a newly purchased red Mercedes convertible to strap on his bomb/back-pack.

11/02/2005 10:34:00 PM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...


There is that aspect to it -- the economic one, the racist one. And that in part flows from the idea that postwar Europe could augment its demography by importing people and never turning them into "true" Frenchmen, for ideological and economic reasons. It was cheaper to leave them as they were, and more picturesque too.

Now Europe needs the Muslims. The demography admits of no alternative, unless some French politician proposes to abolish the 35-hour week, or social welfare. The entire edifice of that welfare state is built, in part, on the poorly paid Muslim; men who will continue to be poorly paid because it is insensitive to turn them into regular educated Frenchmen. This process was called enlightened social policy. If the French were ever good at anything, it was perfume.

But now the bulbs are beginning to dim. And for a variety of reasons the Muslims are angry and those dinky little government benefits don't cut it any more.

11/02/2005 10:46:00 PM  
Blogger ghoullio said...

and therefore allowing them to be "True French" isnt gonna cut it becuase they have tasted the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge?...France will be forced to deal with them on personal terms and that will only incite them further, correct? embolden them to reach for higher levels with these tactics? maybe it is a good thing CNN is ignoring this; imagine a worldwide riot of muslims. this is terrifying, and i am glad i am not in France or Europe at the moment.

and Nahncee, while Arafat sat upon a trasure, his minions and suicide bombers were taken from the ranks within the camps in Palestine. there must be an element of Haves/Have Nots in order to stir the pot of conflict that allows terrorism to breed. these disaffected youths in France would not be doing this if they had attained a higher stature in life.

could this happen in America?

11/02/2005 11:02:00 PM  
Blogger Diogo said...

About the radical Islamism:

The following conversation took place the afternoon of the London bombing on BBC radio. The BBC host interviewed Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company. Peter Power was a former Scotland Yard official.

A Coincidence?

POWER: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.

HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this, and it happened while you were running the exercise?

POWER: Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning. We planned this for a company, and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name but they're listening and they'll know it. And we had a room full of crisis managers for the first time they'd met. And so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid decision that this is the real one, and so we went through the correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to jump from slow time to quick time thinking.

Mr. Power repeats these statements on ITN television. The two-minute video clip is available here.

11/02/2005 11:04:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Wretchard - Now Europe needs the Muslims. The demography admits of no alternative, unless some French politician proposes to abolish the 35-hour week, or social welfare. The entire edifice of that welfare state is built, in part, on the poorly paid Muslim; men who will continue to be poorly paid because it is insensitive to turn them into regular educated Frenchmen.

I disagree about the imperative to bring Muslims in. Europe first has the options of increasing caucasian birthrates or going with more robotics, as the Japanese are doing. If in the end they HAVE to have immigration, maybe now is that great inflection point where Europe determines that Muslims are incompatable with Western Civilization - but 2 billion immigrant candidates in other nations have shown they are quite compatible. It's not like they have to pick only Islamoids because they are nearby, global transportation is cheap and a neglible immigration cost to employers.

20 million Portugese speaking Brazilians would immigrate. Spanish-speaking Christians from Mexico to Chile? Delighted to go to Europe for better jobs. Hindu Indians that have proved to be wonderful assimilators in Canada, the UK, Oceana? 50 million educated Hindis might want to be part of Europe. In the Far East, you have vast numbers of Vietnamese, Filipinos, Chinese that have proved as well they assimilate and are productive, low-crime immigrants that would also be superb candidates.

The big issue is what to do with the soon to be unwanted, violent, unassimilated Islamoids. Getting rid of them might be difficult. But if their welfare is cut enough, many will voluntarily go back to N Africa. Changed laws stripping Islamoids of citizenship sound extreme now, but may not in 5-10 years.

Democracy and tolerance as assimilators clearly don't cut it. Fukuyama should ask Bush to shitcan his Sharansky book.

11/02/2005 11:07:00 PM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...


The Watts rioters of the 60s didn't have a global identity though people like Malcolm X thought they might. The Civil Rights movement was really part of a much longer historical cycle that included Abolition, the Civil War and beyond. The people who rioted in Watts were probably descended from people who had been in America four or five generations. What they were fighting for was part of the American dream.

Maybe the key difference is that the Paris rioters don't want the European package; the job, the atheism, the vacation. Perhaps they want belief, transcendance, family. Perhaps they want Islam. They want a different dream.

The next few days will probably see Villepin offering more of the same. Apologies, a rise in benefits, some new housing, restrictions on police. I'd be surprised if it got Villepin anything in return but contempt. The bread they want may not be the bread he can give them.

11/02/2005 11:15:00 PM  
Blogger ghoullio said...

we have a Prince currently enroute from Londonistan to tell us how we should welcome the Muslims, so i do not forsee any real discussion about the dangers of Islam anytime soon. with Rusia killing itself with their low birth rates (guess which provinces are not in decline), the EU desiring to bring Turkey into its fold, we are in for a nasty ride, as Europe is about to be brought into this War on Terror kicking and screaming. i have no doubt in my mind however that France will come to a boiling point and at some point act in its own self interest. i cannot say the smae for Britain...

11/02/2005 11:18:00 PM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...


Islam brings it on. It's impossible to ignore them. Not facing them (I won't saying confronting) is not an option. Retreat from Iraq, meet them in Detroit. If you can't make Algiers like Paris, then Paris can become like Algiers.

It is perfectly possible to coexist with Islam provided that you have beliefs of your own. They will keep their distance if you are worth respecting. The longer this goes on, the more I start to suspect that the War is less the result of Islam's militance; it has always been so, as about the West's neurosis. Islam, by all indications, deserves to survive. Does Europe?

11/02/2005 11:22:00 PM  
Blogger OreamnosAmericanus said...

It is customary for many Europeans to criticize American imperial hubris. But I think that the real hubris in the West remains in its natural home: Western Europe. How was it anything less than colossal hubris for Europeans, whose history is one of almost continual inter-tribal slaughter, to imagine that they could absorb without tragedy millions of not only culturally, ethnically and religiously alien people, but culturally, ethnically and religiously inimical people? In the US, with our founding mythology of newness and immigration, even we find it a huge strain to incorporate immigrants, but we do it because it is who we are. It is not who Europeans are (nor indeed most humans). I fear that Fukiyama's call for a post-ethnic national identity there is ungrounded in reality. A disastrous clash between Europe and Eurabia may be unavoidable, with many Theo Van Gough's on both sides. Idealism which outstrips reality always leads to disaster.

And while I'm at it, this is another one of Fukuyama's half-right theories. Remember the End of History? Why do people read this guy?

11/02/2005 11:24:00 PM  
Blogger sam said...

Seventh night of violence hits Paris suburbs:

At a nearby market stall, Mouloud, 70, said he was deeply shocked by the interior minister's comments last month, when he vowed to "clean up" the "rabble" in the suburbs, using a water-cannon.

"For Sarkozy, people are dirt," he charged.

For the most part, as in previous nights, calm was restored in the restive areas before dawn.

7th Night

11/02/2005 11:44:00 PM  
Blogger StrategyUnit said...


I agree that this is a strategic moment from France and Europe.

But, I am not sure if its a positive change - I fear this will mean European politicians will fear doing anything to upset the "Muslim Street".

Here's my commentary:

11/02/2005 11:53:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Wrechard - Your moral decay argument is a different one than the one I responded to.

Now Europe needs the Muslims. The demography admits of no alternative,

And in pointing out two billion alternative immigration candidates, I was saying that Europe is not demographically driven to take in anymore Muslims.

And it could easy be similarly morally decayed Chileans, Frenchmen, Vietnamese, and French Guyanans all clustered around a Rive Gauche cafe table talking about how Satre had his head up his ass, on their workbreaks.

Islamoids could quickly be made unwanted and un-needed. Europe cleaned the Muslims and the Jews who worked for the Muslims out of Spain in the 1400's, and cleaned the Turk out of 1st Greece, then the Balkans.

Earlier you mentioned the academic media, and cultural inertia preventing Europe from getting it's spine back. It may happen faster than you think if even liberal elites conclude certain 3rd-worlders can assimilate in Europe and be not dangerous, but part of the culture and a benefit - but Islamoids have failed and must be gotten rid of.

Once that idea becomes fixed in the minds of Europeans, as they watch their cities burn and now half of all robberies and 2/3rd of all rapes are by Muslims - events could move at a rapid pace. The cleansing of Germans at the end of WWII from the Soviet Union, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and the Baltics took under a year.

11/03/2005 12:04:00 AM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...


In principle, you are right. Practically speaking the Muslims are now part of the scenery. Strategy Unit is quoting some pundits who argue that Europe will now oppose the US more resolutely and offer more concessions because they "fear" their Islamic street, a street which has substantial voting power. Stragegy Unit says Europe will compensate, to some extent, by increasing police surveillance, etc.

I don't know how things will turn out, but the scenario of more concessions balanced by a growing police apparatus is a pretty volatile mix.

11/03/2005 12:13:00 AM  
Blogger James Kielland said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11/03/2005 12:15:00 AM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Wretchard writes: Islam, by all indications, deserves to survive. Does Europe?

Islam does not "survive". Islam is death by definition. But Europe does deserve to survive. Europe contributed to our civilization more than most. If Europe wants to rest now, it deserves to do so in peace. To keep Islam, the Grim Ripper, ever waiting in a dark corner, ready for its victim(s) to tire and fall asleep so it can to do its ghastly deed, is a discredit and a disgrace to those of us still awake and have our eyes open. Europe deserves its days of Sabbath. We all deserve our days of rest!

And Wretchard, if you haven't seen it yet, I'd like to bring your attention to an excellent post by Michael McCanles on "The Long War" thread. (7:56 AM).

11/03/2005 01:56:00 AM  
Blogger James Kielland said...

Interestingly, there is nothing on my RSS feed from Reuters about anything in Paris. They do note that that are protests against Bush in some major US cities, however.

11/03/2005 02:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fukayama's most important quote is "The real challenge for democracy lies in Europe, where the problem is an internal one of integrating large numbers of angry young Muslims and doing so in a way that does not provoke an even angrier backlash from right-wing populists..."

Why is "integrating large numbers of angry young Muslims" even an option (as opposed to sending them back to their Islamic paradise?

And, even more importantly, why is "preventing a 'right-wing' backlash" so important to Mr. Fukayama that he would allow the destruction of Dutch society in preference to it?

11/03/2005 03:24:00 AM  
Blogger moderationist said...

Could the riots in Paris be connected to the recent banning of the headscarf in France? Banning religious headdress all over the West would be huge as I state in my blog:


The violent subjegation of women is an integral part of the lethal supremisist script of Islamofascism world domination.

11/03/2005 03:29:00 AM  
Blogger moderationist said...

Whoops I meant supremacist

11/03/2005 03:31:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Out of sight, out of mind. When a story appears that does not fit the story line, well, the MSM can just ignore it 'til it goes away.
If they have a story line and no story, they can fabricate it. Inaccurate but possible, the "new" standard for the News.

There is an element of truth in the "we have met the enemy, and he's us" ideas that Fukiyama's article put's forth. But it is not the whole truth.

Just as in Iraq, we are both part of the cause, as well as the solution, to the challenges there.

As we have been discussing, our system puts greater risks upon the individual, but allows for much greater rewards. The Mohammedan and to a lesser extent European systems attempts to limit the risks an individual may take, claiming "Social Justice" in redistributing "wealth", but leaves the rewards to the elite.

This is exampled by the French "Summer of Death", where a heat wave killed over 10,000 elderly, while the Government officials where at the beach, on Holiday.
Makes the Katrina death toll look tame by comparison and the Government's response to the hurricane, at ALL levels, spectacular. Even the NO Mayor, he stayed on the job, in the City, rather than fly to Aspen for the "Summer Season".

Algiers has come to Paris. How appropriate, cosmic karma or divine justice?
Is it social evolution, the normal ebb and flow of history or is it intelligent design, events flowing along a predetermined path to a prophesied outcome?

11/03/2005 03:51:00 AM  
Blogger RWE said...

I think perhaps the main opposition to even the "treating of the symptom" approach taken in Europe and the U.S. is what it implies on a broader scale about treasured liberal concepts.
1. Multiculturalism doesn't work, bceause some cultures have no right to exist and should be eradicated.
2. All Men are not equal. Some are dirtbags.
3. Military power is an absolute necessity for the survival of polite society.
4. The world operats in more of a Hobbsian way than a Marxist way.
5. Given all of the above "conservative" principles are a necessity.
Recognition of all of these facts would send their world crashing down - even more than it has over the last 20 years.
I.E. The Asprin and Hammer treatment are merely fruitless attempts to avoid surgery for the tumor.

11/03/2005 03:58:00 AM  
Blogger tefta said...

"wretchard said...

Islam brings it on. It's impossible to ignore them. Not facing them (I won't saying confronting) is not an option. Retreat from Iraq, meet them in Detroit. If you can't make Algiers like Paris, then Paris can become like Algiers.

It is perfectly possible to coexist with Islam provided that you have beliefs of your own. They will keep their distance if you are worth respecting. The longer this goes on, the more I start to suspect that the War is less the result of Islam's militance; it has always been so, as about the West's neurosis. Islam, by all indications, deserves to survive. Does Europe?
11:22 PM"

The two paragraphs above are really shocking.

If we’re worth respecting, they (Islam) will keep their distance. So you have picked up on the meme that it was our own fault that Muslim terrorists imbedded themselves into our free and open American society and when given the nod, boarded airplanes and flew them into the symbols of American capitalism, imperialism and decadence because we failed to sign the Kyoto treaty and forced our evil culture onto their pure Allah-land.

Whether Europe or Islam survives won’t be based on their relative merit, whatever that is, but on the will of their people.

BTW - What on earth are the indications that Islam, in your opinion, deserves to survive?

11/03/2005 04:03:00 AM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...

BTW - What on earth are the indications that Islam, in your opinion, deserves to survive?

Because they're willing to fight for their existence and nine times out of ten, that beats the side that is unwilling to fight for its existence. Should Europe decide their way of life is worth preserving then other factors, such as worth may come into play.

But worth alone does not guarantee survival. Nothing survives simply because it is beautiful.

11/03/2005 04:12:00 AM  
Blogger DO said...

I live in Paris and, as far as I can tell, recent rioting has nothing to do with Islam per se. The issue is neither religious nor even strictly cultural. Rather, it is social (the ghettos are on fire, not central Paris) and, if you like, anthropological (visible ethnic minorities, particularly in conditions of economic disadvantage, often engage in oppositional identity-formation).

11/03/2005 04:22:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Well, yes, we did allow the Mohammedans to believe they could attack US with impunity. They have been doing so for decades, with out sufficent response.
From the Collapse of the Shah, through the Hostage taking by Iran, the Oil Embargo, Somalia, Yeman, Ghadafi's disco and plane bombers, the first attack on the WTC, aQ's African attacks on US Embassies, the Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut, the bombings of US sites in KSA, USS Cole, etc. The list is almost endless, of US and "Western" submission to assualts committed by Mohammedan Soldiers of God.
We have yet to prove our mettle, in this new millenium. The Mohammedans are at least acting on their believes, we act as if we are ashamed of ours.
That really is the crux of the battle, in Iraq, the broader Mohammedan world, Europe and even here within US.
The Mohammedans make no apologies because they are firm in their convictions and rightousness, we constantly apologize for acts that require none.
The Mohammedans have a Goal and are acting to make it happen, we do not articulate a Goal, a definition of Victory, and are weaker for it.

11/03/2005 04:37:00 AM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...


I'd find it hard to dispute your argument that "social" rather than religious factors are at work behind the riots because a variety of attributes like religion, ethnicity and income are packaged together. Positively correlated, if you like.

That means you can use any one of these attributes in your model and get roughly the same explanatory power. The press, for example, describes the root cause of the riots as "racism" and others as "unemployment". Even when you expand the frame of reference and ask, why similar but smaller riots are taking place in Denmark, you can say racism also, social alienation also and have a viable argument.

It is quite possible to describe the Arab-Israeli problem, indeed the Abu Sayaf problem in terms of economic disadvantage and it would be hard to rebut as statement of correlation.

Do we have the causal arrows right? I'm not sure. But my instinct says that Islam, not in its strictly religious sense, but in its larger cultural sense, plays a big part in this equation. That's why many rioters use it to characterize their identity and one should take them at their word.

11/03/2005 04:39:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

how are the ethnic groups divided? Country of origin, race or religion?
Is it just the Algierians rioting or is it "all" the "Arabs" or all the "darkies" or just the Mohammedans, with the Christian Africans staying home?

Are the riots in suburbs or slums?
Are there suburban slums in France?

Is Paris Burning?
You report the fires are in ghettos outside the City Center, from W's aerial photo the rioting seems wide spread, how far are the airports from the City?

11/03/2005 04:49:00 AM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...

desert rat,

It doesn't cover a solid area, rather a narrow arc that looks like a giant right parentheses on the map. It's hard to show because I can't get a good inline image on the blog.

The Washington Post suggests the phenomenon is more complex than a straight religious conflict:

"Many of the residents of the northern suburban areas where the violence has been most intense are Muslim. The street fighting threatened to take on religious overtones Sunday when a police tear gas canister was thrown inside a mosque where about 700 worshipers were taking part in prayers. Local Islamic leaders said they have attempted to persuade local youths -- particularly Muslims -- to refrain from violence."

As can be seen from the quote, many pleas for calm by imams are disregarded and the kids are listening to another piper. Islam being a world religion, it is many things to many people. But alienated people full of anger often look for an identity, a banner to rally under. Give people a banner and they will march under it. Nations have been formed on the basis of less.

11/03/2005 05:02:00 AM  
Blogger Zeno said...

The biggest proof that our priorities are inverted is that the suburbs are litterally burning in flames, but the person more heavily criticized by the media is M. Sarkozy for using what the BBC describes as "inflammatory language"...

Pa vo beuzet Paris
Ec'h adsavo Ker Is

When Paris is drowned by the waves
The City of Ys will arise, and be saved.

(Just googled Wretchard's post title to find out what it was all about. Really interesting.)

11/03/2005 05:12:00 AM  
Blogger James Kielland said...


And some people are born under banners that lead them to alienation and anger.

11/03/2005 05:17:00 AM  
Blogger rosignol said...

Is it possible to "reverse the counterproductive multiculturalist policies that sheltered radicalism, and crack down on extremists" and then "reformulate their definitions of national identity to be more accepting of people from non-Western backgrounds"? Or isn't that rather like taking two aspirins prior to massaging your head with a claw hammer?

Considering that the method European societies have traditionally used to deal with troublesome minority groups (ethnic or religious) has been to slaughter them, this may be the preferrable alternative, from a moral point of view.

Of course, morality tends to take a beating in wartime. Many have chosen victory via despicable means over defeat and moral purity.

11/03/2005 05:33:00 AM  
Blogger Dymphna said...

I saw a piece of this in The Australian yesterday. Fukuyama's (he of the-end-of-history fame) notion that The Netherlands and Britain

...need to reformulate their definitions of national identity to be more accepting of people from non-Western backgrounds...

is about as wrong-headed as he can get. And he's had some doozers. In a retrospective on Theo van Gogh and the eruptions in Europe in the year since his death, I took note of a Netherland's "inclusionary" ruling: they are now going to permit something called the other words polygamy is now legal.

Dalrymple had is right (in 2004). Multi-culti is a dishonest pretension:

The multiculturalist preaches that, in an age of mass migration, society can (and should) be a kind of salad bowl, a receptacle for wonderful exotic ingredients from around the world, the more the better, each bringing its special flavor to the cultural mix. For the salad to be delicious, no ingredient should predominate and impose its flavor on the others...

Bah. As he says, they're frivilous. And to me, that included Theo van Gogh. It's what got him slaughtered.

Here's my take:

The Multi-Culti Death Trap

The Jacksonian American-flavored problem solving approach may have its flaws, but it has the Darwinian advantage of not being a death sentence.


11/03/2005 05:37:00 AM  
Blogger Meme chose said...

"The next few days will probably see Villepin offering more of the same. Apologies, a rise in benefits, some new housing, restrictions on police. I'd be surprised if it got Villepin anything in return but contempt."

While I agree with much of the analysis here pinning the Paris riots on Muslims, it should also be noted that the toxic combination of measures favoring older people at the expense of the young extends much more broadly across Europe.

My niece lives in one of the wealthiest villages in England, yet as is typical across the whole country it has its own vicious and unruly underclass of uneducated, mostly unemployed youths living on state benefits. The local authorities built them a youth recreation center in an effort to divert them from their favorite pastime of stealing cars. They immediately smashed a stolen car into it and burned it down.

This is superior to the actions of Paris' Muslim immigrants exactly how?

11/03/2005 05:40:00 AM  
Blogger Dymphna said...

As for your first commenter's remark about them living in ghettoes, he ought to visit some of the rural compounds of Jihad extremists in America. They wall themselves off from the world.

At least for the moment...

As for the links between terrorism and poverty, Osama is anything but poor. The killers in the 9/11 planes all came from middle-class or better homes. Atta had a college degree.

That is definitely an out-moded theory, though it doesn't stop getting preached. I read it in a Saudi newspaper a few months ago. Almost fell off the chair laughing.

Poverty causes terrorism?? Right. Marx lives!

11/03/2005 05:42:00 AM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...

Meme Chose,

Of course the two phenomena are related. The income and generational redistribution policies you describe are part of the dual of the problem. If ethnic Europeans can't sign on to the faceless welfare state without being alienated; when all that state offers in the way of personal fulfillment is a cheesey youth center then why should Muslim immigrants embrace that condition?

Young people are looking for something to live for, something worthy of their dreams. Islam may not provide any billiard tables, but they hand out heady visions by the bushel. The welfare state, on the other hand, creates the incentive for memoryless behavior. The welfare check comes at the price of what used to be called the soul.

11/03/2005 06:09:00 AM  
Blogger Sophia Phoster said...

Spontaneous riots can erupt over single incidents but extended violence requires a group identity. An individual will feel safe in the anonymity of crowds only if he's confident that the guy next to him is like him in some signficant way.

Do argues that identity is poverty but that old shibboleth is too general and too worn out as a justification for every anti-social act to be useful.

We have all seen enough over the past few years to at least recognize the possibility that the rioters identity glue is Muslim. The distinction is significant because politicized Muslims are not looking for their slice of the pie. They want the whole thing and the rest of us restricted to the kitchen to cook it.

Islam grew rapidly because it provided a rationalization and a group cohesiveness to take material goods from others. Mohammed was a brigand by trade and the first Muslims were nothing more than gang members. Like it or not,Islam was then and has always remained a Mafia with rituals.

There is no appeasment. Only a quiet period between battles.

11/03/2005 06:24:00 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

Wait though with all this suspiciously light coverage (I still saw Katrina coverage happening on my local Scola cable channel from Croatia or wherever yesterday) though, what is actually happening in Paris? Are there barricades really? And "police station(s) under seige"?

Holy crap - those weren't kidding who speculated Chirac couldn't support the Iraq war because of the hair-trigger Arabs ringing their cities like Visigoth marauders. Interesting.

11/03/2005 06:35:00 AM  
Blogger jim said...

It doesn't cover a solid area, rather a narrow arc that looks like a giant right parentheses on the map. Sounds like the Crescent of Embrace.

11/03/2005 06:36:00 AM  
Blogger DO said...

Wretchard writes: "But my instinct says that Islam, not in its strictly religious sense, but in its larger cultural sense, plays a big part in this equation. That's why many rioters use it to characterize their identity and one should take them at their word."

You're right and wrong here. Right, because the riots only began to spread (days 2-3) after someone -- authorities say it wasn't the police -- fired a tear gas canister into a local mosque during prayer time. Rioters then claimed they had been provoked into continuing the violence by this event. To describe them as religiously observant would be a reach but this kind of ethnic identification is nevertheless significant (i.e., firing tear gas into the church up the street would hardly have produced the same response).

But you're wrong, too, in assuming that all of the rioters are of Arab origin. These suburbs also have a large (and growing) population of immigrants from non-Muslim regions of Sub-Saharan Africa. Last March's student protest violence, for example -- though it looked very similar on television -- was almost entirely the work of the children of black immigrants.

These young people feel they have little in common with other French people. Apart from poverty and shared ghetto culture -- rap music, drug dealing, clothing -- they also have little in common with one another.

My view: What we're seeing is a race riot, the basic conditions of which are poverty and urban concentration.

And to answer another question: so far, there hasn't been a single incident related to the riots within Paris proper. The banlieus in question are quite far outside the city, though no doubt things will get ugly here, too, should the rioting continue to spread -- Paris itself has several at risk neighborhoods, mainly along its northern frontier with Seine-St. Denis (or just around the corner from where I live...).

11/03/2005 06:39:00 AM  
Blogger DO said...

oh, and in response to the first post in this thread: the fact that they live in ghettos is not adequate to explain the violence. white French people live in the same conditions elsewhere. their sons never riot in this way...

11/03/2005 06:42:00 AM  
Blogger Papa Bear said...

Welfare states do not work. "Bread and circuses" did not work for the Roman Empire. Food stamps and TV don't lead to a viable life in the US inner cities.

What is needed to harness the mental and physical energy of men is an achievable purpose. For many, that purpose is to be able to leave behind something for their kids, where the kids will be at a higher level than their parents.

European-style welfare states frustrate this drive. The penalty for failure to strive is no longer strong enough to goad young men to get out of bed. The web of regulations of the European socialist state becomes an impenetrable barrier to many who would like to start and build their own business. So they sit and rot.

Europe is the intellectual center of the socialist/communist mindset. It is the primary tumor out of which it metastasizes throughout the world. Ho Chi Minh, among many, was indoctrinated and radicalized in France.

The net result of living in welfare-state socialism is that the middle-class can't afford the expense of having children, while the underclass is subsidized into having many children. When the middle-class falls below a critical threshold, the whole society collapses.

People talk about a crisis in France happening in 2050 or so, when the Muslim population becomes the majority. The real crisis will happen sooner, if it is not actually happening now. The real crisis will occur when the middle class, that supports the weight of the welfare state like Atlas groaning under the weight of the world, can no longer support it's burden. "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand, will be illustrative of what happens then

11/03/2005 06:46:00 AM  
Blogger Harrywr2 said...

Allowing/encouraging any demographic group to "fail to assimilate" is a recipe for societal failure.

Societies are held together by a universally accepted set of social contracts.

I.E. State provided education will prepare you sufficiently to get a job.

Basic manners will ensure that an interaction with someone outside of your tribe will be at least neutral.

Without a clear cut set of "Rules of the Game" enforced and enunciated clearly, those demographic groups with different "rules to the game" will fail in any society where they are not the dominant culture.

By encouraging minority groups to retain their cultural identity, the minority group is left with the only option of attempting to become the dominant culture.

Multi-culturalism is fine for University Profressors. For the poor kid who's opportunities in life will extend as far as semi-skilled employment, it is a dismal failure.

11/03/2005 06:50:00 AM  
Blogger Vercingetorix said...

Thesis: "reverse the counterproductive multiculturalist policies that sheltered radicalism, and crack down on extremists"

Antithesis: "reformulate their definitions of national identity to be more accepting of people from non-Western backgrounds"

Synthesis: To end the multi-culti policies are to ignore ‘culture’ altogether; focus on adherence to the law, for opportunity instead of entitlements. Unemployed radicals, unable to feed themselves, will leave. Radical Imams unable to watch their tongues, will be dispossessed.

If you remove culture from the national identity and instead focus on success, you can’t get more inclusive than that.

11/03/2005 06:51:00 AM  
Blogger enscout said...

Why should the Dutch, the French or the Brits abandon their cultural identity for the sake of criminals? The idea is nothing more than appeasement in spades.

The population of Muslims in these countries arrived there for one reason only: economic opportunity. Now, some generations later, if they find themselves at the mercy of the welfare state, it is a result of the choices they made. For them to blame it on the culture they CHOSE to become a part of is crazy.

Islam is not a religion of peace nor was it ever. It is all about bullying others into submission of their own worldview. The alternative for those fortunate enough to be given a choice, is death.

This mindset is now being played out in Europe only because these immigrants feel they have the POWER to overcome their hosts. They are nothing if not patient and opportunistic. If the west does not summon the will to resist them in kind, the results will eventually be theirs to determine.

11/03/2005 06:54:00 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

Yeah everyone espousing some sort of economic substructural sociological explanation for this - please, PLEASE go back and read your intellectual history. You must disabuse yourself of the idea that such analysis is anything but pre-philosophical obviousness. "Look at the squalor - man that must suck; I'd be pissed too!" Wow. Profundity. What of the conceptual power of Islam, eh? Even if the foreign ghetto life intensifies its romance? Wake up! There's a whole civilization out there even its members have ignored by being too close to it.

11/03/2005 06:54:00 AM  
Blogger Papa Bear said...


I think the Europeans are displaying cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, they have got to realize at some level what the continuance of Muslim expansion will mean to their children and grandchildren. On the other hand, political correctness and multiculturalism restrains their response.

The resolution, when it comes, may be very sudden and very violent

11/03/2005 06:58:00 AM  
Blogger Papa Bear said...

Dan said: You must disabuse yourself of the idea that such analysis is anything but pre-philosophical obviousness. "Look at the squalor - man that must suck; I'd be pissed too!" Wow. Profundity. What of the conceptual power of Islam, eh?

Keep in mind that the standard of living of the poorest of the slum dwellers of Paris, is higher than the standard of living they would enjoy in the countries they came from

And MUCH higher than the standard of living that Mohammod's merry band enjoyed when they were conquering half the world

These people are after POWER. They figure one good push and the whole rotten society will collapse and they can seize power. It's the same though that Osama had when he planned 9/11

The Europeans, once they shrug off their shackles, may surprise them

11/03/2005 07:07:00 AM  
Blogger Andrew Scotia said...

At the end of the day; when all the talk about demographics, societal malise and economic theories have been exhausted and the arguments endlessly recycled; someone will have to walk into the middle of the circle and say, "They're here. Saddle up, lock and load."

Wretchard's most salient contribution to this thread is saying, "...they are willing to fight." Much of the West has not arrived at that particular sticking point yet. If they don't, well, Nature is "red in tooth and claw" and they will win.

11/03/2005 07:17:00 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

Papa - I agree with you. Islamic factors are at least relevant to the basic level of controlled chaos obtaining where it holds sway. Ibn Khladun remarks that the Bedouins are savages largely because each one wants to be master, and only a prophet is capable of making them work towards one goal, the religious - which is to say, direct their plundering to a mass-purpose. This is of course a seriously antique observation, and one might counter "well what about the basic chaos of an American ghetto" - say, Cleveland, where I live. Fine, yet there most people are Christian if they are religious. Whereas in Cleveland an unruly, pissed off person naturally craving personal power would eventually run into an ideology of peace and equality and personal responsability, in Paris his counterpart would run into - I mean this intellectually, obviously - Islam, which says only if he accept the overlordship of Allah, all his power-seeking will be transubstantiated into holy warfare for God.

The point is not that rioting is a specific conscious expression of what many allege Islam to be, but only that we are not required to make or test such a pronouncement when it clearly affects general tendencies in this way.

Simply: where Mohamed rules, different ideas hold sway. These are the submission, razza, the jizya, the jihad - the constant ululation and ragged chorus from out beyond the Empire's outer hinterlands, droning out of the blasted south.

11/03/2005 07:21:00 AM  
Blogger Buffy said...

Assimilation is a sin against Islam. You can't make friends with the unbeliever. Eventually you just have to kill the infidel. Don't worry though. Beheading by dull knife is fairly quick. You don't have to listen to them scream for very long.

11/03/2005 07:28:00 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

Because what do you think - you, especially you who are critical of Catholics or the more ancient Protestants - they remind their co-religionists of in the mosques at least every Friday? Turn the other cheek? "Man that is born of womankind is born to misery; he cometh up, and is cut down, like a flower"? No. Obviously not. What then? The submission, and the exhortation. The conflict of the two houses, and inexorable victory.

11/03/2005 07:29:00 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

Also, when THE HELL is France - and the rest of Europe - going to get rid of its ridiculous proportional representation government model? It's a terrible idea, despite whatever accomodation it managed in the transition from monarchy to republicanism. It is idiotic. As a professor of mine once told me, "Europeans are stupid at politics." No shit they are.

Thus spake Zarathustra.

11/03/2005 07:33:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

The world wide asymetrical war continues. The opfor, without uniform or rank, masses and disperses at will. Still protected by each host country's "Civil Rights". What was once a shield for the public from oppresive Government becomes a club to be beaten with. Well not for to long.

Scratch the veneer of civilization from the current crop of Europeans, the Barbarians of the past lurk beneath. The Elites of Europe are more afraid of the ghosts of their past than they are of the Mohammedans. The people, well they can be led astray for only so long.
As Mr Lincoln said:
"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you can not fool all the people all the time."
A few more riots, bombings and school siezures and the Franks will find a new Charlemagne to lead them. To Victory hopefully.

11/03/2005 07:37:00 AM  
Blogger Papa Bear said...

desert rat said: Scratch the veneer of civilization from the current crop of Europeans, the Barbarians of the past lurk beneath.

I think that WWI and WWII had a huge effect on the European psyche. They saw, up close and personal, what kinds of monsters lurked underneath the facade of civilization. They don't want to look behind the facade any more.

But some people are just going to keep pushing, and pushing, until the facade can no longer be maintained. They might not like to see what was underneath, that will re-appear when the Europeans face an existential threat

11/03/2005 07:48:00 AM  
Blogger deeds not fap said...

"The world wide asymetrical war continues. The opfor, without uniform or rank, masses and disperses at will. Still protected by each host country's "Civil Rights". What was once a shield for the public from oppresive Government becomes a club to be beaten with. Well not for to long."

Its curious that no one here has yet brought up any comparisons between these riots and those of the first intifada. Reports have described riots in France, Belgium and the Netherlands. Most commenters go for the most parsimonious explanation - that some sort of pathos spontaneously generated this pan-European phenomenon, with comparable policies providing the fostering environment. However, (and this is pure speculation) no one has compared this to the first intifada, when palestinian rioting resulted in a media blitz against the Israelis. The memetic play still reverberates today insofar as the youth of the west do not see Israel as post-holocaust exiles but as a continuum of brutal colonial projects that exploit the weak/poor etc. Given the muslim love of riots, and the memetic advantages of such campaigns, could Iran be developing or "arming" its "virtual nuke" that is the muslim diaspora in certain european coutnries? Such causal underpinnings of these riots would be best attested to by the length of time they persist, perhaps - or finding who or what may be pulling the strings behind any of these emergent conflagrations(which of course may be unparsimonious BS and they all just love being muslim and throwing stones as a ramadan sorta thing). If these poor have not yet been harnessed for their memetic potential, how long before they are "deployed"?

11/03/2005 07:53:00 AM  
Blogger Pierre said...

Its comforting to know that the Person who declared the end of history a smidgen early is again wowing us with his acumen. I remain unimpressed but then again I have a minority view that the problem isnt the conditions that Islam finds itself that cause its horrible behavior. But Islams horrible behavior that causes the conditions it finds itself in.

Long before there was such a thing as modernity Islam was wrecking havoc against humans. One need only ask the Hindu's how they feel about the Muslims. Or perhaps one might question the Armenians if one can find enough of them left over from the great massacre of which we cannot speak officially lest we upset Turkey, that pillar of Islamic moderation.

Until the problem is identified as Islam itself all the rest of this is spinning wheels and burying your head in the sand.

Pierre Legrand

11/03/2005 07:55:00 AM  
Blogger Evan said...

From that point of view, the "Islamic" aspects are purely coincidental or of minor importance in comparison to the 'real' causes.

Many of the arrested people I have seen in photos have been black. Are these neighborhoods primarily Muslim, or are there non-Muslims, say from French West Africa, participating as well? The latter would favor a broader indictment with respect to France and all its nonwhites, rather than an exclusively Islamist explanation. During the assault on those high-school marchers in Paris some months back there were at least as many blacks as Arabs, although I suppose most of the former could've been Muslim too.

11/03/2005 08:00:00 AM  
Blogger sfrcook said...

Wretchard, excellant analysis as usual. The same contradiction of Fukuyama stood out for me as well.

Do sees a race riot, I'm not so sure. If we are to use the civil rights movement in America as a comparison, I am of the opinion that the nobility of that movement was in its demand that America "live out the true meaning of it's creed. We hold the truths to be self-evident..." Essentially a demand for inclusion which shamed the society as a whole into the realization that its founding promise was not being fulfilled.

Are the riots in Paris equally demanding of such inclusion? Has the promise of the welfare state not been fulfilled and thus these youth are rioting with demands of more largess? One could argue that the promises of the welfare state have been fulfilled. Of course, the welfare state postulates that man is a strictly material creature, so imagine the shock when these young "others" show no gratitude for all that there beneficent hosts have provided.

Verc, I must take exception to your argument concerning culture. Culture is everything and the West would do well to proudly extoll its virtue, especially after the decades of exposing all its vices.

11/03/2005 08:16:00 AM  
Blogger Sophia Phoster said...

papa bear

I too do not see any good outcomes. While some Muslim individuals have and will find a way to adopt Western political values while maintaining the spiritual aspects of Islam, it seems that Muslims as a group are unwilling to do the same.

European elites believed they could "manage" the problems caused by Balkanizing their own societies. It was a fools errand. Any concession to political Islam here leads immediately to two more demands there and continues until the host is devoured.

As Muslim populations grow votes more and more opportunistic politicians will seek to capitalize on them even at the expense of traditional values. Today's Democrats are proving time and again that no national interest supersedes the desire to gain political power. And that's even without an influential national Muslim bloc.

We know from recent European history that Joe Citizen will jump eagerly to the far right when liberal government fails him. The current offering of appeasers who's only plan is to "not make them mad" will hasten the transition.

11/03/2005 08:19:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

In London the Mohammedans bus bomb attack, British involvement in Iraq was reportedly at the "root" of their motivation. In France, which with threat of veto kept US from a UN Resolution to use Force in Iraq, economic and political discrimination is the "root" cause of Mohammedan violence.
They are only rioting, now, because they have been called "SCUM" that needed to be "Cleaned Out". Yeah, that is reason to fire bomb a Police Station, alright.
If only the Government had been more polite, nothing would have happened.

Blame the victim, just choose your victims carefully. The Mohammedans will play the oppressed victims of Gaullic/ European discrimination.
European Intafada, if not now, when?

11/03/2005 08:39:00 AM  
Blogger Nathan said...

France needs Charles Martel.

11/03/2005 09:05:00 AM  
Blogger Vercingetorix said...

sfrcook, I would agree, but one thing must be greater and that is the law. Now American culture existed prior to the Constitution and I'd dare say would have existed without the Constitution, but a healthy, binding American nation, through all of the eras of sectionalism and all of our problems, is frankly unthinkable without that document.

And that underscores my argument. The South, the East, the West, the Midwest, Southeast, and on even of America have different 'cultures' from everything including dialect, food, architecture, art, religion, and even the way we play the same sport (football for instance; there are Midwest styles, a Eastern, Western and Texan style of play). Europe is different by degree.

Multiculturalism would have those differences as penultimate. I would have all of the cultures bow before natural law and the Constitution. It is primarily the multi-culti's emphasis on culture as the arbitrator of value, of a rampant relativism, that is it's undoing.

So, in my humble opinion, I would appeal to the great body of laws from, well, my day in France and on as being the rules to play by. If another culture cannot play by those rules or adapt...leave. But like an originalist constitutionalism, appeal to law as written and decided democratically is fair. This extortion is undemocratic and will fail or will kill its adherrants. Either or, hopefully it will happen soon, so we can deal with better problems, such as our approaching robot overlords (whom I welcome, btw ;).

11/03/2005 09:23:00 AM  
Blogger John Aristides said...

I don't think the composition of race riots or Muslim riots is really that different. Both depend on group instead of individual identity, both use awareness of ostensible status as a foundation for grievances, a status that is conferred to the group and therefore transmuted to the individual. Segregation heightens this perception of collective grievance, and also reinforces the group identity at the expense of the individual's.

Sociologically, the conditions are the same for both types of unrests. It is dangerous to combine group identity, segregation, descrimination, and grievances within walking distance of their causes. The determinative variables, if one starts with the premise that a group is in fact subject to the above situations, are the strength of that particular group identification and the immediacy or primacy of the catalyzing injury.

Islam is unique because it is so successful at supplanted the self with the ideas and loyalties of "Muslimness," which, as Wretchard points out, provides a reckless vitality to Islamic mass movements. It is a lesson worth learning, because if one has a Muslim minority exposed to the sociological tripwires mentioned above, the admixture is uniquely toxic and flammable and might be uncontainable once ignited.

So the answer is that the riots are sociological in their origins, but specifically Muslim in the intensity of their manifestations.

11/03/2005 09:26:00 AM  
Blogger gmat said...

The discussion here the last couple days made me think of an essay I read last year comparing Wahhabism to european christian heresies, and suggests a similar fate here it is

11/03/2005 09:34:00 AM  
Blogger sfrcook said...

Verc, your points are well taken. I was referring to the cultures of Western civilization in general.

I appreciate your emphasis on Law, but aren't the laws a society enacts a reflection of its culture ie, its values?

11/03/2005 09:41:00 AM  
Blogger sfrcook said...

Nathan, Charles Martel had no doubt as to what it meant to be French. I'm not so sure todays Frenchmen do.

11/03/2005 09:44:00 AM  
Blogger Annoy Mouse said...

Islam gives sanctuary to the restless youth, an identity and a salve that embraces terror, destruction, and craven acts of murder. It is inevitable, whatever the French government does, that the seeds of resentment and further radicalization will flourish. The French left and right will first tear each other to pieces.

Meanwhile, the US and French intelligence has set up a counter part to al Qaeda, called Alliance Base.

“…a top secret center in Paris, code-named Alliance Base, that was set up by the CIA and French intelligence services in 2002, according to U.S. and European intelligence sources. Its existence has not been previously disclosed.”

“Such joint intelligence work has been responsible for identifying, tracking and capturing or killing the vast majority of committed jihadists who have been targeted outside Iraq and Afghanistan since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to terrorism experts.”

“To play down the U.S. role, the center's working language is French, sources said. The base selects its cases carefully, chooses a lead country for each operation, and that country's service runs the operation.”

“In France, which has a Muslim population reaching 8 percent -- the largest in Europe -- U.S. and French terrorism experts are desperate to take terrorist-group recruiters and new recruits off the streets, and have been willing to put their own anti-terrorism laws into the service of allies to lure suspects such as Ganczarski from abroad.”

The French, being the sophisticated diplomats that they are, have also a willingness to work behind the scenes and to aggressively prosecute the perpetrators of violent religious fervor.

11/03/2005 10:05:00 AM  
Blogger NahnCee said...

I'll tell you one thing that *would* happen in America if Muslims tried rioting like this in the streets is heaps of perforated Muslim bodies.

If our police didn't put a stop to it, our armed American citizenry would.

11/03/2005 10:54:00 AM  
Blogger Vercingetorix said...

Sfrcook, while culture does reflect some laws, it does not affect natural law, which is universal by definition. While I have absolutely no desire to argue over the existence of what seems to be obvious, here are too links below for anyone really itching for my views on whether a natural law exists.

My amateur take-down of relativism

A professional one consonant with my view, but much better.

The second is excellent and brings up positive law, the law that we can choose to follow if we have the freedom to do so (like Kierkagard, freedom is the dialectic between neccessity and possibility). Again, a secular theory with absolute freedom, the kind intellectuals (who choose theory over reality), positive law might be great, but we have needs and so cannot be absolutely free of the constraints of natural forces.

What would be absolutely fair is to set the rules based on natural law as opposed to the posited law of the Euro-elites and the divine law of the Islamists. Both will of course resist it to the last, as natural law dispenses with both fascist regimes.

11/03/2005 11:23:00 AM  
Blogger Mad Fiddler said...

As usual, the comments here are as provocative and stimulatin' as wretchard's original post.

From a "cosmic" perspective, the underlying conflict can fairly be characterized as a test of ethnic or philosophical "dynamism" — i.e., which of these groups is most willing to assert itself robustly and with confidence.

We Americans suffer from a profound distortion of perception caused by our long insulation from the turmoils of the world outside, the incredible abundance of this continent, and the iconoclastic creativity of a population of people willing to decamp from the societies that were stifling them. This is obviously not any new insight. The continuing tragedy is that so many Americans fail to keep this in mind, and continue to evaluate the world without considering how profoundly alien our experiences are from theirs.

For instance, in the Great Patriotic War Russians lost some twenty MILLIONS of their citizens from fighting, disease, starvation, massacres, etc. American military personnel killed totalled only about half a million, only ONE FORTIETH of Soviet deaths. Wait! Stalin executed and starved more than six times that many Soviet civilians in the twenties and thirties just imposing agricultural collectivization on the Ukraine! Long before the prolonged nuclear face-off of the “Cold War” Soviet leaders had seen that a few million deaths could be readily absorbed by a totalitarian regime, without derailing national goals or will. To Americans, figures like that convey a sense of the end of the world.

How many of us spend our evenings sitting in air-conditioned comfort, munching on micro-waved treats as we watch mindless sit-coms? (Hey! I’m one!) When Gramma’s cancer becomes unbearably painful, we typically remove Gramma to die in hospital, so as not to upset the children. Ditto for the family pets. As more we persist in such antiseptic attitudes, so more estranged we become from the experiences of people in Third-World countries, where Gramma suffers, cries out and is cared for or ignored right in the midst of the one-room hovel shared by the extended family and the pigs, goats, dogs, and chickens.

Kids raised in households that over-use antibiotics and antiseptic cleansers show lowered resistance to childhood diseases. When some new pathogen comes along, bred in the septic conditions which third-world citizens endure daily, we are poorly-prepared to resist. When Islamic zealots come forth equally disposed to saw the necks of Al Franken and Rush Limbaugh, Michael Moore and Charlton Heston, Jerry Fallwell and Hugh Hefner, we are paralyzed by our preoccupation with perfect procedure. While we’re arguing over which law to quote in the indictment, which court should have jurisdiction, and which researchers should be awarded grants to describe how Corporate Greed and Conservative bigotry are actually at fault, the victims' heads have already been removed, and their spilt lifeblood feeds the flies.

We’re too busy magnifying our differences to notice that a Demon has entered the room who doesn’t give a **** about whether you embrace diversity or oppose gay marriage.

The Demon wants to kill everybody it can’t enslave.

11/03/2005 11:30:00 AM  
Blogger Peter UK said...

If certain groups of immigrants are unemployed,what is the rationale behind an immigration policy that enables this.
If there is a shortage of labour,then the markets will take up the slack of any surplus labour.
Whilst the usual cry of racism will rend the air,it has no logic,a shortage of labour is a shortage of labour,businesses are not going to go to the wall simply because of the colour of job applicants,it just does not work that way.

Secondly, Europe has an horrendous unemployment problem,even amongst the natives,we don't need more unemployable people.We need skills that the 21st Century requires,not hordes of the unskilled of any hue or suasion.

Lastly Immigration Watch has fugures which suggest that in the profit and loss of immigration the host country suffers a slight loss.This does not include the cultural evisceration inflicted on the host country to meet the demands of some immigrant groups.

11/03/2005 12:00:00 PM  
Blogger heather said...

Optimism is wonderful, and I hope the Europeans re-capture their pride... but the twentieth century leached most of that away forever... even in Winston Churchill's home.

Anyway, back in about 540 AD, Gildas, in his book 'Concerning the Ruin of Britain' as the dark ages rolled over post Roman Britain, he said something VERY relevant to Europe today:

" Then all the councillors, together with the proud tyrant Gurthrigern (ie, Vortigern), the British king, were so blinded, that, as a protection to their country, they sealed its doom by inviting in among them (like wolves into the sheep-fold) the fierce and impious Saxons, a race hateful both to God and men, to repel the invasions of the northern nations. .... A multitude of whelps came forth from the lair of this barbaric lioness....Their mother-land, finding her first brood thus successful, sends forth a larger company of her wolfish offspring, which sailing over, join themselves to their bastard-born comrades. From that time the germ of iniquity and the root of contention planted their poison amongst us, as we deserved, and shot forth into leaves and branches. The barbarians being thus introduced as soldiers into the island,.... obtain an allowance of provisions, which, for some time being plentifully bestowed, stopped their doggish mouths. Yet they complain that their monthly supplies are not furnished in sufficient abundance, and they industriously aggravate each occasion of quarrel, saying that unless more liberality is shown them, they will break the treaty and plunder the whole island. In a short time, they follow up their threats with deeds. (at

Oh well, that was a long time ago, and we are quite a different human now, are we not????

11/03/2005 12:33:00 PM  
Blogger pete speer said...

The simple truth is that Great Britain, France, and most of the nations of the world have created nation states with horizontal and vertical lock in classes.

Muslim anger builds up because of the lack of interclass mobility and certainly of geographic mobility.

Housed together in warrens the men drift towrds secularism and dissatisfied with that (temporaty relief with the usual vices notwithstanding) they turn to the faith of their fathers and find radical clerics able to compound the inner rage.

Islam is an inward looking faith teaching acceptance among the faithful and hatred of all others. The Koran is no more, no less than the Das Kapital of the Islamic religion.

We have to realize, however, that if we put Islam on the same time as Christianity, with the date of the hegira being called AD 1, the religious development of Islam has reached only the fourteenth century.

In our fourteenth century Christianity was put at the service of autocratic governments. The Age of Enlightenment was not yet at hand. The high priests of Christianity were allied with the autocrats.

Islam is internalized. There can be no final resolution until the a parallel secular philosophy develops.

However, the socialist regimes have built up in Western Europe a continuing clientele -- bottled them up, rather.

In America, we still prize the two mobilities. It would be foolish to suggest that there are not terrorist susceptible Muslims from the Arab immigration. With mobility comes assimilation.

The deeper threat as I see it comes from the radicalization of the Muslim prison converts, who find themselves stymied on the outside.

11/03/2005 12:53:00 PM  
Blogger Charles said...

Two Junes ago I heard in a lecture by noted Christian Apologist ravi zacharias that:

"Many people listen with their eyes and think with their emotions."

I thought of Zararias comment when I ran across Keat's Ode to a grecian urn. consider.

John Keats. 1795–1821

625. Ode on a Grecian Urn

THOU still unravish'd bride of quietness,
Thou foster-child of Silence and slow Time,
Sylvan historian, who canst thus express
A flowery tale more sweetly than our rhyme:
What leaf-fringed legend haunts about thy shape 5
Of deities or mortals, or of both,
In Tempe or the dales of Arcady?
What men or gods are these? What maidens loth?
What mad pursuit? What struggle to escape?
What pipes and timbrels? What wild ecstasy? 10

Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard
Are sweeter; therefore, ye soft pipes, play on;
Not to the sensual ear, but, more endear'd,
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone:
Fair youth, beneath the trees, thou canst not leave 15
Thy song, nor ever can those trees be bare;
Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss,
Though winning near the goal—yet, do not grieve;
She cannot fade, though thou hast not thy bliss,
For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair! 20

Ah, happy, happy boughs! that cannot shed
Your leaves, nor ever bid the Spring adieu;
And, happy melodist, unwearièd,
For ever piping songs for ever new;
More happy love! more happy, happy love! 25
For ever warm and still to be enjoy'd,
For ever panting, and for ever young;
All breathing human passion far above,
That leaves a heart high-sorrowful and cloy'd,
A burning forehead, and a parching tongue. 30

Who are these coming to the sacrifice?
To what green altar, O mysterious priest,
Lead'st thou that heifer lowing at the skies,
And all her silken flanks with garlands drest?
What little town by river or sea-shore, 35
Or mountain-built with peaceful citadel,
Is emptied of its folk, this pious morn?
And, little town, thy streets for evermore
Will silent be; and not a soul, to tell
Why thou art desolate, can e'er return. 40

O Attic shape! fair attitude! with brede
Of marble men and maidens overwrought,
With forest branches and the trodden weed;
Thou, silent form! dost tease us out of thought
As doth eternity: Cold Pastoral! 45
When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st,
'Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

11/03/2005 01:02:00 PM  
Blogger Michael McCanles said...

I'm uncomfortable with any explanations of Jihadi violence and aggression that derives it from frustration of desires, lack of upward mobility, resentment, etc.

The reason is that such explanations are little more than riffs on the old marxist and marxoid notion that they only reason why anybody attacks anybody is because the first "anybody" was oppressed by the second "anybody" and was therefore deprived of [XYZ: power, money, prestige, whatever]. Therefore, the cure? Give them what they want.

This doesn't mean that sometimes this explanation doesn't actually applies to specific cases.

But this is not what the Jihadis say, and it's not the message which the broad history of Islamic aggression against the West since the 8th century delivers to us. What it delivers is something which the marxoid categories of explanation simply cannot handle, because those categories are founded on the notion that envy is the fundamental drive of all human endeavor: whatever you have that I don't has been taken from me and is in justice owned me.

Islam has never said that the West owed them anything--except absolute acceptance of Islamic beliefs. It's possible that because the West is so irrecoverably post-Christian that it simply can't take seriously such a motivation. They want to make everyone do their prayer-rug thingy five times a day, that's the reason why they attacked the World Trade Center?

The explanation is worse than non-explanatory to our mindset--it's insulting. We have a major problem understanding Jihadi terrorism because we can't understand religious fanaticism, and we can't understand religious fanaticism because we no longer take religion seriously.

11/03/2005 03:07:00 PM  
Blogger John Aristides said...

Marxist group theory is a top down, deterministic, simplified version of what in fact motivates mass movements.

Just to be clear, that is not what I am arguing is the cause of the Paris riots. The cause is one of identification, an affliction of the self and an inability on the part of Muslims to comprehend themselves as an individuals. The group think is their reaction to a global consciousness. Anxiety and defiance flow from the individual's perception of the group's current and historical status, and that status is then transmuted to the individual. An insult to one Muslim becomes an insult to all Muslims becomes an insult to me. It's a mind trick, but on a massive, collective scale.

The interesting thing about this dynamic is that the underlying observation--that the group's status is due to the perfidy of other groups--doesn't have to be true for the mind trick to work.

The flip side to my point: if the Muslims dominated the world, or if the Muslims were comfortable with their status in the world, or if the Muslims were staunch individualists, there would be no Muslim suicide bombers.

Option one is out of the question, option three seems unlikely in the near future, so we are going with option two. Hence, OIF.

11/03/2005 03:23:00 PM  
Blogger Meme chose said...

Wretchard: “Young people are looking for something to live for, something worthy of their dreams. Islam may not provide any billiard tables, but they hand out heady visions by the bushel.”

Dalrymple’s first-hand experience leads him away from this sort of interpretation in urban Europe; he has noted elsewhere that the (convenient) subjugation of women is just about the only tenet of Islam urban Muslim thugs typically seek to retain or enforce. The rioters in Paris typically don’t buy into the suicide bombers’ self-sacrificial ideology at all. The incident I read about yesterday in which some of them threw rocks at their own imams dramatically underlines this fact.

Even the stated goals are clearly different. The suicide bombers want a global Islamic regime, whereas what the rioters in both Paris and Aarhus want is local ‘no-go areas’ for the police, i.e. defined tribal areas they can rule and commit crimes in themselves, undisturbed by either the French police or any form of Islamic authority.

There are 1,000 non-devout young Muslims with a propensity to riot along these lines in France for every 1 devout potential suicide bomber. Naturally enough given our experience in the US on 9/11, we worry about the 1. Equally naturally the French worry a lot more more about the thousands in their suburbs.

The ruling French elite may be devious (they are), but they are not stupid. They could see as well as Dalrymple did that they were sitting on top of this social powder keg of their own making, and they knew that war in Iraq could set it off, which has a lot to do with their frantic efforts to oppose it.

Ironically, if any aspect of foreign affairs has encouraged the riots in Paris I think it is most likely to be the EU’s more recent Iran debacle over nuclear weapons development; a demonstration in terms that even ill-educated Muslim youths can understand that defying EU governments gets you immediate abject acquiesence and bigger subsidy offers.

11/03/2005 03:46:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Speaking of Iran, there is a piece in the NYTimes, just today.
The best lines in a plea to open more economic ties with nonGovernment entities.

"... The historic roots of reform run deep in Iran, and support for democratic change remains widespread.

Iran's modern middle class, which is increasingly urbanized, wired and globally connected, provides particularly fertile soil for these aspirations. The Stanford University scholar Abbas Milani has described Iran's middle class as a "Trojan horse within the Islamic republic, supporting liberal values, democratic tolerance and civic responsibility." And so long as that class grows, so too will the pressure for democratic change. ..."

He goes on to say that

" ... Now more than ever, middle-class and other democracy-minded Iranians need to preserve and expand their network of institutions independent from the government - institutions in which they can take refuge from the rapacious hardliners who seek to control all aspects of Iranian life. That network should include a strong private sector; a rich array of nongovernmental organizations dealing with issues like poverty, women's rights and youth unemployment; and social, intellectual and cultural associations that communicate with counterparts abroad.

Unfortunately, United States sanctions now prevent any American person or group from financially supporting, say, a microfinance bank, a program to train future political leaders or even an education initiative for rural women in Iran. That is a mis- take. Elsewhere in the Middle East, the United States has programs that provide exactly these kinds of grants, in the name of democratization.

The United States should ease such sanctions in order to match its rhetorical commitment to Iranian democracy with meaningful action. The European Union should also step up its support for democratic activists and its commitment to the protection of human rights in Iran. Meanwhile, development institutions like the World Bank should invest in Iran's emerging private sector, which is not affiliated with the country's business mafias or the government-linked foundations that control about a quarter of the country's wealth. ..."
Allies in Iran?

A nonmilitary option on the table for dealing with Iran, perhaps not perfect, but it holds out hope for an outcome less than War.
Lawyers, Guns & Money, they'll get US out of this.

11/03/2005 04:36:00 PM  
Blogger heather said...

Dalrymple, in his Autumn 2005 "Suicide bombers among us" makes a totally relevant observation:
"Many young Muslims, UNLIKE THE SONS OF HINDUS AND SIKHS, who immigrated into Britain at the same time as their parents, Take drugs, including heroin. They drink, indulge in casual sex, and make nightclubs the focus of their lives. Work and careers are at best a painful necessity, a slow and inferior means of obtaining the money for their distractions."

And then Dalrymple proceeds to describe the nihilistic, selfish 'lifestyle' of the young British Islamists.

So, yo'all, what is it about Islam that is so very different from two equally 'foreign' cultures, featuring unusual paraphenalia, which makes the Hindu and the Sikh stand out - but not apart - from the modern Christian based West???

11/03/2005 04:43:00 PM  
Blogger heather said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11/03/2005 04:44:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Borrowing from military solutionist Verc:

Thesis: Naive Bush-Sharansky style democracy will empower the noble purple-fingered Iraqi people to create a secular nation where the Religion of Peace is moderated. Liberating oppressive Muslim countries with the blood of American soldiers and vast expenditures of American treasure will cause women to cast off their Burquas.

Antithesis: Exposure to democracy as in Europe, founding Pakistan, Malaysia, America does not deter radical Islam but intensifies it and tolerance simply creates masses of Islamoid terrorists in the midst of their mortal foe the Infidel. Mass Islamoid immigration and "refugee rights" only intensify the problem in N America, Europe, and Oceana.

Synthesis: Since multiculturalism AND democracy fail to temper radical Islam, Islamoids must be given a final choice to reform intolerant religious teachings, assimilate, or go back to the Ummah under threat of force. Plenty of non-dangerous 3rd world potential immigrants exist to replace Muslim labor in Europe, Oceana, and the Americas. End the assaults on Christianity conducted by Muslims and the Jewish-controlled ACLU and Southern Law Poverty Center, as well as the non-Muslim, non-Jewish "effete" elites that also pitch in to control key NGOs, MSM, universities, and ministries.

Conclusion: If post-modern democracy fails to handle the threat due to slow response in dealing with the Islamic enemy within and their sympathizers and defenders - be they Jewish, Christian, atheist - democracy may have to be temporarily supplanted by a new totalitarian model that will rise and deal with the "rights" of the enemy and power centers of their backers in the way that Europeans, Asians, even Americans (Lincoln, FDR) traditionally have done. The West, India, and Asia must agree on the measures needed to be taken to defeat the Islamoids. Final ME borders must be agreed to or imposed. Energy solutions to the present situation of massive petrodollars being transferred to radical Islamists must be part of it.

11/03/2005 04:49:00 PM  
Blogger Das said...

Remember too (while we are deciding the fate of Islam and the West) that on a pure 14 year old animal level a lot of the rioter kids are having the time of their lives. They're out past bedtime, they're making the cops mad, they are mussing up Villepin's hairdo, hell, they're having a blast. Liberal democracies allow for a certain amount of adolescent frenzy; civilization is boring after all.

What is utterly fascinating is the non-coverage by the mainstream press. The depth of its investment in multicultural fantasy is astounding.

11/03/2005 05:00:00 PM  
Blogger Delta Dave said...

I agree with nahncee ... its not about poverty and ghotto living...

no, its about power and control. That is foundational basis of the GWOT ... who is going to be the power and control in the 21C ... Islamic fundamentalist or democracies

11/03/2005 05:09:00 PM  
Blogger sam said...

Paris-Area Riots Spread to 20 Towns:

Residents and opposition politicians have accused Sarkozy of fanning tensions with his tough police tactics and talk -- including calling troublemakers "scum."

"Sarkozy's language has added oil to the fire. He should really weigh his words," said Kaci, whose daughter lost her gym. "I'm proud to live in France, but this France disappoints me."

Paris Riots

11/03/2005 05:12:00 PM  
Blogger Sophia Phoster said...

The address of the Prime Minister of Malaysia at the Islamic Summit Conference (2003) may be useful in understanding the role of Islam in today's world. Bear in mind that Mahathir is considered an "ally" in the GWOT, and his audience for this speech are the ruling elites of 57 recognized nation states. The full text of the speech is here.

The theme of the speech is "We are all Muslims. We are all oppressed. We are all being humiliated." Mahathir pines for the golden age of Islam when "The Europeans had to kneel at the feet of Muslim scholars."

Read the rest. It seems clear to me that Mahathir is calling for jihad, against the Jews specifically and against Europe and the West in general who he posits as the cause of Muslim humiliation. Interestingly he conjures up Mohammed's example of peaceful immigration into the enemy camp as a tactic.

Al Qaeda's declaration of war against the US was ignored in 1998. Two Iranian leaders have promised the nuclear annihilation of Israel without a peep of protest. Mahathir invokes jihad and the annihilation of Jews to the world's Islamic ruling elites. Why don't we take these folks at their word? Islam is at war with the West whether we want to hear that or not. Why do we look for rational excuses for the Islamic mobs rioting in France?

We must confront Islam and push back at every level and at every opportunity.

11/03/2005 05:24:00 PM  
Blogger Mitch said...

There is also a tendency among the French to romanticize violent popular outbursts (the Bastille, '48, the Commune, the Dreyfus riots, '68 ...). This tradition is likely to make it difficult for the government act vigorously against the rioters, who will quickly notice and take advantage of this weakness.

France's best hope is that the Beurs will either get bored or run out of things to burn.

11/03/2005 05:49:00 PM  
Blogger deeds not fap said...

In response to desert rat's 4:36 PM post:

Empowering this native and nascent Iranian subpopulation sounds interesting. A few threads ago (sure wish i could search these threads - there soo valuable but soo ungainly to reference), someone asked how much it would take to park a satellite above iran; i dont believe they mentioned a purpose but commenters presumed they wanted the sat. for jamming purposes etc. I thought they fancied giving the iranians access to all that US Commerce Dept. controlled internet that iran doesnt want. Infact, given the area that would be covered, we could have it "accidentally" spill over into key iranian areas...

So then, why dont we just bake iran with encrypted access to the internet for awhile and see what happens; if we could smuggle in wireless technology that wouldnt be easily detected, we could help to coalesce and mobilize this nascent subpopulation and empower them with the same tools that created the vast right-wing blogosphere. It'd be interesting to see iranian society lift itself up from wherever the hell it is now and find itself next to us in the info revolution. Cell phones and internet access can give protesters a network-centric edge; why not give this subpopulation the same benefit against the IRGC or whatever it is.

MIT is trying to make $100 laptops; could we make $1-10 wireless cards? include one of those mini-cds with all the drivers?

Regime change via a bottom up "electorate-based" process would be far more elegant and far less violent than a top-down "conqueror/occupier-based" process perhaps?

11/03/2005 05:57:00 PM  
Blogger trangbang68 said...

Nathan said France needs another Charles Martel.In the secular brooding culture of post Christian Europe I wouldn't count on it.
A better solution might be the sons of the parachute regiments and Legioneers who learned after Indochina how to fight third world irregulars and could slit a throat with the best of them in Algeria.
Its interesting that the aging radicals governing France probably marched in Paris with Danny the Red in 1968.Of course they were pseudo-revolutionary posers.These junior jihadi cats are like the rabble that lopped off Marie Antoinette's head.They mean it.
I agree with Nahncee.I don't think it could happen here either.We haven't disarmed yet.

11/03/2005 06:15:00 PM  
Blogger Marcus Aurelius said...

Wretchard states:
Because they're willing to fight for their existence and nine times out of ten, that beats the side that is unwilling to fight for its existence. Should Europe decide their way of life is worth preserving then other factors, such as worth may come into play.

I recall hearing about a similar but smaller riot some months ago, in Either The Netherlands or in France. I recall reading how some poor Euro was getting beat by the mob and how some of the mob stated they enjoyed kicking on them because they never fight back.

Also that old saying about idle hands being the devils workshop comes into play.

11/03/2005 06:21:00 PM  
Blogger tcobb said...

I don't doubt that much of the impetus for these riots is due to poverty, but it must be kept in mind that this poverty is purely relative. I doubt that any of them go starving or without shelter in the French welfare state. But ending the analysis there really ignores the question as to WHY they are poor relative to the rest of the population. What about the Asian immigrants to France? I suspect that economically they are much better off that those of Muslim descent, and I don't think you will find them rioting in the streets. So I doubt that racism is the cause of their poverty, despite those that espouse the Marxism for Dummies formulation that all social tension is the result of poverty and racism.

Its their culture that is the culprit. And this really gets back to Wrechard's point, I think. Given that you are an underclass, how will any different cultural groups react to that? The phenomenon is real. Consider if you will a picture I saw from an area of Mississippi that showed a sign surrounded by a group of men that read "Drunks with Guns--U Loot we Shoot." And I'm sure they would have. Can you imagine that in Manhatten? I don't think so. And so it is with cultures that revolve around Islam that inhabit the slums of Paris. Its something that needs to be taken into account, and not just cherished as a celebration of diversity.

All cultures are not equal, and many are inherently incompatible with one another. Its time we learned this before the price for such stupidity has to be paid in rivers of blood. I hope its not too late.

11/03/2005 06:23:00 PM  
Blogger exhelodrvr1 said...

Can you imagine that in Manhattan? Can you say "Kitty Genovese"?

11/03/2005 06:35:00 PM  
Blogger ghoullio said...

trust me, i hate saying this as much as you hate hearing it, but to lay blame entirely on the kids in these riots isnt exactly fair. France shoulders responsibilities for allowing them to brew this cup of bitterness, France engaged in creating a Palestinian-like state for these people. these are Algerians, these are the pros, these arent Chechnyans nor Arabs. they are a whole new breed of problems, and they have every right to be hacked of for being kept in substandard conditions. burn em down and make France rebuild, they saw how these travesties helped their Muslim brethren overseas in Indochina and Pakistan, and to a certain extent Gulf State America. they lack a natural disaster that entitles them to rezoning, they are simply doing their neighborhoods a favor, perhaps this is why France doesnt stop them. in America, i would give them a night before i went down there myself, and i know i am not alone...

but THIS scares the crap outof me...

French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said Thursday that the riots in several Paris suburbs over the previous night were "not spontaneous" but rather "well organized."

"What we saw in the department of Seine-Saint-Denis overnight was not spontaneous, it was perfectly organized. We are looking into by whom and how," Sarkozy told French news channel i-tele.

The interior minister also said the government would not allow "troublemakers, a bunch of hoodlums, think they can do whatever they want" in the country.

A force of 1,000 police were assigned late Thursday to Seine-Saint-Denis, following the previous night of violence which affected about half of the 40 towns in the department, mostly communities of immigrants from Africa, officials said.

how does one link on here?

11/03/2005 08:56:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

I hear sales of Buchanan's "The Death of the West" have picked up considerably in Europe.

Also, they are reprinting the "racist/fascist" book "Camp of the Saints" written by the Frenchman Raspail. In that 1973 book, a souless West is overwhelmed physically by an intitially peaceful 3rd World tide of humanity, that quickly turns violent as soon as the power balance shifts, and the Weserners are exterminated.

The West and white people end up destroyed by themselves more than the dark hordes swarming in. The enemies are ultimately the liberals, the clueless PC/multi cultis, libertarian open borders advocates.

Raspail himself was a bit of a hypocrite - he didn't want the Muslims singled out because he feared retaliation and didn't want to reopen wounds of the Algerian war 10 years past. The last stand of Westernized whites was the few that realized it was all worth fighting for in the end, but it was too late, they were overwhelmed in a last valley where they appreciated their 2,000 year old culture for the last time.

A review of "Camp of the Saints", a book scarier than anything Stephen King ever penned:

I find it amusing that so many civil libertarians hold up a piece of paper, the US Constitution, as if it is some magical talisman against an existential threat and while the Islamoid death toll is still low. Who say they fear more not being in literal, verbatim compliance with their piece of paper, than they fear loss of their civilization or their lives. Better be free until we are conquered than give up a single "freedom" to win the war.

A most stupid, short-sighted outlook, IMO.

There is more to Western Civ than Europeans mindlessly obedient to the UN, One-worldism, progressive tolerance above self-interest or America's obeying the ACLU or anally fixating on all our civilizational defenses being bound and restricted by a 215 year old parchement.

11/03/2005 10:36:00 PM  
Blogger wretchardthecat said...


There's commentary at this BBC Have Your Say site from a number of American Muslims of African origin who've been to France saying that racism and discrimination is much worse in France than in America; incomparably worse. Kinda makes your eyes pop and suggests that behind the politically correct rhetoric lurked the poisonous old tribal insularity of years past. I suppose if the French could look down on Americans they'd have no trouble looking down on Arab Muslims.

If this were the social reality, then the European multi-culti act makes even less sense, because they were raising expectations they weren't prepared to meet.

Thinking back on the push for Kyoto and the budget caps, which it turned out, no European government was actually going to comply with, it occurs to me that what European politicians say isn't the same as what they are really saying. I'm learning.

11/03/2005 10:57:00 PM  
Blogger Jack said...

French racism and multiculturalism exaggerate the tensions by stressing the "us" vs "them" social makeup. However, economically, the immigrants have a good set up, higher wages and much more welfare programs than back home. Social problems are as much their fault as the French, and generally, if they don't like it they are free to leave, as opposed to burning the place down and threatening at the point of a gun. But whenever deportations are attempted, they kick and scream to avoid it, even the firebrand preachers.

11/03/2005 11:43:00 PM  
Blogger sam said...


To link:

HTML Codes

You want the 'anchor' type.

11/03/2005 11:51:00 PM  
Blogger miklos rosza said...

My wife is from Avignon, all my in-laws likewise from Provence. Marseille. Which is Le Pen country.

When she announced our pending marriage, her father said: "As long as he's not an Arab."

I'm waiting to see if this turns into something with a body count. Otherwise, if it's just cars burned and property damage exclusively within the banlieux, I think France may to some extent go back to sleep.

Recommended video rental: LA HAINE (HATE) if you want to see the suburbs up close.

And from what I know, Dalrymple's right: these guys aren't religious. They only invoke Islam when it suits them to mess with and flex their muscles with the girls.

11/04/2005 01:15:00 AM  
Blogger miklos rosza said...

The jihadi element, however, is certainly present -- present in the music of these ghettos, which is rap. And it figures that these guys would be the most organized.

There have long been rumors aboout all kinds of weapons smuggled into France from Chechnya, for instance.

So we'll see. Wretchard is probably entirely prescient about the links now being forged between serious jihadis and dopesmoking lazy teenages and young men who are smalltime criminals who travel in packs and are permanently unemployed.

In other words the real civil war may be yet to come.

I know that in the south of France no one wants to live in the cities because of Arab crime. Avignon has gone downhill just in the last couple of years (which is too bad).

People are extraordinarily passive by American standards. Passive and fatalistic.

Chirac and deVillepin hope to make Sarkozy look bad so deVillepin will be in position to succeed Chirac as president. This is a subplot to watch.

11/04/2005 01:44:00 AM  
Blogger Rune said...

I don't doubt that much of the impetus for these riots is due to poverty, but it must be kept in mind that this poverty is purely relative.

I don’t think it’s poverty. One might argue it’s marginalisation and lack of opportunity. It reminds me of an America movie I saw some time back. Boyz n the Hood I think. Supposedly about a group of people in a run down impoverished part of Los Angeles. But when I watched it, they all ate well, wore expensive clothes and they all had better houses and cars than me. So I asked some Americans, what it was all about. And they said it wasn’t about poverty per se, but about lack of opportunity. Don’t know that I buy it, but perhaps that’s what the driving force in Paris is. Though I have to say, in that case the rioters themselves will have to bear the lion’s share of responsibility. At least if the situation is in any way comparable to Scandinavia. The immigrants from South America fleeing Chilean Pinochet, all are pretty much integrated into society – there were some small initial problems, nothing anymore. Immigrants from Asia, many from Thailand, the Philippines and Tamils never go rioting through the streets. Amazingly immigrants from the Philippines, despite having the same educational background or worse than Middle Eastern immigrants, have an even higher work rate than natives Danes. And all the Asian groups have a lower crime rate than native Danes – while Middle Eastern and African are massively overrepresented. When you compare with all the other immigrant groups which are doing good, there’s nothing, except culture and religion, which single out those from the Middle East.

11/04/2005 05:10:00 AM  
Blogger Marcus Aurelius said...

Cedarford status thusly:
disagree about the imperative to bring Muslims in. Europe first has the options of increasing caucasian birthrates or going with more robotics, as the Japanese are doing. If in the end they HAVE to have immigration, maybe now is that great inflection point where Europe determines that Muslims are incompatable with Western Civilization - but 2 billion immigrant candidates in other nations have shown they are quite compatible.

C4, interesting points. However, it seems to me European manufacturing is already heavily automated. I was listening to some guys talking shop (IIRC it was residential window shop talk) and one person to the surprise of the other noted the labor costs per output in Europe is lower than it is here, because labor is so pricey they are much quicker to adopt automation than we are.

Increasing caucasian birth rates? Good luck one thing I hear more and more over here (and they are further along those lines in Europe) is how young women and men do not have the time or money for children. Plus, a friend of mine in the UAE (a chemistry researcher from India) was talking about research that indicated declining birth rates in the West wasn't due entirely to wealth, extended lives etc but that some of the chemicals we are all exposed to on a regular basis have fertility reducing properties. I don't know about that last one, but the attitude point I am certain about.

You are right, Europe is not restricted to labor from Islamic lands.

Europe may not have their gravey trains social... I would call it safety net but it kicks in way way before anyone would need a net.

11/04/2005 06:43:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger