Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reality and its Discontents [The Threat Posed by Muslim Immigration]
FrontPage Magazine ^ | June 9, 2003 | Steve Vivian

Posted on 06/09/2003 8:07:43 AM PDT by SlickWillard

 
Reality and its Discontents

By Steve Vivian
FrontPageMagazine.com | June 9, 2003

Imagine waking up one day to find that the United States has become the site of…

Honor killings.

Barbarous public slaughtering of animals in religious festivals.

Raving sermons urging the faithful to slaughter the infidels.

Asylum for terrorists.

Is this scenario an absurdity, a paranoid picture of dystopia cooked up by right-wing knee-jerk loonies?

If only.

In fact, it’s entirely possible. Why? Because England, our nation’s first cousin, is the site of these acts—and more. A terrible irony is at work here: For centuries, Britain was the driving force behind classical liberalism. We can trace back this historic drive, which has secured freedom for countless people over the centuries, to the Magna Carta in 1215. Yet now, Britain is rapidly losing what she worked for centuries to establish: a civil society that champions classical liberalism.

And if it can happen in Britain (and elsewhere in Europe) it can happen in the US. If it does, the reasons will boil down to two: the busted dam of mass immigration, combined with the failure of ordinary citizens to defend classical liberalism. Aiding and abetting both causes—at this very moment—is the squishy PC left. The left’s inability to even think straight stems largely from the rot in academe, especially in the humanities and social sciences. In both disciplines, the asinine assumptions of post-structuralism have run riot. Po-mo takes some time to unpack, but for our purposes, we can simply note that academic po-mo “demonstrates” that there is no firm basis for making judgments about culture (such as: “One shouldn’t use gang rape to punish female relatives.”)

Indeed, to merely utter “better” or “worse” in the context of culture is the height of politically correct bad taste. And often, the truth is in bad taste—that is, if we value politically correct fantasies, not hard-nosed reality. And that reality is simple: mass immigration threatens Western classical liberal values. As the multi-culti Left loves to proclaim, “Culture matters!” No kidding. It matters in ways infinitely more profound than PC allows itself to imagine. And here’s another thing that matters: reality.

Lest we forget: prior to September 11, who among the Establishment Left would believe there was the tiniest possibility that Islamist theocratic fascists would use innocent people as munitions and targets? Certainly, at this late date—well beyond 9-11-01—the nation must distinguish between blunt reality and PC fantasy. And after doing so, an obvious step is to dramatically reduce the surge of immigrants from Islamic nations into the United States.

The possibility of doing so is certainly greater now than just a couple years ago. Prior to 9-11, efforts to reduce immigration were dismissed by most of the Left and the Right. The Left indulged in its favorite pastime—scolding and self-exaltation—by attacking immigration reform talk as merely racist, the sour grapes of unwashed Archie Bunkers. The Right typically dismissed the idea with sentimental rhetoric about the nation’s historical melting pot—and behind this, of course, was the love of ever-cheaper labor. But the idea of serious immigration reform is at least now within, not beyond, the pale.

The reality of current immigration, especially that from Islamic nations, is simply too compelling for anyone (save the squishies, of course) to ignore. Islamic nations are among the most repressive on Earth…indeed, these nations’ governments run roughshod over the very freedoms that the Establishment Left pretends to prize. Add to this reality another reality: the freest nations are those of the “infidels”: in other words, the “Eurocentric” nations.

Sentimentalist pro-immigration arguments assume that the melting pot washes away cultural divisions, and in the past, that argument often held true. But that argument grows feebler by the hour. Many immigrants from Islamic nations arrive with deep-seated grievances against the West, and as many scholars (e.g., Daniel Pipes) have carefully shown, fashionable PC grievances often infect second and even third generation members of immigrant families. Throughout the West, fashionable grievances are then nurtured by the spewing of hatred from mosques, encouraged by various “civil rights” groups, academics, and of course praised by the leftist squishies, whose greatest pleasure is to hear that Western culture is uniquely evil and oppressive. Toss in a heaping helping of bilious anti-Semitism, and there’s a lot less melting in the pot.

Simultaneously, the aggrieved immigrants enjoy the unique benefits of living in the Western world; indeed, the very civil liberties that characterize the West are employed to advance extremely illiberal views. This fact can confound only the pious PC left. People do not necessarily change because they cross a border, especially when across that border waits abundant encouragement to isolate oneself in an enclave of old world habits and new world indignation.

In England, time is not on the side of classical liberalism. If immigration is not seriously reformed, our nation’s first cousin will one day hear thunderous calls for sharia, and that’s a “cultural diversity” that only the most hypocritical leftist could celebrate…from a safe distance, of course.

In the U.S, the battle is not yet over. Indeed, many polls demonstrate, most Americans favor a serious reduction in immigration. This desire does not make Americans “Xenophobic” or “racist”; it makes them realists. Ordinary Americans, after all, increasingly bear the brunt of our nation’s highly irrational immigration policies. If the PC herd believed for one second its own hot air about supporting the working class, it would join ordinary Americans in immigration reform.

But it doesn’t, so it won’t.

Steve Vivian is the author of two novels. He holds a Ph.D. in English Studies with a concentration in cognitive linguistics.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: immigration
I used to be pro-immigration, and I am still, to an extent, but I think the US ought to be highly selective in choosing who gets to enter - the problem is not so much that the US is allowing immigration, but that it's letting in all the wrong people.

Of course, the career bureaucrats at the INS will always be politically correct socialists, so changing matters won't be easy.

1 posted on 06/09/2003 8:07:43 AM PDT by SlickWillard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: KayEyeDoubleDee
Bump
2 posted on 06/09/2003 8:08:01 AM PDT by SlickWillard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SlickWillard
"Lest we forget: prior to September 11, who among the Establishment Left would believe there was the tiniest possibility that Islamist theocratic fascists would use innocent people as munitions and targets?"

Um....Islamofascists using innocent people as targets and munitiona began decades before 9/11. The PC left apparently prefers to keep it's collective head inserted where the sun don't shine, lest guaranteed Deomcrat votes be lost. Their approach to Islamofascism is the same as their method of perpetuating class and race warfare as a means to keep black Americans convinced they can succeed at anything in life only with special government dispensation, and blacks who succeed on their own merits are somehow 'Uncle Toms'.

A return to classical liberalism isn't the answer. Common sense actions regarding the potential enemy is.

As a second generation American, I'm pro-immigration...to a point. I believe that immigration should be strictly limited, and each applicant thoroughly screened. Especially Arab Muslim immigrants, no matter what their claimed country of origin.

If they don't like it, they should simply stop killing us infidels. It may eventially reform their collective image among us.

3 posted on 06/09/2003 8:36:43 AM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions=Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SlickWillard
The PC left still refuses to acknowledge the forty year terroist history ( current) of these terroists. When American soldiers are killed they ignore it ( think Beirut onward). When ONLY 6 are killed at WTC in 1993 they ignore it. When Iraq is tied to OKC they ignore it. When the WTC is actually brought down, tey cry for two days and then ignore it. What makes anyone think they will pay attention to the dangers within now? Not me. If we don't get real hardnosed about immigration policy the greatness of Western Civilization is doomed
4 posted on 06/09/2003 9:06:18 AM PDT by jnarcus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SlickWillard
I don't think it's a matter of the PC-left havng their head in the sand about Islamofascists. The PC-left (or the Waffen-PC, as I like to call them) share a common goal with Islamofascists: to destroy what remains of the traditional Judeo-Christian culture. This goal is basically already a done deal in England and Europe, where an unaccountable Tranzi elite rules over a stupefied, shrinking native populace with an ever-expanding Islamic minority. The only serious target left is the US. Once the US is disposed of or neutralized with vast numbers of unassimilated, unskilled immigrants who will vote the Dems into power permanently, Israel can be destroyed and an expanded Cailphate (encompassing Europe) can be established. The Islamofascists are quite able to look at the long-term, unlike the majority of our leaders in the West.
5 posted on 06/09/2003 9:06:43 AM PDT by Bogolyubski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bogolyubski
Excellent comment. Until the West recognizes this is a military movement wrapped in bathrobes, they will be easy prey to these pilgrims from the middle east seeking religious tolerance and acceptance and welfare. Europe is in danger of being fitted for new holy bathrobes. A little discipline for the French?? Europe better wake up soon or it is over.
6 posted on 06/09/2003 9:49:16 AM PDT by Goreknowshowtocheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SlickWillard
Many people cannot see the difference between allowing Mexican and Central American immigration and immigration from the Middle East. Hostility to Catholicism is traditional among liberals, but they have no history of hostile encounter with Muslims. Indeed, the Crusades are held up as typical outrages by (Catholic) Christians against peaceful Muslims. Likewise, colonizing activities of the Western powers in Muslims countries, which involved Protestant and Catholic missions, are deplored as cultural imperialism. The liberal view of Israel as a kind of European colony in a Muslim world has served to erode support for that regime.

About Islam itself,ignorance and romanticism characterize liberal ideas about Islam. Certain aspects of Muslim life, such as the treatment of women and fanatical pronouncements by Muslim clerics caused negative comment, but its strict monotheism has always made it more attractive to liberals , at least in outline, than Christianity. Even now, after 9/11, liberalism has been slow to come to terms with the raw fact that Islam is far more alien to their world view than, say, Catholicism or Mormonism, ever was in their wildest imaginings.

7 posted on 06/09/2003 10:38:24 AM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jnarcus
"When the WTC is actually brought down, tey cry for two days and then ignore it."

Did they cry? I can't imagine where they found the time to cry, while screaming "What did Bush know and when did he know it" and accusing him of actually having been BEHIND the 9/11 attacks so he could steal Iraq's oil via Afghanistan...

8 posted on 06/09/2003 11:00:54 AM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions=Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SlickWillard
keeper
9 posted on 06/09/2003 11:24:02 AM PDT by CGVet58 (I still miss my ex-wife... but my aim is improving!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SlickWillard
Sentimentalist pro-immigration arguments assume that the melting pot washes away cultural divisions, and in the past, that argument often held true.

That only happens to the extent that the various ethnic groups inter-marry. When a kid is 1/4 English, 1/4 German, 1/4 Irish, and 1/4 Italian, and is married to a similar combo, it's hard to get him strongly on the side of one of his component ethnic groups against another.

Strong religious difference is another story. A Muslim woman CANNOT marry a non-Muslim man (and live).

10 posted on 06/09/2003 12:20:13 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor (Java/C++/Unix/Web Developer looking for next gig)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson