Friday, January 06, 2006
Do you feel fine?
If you read one article this week about The End of the [Western] World as We Know It, make sure it's this one.
Some choice excerpts:
The design flaw of the secular social-democratic state is that it requires a religious-society birthrate to sustain it.
Needless to say, there is no campaign of Islamophobic hate crimes. If anything, the West is awash in an epidemic of self-hate crimes. A commenter on Tim Blair's Web site in Australia summed it up in a note-perfect parody of a Guardian headline: "Muslim Community Leaders Warn of Backlash from Tomorrow Morning's Terrorist Attack." Those community leaders have the measure of us.
That's the wonderful thing about multiculturalism: You can choose which side of the war you want to fight on. When the draft card arrives, just tick "home team" or "enemy," according to taste. The Canadian prime minister is a typical late-stage Western politician: He could have said, well, these are contemptible people and I know many of us are disgusted at the idea of our tax dollars being used to provide health care for a man whose Canadian citizenship is no more than a flag of convenience, but unfortunately that's the law and, while we can try to tighten it, it looks like this lowlife's got away with it. Instead, his reflex instinct was to proclaim this as a wholehearted demonstration of the virtues of the multicultural state. Like many enlightened Western leaders, the Canadian prime minister will be congratulating himself on his boundless tolerance even as the forces of intolerance consume him.
If one wanted to allocate blame, one could argue that it's a product of the U.S. military presence, the American security guarantee that liberated European budgets: instead of having to spend money on guns, they could concentrate on butter, and buttering up the voters. If Washington's problem with Europe is that these are not serious allies, well, whose fault is that? Who, in the years after the Second World War, created NATO as a postmodern military alliance? The "free world," as the Americans called it, was a free ride for everyone else.
This ought to be the left's issue. I'm a conservative--I'm not entirely on board with the Islamist program when it comes to beheading sodomites and so on, but I agree Britney Spears dresses like a slut: I'm with Mullah Omar on that one. Why then, if your big thing is feminism or abortion or gay marriage, are you so certain that the cult of tolerance will prevail once the biggest demographic in your society is cheerfully intolerant? Who, after all, are going to be the first victims of the West's collapsed birthrates?
I'm not quite sure what his message is (multiculturalism sucks?) or what he is proposing as a solution. Is it that the Western World should be more fruitful and multiply more? Does he want abortion outlawed so that more unwanted children will be born to win the demographics war?
This is a great article. I'll post another plug for it on Monday since we get fewer visitors over the weekend. I especially would love to get comments from our Democrat regulars.
Sorry I'm not a Democrat regular... (ok, not THAT sorry...) but although I totally agree with the message of the article... I don't see what we can do except to promote it more among people who are not likely to read it and get the message on their own. I mean, people who want to reproduce, will continue to do so. People who don't will probably refuse to read the article or come up with some sort of a lame excuse.
I did read it. It's way too long to read it again, but the take home message I got is what I posted in my previous comment.
In that case, I believe a sufficient capsule of his point would be "Survival of Western Culture is more important than being so committed to multiculturalism that by bending over backwards to accommodate it you wind up shooting yourself in the back."Post a Comment