Former German Chancellor: Turkish workers a mistake

One advice: Do click on the link to the article in The Telegraph (see subheading of the lead post) for a more balanced view on the matter.

TvE

Warning: tve is a muslim troll.

OT:

I've posted about this before,but since we are getting a steady influx of new "regulars" it seemed like a good time to repeat it.

SusanB and I have compiled a list of JW/DWers who wish to make their e-mail addresses available for contact with other JW/Dwers. This is how it works: if someone wishes to have interpersonal contact with another member (exchange personal e-mails), they contact SusanB who will then request authorization from the other party for his/her e-mail address to be shared on a one-time basis, only with the individual requesting contact. No e-mail addresses will be given out without authorization of the parties involved. Sometimes individuals prefer to network offsite and this provides an opportunity to correspond privately and perhaps in greater depth than would be appropriate posted at JW/DW.

If you would like to be included in our database, please e-mail SusanB at susan_b356@yahoo.com. Please don't forget to include your JW/DW screenname so that we know who you are.

CGW

Thanks for the troll warnings CGW.

Typical Jihadwatchers seem a good people who believe in working and earning an honest living. To that extent, our time is precious and we'd rather not spend it on trolls. I'd go out and say if any of us comes across counterproductive stuck-record trolls, lez warn all the others to save their time and energy.

Actually, in my opinion multiculturalism can work. What is multiculturalism anyway? People from different cultures living in the same country.

Portugal, Spain, France, Italy: all have different cultures. The same with Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Norway, China and Japan. My country has a Chinese community and I don't know of a single crime committed by a Chinese in my country. The same with people from many other countries. The issue is not the culture.

The issue is that large numbers of newly arrived immigrants won't need to adapt so fast to the host country (as they would if they had to depend on the natives for most things), and the issue is that some people - particularly some people from some very specific countries - are completely unwilling to adopt the culture of the country that welcomed them out of prejudice or out of pure hostility.

The "multiculturalism" that doesn't work is the irresponsible mess that happened in Northern Europe since the 1950s (and more recently it also happened in southern Europe as well, although to a lesser extent).

Immigrants from similar cultures (say, a French living in Britain) won't need much of an adaptation, or at least he won't be half as shocked with what he sees as an Afghan who saw women being stoned to death on a daily basis and who is now presented with western freedom.

The real problem is that the ordinary politician is a smooth-talker, but he is usually ignorant, self-centered and corrupt (even if his level of corruption is passive). They will in most cases do what is best for their personal careers, even if their actions damage public interest. That is the real problem: letting waves of foreigners in, was considered a direct and just consequence of the post-colonial burden of most of Europe. They thought that things would eventually fix themselves if they pretended that there wasn't a problem.

The public knows for a long time that there is a problem, but most people don't have the guts to say what they really think in public. It took Pim Fortuyn and Van Gogh's deaths to make the political class that the one thing that is sure to have consequences, is political irresponsibility.

"Multiculturalism" and "diversity" are charged vocabulary from leftwing postmodernist utopianism and describe specific circumstances that fit into their philosophical model. America is very multicultural -- for example, here in New York City one can eat food from a restaurant that derives its recipes, employees, and schtick from just about any country on the planet. One can meet people from all of these places as well. Many of these people are recent immigrants and are integrating into American society quite famously. But this is not what is meant by "multiculturalism." Indeed, multiculty (slang term that I prefer) is about the politics of identity and victimization. Multiculty initiatives encourage immigrants to not learn English, for why would they wish to speak the horrible language of the imperialist oppressors? Would this not lead them to submission and the loss of their cultural heritage and identity? Also, since they are victims of imperialist colonial oppression (probably explains why they came to America -- i.e. coercion by terrible American policies) shouldn't they give up this idea of getting a job and pursuing the American dream? Why not take some welfare instead and really stick it to the imperialists by using their tax money?

Indeed, David Horowitz puts the lie to the term "diversity." In his work for promoting intellectual diversity in the universities, he meets with much resistance. For diversity only refers to identity politics -- not varying viewpoints. Since postmodernist thinking can only be correct, and all other perspectives demonstrate stupidity, why should there be viewpoint diversity? Such a silly concept. Now be a good little drone and re-read your old issues of the "Nation," preferably in your native language and not that terrible language called English.

Note: there is NO problem with the communities of Vietnamese, Chinese, Koreans, Hindus from India or Kashmir or Singapore, no problem with those who are practicing Buddhists. There are no caches of fake passports, explosives, poisons, no plans of the subway, the water-system, the American or Israeli or Australian embassies, no weekly call to hate, no canonical texts declaring that "Islam is to dominate and not to be dominated" and that "war is deception," no
model akin to Muhammad who enjoyed watching the execution of prisoners and ordered the assassination of those who offended him, no Rushdie affair, no videocassettes proudly -- proudly! -- showing decapitations of Infidels. No, none of that.

Schmidt's comment on "multiculturalism" if it is directed at others than Muslims is far too broad. Perhaps he simply cannot bring himself to make the real point: HIndus, Buddhists, Confucians can become perfectly integrated into Western societies without difficulty. They do not pose a security risk. They do not oppose the political, legal, and social arrangements that have been built up over centuries. They do not see the locals as simply temporary inhabitants, whose property and women, rightly belong to them, as Muslims are taught to believe they have only to wait, to procreate, to conduct Da'wa -- all the while keeping up a steady pattern of apologetics, combined with threats (of violence, or of lawsuits) to keep those who see the truth from getting it out -- until such time as their numbers increase sufficiently and they need not hide (though some do not bother to hide) their aims.

Would that instead of a general comment, Schmidt had simply said this:

"It was wrong to have, for the purposes of cheap labor, Muslims come to this and other Western countries without having considered, and internalized, the real costs -- to our society, to our future expense, to the civility and harmony of our daily lives, and in the end to our very survival -- of Muslim migrants. We thought, some of us, that they were just like others. We, who should have known best of all what an ideology can do to people, should have taken that ideology -- the ideology of Islam -- into account. We should have understood that this is a problem, and these migrants -- unlike any other.

And with the Turkish migrants, in particular, we should not have so quickly assumed that as products of what we took to be "secular" (i.e. Kemalist) Turkey, that this "secularism" travelled. In fact, the Turks outside Turkey are far more militant, far more Muslim, than the Turks who are at home, where the Cult of Ataturk, and the army, continue to enforce -- despite Erdogan's inraods -- constraints on Islam that we in the West have not the stomchah for.

It is not too late to reverese this. All Muslim migration to the West must be stopped. All Muslim non-citizens must be sent back to their countries of origin. Such moves aree completely in accord with what the Muslims themselves have done -- consider only what the Kuwaitis did to 400,000 "Palestinians" overnight in 1991, or the Saudis to 1,000,000 Yemenis. Or consider, of course, what was done -- to Sudeten Germans -- for reasons that we Germans should understand.

And beyond that, all those whose belief-system makes it simply impossible for them to be telling the truth when they go through the motions of swearing allegiance to the Infidel nation-state, or to, for example, the written Constitution, as in the United States, our strongest ally, our final protector across the seas, should also be expelled. A perjured oath of loyalty is no oath at all.

I am in retirement. I am 85. I have had the leisure, therefore, to think, to read, to observe. And this is my conclusion. How awful to think that we Germans helped to organize the mass murder of Europe's Jewish citizens, who asked nothing except to contribute to the wellbeing of that civilization, and then, the blood scarcely dry on our hands and those of so many other Europeans who participated, or looked on with pleasure or indifference, we admitted into our midst those who do not wish to contribute, and whose belief-system makes them incapable of so contributing, to European civilization (despite the smiling assurances of a new "Euro-Islam" from the likes of Tariq Ramadan and his silly local echoers, such as Gilles Kepel), Muslims -- and what is worse, we helped in a thousand ways to echo their own crude, cruel and sinister vilification both of Israel and of its ally, the United States -- coming, as part of the softening-up process, and of helping to distance Europe from America -- that the Euro-Arab Dialogue and the pro-Arab and pro-Muslim forces who for several decades have steadily pushed the Islamintern agenda, at the U.N., the E.U., the B.B.C., RFI, Le Monde, The Guardian, and a thousand other points of mental blight. The clever exploitation, chiefly by Arab Muslims, of the pre-existing mental pathologies of anti-Americanism and antisemitism, have to be recognized and fought.

And whatever else, we have to regain our sense of what Western civilization -- the civilization that was saved from a great threat that came from within, Nazism, and now faces another from those who come, not in Panzer divisions rolling across meadows, but in the thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, quietly, at this seaport, at this airport, at this train station, setting up shop -- setting up and spreading out -- as they see it, forever. And if military force cannot work, because the West is too strong, they shall simply burrow from within, and eventually rise even in the ranks of army and security forces, and seize, by force of numbers, what their own world could not produce on its own."

That is what he should have said.

ted and alex 221166 have important points. Diversity, or plurality - be it of identities or opinions - is not a problem, on the contrary. Multiculturalism is an ideology that has nothing with plurality or diversity to do. It has only to do with certain groups - primarily, if not solely Muslims - refusing to adapt to the cultures of the lands that they voluntarily choose as their homes; it's an ideology of justifying (and glorifying) such refusal. New York has diversity; Malmö, Århus and Rotterdam have multiculturalism (read: no-go Muslim ghettoes). If turning Nordic city suburbs to backyards of Saudi Arabia is what multiculti means then yes, multiculti must go.

Of course, the German ex-chansellor doesn't get himself to mentioning that it was bringing particularly Muslim guest workers, and not making them assimilate, that was a mistake. Even if they admit there's a problem, they see a problem with immigration as such - not with Islam. There was such a hystery last spring, in connection with EU-enlargement, in Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy and Spain (at least) about the potential influx of Eastern Europeans from Poland, the Baltic states, Hungary and Croatia - what a disaster if some of them would come and work in Western Europe! Somehow, with Eastern Europeans, one didn't need to be politically correct, keeping them off the Western job market was a leftist agenda and thus completely legitimate. Now, we're weeping again that we're short of work force - must import more Muslims from north Africa!

We're not getting anywhere with this unless we stop pretending that the problem is immigration as such, or cultural diversity, or "race". Nothing positive will happen, as long as Europe doesn't admit that there's a problem with Islam - not just with radical islam, but with the whole massive, non-assimilationist Islamic immigration.

love what hugh makes Schmidt say, but sadly, that's exactly what he won't say. it'll still take time until someone in that position will. so long, we're just pretending we're having a discussion.

Wow, that's a powerful essay, Hugh.
I fully agree.
Thanks for sharing this!

Hugh, one of your best yet (and that's really saying something). If only the msm would reproduce these essays our fight against islam would be won so much quicker. Happy Thanksgiving Hugh !

I can't imagine what it feels like when one suddenly realizes that he's let the Trojan horse into the city.

I agree with HF that Moderate muslims, who are few in number as well as camouflaged, are at the end of the day, still counted as muslims. They thus increase the perceived power of the islamic contingent in the West. As this base grows, from a combination of immigration and a high birth rate, and to an extent, some conversions, a time is soon coming when muslims will claim political power. If they do not get all they wish, they will demand a separate state. That has been my view for well nigh 30 years.

Daniel Pipes in his recent article on moderate muslims, suggested that far more research is required on how to distinguish a moderate muslim from a not so moderate muslim. To suggest such a research topic, tells me that Daniel Pipes, that great believer in the moderate muslim, has reached a state of believing in miracles.

This war in the West will only grow as muslim numbers increase. Civil war is the natural outcome when two ideologies cannot coexist. In bitter civil wars, the winner generally takes all and the loser is evicted. This was what was happening in Kosovo with the Albanians till Clinton intervened, which subsequently led to the eviction of Serbs from their ancestral land.

I really do hate the idea of a civil war, as this one will be the most brutal of all. Far better to seek an amicable divorce rather then continue to believe that we can all live in the same tent with muslims. It has never worked.

Immigration of muslims must cease as a first step. Second the ground has been very fertile for muslim growth. This ground has to be made much less fertile for islamic growth. We have been too lenient in giving public space to islam while denying it to Christians and Jews. Surely a suicidal policy. The public call to prayer over loudspeakers should be deemed as an occupation of public space and thus an infringement of the rule, that religion is a private matter. Such broadcasts of call to prayer, is also insensitive to people of other faiths or no faith at all.

All this is not going to come about in one swift moment. The growth of islam in the West has been a 30-year affair. It will take as long at the least, to turn the tide around. But it can be done.

And poor Geert Wilders- a refugee in his own country. It is a fate that is inevitable for us if we do not start reversing the tide.

Milosovitch must be smiling ruefully, as he sits in his Dutch cell and sees the crisis caused by islam around him.

Hugh, please tell yourself how deeply I admire you and the work you do. I'd tell you myself, but you can do a far better job. Bravo, Hugh.

In my hurry to read the comment,i didn`t pay much attention to details,i just kept on reading,and the more i did,the more unbelievable the words of mr.Schmidt seemed and the more i was congratulating him for the courage and the wisdom he has reached at his advanced age....and them i got to the end and to the "this is what he should have said" part....and i got back to reality.
Too bad he didn`t say exactly hugh`s words,for the whole world to hear.

I am blown away about your essay, Hugh! How to turn the tide now? Appalling that the media is generally so squeamish about bringing it out into the open. Any chance to interest some investors to help us start up a JIHAD WATCH NEWs channel? Something more sincere and not as superficial as the CNN ten second sound bites. I feel there would be a huge audience world wide, just to counter the terrorist propaganda beamed out by Al Jazeera.

Hapy Thanksgiving!

DP111:

Had Milosvitch not acted the thug that he did (mass rapes, etc.), he might not be in that jail cell now. Sentiments, in Canada at least, during the Mulroney years (early part of the conflict)were pretty pro-Serbian.

Why is Milosevich in Jail? If Yemen and Saudi Arabia lets hundreds of Al Queada fighters out of the slammer because they "repent and mend their ways" shouldnt we give Milosevich also the key to his cell and let him go back to Serbia where he can continue what he couldn't finish the first time?

I think the West slaughtered the wrong swine. We would have been better off looking the other way!

Funny enough: Milosevich is "unrepentant"- perhaps another word for " more honest than a Moslem can ever be?"