Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
74 of 86 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Charles Martel- Eat your heart out, August 2, 2009
There is now a growing literature on the subject of the threat presented to Christian or perhaps secular- post- Christian Europe by its post- War immigration from Islamic countries. As Christopher Caldwell points out in this book, a prospering Europe hungering for workers, and perhaps overestimating its need for them opened the gates to what it thought would be a temporary immigration of foreign workers from Islamic lands. But today Europe has between fifteen and twenty-million adherents of Islam, whose continued growth is promised even if the gates of immigration be shut. The Islamic minorities have far higher rates of population - growth than do the native populations of the host - countries. There is even in Caldwell's book a study of the psychological and sexual implications of the virile East over against the zero- population- growth West. The demographic component is then one real element in the threat Caldwell sees to Europe's future.
But an even more major element in the threat is as Caldwell sees it the failure of the Europeans to truly integrate the new immigrants. Instead of being encouraged to assimilate to the host cultures the new immigrants were given a kind of laissez- faire treatment. This was one of the reasons they persisted in holding on to their Islamic loyalty as first element of their identity. So instead of there being a Europe in which Islamic populations in some way enter a kind of melting pot, there is a Europe in which whether in East London or the suburbs of Paris in Rotterdam and Amsterdam in various other European areas, Islamic population concentrates and remains in a world of its own.
There are many consequences of the European failure to present their own respective national identities or even a collective European Western identity as appealing. One has been outbursts of terrorist violence . Another has been the development of a hostile minority attitude towards the general culture. There are too the economic sides of this with the immigrants suffering from higher unemployment rates as they swell the welfare rolls. There is a vast culture of the unemployed, living off the social services and network of the host countries.
Caldwell analyses brilliantly the collapse of moral will and identity on the part of the host countries. When one no longer believes in oneself it is apparently easy to be manipulated by others. He also points out how the Islamic element has revived anti- Semitism in Europe.
Like all those who have written on this problem including Ba'at Yeor, Bruce Bawer, Robert Spencer, Mark Steyn, Caldwell does not provide a very hopeful picture of the European future. For even if the Islamic groups fall far short of ever really 'taking over' in any country they represent they promise to be a continual source of economic and social disturbance for the future.
Caldwell is far more sanguine about the United States, in which he believes there has been better integration of minorities. Yet an Islamicized Europe in presenting a global threat to the forwarding of values of liberty and individual rights, threatens the United States also.
|
|
|
40 of 46 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The Dying Continent, August 5, 2009
What arguments can still be made in favor of immigration? The supposed benefits of diversity were never articulated and have been shown to be wishful thinking. The economic argument, with the numbert of poor European ghettos in any given country being directly proportionate to the number of nonwhites they've let in, has been thoroughly discredited. Democratic arguments can't be made; whenever the issue has been put to the voters they've always come out on the "wrong" side. The ruling class seems to be hoping that we all simply shut up until natives are so outnumbered that they can't complain any more. These common sense observations have been recorded in several books. The recent Reflections on the Revolution in Europe is the latest.
An analysis of Europe's predicament has to start with a look at the numbers. The British politician Enoch Powell rallied against nonwhites settlement in the British Isles back in the 1960s. From a descriptive perspective, there's no question that he was clear-sighted. In 1968, Powell shocked Britons by claiming that by 2002 there could be 4.5 million nonwhites in their country (the 2001 census reported over 4.6 million). He said that between 20 and 25 percent of Birmingham and Inner London could be composed of immigrants and their descendants (the numbers are 29.6 and 34.4 respectively). Caldwell states that if people at the time knew what immigration entailed they would've never stood for it in the first place. But what's done is done.
To the author's credit, for the purposes of his analysis he differentiates between people moving within Europe and those coming from outside it. 37 percent of Luxembourg's inhabitants were born abroad, but the small country is basically a playground for the continent's elites. The book's main focus is Islam. Britain has about 2 million Muslims (2% of the population), Germany 4 million (5%) and France 5 million (8%).
This influx has been widely unpopular. Only 19 percent of Europeans say that their country has benefited from immigration. 57 percent of Europeans say that their country has "too many foreigners" (73 percent in France and 69 percent in Britain). Despite this, there has been no slow down. 1.7 million people arrive in Europe each year. They mostly come as refugees and through family reunification.
The European Union allows freedom to travel between member countries, but each nation gets to set its own immigration laws. That means that in reality migration policy is set by the country with the laxest laws. In 2005, that was Spain. Socialist prime minister José Rodriguez Zapatero announced that illegal aliens would be given amnesty months in advance of carrying it out. Some people traveled from other countries in the EU in order to take advantage. By decree, 700,000 new "Spanish" citizens were created.
By any projection, things are getting worse. Even if immigration were cut off, the higher nonwhite birth rate would mean that their numbers would continue to grow. By 2020, around 14 percent of those living in Denmark will have roots in "authoritarian countries and cultures." By 2050, Britain will have between 7 and 16 million nonwhites, depending on immigration policy. French women have 1.7 children each; foreign born French women 2.8. "By midcentury in most of the major European countries, foreign-origins populations will be between 20 and 32 percent." Compared to America, that's not so bad. Europeans still have time to recover.
What's interesting is the dance that Caldwell does to avoid being called "racist." He acknowledges that it's completely legitimate to want to admit only those that come from a similar culture. He approvingly cites Robert Putnam's work showing diversity destroys civic trust. But as long as it's culture, and not race, we care about, we're ok. Spain has been more open to Latin American immigrants than they have been to Middle Eastern or African ones. They're entitled to do so, and since many of these migrants aren't white, it shows that the motivation for rejecting Arabs and blacks isn't racial. More problematic cases, like the socioeconomic failure of Christian English speaking West Indians, are ignored.
Although Muslims are the cause of most interethnic tension, making laws singling them out isn't politically feasible. So when the French wanted to ban the head scarf in schools, yarmulkes had to go as well. The Dutch made it more difficult to import foreign brides but the law has to apply regardless of whether the wife is Pakistani or Australian. A Swedish minister suggested that all female infants be checked for signs of genital mutilation, a practice only found amongst Somalian refugees.
In Austria, Catholic women have 1.32 children each, Protestants 1.21 and non-affiliated 0.86. Muslims have a birth rate of 2.34. Italy's native population will almost be half of what it is by the middle of the century. No European country save Muslim Albania has replacement fertility. Obviously, it is secularism and women's liberation that has destroyed the West. Islam is filling the void.
Despite that, gender equality seems to be the only value Europeans will unconditionally defend.
"Adapting to European styles of sexuality and gender relations is the only nonnegotiable demand that Europe makes of its immigrants...Europeans may be reluctant to proclaim any preference for their own high culture and cuisine over foreign ones, eager to give way on freedom of speech when it hurts Muslim sensibilities, and willing to tar as extremist or fascist anyone who holds that Islam poses an especial danger of terrorism. Sex is different...It is the one area where Europeans retain both a deep suspicion of Muslim ways and a confidence in their own institutions that is free of self-doubt.
What is more, the suspicion falls directly and uneuphemistically on Islam the religion, and not any epiphenomenon, such as "poverty" or 'segregation' or 'tradition.'"
This is quite amazing. One would think that if the West's system of gender relations was so obviously superior other cultures would be quick to recognize that. In reality, it's the one thing from the West that many people across the globe seem not to want. "Modernization without Westernization" has been a popular slogan from the Middle to the Far East. The most fundamental criticism of the Western matriarchy that one can make is that even if it provided all the happiness in the world, the low birthrates ensure that it can't survive. Only a culture as infantile as Europe's is unable to see that.
The Dutch government has made a video for potential citizens showing homosexual kissing and informing them that women are expected to work. Needless to say, no other "values" are worth mentioning.
While outraged about the way Muslims treat their women, Europeans are forgiving about crimes committed against themselves. In many French prisons Muslims make up 50 to 80 percent of the inmates. Italy's jails are 47 percent foreign-origin. In Sweden, 26 percent of those in jail are citizens of other countries (not including children of immigrants). Only politically incorrect gender practices are blamed on the perpetrators themselves, the rest is excused in the normal liberal way.
By 2050, the US will be on its way to becoming a second world country if not already there. It won't be the world's policeman anymore. France's Muslim population will have doubled from now until then and the ghettos will remain a perpetual powder keg. Across the European continent, it's no longer possible to deny that, just as surly as communism was, diversity has been a colossal failure. In some places at least, voters are starting to act on that realization.
"May you live in interesting times," as the Chinese curse says. For generations, Europeans have worked to make that a reality for the few descendants they're leaving behind. Reflections on the Revolution in Europe will let you know how bad things are, but leaves little room for optimism.
|
|
|
18 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Intellectually powerful, August 31, 2009
Christopher Caldwell's "Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam, and the West" is an important and surprising book.
In essence, Caldwell's Reflections is a Brimelovian vindication of Enoch Powell, the brilliant Tory who warned against immigration in a prescient (and thus notorious) 1968 speech that began "The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils".
Caldwell points out in his opening pages: "Although at the time Powell's demographic projections were much snickered at, they have turned out not just roughly accurate but as close to perfectly accurate as it is possible for any such projections to be: In a 1968 speech, Powell shocked his audience by stating that the nonwhite population of Britain, barely over a million at the time, would rise to 4.5 million by 2002. (According to the national census, the actual "ethnic minority" population of Britain in 2001 was 4,635,296.)"
Readers who get their views from the MainStream Media, though, will be startled by how gracefully--yet bluntly--Caldwell delivers an intellectually cohesive assault on the conventional wisdom of the diversity dogma.
Reflections is also a model for how a working journalist can transform years of old articles researched on scores of trips to Europe into a stylish book. Caldwell's solution is to enhance his prose style with aphorisms worthy of G.K. Chesterton.
For example, in Caldwell's original February 27, 2006 Weekly Standard article on Nicolas Sarkozy, The Man Who Would Be le Président, he discussed Sarkozy's call for affirmative action in France to appease riotous Muslims:
"It can be argued that France needs such measures desperately, ... but, ... Sarkozy shows a bit of the naiveté of, say, Hubert Humphrey in 1964 when he implies the program would be only temporary. ... How long would the program last, then? Twenty years? 'No, twenty years is too long.'"
In his book, however, Caldwell adds this memorable dictum in reply to Sarkozy's Continental innocence about America's experience:
"One moves swiftly and imperceptibly from a world in which affirmative action can't be ended because its beneficiaries are too weak to a world in which it can't be ended because its beneficiaries are too strong."
Unexpectedly, Caldwell takes the arrogant bluster of European intellectuals and patiently and quietly extracts the simple silly-mindedness at its heart:
"Bizarrely, as immigration began to change Europe at its economic and cultural core, the political vocabulary remained the same as when immigration had been a fringe phenomenon. People kept talking about restaurants."
He points out the endless contradictions of the cult of tolerance:
"The policing of tolerance had no inbuilt limits and no obvious logic. Why was 'ethnic pride' a virtue and 'nationalism' a sickness? Why was an identity like 'Sinti/Roma' legitimate but an identity like 'white' out of bounds? Why had it suddenly become criminal to ask questions today that it was considered a citizen's duty to ask ten years ago?"
And yet, as the Danish Cartoon Riots of 2006 showed, the absurdity of Europe's ever-growing restrictions on freedom of speech about immigration -- both legalistic (what Caldwell calls "the criminalization of opinion") and vigilante (enforced by young Muslim thugs) -- aren't funny. As Caldwell explains,
"Immigration exacts a steep price in freedom":
"A new, uncompromising ideology was advancing under cover of its own ridiculousness--not as the Big Lie of legend, perhaps, but as something similarly ominous that might be called the Big Joke."
Caldwell is extremely good at disentangling the ideological evolutions -- the "He who says A, must say B" thought processes -- that got Europe into its Muslim mess.
"The Holocaust has in recent decades been the cornerstone of the European moral order. ... Under the pressure of mass immigration, however, post-Holocaust repentance became a template for regulating the affairs of any minority that could plausibly present itself as seriously aggrieved. ... Once on the continent, Muslims took up a privileged position in any public debate on minority rights: they, too, were 'victims.'"
Europe's elites needed a new minority in order to feel morally superior to European commoners. And the Muslims agreed:
"[M]any Muslims felt their community offered native Europeans a more appropriate object than the Jews themselves for moral self-examination and moral self-flagellation. An increasing number of Muslims saw themselves, in fact, as the 'new Jews.'..."
Ironically, Europe's obsession with the Holocaust has stimulated the outbreak of anti-Semitic violence by European Muslims in this decade:
"As the Jews accumulated 'rivals' with an interest in dislodging them from their position as Europe's top victims, the system was suddenly turned inside out. The ideology of diversity and racial harmony ... now became the means through which anti-Jewish fury was reinjected into European life. ... If the Muslims were the new Jews, apparently, then the Jews were the new Nazis."
Caldwell sums up with a quote from French philosopher Alain Finkielkraut:
"I think that the lofty idea of 'the war on racism' is gradually turning into a hideously false ideology. ... And this anti-racism will be for the twenty-first century what communism was for the twentieth century: a source of violence."
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
5.0 out of 5 stars
The fragility of our civilization
With approximately 500 million people, the European Union currently comprises Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany,...
Read more
Published 1 month ago by Pieter
|
|