|
After Creating Migration Flood Merkel Throws Up Emergency Dikes
The German chancellor Merkel tried to gain some points with her neoliberal friends and with big companies and donors by suddenly opening the border for "refugees" of all kinds, even for those who come from safe countries. These migrants would help to further depress German wages which, after years of zero growth, slowly started to increase again.
But neither she nor her allies ever prepared the German public for a sudden influx of several hundred thousand foreigners. Changes in immigration policy were sneaked in without any public discussion. Suddenly 800,000 foreign people are expected to arrive this years and many more over the next years. People who neither speak German nor readily fit into the national cultural and social-economic environment. Most of these do not come out of immediate dangers but from safe countries.
While Merkel was lauded by all kinds of Anglo-american neoliberal outlets, from the Economist over FT and Newsweek to the Washington Post the backlash in Germany was brewing. In Who Runs The Migrant Media Campaign And What Is Its Purpose? I predicted:
There will be over time a huge backlash against European politicians who, like Merkel, practically invite more migrants. Wages are stagnant or falling in Europe and unemployment is still much too high. The last thing people in Europe want right now is more competition in the labor market. Parties on the extreme right will profit from this while the center right will lose support.
Despite a major campaign of pro-migrant propaganda in Merkel friendly media the German population in general is furious with her stunt. The backlash comes from all sides but especially from her own conservative party. Additionally many European leaders point out that Merkel, who insistent on sticking to the letter of law in the case of Greece, is now openly breaking European laws and agreements.
The flood of migrants Merkel, and the publicity over her open border policies, released seriously endangers her position in the next elections. The flood now needs to be stopped. Urgently. Merkel is pulling the emergency break:
Germany is preparing to reintroduce some form of controls along its border with Austria, according to local media reports.
The German newspaper Bild said Bavarian officials were set to "close" the border with Austria, in what it described as a "dramatic shift in refugee policy".
…
Germany's interior minister, Thomas de Maizière, has scheduled a press conference for 6pm local time (5pm BST), when he is expected to announce further details of the planned move.
I predict that in a week or two German borders will be tightly controlled and new migrants will have difficulties to be accepted. Many, if not most of them, will be send back to either their home country or the country they came from.
On this issue Merkel had lost her feeling for German political realities. This might well cost her a reelection. That would then be the only positive effect of this affair.
Are we (the libtards among us) suffering from “pathological altruism?”
Caucasians have pathological altruism. This pathology exists in an especially strong form in Northwestern whites, those peoples from Nordic countries; and also includes pathology to a lesser degree people’s from Germany, Britain, and France.
Evolutionary pressure from fourth ice age, which was particularly severe, created ice age people who easily form trust networks. Trust networks are important to allow societal and civilizational constructs to form. In Scandinavia, socialism works because everybody is Johansson, or Sons of John. They are all one tribe, so redistribution via government is ok because it is the same as transfer within the family.
“Bowling Alone” by Robert Putnam can be read with the view that white people form trust networks necessary for a republican type government, or even socialism. In multi-racial America, neighborhoods hunker down, and turtle – they pull in and hide from neighbors. Arabs, Islamists, and Jews are especially low trust peoples, who see only their family or in-group. Hence these people types are incapable of building high trust civilizations.
Middle Eastern Cultures are my family against your family, and my tribe against your tribe. A good proxy for a high trust society are how baby sitters are acquired; in middle eastern countries – especially those which were goat herding cultures, they will not use a baby sitter from another tribe, or even another family if it can be avoided.
What about Han’s (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans), they also survived fourth ice age? They act as an in-group but are not pathological. They also easily integrate into civilizations built by white men. They tend to not try to take over levers of political power. Jews for example are drawn to power centers like a parasite to a brains host. Han women have a high out-marry rate, and if an in-group cannot control the breeding of their women, they will not long survive as an in-group.
Islamist and Jewish in-group behavior and control of women (must marry within the race or religion, etc.) is a proxy for “low trust” cultures.
These types of low trust people are easily accepted into pathological altruist areas like Scandinavia.
So, the very thing that helps build higher civilization, high trust is the very same thing that threatens to be civilizations un-doing.
When high trust white people exit the earth and become extinct, then a question is beggared? What are qualities of those peoples who will then assume the earth?
If you don’t have lawful sovereign money, borders, single language, and a unique culture – then you do not have a country. High civilization requires high trust peoples, so the future is now in balance.
If a country is made up of high trust peoples then their leadership needs to be on guard against their own internal defect – pathological altruism.
It is not altruistic to admit immigrants from low trust societies; it is national and racial suicide.
International money, like “gold” or banker “credit” allows one to pretend that money is not law. Law originates by a sovereign people agreeing on moral and contractual precepts in advance.
Low trust people groups will not create moral law, or moral money.
Low trust people groups are at war with higher civilization – low trust peoples have evolved along different pathways. High trust altruists, especially liberal whites – or libtards – will have an especially hard time with this argument, as they believe everybody is the same, despite mountains of history showing that is not that case. Libtards will be a high proportion of population in Scandinavia and other white regions, and have to be protected from themselves, as their pathology makes them “feeeeel” but not think. This pathology also makes altruistic whites a perfect petri dish for a pathogen, for example Jewish in-group parasitism, to grow and take root.
sovereignmoney.eu
Posted by: Andy | Sep 14 2015 20:00 utc | 47
The Solitude of Latin America
Eleven years ago, the Chilean Pablo Neruda, one of the outstanding poets of our time, enlightened this audience with his word. Since then, the Europeans of good will – and sometimes those of bad, as well – have been struck, with ever greater force, by the unearthly tidings of Latin America, that boundless realm of haunted men and historic women, whose unending obstinacy blurs into legend. We have not had a moment’s rest. A promethean president, entrenched in his burning palace, died fighting an entire army, alone; and two suspicious airplane accidents, yet to be explained, cut short the life of another great-hearted president and that of a democratic soldier who had revived the dignity of his people. There have been five wars and seventeen military coups; there emerged a diabolic dictator who is carrying out, in God’s name, the first Latin American ethnocide of our time. In the meantime, twenty million Latin American children died before the age of one – more than have been born in Europe since 1970. Those missing because of repression number nearly one hundred and twenty thousand, which is as if no one could account for all the inhabitants of Uppsala. Numerous women arrested while pregnant have given birth in Argentine prisons, yet nobody knows the whereabouts and identity of their children who were furtively adopted or sent to an orphanage by order of the military authorities. Because they tried to change this state of things, nearly two hundred thousand men and women have died throughout the continent, and over one hundred thousand have lost their lives in three small and ill-fated countries of Central America: Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala. If this had happened in the United States, the corresponding figure would be that of one million six hundred thousand violent deaths in four years.
One million people have fled Chile, a country with a tradition of hospitality – that is, ten per cent of its population. Uruguay, a tiny nation of two and a half million inhabitants which considered itself the continent’s most civilized country, has lost to exile one out of every five citizens. Since 1979, the civil war in El Salvador has produced almost one refugee every twenty minutes. The country that could be formed of all the exiles and forced emigrants of Latin America would have a population larger than that of Norway.
I dare to think that it is this outsized reality, and not just its literary expression, that has deserved the attention of the Swedish Academy of Letters. A reality not of paper, but one that lives within us and determines each instant of our countless daily deaths, and that nourishes a source of insatiable creativity, full of sorrow and beauty, of which this roving and nostalgic Colombian is but one cipher more, singled out by fortune. Poets and beggars, musicians and prophets, warriors and scoundrels, all creatures of that unbridled reality, we have had to ask but little of imagination, for our crucial problem has been a lack of conventional means to render our lives believable. This, my friends, is the crux of our solitude.
Thus spake Gabriel Garcia Marquez, thirty-three years ago, pronouncing his Nobel Lecture, on 8 December, 1982. He needed not explicitly to name the monstrous colossus responsible for all the suffering and deaths of which he spoke. The name was known by all who heard him speak.
Neither do the peoples of Asia and North Africa – of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen nor, of course, of Palestine – need to name their torturer, their devastator, their destroyer, their slayer today thirty-three years later.
‘My name is Obamandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!’
Yes we despair, oh huckster of hope.
How much longer before nothing beside remains. Before two vast and trunkless legs of stone stand in the desert round the decay of that colossal wreck, and boundless and bare the lone and level sands stretch far away?
Can’t be soon enough.
@64 blues
I saw that post the first time … ‘opted for the massive fecundity strategy’ … who was it said …
La majestueuse égalité des lois, qui interdit au riche comme au pauvre de coucher sous les ponts, de mendier dans les rues et de voler du pain.
In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.
Yes. And in its majestic equality society allows rich and poor alike to opt for the massive fecundity strategy … sounds like your own rich self, which feels at least that it has something to lose at any rate, eh?, has opted out.
Posted by: jfl | Sep 15 2015 12:06 utc | 70
|
