source: http://globalpolitician.com/24462-europe-multiculturalism
In more and more European cities, the native population is being
pushed out of their own neighborhoods by immigrant gangs. The natives
receive little or no aid from their authorities, sometimes blatant
hostility, when faced with immigrant violence...
Numbers discussed in 2008 showed clearly that mass immigration has had
no positive effects on the economy in Britain, and I have seen similar
calculations from France, Denmark and Norway, among others. On the
contrary, it is a drain on the finances of the native population, and
that's even if we don't count the wave of terrorism, insecurity and
street violence which is sweeping Western Europe, from Sweden via
Germany to the Netherlands...
Genetically speaking, native Europeans have thus lived longer on the
same continent than have Native Americans. Many Southeast Asians are
descendants of southern Chinese settlers who displaced or eradicated
the original, dark-skinned inhabitants of the region in early
historical times, just as many of the nations of sub-Saharan Africa
are Bantu invaders who displaced or eradicated the indigenous Khoi-San
peoples throughout much of Africa. Modern-day Japanese have lived in
Japan for a shorter period of time than Europeans have lived in
Europe. Yet a Scottish councillor, Sandy Aitchison, was chastised for
using the term "indigenous" about native Brits. Why is it considered
ridiculous or evil if Europeans assert our rights? Is it because we
are white? Everybody's supposed to keep their culture, except people
of European origins? Is that it? Why is colonialism bad, except when
my country, which has no colonial history, gets colonized by Third
World peoples?
Western Europeans have in recent years accepted more immigration in a
shorter period of time than any society has ever done peacefully in
human history. If we want a break we have the right to do so. What we
are dealing with is not "immigration" but colonization, and in the
case of Muslims, internationally organized attempts to conquer of our
countries. If non-Europeans have the right to resist colonization then
so do Europeans. Switzerland, Sweden, Finland and Norway hardly have
any colonial history at all. The Germans had a colony in Namibia. Why
should they accept millions of Turkish Muslims, who have a thousand
years of brutal colonial history of their own, because of this? There
are hardly any Britons in Pakistan today, so why should the Brits
allow huge numbers of Pakistanis to settle in Britain? And if the
Algerians can demand independence from France, why can't the French
demand independence from Algerians?
I like cultural diversity and would hope this could be extended to
include my culture, too. Or is Multiculturalism simply a hate ideology
designed to unilaterally dismantle European culture and the peoples
who created it? If people in Cameroon or Cambodia can keep their
culture, why can't the peoples who produced Beethoven, Newton,
Copernicus, Michelangelo and Louis Pasteur do the same? As Rabbi Aryeh
Spero points out, European elites insist "on the primacy of indigenous
cultures and religions when speaking of other faraway regions, yet
find such insistence arrogant when it concerns the indigenous culture
of its own lands."
Yes, a little immigration from compatible cultures can be absorbed,
and can be beneficial on certain terms. But what we are dealing with
now is not from compatible cultures, and it certainly isn't little. My
nation runs a very real risk of being demographically wiped out during
this century, as do the other Nordic countries. We will go from being
among the most successful societies in human history to being
eradicated in the space of a few generations if current levels of mass
immigration continue. Do I have the right to worry about this, or is
that "racist"?
The author Gore Vidal once stated: "Norway is large enough and empty
enough to take in 40 to 50 million homeless Bengalis. If the
Norwegians say that, all in all, they would rather not take them in,
is this to be considered racism? I think not. It is simply self-
preservation, the first law of species." Thomas Jefferson said that
"The law of self-preservation is higher than written law," and he was
right.
As I wrote two years ago: "By any standards possible, we're one of the
most successful cultures in the world, our largest flaw, which could
eventually bury us, probably being our naivety. So why on earth should
we quietly watch while our country is subdued by the most unsuccessful
cultures in the world? The most basic instinct of all living things,
even down to bacteria level, is self-preservation. In 2006, you have a
natural right to self-preservation if you are an amoeba, but not if
you're a Scandinavian. Maybe the solution then is to argue that
Scandinavians are indeed a species of amoebas, and that we need
special protection by the WWF. We could showcase some of our finest
specimen of Leftist intellectuals and journalists to prove our point.
Shouldn't be too hard."
For simply suggesting that I would not enjoy being turned into a
persecuted minority in my own country, I have been accused of being a
"white nationalist," which says a great deal about how demonized
people of European ancestry have become. What about Koreans or
Japanese? If they were gradually being displaced by, say, Nigerians
and Pakistanis and were harassed in their cities by people who moved
there out of their own free will, would they be denounced as yellow
nationalists if they objected to this? In fact, why do the terms
yellow nationalist, brown nationalist and black nationalist hardly
exist, whereas the term white nationalist does? Isn't that by itself
an indication of a double standard?
|
