
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704364004576131940794840176.html
(Mr. Murray is director of the Center for Social Cohesion in London.)
'Multiculturalism has failed," said British Prime Minister David Cameron last weekend in Munich. If anybody thought they had read those words before, it is because they have. Many times. Last October German Chancellor Angela Merkel (sitting onstage with Mr. Cameron when he gave his speech on Saturday) said the same. Finally, Europe's mainstream party leaders seem to be realizing what others have long noticed: Multiculturalism has been the most pernicious and divisive policy pursued by Western governments since World War II.
Multiculturalism is a deeply misunderstood idea. That was one of the reasons for its political success. People were led to believe that "multiculturalism" meant multiracialism, or pluralism. It did not. Nevertheless, for years anybody who criticized multiculturalism was immediately decried as a "racist."
But the true character and effects of the policy could not be permanently hidden. State-sponsored multiculturalism treated European countries like hostelries. It judged that the state should not "impose" rules and values on newcomers. Rather, it should bend over backwards to accommodate the demands of immigrants. The resultant policy was that states treated and judged people by the criteria of whatever "community" they found themselves born into.
In Britain, for instance, this meant that if you were a white English girl born into a white English family and your family decided to marry you against your will to a randy old pervert, the state would intervene. But if you had the misfortune to be born into an "Asian-background" family and the same happened, then the state would look the other way.
In 1984, a British school principal named Ray Honeyford politely suggested in an article in the Salisbury Review that it might be a good idea if students at his state-funded school were able to speak English and did not disappear to Pakistan for months at a time. The result was a siren of accusations of "racism," which willfully ignored his arguments and precipitated the end of his career.
The multicultural model may have continued a lot longer if it hadn't been for radical Islam. The terrorist assaults and plots across Britain and Europe—often from home-grown extremists—provided a breaking point that few sentient people could ignore. The question now is what can be done.
In his speech in Munich, Mr. Cameron rightly focused on the problem of home-grown Islamic extremism. He stressed several preliminary steps—among them that groups whose values are opposed to those of the state will no longer be bestowed with taxpayer money. It is a symptom of how low we have sunk that ceasing to fund our societies' opponents would constitute an improvement.
But this is a first, not a final, policy. The fact is that Britain, Germany, Holland and many other European countries have nurtured more than one generation of citizens who seem to feel no loyalty toward their country and who, on the contrary, often seem to despise it.
The first step forward is that from school-age upward our societies must reassert a shared national narrative—including a common national culture. Some years ago the German Muslim writer Bassam Tibi coined the term "Leitkultur"—core culture—to describe this. It is the most decent and properly liberal antidote to multiculturalism. It concedes that in societies that have had high immigration there are all sorts of different cultures—which will only work together if they are united by a common theme.
The Muslim communities that Mr. Cameron focused on will not reform themselves. So the British government will have to shut down and prosecute terrorist and extremist organizations, including some "charities." There are groups that are banned in the U.S. but can and do still operate with charitable status in the U.K. Clerics and other individuals who come from abroad to preach hate and division should be deported.
Will Mr. Cameron manage to do any of this? There is reason to be skeptical. In the wake of the 2005 subway and bus bombings in London—attacks carried out by British-born Muslims—Tony Blair announced that "the rules of the game are changing." They then stayed the same.
It is possible that Mr. Cameron will show more political courage. If he does, he will undoubtedly be lambasted by the defenders of multiculturalism. He will also become a leader of significance. If he doesn't, then future generations may well associate him with Munich. But it will not be for Saturday's speech. It will be with a previous prime minister who also went to that city and who returned with an honor that proved deeply temporary.
Mr. Murray is director of the Center for Social Cohesion in London.
Anyone who has not seen this needs to do so. The UK needs send these people packing. The UK should welcome immigrants who accept their culture and laws. Those that don't need to be exposed and dealt with some how. David Cameron is on the right path.
AntwortenLöschen"Undercover Mosque is a documentary programme produced by the independent television company hardcash productions[1] for the Channel 4 series Dispatches which first aired on 15 January 2007 in the UK. The film caused a furore in Britain and the world press due to the content of the released footage. The documentary presents film footage gathered from 12 months of secret investigation into mosques throughout Britain."
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2515587181120245843#
I am of the conviction that the "segregation" was a long time government policy in Germany and elsewhere in Europe to secure that there would be an underclass willing to do the low paying jobs.
AntwortenLöschenIt was first started with Germany's program of deliberately importing totally undereducated unskilled laborers and letting them live in ghettos trying to help themselves.
Furthermore, these so called "guest-workers" were denied a permanent-residency or citizenship even after several generations.
They were kept under continual threat of being sent back home by not extending their work permits.
While that threat kept them "obedient" hardly any one of them have actually ever been sent back home.
At one point, older generations (retired) were given incentives (lump-some money) to RETURN to their homelands, thus getting rid of paying them retirement money.
I do not know how the French or UK system actually is. I would be surprised if they are not more or less the same: keep an underclass.
Eventually, they are beginning to realize that there is a COST to keeping these people segregated and inferior on the society.
Hence, there is this new trend to change that.
Change to what, though? THAT is the mystery part.
BTW, neither Merkel nor Cameron were the first:
Decades after such figures appeared elsewhere in Europe, Germany finally has produced its own high-profile star of the anti-immigrant right. But only for about a week. Thilo Sarrazin, a former Social Democratic politician, set off the fiercest storm of public outrage in recent memory with his new book, Germany Abolishes Itself, in which he lays bare the failures of German education, migration, and welfare policies. At No. 1 on the Amazon bestseller list for Germany even before it was released last week, the book also makes eccentric forays into the heritability of intelligence and claims that something in the culture of Islam keeps Muslims from getting educated. Even more upsetting in a country that prides itself on having drawn the right lessons from history, he made an offhand reference in an interview to research showing that “Jews have a shared gene,” for which he later apologized.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/06/the-scandal-behind-the-sarrazin-scandal.html
About the cartoon:
AntwortenLöschenAs you should know, if a Jewish joke is made by a Jew, it is comedy, if done by a non-Jew, it becomes hate-crime.
Remember the movies by Mel Brooks (such as "History of the World Part-I")?
:)))
Well, son. This is America.
AntwortenLöschenJOHN WAYNE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LYRICS
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS--
ONE NATION UNDER GOD,
INDIVISIBLE,
WITH LIBERTY
AND JUSTICE
FOR ALL.
"I pledge allegiance to the flag"
What do those words mean to you? To me they say, "Thank you, America, for your strength, your courage and your freedom...which has been a beacon to the world for two hundred years."
"Of the United States of America"
Whose bright stars are fifty states...each bearing its own stamp of individuality. People...two hundred million strong...people who have come to her from all corners of the earth.
"And to the republic for which it stands"
A land of laws...with an ingenious system of checks and balances that allows no man to become a tyrant...and lets no group prevail...if their power is not tempered with a real concern for the governed...A land where the right of dissent and of free speech is jealously guarded...wheere the ballot box is the sword...and the people its wielder.
"One nation under God"
A land where freedom of worship is a cornerstone of her being...A land graced with temples and churches, synagogues and altars that rise in profusion to embrace all the religions of the world.
"Indivisible"
A land forged by the hot steel of raw courage...and formed forever...by the awful crucible of civil war.
"With liberty"
Where man in pursuit of an honest life will not be denied his chance...where her citizens move freely within her vast borders without hindrance or fear...A land brimming with opportunity...where freedom of choice is the guide for all.
"And justice"
The courts of our land are open to all. Its wheels of justice grind for all couses...all people. They look to every avenue for justice...every concern of the law...and they temper their reasoning with mercy...
"For all!"
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG...
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA...
AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS...
ONE NATION UNDER GOD...
INDIVISIBLE...
WITH LIBERTY...AND JUSTICE...
FOR ALL.
Multicultural Wake-Up Call ,hummmm, just ask we Native Americans how that worked out.
AntwortenLöschen