November 24, 2016

"I am not a racist and my voters are neither. They are people who want their country back and who are sick and tired of not being listened to."

"If you convict me, you will convict half of The Netherlands. Many Dutch will then lose the last bit of trust in the rule of law.... The court is being abused to settle a political score."

Said Geert Wilders, addressing the 3-judge panel who will decide whether to find him guilty of insulting a racial group and inciting racial hatred. At a political rally, he asked the crowd whether they wanted "fewer or more Moroccans in your city and in the Netherlands." They shouted "Fewer! Fewer!" And Wilders said: "We're going to organize that."

119 comments:

David Begley said...

In America, we have our own three judge panel judging people for the charge of racism. The NYT, CNN and MSNBC.

Mike Sylwester said...

If Clinton had won, we would have had a law like this in the USA during the next decade.

rhhardin said...

It's not racist; it's culturist. They don't agree to Dutch rules.

No rules, no country.

traditionalguy said...

Globalism is the idol to whom all must bow. It is the State Religion with a State Church paid tithes to control the State Climate.

rhhardin said...

I talked to Morocco just the other day (Nov 19, 5C2AO). Seemed friendly enough, in the ten seconds the conversation lasted. An all Burgaria contest, which for some reason gave points for talking to people besides Bulgarians. We exchanged signal report and ITU zone number.

I think you got more points for Bulgarians.

exhelodrvr1 said...

rhhardin,
"It's not racist; it's culturist. "

Yep - same thing in the US

rhhardin said...

We also say of some people that they are transparent to us. It is, however, important as regards this observation that one human being can be a complete enigma to another. We learn this when we come into a strange country with entirely strange traditions; and, what is more, even given a mastery of the country's language. We do not *understand* the people. (And not because of not knowing what they are saying to themselves.) We cannot find our feet with them.

Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations p.223)

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MikeR said...

Wow - read the comments on that article. The emperor has no clothes: once people start talking, anyone sane understands that allowing hundreds of thousands of cultural enemies into your country is a terrible idea. Not everyone is sane, but enough. This kind of thing makes it more and more likely that Wilder will win his election. Boom: Nethxit.

I am always fascinated that European politicians in favor of immigration controls are invariably called "far right-wing" in the press. Generally they are socialists like any other European. Just like Bernie Sanders. Left/right is a stupid and universal attempt to fit a complex of political values into a single dimension. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart

gspencer said...

Is multiculturalism & Kumbaya practiced inside Europe's many No-Go Zones?

Diogenes of Sinope said...

Political speech as a felony. Soon they figure out how to read our thoughts......

traditionalguy said...

Garage has identified the European State for us. It is GERMANY ruling Europe. And by golly it is the Russians who are standing up to encroachment by the German State a/k/a Europe. And Farage has fought them from England and Trump has kicked them out of ruling over the USA.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael McClain said...

This will only be a problem when the folks inside the guarded/gated communities begin to suffer. Until then, our betters are secure in their smugness.

tim maguire said...

Now would be a good time to note the difference between the right in the US and the right in Europe. In the US, ignoring the people's legitimate complaints of the people gets you politicians who look to roll back the power of government and expand personal liberty. In Europe, ignoring the people's legitimate complaints gets you fascism.

Quaestor said...

It seems to me Geert Wilders has the cart before the horse — which is not to say that Muslims aren't a threat to the Dutch people, which they are, and have proven the point by numerous incidents ranging from mutilations, to rapes, to murders in the the streets — the question Wilders and his followers should pose to the Dutch is this: Is our country worthy to be called free?

PS
The reCaptcha image was a street sign in Amsterdam.

J. Farmer said...

Not wanting to see your country ethnographically destroyed is obviously very hateful.

Paddy O said...

We learn this when we come into a strange country with entirely strange traditions; and, what is more, even given a mastery of the country's language. We do not *understand* the people. (And not because of not knowing what they are saying to themselves.) We cannot find our feet with them.

I felt this during my 4 years of living in the Midwest.

Bay Area Guy said...

The "multi-cultural" political left in Europe will kill off your country by enabling a Muslim invasion. Not by war, mind you, (see Crusades, 1100), but by simply opening the front door, letting the hordes in, and then demonizing and prosecuting all the sensible people who want to close it.

Fight global warming, Yes!

MikeR said...

"Not wanting to see your country ethnographically destroyed is obviously very hateful."
Don't mean to change the subject too far, but our host and many other liberals and libertarians seem to be oblivious to the feelings of those in America who didn't want our culture made over by things like SSM. Presumably not as bad a dichotomy as Muslim rape gangs, but there was a culture I grew up with ("Judao-Christian ethics") and I think it is better than what is rapidly replacing it, and worth defending. Scalia understood that, but he is outvoted. That culture did make things more different for some groups of people like homosexuals, but every societal decision makes things more difficult for somebody and it can still be a good idea. Apparently that makes me a hater.

Otto said...

We are all racists in some form or another, even AA. And we are all liars if we say different. So what. As long as we are law abiding citizens what we think is our own business. Love, hate , happiness are all part of life.Stop this adolescence and use your mind for better purposes. Happy Thanksgiving .

Skeptical Voter said...

It's going to be 1984 forever in The Netherlands. He's guilty of double ungood wrongthink.

AJ Lynch said...

Open borders and illegal and legal immigration from 3rd World is, in effect, giving up an advantage we currently have over the rest of the world. And we are getting nothing in return for that other than problems and crime and dissipation of our historic cultural strengths.

No one, in their right mind, gives up an advantage they possess, without getting something of worth in return. Yet our govt and our elites are doing just that in spades. It is insanity.

mockturtle said...

The toothpaste is out of the tube. Even if Wilders loses, the Dutch people will win.

Jupiter said...

AJ Lynch said...

"No one, in their right mind, gives up an advantage they possess, without getting something of worth in return. Yet our govt and our elites are doing just that in spades. It is insanity."

No it's not. *They* are giving up something *you* possess. And *they* are getting something *they* want in return. So it makes perfect sense.

RigelDog said...

His speech is magnificent. Further into it he explains the rhetorical context of the words he is being tried for. It seems to me that his accusers are taking one phrase from a carefully constructed rhetorical framework and asserting that it means something akin to "lets eliminate all Moroccans from the Netherlands by any means necessary." In context, the phrase means "do you want government policies that result in less or more Moroccan immigration?"

robother said...

Free speech is not an absolute value in Europe. Based on evolution of the law in the UK, it seems like a snapshot of English Enlightenment political thought that got captured in the amber of the Constitution.

American Progressives, starting with Wilson and Holmes, have always viewed Free Speech as merely utilitarian, subordinate to Progressive values of any age (Wars to make the world safe for democracy, racial/gender justice, therapeutic comforting). In the hands of a Progressive SCOTUS majority, First Amendment free speech will be shrunk to fit European values.

AJ Lynch said...

Jupiter - You are absolutely right- I just would have liked them to, at a minimum, asked us for our approval before they gave away our stuff.

gadfly said...

Whether or not one feels any support for Wilders's sentiments is not in fact the point in this case. The point is that by prosecuting someone for saying what he said, the courts in Holland are effectively ruling that there is only one correct answer to the question Wilders asked. They are saying that if someone asks you whether you would like more Moroccans or fewer, people must always answer "more," or they will be committing a crime. ~Douglas Murray

Terry said...

Blogger Jupiter said...

No it's not. *They* are giving up something *you* possess. And *they* are getting something *they* want in return. So it makes perfect sense.


This correct, Jupiter, but I would substitute the word "value" for "possess" and "want."

clint said...

"Skeptical Voter said...
It's going to be 1984 forever in The Netherlands. He's guilty of double ungood wrongthink."


Alas, no. In 1984 in Amsterdam, two men could walk down the street hand in hand in a cannabis haze from the Van Gogh museum to that pub with the seven hundred delectable microbrewery beers.

Today, that is no longer considered a safe activity. For some unknown reason, the number of young men in the Netherlands with a violent reaction to gay men has skyrocketed in the last few decades. Some call this progress.

(Also, note that you misspelled "doubleplusungood" -- it's all one word and needs the "plus", though the "double" is optional.)

Bad Lieutenant said...


coupe said...
ISIS has the right idea. Mass graves, no witnesses.
11/24/16, 8:49 AM

Big talk, wet-brain. Why don't you show some leadership then? Or, heh-heh, are you?


Blogger gadfly said...
Whether or not one feels any support for Wilders's sentiments is not in fact the point in this case. The point is that by prosecuting someone for saying what he said, the courts in Holland are effectively ruling that there is only one correct answer to the question Wilders asked. They are saying that if someone asks you whether you would like more Moroccans or fewer, people must always answer "more," or they will be committing a crime. ~Douglas Murray
11/24/16, 10:34 AM

Now it is clear why you opposed Donald Trump and supported Hillary Clinton. 🤔

chickelit said...

In the past, too few ethnic Dutch showed up for the future. Now there are unintended demographic consequences. This is a precarious tipping point for that nation, as it is for ours.

Give thanks that we are not yet at war over it.

mockturtle said...

Chickelit aptly states: This is a precarious tipping point for that nation, as it is for ours.

Tipping point, yes. For all of Western Civilization.

Richard Dolan said...

Funny how a courtroom drama like this so often functions as a microcosm of a society. The sides are well defined and have little common ground, the issues are sharply drawn, and each side tries to win by caricaturing the other. Wilders is surely right that the trial is a political spectacle, but so was the Snopes trial, the trial of Socrates, any one of the show trials under Stalin, and on and on across time and cultures. Regardless of the outcome, he will quite likely be judged as the winner, just like the unfortunates in the three examples cited here. That the bien pensants of Holland thought it wise to give him this platform to trounce them is all the evidence you need to see where they are likely to end up.

buwaya puti said...

The biggest part of their problem, in the short term anyway, is that they, like the Germans and Swedes, mostly imported the wrong people. They would be much better off, with much less trouble of all kinds, with Mexicans. Yes, really. The US is very fortunate in that respect, hard as it is to see in the present circumstances.

The pity of of it is they had the world to choose from. They could have had their pick of culturally compatible, economically productive immigrants (like some nice Filipinos, ahem). If there was some need to import a replacement population, they have gone about it in the worst possible way.

Fen said...

Its not about the muslims, its about the Cultural Marxist Establishment that is importing them with a deliberate purpose. The Elites are betraying their own countrymen.

We just had that discussion over here in the US, and fortunately, the blue collar workers of Michigan and Pennsylvania just gave the Establishment the finger.

Fen said...

I'm also tired of "racism sexism homophobia" being the Great Satan. Sure, they are wrong and should be stomped out, but we have much bigger issues than someone's thought crimes.

Phil 3:14 said...

It's understandable AND racist.

But then again to be Dutch in the Netherlands is a different thing than being American in the US.

David said...

Morocco for the Moroccans! Hey nothing wrong with that.

Malesch Morocco said...

Off Topic

Have a blessed and Happy Thanksgiving to Althouse and Meade and all their wonderful readers and commenters!🦃🦃🦃

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
walter said...

Blogger traditionalguy said...Garage has identified the European State for us.
--
Unique typo for this forum.

Francisco D said...

Otto,

Racism and prejudice do not have the same meaning. You were referring to the latter. I suggest you learn what words mean before you use them.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Terry said...

"They would be much better off, with much less trouble of all kinds, with Mexicans. Yes, really. The US is very fortunate in that respect, hard as it is to see in the present circumstances."
If immigrants are such a valuable commodity, because they increase the GDP and the cultural health of a nation, why are they in such oversupply? If you believe in market economics, you have to conclude that the market needs to correct itself, perhaps by would-be migrants improving conditions in their own country.

Phil 3:14 said...

Looking back 120 years in the US. Note both anger towards their land of origin and their religion.

Good thing it wasn't more effective, otherwise we wouldn't have Rudy Giuliani, Andrew Napolitano, Samuel Alito...

Achilles said...

The worm has turned on multiculturalism and open borders. The west is a better place to live because of the people that live there and the culture they created.

Sebastian said...

"the courts in Holland are effectively ruling" Don't think they've ruled yet. The prosecutors are to blame thus far. And of course the underlying law, which makes a mockery of protection for free speech, to which European countries do pay constitutional lip service.

rcocean said...

That's what liberals want in this country. They'd love to not just get so-called "racists" fired from their jobs or kicked off campus, but convicted of "hate Speech" and sent to prison or heavily fined.

And I'm sure a Ginsburg SCOTUS would be OK with that. Not so sure about a Roberts SCOTUS.


rcocean said...

I surprised he's alive. Usually, the European Left finds some "lone nut" to shoot politicians they don't like.

rcocean said...

That's what liberals want in this country. They'd love to not just get so-called "racists" fired from their jobs or kicked off campus, but convicted of "hate Speech" and sent to prison or heavily fined.

And I'm sure a Ginsburg SCOTUS would be OK with that. Not so sure about a Roberts SCOTUS.


Fernandinande said...

From Steve Hsu
... a widely-read Weibo post (again originated from Zhihu) summarizes what Trump’s win has “taught China”, generating tens of thousands of retweets.

1. We should retain our college entrance exam system that ensures a pathway for poor kids to move up the social ladder. The American election shows how a lack of upward mobility tears apart the society;

2. China should protect its manufacturing sector and prevent it from being outsourced. America’s deindustrialization only benefits capitalists, not workers;

3. China should forcefully resist immigrants and reject political correctness. Illegal immigrants usually compete with lower working class people for jobs, not professional middle class. When the daily safety of working class residents is threatened, they should be able to protect themselves without fear of being politically incorrect.

4. China should be adamantly against excessive care for the LGBT community. Their values and choice should be tolerated, not advocated, especially not at the expense of suppressed mainstream values.”

MikeR said...

'That's what liberals want in this country. They'd love to not just get so-called "racists" fired from their jobs or kicked off campus, but convicted of "hate Speech" and sent to prison or heavily fined.' Well, not racism, but we do still have Mark Steyn's trial dragging on and on. An attempt to punish free speech if ever there was one.

Alex said...

They will convict him and life will go on. There will be no consequences.

mockturtle said...

Back in the day, we were horrified to think there would be Thought Police, as in Orwell's 1984 but we have effectively moved well beyond that in many respects because surveillance is technologically much easier than Orwell might have imagined.

We are moving well along into Brave New World, too. Are there enough 'Savages' left to save us?

n.n said...

Social justice adventurism has been a first-order cause of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change that has driven immigration reform, including the refugee crises, harming Moroccans and Dutch. Class diversity schemes have been used to reconstitute institutional racism and disenfranchise people who are judged by "the color of their skin".

buwaya puti said...

Terry,
I am making no judgement about the advisability of encouraging immigration. As a foreigner in the US myself, should I make one, it would be an argument tainted by self interest.
My only point, should you care to address it, is that there are immigrants and there are immigrants. It would be interesting to consider whether a different sort of immigrant population would have led to quite such a reaction. If the new people in the Netherlands had mostly been Chinese from Java and Christians from Ambon and the Moluccas, would there have been a Geert Wilders?

chickelit said...

Phil wrote: "Good thing it wasn't more effective, otherwise we wouldn't have Rudy Giuliani, Andrew Napolitano, Samuel Alito..."

Presumes that 17-20th century immigration resembles 21st century immigration. It doesn't. For starters, we've encouraged and normalized dual citizenship. If you liked your old country, you can keep your old country.

buwaya puti said...

I suspect Trump will do rather well dealing with the Chinese.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

Racist, bigots, misogynists, etc all have the same freedom of speech rights as every other USA citizen. Most European countries have limited freedom of speech. Leftists, Democrats, Progressives here in the USA want our freedom of speech rights restricted like in Europe.

Roughcoat said...

I'm opposed to immigration that produces a massive racial re-structuring of society: the more so because racial restructuring always goes hand-in-hand with massive cultural changes. If that's racist, so be it.

How would Mexicans like it if tens of millions of white Americans immigrated to Mexico in a relatively short time-frame?

How would Moroccans like it if millions of Europeans moved into Morocco? Oh, wait, that already happened: it was called colonialism (by the French and Spanish). The Moroccans didn't like it.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Blogger coupe said...

quit humping my leg
11/24/16, 11:59 AM

Your leg, coupé? Everybody knows you like it in the ass.

n.n said...

whether a different sort of immigrant population would have led to quite such a reaction

The rate of immigration combined with reconstitution of class diversity has discouraged assimilation and encouraged disruption of native environments. The general issue is whether assimilation of immigrants would affect native integration.

AJ Lynch said...

Buyawa;

This is a good day to thank you for your regular and insightful and measured comments. I will add if the immigrants to those Euro countries were more like you, we'd probably have never heard of Wilders.

Jupiter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jupiter said...

Fen said...
"I'm also tired of "racism sexism homophobia" being the Great Satan. Sure, they are wrong and should be stomped out, but we have much bigger issues than someone's thought crimes."

Um, Fen, maybe you should explain what you mean by "racism sexism homophobia". Then you can explain how you are so sure they are "wrong". Then you can explain why they should be "stomped out", and just exactly how you propose to go about that. Then we can have that war you are trying to start.

My ideas, which I have developed over decades of thought and study, are routinely dismissed as "racist, sexist and homophobic" by people who aren't fit to feed to my dog. But my dog has to eat something.

buwaya puti said...

There was very little white immigration to Morocco. It was a colonial protectorate of France (and parts were and some still are held by Spain), but it was even then recognized as a foreign land and the Sultan retained his rights.

Morrocco wasnt long under colonial control either, 1912-56.
Now, Algeria is a different story. They really did have substantial numbers of white colonists.

mockturtle said...

Your leg, coupé? Everybody knows you like it in the ass.

That reminds me, BL. Where has Titus been?

Michael K said...

They would be much better off, with much less trouble of all kinds, with Mexicans

Yes and I have posted this at times. At least Mexicans are Christian and have our values, in part anyway.

I have had many Mexican immigrant friends. My best friend in medical school was a son of parents who had come in back in the 30s and 40s. He had 10 siblings and, with the exception of his oldest brother who had been killed in an industrial accident, all of his siblings had college and graduate degrees. His mother did not speak English and still made her own tortillas.

His father had a wrought iron business in east LA and he had gone to college on a scholarship provided by Dr Francisco Bravo, who founded a clinic in East LA and spent his fortune on sending Mexican-American kids to college and medical school.

There is a huge high school named for him near the USC medical campus.

Ed went to Stanford and worked as a lab tech while attending college. The medical school scholarship had a clause that, if the graduate worked in a community with 25% Spanish surnames, the debt would be forgiven. He set up his surgical practice in Chula Vista, just south of San Diego near the border. Eventually, his daughter Anna, joined him in surgical practice. His two sons went to law school.

That era of immigrant seemed to adopt the American work ethic and thrive. More recent immigrants seem to be more from Indian communities and many do not speak Spanish.

The biggest problem is the volume. There are too many low intelligence, poorly educated, illiterate people coming in faster than we can assimilate them.

The other factor is the divisive role of these ethnic politicians and "activists" who make their living stirring up resentment.

Victor Davis Hansen has spent decades teaching classics in the UC campus in Fresno, a heavily Hispanic area of California and speaks from experience in his book, "Mexifornia. "

sean said...

Free speech is a fundamental right even when it's racist speech. Thanks to American educators of the past 30 years, no one under the age of 50 believes this anymore.

Hagar said...

After the Dutch withdrawal from Indonesia, the Netherlands were obliged to accept a large influx (I thought it was a couple of million, but Wikipedia says only 300,000) Indonesians fleeing Indonesia, when the newly independent Indonesians went on a rampage killing "foreigners," especially Chinese, and also fellow Indonesians in any way seen connected to the hated colonial Dutch regime.

The Netherlands is a small country, just a little larger in area than the State of Maryland, and this influx of refugees in addition to absorbing their returning officials caused a lot of trouble, but the government felt honorbound to accept them and went to considerable lengths to tamp down the resistance. Dutch laws on this subject may date from that era.

Bad Lieutenant said...

That reminds me, BL. Where has Titus been?
11/24/16, 1:27 PM

Fair q, mock. One never sees them in the same room together, does one?

Fen said...

Um, Fen, maybe you should explain what you mean by "racism sexism homophobia". Then you can explain how you are so sure they are "wrong". Then you can explain why they should be "stomped out", and just exactly how you propose to go about that. Then we can have that war you are trying to start.

My ideas, which I have developed over decades of thought and study, are routinely dismissed as "racist, sexist and homophobic" by people who aren't fit to feed to my dog. But my dog has to eat something.


You must be new here. Preaching to the choir. I'm not talking about the way leftists resort to sliming anyone who disagrees with them as racist sexist homophobes. And I know exactly where you are coming from because the exact same thing has been done to me for 30 years.

No, I'm talking about actual racism, etc. I'm tired of all the hand-wringing over it, especially coming from the Left which has a huge blind spot re their own bigotry.

So Tony hates black people. Big fucking deal. So Jim thinks women are inferior. Who cares. It's this insane focus our culture has on bigotry things that I'm sick of. Yes, they are wrong and we shouldn't enable it, but they don't even make the top 10 list of *real* problems this country faces. People need to get over it and move to serious business.

Fen said...

My only point, should you care to address it, is that there are immigrants and there are immigrants. It would be interesting to consider whether a different sort of immigrant population would have led to quite such a reaction. If the new people in the Netherlands had mostly been Chinese from Java and Christians from Ambon and the Moluccas, would there have been a Geert Wilders?

I can speak to this. I've recently been studying Norway's current condition in retrospect to the mass shooter (Breivik) from 2011. From the articles and chat rooms, they don't have any issue with immigrants from other cultures like China. Its specifically the Muslim culture they are concerned about.

Achilles said...

Fen said...

I can speak to this. I've recently been studying Norway's current condition in retrospect to the mass shooter (Breivik) from 2011. From the articles and chat rooms, they don't have any issue with immigrants from other cultures like China. Its specifically the Muslim culture they are concerned about.

Any decent person should be concerned by shariah law. Shariah law is absolutely incompatible with modern civilization.

Anglelyne said...

rhhardin:

"We also say of some people that they are transparent to us. It is, however, important as regards this observation that one human being can be a complete enigma to another. We learn this when we come into a strange country with entirely strange traditions; and, what is more, even given a mastery of the country's language. We do not *understand* the people. (And not because of not knowing what they are saying to themselves.) We cannot find our feet with them."

Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations p.223)


Wittgenstein, prole translation, courtesy R. Kipling:

"The men of my own stock
They may do ill or well,
But they tell the lies I am wonted to.
They are used to the lies I tell,
And we do not need interpreters
When we go to buy and sell.

The Stranger within my gates,
He may be evil or good,
But I cannot tell what powers control
What reasons sway his mood;
Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
Shall repossess his blood.

The men of my own stock,
Bitter bad they may be,
But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
And see the things I see;
And whatever I think of them and their likes
They think of the likes of me."

Anglelyne said...

Jupiter:

AJ Lynch said...

"No one, in their right mind, gives up an advantage they possess, without getting something of worth in return. Yet our govt and our elites are doing just that in spades. It is insanity."

No it's not. *They* are giving up something *you* possess. And *they* are getting something *they* want in return. So it makes perfect sense.


Exactly. The minute the people promoting open borders and mass migration begin to find the disadvantages *to them* outweighing the profitability *to them* of said regime, they will all of a sudden discover that they have been national sovereignty champions all along.

mockturtle said...

Its specifically the Muslim culture they are concerned about.

And that makes sense. For one thing, Islam is antithetical to democratic-style government. For another, Muslims have no wish to assimilate. Thirdly, they intend to literally rule the world for Allah. Anyone who doubts this has been living in a cave.

Anglelyne said...

buwaya puti: Morrocco wasnt long under colonial control either, 1912-56.
Now, Algeria is a different story. They really did have substantial numbers of white colonists.


All of whom had to hoof it pretty quickly or get dead when the SHTF.

dwick said...

Community organizing is a two-way street, you know...

Recalling the words of his campaign treasurer (Rick Kahn) at the late Paul Wellstone's memorial-rally back in 2002:

KAHN: I can still hear that strong clear voice calling to me that is now our time to stand up for the people he fought for, that we need to stand up for our children. We must stand up for our seniors!

MOURNERS: (louder cheering)

KAHN: We have to stand up. We are going to stand up together, and we're going to organize! (screaming) We're going to organize!

MOURNERS: (cheers drowning out Kahn)

KAHN: We're going to organize! We're going to organize! We're going to organize! We're going to organize!


http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/01/13/great_democrat_memorials_past_the_wellstone_memorial_2002

Funny how the establishment powers that be get all bent out of shape if/when the conservative right even talks about organizing (e.g., IRS suppression of tea party and other conservative groups) but organizing on the left is perfectly okay and even encouraged.

Michael K said...

Islam is antithetical to democratic-style government. For another, Muslims have no wish to assimilate. Thirdly, they intend to literally rule the world for Allah.

I am unaware of a Muslim society with a reasonably free government. Turkey was but corruption opened the door to the fascist Erdogan.

I was in Istanbul in 2006 and they people were friendly although, when we went into the Blue Mosque, there were young men with angry eyes watching us to be sure we took our shoes off and the women covered their hair.

We had a young guide for part of the time who idolized Ataturk. He was the one who told us about the beautiful Byzantine mosaics that were uncovered when the panels of Islamic calligraphy were taken down. The mosaics had been carefully preserved by the workmen who put up the panels in Hagia Sophia after Constantinople was conquered by the Turks.

I wonder what has happened to those mosaics now? I am not about to go back.

There are too many examples of "sudden jihad syndrome" for me to trust Muslims. Major Hassan is an example of how the poison infects educated native born Muslims.

Anglelyne said...

Michael K: I was in Istanbul in 2006 and they people were friendly although, when we went into the Blue Mosque, there were young men with angry eyes watching us to be sure we took our shoes off and the women covered their hair.

Interesting. On a visit to the Blue Mosque in 2011 no one bothered my daughter and I (or any other tourists) about covering our hair. They stipulated "modest clothes" (leg and arm covering) for both sexes, but no headscarf demands. It was during Ramadan, and we had a nice guide who was strictly observing - he must have been very hungry, thirsty, and hot in the middle of an August afternoon. Maybe the angry-eyed young men were to hungry and thirsty themselves to bother the tourists then.

Wonder what it's like now.

narciso said...

Yes the pied noir, and the harks who worked with them. Poujafe was their spokesman. The pinay circle and the national front succeeded in due course.

David said...

buwaya puti said...
I suspect Trump will do rather well dealing with the Chinese.


Read Kissinger's "On China" and then his section on China in "World Order" and see if you are still as optimistic. At their best the Chinese have a very long view that serves them well. We usually don't, nor does 100 year thinking seem to be in Trump's wheelhouse.

Terry said...

David said:
" . . . nor does 100 year thinking seem to be in Trump's wheelhouse."
Nor does it seem to be in China's wheelhouse. China today is nothing like the Chinese of even forty years ago imagined it, let alone a century. Since the 15th century, at least, Chinese history can be looked at as an instruction manual on what not do.

EMD said...

That reminds me, BL. Where has Titus been?

In Wisconsin, where that harmless fraud has always been.

gadfly said...

@Bad Lieutenant said...

Blogger gadfly said...
Whether or not one feels any support for Wilders's sentiments is not in fact the point in this case. The point is that by prosecuting someone for saying what he said, the courts in Holland are effectively ruling that there is only one correct answer to the question Wilders asked. They are saying that if someone asks you whether you would like more Moroccans or fewer, people must always answer "more," or they will be committing a crime. ~Douglas Murray
11/24/16, 10:34 AM

Now it is clear why you opposed Donald Trump and supported Hillary Clinton.


Playing troll tonight, BL?

The subject of Althouse's blog post is Geert Wilders and his trial in Holland. You just quoted every word that I added to the subject and there is nothing in there about Donald Trump or Hillary. The entire posting that I put up is attributed to Douglas Murray, a British author.

We can get you some information of remedial reading classes if you wish. I am sure that there are people on here who will help. 🤔

gadfly said...

Final Statement of Geert Wilders at his Trial, 23 Nov. 2016

Thanks to Gates of Vienna for the entire speech which is well worth your time to read.

Bad Lieutenant said...

gadfly, perhaps you're not that bright. In Trump vs Clinton, Wilders de facto aligns with the former; you support Wilders; so you should support Trump, except that he is a poopy head. Or you are.

mockturtle said...

Wilders' speech is worth reading in its entirely. Thanks, gadfly. It is a grim reminder that we are THIS CLOSE to losing our freedoms, just like Europe, if we don't remain constantly vigilant.

grackle said...

Racism and prejudice do not have the same meaning.

And the problem is compounded by the fact that both terms have become almost meaningless by their casual misuse in the cultural war. They’ve been denatured.

The worm has turned on multiculturalism …

It depends on the culture. Personally, I feel right at home with Mexican-American culture. I’m not talking about illegal immigrants, who are an economic drain. Culturally, the Mexican-American culture represents no threat to my freedom.

But I worry about Muslims and their viewpoint of freedom. They seem confused about freedom and hostile to the whole notion of freedom, of equality and tolerance. Wiki has a chart of countries and their % of Muslims.

http://tinyurl.com/hv7u9jm

Find any country with a Muslim majority. Look up the country in the US State Department’s reports on Human Rights Practices.

http://tinyurl.com/6sgb4wd

You’ll have to use the pull-down on the blue banner labeled “Countries/Regions.” BTW, they’ve made this information less accessible since the last time I did this. They used to have an easy-to-scan clickable alphabetical list all on one page and it was easy to find. Not now. And I think they’ve changed the title of the reports slightly. Obfuscation on purpose?

What you will find is that no country with a Muslim majority has any semblance of what, say, the average American would think of as “freedom.” The obvious conclusion is very politically incorrect. The obvious conclusion spawned Brexit, Wilders, Le Pen and Trump.

Mick said...

Muslims can never pledge sole allegiance to the US, as stipulated and demanded by the United States Naturalization Oath. Their allegiance will always be to a political faction called Islam. Any claimed allegiance to another political entity is forbidden by Islam--- they would be an apostate, and sentenced to death. But they may practice Taqiyya--- Koran allowed lying for the benefit of Islam-- that way they can create the Caliphate by mass migration, which is happening now.

Craig said...

"Muslims can never pledge sole allegiance to the US, as stipulated and demanded by the United States Naturalization Oath. Their allegiance will always be to a political faction called Islam. Any claimed allegiance to another political entity is forbidden by Islam--- they would be an apostate, and sentenced to death."

What ignorant, obviously false bullshit.

1) Muslims obviously can perform the act of pledging sole allegiance to the United States--Mick-on-the-Internet even suggests as much in his third sentence, allowing that such a Muslim would thereby have committed apostasy.
and
2) That Mick-on-the-Internet interprets some selected provisions of text some way does not mean that Mick-on-the-Internet is definitive of Islam. There are obviously many variants of Islam, and so you'd have to be an idiot to think there is just one way. (Indeed, if we accepted the presuppositions needed to read Mick-on-the-Internet's provisions charitably, the argument offered Mick-on-the-Internet would also entail that Christians can never pledge sole allegiance to the US. Give me a damned break.)

It's not clear what is worse here--the vicious misanthropy or the failure to read or reason well.

Qwinn said...

Craig:

Your rebuttal 1 makes no sense. The only way I can see it making sense is in the most pedantic interpretation possible.

As for point 2, get back to us when Christians start executing each other for apostacy the way Muslims do regularly.

Qwinn said...

Oh, and Craig? Get back to us when y9u can find a single school out of all these "variants" of Islamic thought that, just as an example, doesn't believe that all the "peaceful" passages in the Koran aren't overidden by the later "convert them by the sword" passages.

Yes, there's many variants of Islam. But on the things Mick is discussing, all the scholars and imams of all the major variants agree. And yes, they're all empowered by their Prophet to lie to you about it.

HT said...

It’s not just about controlling this one thing, immigration. You can’t necessarily pick and choose when it comes to this system we have. It’s part of a larger picture. And in Europe, it’s obviously different bc there is less space, but there are many similarities. Do we want to continue with a system in which the average lifespan of imported farm workers is so much less than everyone else? And this is just one tiny facet of the picture to consider.

Rusty said...

Craig.
Someone here made this observation. And while funny it rings true.

"Peaceful Muslims don't want to kill you.
Radical Muslims want to kill you.
Peaceful Muslims want radical Muslims to kill you."

Or words to that effect. It rings true because there is no groundswell outrage by peaceful Muslims over the actions of radical Muslims. Otherwise we'd be seeing westernized Muslims joining the Kurds and Iraqis battling ISIS.

Robert Cook said...

"...Islam is antithetical to democratic-style government."

So would be a Christian government, or any theocratic government. Religion as the organizing principle of government is antithetical to democratic forms of government.

Robert Cook said...

"...there is no groundswell outrage by peaceful Muslims over the actions of radical Muslims."


Sure there is. The media just doesn't cover it.

"Otherwise we'd be seeing westernized Muslims joining the Kurds and Iraqis battling ISIS."

What does this mean? Do you expect Muslim citizens in countries not embattled with ISIS attacks should rise up en masse, leave behind their families and jobs and lives, and travel to those lands to take up arms? This is absurd.

Drago said...

Cookie: "What does this mean? Do you expect Muslim citizens in countries not embattled with ISIS attacks should rise up en masse, leave behind their families and jobs and lives, and travel to those lands to take up arms? This is absurd."

LOL

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/why-are-so-many-westerners-joining-isis/

You really are an idiot.

Drago said...

In more fantastic leftist news, the economic refugees are fleeing the latest lefty workers paradise by any means available.

Is there anything more predictable than the collapse of leftist policies in the real world?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/world/americas/hungry-venezuelans-flee-in-boats-to-escape-economic-collapse.html?_r=0

Robert Cook said...

Drago,

Because fanatics choose to leave their lives and countries to join ISIS you think it axiomatic that non-fanatic, job-holding, family-raising, ordinary Muslim citizens should feel (or have) an obligation to leave their lives and jobs and countries to fight against the fanatics to prove their opposition to radical Islam?

That is absurd.

Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

Drago says:

"Is there anything more predictable than the collapse of leftist policies in the real world?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/world/americas/hungry-venezuelans-flee-in-boats-to-escape-economic-collapse.html?_r=0


Things are not always as they seem.

mockturtle said...

I said "...Islam is antithetical to democratic-style government."

Cookie says: So would be a Christian government, or any theocratic government. Religion as the organizing principle of government is antithetical to democratic forms of government.

Do you expect an argument with that? Is anyone here advocating a theocracy? Have any Christians been advocating replacing our democratic Republic with a Christian theocracy? Of course not. But Muslims oppose democracy and passionately advocate Islamic rule. Even nice, respectable Muslims, of whom I have known more than a few.

Drago said...

Cookie the Stalinist falls back on the economic conspiracy theories to explain another leftist economic failure!

Lol

Drago said...

Sorry cookie, things are EXACTLY as they seem in Venezuela.

Let me guess cookie, you believe the Berlin Wall was put up to keep outsidersfrom sneaking into the Lefty paradise of East Berlin, right!

We will just place this latest conspiracy lunacy of yours next to the mythical SR-71 HW used to fly to Paris to conspire with the Iranians to hold Americans hostage longer!

Lol

mockturtle said...

Drago suggested: Let me guess cookie, you believe the Berlin Wall was put up to keep outsidersfrom sneaking into the Lefty paradise of East Berlin, right!


And he thinks Trump's wall will be built to keep Americans from escaping into Mexico.

Drago said...

Next up for cookie: Alger Hiss was innocent! Innocent I tell ya! Nixon framed him!

Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

"But Muslims oppose democracy and passionately advocate Islamic rule. Even nice, respectable Muslims, of whom I have known more than a few."

And there are Christians in this country who believe we are a "Christian Nation" (we are not) and that the government should be directed by Christian dogma.

Not all Christians feel this way, not even most. Likewise, I defy you to prove that all, or even most, Muslims "oppose democracy and passionately advocate Islamic rule."

Robert Cook said...

"Let me guess cookie, you believe the Berlin Wall was put up to keep outsiders from sneaking into the Lefty paradise of East Berlin, right!"

"Next up for cookie: Alger Hiss was innocent! Innocent I tell ya! Nixon framed him!"



Nope, as the known facts refute such notions.

mockturtle said...

Cookie demands: Likewise, I defy you to prove that all, or even most, Muslims "oppose democracy and passionately advocate Islamic rule."

There is no way, as you must realize, that I can 'prove' this. However, I strongly suspect that you know very few, if any, Muslims well enough to exchange ideas.

Rusty said...

The proof is in the absence of Muslim democracies.

Drago said...

cookie the hopeless lefty: "Likewise, I defy you to prove that all, or even most, Muslims "oppose democracy and passionately advocate Islamic rule."

LOL

Whatever you do, don't look at how any of those Islamic nations are actually organized nor the laws they live under!

Avert your gaze and instead just take cookies word for it!

Fantastic.

Gahrie said...

I defy you to prove that all, or even most, Muslims "oppose democracy and passionately advocate Islamic rule."

Every survey I have ever seen, taken in the West or the Middle East, has shown that a majority of Muslims want to live under Sharia law, which is incompatible with democracy or a liberal republic.

Gahrie said...

@Comrade Cookie:

That article you link is so absurd, it tries to blame plunging oil prices on the Saudis, in some obscure Saudi/Zionist/US conspiracy, instead of on fracking.

Gahrie said...

Because fanatics choose to leave their lives and countries to join ISIS you think it axiomatic that non-fanatic, job-holding, family-raising, ordinary Muslim citizens should feel (or have) an obligation to leave their lives and jobs and countries to fight against the fanatics to prove their opposition to radical Islam?

That is absurd.


Why?

Paddy O said...

"Racism and prejudice do not have the same meaning."

Francisco D, yes, exactly. They can overlap, but if we only see racism as the issue, then we both misunderstand others and likely excuse a lot of other prejudice.

I grew up in a very multi-racial setting, and have a lot more in common with those from my setting than those who share my race from other parts of the world/country.

Confusing racism with prejudice also is very ahistorical, even anti-historical. One cannot explain European history by racism, yet it is filled with all sorts of prejudice. Having only a "racism" label also allows for the broad overuse of 'white privilege' as if everyone who is white has live a life of privilege, again discounting the broad testimony of history outside very narrow categories.