When did having national pride, holding a strong justified opinion on equality and freedoms, practicing your religion (Christianity), identifying with your culture and seeking to preserve hard won freedoms evolve from being noble activities to frowned upon signs of potential ultra right-wing fascist tendencies.
For the sake of clarity the definition of a fifth column is any group of people who undermine a larger group — such as a nation or group of nations in an alliance (substitute the EU) — from within, usually in favour of an enemy group or nation. The activities of a fifth column can be overt or clandestine.
The Vacuous PC Pseudo-Ideology
Current German & Swedish refugee policy is based on a slavish adherence to non-specific vacuous PC pseudo-ideology https://t.co/CtjKEDZAVj
— Graham Penrose (@GrahamPenrose2) January 8, 2016
In the case of current German and Swedish refugee policy they are overt and facilitated by the main stream media and a slavish adherence to the bonkers notions dictated by that non-specific vacuous pseudo-ideology that is referred to as “political correctness”. This misguided set of cobbled together directionless principles is code for “I have not got the strength of character to defend an opinion that upholds the traditions and beliefs of my community” or “I despise my own culture and wish to dilute it and eventually replace it with an external alien set of aggressive, contradictory and oppressive ideologies”.
PC slaves label opponents as “reactionaries” but if you define this as a person who holds political views that favour a return to the status quo ante, the previous political state of society, which they believe possessed characteristics (discipline, respect for authority, etc.) that are negatively absent from the contemporary status quo of a society – then it is a badge to be worn with pride.
Putting Minority Rights in Context
The most extreme treatment of minorities has been carried out by 20th and 21st-century dictatorships. The worst examples are those of totalitarian regimes that carried out genocide to eradicate unwanted groups in society. Ironically the main players in the most extreme of these events were the Germans, Russians and Turks during the Holocaust, the Purges and the Armenian Genocide respectively. All once again playing an active role in the facilitation and exacerbation of contemporary tragedies of a similar scale.
The Holocaust perpetrated by Nazi Germany murdered six million Jews, one-third of the total world Jewish population, as well as a significant portion of the Roma (“Gypsy”) community. Homosexuals were also a targeted minority for extermination.
The Soviet Union, under Stalin, carried out mass executions and deportations of dozens of Caucasian and Central Asian ethnic groups; some now face extinction. More recently, the Russian Federation has waged a brutal war against its own republic of Chechnya, killing tens of thousands of civilians and displacing more than half the population.
In April 1915 the Ottoman government embarked upon the systematic decimation of its civilian Armenian population. The persecutions continued with varying intensity until 1923 when the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist and was replaced by the Republic of Turkey. The Armenian population of the Ottoman state was reported at about two million in 1915. An estimated one million had perished by 1918, while hundreds of thousands had become homeless and stateless refugees. By 1923 virtually the entire Armenian population of Anatolian Turkey had disappeared.
Other examples of mass killings of a minority by a dictatorship include the Nigerian campaign against Biafrans, the Hutu genocide of Tutsi in Rwanda, Saddam Hussein’s mass killing of Kurds and Shiites in Iraq, and the Sudanese government’s sponsorship of mass killing, raping, and deportation in Darfur. The project for an “ethnically pure” Greater Serbia undertaken by Slobodan Milosevic resulted in the murder of 200,000 Bosnian Muslims and 10,000 Albanian Muslims in Kosovo by a killing machine that was stopped only by military campaigns carried out by NATO.
The Tyranny of the Majority Reconsidered
Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in the “Tyranny of the Majority,” Chapter XV, Book 1, Democracy in America: “If it be admitted that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should not a majority be liable to the same reproach? Men do not change their characters by uniting with one another; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase with their strength. For my own part, I cannot believe it; the power to do everything, which I should refuse to one of my equals, I will never grant to any number of them.”
Democracy in its purest form requires minority rights equally as it does majority rule. As democracy was conceived, the minority’s rights must be protected no matter how singular or alienated that minority is from the majority society; otherwise, the majority’s rights lose their meaning – in theory.
These rights are considered the essential element of any liberal democracy. The British political philosopher John Stuart Mill took this principle further. In his essay On Liberty he wrote, “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others.”
The Tyranny of the Minority
Mill’s “no harm principle” aims to prevent government from becoming a vehicle for the “tyranny of the majority,” which he viewed as not just a political but also a social tyranny that stifled minority voices and imposed a regimentation of thought and values. Mill’s views became the basis for much of liberal political philosophy since, whether it is free market or economic liberalism or social liberalism.
The irony is that as we stand today in Europe the principle has been reversed as a social tyranny prevails that is implemented by elected governments that stifles majority voices and imposes an alien and contradictory set of undermining minority agendas.
The German 20th Century Guilt Complex
The time line that explains how Europe has developed contradictory attitudes to “tolerance” that undermines its own people and favours external opportunists begins at the end of World War II. Europe and Europeans have a cultural and historical distinctiveness that sets them apart from other regions and in particular is entirely at odds with the alien cultures of the Middle East and Near Asia both politically, ideologically and spiritually.
Even the most uninformed are in some way aware that the cultures of Europe and the Middle East / Near Asia have been at loggerheads for millennia. The fact that Europe maintained an upper hand in recent centuries belies the uncomfortable truth that from the mid-500s to the mid-1500s Europe risked being overrun by various aggressively expansionist Islamic empires.
I will not do justice to the usual anti-Crusader rant that Islamic extremist apologists use to justify Islamic disgruntlement with Europe and Europeans. Suffice to say that those events were a direct response to incursions and threats from the Caliphate(s) at that time and have worn thin as any form of practical justification for any contemporary ideology that seeks to use these almost millennia old events to justify any current foreign or cultural policy.
The refugee crisis in Europe has been caused in many respects by the naive social policies of Germany and Sweden. After the events of the 20th century, Germany has since the 1940s, sought to “atone” for the atrocities and deprivations it imposed on most of Europe in the previous 50 years by seeking to demonstrate its alleged tolerance and openness.
The “lost post war generation” in Germany struggled with an identity crisis and a guilt complex and subsequently heavily subscribed to even the most misguided 60s civil rights movements, soviet infiltrated anti-nuclear campaigns, “believe in nothing” flower power nonsense and embraced and encouraged most all marginal and deviant groups that emerged then and since, under the guise of equality and multiculturalism.
Sweden’s Self-Serving Opportunism
The “brave” Swedes who to their eternal shame – along with Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Andorra, Liechtenstein, Vatican City, San Marino and Switzerland held a neutral stance during World War II – breached the nation’s neutrality in favour of both Germany and the Western Allies when it became expedient.
During the German invasion of the Soviet Union, Sweden allowed the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport (June–July 1941) the German 163rd Infantry Division along with howitzers, tanks and anti-aircraft weapons and associated ammunition, from Norway to Finland. German soldiers traveling on leave between Norway and Germany were allowed passage through Sweden — the so-called “permittenttrafik”. Iron ore was sold to Germany throughout the war.
And for the Allies, Sweden shared military intelligence and helped to train soldiers made up of refugees from Denmark and Norway, to be used in the liberation of their home countries. It also allowed the Allies to use Swedish airbases between 1944 and 1945. In 1943, following an order to deport all of Denmark’s Jewish population to concentration camps, nearly all of Denmark’s 8,000 Jews were brought to safety in Sweden. Sweden also became a refuge for Norwegian Jews who fled from Nazi occupied Norway.
They now confuse the noble activity of becoming a refuge for anti-fascist and Jewish refugees from all over the region during that time with their current open door policy to Islamic economic migrants and other North African and Asian opportunists.
What the actions of Sweden during that time demonstrate about Swedish mentality is that they are incapable of holding a strong opinion – they are opportunists unlike the ruling classes in Germany who are simply determined to thrust Europe headlong once again into a crisis of their making.
Economic & Ideological Bullies
Not content with being the economic bully boy of the European Union the Germans now insist on foisting their twisted visions on the rest of Europe and in doing so undermine many of the principles that Europeans hold dear. Germany like Russia has always shown a propensity for authoritarianism and the psyche of the German nation is demonstrably schizophrenic as it flip flops from one extreme to another as everyone else picks up the tab for their ideological mis-adventures.
Migrant Crisis is putting whole of Europe in Danger
(This section is an excerpt taken entirely from an article in The Express 7th January 2016)
Countries such as Sweden and Germany that have taken in large numbers of migrants now have significantly more men than women. According to Dr Valerie Hudson this alone is a recipe for higher crime. But we cannot discount the fact that these migrants are also coming from an alien culture.
The dangers are already obvious. In Germany a wave of sex attacks over the New Year was perpetrated by migrants who showed no regard for their victims or the law. The threat is compounded by the possibility of jihadists using the crisis as a cover to sneak operatives into Europe. Even if only a tiny minority of the migrants identify with terrorist groups the risk is still unacceptably high.
There are still those labouring under the delusion that these people are refugees. They are not.
Historically when refugees have fled persecution they have overwhelmingly been women, children and the elderly. What we witnessed in 2015 – something which shows no sign of stopping in 2016 – was the mass movement of young men. These are migrants coming to Europe to further their own interests, not vulnerable people in need of sanctuary.
We owe them nothing. Europe’s leaders need to stop ushering in ever more of these new arrivals and start doing something about the problems caused by their obsession with open borders.
Paris police got it right Paris yesterday marked the first anniversary of the attacks on the offices of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. A year on from those dreadful events Europe’s anti-terror forces are still on tenterhooks.
This was graphically demonstrated in the French capital as police shot dead a man who was wearing a fake suicide vest and soldiers were deployed on to the streets. The officers involved had little choice but to shoot to kill.
The officers involved had little choice but to shoot to kill. While his bomb may not have been real he was still waving a knife, shouting jihadist slogans and carrying an IS flag. As a spokeswoman for France’s interior ministry said: “The security forces showed true professionalism and vigilance.” The police must do everything in their power to keep the public safe.
Acknowledgements & References
1. John Stuart Mill. On Liberty, The Library of Liberal Arts edition, p.7. https://publius2013.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/tyranny-of-the-minority/
2. A Przeworski, JM Maravall, I NetLibrary Democracy and the Rule of Law (2003) p.223
3. John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, Vol. Three (London: 1788), p. 291.
4. Volk, Kyle G. (2014). Moral Minorities and the Making of American Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human: First Sequel: Mixed Opinions and Maxims, 1879
6. Ayn Rand (1961), “Collectivized ‘Rights,'” The Virtue of Selfishness.
7. The Repressive Tolerance by Herbert Marcuse Jump up
8. Lani Guinier, The Tyranny of the Majority (Free Press: 1994)
9. Lacy K. Ford Jr., “Inventing the Concurrent Majority: Madison, Calhoun, and the Problem of Majoritarianism in American Political Thought”, The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 60, No. 1 (Feb., 1994), pp. 19–58 in JSTOR
10. University of Virginia
11. First Principles Journal
12. Democracy Web
13. Donald J. Maletz The Journal of Politics Vol. 64, No. 3 (Aug., 2002), pp. 741-763 Publish
14. Daily Express
17. Channel 4 Dispatches
18. Mail on Sunday
19. The Times
21. The IB Times
22. Business Insider
24. The Long War Journal
25. Defense One
26. The Washington Institute
28. VICE News