You push Alameida's long-awaited dish post down the page to talk about demographics. Who sent you?
I'm about halfway through the piece, haven't got to the part you quoted, haven't encountered anything that doesn't seem like rank bullshit, haven't encountered anything that backs up "The progressive agenda--lavish social welfare, abortion, secularism, multiculturalism--is collectively the real suicide bomb" except a lot of hooey about how we're too nice to Muslims, and am not reading any farther. If there is something to be salvaged here, let me know. baa?
One of the lessons of the past five years is that being Tough and Strong for its own sake, so that Something Will Have Been Done, is stupid. I think this also applies to the idea that Europeans are Weak and so will Perish. You have to have some idea about how that perishing will occur, and "the internal contradictions of the EU will manifest themselves in the usual way" seems like a rather enthymematic argument on the way to burning buildings, street riots, and assassinations in four years.
4 followed directly on 2, I don't take myself to be arguing with anyone except Steyn. It would be nice to hear a reasoned take on demographics etc. Could increasing productivity make up for decreasing population?
This Applebaum piece that I linked to back in the day isn't entirely about demographics, but is a non-crazy exposition of some parts of the problem. And it is a problem, though not in the racist way Steyn and company say.
If Europe officially heads in a more Islamo-friendly direction, then assuming they're not completely stupid (like the French are in this regard), they'll do it in such a way as to covertly secularize the Muslims while allowing them to retain a Muslim surface. Or they could pretend that there's something ontologically "there" as regards ethnic or religious identity, and then get caught up in a struggle to the death.
A thought experiment: compare the rhetoric of the "Muslim question" in Europe today with the rhetoric of the "Jewish question" in Europe between about 1900-1933 or so.
Matt, I'm sure you'll find Wretchard's take to be completely clear and convincing.
and the values allegedly in danger are ones I hold dear
I understand the concern, but I am much, much more worried about the attack on the values I hold dear that is presently coming from the Southern Republicans (and some Southern Dems). If letting in 10 million foreigners a year would bring us Democratic control of the nation (or at least non-Southern Republican control), I think that's far preferable to going down the alternate history route with our present population.
Which is to say, I'm not sure that the culture you think we share is all that shared. (See the works of Michael Schneider.) Therefore, I am suspicious of strong claims that the fuckers in South Carolina are better guardians of those values than some random from Algeria.
covertly secularize the Muslims while allowing them to retain a Muslim surface
This is more difficult than it sounds. See, say, Turkey in the 20th century.
Timbot makes a great point, and in the same vein: some of the rhetoric about muslim immigrants assumes that they're all hyper-religious importers of fanaticism. Not only is that untrue, but, like Adam says, there are ways to integrate people, no matter what their beliefs, and integration--particularly economic integration--is where the European countries have really fallen down.
Look, plenty of immigrants would be perfectly happy to assimilate, if it meant that they could (or could hope to) participate fully in the society to which they've come. It's not as if the muslim virus comes in and you count up how many agents it has and whether you can cordon it off.
If you look at Dyab Abou Jahjah's rhetoric, he's not saying "we want a Muslim society," he's saying "we Muslims want to be treated as full citizens."
There are extremists in every group, though. You think there are more white supremecists or second-generation radical muslims? There might even be acts of terrorism perpetrated by some second-generation muslims, but you're framing the issue so that anything like that will be some kind of proof of the impossibility of assimilation.
*I* was happy to hear about what a creep Nick Gillespie is, until you went all Grand Wizard on us.
If we're actually talking about France, the problem is that the idea of social mobility only exists a) prior to the age of 16, or b) if you have really good contacts. Neither of which will be likely to apply to immigrants of any race or religion. Oh, and then there's a degree of latent racism that Americans would find hard to believe.
15 + 16 = Those crazy Muslims, rejecting a culture that treats them like second-class citizens.
Ok, I'm kidding, of course. This is a serious problem. But a lot depends on how it's framed and what the expectations are. If we start with a suspicion that muslims are some sort of deadly contagion, then every outbreak will call for overwhelming response, and throw the whole project of assimilation into question. If we think of them as people with varying beliefs and temperatments, who are responsive to normal human incentives, then we can get somewhere.
I thought it was pretty overt in Turkey?
Ben, I vould like to haff overt vith you.
I agree with 2. I mean, come on, this?
What's the better bet? A globalization that exports cheeseburgers and pop songs or a globalization that exports the fiercest aspects of its culture?
That gets it so unbelievably wrong on like four different counts.
Silvana, I realize we're disintegrating into unseriousness here, but I really do want to hold out against 21, since it seems to me that there really is an interesting question about what radicalizes people; it's not just 'depraved on account of deprived.' I have only anecdotes to go on, of course, so this can't really go far.
Yabbut, Mark Steyn is a fucktard.
To confound you, Labs, my grater will be purchased at Sur La Table.
23: ogged, I'm not muslim, so, of course I will die childless as the Muslims overtake the planet with their 42.4 babies per woman. Sorry.
I really think that serious consideration should be made as to the effects of life extension technology that, according to some, is going to be effective starting within the next two decades. With a population that is no longer aging significantly, things change a lot. You don't need immigrants to sustain your population numbers any longer, and so you don't even need to allow immigration. (Which, from a human perspective, is probably not a good thing.)
Genetics, nanotech, robotics. Genetics, nanotech, robotics. Future, future, future.
You know, I was recently at an upscale grocery while my sister and her friend purchased products for a dinner party tomorrow, and at the butcher area some upper middle-aged women were conversing with a meat dude about the virtues and appropriate cooking methods of various cuts of meat. At one point Meat Dude mentioned some product, and Lady One said something like "oh, you can probably get that at Sur la Table"—but she pronounced "table" the English way. I was scornful! But then I remembered that I had once done exactly that, and been corrected, and resolved to be less supercilious & sanctimonious in the future.
But, considering the make of car they can be assumed to drive, they should have known better! I demand that my upper classes be classy!
I was already fake by virtue of my half-Arabness. That doesn't prevent me from getting thoroughly searched every time I fly.
I on the other hand, a thirty-something muslim man, never get searched.
1. Ogged, you aren't an Arab, right? And don't the Iranians and Arabs hate each other?
2. I'm still not clear where there have been massive integration problems. IIRC, the stuff in France was a pain in the ass, but not that serious. And I thought it was done primarily by non-Arab immigrants (i.e., the black ones.)
My frequent trips to Egypt don't help. An interesting side-story: Last time I was in Luxor, my sister and I were appalled that we walked through "security" at Hatshepsut's Temple without so much as a second glance when we passed through and set off the metal detectors; our bags went unsearched and we were waved through. But when we were leaving, we saw a bunch of twenty-something Egyptian guys really getting the third degree. You think profiling is bad here.
Oh, sure, it's really the black man's fault.
don't the Iranians and Arabs hate each other?
Not as much as they hate whitey.
not clear where there have been massive integration problems
There's stuff simmering in just about every European country. I have relatives in probably 75% of the Western European countries, and they all talk about the tension, and feeling unwanted. But again, a lot of what results from that depends on economics: if they're in stable economic circumstances, chances are good that they're kids will assimilate pretty easily, if not, not. (And it can be true both that most suicide bombers come from affluence and that affluence makes people far less likely to be radicals.)
there really is an interesting question about what radicalizes people
Of course. But my thoroughly arigorous theory is that it's the same thing no matter what your flavor of radicalism: a perception, real or imagined, that the culture is trying to weed you out, scorns you, or is against everything you believe in.
Cf. Christian fundamentalists.
And a belated response to 24: yes, it was initially overt, but eventually the government tried to secularize by controlling religious entities, which doesn't look at first glance like secularization.
Short answer: no.
Long answer: Here
Oh, sure, it's really the black man's fault.
Salvadoran is the new black. Try to keep up.
Bah, I reject that argument, but it will have to wait until later, since I have to sleep.
I'm not going anywhere in particular with this, but I'm wondering what our collective take is on the demographic worry, and whether there's something to be salvaged from this piece in spite of its craziness-ridden bad self.
The short answer would seem to be no. Steyn's piece is so larded with begged questions, dodgy assumption and outright racism that disentangling the whole mess is probably not worth the time. As far as demographers go, the Evil Frenchman Emmanuel Todd is worth a dozen Steyns any day of the week. (Though I'm sure he won't be getting any recommendations from Hugh Hewitt... guess he'll have to live with that, somehow.)
Go to sleep, whitey, and I'll go breed.
and they all talk about the tension, and feeling unwanted
Well, fuck, ogged, if they're anything like you, I don't think you can lay that at ethnicity's door. (Huh. I knew there were some issues in Germany and France, and now Holland, but otherwise, not so much.)
#45: Thanks for that link. I was trying to find that article the other day, it's excellent.
Sleep - what's that like again? Anyone have a miracle cure for insomnia?
Sorry, 47 was to Silvana. David, thanks for that link-- the piece looks really interesting
I feel like I should pimp some of our posts, but can't decide which. Everything here is marginally relevant, esp. the posts from 2004.
http://fistfulofeuros.net/archives/cat_minorities_and_integration.php
Not really related, but of interest: Scott on Mexican immigaration.
http://pedantry.fistfulofeuros.net/archives/000481.html
Did I just kill the thread by introducing some facts?
No, I'm reading the blog. It's very good.
Fuck me, but:
"It seems more likely that within the next couple of European election cycles, the internal contradictions of the EU will manifest themselves in the usual way, and that by 2010 we'll be watching burning buildings, street riots and assassinations on American network news every night."
is such total fucking shite it's not even worth discussing. It's masturbatory wish-fulfillment crap.
It's not that there's even the remotest shred of evidence that could justify such a prediction but rather that a certain kind of American feels better about themselves and their nation's manly virility if they spout this kind of bullshit.
The fluid national identity of "translatlantic" wingnuts is amusing considering the role patriotism and even nationalism plays in their rhetoric.
The demography thing is worrying, but it's not even across Europe; and, unhappily for the wingnut thesis, it is the less French and newer parts of the EU which are facing real demographic problems. I made a radio programme about this last year which spooked the hell out of me, if not out of the listeners. Transcript [I hope] at http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/programmes/analysis/transcripts/17_03_05.txt
Not quite on topic, but another issue for Europe's future is immigration within the expanded EU. Here's an article on a protest in Ireland over the use of Latvian laborers on ferries. (Some background: I linked to a couple of articles a while back on Latvia and Ireland.) And just for fun: Swedes in Finland.
Hmm. I just posted something with only four links and was told it would be moderated anyway. I thought the limit was five. I'll try again, but of course feel free to approve only one of the attempts.
1) SCMT, nope, the car-burning was NOT mainly done by black people, but by maghreb (ethnically arab and berber) kids often well under 18.
2)the problem in France is much more complicated than this thread admits - by the ALGERIAN CIVIL WAR which france took part in, during which bombs were occasionally set off and acts of "terrorism" performed *in Paris* by Algerian separatists. Memories of this are probably at the root of a lot of the current discrimination (which as jackmormon points out certainly occurs), not "muslimness."
3) French-Africans are often much better integrated in French society than Algerian or Arab French. And black French-Africans are quite often Muslim - Senegal, for example, is mainly Muslim -- so therefore clearly the problem is not rooted in muslim "ideology" but something else.
I would also point out that French-Africans often seem better integrated here in Paris than African-Americans in, say, Boston. Funny the difference a lack of history of slavery can make.
At the Minneapolis airport, airport security is staffed by Somalis, who are insidiously moving into ALL of the low-paid jobs in Minnesota. I guess I should just convert to Islam and have doe with it; the Wobegon culture is doomed.
i always feel so badly for the poor somalis in minneapolis - they must be so cold!
If letting in 10 million foreigners a year would bring us Democratic control of the nation (or at least non-Southern Republican control), I think that's far preferable to going down the alternate history route with our present population.
Along these lines, I liked yglesias's suggestion to "annex" quebec.
I'm certain I've heard of all these arguments before, except it was about Italian and Irish immmigration to the U.S., and how those Catholics had so many more babies and good American boys wouldn't be able to get jobs.
I read most of this article as a screed against birth control, really.
Of course second-generation fundamentalists are often from the upper classes. They're the only ones with the leisure time to organize; and they see that not everyone ended up upper class and have time to think about it.
It's going to be a rough transition, but not, I think because of anything particular to Islam (what, is that the only religion that's ever had a hard time integrating?).
To avoid collapse, European nations will need to take in immigrants at a rate no stable society has ever attempted.
And why is this particularly true? What does he mean by collapse? To have the same population levels? To support the welfare state? What?
I read most of this article
That's where you went wrong.
Yeah. Most of the time his argument seemed to be 'Be conservative now, because while you won't have any rights under a Republican regime, by not voting Republican you are ensuring you'll live under an ISLAMOFASCIST regime!'
So liberals should vote for conservatives!
I read most of this article as a screed against birth control, really.
Me too.
70 is awesome also. But 26 gets it exactly right.
What about the oil crash? That'll solve all our overpopulation problems. Here's hoping!
I think the real solution is a diet of Muslim babies.
(If you can't get the allusion, well, yeah, don't get irate).
Look, it's not just a population, it's an economic question. If economies in the developed world were robust, there wouldn't be much reason for backlash. Nobody would care that there was an influx of immigrants because, well, there's enough mobility for nearly eveyone to find a job. On the continent, however, you've Germany which is really struggling to employ its citizens. With immigrants, this only increases the pressures. Combine this with what has been mainly a Christian society for a long time (as far as I can tell), and duh, backlash against the muslims and jews (to deny that the anti-semitism of the 30's and 40's was at least partially a result of the Depression is ludicrous). Anyhow, my train of thought got derailed, but how long before Koreans and Filipinos living in Japan get called Japanese? In short, you're always going to have people who feel as though they been slighted by the government or the people or the dominant religion, and some of these people will react violently. Right now, we perceive this as Muslims. Remember after Ok. City when we thought the militias would start to attack America from the inside?
Oh, what the hell do I know. I've just been refuted decisively by being told my argument wasn't tautological over at John & Belle's.
Most people have no understanding of the harm the United States suffered due to massive Irish immigration. I could tell you stories.
I know. The presence of my grandmother alone set Queens back a hundred years.
Hell, I just had beef stew last night. Last night! It's like I'm not even an American.
Every single grocery store I go into -- bags and bags of potatoes. Makes me want to spit.
One shouldn't expect Mark Steyn to get this right, but there is actually one EU member state with a birth rate well above replacement. It begins with an F and rhymes with "France".
They did face a declining birth rate not so long ago but decided to pass a massive family-friendly tax credit and subsidised childcare package and guess what? it worked.
Most people have no understanding of the harm the United States suffered due to massive Irish immigration.
Could have been worse. Could have been the Welsh.
Not to mention how corrupted our daily culture has become. We are now forced to have a yearly national festival commemorating the Irish, and not once does this festival mention the negative influences of the Irish on JudeoChristian values.
It begins with an F and rhymes with "France".
I think I know this one, but I want to see how many others can guess it.
Could have been worse. Could have been the Welsh.
The other side of my family. You knew my parents were really getting into it once Mom started muttering, "Taffy was a Welshman, Taffy was a thief..."
You know what's great, is when the New York Times publishes captions like this on their front page:
Little Pity in the Arab World
The basic sentiment at the prospect of Ariel Sharon's dying was that it would be a shame if he passed away peacefully in bed.
Why do you have to be so bloodthirsty, The Arab World?
On topic, Italy's passed some sort of pregnancy-bonus that is hoped to halt their declining birth rate.
The instability problem is serious, but Steyn's acting as if there is nothing that can be done at all to arrest the slide short of moving to the U.S. and voting Republican, a strategy I'm not sure helps democracy in France much.
Ok, I'm going to try the comment I wanted to post above again, with fewer links:
Not quite on topic, but another issue for Europe's future is immigration within the expanded EU. Here's an article on a protest in Ireland over the use of Latvian laborers on ferries (some background).
Jeebus, LB. The notion of a Welsh-Irish union immediately raises this issue: what in gawd's name were you forced to eat for dinner?
74: That guy really made no damn sense whatsoever, did he? His persistent refusal to explain what he was talking about was really astonishing (like, what did UG and EG have to do with anything?) I think he can be explained by noting that all his comments pointed back to yahoo.com.
I just don't get why this instability problem is supposed to be inevitable.
Where is this coming from?
I take it the claim is that:
1) current EU birthrates are low enough that future commitments to pensions, healthcare and the welfare state cannot be met from future income from workers.
2) immigration is the only source of labour that can supply this income
3) immigrants will largely be from Islamic cultures
Then,
4) this will lead to instability
2,3 and 4 are all highly questionable to say the least. 1 is semi-questionable.
I was wondering if the tautology comment was a weak attempt at conciliatory self-deprecation: "You've got me, I don't know anything about philosophy. I do know enough elementary logic to tell you that your arguments aren't tautological, but that's it."
eb, I approved your earlier comment. I think it counts the URL linked to your name as 1.
LB, I dunno. I read it as 'You haven't proven anything, for you haven't shown a tautology!'
I read it as "I'm a pompous moron!"
Teh True™ brand airhorn says: bweeeeomp!
Weiner, I'm confused by your comments on 74. I realized while writing it that it was one of the weakest comments I've ever written, but I'd already spent like a minute and wanted to post something. I'm a pompous imbecile.
Matt meant 75, which referred to somebody else entirely.
Tweedle, the solution is that I can't count, or read. 92 was directed to 75 (talking about the guy who pwned! Cala at J&B by bringing up propositional logic). 74 was an interesting comment. Sorry.
Well, I still stand by calling myself a pompous imbecile.
This is getting entirley too silly.
This article suggests that the republican party should introduce incentives for having children like in France. The theory being that non-hispanic whites with big familes tend to vote republican. The article thankfully does not discuss ways to limit the incentives to non-hispanic whites.
95: Thanks, I forgot that spammers often use the signature line so that counts as another link.
And for everyone else, the comments must have been renumbered after my 62 got approved. Hence the entertaining confusion.
Oh, and Cala, that guy is probably the Troll of Sorrow: he usually signs as yahoo.com, mentions Quine, and uses Fritz among his pseudonyms. There's no point in engaging him.
Yeah, I think I've given up. Anyone who claims that all of philosophy, which includes the academy and people who sit around in cafés, don't know anything about philosophy because they haven't said anything that is a tautology yet isn't really worth it.
I almost thought he was a philosophy spambot, maybe selling Kant.
eb, of course, the Troll of Sorrow! I was fooled because it took him a while to get into the obscenities, but the bit about the PC Left should have given it away. I hope he doesn't show up at my crib now, telling me not to bother with philosophizin' if I don't know predicate logic.
there are mein0ngi4n obj3cts in all amerikin households. we hav3 the secret to stop the POPULATION EXPLOSION.
get rid of these pests tdoay & improv3 your p3ni5 size by 3''
there are mein0ngi4n obj3cts in all amerikin households. we hav3 the secret to stop the POPULATION EXPLOSION.
but no imitatins. imitarots dont have tautologys so they dont WORK. and yu need this to work!!!11
meinongian ruin our logicul systemz and DESTROY americkan values! and preidcaate logic!1!!!
I can see why Cala was stupefied.
New Quinean water! Prevents malaria! Accept no snake-oil salesmen marketing XYZ as a substitute!
The Troll was amazingly controlled today. Sensitive, sheltered people may think that today's performance was in some way problematic, but they should count their goddamn blessings.
I don't know why I said that -- I enjoy flame wars and told the guy to suck a pistol last time I ran into him.
quinean does not WORK! it is backed by the DRUG INDUSTRY who rapes profits from meinongian sufferers!
Quinean prevents malaria and tharthritis! And Bon Jovi!
Quinean prevents malaria and th' arthritis!
But promotes pinheadism!
Get yer apostrophe outta my tharthritis. For n00bz, this explains how Bon Jovi got in there.
Is there a word for Mark Steyn's trust in the CIA when it supports his paranoid theories (as here) and not when it doesn't (as in whether Mohammed Atta made several trips into the US before 9/11, merrily bypassing immigration)? If there is, is it "hyprocritical"?
See Steyn himself:
Sept. 11 was a total government fiasco: CIA, FBI, INS, FAA, all the hot shot acronyms failed spectacularly. But appoint an official commission and let them issue an official report and suddenly everyone says, oh, well, this is the official version of 9/11; if they say something didn't happen, it can't possibly have happened.
