Does Diversity Really Unite Us? Citizenship and Immigration | Imprimis

Related image

Historically, constitutional government has been found only in the nation-state, where the people share a common good and are dedicated to the same principles and purposes.

Source: Does Diversity Really Unite Us? Citizenship and Immigration – Imprimis

What we are up against, continued – in the words of Dr. Edward J. Erler (whose bio lends him considerable credibility on this issue):

“In the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump appealed to the importance of citizens and borders. In other words, Trump took his stand on behalf of the nation-state and citizenship against the idea of a homogeneous world-state populated by ‘universal persons.’ In appealing directly to the people, Trump succeeded in defeating both political parties, the media, political professionals, pollsters, academics, and the bureaucratic class. All these groups formed part of the bi-partisan cartel that had represented the entrenched interests of the Washington establishment for many years. Although defeated in the election, the cartel has not given up. It is fighting a desperate battle to maintain its power.

“Historically, constitutional government has been found only in the nation-state, where the people share a common good and are dedicated to the same principles and purposes. The homogeneous world-state—the European Union on a global scale—will not be a constitutional democracy; it will be the administration of ‘universal personhood’ without the inconvenience of having to rely on the consent of the governed. It will be government by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, much like the burgeoning administrative state that is today expanding its reach and magnifying its power in the United States. ‘Universal persons’ will not be citizens; they will be clients or subjects. Rights will be superfluous because the collective welfare of the community—determined by the bureaucrats—will have superseded the rights of individuals…

“In support of all this, we are asked to believe something incredible: that the American character is defined only by its unlimited acceptance of diversity. A defined American character—devotion to republican principles, republican virtue, the habits and manners of free citizens, self-reliance—would in that case be impermissibly exclusive, and thus impermissibly American. The homogeneous world-state recognizes only openness, devotion to diversity, and acceptance as virtues. It must therefore condemn exclusivity as its greatest vice. It is the nation-state that insists on exclusive citizenship and immigration policies that impose various kinds of restrictions.”

It will be no mystery to any reader of this blog upon which side of this divide I have pitched my tent! Furthermore, Dr. Erler asks, Continue reading “Does Diversity Really Unite Us? Citizenship and Immigration | Imprimis”

Advertisements

King Arthur? Avalon? Who? What…?

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0895/0864/products/42-21436247_1024x1024.jpeg?v=1450887342
Illustration of King Arthur Receiving Excalibur from the Lady of the Lake. N.C. Wyeth, c. 1910.

I had an instructive incident this afternoon, as I was teaching one of my behind-the-wheel students: since the struggle to save the West does not come with a salary, I teach driver’s education to put meat and bread on the table, and otherwise attempt to keep the wolves from the door.

Seeing a Toyota Avalon ahead of us at a stop light, I quipped to my student, “Well, there’s Avalon! I wonder where King Arthur is?” There was a brief silence, followed by a (slightly sheepish, to her credit) “I didn’t get that one!” from my student.

She didn’t get it. An Anglophone high school student, and one with a European last name and apparent ancestral heritage, to boot, didn’t get a reference – and not an obscure one – to the Arthurian legends, one of the most formative legendary and literary cycles in the history of the English-speaking peoples (and significant to French and German-speaking ones, as well). If there is any doubt that our educational system is in serious disarray, this one incident is proof positive, I would confidently assert.

I passed off the episode lightly, for my student’s sake – I’m teaching her to drive a car, not appreciate her own cultural heritage, and there were tasks to accomplish, and traffic and road conditions in need of attention – but it bothered me, and it continues to rankle.

But thinking about it tonight, I realized that from the perspective of the propagandists and ideologues that make up much of our educational establishment, this is an example, not of disarray, but of how well their plan is working. King Arthur should most emphatically not be taught, according to this outlook!

He is not only a member of one of the most despised of all classes (and one of the very few it is permissible – indeed, encouraged – to despise), a “DWEM” (Dead White European Male), but he actually fought against the invasion and subjugation diversity and cultural enrichment of his Romano-British land and people by the Anglo-Saxons. Really fought! With swords and spears and things. And in the process became an icon and an inspiration for defense against immigrant invasion opposition to multiculturalism for centuries thereafter.

How vile! He must have been one of those white supremacists. Oh, wait – the Anglo-Saxons were white, too! And so were the Vikings… and the Normans… and even the French and Spanish, who tried and failed to invade England. Best we just leave British / English history out of the schools entirely, unless we can find ways to convincingly pretend that they weren’t nearly as European as they very clearly and historically were, at least until the last decade or so.

We certainly don’t want to infect any of today’s students of European ancestry with any pride in their heritage, do we? Much less suggest to them, however indirectly, that it might be – perhaps even, ought to be – defended from invaders? Perish the thought!

We are seriously screwed up, and are getting screwed-er up-er, all the time!

 

A response to HuffPost’s “What White, Western Audiences Don’t Understand About Marie Kondo’s ‘Tidying Up'”

A still from Netflix's "Tidying Up with Marie Kondo."

Dilloway: “Backlash to the Netflix show ignores an essential aspect of the KonMari method: Its Shinto roots.”

Source: What White, Western Audiences Don’t Understand About Marie Kondo’s ‘Tidying Up’ | HuffPost

Those darned white Westerners! Always screwing everything up…

Nonetheless, despite being a white Westerner, I have a great deal of admiration and appreciation for Shinto – and many aspects of Japanese culture – myself.

And although I, personally, am not likely to reduce my book collection to thirty (yes, I realize Marie Kondo only stated that she herself only kept 30 books at a time, she was not decreeing it for everyone), I definitely recognize that I could benefit – both my living space and my head-space – from some pretty substantial de-cluttering!

My problem with this essay is that its author, Margaret Dilloway, chose to racialize the issue – ironically, since that’s exactly what she was complaining about others doing to Ms Kondo – and to do so in a way that is either ignorant of certain facts, or else intentionally disingenuous. Continue reading “A response to HuffPost’s “What White, Western Audiences Don’t Understand About Marie Kondo’s ‘Tidying Up’””

The Glories of the West: the beauty of European women

This is Europe – dirndl-wearing maidens

The beauty of European women is striking, and so is their variety! There is more than a little irony in the fact that globalists and Leftist claim that the reason for their desire to replace Europeans (and people of European descent in America, Australian, South Africa, and elsewhere) with non-European immigrants is a quest for “diversity.”

I have spoken before to the point that if their desire was truly for diversity and multiculturalism, they would do all they could to foster diverse cultures and peoples in their own historic and geographic context, not seek to mix them up all over the world (but of course, mostly in what have historically been European-majority lands).

But just consider this one point: they claim they want “diversity.” European women (and men, too, of course) have a stunning diversity of hair and eye colours. Even of the two lovely young women in this picture, one is a dark blonde, the other a light brunette; it’s hard to tell from the pic, but I suspect their eye colors differ, as well.

Image may contain: 5 people, text

In the name of “diversity,” the Leftist lunatics want to import an ever-increasing number of people who, other characteristics aside, are uniformly characterized by black hair and brown eyes. Where is the diversity in this, I ask you? From Scandinavia to Sicily, from Ireland to Illyria, Europe has all the diversity it needs. And so do the rest of us!

Battle Lines Are Clearly Drawn: Multicultural Utopia VS Populist Traditionalists | Oath Keepers

HuffPost Germany Writer Calls For Replacing Germans With Migrants to Stop Populism

In a very revealing article posted by Paul Joseph Watson, on InfoWars.com, Paul points out a HuffPost Germany writer, Veit Lindner, who asserts, that to stop the momentum of the “new right,” “it would actually be best to just replace” the German people with foreigners.

Source: Battle Lines Are Clearly Drawn – Multicultural Utopia VS Populist Traditionalists – Oath Keepers

Yes, I know that many people will simply ignore / dis-count this, due to its source. That would be a mistake. The article is real, and it is scary.

Referring to the “New Right” (those who are of a traditionalist / populist mindset, who wish to preserve and protect their people and their ethnic and cultural heritage) as a “stinking flatulence,” the author of the HuffPost piece (frighteningly entitled “Repeople us! Why the German people should be abolished”) asserts that

“it would actually be best to just replace them [ethnic Germans]. Attention, Germans! Fall in for comprehensive repeopling! [Umvolkung]

“Black, brown, yellow, white, Asians and Arabs, Africans, you people from America, India, people of all faiths – come and help us! Stream in and repeople us, but thoroughly! […]

A little more genetic and cultural seed-scattering here and a little more self-abolition through reproduction fatigue there – that, as Deniz Yücel once called it, would be the ‘most beautiful side of the perishing of a people.'”

As if there could ever be anything beautiful about the perishing of a people! Imagine the outcry – wholly justified – if someone on the right were to write such a thing, and publish it in a (relatively) mainstream publication, about any demographic group except white Europeans? But no, it is not only acceptable but praiseworthy to sacrifice Europeans for this utopian multicultural future.

This is a nihilistic, vicious, hateful, and intrinsically violent vision: calling for the disruption and destruction of a people, a culture, and a society that have developed organically over centuries and millennia, to forcibly impose a socially-engineered vision believed by a small number of zealots – violent extremists, rather – to be preferable to that highly developed culture: a culture which has brought aberrations like Marx and Hitler, true, but has also brought us Mozart, Handel, Beethoven, and Strauss; glorious art and architecture; remarkable scientific and technological advances; along with, yes, pretzels with German mustard, a wide range of tasty sausages, and other features of a remarkably rich and flavorful cuisine; excellent beer; folk dances, dirndls, and lederhosen, and the joys of Oktoberfest.

And now all of this must be swept away, to make room for a new, supposedly “multicultural” future. Why? No one has ever provided any sort of remotely logical reason! Because of Hitler? That was 80 years ago! Because of the “New Right”? Well, guess what: the New Right arose precisely because of and in reaction to this extreme multicultural program the Left is attempting to impose, not just on Germany, not just on Europe, but on the West as a whole. The New Right are the antibodies, fighting the disease of Leftist insanity.

But of course, anyone opposed to the Leftists’ utopian vision will be pilloried as a racist, a xenophobe, a white supremacist. However, it is not racist, xenophobic, or any sort of “supremacist” to oppose and resist the destruction of your people, your ethnic and cultural heritage. Rather, it is a moral duty, just as defending one’s own family would be: for one’s nation and people are one’s family, writ large.

If you are a “person of colour” and are calling for this “repeopling,” you are advocating ethno-cultural genocide; if you are of European heritage, then you are advocating ethno-cultural suicide. In either case, you are bat-shit crazy (pardon my language), you are diseased, you are a vile and evil person. I want nothing to do with you, and I will do my best to unmask and denounce you as the horror you are.

Let us remember that “utopia” means, literally, “no place.” It does not and cannot exist. What utopians call for is something that is unnatural, unreal, that cannot happen. It is an illusion, a false promise of peace and cooperation that in fact could only end in death and destruction. Doubt me? Well, we just “celebrated” (some of us mourned) Bastille Day, the 14th of July, the date marking the storming of the Bastille and thus the dawn of the French Revolution.

As I have commented elsewhere, those who are actually aware of the existence of Bastille Day, here in the U.S., tend to celebrate it (if they give it a second thought) as if the French Revolution was the American Revolution, Pt. 2. It was not. Despite the cries of “Liberté, egalité, fraternité!” (“Liberty, equality, fraternity!”), it started in blood, it was advanced by blood, and it ended in blood: a dark and sinister time in the world’s history. Today’s Leftists are treading the same bloody path – one which has been tread by the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, among others.

The mindset revealed in this HuffPost Germany essay is a classic example of the old adage that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The only good thing that I see in all of this is that the extreme Leftists are finally showing their true colours. They are not tolerant, they are not peaceful, they are not compassionate, and they only want “diversity” on their own terms. I can only hope that the fence-sitters and moderates wake up to what is actually being proposed, and realize how bad it actually is, and how bad the people proposing it actually are!

Mark my words: if enough of us do not say, “No! You are wrong, you are crazy, this cannot and will not be allowed to happen,” we will find ourselves in a violent and bloody conflict that will make the French Revolution look like a walk in the park.

 


 

Nota Bene: What constitutes “genocide”? Well, here’s the UN’s definition, from its “Convention on Genocide,” which it considers (rightly) a crime against humanity:

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical [sic], racial or religious group, as such:

  1. Killing members of the group;
  2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

If you don’t think at least (b), (c), and possibly (d) describe what’s going on in Europe at present already, and particularly what is being proposed in the HuffPost Germany essay referenced above, you are not paying close enough attention!

 


Do you appreciate and/or enjoy these posts, and want to support The Anglophilic Anglican in my defense of Western Christendom, and enjoyment of Western culture and civilization?

Then please consider supporting me on Patreon!

Many thanks in advance.

 

Britain slips (further…?) into “1984” mode

“Hey, Tommy Tommy! Hey, Tommy Robinson!”

— chant from a recent Free Tommy Robinson rally in the UK

There is an old saying that goes, “I love my country, it’s the government I can’t stand.”

I love Great Britain, its history, its culture, its Queen (God save Her Majesty!), its monarchical, aristocratic, folk, and just plain quirky traditions, and yes, I believe, its potential – if it can shake off these “dark times” (in Katie Hopkins’ words) it is going through. But its government? That, I have less and less respect for all the time.

In this latest confirmation that George Orwell (author of the classic work of dystopian fiction, Nineteen Eight-Four) was not wrong, just several decades premature, social activist and citizen journalist Tommy Robinson was recently livestreaming outside the latest grooming-gang trial in the UK. As reported in, inter alia, the National Review,

“The police turned up in a van and swiftly arrested Robinson for ‘breach of the peace.’ Within hours Robinson had been put before one Judge Geoffrey Marson, who in under five minutes tried, convicted, and sentenced Robinson to 13 months. He was immediately taken to prison.”

Tommy Robinson is a controversial figure, to say the least. The founder of the English Defense League, he is definitely to the nationalist and populist right of center. For those whose social and political perspective is globalist and statist, or “progressive” and multiculturalist, that’s enough to make him persona non grata.

But he has not only been opposed to the enforced mass immigration that the now apparently dead-in-the-water Brexit was, in part, about, but he has been focusing on exposing the mostly-Pakistani Muslim “grooming gangs” – as the British press delicately phrases it – or as Hopkins more accurately puts it, “rape squads.”

This is no exaggeration. Would that it were! But as Douglas Murray points out in a National Review article that pulls no punches on either side, “every month brings news of another town in which gangs of men (almost always of Pakistani origin) have been found to have raped young, often underage, white girls.”

Since this is an issue the authorities would rather not confront, they are needless to say not inclined to look favorably on someone whose activities – as a social activist and citizen journalist – are forcing the issue into public attention. Have some of his actions been unwise, even foolish? Yes. Has the British government’s response to him been disproportionate and extreme? A thousand times, yes! Murray continues,

“The primary issue is that for years the British state allowed gangs of men to rape thousands of young girls across Britain. For years the police, politicians, Crown Prosecution Service, and every other arm of the state ostensibly dedicated to protecting these girls failed them. As a number of government inquires have concluded, they turned their face away from these girls because they were terrified of the accusations of racism that would come their way if they did address them. They decided it wasn’t worth the aggravation…

“What can be said with absolute certainty is that Tommy Robinson has been treated with greater suspicion and a greater presumption of guilt by the United Kingdom than any Islamic extremist or mass rapist ever has been. That should be — yet is not — a national scandal. If even one mullah or sheikh had been treated with the presumption of guilt that Robinson has received, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the rest of them would be all over the U.K. authorities. But different standards apply to Robinson.”

And now he has been sent to prison for 13 months, where – if he is in an open ward, in which are a very large proportion of Muslims – he may end up coming out in a body bag. As Tucker Carlson and Katie Hopkins point out in the video above, you don’t have to like Tommy Robinson, agree with him, or even know who he is to understand that what has happened to him is wrong. To quote Murray again,

“Tommy Robinson will be in prison for another year. And all those people happy with the status quo will breathe a sigh of relief. ‘Thank goodness that troublemaker has gone away.’ Yet their real problem has not gone away. There is no chance of their real problem going away. Because they have no plan for making it go away.

“They have a vague hope, of course, which is that at some point soon in the coming generations this will all simmer down and the incoming communities will develop similar views about the status of women as the rest of society. And perhaps we will get there someday. But it is telling that the apparently tolerable roadkill en route includes one young man from Luton — and thousands of raped girls.”

Report: Most Brits Say Immigration Has Divided Communities

immigration mosque uk

“A strong majority of Brits think immigration has divided communities, particularly in areas most affected by mass arrivals, polling by a left-wing group has found.”

Source: Report: Most Brits Say Immigration Has Divided Communities

“A strong majority of Brits think immigration has divided communities, particularly in areas most affected by mass arrivals, polling by a left-wing group has found. The study, by the think tank Demos, also found that large numbers of people believe the government should be working to preserve traditional ways of life in a time of globalisation and deep economic change.”

Please note: this is a study by a left-wing group! Even though they may be in ideological agreement with the pro-mass-immigration, enforced-multiculturalism agenda, even they are unable to ignore the fact that it is deeply unpopular with the British people: indeed, they actually tweeted out that 71% of Brits believe the sense of community in their area has deteriorated over their lifetimes. That is nearly three-quarters!

The study further noted that “A large number of Brits are also ‘particularly incensed by cultural pluralism, seen to be favoured over British values and traditions, and political correctness, regarded as taxing and repressive.'” This is, of course, the case not only in Britain, but throughout much of the West – including the United States, where the election of President Trump is an indicator of a significant push-back.

“Only three issues appear to truly unite the nation – the belief that the country is in a state of decline and that further change lies on the horizon, feeling that immigration has negatively impacted British society, and believing the nation’s cultures and traditions are not being sufficiently defended and promoted.”

Finally, however, the study notes that

“Despite the widespread critiques of contemporary British society, and anxieties about the future, many citizens remain both resilient and begrudgingly optimistic – a point that sets them apart from participants in our French and German focus groups.”

In other words, despite its frustration and aggravation, and despite a massive influx of alien elements, Britain – so far – remains Britain: doughty, pugnacious, and determined, keeping a stiff upper lip. That, at least, is encouraging! All may not yet be lost, in “England’s green and pleasant land.” God grant that it ever remain so! And may God strengthen the hands of those seeking to keep Britain British.