If I want to hear the muezzin, I also can book a vacation to the Orient
by Thilo Sarrazin
Bild (Translation by Big Peace)
Uncontrolled immigration may at any time threaten the state structures and undermine the stability of a society. The Chinese empire therefore had its Great Wall, the Romans had their Limes. At no time were the securing of the territory and the regulation of immigration something trivial. The complications arising from these issues threatened states and societies to their core and penetrated them deeply. And each time they were accompanied by orgies of bloodletting and violence.
In the German media this is frequently concealed. Immigration issues are often treated with a raised admonitory finger, and an attitude that probably can be the best characterized with the slogan: “Peep, peep, peep! We all just love each other.” This approach is as unhistorical as it is silly. Even more regrettable is that the German political elite lets its position on immigration be determined largely by the voices from the media. It thus runs the risk of alienating itself both from the people and the core of the problem.
The growing influx, noted by right-wing populist movements in many European countries — also the referendum on the acceptance of minarets, as held in Switzerland — are consequences of the predominantly unhistorical, naïve and opportunistic migration policy of European governments.
In all countries concerned — whether Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark or Norway — one makes similar observations about the group of Muslim migrants, namely:
- Below-average labor market integration;
- Above-average dependence on welfare benefits;
- Below-average participation in education;
- Above-average fertility;
- Spatial segregation with a tendency towards the emergence of parallel societies;
- Above-average religiosity with growing penchant for traditional and fundamentalist movements in Islam;
- An above-average criminality, from “ordinary” violent street crimes to participating in terrorist activities.
Thilo Sarrazin: How Germany is commiting suicide by Islam
In Germany, an army of integration committees, Islam researchers, sociologists, political scientists, organizational representatives and a group of naive politicians work intensively, hand in hand, on trivialization, self-deception and denial of the problem.
It is particularly popular to blame the critics of Islam for a lack of tolerance. Thereby an important distinction is lost: One can, indeed must be liberal towards beliefs and lifestyles that differ from our own. But this liberality then may not be applied to those who do not want to tolerate different beliefs and lifestyles.
The 18-year-old murderer Ayham Sürücü — who in February 2005 in Berlin, commissioned by his deeply religious Turkish-Kurdish family-in-law, shot dead his sister Hatun Sürücü, five years his senior, because she had a different lifestyle — was deeply religious, and a representative of a broadly shared view among Muslims. Can someone who judges this kind of religion to be unworthy — even if it does not lead to murder — be described as illiberal?
That the strong growth of the Muslim minority in Europe is causing concern certainly need not be construed as xenophobia. Below-average employment among Muslim immigrants in Germany can be established. Only 33.9 percent of them earn a living through professional and other gainful employment. In the population without an immigration background, that is 43 percent.
It is often noted that many Muslim immigrants are especially likely to be self-employed. There are approximately 80,000 self-employed persons in Germany with a Turkish immigration background, of which 40,000 are in food retailing.
At any rate, the percentage of self employed persons among Muslim immigrants is significantly lower than that of the German population and other immigrant groups — in 2007 only 6.8 percent, compared with immigrants from EU countries (12.4 percent), Southeast Asia (13.9 percent) and persons without an immigration background (10.4 percent).
Compared to the working population, there are among Muslims four times as many people living on unemployment benefits and welfare assistance than among the German population. The situation is completely different among the migrants from the EU Member States. Their employment rate is 44.2 percent, which is even slightly higher than that of native Germans.
Of the people living in Germany with a Muslim immigration background, 30 percent have no school diploma whatsoever, and only 14 percent a Higher School Certificate.
It is noteworthy that the immigrants from the EU and South- and East Asia do not have similar problems. Of the children of the Vietnamese contract workers of the former East Germany 80 percent even have a Higher School Certificate, a higher percentage than the Germans.
Discrimination as a cause for this lack of success of the Muslim immigrants can be excluded, as groups of migrants from the Far East or India, whose appearance is even more exotic than that of the Turks and Arabs, in some cases even surpass the Germans.
The relative failure can also hardly be attributed to congenital capacities and talents, as it concerns Muslim immigrants of various origins. It also is a mystery why the progress in the second and third generations, if there is any, is much less with the Muslim immigrants than with others.
Some Germans — including the elite — have not yet even noticed the problem. In their life, domestic, and working environments Muslim immigrants at the most are encountered as cleaners or as an exotic backdrop for a rare visit to Berlin-Kreuzberg [culturally enriched neighborhood in Berlin]. Certain portions of the intelligentsia and the liberal press seem even to quietly gloat about Muslim immigration undermining German society.
What did the U.S. government do for the integration of German, Jewish, Irish and Italian immigrants? They integrated themselves, because they had no other choice if they wanted to survive. There was no public support for importing brides. The failure of integration in Germany is due to the attitude of the Muslim immigrants.
I would like my great grandchildren 100 years from now still to be able to live in Germany — if they want to. I do not desire that the land of my grandchildren and great-grandchildren be largely Muslim, that Turkish and Arabic be spoken in broad swathes, that women should wear headscarves, and the daily rhythm be determined by the prayer call of the muezzin. If I want to experience that, I can book a vacation to the Orient.
I do not want us to become strangers in our own country.
» » » » [Big Peace (English Translation), from Bild]
Review of Thilo Sarrazin's Germany Consigns itself to Oblivion, by Dr. Frank Ellis, Former Professor of Russian and Slavonic Studies at Leeds Univ. UK
by Dr. Frank Ellis |Why We Are White Refugees
Publication in Germany earlier this year of Thilo Sarrazin’s Deutschland schafft sich ab: Wie wir unser Land aufs Spiel setzen (Germany Consigns itself to Oblivion: How we are Putting Our Country at Risk) has made it possible for Germans to talk openly for the first time about themes which have been publicly censored in Germany over the last five decades. Having read this work very closely, I have no doubt that Germany Consigns itself to Oblivion may well be the book that finally smashes taboos about race, immigration and integration which have exerted such an insidious influence on German intellectual life since the end of World War Two. In fact, the influence of Sarrazin’s book will extend way beyond Germany. This book is not just about the future and fate of Germany: it is about the very survival of Europe.
Concerns over the magnitude and speed of population growth, as well as the racial and cultural changes brought about by mass immigration are nothing new. What is new is the manner in which the political establishments of virtually all Western states have abandoned, with complete disregard for the legitimate fears and well being of their own indigenous populations, any form of immigration controls. In the USA and Western Europe, a very large proportion of the political class have tried to justify this mass influx of foreigners with the claim that we need the labour, skilled or otherwise; that the mass movement of people is a necessary part of a globalised economy; that in some vague, sentimental way the prosperous nations of the north have an obligation to throw open their doors to the surplus populations of the Third World. Until quite recently, this mass movement of the unemployed and unemployable from the slums of the Middle East, Africa and the Indian sub-continent, with a fair proportion of actual and would-be terrorists among them, used to be justified by the obviously preposterous claim that the white indigenous populations of northern Europe would somehow benefit from the influx of millions of foreigners into their countries. Indeed, we were told – though not so much these days – that immigrants were bearers of the remarkable gift of diversity; that their presence enriched us.
In common with other Western states, Germany has suffered from the combination of a duplicitous and negligent political class, one which has relentlessly harried its citizens to accept what they instinctively feel and know to be wrong, and from waves of immigrants who, the evidence quite clearly shows, have no intention of integrating. Third World immigrants are attracted to Germany not by abstract concepts of free speech, the rule of law, liberal democracy and personal freedom but by the higher standard of living they can enjoy at the expense of the German taxpayer. In part because of the Nazi period, the pressure on Germans to conform to the United Nations-sponsored ideology of multiculturalism has been immense, much worse than anything we have experienced in the United Kingdom. History matters: the Nazi past will remain an integral part of Germany’s history but no other nation has submitted itself to such soul-searching and public flagellation in order to face up to its past and to make amends. However, one of the downsides of Germany’s laudable, post-1945 Vergangenheitsbewältigung (coming to terms with the past) has been to treat any assertion of national German pride as a manifestation of Neo-Nazi tendencies, as something hideously offensive and shameful when it is, in fact, the normal, emotional and rational pride in, and commitment to, one’s country of origin, to one’s Vaterland, to use that beautifully evocative German word. Germany’s reaction to its past stands in striking contrast to Turkey. The Turkish government will not tolerate any discussion of the genocide of 1.5,000,000 – 2,000,000 Armenians perpetrated by Turks in 1915, and those who highlight the genocide in Turkey can expect to be censored and subjected to other harsh sanctions. Moreover, the Turkish government demands that Turkey be treated as a modern European state, which Turkey emphatically is not, and does not hesitate to pass comment on German immigration policy, as it affects Turks. By exploiting the presence of Turks in Germany for its own ends, as a club with which to belabour Germany, and to exact concessions, the Turkish government behaves in exactly the same way as the Hitler regime did towards Czechoslovakia before World War Two (see below).
It is this specifically German historical, social and political background that makes the appearance of Thilo Sarrazin’s book in Germany so remarkable, and all the more remarkable for its having been written by one of Germany’s top technocrats, a person at the very heart of the German administrative establishment, a person, who whatever his misgivings about the state of Germany, I, for one, would have expected to remain silent. Clearly, Herr Sarrazin has had enough. He instinctively grasps the truth of Solzhenitysn’s eleventh commandment: thou shall not live by the Lie. There is something about Sarrazin that bears the stamp of Martin Luther, Pastor Martin Niemöller and the White Rose students who defied the Nazis in Munich. Moral courage is always inspirational and life-enhancing. Indeed, the fact that Sarrazin’s book has become a best seller in Germany and attracted enormous support for its author may well have prompted Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, publicly to admit (October 2010) that multiculturalism had utterly failed in Germany. Indeed, it has: and not just in Germany.
Sarrazin is well aware that the title of his book will inevitably cause some readers to ask, in all seriousness, whether his central thesis – that Germany is heading towards self-inflicted oblivion – is an accurate reflection of what is happening. The ensuing avalanche of evidence and professional analyses presented by the author left me in no doubt that the suicide scenario is fundamentally accurate. Sarrazin underlines the rather obvious but easily forgotten point that Germany is Germany ‘by virtue of its inhabitants and their living intellectual as well as their cultural traditions. Without the people it would merely be a geographical term’ (Germany Consigns itself to Oblivion, p.7). The same is true of England, Denmark, France and Russia. As befits a highly trained and experienced member of the German technocracy, Sarrazin presents a thoroughly well researched set of arguments. Each chapter addresses some aspect of the immigrant problem – poverty, fertility, declining mean IQ and educational standards, spiralling welfare payments, left-wing and intellectual cowardice and the relentless Islamification of Germany - providing the reader with a series of brilliantly written mini-monographs. He examines the various socio-economic, intellectual and demographic trends which are inextricably linked with one another and which lead inexorably to his synthesis and the work’s devastating conclusions. Germany Consigns itself to Oblivion is a masterly display of erudition and logical exposition; yet additional reasons why the intellectually lazy and sentimental will hate the author.
Including a detailed introduction, Germany Consigns itself to Oblivion comes with a total of ten chapters. What follows is a chapter-by-chapter summary and review-commentary. My aim is to provide as much information and as many translations of key passages as possible for the English-speaking reader and at the same time to offer a ready reference work for students, academics and others alarmed by, to borrow the title of Oswald Spengler’s book, the Untergang des Abendlandes (The Decline of the West, 1918) and what, if anything, can be done to reverse these trends. For those, such as this reviewer, who consider sources and references important, I have numbered every paragraph in this summary for ease of reference. Page numbers in brackets refer to the original German publication (Deutschland schafft sich ab: Wie wir unser Land aufs Spiel setzen, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, München, 2010, ISBN 978-3-421-04430-3). All translations from the German are mine: all analysis, commentary and any errors therein are also mine.
Before turning to the substance of Thilo Sarrazin’s book I want to deal briefly with the translation of the German title. The main German title of the book has in some quarters been translated into English as Germany is Abolishing itself or Germany is Doing away with itself. The German verb abschaffen can indeed be translated as to abolish or to get rid of something but these translations do not, in my opinion, do justice to the scope, depth and above all the implications of the book’s themes which will become clear below. I suggest, therefore, that a better translation of the main title, one that better reflects the impending German (and Western) catastrophe, would be Germany Consigns itself to Oblivion (or even Germany Commits Suicide or Germany’s Death Wish).
I can only hope that this magnificent book will very soon be translated into English as well as into all the major European languages. That said, having observed and personally experienced the intellectual and moral cowardice and double standards of the left, above all in universities, I have no doubt that those hostile to Sarrazin’s message will do everything they can to distort the findings and to try to prevent this book from ever being translated into any other language in the hope that Sarrazin’s findings do not become too widely known. I pray I am wrong. Meanwhile, until such time as Sarrazin’s book is translated into English, this review-commentary with its selected translations will serve as a provisional, and I hope, a useful reference work.
» » » » [Read Review]
African White Refugees Support and Appreciation for Dr. Thilo Sarrazin’s Courageous Intellectual Honesty
08 September 2010 | Andrea Muhrrteyn | Why We Are White Refugees06 September 2010
Sigmar Gabriel, Chairman of the SPD
Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD)
SPD Parliamentary Group in the German Bundestag
Platz der Republik 1, 10557 Berlin, Germany
- Chairman and Board of Directors, Deutsche Bundesbank
- Dr. Thilo Sarrazin, Deutsche Bundesbank
- Mr. Geert Wilders (PVV)
Party for Freedom (Partij de Vrijheid)
RE: African White Refugees Support and Appreciation for Dr. Thilo Sarrazin’s Courageous Intellectual Honesty
Why We Are White Refugees (i.e. Jus Sanguinis Right of Return to Europe for African White Refugees & Jus Sanguinis Right of Return to Holland, for Boer-Afrikaners) has taken note of the media and certain political elite’s hysterical condemnation of board member of Germany’s Bundesbank, and the Social Democratic Party, Dr. Thilo Sarrazin’s theories as expressed upon the release of his new book: Germany is Destroying Itself: How we Are Gambling with Our Country. For example, in German Politics Hit by Blowback over Sarrazin, Terence Roth of the Wall Street Journal writes:A day after the German central bank asked President Christian Wulff to dismiss [Thilo Sarrazin] for racially charged remarks, it was becoming evident that a sizable slice of the electorate share Sarrazin’s concerns over immigration and ethnic integration and were protesting preparations to expel the 65-year-old from the central bank. Informal TV polls suggest that nine in 10 call-ins say Sarrazin might have a point or two.
The government itself fears that the Sarrazin case is splitting society on a thorny issue that German mainstream politics has tried to avoid confronting head on. Now there’s no choice.
The starkest evidence was the letter that the Social Democratic Party sent to members defending a decision to expel the 65-year-old Sarrazin from their party. It was in response to a groundswell of support for the author of a book that warned that high fertility rates among Muslims in Germany will erode the country’s economic potential and collective intelligence.
Why We Are White Refugees would like to express our support and appreciation for Dr. Sarrazin’s courageous intellectual honesty, and request SPD leadership to find the courage to make an impartial enquiry into Dr. Sarrazin’s theories, as opposed to simply firing him to avoid confronting the issues he has raised. We wholeheartedly agree with Dr. Sarrazin that the issues he places before the German people, Europe and the world, are indeed very uncomfortable issues – particularly for those preferring to practice political correct sycophancy, instead of intellectual and visionary ‘practice what we preach’ leadership – and that to solve problems, we do first have to recognize them.
As detailed in Military Study Warns of Potentially Drastic Oil Crisis, by Stefan Schultz, Der Spiegel , 01 September 2010, we believe the ‘friction theory’[*] issues of immigration and integration between conflicting cultures are important issues of leadership and are only going to become more important as Peak Oil takes center stage in the collapse of the globalised industrial economy:A study by a German military think tank has analyzed how "peak oil" might change the global economy. The internal draft document -- leaked on the Internet -- shows for the first time how carefully the German government has considered a potential energy crisis.
The term "peak oil" is used by energy experts to refer to a point in time when global oil reserves pass their zenith and production gradually begins to decline. This would result in a permanent supply crisis -- and fear of it can trigger turbulence in commodity markets and on stock exchanges.
The issue is so politically explosive that it's remarkable when an institution like the Bundeswehr, the German military, uses the term "peak oil" at all. But a military study currently circulating on the German blogosphere goes even further.
The study is a product of the Future Analysis department of the Bundeswehr Transformation Center, a think tank tasked with fixing a direction for the German military. The team of authors, led by Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Will, uses sometimes-dramatic language to depict the consequences of an irreversible depletion of raw materials. It warns of shifts in the global balance of power, of the formation of new relationships based on interdependency, of a decline in importance of the western industrial nations, of the "total collapse of the markets" and of serious political and economic crises.
On 18 July 2006, PeakOil_RSA filed a 136 page Peak Oil Briefing Paper (PDF) to the South African Government, Media and Civic Society organisations, c/o and via the then Minister of Intelligence: Mr. Ronnie Kasrils, which asked: “Is Gross Mismanagement of the nation’s energy policy an impeachable offense?” The political secession and economic relocalisation suggestions for mitigating a Post Peak Oil world, included: (i) Limit Population, (ii) Develop Alternative Energies; (iii) Reinvent the Way Money Works, i.e. implement local currencies; (iv) Save Energy; (v) Foster local communities, (vi) Get Out of Debt and (vii) Educate and Raise Awareness. The Briefing Paper was ignored by SA political, media and corporate elite.
The issue of cultural conflict in multi-cultural societies, as Dr. Sarrazin identifies, shall be of exponential importance in a future world of energy restraint and socio-economic collapse. It is vitally important that these issues be discussed transparently prior to such events occurring so that citizens, organisations and governments can make the appropriate plans for a relocalized and energy-strained future. Time is of the essence.
It is our view that the most effective and least conflict ridden approach to this Post-Peak Oil future is by implementing the parallel goals of Political Secession and Economic Relocalisation. In Economic Relocalisation: A strategic response to Peak Oil and Climate Change, Jason Bradford of the Oil Drum argues, not from a political or social agenda, “but as a scientist who makes deductions based on the laws of physics and ecology”, that many of the trends of the last century or more, made possible by cheap and abundant energy sources, are going to be reversed.” He clarifies the trends that shall be reversed as “population growth, centralisation of political and economic power, and vastly increased quantity of global trade and mass tourism.” In order to avoid the DieOff resource war consequences feared by the German Military’s Peak Oil report, he advocates Relocalisation.Relocalization is (i) based on a systems approach that doesn’t solve one set of problems only to make another problem worse; (ii) based on an ethic of protecting the Earth System--or Natural Capital; (iii) starts from the premise that the world is a finite place and that humanity is in a state of overshoot. Perpetual growth of the economy and the population is neither possible nor desirable. It is wise to start planning now for a world with less available energy, not more; (iv) advocates rebuilding more balanced local economies that emphasize securing basic needs. Local food, energy and water systems are perhaps the most critical to build. In the absence of reliable trade partners, whether from peak oil, natural disaster or political instability, a local economy that at least produces its essential goods will have a true comparative advantage.Finally, in the Radical Honesty White Refugee Amicus Curiae(PDF) supporting a Population Policy Common Sense Interpretation of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation (TRC) Act, before the SA Constitutional Court, our ‘White Refugee’ argument – supported by the current African White Refugee political reality – is that Gause’s Law of Competitive Exclusion must be considered legally relevant where a lower reproducing productive race finds itself effectively censored, by politically correct fascism from prohibiting its eventual elimination from the environment.
We conclude by reiterating our support and appreciation for Dr. Sarrazin’s courageous intellectual honesty, and request SPD leadership to find the courage to make an impartial enquiry into his theories.
Why We Are White Refugees
Jus Sanguinis Right of Return to Europe, for African White Refugees
[*] ‘Friction theory’ was one of the two primary driving forces for the establishment of Apartheid, as cited by the Minister of Interior, introducing the Group Areas Act to Parliament on 14 June 1950: “Now this, as I say, is designed to eliminate friction between the races in the Union because we believe, and believe strongly, that points of contact – all unnecessary points of contact – between the races must be avoided. If you reduce the number of points of contact to the minimum, you reduce the possibility of friction….. The result of putting people of different races together is to cause racial trouble”. The central justification for this perspective was that segregation was in the interest of all different racial groups, because population pressure contacts between different races, with different cultures, inevitably produced conflict. According to English social geographer, John Western in Outcast Capetown (University of California Press, 1997), the friction theory does have a measure of sense to it, as detailed in the work of Robert Sommer: “[Animal studies] show that both territoriality and dominance behaviour are ways of maintaining social order, and when one system cannot function, the other takes over… Group territories keep individual groups apart and thereby preserve the integrity of the troop, whereas dominance is the basis for intragroup relationships… Group territoriality is expressed in national and local boundaries, a segregation into defined areas that reduces conflict.” (Personal Space, (1969), N.J. Prentice Hall, pp. 12, 14, and 15)
[Gause's Law of Competitive Exclusion]: Stalking the Wild Taboo, by Garrett Hardin: Part 4: Competition: (20) Competition, a Tabooed Idea in Sociology; (21) The Cybernetics of Competition; (22) Population, Biology and the Law; (23) Population Skeletons in the Environmental Closet; (24) The Survival of Nations and Civilisations (www.garretthardinsociety.org)
» » » » [African White Refugee Letter: Thilo Sarrazin - EU Prophet (PDF)]