The broken souls in the mainstream media are beating that tin drum again about how it is bad to be white, and how everyone else is better than you, despite their lack of accomplishments as civilizations and in any area beyond athletics:
The games can be read as something of a physical rejoinder to Trump. “The performance of immigrants and children of immigrants in the Olympics really contradicts Trump in two ways,” Roger Pielke, Jr., a University of Colorado political scientist with an upcoming book on sports, told me in an email. “One is that America is already great (look at the medal count!) and the second is that immigration is a big factor in what makes America great in sports (and business, and culture).”
Ever wonder why people are not enthralled with the Olympics, and really have not been since 1984? It is no longer a national contest. When it was ethnic Germans versus ethnic French, it was an interesting look into humanity that encouraged each group to surpass itself. Now it is diverse teams from all over the world, which effectively look identical with zero actual diversity between them, competing for green cards, or something of that nature.
The bigger point is that being anti-diversity is not about thinking that immigrants are bad in themselves, but that they are bad to have here because diversity itself is toxic. Diversity destroys the majority culture as it contorts to accept the newcomers, even if they are slaves or temporary labor. This in turn destroys social trust, obliterates any sense of mission or values in common, and creates an alienated wasteland where people avoid each other.
In other words, this is not about any group being bad, but diversity being bad. If Sweden flooded itself with Japanese immigrants, who have high IQs and high abilities including athletics, it would destroy itself just as surely as if it admitted Somalis. In the same way, if Nigeria admitted ten million Irish people, its people would be destroyed through the resulting indirect genocide, and its culture would die long before that.
Diversity is death. It is a crazy policy based on emotional gestures, like socialism and zero tolerance policing. It has nothing to do with reality because in reality, people like to be with others like them. That allows them to have social standards, values in common, culture and shared goals; these are essential for the human spirit and sense of well-being. All diversity is toxic, even one drop.
Mo Farah’s brother jailed again after he tried to break into an elderly couple’s home – his 20th offence in a string of convictions
Omar Farah admitted one count of attempted burglary with intent to steal. The younger brother of Olympic hero Mo left his fingerprints at the scene. Farah, 21, tried to break into a west London house in March 2013. He was jailed for 15 months at Kingston Crown Court by Judge Jones. Judge Jones described Farah’s 15 previous convictions as ‘unimpressive.’
However, even if these immigrants were not criminals, they would be toxic — and not from any properties of themselves. The presence of the Other in any form destroys communities and erases culture, which is a consistent goal of the Left as it wants to destroy anything that can compete with ideology as a control principle. Culture, values, heritage, the family and even behavioral standards must die so that equality stands above all else.
In reality, people exhibit group effects, group dynamics, group belonging, and group affiliations. You can also tell a surprising amount about someone by the groups they are associated with or fall into.
Much of the time we have very little information about individuals. As children, there was probably not a great deal to distinguish Mo from his brothers. In such a situation, we should focus upon what we know about the groups they belong to and what patterns we have seen in their group behaviour over time.
What track record of integration into Western society do Somali immigrants have? At what pace and rate do they integrate? What burden of adaptation do they place upon the indigenous population? How about their children and grandchildren? What are their marriage practices (do they extensively intermarry with other groups? Are they clannish in their marriage patterns?) and what forms of family do they have? What are their religious beliefs and cultural practices? How compatible are these with the historic practices of our Western societies? Are they vulnerable to radicalization? What skills do they have to offer? Do we need those skills? Are they jeopardizing the strength and cohesion of the communities and the security of the employment of more vulnerable groups in our own native population? What are their patterns of settling in Western societies? What are their education and employment rates? Have we been able to provide previous generations of immigrants from these groups with secure employment and respected social status (and, if we haven’t, we are we taking in more?)?
What are the demographics of current immigrants? What long term effects might these demographics have (e.g. in Sweden there is now a ratio of 123 males to 100 females in the 16-17 age range, while immigrant groups take about ten years to gain even 50% levels of employment—such statistics should ring warning bells)? Etc., etc.
These are the sorts of questions that need to be asked. Rather than ‘tarring everyone with the same brush’, what we need is the prudent application of the knowledge that comes with probability patterns. Such probability patterns may not give us direct knowledge specific to a given individual (although they can give us real knowledge about risks associated with persons of their type), but they tell us a lot about groups.
But this misses the point: it is not the groups that are the problem, it is diversity. Diversity destroys civilization. It forces people into a society they hate because it is actively working against their values and interests. As a result, those people become selfish and begin to destroy their own society. This pattern repeats again and again, but humans are too pretentious to admit that it is what they are seeing.
Multiculturalism means “more than one ethnic group living in the same nation.” This is indistinguishable from what the French Revolutionaries wanted, which was “internationalism,” or an abolishment of borders so that the underclasses of the world could unite without the complexity of national identity.
In order to slowly reverse the disastrous changes of the Left, Donald Trump has embraced Internationalism Version A instead of Internationalism Version B, by promoting multiculturalism based on assimilation to the majority culture.
In a speech on foreign policy and radical Islam delivered Monday in Youngstown, Ohio, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said that new immigrants would be expected to assimilate to American culture — not the other way around.
Trump described a vision of inclusion different from that of the multiculturalism of the left, which has left the intolerance that many immigrants bring with them — particularly from the Islamic world — intact.
Trump has taken a sensible course, which is to reverse internationalism to its earlier form and, in doing so, to re-introduce questions about its viability. The early form of internationalism requires immigrants to come here in a subordinate position and to prostrate themselves before the host culture, essentially begging for inclusion on its terms and not their own.
Naturally this will fail just like Version B has done, because it steals from people what they need most: their pride and sense of well-being through the notion that people like them are in control, succeeding and making a society for others like them. But that is some time off. For now, Trump is demanding an end to pluralism, but he is doing so indirectly, by asserting a majority culture — even if that culture does not exist, because the adulteration caused by multiculturalism will destroy it.
The most sensible approach is to simply admit that diversity of any form does not work, but that offends the pretense of the majority of people, who are essentially creatures of habit without reflection. This leaves them with only one mode of “thought,” which is to be offended when a sacred cow is slaughtered, and the diversity sacred cow is actually camouflage for the equality sacred cow, which allows individuals to demand inclusion in the benefits of civilization without having to be responsible for contributing to it.
As this venal modern age dies in gasping exhaustion, the distractions and illusions will die slowly as people cling to them stubbornly out of nothing but fear. They do not understand the world beyond these illusions, so their inner monkey panics and demands the broken illusion over reality instead of taking what to them is an unfathomable risk. But, as these illusions die, they will be dispossessed of their sense of security entirely, and forced to look toward alternatives.
Whatever the eternal optimists of the Pinker school assert about the decline of violence in general, the fact is that over the last couple of years terrorist attacks have been happening on European soil at an exponential rate. Despite 2016 being just over half way through, the continent has experienced at least ten jihadist atrocities. 2015 saw six attacks, there were two in 2014, one in 2013 and, well, you get the picture. These numbers, which I gleaned from Wikipedia, don’t take into account terrorism in Istanbul, or random stabbings, or the orchestrated sexual assault of dozens of women in cities across Europe.
Given Angela Merkel’s staggeringly irresponsible decision to open up Europe to millions of young men from Africa and the Middle East, it stands to reason that many Europeans would associate the rise in terrorist incidents with the rapid influx of Muslims. It’s true that ISIS has been sending young men to Europe with instructions to kill as many people as possible, but this is a small minority. Blaming the recent wave of immigrants for the continent’s present ills is shortsighted and distracts us from the real issue, which is the nature of mass migration and how it is reshaping the demography of Western Europe.
Syrians were involved in a machete attack in Stuttgart and the Ansbach suicide bombing, but it’s important to realise almost all recent acts of terrorism in Europe have been carried out by EU citizens. Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel, the man who killed 84 people by driving his truck down a packed promenade in Nice, was living in France for over a decade. Of the five men involved in the Brussels bombing attacks, four were Belgian citizens and the other was Swedish. All nine perpetrators of the November 2015 attacks in Paris that killed 137 people were citizens of the European Union.
By constantly invoking the danger of the “Syrian refugee” whenever there is an attack we shift the focus away from the demographic that is lethal right now (homegrown jihadists) and allow the “Refugees Welcome” crowd to score points with a suicidally altruistic European public. Every time a terrorist attack is carried out by a “Belgian” or “French-Tunisian” rather than a recent arrival from Syria the Left appears vindicated: “You see? The Syrians are victims. They’re running away from the barbarians of ISIS. The terrorist was actually French. Refugees welcome!”
That the majority of terrorists in Europe are homegrown is even more terrifying than the idea that ISIS is training and dispatching young men to murder innocent Europeans. We hold the palantír in our hands; we have already witnessed men born and raised in Europe transmogrify into jihadists. We have seen French and Belgian citizens — bestowed with the kind of dignity, freedom and relative prosperity that are a fantasy for millions across the Maghreb — turn to Islamism despite all this. Utopianists might blame the “racism” and “Islamophobia” of Europeans for these outcomes, but it’s naïve to think that young men whose faith requires them to avoid the kind of vices Europeans indulge in daily will all simply…integrate. It is unrealistic to not acknowledge that among this population there will always be frustrated loners considered outsiders by the natives. One wonders how on earth the current generation and their children will turn out any different when overall hostility to Muslims increases every time there is a terrorist attack.
The most recent mass shooting in Europe, in Munich, was carried out by a so-called German-Iranian who by all accounts seemed to have been something of a loner. Only 18 years old, Ali Sonboly had already spent time in psychiatric care, and when police raided his room they discovered a book entitled Why Kids Kill. A link to Islamism has been all but ruled out in this case (the press spun it as a “far-right” Breivik-inspired murder though they provided no hard evidence for this), but by closing the book on the case so quickly and filing it under “crazed lone wolf” we disregard the broader lesson to be learnt: that even if the vast majority of newcomers never commit a terrorist attack, long-term multiculturalism fails.
One British rapper of Pakistani ancestry recently discussed in The Guardian the nature of his identity, and his experiences surely apply to many young Muslims in Europe: “I don’t feel British. When I go to Pakistan, I don’t feel Pakistani. But I do know that I’m a Muslim – Islam fills that gap”. We can’t blame Britons for this, nor can we blame the Pakistani for feeling alienated, but we can blame globalism. We can blame an agenda that encourages the mass movement of people of radically different values all the while claiming it to be an inherent good even when the facts tell us something different.
Sonboly was of Iranian ancestry, a country I visited on holiday in 2011. It is a beautiful place with the kind of architecture and historical sights that make your head spin. The people are overwhelmingly friendly and curious. However, I don’t think a million Iranians transplanted to Ireland (where I’m from) or Thailand (where I live) would be beneficial to either country. Despite Iran’s charms, its conservatism is of a breed quite foreign to me. I knew I was in a different civilisation from the moment my plane started its descent into Shiraz and local women began to cover their hair. Similarly, I don’t think a million Swiss or Japanese transplanted to Iran would do the Iranians any good. There are exceptions of course and many would thrive, but in general the cultural differences would be insurmountable, and such scenarios would end badly. Sonboly was the product of Iran and Iranian parents. The German kids at his school knew he was different. Maybe they bullied him for it. He grew up in a society of pork-lovers and beer-drinkers; in a city of liberals for whom the intermingling of the sexes and pornography and prostitution are normal; in a society of atheists and Christians and neo-hippy Buddhists and pagans who do hot yoga and pilates.
Like the British Pakistani rapper, Sonboly was neither fully German nor Iranian. He was like the millions of Muslims who have inhabited the continent for years and like the hundreds of thousands who have just arrived. He lived, as millions do, in that purgatory of multiculturalism where there exists no shared history, culture, traditions or heritage; only the babel of voices telling him that diversity makes him stronger.
A refugee from Eritrea has been arrested on suspicion of raping a 79-year-old woman in a cemetery in Germany. The pensioner was attacked while visiting the grave of her sister in Ibbenbueren, North Rhine-Westphalia, on Sunday. The suspect, 40, who has lived in Germany since 2013, was charged with rape and placed in police custody.
Q: “So what does a guy in Germany say after he finishes raping a 79 year old pensioner next to her sister’s grave?”
A: “Allahu Akbar!”
JPW: “Umm, you must not be reading the papers much lately, if you do not believe these attacks are happening with increasing frequency.” You’d really have to have a dark view of the universe to want to fire a bunch of incompetents that get people blown up because of their gutless and feckless and ineluctable stupidity. It’s almost like these people are getting paid to be that stupid….”
Constant Critic: “You know it never happens here. We have a low risk. You’re more likely to die from skin cancer that’s scientifically linked to using your AC in the Summer months than you are from terrorism. Your extremist Islamophobia is why people resort to terrorism.”
JPW: “Just what is it with recent US Secretaries of State? You are at threat from terrorists, any time that you act like a manvajayjay. Terrorists do it because it works like hell. It’s a religion of peace once they’ve shut you the f*ck up.”
Constant Critic: “Seriously, we don’t have a big stream of migrants in our country that can’t be assimilated. It’s not like Cologne, Germany, or anything.”
Constant Critic: “But it’s not all Islam’s fault. You’re just racist! You hate people, and I’m glad I’m not like that.”
JPW: “I’d tell you that you cuck rather easily, but you probably get that a lot. I’ll bet they called Cassandra racist when she told King Priam to beware of Greeks bearing gifts. Speaking of which, Enoch Powell would have to qualify as the Cassandra of Albion. He nailed it and for that he was nailed to the cross. Enjoy your Trojan Horse – if calling it that isn’t Islamophobic.”
The recent struggles over Black Lives Matter and Muslim terror in Europe serve to conceal an important idea: diversity does not work at all.
Even more, as is typical in democracy, when the left hand starts moving, watch the subtler movements of the right. The Establishment will allow you to get angry at African-Americans, because it has already decided to replace them. In fact, it decided that almost thirty years ago.
Industry and Leftists love cheap labor because it makes fatter profit margins and it always votes Leftist. At some point, the engines of economic Progress joined with the forces of social Progress because their agendas were convergent. Now they agree: diversity good, culture bad.
Their game plan is a two-step punch. First, they will import as many Mexican indios as possible. Indios are descended from the slave peoples of the Maya and Aztec, and their heritage originates entirely in Siberia, making them low Asiatics.
The “Hispanics” (really: Amerinds/Asians) are of the mid-90s average IQ variety and will replace basically all manual, unskilled and low-skilled labor. African-Americans will be SOL as they have traditionally filled this role and will be quickly squeezed out.
Then, it will be time to replace the troublesome middle class who keep voting Republican. These will be replaced by a variety of low (Thai, Vietnamese, Filipino) and high (Japanese, Korean, Chinese) Asians who will take over all jobs traditionally performed by white people.
This will leave us with an elite of mixed-race people who are mostly Caucasian with tinges of Asian and possibly tiny amounts of African, mirroring the elites currently ruling in Russia and much of Southern Europe.
This is how empires die, and what they leave behind.
In those decades after the second world war, Keynes seemed to have the better of the argument. As productivity rose across the rich world, hourly wages for typical workers kept rising and hours worked per week kept falling – to the mid-30s, by the 1970s. But then something went wrong. Less-skilled workers found themselves forced to accept ever-smaller pay rises to stay in work. The bargaining power of the typical blue-collar worker eroded as technology and globalisation handed bosses a whole toolkit of ways to squeeze labour costs.
When did both unions and immigration begin their dominance? Oh, right: the 1970s. And the market reacted, by importing more labor and driving out the natives, who had made themselves ludicrously expensive through unions and the resulting lawsuits. The result is that everyone works more.
Enjoy your slavery, morons. In the name of the defense of those who cannot be protected, you brought this on yourselves. Like most things democracy, people paid attention to the trigger pull, not where the gun was pointed, and now that the bullet has landed, things have turned out “less than ideal.” As predicted, but ignored.
Way back in the 1930s, people like myself saw the truth of benefits states: while it is cheaper per individual to distribute the cost among many, the imbalance between takers and makers quickly raises costs. The distribution also amounts to a reduction of value, which raises costs and reduces the purchasing power of money.
This is true of democratization in general, because by spreading a franchise it reduces its effectiveness to act in any given situation, resulting in a decrease in value. When you democratize steak, you end up with the half-soy McBurger.
But of course, the Crowd specializes in thinking in the short term, and declaring that because its policies have not caused the apocalypse right now, they are good and should be expanded. The great rush was on to spend money on entitlements, or payments directly to citizens, which are now the majority of Western budgets.
The solution dreamed up by the Leftists who took over during 1968, themselves part of the “Me Generation”/”Baby Boomer” gold rush brought on by the population boom at the end of the Second World War? Import new labor and hope they work their little tails off to pay for Baby Boomer retirement.
The demographic squeeze could be eased by the influx of more than a million migrants in the past year. If many of them eventually join the working population, the result could be increased tax revenue to keep the pension model afloat. Before migrants are even given the right to work, however, they require housing, food, education and medical treatment. Their arrival will have effects on public finances that officials have only started to assess.
There are many problems with the immigration plan. First, it stimulates overpopulation by creating an escape valve from the already-overburdened third world, which in turn causes people to breed more because the cause of that overpopulation is a Tragedy of the Commons style need to have a large enough family to subsidize each person in old age, so when that family leaves, they make more of them. Second, it destroys Western civilization entirely by ethnically replacing its one unique component, namely its people and their genetics. Third, it assumes that people from third world countries will produce at the level needed, when if they could have done that, they would have back at home where living is cheaper.
Generation X and Millennials are already looking at working until they die. What if, instead of paying 50% total taxes, they paid only 25% of their total income into taxes? They would be able to save that remaining about. What could you do, if you saved half of your tax payments every year in a retirement fund? Retire early, probably, and that is what they fear. They need to keep milking you for cash until they are all dead, which will take at least another half-century.
So go to those jobs and endure those rapefugee sexual assaults with a smile on your faces! After all, you are paying for the Me Generation — who destroyed everything with their Leftism fanaticism, and saved nothing — to live out their dying years in luxury. Now, don’t waste any more time reading this article — back to work!
Meet Bosko Pavlovic. From Serbia, he is accused of being part of a rape gang in Germany. The Daily Mailreports:
A 14-year-old schoolgirl was allegedly raped by a Serbian gang of migrants in Germany who also reportedly filmed the horrific act.
The girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had been invited back home by another older Serbian girl, 15, who was allegedly part of the group.
Instead of helping her, the 15-year-old girl filmed the sickening ordeal for the Serbian gang, whose ages ranged from 14 to 21.
This girl may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but this assault illustrates a fact of life that was once accepted as common sense: other groups, no matter who they are, want to kill you and take your stuff because you are Other to them.
It has zero to do with how nice you are, how much welfare or foreign aid you give them, or your own socioeconomic status. You are Other; that makes you a threat to Us, whoever Us is, and therefore you must be conquered by any means necessary. That includes war, but also crime, politics, corruption, and rape.
Too much of our focus in the West is taken up with Arabs and, in the USA, African-Americans. The reason for this is that people want to believe our diverse internationalist liberal democratic oligarchy (D.I.L.D.O.) is actually a functional system, except for those nasty ghetto-dwellers and Islamic fundamentalists.
The reality is that diversity does not work because every group is threatened by the Other and wants to destroy the Other and take its place. It just seems to work at first when the diversity numbers are low and so each group is not empowered to act as a bloc. But once the minorities are majorities, wow, watch the crisis fly.
If anything, African-Americans show restraint in America because they’ve grown up around friendly white people who help out when they can, and African-Americans share some political identity with other Americans. While ethnic tensions are rising, our liberal media finds it acceptable to cover these in order to cover up the bigger problem which is that there are many minority groups, and to each of them we white Americans are Other.
In addition, to them all other groups are Other, too. In my city, Hispanics and African-Americans war on each other, which is not news; I saw this in California years ago, where the press suppressed it as well. But you can also find Hispanics at war with Indians, Orientals and Arabs. And those groups with each other. In fact, thanks to diversity, every known pairing of ethnic antagonism has played out here, mainly because different groups are incompatible.
If you ask a Leftist to name diversity success stories, they will always mention places with low actual diversity: London, for example. They do this because when diversity means a few individuals, the inherent and unavoidable problems of diversity remain invisible. Once populations are large enough to be in conflict, the true nature emerges.
The truth of it is that diversity fails for obvious reasons: groups need identity and the ability to have their own standards and self-determination. This is why nations, ethnies and races formed in the first place, and why most people stay in their home countries even when impoverished. Only Western liberal democracy, which demands that we demonstrate how people are equal by engaging in sociopathic and suicidal failed policies like diversity, denies this reality.
The ugly pathology behind diversity is that Leftists adore the idea of regression to the lowest common denominator. In fact, it is the goal of egalitarianism to do so. That way, individual Leftists cannot be seen as mediocre, and in the social chaos that it has created, Leftist individualists can do whatever they want and not come into conflict with pesky social mores, cultural standards, morals and values. Leftists want anarchy because as individuals they want to transgress civilizational norms of behavior.
As a result, they keep pushing democracy on us. When it fails, they find a group to throw under the bus. At first it was whites, but now the Left is increasingly willing to toss African-Americans and Arabs under the wheels so that the Left can keep importing Orientals (high Asians), Vietnamese/Thai (low Asians), North Africans and Indians (Caucasian mixes), Central and South Americans (low Asians: Siberians), and any other group that will adulterate our population. They do not care who the group is, only that they can use this group to destroy us and remove those social standards.
Leftists are insane because they ignore the destruction of civilization their policies will accelerate, not because they are not deliberate. There is a plan. The target is Us, and the implement is any Other group that can be found. The goal is to abolish civilization so Leftists can run amok and engage in whatever crass, venal, greedy, perverse and neurotic behaviors they desire. And in the end, only a ruin will remain.
What to do, when a ship carrying a hundred passengers suddenly capsizes and only one lifeboat, with room for only ten people, has been launched? When the lifeboat is full, those who hate life will try to load it with more people and sink the lot. Those who love and respect life will take the ship’s axe and sever the extra hands that cling to the sides of the boat.
These are the translated words of Pentti Linkola. We can dispute the truth of what he says as much as we want, but at some point, technology will fail to deliver solutions that enable us to continually further expand our population density to levels far above our carrying capacity. This is when we find ourselves forced to make difficult decisions.
Eventually, like every other species, we deplete a resource faster than it can renew itself. Even as the resource is gradually depleted our growth will continue, a phenomenon referred to as overshoot. Gradually, the depletion renders the resource unable to provide all of us with our basic necessities. The population has to contract as a consequence.
However, long before we run out of food and water, our standard of living will decline because of the depletion of other resources. Oil depletion reduces our standard of living drastically, triggering a process that can only be described as the collapse of global industrial civilization. Billions of people will die as a consequence.
Before we arrive at this point however, decline expresses itself in various other forms. People can flee, from places that are further along the path of collapse than other places. Syria would be an example. Millions of people are now fleeing a nation that has been ravaged by a severe drought and a simultaneous decline in oil production. These factors helped tip a naturally fragile nation into a state of chronic civil war.
Most people now know that 2015 was the warmest year in recorded history. It’s expected that 2016 will prove to be even warmer. So far, January of 2016 has been the most abnormally warm month in human history. It’s inevitable that we will witness more droughts similar to the one seen in Syria. Consider the case of Ethiopia, which is expected to witness the worst drought in fifty years a few months from now. It’s thought that ten million people there will need emergency aid.
Above the Mediterranean sea, an enormous lifeboat is struggling to stay afloat. Its passengers debate whether or not they can take in the people clinging onto the side of the boat. What’s taboo to mention however, is that the sinking cruise liner they left is about to capsize, throwing a thousand more people into the sea, all of them desperately trying not to drown.
We can judge our actions based on our intent, or on their outcome. If the passengers in the lifeboat wish to think of themselves as good people, they can peddle back in the direction of the cruise liner and sink their vessel by trying to fill it with all the passengers who will fall off. If they wish to keep their vessel floating on the other hand, it would be prudent for them to leave.
The point to understand here is that what is known in Europe as a “refugee crisis” is not a phenomenon that’s going to come to an end anytime soon. Whether or not all of the migrants are fleeing wars and genocide is a red herring, because for every economic migrant now hoping to strike it big, numerous genuine refugees will soon flee their destroyed nations.
Politicians seem wary of admitting to impotence, but it’s important for us to recognize that not every problem we encounter can be solved. Whether or not these people fleeing to our continent are good people and whether or not they deserve to receive help will be irrelevant, if we will prove incapable of helping them.
We don’t know when this point will arrive. It might happen this summer, if hundreds of thousands of Ethiopians decide to flee in our direction. It might happen ten years from now, when the third world’s population has risen further, along with the mercury in our thermometers.
Anyone who thinks that Europe can cope with the refugee streams that are about to come our way fails to understand the severity of the global climatic upheavals we have brought upon ourselves. A new age of mass migrations is now upon us. Instead of preparing ourselves for the problem, our politicians make decisions in the middle of the crisis, based on emotional rhetoric and feelings of guilt.
It’s sadly too late for solutions, an era of severe suffering is ahead of us. Politicians came together in Paris and declared that the global temperature rise has to be kept below 1.5 degrees above the pre-industrial average. As Michael Mann explained however, this is not a goal that can still be achieved. Politicians were forced to choose between addressing ecological overshoot or sedating the public with short-term economic growth and most of them chose the latter.
What can be achieved however, is to ease the pain. It is not too late for palliative care. The refugee camps in Europe and the Middle East are places infested with rape, suicide and child abuse. In many places it’s common for family members to sell daughters as young as twelve to middle-aged Saudi men for use as sex slaves. Not so long ago, asylum seekers in Sweden rioted, because staff were trying to take away a ten year old boy who was repeatedly raped by older men.
In light of the situation we face, the most merciful option is to proceed with mass euthanasia. Merkel’s promise was a cruel joke. There is no chance whatsoever that Europe can deliver lives worth living to the millions of people who seek to migrate to the continent. The suffering of many refugees in Europe and especially in the Middle East is worse than that of many elderly individuals in Europe who are regularly given the means by which to end their lives.
It should be perfectly possible for European nations to send volunteers to refugee camps in Greece, Italy, Turkey, Jordan and other nations. Their task would be to distribute pills by which refugees are given the means to end their lives in a humane and dignified fashion. This would help prevent a lot of pointless suffering. It is the best outcome we can realistically hope for, an expression of genuine empathy, rather than the disingenuous public displays of altruism we see on train stations across Germany. A bottle of water might quench your thirst, but it does not help you to forget.
Recently an economist asked whether American productivity was actually in decline as reported, because there was some suggestion that measurement criteria may be faulty. In theory, since US competitiveness has “improved,” productivity should also have improved. But this takes us into the woolly world of globalist economics.
The World Economic Forum defines competitiveness as follows:
…the set of institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country.
The World Competitiveness Report is actually a very interesting, intensive document and I would appreciate philosopher kings reading it. Apart from our paradoxical world where economic modelling of productivity contradicts with competitive measures, it appears that quality itself is also deteriorating. Measurements simply do not tally up anymore because of a lack of Quality Assurance and Control.
For example, take how Donald Trump polls before Iowa differed from the actual vote outcome. In addition Trump’s non-PC approach seems to contradict the generally accepted norms of the GOP; in fact, it exposed the lies of the some incumbents currently supporting the same party. Clearly there is a total lack of quality control in how polling and political parties work.
his has even gone so far that people accept “fact-checking” as the “norm.” In other words, independent fact checking has now been accepted as the “new” quality norm obviating the need for politicians to apply their own quality policies. This sad state of affairs can be seen in companies too –- despite companies having registered their ISO standards –- it has become a marketing tool only.
Another aspect of competitiveness can be seen in the changing assessment of Syrian competitiveness. According to the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) of 2007 and 2011, Syria fell from its position at 80 (out of approximately 150 countries participating, with lower scores being more competitive) to 98. This is clearly a serious drop requiring further evaluation.
The GCI process measures and allocates all participating countries into three competitive groups as follows:
All together there are 12 pillars distributed between these three groups which allows the “judges” to fairly accurately allocate a country; for example, Syria was allocated to the “Basic Requirements” group because of its good merits in the first four pillars and bad merits in the other eight pillars. Obviously it is not a problem but in fact is intended to provide assistance (free of charge) to politicians in Syria to bite the bullet as it were.
In the 2016 report Syria appeared to have disappeared, most likely caused by their inability to even participate. This is where things become interesting. Clearly the World would benefit by encouraging Syria to improve (as it were), so why drop them from the GCI Report?
Before I answer that, let’s take a detour to what the GCI Report thought about 9/11.
From the above, three interesting paragraphs emerge:
“This Report makes a key implicit assumption that economic integration will continue in the years ahead”
“In the longer term, the terrorist attacks will have a lasting negative impact if the policy responses trigger a reversal of the global economic integration that has characterized the past twenty years”
“market uncertainty have the potential to raise costs of cross-border business to levels not seen in decades”
Despite enormous losses suffered from the 9/11 terror attacks, globalists really want to have an integrated economic system in the world with no borders because it will reduce their costs. Even a two trillion dollar loss is unimportant to achieve this goal. This is why Bush never killed Osama –- (it is unimportant) and Obama killed him (because it’s unimportant).
This is only one aspect we learn from Syria and Competitiveness. Syria fell off the report because cross-border trade to/from Syria is not an issue anymore.
Another aspect from the GCI report assesses the migrant world. Migrants appear to like moving to Germany and France as a lot of people have noticed. In other words, people from number 98 are moving to live with people at number six or 18. If one considers that Syria only performs well in four out of 12 pillars, imagine the re-education Germany will have to implement in order to educate Syrian adults and children on the additional eight pillars.
The last jewel the GCI report provides in this short evaluation relates to debt. Based on the latest trend to incur debt by simply flooding the marketplace (banks) with money (this is undoubtedly good for Globalists), it points out quite emphatically the following:
The accrual of public debt can enhance competitiveness if it is used to finance investments that raise productivity, such as upgrading schools or supporting research. However, if debt is used to finance present consumption, it burdens the economy in the long run with little tangible benefit.
General feedback regarding quantitative easing is that banks did not lend it to borrowers. They apparently used it via stock exchanges across the world to make money.
If one takes how much was spent to “fix Iraq” or Afghanistan, then one can imagine what it will cost to fix Syria. However, since that investment did not come from Syrians themselves, but from “across” the “cheap” border, the productivity of Syria will not improve, and neither will the economy of America because it is all a bubble.
Clearly globalists do not want quality measures because those increase costs (e.g. Iraqi buildings were never even finished), they do not want borders because those increase costs, but they do want countries with taxpayers to socialize those costs because that will be very productive for the globalists.
The contradiction is that having quality processes and borders is actually good for the middle-class. We have to instruct our elected representatives to represent their electorate (or get prosecuted) and not their donors, simply because it improves competitiveness (the correct way). This is important because bad economy correlates with increased mortality (Syria and Zimbabwe).
One simple improvement may be proposed here (for evaluation): Implement a system manager in each country to perform the necessary loss-benefit analysis of any national policy for its own tax-payers and then implement an enforced quality assurance process that will follow that investment through to its predicted outcome.
This is what Trump intends doing IMO: like a good manager, to run America with its own quality-assured, competitive system. No more “competitive or productive measurements from foreigners” will be necessary after that. They can keep all of that for themselves (especially the incorrect measurement parts).