You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] olinneserpona [S] ago 

before we start criticizing the threat of “non-European otherness” (i.e. the threat to our identity by non-European migrants) we must first ask ourselves: who benefits mostly from their arrival to Europe? ... Our main enemies are not non-European migrants, but our own politicians and their System-friendly intellectuals residing in posh districts and laying the foundations for social discord, without considering the negative impact of their misguided and utopian policies.

This point is IMO the most important the author makes. Immigrants are invited to our homes, blaming them for the situation simply because they accepted the invitation is understandable, but that is not where the focus needs to be. The only groups that benefits from the "us vs. immigrants"-narrative are our elected, domestic elites and the global, unelected elites. It is divide and conquer.

European small-time nationalisms, with a flurry of national identities of sorts, inherited from the 20th century, must no longer play a crucial role in our new identity building process.

White people have to unite across nations. The author wrote this in an American context, but I would say it applies to those of us who live in Europe as long as it does not affect out national identity negatively. Perhaps a slight sacrifice of national identity be necessary to win this cultural battle? IDK.

It would be a waste to time trying to disarm the proponents of the welcoming–multi-culture in Europe with arguments based on empirical data. Ideological or religious believes cannot be countered by reeling off empirical facts, as thinkers Gustave Le Bon and Vilfredo Pareto warned.

It's a waste of time debating with those already indoctrinated. They are all lost. I have never heard of a 30 year old Marxist change their belief. Only if they suffer physical(rape, violence, survive terrorist attack) or emotional trauma will the come to their senses.