Saturday, September 12, 2015

“Just Do It!”—Part Two

“Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.” Immanuel Kant, in Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, 1785

Or, to put Kant’s categorical imperative in contemporary language: “Do the right thing!

See my article, “Just Do It!” – Kant and the Immigration ‘Crisis’” for an explanation of today’s title.

On September 11th, I responded to Diane West’s foreshadowing article, “Strangers in Your Own Land,” in which she details the inexplicable behavior of European leaders in wanting to “redistribute” the invasion of the Continent by raggedy hordes of Muslims and other “asylum seekers” or “refugees.” In her article she expresses some bafflement about why German Chancellor Angela Merkel and others are inviting the demise of their countries as Western countries committed to Western values and civilization:

I wonder about the wielders of power, the redistributors, seated in their elegant conference rooms, sipping sparkling water, pronouncing on the fate of millions of citizens across Europe. German Chancellor Merkel. Swedish Prime Minister Lofven. European Commission President Juncker, and the rest. Either they have no understanding of the plight of their peoples; or, they have full understanding of it. That is, either they are insulated to a point of numbness to what actually happens to Europe's people – their churches and remaining synagogues, their schools and languages, their marketplaces and streets, their customs and their lore – when a town or neighborhood is engulfed by an alien and predatory culture such as Islam; or, they sadistically relish the prospect in the name of something they like to call "European values."

Well, an alleged “European value” that contains the kernel of its own destruction is nihilistic and no longer anything, least of all “European.” In point of fact, an ethical “value” that prescribes the suicide of the person who holds it is Eastern in nature, rooted in the anti-life mysticism of various such systems that originated and thrived in the Far East. It neither European nor Western.

And, you can bet that neither Merkel nor her cohorts in treason will need to experience first-hand the inundation of Muslim barbarians in their homes or neighborhoods. They will be living safely and undisturbed in their gated or fortified communities, away from the chaos they have birthed in the name of altruism and repudiating genuine, life-affirming Western values.

I wrote Miss West this comment, edited for the occasion:
Just read your “Strangers in Your Own Land” column via Ruth King. Great piece. You are, however, one who also is baffled by Angela Merkel’s actions and those of the EU privileged class (that non-elected gang of bureaucrats you briefly mention) in deciding to allow tens of thousands of innately hostile Muslims to change the character and demographics of Germany and other European countries.
 I think Merkel’s actions are particularly vicious; seeing the hesitation and often the resistance of Germans to allowing even more rapists, killers, and welfare parasites into the country, she deliberately dumps batches of them amidst the “foot draggers” with a “get used to it” or “eat it” attitude.
Now, one reason I wrote the “Just Do It!” piece was to underscore the Kantian premises of European leaders. Ideas do have consequences, and Germany in particular has never entirely shaken off the influence of Kant (and, implicitly, of Nazism).
One of Kant’s categorical imperatives, as I illustrate in my piece, is that you must “do your duty” even if it means your death – even when you know it will mean your death. Merkel and Company are saying to their underlings in Germany and Sweden and elsewhere: “We, the powerful, are doing our duty by welcoming hordes of Muslims into our countries; you, the hoi polloi, must do no less; it is your duty to tolerate Muslims even though they may beat you up on the street, pursue your Jewish neighbors, prey on your daughters and wives, demand more and better welfare benefits which you will pay for, and enjoy more freedom of speech than we allow indigenous Europeans; that is, they are free to spew hate speech against you, but you may not criticize them or answer them in any way without incurring penalties.”
Merkel harks back to the bad old days of Nazi Germany:
“If you thought the scale of Russian rape in Germany once the Soviets occupied it was awful and once that not very nice man Hitler was gone, you ain’t seen nothing yet! (‘Sie ist noch gar nichts gesehen!‘) Just look at Sweden, the rape capital of Europe. But then, we deserve a sharp rise in crime rates among Muslims. Don’t we? We are all guilty for having killed so many Jews. Muslims hate Jews, and would like to kill them all, but I’m sure some accommodation can be reached between Muslims and Jews, so that fewer Jews are victimized. Why are you laughing, Blöd?
“You may not ‘provoke’ or ‘incite’ Muslims to violent behavior by wearing short skirts or giving a Muslim a dirty look or refusing to serve halal food exclusively in all European restaurants and schools. If physically attacked by Muslim youth,  you may not defend yourselves without the risk of arrest or enduring other penalties. Muslims may do as they please. Yes, we will prosecute Muslims who commit really, really, really awful crimes; but, for the most part, we must grant them a free hand to conquer you and subject you to their peculiar barbarism and harassment and being beaten up by gangs of ‘asylum seekers.’
“Unfortunately, many of our citizens must learn the hard way that they must correct their ‘White European Privilege’ and not flaunt it provocatively in front of our Muslim brother citizens.
“Resign yourselves to the inevitable!

“We know, from experience, that Muslims already here and this new wave of Muslims – mostly adult males between 25 and 35 years old, and ready to rumble, jihadist style, if you will – will not assimilate into German or Swedish or Dutch or French culture; to avoid conflict, you, the hoi polloi, must assimilate into Muslim culture. You must accommodate their customs and practices; it is the height of imperialistic hubris to expect them to adopt our 'superior' ways. It is your duty. Just do it, no questions permitted.

“We have done our duty, by opening wide our borders so that you may prove your moral worth by submitting to Islam; now it is time for you to do yours. It is the altruistic thing to do, even if it means suicide. Do you question altruism? Do you question our motives? It is the multicultural thing to do, even if it means the submersion and more likely the drowning of Western culture! You don’t think multiculturalism is working? Off with your head!

“If you won’t comply with our edict, then we can only conclude that you are racists, or bigots, or Islamophobes. You are common lickspittle!   Dare we call Muslims racists, or bigots, or Europhobes – even though most Muslims have amply demonstrated those character flaws, intrinsic and prescribed in their ‘creed’? No. However, you will not be permitted to point that out publically without incurring penalties. Europe oppressed Islam and Muslims for fourteen centuries. Now it’s pay-back time. We must do our duty and submit to Islamic justice! Submitting to Islamic justice is our moral duty! If we don’t, we are immoral!”

Anyway, Diane, I don’t know how else to better demonstrate the poisonous influence of Kantian ethics that is governing European behavior. There’s really nowhere else to look for a reason why Merkel and Company are behaving as they are. It’s a philosophical issue first, a moral one second.

Merkel and Company say: We must do our duty – it is categorically imperative! – even if it means soaking and choking Europe in the swirling sewage waters of Islam!

Glug, glug. The sound you hear is Europe drowning.

Back home, Obama, heeding Rahm Emanuel’s advice to never let a serious crisis go to waste, has jumped on the Syrian refugee bandwagon and announced that he wants to bring in at least 10,000 alleged Syrians. These will be in addition to the tens of thousands of Somalians and other Muslims he’s welcomed into various American towns and cities. Don’t get me started on his open borders invitation to countless Mexicans and other South Americans who have no cultural affinity with the U.S., but rather a cultural hostility.

Syrians? Columnist Daniel Greenfield remarked recently that Syrian passports are as cheap to buy as a European Union bureaucrat’s honor. In his FrontPage article of September 11th, “Get Ready: Obama Bringing 10,000 Syrian Refugees to U.S,” Robert Spencer wrote:

The Reuters headline was “Obama wants U.S. to prepare for 10,000 Syrian refugees next year: White House.”

Prepare? How can we prepare? Bomb shelters? Underground bunkers? Metal detectors at shopping malls? Funeral arrangements? Exactly what preparations does the President expect us to make?

I know what you’re thinking: there you go again, Spencer, you racist, bigoted Islamophobe. Here is Barack Obama magnanimously opening America’s doors to a desperate population in crisis, and you’re demanding that our nation’s hospitality not be tendered to these poor people – and why not? Just because they are “brown”?

Nope. That’s not the problem at all, although as always, charges of “racism” will be used to drown out any dissenting voices. The real problem is that last February, the Islamic State promised to flood Europe in the near future with as many as 500,000 refugees. That future is upon us, and it is important to note that the Islamic State was not simply talking about engulfing the continent in a humanitarian crisis that would strain its resources to the breaking point. The jihadis were also planning to cross into Europe among those refugees, and now they’re boasting that they have done so.

An Islamic State operative boasted last week that among the flood of refugees, 4,000 Islamic State jihadis had entered Europe. “They are going like refugees,” he said, but they were going with the plan of sowing blood and mayhem on European streets. As he told this to journalists, he smiled and said, “Just wait.” He explained: “It’s our dream that there should be a caliphate not only in Syria but in all  the world, and we will have it soon, inshallah.”

And now Barack Obama is bringing 10,000 of these refugees to the United States. How many Islamic State jihadis will be among them? No one can say, but what jihadi would pass up a chance to go to the Great Satan itself, and win his share of virgins by destroying an American landmark or mass murdering American infidels wholesale?

And what about those Syrian passports? Daniel Greenfield provides the lowdown on just how “Syrian”  most of those “refugees” are in his September 12th column, “Syria Happy to Help ‘Refugees’ Fake Their Way into Europe.”

The official story is that all those poor refugees are fleeing Assad's oppression. But Assad seems eager to help them go.

Lax new rules handed down from Damascus allows passports to be issued abroad with virtually no checks for just £250.
Why is Assad doing this?

1. Obviously money - Refugee smuggling is big business and his regime is happy to take a cut. 10,000 passports being issued in August in Jordan adds up to 4 million dollars or so. Keep multiplying and you end up with half a billion dollars.

2. Russia  - Assad is an Iranian/Russian client and Moscow is obsessed with destroying Europe, particularly the big three players, the UK, France and Germany. A flood of Muslim migrants will eventually get that job done. Muslim migration will also destroy Russia, but it's not like anyone is thinking rationally here. Instead the various Western nations keep using Muslims as weapons against each other.

But that was also true back in the Gates of Vienna days.

3. Refugees as a Terror Weapon - There's quite a history of countries using refugee dumping to destabilize and damage other countries. Gaddafi is a famous regional example. Assad is warning Europe that the alternative is a flood of refugees and so it ought to meet his demands. Since Europe can't actually shut down the Syrian civil war, it's a little pointless, but European leaders aren't known for having any understanding of the situation anyway.

4. Mainly this benefits Iran, which can once again claim that it can stabilize everything as long as its demands are met. Again, all it can do is prolong the conflict, but that is what it wants anyway.

The Washington Post ran an article on September 12th, “Protests in support of migrants expected throughout Europe” about the “hardships” of these “refugees,” complete with the standard tear-jerker photograph of a little girl screaming her head off. No photographs or videos, however, showing the overwhelming number of physically fit Muslim men rioting and throwing food and water back at their benefactors in Hungary and Greece and Austria and trashing the hostels they’ve been billeted in. It’s not the poor women and children – an infinitesimal percentage of the Mongolian horde sweeping into Europe – that anyone is worried about. It’s all those “asylum seekers” in their prime ready to go on welfare and ready to wage jihad. They’re escaping  the “war torn” Middle East and North Africa, you see, so they can wage the same war in Europe itself.

Of course, with Obama, it’s not an issue of his being captive to one of Kant’s categorical imperatives. He’s just a hateful nihilist who wishes to subject this country to the same chaos that Europe is now experiencing. He wants to beat down “whitey” by surrounding him with Muslim brown and Mexican brown. But, don’t call him a racist. Or an ally of La Raza or the Muslim Brotherhood or of #BlackLivesMatter.

That would be “racist.”


madmax said...


I agree with your arguments about Kant. It's essentially another variant of what I call "Rand's thesis"; namely that Kant secularized Christianity's self-sacrificial ethics and that secular version of altruism has conquered the European world. Its a good argument and it does explain alot. However, I think you should also consider that there is a "twist" if you will, and that comparison's to Hitler are somewhat misleading.

Hitler was an example of "in-group" altruism. His entire philosophy was directed at creating an empire where Nordics could flourish. Now that entailed killing alot of people and establishing racial hierarchies even among whites. It also involved removing what was considered a hostile, parasitic out-group; ie the Jews. Today's Left on the other hand is *militantly* in favor of "out-group" altruism. Moral virtue now consists of the sacrifice of white interests to non-whites, of men to women, of straights to gays, and of the European world to the 3rd world especially the Muslim world. This is how altruism is manifesting itself today. The Left will not allow whites to have any in-group sentiments at all. This is why they demonize the two largest mainstream Right movements that are not pro-white in nature; ie the Tea Party and the anti-Islam movement. They hate both of those movements because they are essentially all white in composition. The Left wants white people demoralized. Now, getting behind that and fully linking that to the ethical developments post Kant IS a fascinating subject. THIS is what the Objectivist movement should be working on. But of course they are not because they are still blind to the Left's specifically anti-white male crusade which is in large part due to vestigial egalitarian elements in Rand's core philosophy.

My point to you is that while Kant is involved it is not the best polemical tactic to use Hitler and the Nazis. The Left has used the Nazis as their *primary* intimidation tactic for complying with Leftism; ie if you oppose Leftism in any way or if you are associated with white, Christian, European, traditional sexual morality, nuclear family, patriotism (they call it nationalism or jingoism), merit based capitalism, etc then you are a DE FACTO Nazi. Further, you are corresponding with Diana West who is heavily influenced by some Paleo Conservative thinkers (one of the them Larry Auster). She is not going to be responsive to arguments that rely on Hitler. Because she, as *everyone* on the non-mainstream Right, is sick to death of Hitler accusations and comparisons; ie the Left's "argumentum ad Hitlereum". Sadly, it is in large part a reaction to Hitler that the Left wants to see white European civilization disappear.

Today's Leftism is a Sick, Sick movement. The likes of which has never been seen before in human history; a movement which at is core is motivated by racial self-loathing. That historically is new.

madmax said...

"...seeing the hesitation and often the resistance of Germans to allowing even more rapists, killers, and welfare parasites into the country..."

Speaking of rapists and killers, this via Ann Barnhardt, please note, there are some very disturbing images:

If you Google for more info on this woman you will find that she was formerly a beautiful blond Swedish girl who was totally indoctrinated by Leftism. To such an extent she made a "music" video for a European NGO the sole purpose of which was to encourage racial miscegenation. In that video she is having simulated sex with a black man. Well, she was ultimately rapped brutally and killed be an Ethiopian man and then dumped in a ditch and buried with leaves.

And Harry Binswanger wants open immigration with no border checks no less. Does Binswanger have any daughters? Of course not, having children would have been to selfless I guess.

Economics is crucially important, but nothing right now is more important than immigration. This really is looking like end of times for Europeans. But no one seems to care because if you do, well that's just racism.

Edward Cline said...

It's interesting what the MSM overlooks when reporting (sympathetically) the rush of "immigrants" to Europe. One of things overlooked, and this has been pointed out by Jihad Watch and other "Islamophobic" sites, that the overwhelming number of "immigrants" are Muslim males in their prime who really don't look like they're escaping poverty or a "war-torn" country. They look well-fed, fit to get into fights, are wearing the latest pop T-shirts and shoes and caps and pants they could find in a Gaza shopping mall, use cell phones and iPhones and camera phones and just don't look as though they've been suffering from malnutrition or other maladies. Neither do most of the plump-looking Muslimas and their brats look like they've been enduring very many privations. Robert Spencer, whom I quote in this piece, stated that this number of people are a kind of "flash mob" signaled by ISIS to invade Europe through Libya and other Mideast points. It's a mathematical improbability that so many tens of thousands of "refugees" all got the same notion at the same time to head for Europe by water, on foot, or by train. This is a planned invasion that is in accordance with the Muslim Brotherhood Memorandum of 1991 that details how Europe and the U.S. can be "settled" in by Muslims and taken over by sheer demographics.

Steve Jackson said...

Harry Binswanger announced on his blog that he has moved to Naples, Florida, which is 94% white. He also lives in a gated community. According to Ed Powell, Binswanger exempts Israel from the requirements of open immigration. (Yaron Brook says that Israel has a right to restrict immigration to preserve its majority Jewish culture!) But for the rest of us, it's Katey-bar-the door, or whatever the expression is.

Seriously, Binswanger believes that if 100,000 men from the Boko Harum region of Nigeria want to hop on planes in move to the US tomorrow, they should be free to do so w/no screening and its "racial bigotry" if you don't like it. I gather that Rand didn't trust him, although he likes to make a big deal about being her "associate."

This phenomena of hating your own group is a first in history, from what I can tell. Europe is undergoing a massive Stockholm Syndrome (ironically so-called). It's really sick to see these cute blond haired German girls with signs "Welcome Immigrants." They are welcoming their future rapists. Their parents ought to be prosecuted for child abuse.

Trumps got a great issue with the "Syrian" "refugees" since no one likes Muslisms. Heck, even the left hates them, they only love what they are doing to our culture.

Steve Jackson said...

"Sweden's prosperous society has nothing to do with actual Swedes but with abstractions. So since all people are basically the same and only philosophic ideas matter then what's the harm in open immigration?"

A few years ago Eric Mack wrote that in the 70s a "high ranking member of the Peikoff group" told him that the statistics showing a high life expectancy for Scandinavian countries were "faked."

This is obviously based on a cramped reading of Rand's discussions concerning the relationship between freedom and rationality on the one hand and "life" on other. However, that high IQ Scandinavians can build a prosperous society under a bad economic system (and to a lesser extent East Germans under a worse system) says something about the importance about a group's qualities and not just their ideas.

In Rand's 1963 essay "Racism" she denied that there were group differences in intelligence and said that, even if they were, it wouldn't matter because even lesser intelligent people would benefit from a free market system. Granted that this was written before Jensen's article and The Bell Curve, but it seems in retrospective a little naive. We now know that low IQ is correlated with crime, illegitimacy, welfare dependency and unemployment, not exactly the things that are conducive to a free society.

Edward Cline said...

One factor that contributes to Muslim crime rates in Europe is the practice of Muslims marrying within their familial tribes, that is, pairing in arranged marriages with first or second cousins to produce children with low IQ's. Or pairing with uncles and aunts. It's been proven that the offspring of incestuous marriages are usually not dealing with full decks, and incrementally so with fewer cards in the deck if it's a generational practice.

Steve Jackson said...

I'm no geneticist, but I don't imagine that the ill-effects of centuries of inbreeding can be cured by a generation or two of outbreeding. So even if Europe ended Islamic immigration today, it's already imported a permanent criminal underclass.

Christians have traditionally opposed first cousin marriage. I wonder what the IQ and success rate of Middle Eastern Christians is verses Muslims. Of course such a study won't be done anytime soon. The Middle Eastern Christians I've met have all been decent people, but that might just be the effects of selective immigration. I have read stories of Christian Syrian gangs in Europe. (Obama's buddy Tony Rezko is apparently a Syrian Christian.)

Can't wait until my next BMW is made on a Muslim assembly line. It's not like they don't break down enough already.

Edward Cline said...

An excellent recap of the roots of Europe's invasion "crisis" can be found on Gates of Vienna here.

Edward Cline said...

And here's another gem from Gates of Vienna. Paul Weston, the author, was arrested by British police for reading Churchill's estimate of Islam and Muslims in public.

Unknown said...

Seeking a chronological list of the original publication dates of Ed Cline's books,esp. novels. Any help is welcome.