Immigration, Europe, and Europe's Future

(Source: Daily Mail)

In a recent article discussing the collapse and shift of old borders, Richard Fernandez concluded: "The fences are going up all over Europe, we shall not see them torn down again in our life-time." Such appears to be the case. Germany has reinstated border controls, including passport checks. Hungary has closed a gap in its border fence, and enacted emergency provisions to stop the flow of immigrants, which has angered Serbia, now stuck with those immigrants. And Finland has closed its border with Sweden after the Swedish railway allowed immigrants to ride for free, and without having to show documentation, across from Sweden into Finland.

Like bad roommates, Germany, Sweden, and the U.K., have invited visitors into their flat (Europe), to make free with the whole premises, over the objection of the other roommates (e.g., Hungary, the Czech Republic, and so on). While Germany has implemented border controls, this seems more aimed at forcing other members of the E.U. to accept quotas of immigrants than a reversal of German policy. Merkel still insists that Europe has a duty to accept the Middle-Eastern horde descending on it.

So, where does this end? Like the U.S.'s immigration policy, German policy is driven largely by a demand for cheap foreign labor. Germany purports to have a shortage of labor (although it is not clear why it cannot use workers from fellow E.U. countries which have high unemployment rates--I'm kidding, it is clear: they don't want to pay the higher wages). However, in a decade or two, when the need for this labor is obviated by robotics, what then?

Stephen Green discusses this issue in his article entitled "Post-Modern Warfare Re-Revisited." He begins by noting an article from early this year by Will Collier, entitled "Dhimmitude Or Diaspora?" in which Collier suggests:

What happens 20 or 30 years from now, when demographic trends could well result in “minority-majority” (or even outright majority) status for the Islamic cohort in western Europe? If they’re faced with the options of dhimmitude or flight, where will the native Europeans flee to?

Why, here, of course.

Green's thesis, however, is that Collier has missed a third possibility:

If somewhere down the road the worst should come to worst, Europeans could always stay home and fight. And don’t think they couldn’t.

Problem is, the fight wouldn’t be the pretty kind where you see a few bold arrows drawn on the map, confidently slicing through history and the enemy lines. We’re not talking Desert Storm here, which you could draw with five arrows and lasted only 96 hours. We’re not even talking about the Liberation of France in 1944, which took slightly more arrows and just six weeks. Oh, no.

We’d be talking about city fighting. But not the kind of city fighting you saw in Saving Private Ryan, where the likable, well-trained and battle-hardened soldiers could call in an air strike just when all seemed lost. Thanks to modern Europe finally putting “ain’t gonna study war no more” into nearly full effect, they hardly have any battle-hardened soldiers. They hardly have any soldiers left at all.

The city fighting we’d see in Europe would look like what we saw in Sarajevo ten years ago. You know, ragtag bands of men with no uniforms, stolen weapons, and a desire to kill anybody who looked Muslim (or on the Muslim side, European). Holland and Denmark would fare worst. They’re both tiny, both have very high (and increasing) Muslim populations, and neither country has much of a modern military tradition. In this worst-case scenario, the likelihood of ethnic mob rule a la Bosnia seems high.

Want to take the worst-case a little further? Both countries border Germany, which might feel the very legitimate need to march in to restore Ordnung. I think we all know what usually happens once the Germans start goose-stepping through their smaller neighbors.

No, the result wouldn’t be World War III (or V?). But Europe could very well become Bosnia on a continental scale, with all the devastation, mass graves, and ethnic cleansing that implies. You can bet, at best, there would be a whole lot of people put at gunpoint onto refugee boats bound for North Africa and the Levant. Assuming, of course, the Europeans win in such a scenario. If not, the poor refugees would speak languages much like our own, and be bound for our own shores – just like Will suggested.

Me, though, I’d put my money on the Europeans winning a war of mass, mechanized murder.

My bet is a bloody war, followed by a diaspora. I have two reasons for thinking this, and it both stems from the fact that Europe is soon to overwhelmed by refugees and immigrants. First, the Middle-East is collapsing. The economies are barely functioning, and war is breaking out all over the region. This is mostly what is driving the current exodus. However, at some point, the young men flooding Europe are going to be sending for their families, and the situation will become much worse for Europe.

But this is just the beginning. As I noted recently, Africa's population is exploding. By 2050, Nigeria will likely be the third most populous country in the world; and Africa will make up 25% of the world's population (compared to its current 16%). Although many of its young people will seek to escape to the United States, Europe will face the toughest time. Another article I cited recently, "An African Planet?", indicates that Africa's overall population is expected to grow by a billion over the next 35 years. Remember, this is at the same time that many other regions will have either no growth, or be starting to shrink. (2050 will probably represent the time of the peak of the world's population). The result, according to the author:

The sad truth is that Africa’s “economic miracle” will never happen. As the population grows, survival will mean only one thing: emigration. The bright lights of Europe and North America–and of South Africa for those who cannot manage to leave the continent–will exert a hypnotic attraction. Many Africans will buy plane tickets financed by their relatives already overseas, or by Western aid money, and those who cannot afford to fly will pile into rickety ships to cross the Mediterranean. The African avalanche is inevitable.

The rush to Europe will be so massive and relentless that it will not be possible to stop it without direct military force. That would require a fundamental ideological change, and without such a change, at some point in the 21st century, Europe will accept African domination. This is not as preposterous as it sounds; most Europeans will be as resigned to black rule as white South Africans are today. Liberal Europeans will probably fight as hard as Africans to implement the current South African system of race preferences, quotas and forced integration.

* * *

Given the West’s simplistic notion of “democracy” as counting votes, it is hard to see what will stop the Africans. Every African born on the continent is a potential voter, and as South Africans say: “Vote for a living, don’t work for a living!” There will be four billion voters in Africa, and their voting power will spill far beyond the continent and overwhelm the paltry, aging populations of Europe.

* * *

In South Africa, blacks assert their rights as the original, “indigenous” owners of the land. In Europe and elsewhere, they will assert their rights–perhaps even more ruthlessly–as conquerors. ...

This immigration crises may well be the last real opportunity Europeans have to stop the cultural suicide mandated by their ruling elites.