Earlier this week some Irish had enough with immigrant violence after an Algerian stabbed a woman and several children. Mostly peaceful protests occurred across Dublin, including the burning of a hotel used to house illegal aliens (aka, invaders). The response of Ireland's Prime Minister, Leo Varadkar (who is Indian, not Irish) was as predictable as the sun rising in the east. Per Reuters:
Ireland's prime minister pledged to modernise laws against hatred in the coming weeks after 34 people were arrested for rioting in Dublin on Thursday night.
"We will pass new laws in the coming weeks to enable the Gardai (police) to make better use of the CCTV evidence they collected yesterday, and also we will modernise our laws against incitement to hatred and hatred in general," Varadkar told a news conference on Friday.
"I think it's now very obvious to anyone who might have doubted us that our incitement to hatred legislation is just not up to date. It's not up to date for the social media age. And we need that legislation through within a matter of weeks."
When I reviewed Peter Turchin's book, End Times, back in September, I noted his findings that:
... once you include the preferences of the top 10 percent and interest groups, "the effect of the commoners [on national policy] is statistically indistinguishable from zero." (p. 130). And "issues on which the common people and the economic elites disagree are always--always--resolved in favor of the elites." (Id.).
Vox Day recently noted this as well, although with perhaps a better quote from Turchin's book:
In END TIMES, Peter Turchin cites compelling and reasonably comprehensive data analysis that proves the democratic will of the people in the United States has absolutely no influence on the policies put into place by their elected leaders, by means of a large-scale comparison of their policy preferences with the resulting policies put into place by their government.
The political scientist Martin Gilens, aided by a small army of research assistants, gathered a large data set—nearly two thousand policy issues between 1981 and 2002. Each case matched a proposed policy change to a national opinion survey asking a favor/oppose question about the initiative. The raw survey data provided information that enabled Gilens to separate the preferences of the poor (in the lowest decile of the income distribution) and the typical (the median of the distribution) from the affluent (the top 10 percent).
Statistical analysis of this remarkable data set showed that the preferences of the poor had no effect on policy changes. This is not entirely unexpected. What is surprising is that there was no—zilch, nada—effect of the average voter. The main effect on the direction of change was due to the policy preferences of the affluent. There was also an additional effect of interest groups, the most influential ones being business-oriented lobbies. Once you include in the statistical model the preferences of the top 10 percent and the interest groups, the effect of the commoners is statistically indistinguishable from zero.
Peter Turchin, END TIMES: Elites, Counterelites, and the Path of Political Disintegration, 2023
While the research Turchin cited focused on the United States, there is no reason to suppose it would be different in any other so-called democracy. This is why protests against mass immigration, voting for politicians that ostensibly oppose mass immigration, and so on, never generate any changes to policies on mass immigration; and, in fact, as shown above, actually lead to governments cracking down on anyone that would oppose mass immigration. In Europe, we've even seen it made a crime to point out how criminal are the migrants. (So far, in the U.S., such views currently only get you labeled a bigot and banned from polite society).
In other words, nothing will done about mass immigration unless the elites will it otherwise, which they will never do willingly. As Turchin makes clear in his book, the only way to get the elites to change course is through fear: fear of mass unrest and civil war (as happened in the 1920s and 1930s in the United States) or actual mass unrest and civil war that kill off much of the elites (such as happened to France in the Hundred Years War). Blacks and other minorities have long recognized this--thus the long history or rioting and looting in which they engage--but it is less common among the (for now) majority population. Thus, the mostly peaceful protests in Dublin are actually an encouraging sign.
The Irish are waking up.
ReplyDeleteWe'll see. It was just one mostly peaceful protest. It would require weeks of such mostly peaceful protests all over Ireland to scare the elites into limiting immigration. Particularly because it would require the Irish PM to take action inimical to his own people--the Indians.
Delete