Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

Let the Syrians in

So there’s a million or so migrants, apparently many of them from Syria, who are trying to push their way into Germany. Germany is apparently willing to accept them, but they’re trying to send a bunch of them to other EU countries too. The Daily Mail is doing a masterful coverage, both inciting outrage at how the onslaught will drown us all, and inciting compassion by showing little children being drowned and starved by those meany Europeans who won’t pay them a plane ticket to Munich. One has to respect a news site being so unabashedly shameless.

I’m from Europe, but living abroad at the moment, so my comment might seem a bit irresponsible. But I say let them in. Yes I know, a million Muslim immigrants won’t do any good. Yes, they’ll suck out welfare money like leeches. Yes they’ll rape and steal, and they might kill whoever dislikes Islam and says so in public.

But still, we’d rather let them in sooner rather than later. Because eventually, this is going to happen.

And I’m actually happy that the Refugee Crisis is happening now, rather than in 20 years or so, when 2 billion Africans are looking for a way into Europe, and Europe is deep in demographic decline and economic recession. And we know blacks are holier than Muslims, so they’d be much more likely to get in without opposition.

So let the Syrians suck our governments dry, let them rape our teenagers walking home alone after leaving the nightclubs, let them kill our left-wing cartoonists and bomb our synagogues. After 10 years of that, maybe Europe is less inclined to bring in 100 million black Africans. Hell, maybe after some years of that, the Syrians and other Arabs are capable of opposing that for us. Islam is pretty bad, but Africa is way worse

EDIT: This post has nothing to do with the fact that Germany is the biggest competitor of Japanese export industry.

Advertisements

40 responses to “Let the Syrians in

  1. Pingback: Let the Syrians in | Neoreactive

  2. Chuck September 4, 2015 at 10:22

    Send them to Israel. Two birds and all…

  3. Pingback: Let the Syrians in | Reaction Times

  4. DK101010 September 4, 2015 at 22:21

    Makes sense. If your are able to convert them properly to European principles down the road there won’t be a need to let in large influxes of Africans or any immigrants in general.

    • spandrell September 5, 2015 at 04:01

      On the contrary. If they properly convert to European principles, they’ll go to college, work in the government, stop breeding, thus creating the need for more immigrants to work the actual jobs out there.

      And fat chance of making a million Muslims behave. It’s not that we’ve succeeded with the previous Muslims.

  5. Karl September 5, 2015 at 09:06

    The Syrians are only a tiny fraction of the masses that are invading Germany. The hordes from Africa are allready arriving.

      • Karl September 6, 2015 at 11:58

        The German government’s report for 1/15 to 7/15 contains the following percentages for Country of origin (from https://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Downloads/Infothek/Statistik/Asyl/statistik-anlage-teil-4-aktuelle-zahlen-zu-asyl.pdf?__blob=publicationFile )

        Syria: 21.5 %
        Kosovo 15.3%
        Albania 15.0 %
        Serbia 5.9%
        Irak 5.4%
        Afghanistan 5.2%
        Macedonia 2.8 %
        Eritrea 2.5%,
        Nigeria 1.7%
        Pakistan 1.7%
        Other: 23%

        Form what I see in Gemany, e.g. the Munich central station where thousands arrive by train every day, the “other” component is mostly from Africa. But I don’t have any hard data.

        It should also be noted that the report is lagging as it list only 195.000 asylum requests. Presently the German government admits that is expects 800.000 for the year 2015. Considering that more than 100.000 asylum seekers arrived in August alone, a million seems more realistic.

        Moreover, someone from Syria or Irak has no reason to hide the country of origin as such an origin will guarante that asylum is granted. With African countries the situation is different – no war in the country of origin means, means that asylum is denied. However, if someone does not say where he is from and has no official documents at all, the German government will not deport that person. So the other/unknown category of the government report contains a lot of people who have a reason to hide their country of origin.

        • spandrell September 6, 2015 at 12:48

          Thanks. 30% Albanians is amazing. What are they claiming? Blood feuds with their cousins from the valley next door? Will they get in too?

          The media reports are all about white-ish looking Syrians, the younger the better, so it shows that they understand that people will be more accepting of accepting cute white children. Let’s see how they spin it when it’s 10 million black men.

          • ivvenalis September 6, 2015 at 17:33

            I came here to post this, but Karl beat me too it, and with numbers. The media is anchoring Syrians in the minds of their viewers as the archetypal migrant. Another issue is that the migration isn’t randomly distributed. Areas with lots of Eritreans are more likely to receive more Eritreans than Albanians, e.g.

            If it’s 10 million black men, they’ll find some of the 10,000 Albanians or whatever and take pictures of them. Something similar is already done to hide the sex ratio of the current migrants.

  6. n/a September 6, 2015 at 01:30

    spandrell,

    Bizarre posts. You appear to be a fan of Asian nationalism and Jewish nationalism, but hostile to European nationalism. Why is this?

    “Israel should remain healthy and strong so that European Jews have a place to escape to.”

    Why?

    “thus creating the need for more immigrants to work the actual jobs out there”

    There is no “need” for immigrants, period. Not for productive immigrants, and certainly not for net consumer, taxpayer-subsidized refugees.

    Immigration ‘No answer’ to Pension Time Bomb

    The ‘myth’ that continued mass immigration is the answer to Britain’s pensions time bomb has been described as ‘totally dishonest’ by a new report out today.

    The report from think tank Migrationwatch, finds that the present ratio of workers to pensioners could only be sustained by immigration at a level that would bring the population of the UK to 119 million by 2051 and 303 million by the end of the century – obviously absurd propositions.

    ‘The pensions myth is just one in a long series of excuses that are trotted out in support of justifying the highest levels of immigration in our history, and each time they are examined in detail they fall apart as this study again demonstrates,’ said Migrationwatch chairman, Sir Andrew Green.

    The report reviews the prospects for this ratio – known as the Potential Support Ratio (PSR) – in the light of the most recent population projections from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). It finds that, with no migration at all the ratio would fall from today’s level of 4.15 to 1.9 in 2051. If net migration continues at 180,000 a year, as the ONS predicts, the PSR would drop to 2.4 in that year. However, this improvement in the support ratio would require a continuing conveyor belt of new immigrants resulting in an extra 13.6 million people with all that that implies in what is already one of the most crowded countries in Europe.

    The report quotes four major studies which have dismissed this approach. Most recently, the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs concluded that “arguments in favour of high immigration to defuse the “pensions time bomb” do not stand up to scrutiny…”

    ‘The Government have been running this dishonest argument for years. They have recently shaded it to talk about “helping” with the pensions problem but the reality is that any significant impact requires a huge and continuing increase in our population. They know it is no answer to the pensions problem and it is time they levelled with the British public and dropped this absurd argument,’said Sir Andrew.

    http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/press-release/218

    • spandrell September 6, 2015 at 03:35

      I know dude, I know. Read the post, not just the title.

      • n/a September 6, 2015 at 16:29

        “Read the post, not just the title.”

        I read this post, the last post, and your comments in this thread in full, and the impression I got is exactly what I said. I’m not concerned with the main point you argue in this post. What I was responding to:

        Per your last post, the pro-immigrationism of leftist Irish “nationalists” proves “nationalism isn’t about nations” and Europeans should eschew nationalism, while the desirability and practicability of Asian and Jewish nationalism are taken for granted.

        In the EDIT to this post, you hint, jokingly or not, you’re more concerned about your job and/or the economy of (I’m assuming) your wife’s country than the continued existence of Germany.

        Low birthrates are a reason to deprecate Europeans specifically but not Asians.

        Etc.

        • spandrell September 6, 2015 at 18:54

          Per your last post, the pro-immigrationism of leftist Irish “nationalists” proves “nationalism isn’t about nations” and Europeans should eschew nationalism, while the desirability and practicability of Asian and Jewish nationalism are taken for granted.

          What the hell? How does that follow? No. I’m just pointing out what a funny thing this nationalism thing is, when Irish nationalists who were shooting people for their cause just two decades ago are now rooting for African immigration.

          I didn’t say “Europeans should eschew nationalism”. When the hell did I ever use the word “should”? I’m just saying European nationalists suck, big time. I don’t know about desirability, but the practicability and real world performance of Asian and Jewish nationalism is certainly superior.

          And I’ll readily admit that while it does make me sad, I care more about my job than about Germany. Especially given that they’re doing this to themselves.

          And when did I mock European birthrates but not Asian? Dude stop putting words in my mouth. Why are you doing this?

          • n/a September 6, 2015 at 21:05

            spandrell,

            “I’m just pointing out what a funny thing this nationalism thing is, when Irish nationalists who were shooting people for their cause just two decades ago are now rooting for African immigration.”

            If you had left it at that, I could have agreed. Instead, you appeared to be urging your (white) readers to infer from the behavior of leaders of a left-wing Irish “nationalist” party that nationalism in general is futile or counterproductive.

            “When the hell did I ever use the word “should”?”

            You asserted “nationalism isn’t about nations” and offered the imperative “think about it”.

            They killed, and they died.

            For what? you ask. What, indeed. Think about it.

            Self-sacrificial altruism evolved (and can only have evolved) because weighted over evolutionary time it was adaptive in the context of intergroup competition. Irish republicans killed and died in the name of Irish nationalism because they were successfully mobilized to do so and because these evolved groupish instincts exist.

            Inviting mass foreign immigration to one’s homeland is clearly maladaptive. If someone like Gerry Adams exploits groupish instincts to recruit terrorist paramilitaries ostensibly to fight for Irish interests and subsequent to that promotes policies that are actively harmful to Irish interests, the correct lesson is not that the Irish should eschew concern with their own interests.

            Nor, as far as I know, do the majority of the Irish support replacement-level foreign immigration to Ireland.

            “I’m just saying European nationalists suck, big time.”

            The only nationalists in Europe I know of who favor increased immigration are leftwing Irish and Scottish “nationalists” (and, even there, I doubt that in either case the demand for more immigrants arose from the grassroots). The general trend, of course, is the opposite: nationalism is associated with anti-immigration sentiment.

            “I don’t know about desirability, but the practicability and real world performance of Asian and Jewish nationalism is certainly superior.”

            So you take from this that we should root for Asians and Jews and shit on Europeans? Why would that ever make sense for a European?

          • n/a September 6, 2015 at 21:17

            “And when did I mock European birthrates but not Asian?”

            If they properly convert to European principles, they’ll go to college, work in the government, stop breeding, thus creating the need for more immigrants to work the actual jobs out there.

            “Especially given that they’re doing this to themselves.”

            “A dominant faction of Germany’s elites” is not the same thing as “all of Germany”, and even Germany’s political leaders are not as enthusiastic as you imagine.

            For a long time, the German government was very comfortable with the Dublin agreements and leaving Italy and Greece alone to bear the brunt as countries where refugees first entered the European Union. Only now that refugees are coming to Germany in larger numbers and putting unprecedented and unforeseen strain on German communities do we see leadership in this matter.

            The dramatic scenes and pictures in the last days from Hungary or the shores of Greece have strengthened the German leadership resolve. But to say that Germany is willing to take up to 800,000 refugees, as some have, is a misperception. Rather, those 800,000 are the projections until the end of the year, not a quota and definitely not a wish from Merkel.

            It is a fact that a lot of people will try to make their way to Germany and that everyone who gets to Germany has a right to an asylum hearing. Merkel’s hands are equally tied by laws as well as by normative stances. Germany has taken up a new pragmatism in a very commendable way and Merkel is leading this pragmatism and making a virtue out of the necessity.

            Merkel rightfully states that Germany can cope with the increase, that we need to be more flexible and less bureaucratic in these times, and that we have a moral and legal duty to protect anyone fleeing conflict. But there is also another, internationally less recognised, discussion in which the German government is trying to bring those numbers down, not up.

            Germany has asked Italy to temporarily reinstal border controls to Austria; it has told Hungary that it needs to keep and process refugees to comply with “Dublin rules”; and it is now leading the push on the EU level for sharing the responsibility. This is why a clear distinction is made both politically and among the public between those asylum seekers who are nationals of western Balkan countries and those fleeing places of conflict such as Syria.

            About 45% of those who have come to Germany so far are from the western Balkans. It is safe to say that they will also be a large proportion of the projected 800,000. With a recognition rate of less than 1% of their asylum cases, it is the expectation that they are returned as quickly as possible to their countries of origin, thus bringing down the numbers in the future. That is why the government aims to speed up hearing times, not least because lengthy processing times were seen by many as a pull factor for those escaping harsh winter months in the Balkans.

            Processing times are currently between five and seven months; the aim is to have them reduced to one week for those from the Balkans. Germany is also working hard to get those countries recognised as safe countries of origin, even though it is not entirely clear whether these measures really help to bring down numbers.

            The government is also discussing distributing non-cash items rather than pocket money to reduce incentives for coming to Germany; deporting non-recognised asylum seekers more quickly and more efficiently; and putting a five-year re-entry ban on those who were denied asylum. Most of these measures are backed by public opinion, as the ARD-Deutschlandtrend poll revealed. Seventy-two per cent are in favour of giving out non-cash items instead of cash and 79% are for stricter deportation of denied asylum seekers. Returns are a touchy subject, but this high agreement should not be read as a sign of harshness; it is an indication that Germans want a proper management of migration, including a functioning asylum system that follows rule of law.

            http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/06/refugee-crisis-germany-response-heartwarming-will-pressures-show

            • spandrell September 7, 2015 at 03:28

              That was in response to a comment arguing that the Syrians et al. would assimilate and all would be ok. You should read more carefully and stop putting things in my mouth.

              And I’m not rooting for anyone. This blog is not a political party. I’m not telling people what they should do. I look at reality and try to see what’s going to happen. And things in Europe don’t look good. You seem to think that Europeans actually reject left-wing madness and are just waiting for the right leader to lead them against the Jewish-led power structure.

              Well tough luck. I know my fellow Europeans. Rich and poor. And they won’t lift a finger. The upwardly mobile have completely bought in and will follow left-wing crap as they are told to. The downwardly mobile are too busy watching sports and going to the beach.

              Hey, if Germany grows a backbone, sends the migrants packing, and then sends an army to sweep the blacks and arabs out of France, I’ll be the happiest man on earth. I’ll kiss German ass everytime I see one and eat sauerkraut with every meal.

              But I don’t see that happening. The German as of now want to distribute the immigrants around all Europe. Fuck that. But anyway, we’re already in disaster control mode. Given what’s likely to come later, let the Syrians and Albanians bankrupt the EU, so there’s a chance individual countries can recover border sovereignty before it’s too late.

              • n/a September 7, 2015 at 05:52

                > And I’m not rooting for anyone. This blog is not a political party. I’m not telling people what they should do.

                > Israel should remain healthy and strong so that European Jews have a place to escape to.

                “I look at reality and try to see what’s going to happen. And things in Europe don’t look good.”

                Again, if that’s all you were doing, I would leave you to it (though I don’t think despair is ever likely to be justified). But you’re not merely objectively reporting and attempting to forecast the future. You appear to suffer from a version of the pathology you ascribe to Europeans in general and be looking for reasons to dismiss European interests and elevate non-European interests. That’s what I’m doing here, dude (attempting to call your attention to this).

                “You seem to think that Europeans actually reject left-wing madness and are just waiting for the right leader to lead them against the Jewish-led power structure.”

                Germans today are not appreciably different genetically from the Germans of 70 years ago. Obviously there is nothing innate and unchangeable that prevents Germans from seeking to advance their own interests.

                They’re currently under the sway of a particular set of ideologies and part of a particular international system. Neither of these can or will prevail forever.

                You seem to be holding on to two contradictory ideas: (1) In arguing that worse is better, you acknowledge change is possible. (2) In claiming “I know my fellow Europeans. Rich and poor. And they won’t lift a finger.”, you imply this situation is inevitable and warrants condemnation of Europeans in general (including the large fractions of Europeans who explicitly oppose immigration — and their yet-to-be-born descendants).

            • spandrell September 7, 2015 at 07:54

              So I say we want Israel to remain healthy so the Jews in Europe can leave, and that’s “rooting for Jewish interests”. I thought you didn’t want the guys around. What’s the correct answer then? You don’t want them here, don’t want them in Israel either, what do you propose?

              I don’t suffer from a pathology. I lived in Europe for most of my life, and I’m well justified in despairing. Not that I think that the whole continent will be run over, of course. Parts of Europe are fortunately poor enough to not attract much immigration. But some areas seem positively hopeless. I don’t see how France will get out of this. I don’t see how Sweden will fix itself either.

              There is indeed nothing innate about left-wing madness, nor have I hinted there is. But being potentially changeable doesn’t mean it will be. All evidence hints at Europe turning into a sort of muslim Brazil, and every step of the way might be just bearable enough that most countries will have an incentive to organize a revolt. And instead, parts of Europe might remain just barely functional enough to try to wage force to impose their diversity on others, as the US does today.

              And again I’m not condemning anyone. This not a church, and I am no priest. I am one of those Europeans who explicitly oppose immigration, as is my family. I am not condemning them. I just predict that our case is hopeless, and we should look at ways of minimizing the damage.

              You seem to think thatwords are magic, and my despair is contagious and brings bad luck, so I should just proclaim my loud opposition as to attract the favor of the gods. Well I did that for over 10 years. I got tired of it, never did me any good, and it prevented me from making an accurate assessment of the situation. Now I’d rather look at the actual details, and make actual plans so that the people I care about, both home and abroad, can suffer the least damage possible.

              But hey, by all means go on proclaiming your loud opposition to immigration in your blog, and do fight for the future of the white race in your blog. If that works out I’ll be the first one to thank you.

              • jawohl September 18, 2015 at 21:31

                “Why are you doing this?”

                n/a is a good soldier, which means there’s a ceiling of orthodoxy above which he can’t rise, and must perceive in others, however careful they are in expressing their ideas.

    • bomag September 6, 2015 at 11:00

      ratio of workers to pensioners

      It should be, “the ratio of machines and other productive assets to pensioners”. Those that do productive work today are immensely more productive than in the past. And, as noted, most people don’t do productive work anymore. So just blindly counting numbers of people in these workers-to-pensioners calculation is a kind of stupidity we get from our economic leaders today.

      • Candide III September 7, 2015 at 16:46

        That is true to an extent, but you must not forget that (a) the Western standard of living is just that much higher than in those ages when labor was the most important input to production, so you have to multiply pensioners by expected standard of living, and that (b) the number of people who are involved in running these highly-productive assets and in creating an environment suitable for their application is rather higher than it appears from a cursory glance on the issue. And this includes e.g. people in intra-industry sales like what (AFAIK) the great Japanese manufacturing firms (Mitsubishi, Honda etc.) largely consist of.

        • bomag September 10, 2015 at 14:03

          (a) the Western standard of living is just that much higher than in those ages when labor was the most important input to production, so you have to multiply pensioners by expected standard of living

          The productivity growth from machines has given us the higher standard of living. Matching this expected standard of living in the future depends on building and maintaining more machines. Not so much people anymore.

          (b) the number of people who are involved in running these highly-productive assets and in creating an environment suitable for their application is rather higher than it appears from a cursory glance on the issue. And this includes e.g. people in intra-industry sales like what (AFAIK) the great Japanese manufacturing firms (Mitsubishi, Honda etc.) largely consist of.

          Well, okay, but they follow the Pareto distribution where 20% of the people do 80% of the work. And they don’t employ that many people in relation to all the other people in the sphere of their customer base.

          From where I sit, I see most people as not working or working in a job with zero/negative marginal product. And they all live pretty well.

          • Candide III September 11, 2015 at 09:03

            I can concede your point on the Pareto distribution and still hold my position, because you can’t get away not doing the 20% of the work that remains and keep the high productivity. All highly-productive assets are critically dependent on their environment in many ways that mutually reinforce one another. If it degrades by say 10%, the assets’ productivity does not go down by 10% but something like 1-(1-10%)^5 = 40%. Or even more. Where do you sit?

            • bomag September 12, 2015 at 12:28

              Where do I sit? Rural U.S., where the farms and mines have been mechanized to the nth degree and hire few people.

              I disagree with your analysis. The marginal contribution is a marginal contribution. The fast and aggressive iterate their advantage until we have Walmart and Amazon.

              I’m rethinking the idea of economic Man. Most existence is leisure. Many places have 90% unemployment, and there is little impetus to change. People are happy to get paid for doing nothing, or nothing of importance. Work is a social activity.

              It is a kind of madness to speak of immigrants as an economic boon. I saw a blurb where 4/5 of the immigrants to Denmark are unemployed after ten years in the country. I doubt the other fifth is doing much of consequence. The migration we see is largely people looking for a better place to spend their leisure time.

              The future is dividing the production from machines amongst the human population.

    • Bill September 10, 2015 at 05:53

      I’m not sure why you’re attacking spandrell for not toeing the party line. He’s not an ideologue or a polemicist, and he writes for a niche audience interested in what he has to say. You’re attributing positions to him that he doesn’t hold. And I don’t know why you’re criticizing him for his points on the failure or shortcomings of traditional European nationalism today, when that’s not an uncommon theme among white nationailsts on alt-right blogs.

  7. The Slitty Eye September 6, 2015 at 18:02

    Some rich dude should sponsor to pay for a couple of cruise ship and send all of them to Ellis Island. It is quite feasible and won’t take much dough to make it happen. Frankly I am sure they’d love to get on board that ship. You don’t even have to anchor on New York harbor, just abandon the damn ship when you are 100 miles away on the Atlantic Ocean.

    Problem solved.

    • spandrell September 7, 2015 at 03:29

      Some dudes are getting rich bringing immigrants to Europe. Scary guys with guns. You don’t mess with their business.

      • ivvenalis September 7, 2015 at 06:48

        If only European governments had their own guys with guns. …nah, too uncivilized. This Volkerwanderung is really just pushing on an open door.

        Western rulers appear to be basically incapable of understanding concepts of sovereignty and violence. My uncle worked had an oil job up in Canada not long ago and said that First Nations types were physically interfering with the operation: death threats, sabotage, crowds blocking the road, etc. A Canadian court sided with the oil company’s claims to the property, but the saboteurs just didn’t comply. The Canadians did nothing, of course. In other words, the Canadians had simply ceded sovereignty over some of their territory to an ethnic gang.

        • spandrell September 7, 2015 at 07:57

          There are no “western rulers”. The bureaucrats who run things don’t want to allow their guys with guns to do a good job, and thus gain power and status.

          It’s a pretty old tale of bureaucratic infighting. The Chinese mandarins routinely sabotaged the military, which predictably led to foreign invasions. But the mandarins don’t care about the frontier, they care about calling the shots in the capital, and they succeeded at that alright.

          Until the shit hit the fan, civil war happened, and then some general turned warlord wins the war and kills all the mandarins and their families. Then rince and repeat over 300 years or so.

      • The Slitty Eye September 7, 2015 at 14:02

        i see business opportunity, those dudes are going to join the corporation sooner or later for the trans-Atlantic business. All you need is a rich dude to take the lead.

  8. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2015/09/06) | The Reactivity Place

  9. Pingback: Współczesna wizja Wolnej Polski, odrodzenia narodowego i władzy idealnej! | Wolne Wybory

  10. Pingback: Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » Chaos Patch (#79)

  11. Pingback: De Europese immigratie-tsunami | Alfa NL

  12. Stephen W September 15, 2015 at 14:35

    A hundred years ago we knew how to repel human wave assaults. Not any more apparently.

  13. jawohl September 18, 2015 at 21:21

    Now, this is grown-up thinking. Awesome and totally agreed.

  14. Steeve September 21, 2015 at 03:11

    I think projections beyond 20-30 years are too hypothetic to be of any use in any analysis. And the further in the future, the more useless the projection is. At some point, it’s pure speculation.

    • spandrell September 22, 2015 at 09:27

      Yeah well but those Africans being born right now will be 20 years old in 20 years. That’s not speculation. Population figures for 2100 are stupid, but there’s some point at which we can confidently say that this ain’t looking very good.

Please comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s