Monday, March 06, 2006

Who let them in, anyway?

Charles Martel:

"Snouck -> sometimes I wonder just how the hell did Denmark or Sweden end up with hundreds of thousands of Muslims?

.. Denmark? Who in God's name did they invade or colonise?

Snouck:
The Danes colonised Greenland. Still do in fact. And Ireland and England. They sacked Dorestadum, the biggest port in The Netherlands around the year 850. They used to be real bastards, the Danes, back in the good, old days. But we got revenge!!!!! We burned down Copenhagen in 1807, I think. This should show the Muzzies not to #### with the Dutch. We are kind of slow, but we 'll get you in the end.

Charles Martel:
Is there some faceless bureaucrat in Brussels deciding that Denmark should get its "quota" of Muslim? Is that how it happened? Because, as far as I can tell, this was never put to the Danes in a referendum - nor were they given a choice about it. The same with Norway and Sweden.

...I am originally from Ireland, and we also have the same problem - suddenly there are thousands of Muslims living in Dublin - nobody asked the Irish if that was a good idea or not - it just "happened"."


Snouck:
Thanks for your question. I am not an expert on Scandinavia. But I think that all these countries the pattern was more or less similar to what happened in Germany and The Netherlands.

After Destruction: Reconstruction

After the Second World War parts of the continent were laying in ruin. Everything that had not been stolen by the Germans had been bombed and strafed by the English and Americans, our liberators. I am talking about rolling stock for the railways, machinery and tools of the factories, bridges blown up, villages, towns and cities devastated, ruining the stocks of houses. Employment was scarce and there were armies of jobless, many of them former soldiers or forced labourers who had been dragged off too.

So there was a lot of work to do. And this work was done by the Europeans. They slowly built up their nations and economies. The loans provided by the Marshall plan, a big credit scheme, administered by continental national and private banks enabled the Europeans to buy machinery in the USA to rebuilt Europe's devastated industrial areas. And the Europeans not only took the machinery from the Americans but also implemented the American way of mass production in Turin and Milan, in Paris and Wolfsburg. The Germans call this the “Wirtschaftswunder” the Economic Miracle.

Soon the reconstruction gathered pace and there was a situation of more or less full employment. In such a situation wages go up and the workers become more powerful, while the employers, the capitalists, especially those in marginal industries lose power and face bankruptcy. This is a normal situation and happens all the time in well-run and free economies. The proper response to such a situation is to let the marginal industries go broke. Because there is full employment anyway the laid-off workers will quickly find new jobs, at better wages in industries that are more profitable and who are desperately looking for workers.

Tight Labour markets

In Denmark, Germany, France, Belgium and The Netherlands in the mid fifties this situation of labour shortages developed and was keenly felt in coal mining, textiles, steel industries, industries that add little value and that showed little possibility of innovation. These industries had been built up around the 1850s. This was the time of significant expansion of Capitalism and the industrial Society and the switching of wood burning to coal burning energy economy.

There is this rhetoric of “jobs Dutchmen, Germans, Americans do not want to do”. Bush repeats it all the time. So does the Multicultural Left and the supporters of Mass-immigration. It is a lie. Off course Westerners want to do these jobs. It is just that there are other jobs elsewhere that pay better. So if you want workers, increase your wages.

The industries that are marginal however (unprofitable), cannot pay higher wages so they are in a bind.

The deal between the Barons, the Governments and Organised Labour

The Capitalist barons in charge of these industries did not want their properties to be devastated by bankruptcy and they made deals with the Labour Unions and Governments. To make up for the shortfall of labour at a price that the Capitalist Barons could afford, they started to import labour from the South of Europe, mostly Spain and the South of Italy, which were socially and economically backward. By doing so they undercut the wages of blue collar workers, especially those at the bottom of the societal ladder. As far as the labour unions are concerned it was a true betrayal of the interests of the constituency they pretend to represent.

As far as the Governments are concerned it is the same, but they had a wider societal picture to consider. As far as the Capitalist Barons are concerned, well they are Capitalist Barons and they were just doing what comes natural to them. They do not pretend to be angels nor would we believe them if they did.

For Spain and Italy it was nice off course that their people found jobs up North and when these people came back they brought with them not only money but also skills and knowledge that were assets to their nations. In the early sixties, the Capitalist Barons used the charter agreed upon with Organised Labour and Governments to recruit cheap, unskilled labour on the other side of the Bosporus and the Mediterranean Sea, amongst the Islamic populations of Eastern Anatolia and the Rif Mountains, the most backward demographics of their nations. These people were contracted to do their work, earn their money and to disappear again to whence they came, as had most of the Spanish and Italians that had preceded them.

Islam was regarded as no threat


At that time the intellectuals in the West regarded religion a spent force and Islam was not seen as something that could ever be a force. It would go the same way as Christianity as far as these intellectuals were concerned, into the dustbin of history and nationalism was bound to follow.

Because these people were not seen as permanent citizens of the nations were they went to work no thought was given to educating them or training them to fit into society. Their employers taught them the rudiments of the majority language and that was mostly it.

The October war of 1973 between the Egyptians and Syrians and their allies and the Israelis united the Oil producing countries into a cartel, to wage economic war on the West and to improve the power of Thirld world oil producing countries. The cartel was highly successful into scaring the Europeans into co-operating with a scheme to increase Muslim populations in Europe and in maintaining the religious and cultural character of the immigrants. The economic shock of high energy prices made the marginal industries even less profitable and many of them faltered and went into bankruptcy. By 1980 most of them had disappeared or restructured themselves into industries with a higher added value. Beneficiaries of this trend were: South-Italy, Spain, Turkey and Asian countries such as South-Korea and Taiwan, which were industrialising. The losers were those Capitalist Barons who did not go with the trend of the time and who failed to build up industries in developing nations or move into more innovative fields.

With the marginal industries gone it was time for the Muslim migrant workers to go home. There was no further rationale for their presence in Europe. They had to reunify with their families and get on with whatever it is that people do in the interior of Turkey and North Africa.

Alas, that is not what happened.

They DID reunify with their families, however. They brought them over to Europe! No Job? No problem! One can get free money from the Infidel Government. In the 80ies the Muslim populations in Germany, Holland, Belgium and Denmark exploded. The more dependants a man had, the more money he had, the Government paid for his wife and his children. Health care and Education were provided free of charge. Only some one with a LOT of self-respect would refuse such a gilded deal.

And so the inner cities filled up with Muslims men without self-respect, their wives and their off-spring. The neighbourhoods were they live are the low rent areas. These filled with a teeming humanity of many origins and most of the whites with more than 80 IQ-points have left them and live in suburbs or towns within commuting distance of the white collar office jobs. The sort of job that adds most of the Value in Western Economies.

The early 80ies also saw the first nationalist resistance against the presence of large numbers of Non-Westerners, especially in France and Belgium. In The Netherlands the Government created a violent Anti-Fascist movement from amongst squatters and Leftist students, who made Anti-Fascism or “Antifa” an interesting lifestyle, a pleasant, interesting and subsidised alternative for being a wage slave in a consumer society. These people off course imagined themselves rebelling against society, although in reality they were just the muscle of the elites against those who sought to protect the nation. I suspect that the picture in Denmark, Belgium and Germany looks more or less the same.

So this is the partial answer to your question. The immigrant’s coming to Denmark, Germany, Belgium and The Netherlands has nothing to do with colonialism. France has a history of colonial involvement with North Africa. But for the rest of these countries goes that the migrants came as part of a deal to save industries that were on the verge of bankruptcy. In the mid 1980ies a new immigration wave hit Europe. That will be covered by another piece to be written tomorrow, Inshallah.

3 comments:

Charles Martel said...

wow. interesting. you're getting very close to marxism there Snouck (capitalist barons?)

but generally, spot on.

the question i ask is that its very very hard to pin this one down - who decided? when? and where?

i understand fully that Germany needed those Turkish workers in the 1960s - the "guest worker" program. they needed them - and the Turks and Germans were allies in World War One - so there is probably a cultural connection there.


but there suddenly appears to be Muslims in , of all places, the the Czech Republic. Although - might that be linked to Bosnia? or the legacy of the Austro-Hungarian Empire maybe?

it would be very interesting for some scholar somewhere to do a comprehensive demographic analysis of the Islamic influx into Europe in the latter 20th century - to figure out how this came to be. How come we ended up with a 20 to 30 million strong fifth column in Europe.

And who allowed it to happen.

Snouck said...

Charles Martel:
"you're getting very close to marxism there Snouck (capitalist barons?)"

Snouck:
Yes, I use "Capitalist Barons" as a pointer. What is happening here with immigration can be seen as class struggle. It is the upper class using the first Muslims as what Marx would call a "reserve army of labour" in order to increase their power. And later the immigrants are also used to facilitate "alieniation". That will come in a later post.

I am a Conservative, but I do not close my eyes to the perceptiveness of most of the analysis of Marx.

It is the Marxist rationalism, State worship that I reject. You could say that I agree with the analysis, but reject the "solution".

Snouck said...

Charles Martel:
I understand fully that Germany needed those Turkish workers in the 1960s - the "guest worker" program. they needed them -

Snouck:
You are missing a main feature of my article. Germany did NOT need the Gastarbeiter. A tiny subsection of the population needed the Gastarbeiter, to staff their facories and mills which were about to go broke anyway.

Charles Martel:
and the Turks and Germans were allies in World War One - so there is probably a cultural connection there.

Snouck:
I do not know if this is the reason why Germany recruited in Turkey. I think it happened because Turkey is nearby. I was the guest of some German Turks from Freiburg once and they were really proud of the aid the Turkish population gave to Germany in the 2nd World War. There is still widespread admiration amongst Turks for the Nazis and Hitler. Like one of those German Turkish kids said: "Hitler was the little brother of Ataturk". But for ethnic Germans this admiration has become an embarassement. 40 percent of Turks in The Netherlands and Germany regards themselves as Fascists (Grey Wolves) not Islamists. Hardly any are secularists of the same tree as the Turkish elite.