Westerners generally subscribe to the notion that it is wrong to discriminate. Since the 80ies discrimination has become illegal in most countries. Including the Netherlands.
Whose racism wins out?
Browsing a newspaper in the supermarkt today I noticed a story on a chain of shops where a manager had sent out an e-mail with recruitment instructions to 31 stores. In bolded print the message stated "no Morroccans". The story was featured a few days ago on IslaminEurope by Esther.
The article 1 offices brought the case under the attention of the media. The newspapers are trying to hype the story. The manager who wrote the mail out was not fired. Neither was the HRM-assistant who forwarded the mail without comment.
If people are discriminated against they can turn to a network of 45 anti-discrimination offices. The offices are called Article 1 after the first article of the Dutch constitution, which was amended in 1983 to outlaw discrimination by private citizens.
Affirmative Action is also discrimination
But the state has a program to promote the hiring of women and minorities. E.g. interior Minister Guusje ter Horst carries out her instructions to employ fifty percent women and minority police chiefs with enthusiasm as has been repeatedly reported on this blog. This is discriminates against men. But men can not turn to the Article 1 offices, because these will say it is okay if the state discriminate against them. Discrimination is only bad if the citizens discriminate.
But what is the greater danger? When the powerful state using citizen funding discriminates? Or when a private citizen using his own money does it?
The danger is to the social capital of the nation. With these blatant double standards and abuses of power, the trust between the state and the citizenry evaporates.
Marxist rethoric losing its appeal
The Article 1 offices are conducting a advertizing campaign to make minorities and women aware they have the state behind them if they are discriminated against. The campaign against the supermarket is co-ordinated with that media blitz. What is remarkable is that the power of the article 1 lobby to convince Dutchmen that they are bad if they discriminate is waning. Comment sections in the newspapers show that a considerable portion of the public understands what motivated the supermarket to exclude Moroccans.
If this trend continues the days of the Multicultural society in The Netherlands are numbered.
Showing posts with label Article 1. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Article 1. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Downfall of Europe by the Prophet Mohammed Rasul
The Netherlands, land of the naive fools
A few years ago, on April 9 2006, this blog featured an article on a Dutch book from 1990. The article is titled "Banning speech, banning prophesy".
The article describes the strange case of a book warning the Dutch of what would happen if they would allow Muslim colonization of their land. Many of the prophesies of the author have been fulfilled. E.g.
A few years ago, on April 9 2006, this blog featured an article on a Dutch book from 1990. The article is titled "Banning speech, banning prophesy".
The article describes the strange case of a book warning the Dutch of what would happen if they would allow Muslim colonization of their land. Many of the prophesies of the author have been fulfilled. E.g.
- there will be more crime, fuelled by moslim crimeThis has already come about. There used to be an English translation online but the webpage disappeared. I found the text in the internet archive and made a new document "Land of naive fools - Downfall of the Netherlands" by Mohammed Rasul as a Google doc. The text can be used as a template for what will happen if any Western country allows itself to be colonized by Muslims.
- the Dutch will become cynical and untrusting, less gullible
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Mayor Cohen of Amsterdam okays discrimination of women
The mayor of Amsterdam, Job Cohen, Labour, stunned Amsterdam politicians yesterday afternoon. The case had come up of a Muslim "city security coach" refusing to shake women's hands as a matter of principle. Upon being asked what his stance was on this issue in the light of the constitution's insistence on non-discrimination on the basis of gender (Article 1 of the Dutch Constitution no less) the Amsterdam mayor stated that this was allright and municipal workers and officials could freely discriminate against women if their faith demanded this (HT Kleinverzet).
The core of Liberalism/Leftism is the principal of non-discrimination. Minorities are specially protected by the Left for protection against this cosmic evil. Dutch Libertarian Bart Croughs wrote a book in 1995 called: "in the name of the woman, the gay and the foreigner" in which he wondered what Leftists would chose to support if they HAD to choose between to minorities if they were discriminating against each other. He specifically raised the combination of Muslims discriminating against women.
As far as the mayor of Amsterdam is concerned the issue is clear. The strictures of Islam take precedence over women's rights (Dutch). And it is now Amsterdam municipal policy too.
Christian Democrat municipal councillor Maurice Limmen stated that this would cause many more issues to crop up, such as the permission of discrimination of gays by municipal employees and vowed to oppose such permissiveness.
Of course there is a more pressing issue than discrimination of gays, women and assorted Liberal/Leftist heart throbs.
The question that haunts Amsterdam is whether discrimination of all Infidels by Muslim municipal workers is now permitted. And if it is permitted we have to ask ourselves: "do the municipal authorities still represent us Infidels and our interests or have they been subordinated to Muslims and their Sharia law?"
Oh, for the record. I quite agree with the Muslims with regards to the position of women. Women are societally inferior to men. I endorse discrimination of women. Not in the shaking of hands but in other fields. Such as women being allowed to vote, or to be elected. Generally I am all for discrimination and I think inequality is the basis of society and even all Creation.
Unequal things must be treated unequally. Muslims are unequal to Dutchmen. They think so and I agree with them. So they should be discriminated against. They do not belong in our society. Certainly not in our political order. Not in any way. Article 1 of the Dutch constitution has to be rewritten.
The core of Liberalism/Leftism is the principal of non-discrimination. Minorities are specially protected by the Left for protection against this cosmic evil. Dutch Libertarian Bart Croughs wrote a book in 1995 called: "in the name of the woman, the gay and the foreigner" in which he wondered what Leftists would chose to support if they HAD to choose between to minorities if they were discriminating against each other. He specifically raised the combination of Muslims discriminating against women.
As far as the mayor of Amsterdam is concerned the issue is clear. The strictures of Islam take precedence over women's rights (Dutch). And it is now Amsterdam municipal policy too.
Christian Democrat municipal councillor Maurice Limmen stated that this would cause many more issues to crop up, such as the permission of discrimination of gays by municipal employees and vowed to oppose such permissiveness.
Of course there is a more pressing issue than discrimination of gays, women and assorted Liberal/Leftist heart throbs.
The question that haunts Amsterdam is whether discrimination of all Infidels by Muslim municipal workers is now permitted. And if it is permitted we have to ask ourselves: "do the municipal authorities still represent us Infidels and our interests or have they been subordinated to Muslims and their Sharia law?"
Oh, for the record. I quite agree with the Muslims with regards to the position of women. Women are societally inferior to men. I endorse discrimination of women. Not in the shaking of hands but in other fields. Such as women being allowed to vote, or to be elected. Generally I am all for discrimination and I think inequality is the basis of society and even all Creation.
Unequal things must be treated unequally. Muslims are unequal to Dutchmen. They think so and I agree with them. So they should be discriminated against. They do not belong in our society. Certainly not in our political order. Not in any way. Article 1 of the Dutch constitution has to be rewritten.
Sunday, April 09, 2006
Banning speech - banning prophesy
Fjordman the blogger from Norway wrote a piece exposing the fellow travellers of Islam called: "I am a terrorist groupie, hear me roar"
The title says it all. Go and read it anyway. That is an order!
Where was I? Where are my pills?
O yes. Fjordman. Let's lift a part out of the article that deals with the heroic work of people who opposed Multiculturalism in the beginning, the Genesis of the resistance against the suicidal Left. The first blossoming of the force of Life in the great rotting corps, the fallen tree of Christendom. Seedlings like "Carl I. Hagen, Pia Kjærsgaard of the Danish People’s Party, Pim Fortuyn, Theo van Gogh and Geert Wilders".
The seedlings of a new Europe
These seedlings were set upon by the Ravens of the Left. Any opposition against Multiculturalism, the great ideology of the Left met with hysterical opposition, public trials by the press and the intelligentsia, hell bent on taking us all with them into the end of history. The end of our history.
One of the oddest seedlings flowered in The Netherlands in 1990. A man called Mohamed Rasul wrote a book called: "De ondergang van Nederlands - Het land van de naiëve dwazen" or "The coming downfall of the Netherlands - The nation of gullible fools".
Gullible Fools - Harsh but Fair.
The author, a Pakistani called Mohammed Rasoel or Mohamed Rasul wrote a short book on the threat of Islam, the treat of importing millions of Muslims into a nation and a culture that had gone too soft to defend itself. The book was published in 1990. Or in 1987. It has not been translated into English, although the author originally put it into together in bad English and had it translated by René Kurpershoek, who perhaps had a significant contribution in its composition. The real name of this "Prophet Mohammed", for that is what nom de plume Mohammed Rasul means, was Zoka F.
Counter Qoran
It was Rasul's intention to write a counter Qoran - his own Satanic Verses. He began writing about growing up in a Muslim family in Pakistan, growing up to be a Pakistani, travelling to Europe and arriving in the best and most gullible nation after the Scandinavian countries: The Netherlands.
He sees the Netherlander through the eyes of an outsider and shows their great points: easygoing, self-critical, calm and ready to excuse any fault in a foreigner in order to exell at the highest virtue of Dutch society in the 70ies and 80ies. Tolerance and understanding of the Holy Other. To be not Nazis. To be anti-Nazis. To be members of the "post-war resistance".
Rasul prophesies: by taking the negative of Nazism as a blueprint of society, the gullible Dutch will eventually end up at the same station as the Jews. He makes more prophesies, some quite obvious to many observers for instance to me at the same time, a teenager growing up in The Netherlands, others quite perceptive due to the islamic insider perspective:
- there will be more crime, fuelled by moslim crime
- the Dutch will become more criminal too
- the Dutch will become cynical and untrusting, less gullible
- the value of a witnesses in courtcases will diminish,
because Muslims lie and deceive
- Dutchmen will lose the "look of innocence in their eyes"
- Dutchmen will become irritable and aggresive
- Corruption will become epidemic
- Islamic groups will impose parts of Sharia on Dutch law
- Different Muslim groups will clash with each other and not just with the Dutch
- The cosiness, the sense of humour, the sense for freedom of the Netherlanders will dissapear
And others. And all this to no gain as Rasul points out. Because there is no gain in replacing a native population and they will not adopt the laws of the host population because those laws are weaker and less dominant than the laws of Muslim populations. Laws travel with populations. Rasul points out there would have been no Mafia in the USA if they had kept the Italians out. And lots of Americans would have been better off that way.
Again: the Dutch are so scared of treating other like the Nazis treated Jews that they will be like the Jews themselves.
Meanwhile, in 2006 all those Muslim fruits have come to fruition.
In the middle of the book Rasul describes the phenomenon of Political Correctness, which was still nameless in 1990. He shows how anyone critisizing Islam will be ostracized from civilized society, will be sued, and found guilty by a Dutch Judge of "Discrimination". This is the same that the illustrious Fjordman says in "terrorist groupie"
Only Rasul said it in 1990. Or even in 1987. A few years after Marcus Bakker managed to get article 1 of the Dutch Constitution amended in a way inspired by the Soviet Communism.
The Gem: the proof of Rasul´s allegation.
Rasul was proved right. He was attacked by Dutch journalists and academics for his stance on Islam and Muslims. He appeared in talk shows in disguise.
Koenraad Elst, of Brussels Journal writes:
Aftermath: the 90ies
The story did not end there. For a while leftist intellectials such as Teun A. van Dijk started a witchhunt against Dutch writers who were accused of having actually writte "the impending downfall of The Netherlands". As a proof Teun van Dijk wrote "analyses" of the writing style of for instance Gerrit Komrij. The witchhunt had a intimidating effect on discussion of the growing Muslim communities in the 90ies. Komrij has a sharp pen and defended himself ably against the mediocre Van Dijk.
Perhaps he was chosen to be attacked because he had scathingly attacked Multiculturalism. He became the "national poet" in 2000 (I think). On 7 May 2002, the morning after the assasination of Fortuyn he wrote a searing poem on the klammheimlicher joy of the established politicians in his poem: the Established Politician (Dutch).
The poem appeared in the NRC Handelsblad, the newspaper for the "intellectual". And for me. On six o´clock in the evening on May the sixth on the moment that Pim Fortuyn´s body hit the pavement, killed by 6 bullets, the NRC Handelsblad hit the doormat in thousands of Dutch homes. The editorial written (Dutch, Theo van Gogh´s site) by Folkert Jensma, WARNED the Dutch voters against Fortuyn:
Editor Folkert Jensma made all the effort to create a piece the Völkischer Beobachter or Pravda would have been proud of. Not that it is anything special. Our elite is decadent and has turned its back on us. Their inability to formulate societal goals and hatred (Dutch) of those who do try to bring our Civilisation back to life are proofs of that decadence. The utterances of pundits and politicians had become more and more rabid as the number of people who said they supported Fortuyn went up and up. A hatewave was going through the country.
Getting back to Rasul and Fjordman. Fjordman selects a quote about European Civilisation "that Europe has made repentance for old sins, perceived or real, the central point of its identity, and something close to an obsession."
It is either the Crusades, or Colonization, the Holocaust or the Moral Equivalency canard. It does not matter what it is. Europeans are not permitted to think that their nations should be perpatuated. Europeans are not permitted to think that the effort of survival can be worthwhile. Basking in "unearned guilt" is the way to go.
It is the easy way to a position of individual moral superiority. The difficult path is the path of a shared destiny as Westerners, a morality of individual sacrifices on behalf of a collective, like family, people, nation and religion.
That is just too much EFFORT.
A postscript on Zoka F. or Mohammed Rasul. He is still there. He was later convicted of sexually harassing some women, who he had hired to pose for him. It is a strange story. I really do not know whether he wrote that book himself or whether a Dutch writer was behind it.
The title says it all. Go and read it anyway. That is an order!
Where was I? Where are my pills?
O yes. Fjordman. Let's lift a part out of the article that deals with the heroic work of people who opposed Multiculturalism in the beginning, the Genesis of the resistance against the suicidal Left. The first blossoming of the force of Life in the great rotting corps, the fallen tree of Christendom. Seedlings like "Carl I. Hagen, Pia Kjærsgaard of the Danish People’s Party, Pim Fortuyn, Theo van Gogh and Geert Wilders".
The seedlings of a new Europe
These seedlings were set upon by the Ravens of the Left. Any opposition against Multiculturalism, the great ideology of the Left met with hysterical opposition, public trials by the press and the intelligentsia, hell bent on taking us all with them into the end of history. The end of our history.
One of the oddest seedlings flowered in The Netherlands in 1990. A man called Mohamed Rasul wrote a book called: "De ondergang van Nederlands - Het land van de naiëve dwazen" or "The coming downfall of the Netherlands - The nation of gullible fools".
Gullible Fools - Harsh but Fair.
The author, a Pakistani called Mohammed Rasoel or Mohamed Rasul wrote a short book on the threat of Islam, the treat of importing millions of Muslims into a nation and a culture that had gone too soft to defend itself. The book was published in 1990. Or in 1987. It has not been translated into English, although the author originally put it into together in bad English and had it translated by René Kurpershoek, who perhaps had a significant contribution in its composition. The real name of this "Prophet Mohammed", for that is what nom de plume Mohammed Rasul means, was Zoka F.
Counter Qoran
It was Rasul's intention to write a counter Qoran - his own Satanic Verses. He began writing about growing up in a Muslim family in Pakistan, growing up to be a Pakistani, travelling to Europe and arriving in the best and most gullible nation after the Scandinavian countries: The Netherlands.
He sees the Netherlander through the eyes of an outsider and shows their great points: easygoing, self-critical, calm and ready to excuse any fault in a foreigner in order to exell at the highest virtue of Dutch society in the 70ies and 80ies. Tolerance and understanding of the Holy Other. To be not Nazis. To be anti-Nazis. To be members of the "post-war resistance".
Rasul prophesies: by taking the negative of Nazism as a blueprint of society, the gullible Dutch will eventually end up at the same station as the Jews. He makes more prophesies, some quite obvious to many observers for instance to me at the same time, a teenager growing up in The Netherlands, others quite perceptive due to the islamic insider perspective:
- there will be more crime, fuelled by moslim crime
- the Dutch will become more criminal too
- the Dutch will become cynical and untrusting, less gullible
- the value of a witnesses in courtcases will diminish,
because Muslims lie and deceive
- Dutchmen will lose the "look of innocence in their eyes"
- Dutchmen will become irritable and aggresive
- Corruption will become epidemic
- Islamic groups will impose parts of Sharia on Dutch law
- Different Muslim groups will clash with each other and not just with the Dutch
- The cosiness, the sense of humour, the sense for freedom of the Netherlanders will dissapear
And others. And all this to no gain as Rasul points out. Because there is no gain in replacing a native population and they will not adopt the laws of the host population because those laws are weaker and less dominant than the laws of Muslim populations. Laws travel with populations. Rasul points out there would have been no Mafia in the USA if they had kept the Italians out. And lots of Americans would have been better off that way.
Again: the Dutch are so scared of treating other like the Nazis treated Jews that they will be like the Jews themselves.
Meanwhile, in 2006 all those Muslim fruits have come to fruition.
In the middle of the book Rasul describes the phenomenon of Political Correctness, which was still nameless in 1990. He shows how anyone critisizing Islam will be ostracized from civilized society, will be sued, and found guilty by a Dutch Judge of "Discrimination". This is the same that the illustrious Fjordman says in "terrorist groupie"
Only Rasul said it in 1990. Or even in 1987. A few years after Marcus Bakker managed to get article 1 of the Dutch Constitution amended in a way inspired by the Soviet Communism.
The Gem: the proof of Rasul´s allegation.
Rasul was proved right. He was attacked by Dutch journalists and academics for his stance on Islam and Muslims. He appeared in talk shows in disguise.
Koenraad Elst, of Brussels Journal writes:
The Dutch press frantically tried to uncover his real identity; a television talk show host tried to grab his passport and pull off the shawl with which he covered his face; a Muslim politician was ostensibly willing to talk to him, only to pass his teacup onto the police for the fingerprints.The Anne Frank Foundation, whose directors were the high priest keeping the mysteries of the cult of Anne Frank, guardians of the taboo of the Holocaust sued Rasul in 1992. Rasul was convicted of
discriminating Muslimsof making
sweeping statements on Muslims. Rasul´s commentary:
It proves that the general thrust of my book is correct, that Dutch society is changing and becoming less tolerant. Freedom of opinion is already being sacrificed. I don't blame this state attorney, he is a nice man but rather dumb and naïve like most Dutchmen. . . . Muslims are allowed to shout: kill Rushdie. . . . When Muslims say on TV that all Dutch women are whores, it is allowed. . . . It is ridiculous and scandalous that I have to justify myself in court for discrimination of Muslims.
Aftermath: the 90ies
The story did not end there. For a while leftist intellectials such as Teun A. van Dijk started a witchhunt against Dutch writers who were accused of having actually writte "the impending downfall of The Netherlands". As a proof Teun van Dijk wrote "analyses" of the writing style of for instance Gerrit Komrij. The witchhunt had a intimidating effect on discussion of the growing Muslim communities in the 90ies. Komrij has a sharp pen and defended himself ably against the mediocre Van Dijk.
Perhaps he was chosen to be attacked because he had scathingly attacked Multiculturalism. He became the "national poet" in 2000 (I think). On 7 May 2002, the morning after the assasination of Fortuyn he wrote a searing poem on the klammheimlicher joy of the established politicians in his poem: the Established Politician (Dutch).
The poem appeared in the NRC Handelsblad, the newspaper for the "intellectual". And for me. On six o´clock in the evening on May the sixth on the moment that Pim Fortuyn´s body hit the pavement, killed by 6 bullets, the NRC Handelsblad hit the doormat in thousands of Dutch homes. The editorial written (Dutch, Theo van Gogh´s site) by Folkert Jensma, WARNED the Dutch voters against Fortuyn:
sixty years after the war it may be a Prime Minister Fortuyn with a wreath at the national monument, a man who thinks Islam is "backward" and people from Turkey and Morocco do not belong in "modernity"? (...) It is the pride of The Netherlands that we do not prefer one culture over another culture. That people are treated equally in an open society. That we keep far from racists and xenophobes. It is a DISGRACE that we have to remind a politician in our midst of those matters sixty years after the war.
Editor Folkert Jensma made all the effort to create a piece the Völkischer Beobachter or Pravda would have been proud of. Not that it is anything special. Our elite is decadent and has turned its back on us. Their inability to formulate societal goals and hatred (Dutch) of those who do try to bring our Civilisation back to life are proofs of that decadence. The utterances of pundits and politicians had become more and more rabid as the number of people who said they supported Fortuyn went up and up. A hatewave was going through the country.
Getting back to Rasul and Fjordman. Fjordman selects a quote about European Civilisation "that Europe has made repentance for old sins, perceived or real, the central point of its identity, and something close to an obsession."
It is either the Crusades, or Colonization, the Holocaust or the Moral Equivalency canard. It does not matter what it is. Europeans are not permitted to think that their nations should be perpatuated. Europeans are not permitted to think that the effort of survival can be worthwhile. Basking in "unearned guilt" is the way to go.
It is the easy way to a position of individual moral superiority. The difficult path is the path of a shared destiny as Westerners, a morality of individual sacrifices on behalf of a collective, like family, people, nation and religion.
That is just too much EFFORT.
A postscript on Zoka F. or Mohammed Rasul. He is still there. He was later convicted of sexually harassing some women, who he had hired to pose for him. It is a strange story. I really do not know whether he wrote that book himself or whether a Dutch writer was behind it.
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Free speech in The Netherlands
The Constitution of The Netherlands states in article 7, that all citizens are free to speak their minds in public. This is necessary in a Democracy, because if problems arise they must be debated in public. This way something can be done about issues that trouble citizens. Since Thorbecke gave The Netherlands its constitution in 1848 the Dutch had enjoyed free speech and in fact free speech had also been protected under the charters of the 7 provinces of the Dutch republic, since roughly 1600. This makes The Netherlands the first Western country to have free speech and attracted philosophers from all over Europe to the Dutch Republic, were texts were printed freely and distributed all over Christendom.
After 1968 The Netherlands which had been a stronghold of prudent Conservatism beforehand was taken over by The Left by storm. By the mid 70ies they had well entrenched themselves in the institutions such as the bureaucracy, education, media and in fact even in rightwing political parties, such as the Christian parties. In fact polls after 1972 consistently that the whole political spectrum was ideologically to the left of the entire public on most matters. The Left never polled more than 40 percent of the vote and they only ruled in combination with the Christian Democrats.
Article 1 [Equality] of the Constitution written by Thorbecke in 1848 states:
In 1980 Communist Markus Bakker introduced an addendum to Article 1.:
The punishments for transgression of this law are detailed in the Dutch criminal code: article 137 item d, e, f state that discrimination and discriminatory speech are punishable with up to one to two years in jail.
Pim Fortuyn was thrown out of Livable Netherlands by the LN leadership the moment he proposed changing the article because of its muffling effect on the Freedom of Speech.
The inspiration for the addendum by Communist Markus Bakker is Soviet Constitutional law. Article 52 of the 1977 Soviet Constitution states:
Multiculturalism takes Western ideals such as Equality for the law and twists it so that the State can ursurp Freedom the same way Communism did to achieve a situation were the State and the State bureacracy is in total control of the lives of the citizens.
One would think that after murdering Fortuyn in the name of protecting minorities and assasinating Van Gogh in the name of the honour of the profet of a minority the Dutch elites would stop their totalitarian agenda.
But no. Even the nominally right-wing Christian Democrats, who used to be defenders of liberty have just proposed a new law to make it STILL easier to take away the rights of individuals and groups advocating "hatred" against religions and ethnic groups. This is done under the guise of a anti-Islamic effort. It is the same as the anti Islamic efforts of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Citizen's rights are ursurped by the State.
The Soviet-Union collapsed in 1989. The Southern Soviet Republics in Central Asia with Islamic populations had seen their populations grow to the point that Ethnic Russian elites did not want to share the national wealth with them. The CIA stoked the fire of Islamic rebelliousness up to the point were it had become a major concern for the Communist Politburo in the late 70ies. In 1978 the Soviet-Union invaded Afghanistan on its southern border. 10 years later after an American supported war of attrition the Soviets gave up and shortly afterward their Multi-ethnic empire collapsed. At that time Osama bin Laden and the US were allies.
Lies have a short life span. The Truth endures. Nations need to be ethnically and culturally homogenous to endure.
After 1968 The Netherlands which had been a stronghold of prudent Conservatism beforehand was taken over by The Left by storm. By the mid 70ies they had well entrenched themselves in the institutions such as the bureaucracy, education, media and in fact even in rightwing political parties, such as the Christian parties. In fact polls after 1972 consistently that the whole political spectrum was ideologically to the left of the entire public on most matters. The Left never polled more than 40 percent of the vote and they only ruled in combination with the Christian Democrats.
Article 1 [Equality] of the Constitution written by Thorbecke in 1848 states:
All persons in the Netherlands shall be treated equally in equal circumstances.This means that if the Government has jobs or hands out money all citizens should have equal chances to get those benefits, which are paid for by taxes they had to pay. This practise is different from the Third World were jobs and money are handed out to the powerfull and well connected, the protected classes who have privileges.
In 1980 Communist Markus Bakker introduced an addendum to Article 1.:
Discrimination on the grounds of religion, belief, political opinion, race, or sex or on any other grounds whatsoever shall not be permitted.Where the original text of article 1 ensured that the State should not give privileges to certain groups the addendum turned article 1 into a sledgehammer of the State to attack private citizens and organisations. With one stroke of the pen businessmen, churches, schools, public places all had their policies of spending, hiring and admission under State scrutiny. Equality for the law is turned into the obligation to have protected classes such as women, homosexuals and immigrants achieve the same occupational and financial positions as white males, the only not - protected class.
The punishments for transgression of this law are detailed in the Dutch criminal code: article 137 item d, e, f state that discrimination and discriminatory speech are punishable with up to one to two years in jail.
Pim Fortuyn was thrown out of Livable Netherlands by the LN leadership the moment he proposed changing the article because of its muffling effect on the Freedom of Speech.
The inspiration for the addendum by Communist Markus Bakker is Soviet Constitutional law. Article 52 of the 1977 Soviet Constitution states:
Citizens of the USSR are guaranteed freedom of conscience, that is, the right to profess or not to profess any religion, and to conduct religious worship or atheistic propaganda. Incitement of hostility or hatred on religious grounds is prohibited.And article 36 states:
Citizens of the USSR of different races and nationalities have equal rights.It is a neat trick: "freedom of concience (article 52)" is followed by "incitement .... is prohibited" and "equal rights (article 36)" are turned into "advocacy .... punishable by law".
Exercise of these rights is ensured by a policy of all-round development and drawing together of all the nations and nationalities of the USSR, by educating citizens in the spirit of Soviet patriotism and socialist internationalism, and by the possibility to use their native language and the languages of other peoples in the USSR. Any direct or indirect limitation of the rights of citizens or establishment of direct or indirect privileges on grounds of race or nationality, and any advocacy of racial or national exclusiveness, hostility, or contempt, are punishable by law.
Multiculturalism takes Western ideals such as Equality for the law and twists it so that the State can ursurp Freedom the same way Communism did to achieve a situation were the State and the State bureacracy is in total control of the lives of the citizens.
One would think that after murdering Fortuyn in the name of protecting minorities and assasinating Van Gogh in the name of the honour of the profet of a minority the Dutch elites would stop their totalitarian agenda.
But no. Even the nominally right-wing Christian Democrats, who used to be defenders of liberty have just proposed a new law to make it STILL easier to take away the rights of individuals and groups advocating "hatred" against religions and ethnic groups. This is done under the guise of a anti-Islamic effort. It is the same as the anti Islamic efforts of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Citizen's rights are ursurped by the State.
The Soviet-Union collapsed in 1989. The Southern Soviet Republics in Central Asia with Islamic populations had seen their populations grow to the point that Ethnic Russian elites did not want to share the national wealth with them. The CIA stoked the fire of Islamic rebelliousness up to the point were it had become a major concern for the Communist Politburo in the late 70ies. In 1978 the Soviet-Union invaded Afghanistan on its southern border. 10 years later after an American supported war of attrition the Soviets gave up and shortly afterward their Multi-ethnic empire collapsed. At that time Osama bin Laden and the US were allies.
Lies have a short life span. The Truth endures. Nations need to be ethnically and culturally homogenous to endure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)