Friday, June 8, 2012

Anomie and Immigration

“The purpose of American immigration laws and policies is not to be either humane or inhumane to illegal immigrants. The purpose of immigration laws and policies is to serve the national interest of the country.” (Thomas Sowell, November 29, 2011)

We have had an incremental communist/Islamist/fascistic/environmentalist revolution in the U.S. facilitated by illegal immigration, refusal to accept American values, culture, and language, lack of border protection, the liberal indoctrination of our population in the name of religious tolerance, political correctness as a form of speech control, unions, politicians’ betrayal, and environmentalism. The tragedy is that nobody paid attention or noticed.

European nations such as France and Germany acknowledged through their respective leaders that the darling liberal philosophy of “multiculturalism” has failed miserably across Europe.

Associate Professor of Political Science Jonathan Laurence at Boston College believes the culprit for the failure of Islamic immigrants’ integration in Europe to be “anomie.” (The New York Times, “How to Integrate Europe’s Muslims,” January 23, 2012)

The dictionary defines “anomie” as a societal instability caused by the erosion and abandonment of moral and social codes. Muslims perceive the absence of a supporting moral and social framework in the country they immigrate to and express their displeasure through a social alienation and feelings of disorientation, which result in violence and hatred.

It is not that young immigrants of Muslim faith hate the infidels. It must be anomie that persuades immigrants to take to the streets, causing violence and burning private property, while calling for the destruction of the very Western culture, which took them in and supported them financially. Western culture is not only ignored and maligned, but also rejected vehemently.

Liberals like to attribute the lack of Muslim integration to right-wing citizens who do not allow Muslims their religious requirements, thus preventing assimilation and creating radicalism. The fact that mosques teach children intolerance and hatred toward Christians, and Christians are killed all over Africa gets lost in the narrative.

Liberals think that Muslims should have “democratic rights” to form associations and participate in political life. Democracy is a lofty goal, however, most Muslim countries do not understand the concept of democracy which is alien to their history. They are totalitarian regimes ruled by seventh century norms of behavior and moral code. Furthermore, Shariah Law is incompatible with western law and our Constitution.

Once a person desires to immigrate to another country, they should abide by the laws in that country, not the Shariah Code of the country they have left. Rejecting the law of the land should have one solution, repatriation of the immigrants to the country of origin where they are free to follow their tribal law.

Nobody prevents Muslims from seeking political office, they certainly have plenty of money to run campaigns and have done so successfully. They can buy businesses, real estate, and land, build mosques, and open their own schools.

A Western nation believes in religious liberty. It has a unifying language, a legal code, and culture that define that country. Excessive tolerance to allow immigrant sub-sets to take over will result in the destruction of the host country and culture.

Liberals are eager to vilify citizen patriots as right-wing extremists and hate mongers when they blame the lack of integration of the large-scale immigrant population, Muslim or Christian, into the host western culture on excessive tolerance.

The immigration influx started in the early seventies, enabled, promoted, and protected by progressives. The fruits of such policies are social unrest, legal and justice duality, all born and sustained by unbridled multiculturalism.

Liberals have turned many European cultures upside down with their excessive tolerance towards immigrants from non-Christian roots, giving them not only basic rights as the local population, but privileges that ordinary citizens do not have but must subsidize through taxation.

At the same time, it is hard to blame Muslims for rejecting a western culture, which is defined by rampant corruption, lawlessness, moral decay, and the trampling of faith and family. However, if they are so incensed by Western cultures, they should have stayed in the countries they left where they were comfortable and happy with their own value system.

Women in western countries have fought hard to gain equal rights with men in the work place, the right to vote, drive cars, go to church alone or with their husbands, express their opinions freely without consulting first with a male family member, go out in public in the garment of their choice, go to the beach in a bikini, and go shopping or on vacation without a male chaperone. Western females are not subjected to the Muslim-style dual daily reality of separate but equal, and the status of a half a person in a court of law.

Islamic theology is incompatible with Western values and particularly our Constitution. Shariah Law should not co-exist within our legal system. Everybody should be equal under the law of a country and appear in front of the same judge not a special theocratic tribal judge.

Everybody should learn the history of the host country, the language, the culture, should respect the Constitution, the flag, the national anthem, and obey the laws. Seeking to establish a world Caliphate and replacing our democratically elected representatives with a theocratic system of government is alien to our culture. Wearing costumes that hide completely the identity of a person is not a western custom. Expecting and demanding special treatment because of religious beliefs is counter-productive to a civil society.

Liberal political correctness has replaced for decades common sense and stifled conservative freedom of speech. Hate speech has now taken the place of political correctness in Britain and soon in the U.S. by adding the punishing teeth of the law. Conservative speech is now deemed inflammatory and resulted in the banning from England of a famous talk show host.

I may be naïve, but in modern times, I cannot imagine a Christian who would censor or object to any worshipper of another God. We welcome anyone who is faithful to the U.S. and swears allegiance to protect it.

I understand Americans who mistrust immigrants who carry allegiance to their former countries and seek to destroy the host country as well as forbid and annihilate any other faith other than their own. Until such time, IN GOD WE TRUST features prominently on our U.S. currency and in any institution that has not been sued by the atheist ACLU to have any mention of God removed from the premises.

While we are busy developing new ways to improve life and alleviate pain and suffering for humanity, “nation building” Iraq and Afghanistan into the democracy they do not want, the Islamists are confident that we will submit to their seventh century theocratic life style and the Caliphate will reign supreme.

While the communist elites want to control us for the “common good," "social justice,” and the interest of the proletariat by eliminating the middle class, the so-called “bourgeoisie,” the environmentalists on the march are restricting our lives, property, and freedoms into “sustainability” through regulatory doomsday faux predictions, sending us to the stone age by interdicting the use of fossil fuels.




No comments:

Post a Comment