Well, I guess this has become the go-to thread about migrants, since the other threads seem to have been closed, censored, call it what you will.

So i'll post this here:

http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/05/...-civilization/

Spot on pilatus1. The West does have to decide whether to defend its values or see them slip irrevocably away. I doubt any Western leaders have the will for the fight though. Harsh measures are alien to their nature and that's what's needed, whether others scream racist, xenophobic, whatever. EU borders must be closed, legal migrants must be able to speak the language of the country they want to migrate to, all religious/free schools must be closed (I include Catholic schools in this too), failed asylum seekers must be sent back immediately.

What I fear we will see eventually will be a sort of "civil" war in Europe with anti-Islam/migrant groups gaining power and physically attacking Muslims/migrants in their countries. They of course will fight back and we'll have guerilla warfare all over the continent.

While multiculturalism is a wonderful thing, and we all have something to gain by learning about other cultures and people, too much of anything at once is a shock to any system. It'd be great to live in a utopia where everyone is accepted regardless of race or creed, resources are divided equally, borders are meaningless, etc. etc - and maybe one day we can achieve this as humans on a global scale. But trying to force it will only result in social upheaval, violence, and reversion to even more racism and xenophobia.

Thanks, a good read!

Tom

Be careful what you wish for... Raispail is a highly conservative catholic traditionalist. Claiming to be monarchist in France is definitely not a sign that he wants to defend the values you are thinking about in a context western vs. islam.
The only good thing abour Raspail is that he is not racist. For the rest.. his definition of western values definitely doesn't match most people's definition of it in this forum.... and judging by the article linked, also the journalist's definition.

What he is or is not has no bearing on the fact that he's right about the West having to decide whether or not it's lifestyle/beliefs are worth fighting for. I, for one, would like to keep democracy (with all its faults), equality between men and women (yes I know we still have a way to go with this, but far ahead of Muslim countries), education for all, opportunity for all to work in whatever employment they want, freedom to worship as you wish and be able to change your religion if you wish without dire consequences, etc.

I have no problem with Muslims who are happy to live with the above values in the UK, Switzerland or elsewhere in the Western world. Many do and they add to those countries' cultural diversity. What I have a problem with is Muslims who want Sharia law written into British law, French law, etc and Sharia police on the streets. Who expect us to accept their rules and abandon our way of life for theirs. If they want to live like that fine, just move to a Muslim country and don't try and force your beliefs on to me.

Fine with me, no problem. I was only informing the community that Raspail is not happy with muslims with or without integration because he does not make a difference between civil values and community values. You are.

In other words, you are welcome to agree with one simplified summary out of context, but I felt it was important to inform all that what Raspail means is something very different. You all do what you want with this information.

I don't know enough about Raspail's ideology to comment, I havent read the book - and I certainly don't support a return to Catholic monarchism. IMO, it is the inherent Christian ideology of the West that enables the current mass migration to occur - Merkel et al would gladly nail themselves (and western culture) to the cross in self-sacrifice as a way of dealing with their Christian/white guilt.

If I had to guess, i'd say that the book (though i've only read a description of it) is naive in it's stance that Europe would acquiesce to foreign culture - more likely, there will be a surge of infighting, racism, nationalism, and a breakdown of the EU. The migrants will merely be left to defend themselves as the EU tears itself apart at the seams (As is already starting - internal border controls, pegida,SVP, Brexit, strengthening of the far right, political rifts between member states...)

I'll meet you halfway on this:

Borders should be controlled, not closed.

Language should not be forced on migrants by mandate, and should not be the penultimate indicator of level of integration. After all, I'd imagine most of this forum otherwise would not be here in CH. Looking at the US,for example, there are many areas where only Spanish is spoken. I don't consider these citizens to be any less American than I am just because their English is spotty.

I don't agree with forced closing of religious schools by any means - and they are already dying a slow death on their own.

+1 on the civil war part.

More of a problem to me are the enablers - so-called PC Westerners burdened with white guilt and an identity crisis, who embrace foreign cultures that they don't understand, often to their own/society's detriment. Swiss feminist women becoming Muslims, Red-headed Irish-blood girls claiming to be of Apache descent, new agey types changing their names to sound less white (Roger to Raja, Jackie to Jashana). I almost wouldn't believe it if I hadn't met these people in person. I find it callous and offensive towards the culture(s) they are trying to co-opt or be identified with. If I changed my name to Ueli, started wearing an edelweiss shirt all the time, and took up yodeling, alphorn, and schwingen, i'm sure the Swiss would feel the same way about me. It's the lack of soul mentioned by Raspail and in the article.

sorry for my rambling, ive gone off topic now...just mean to say that Muslims are welcome, but it's Europe's own fault if it wants to adopt a more conservative dress code, for example. (in self-destructive counter-integration - i imagine that's Raspail's point? I'll have to read the book now.)

"legal migrants must be able to speak the language of the country they want to migrate to" I wonder how many posting here have this ability to a decent level (supported by a diploma won by examination)?

That is completely true and imo common sense.

Very, very few.

Early results from the weekend German elections show the CDU/SPD vote to be roughly the same, massive losses by the Greens and major gains by the right wing AfD.
Massive low turnout by voters (less than 40%). Possibly the AfD gains are due to the refugees but if so the voters seems to be blaming the Greens
Basically most of them do not care. If they really cared they would turn out to vote.

As I said: all evidence points to very few of the people who post racial slurs on FB actually getting up and casting a vote.
Thankfully.
Personally, I'm all for opening the ballots at 06:00 and closing them at 16:00
;-)

I do, just not for the linguistic region I live (or have lived) in.

Tom

Well, even unpleasant people can sometimes say things that are true.

Agreeing with this article is not the same as worshipping everything Raspail stands for.

Good grief, they can't even agree on closing a border.

"A draft summit communique reported by journalists on Sunday had declared that "irregular flows of migrants along the Western Balkans are coming to an end; this route is closed".

But Mrs Merkel said: "Every country, including Greece must understand that this can't be about closing something.

"Today is about finding a lasting solution together with Turkey... trying to find a way to stop illegal migration and improving the living conditions for the refugees."

A German government source told the BBC there was no point saying the route was closed when 300-500 people still arrived in Germany every day this way."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35741494

Emotions seem to running high in Germany right now.

I was in Freiburg over the weekend and there was talk about a guy affixing a billboard for AfD being attacked and injured by a group of masked and armed thuigs. The guy himself was not AfD but employed by the billboard agency. Also, all over town virtually all AfD posters have been vandalized.

Although the police say they have no leads and are not investigating further, the local Antefa group, which is supported by government sponsorship money, has been openly calling on people to do this sort of thing.

Echoes of 1933?

Apples and oranges:
The state lacks legitimacy with respect to people who pay for their own livelhood.

Demanding things (including behaviour) from recognized refugees and asylum seekers something completely diferent.

Howe's that supposed to work?

Assume you're a legitimate refugee form Syria, say. How can you be expected to have learned German (don't even mention swiss German) to a reasonable degree before leaving the country? And how would you prove command of the language, would you have asylum seekers take a B1 Goethe test while in refugee camp in Turkey? What about the illiterate, which (I'm guessing here) may even be the majority of the cohort?

Sounds very much like the proverbial Wolkenkuckucksheim.

I believe some countries have a time limit. If you haven't mastered the language to a certain level within a certain timespan, you're out.

Having said that, I have the impression most asylum seekers make themselves understood pretty well.

Another interesting view from an Algerian journalist living in France.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35653496

And yet another furore over his comments.

local elections.

on the whole nobody cares.

wait for the state-level elections, and the picture may be different.