What if...
Mark Steyn, the world-renowned Canadian columnist likes to write articles about the unsustainability of Euro-Canadian welfare state society. I think he's mostly right. The Welfare state cannot sustain itself for more than a generation or two. Trudeaupian welfare statism began to unravel in the 1990s and I suspect that it'll continue to unravel in the future. Current attempts at strengthening the welfare state are mostly less ambitious and less encompassing than the attempts put forth in the 1960s. For example, subsidized childcare is nothing in comparison to state-monopolized healthcare.
Anyways, all of that is besides my point. I was thinking that France, Germany and other unsustainable European powers probably had some REAL reason to be against the invasion of Iraq. I've never really grasped a substantive reason, except for short-term political benefit. However, I was thinking and maybe there really was a deeper reason. I'm not sure if this is a new or a unique insight, since there's a lot of smart people out there thinking up this stuff all the time, but what if, the Europeans are against "freedom" and "democracy" in the middle east for basic demographic reasons?
Let me elaborate.
It's common sense to state that much of the Muslim world is "not free". However, it would be racist to state that Muslims are incapable of being free. A single Muslim man or woman is just as capable as anybody else of experiencing the creative potential and energy allowed by a free society. This is why almost all immigration leads towards the west and not the other way around.
If it became possible for the Muslim world to determine their own history and for them to govern their own societies, with the best interests "of the people" driving their governments, then immigration as we know it would never be the same. The creative potential of the world's Muslims would be possible to achieve in the Middle East, without immigrating to the west.
The Middle East would not suddenly begin to look like Europe or North America, but that wouldn't matter. Arabs and others would fail to see why they would have to move to Europe if they're capable of self-government in their native lands. The completely unsustainable and unrealistic European birthrates would begin to therefore have real and dire consequences. Maybe "stability" means more to Chirac and Schroeder and other European nations than they let others believe. Free societies in other parts of the world would completely change the landscape of immigration patterns and the unsustainability of European welfare statism would become that much more pronounced and obvious.
Who knows.
PS. I wrote this post in less than eight minutes! It just flew off my fingers - I guess that's because my internet connection at home has been extremely slow and mostly dead recently. I'm blogging from school right now...
Anyways, all of that is besides my point. I was thinking that France, Germany and other unsustainable European powers probably had some REAL reason to be against the invasion of Iraq. I've never really grasped a substantive reason, except for short-term political benefit. However, I was thinking and maybe there really was a deeper reason. I'm not sure if this is a new or a unique insight, since there's a lot of smart people out there thinking up this stuff all the time, but what if, the Europeans are against "freedom" and "democracy" in the middle east for basic demographic reasons?
Let me elaborate.
It's common sense to state that much of the Muslim world is "not free". However, it would be racist to state that Muslims are incapable of being free. A single Muslim man or woman is just as capable as anybody else of experiencing the creative potential and energy allowed by a free society. This is why almost all immigration leads towards the west and not the other way around.
If it became possible for the Muslim world to determine their own history and for them to govern their own societies, with the best interests "of the people" driving their governments, then immigration as we know it would never be the same. The creative potential of the world's Muslims would be possible to achieve in the Middle East, without immigrating to the west.
The Middle East would not suddenly begin to look like Europe or North America, but that wouldn't matter. Arabs and others would fail to see why they would have to move to Europe if they're capable of self-government in their native lands. The completely unsustainable and unrealistic European birthrates would begin to therefore have real and dire consequences. Maybe "stability" means more to Chirac and Schroeder and other European nations than they let others believe. Free societies in other parts of the world would completely change the landscape of immigration patterns and the unsustainability of European welfare statism would become that much more pronounced and obvious.
Who knows.
PS. I wrote this post in less than eight minutes! It just flew off my fingers - I guess that's because my internet connection at home has been extremely slow and mostly dead recently. I'm blogging from school right now...
posted by Japnaam Singh at
5:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home