The securing of a new homeland or the concept of conquest is basically a positive expression. Those who arrive at somewhere during a conquest are happy to establish a new, better homeland. Those who lived there before and become subjugated or persecuted consider the happenings from another perspective. It is
impossible to judge whether we are witnessing a modern-day migration or the conquest of Europe by Asians and Africans. But it is absolutely certain that it is not a traditional refugee crisis. Whatever the case the process that has just started is certainly not positive for the Europeans.
It is unfortunate, and to some extent hopeless, that indecisive people lead many of the governments of the European Union’s member states. Contrary to the hope of the heads of many governments the current migrant masses are just the tip of the iceberg. The majority, millions of Moslems and other potential migrants, have not even packed their bags yet. But the family is already collecting the family silver to sell it and finance the trip to Europe.
At the extraordinary meeting of the European heads of governments the Austrian chancellor replied thus to one of the Hungarian suggestions: if the only way to keep the migrants out of Europe is with a fence, we should rather let them through. All right: where should we send them?
To Germany, which is going to close its doors in a short time? To Austria, where the masses will get stuck if they cannot go to Germany and where the voters’ anger will demolish the Social Democratic Party of the chancellor because of its migration policy?
Or to those countries that do not want to receive any migrants at all? This kind of irresponsible political thinking is not only obscene but it could mean the end of Europe as we know it.
Liberalism and rationality are not two mutually exclusive concepts. A thinking, careful person can do a lot to improve the quality of life of the less fortunate without risking his own existence. Those who are not willing to act rationally on the issue of migration probably do not understand the extent of the problem.
At any given moment there is war, civil war, revolution, genocide or some other horrible tragedy in 10 to 20 countries. Millions of people want to move to a more peaceful place. About 80% of the world’s population lives in very bad, sometimes awful conditions. Tens of millions are ready to leave their countries at any moment to Europe to find a better life.
These are the facts. Somewhere, someone must stop this endless, potential flood before it totally deluges Europe.
Many politicians, who want to play the friend of the downtrodden, do not even understand that some or most of the migrants only want to take advantage of social benefits. Another group wants to work but has no qualifications to fill the positions that the German employers have been unable to fill with East and South European guest workers or Turkish immigrants because of the low wages.
Many have noted in the heat of the migration debate that the multicultural society is dead. This is not true at all. The multicultural society is in good health in the United States and in some other places where the country has an immigrant tradition and where the population accepts the colorfulness of the society, and where the immigrants are willing and able to assimilate into the majority nation while still maintaining their own cultural, social, culinary and other traditions.
In the present situation every indicator shows that there is no chance for this in present-day Europe regarding the Moslem migrants. Why not?
There is a large Arabic Moslem minority in France and a large Turkish Moslem minority in Germany. One does not have to be a sociologist; it is enough to read newspapers regarding their present situation.
It became clear in both countries that the Moslem minority does not want to and/or cannot integrate into the majority society. In many cases “political correctness” and some politicians’ attempts to buy votes prevent the officials from taking note of the reality, but in both countries the mass integration attempts became total fiascoes.
I am not suggesting that this result came about solely because of the attitude of the immigrants, but under the present circumstances I do not think such analysis is necessary. Whatever an analysis could show as the root cause of failure, the failure remains even if the immigrants themselves are not the sole cause of the disaster.
The visible resistance, the burning cars in the French suburbs, natives blasting migrants’ accommodation in Germany and the total absence of integration are sufficient warnings to Europe.
Putting aside the gibberish raving of most opinion makers, we should say a few words about the real or imagined rights of the migrants. Political refugees have the right to receive temporary asylum in the country closest to their homeland. To be clear: temporary and next to their homeland. These destinations are not in Europe.
The others have no rights to be unwanted guests in another country. I know that many people do not like the truth because everyone thinks that he “has rights” regardless what international conventions provide. As a result most immigrants enter Europe illegally.
Europe’s resources are finite. Even Germany indicated that it would not be able to receive migrants above a certain number. The myth about the unfilled German working positions will be disproved. Only a small percentage of the immigrants have the necessary qualifications to fill these positions. Two-thirds of the adult Afghan population have successfully completed eight years or less of elementary education.
We find similar numbers when we look at the migrants arriving from other directions. What kind of jobs could they take? How much will their support cost?
George Soros, the US financier recommended last week spending EUR 17,000 on every migrant. This proposal is realistic if Mr. Soros pays the bill. Does someone seriously think that it is realistic for the Hungarian government to pay for the integration of migrants from Bangladesh when in the Hungarian countryside hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Gypsies and other poor people are waiting for a better life and help from the government?
I did not yet say anything about those factors that are usually cited by opponents of the migration: cultural differences, religious differences, terrorist threats and other valid arguments. Despite all politically correct speech, the facts remain facts: the present-day Moslem religion is not an inclusive proposition.
Believers are happy to receive anyone into their own religion as converts, but given the opportunity they act in the toughest and most aggressive way against those who do not believe in Allah but in another God. This is bad news for Christian and Jewish Europe.
The growing terrorist threat is evident. When Europe, Christianity and the enemies of modern times step on the shores of Europe with the other migrants, the continent would unnecessarily start a journey that could lead to the elimination of its own identity.
It has been noted many, many times and at many places that a civilisation cannot be destroyed from the outside. The Trojan horse has arrived. If the enemies of European civilisation, those who refuse to accept the traditions and minimum values of a thousand years of experience are admitted into Europe, we do not have to worry about the destruction of European civilisation by its external enemies. The new Europeans might take care of it from the inside.
George F. Hemingway
US businessman, attorney