The leftist Salon website has noticed the European Identitarian campaign I wrote about last month. What is happening is that there are ships being operated by various NGOs which are picking up illegal immigrants from the coast of Africa and, in contravention of international law, ferrying them to Europe (they are supposed to be taken to the nearest African port).
The Identitarians have launched a campaign to operate a vessel of their own, a bit like the Rainbow Warrior, to block the NGO ships. The campaign has, to the consternation of Salon, quickly raised funds. (At our last meeting of the Melbourne Traditionalists we raised money to send off to this campaign.)
In their hit piece, Salon quotes one of the Identitarians as saying:
This massive immigration is changing the face of our continent. We are losing our safety, our way of life, and there is a danger we Europeans will become a minority in our own European homelands.
The Salon piece then continues:
The group writes that “humanitarian NGOs traffick hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in Europe and endanger the security and future of our continent. They are responsible for the mass drowning of thousands of Africans in the Mediterranean.”
As The Observer recently reported, the group has raised nearly $100,000 in less than three weeks through an anonymous crowd funding campaign. The group says it plans to pay for vessels, travel costs and film equipment. Italian Identitarians claim they have been offered ships and support from people with boat driving licenses.
The Identitarian statements sound reasonable enough to me. And, as I wrote in my original post on the campaign, it is a template changer - it marks a shift toward a more activist response to what is happening in Europe. And this, I expect, is what has caught the attention of the leftists at Salon.
The Facebook comments are highly revealing of the attitudes of the 'humanitarians'. As far as they are concerned any attempt to stop this illegal immigration is morally wrong, and even murderous (baby killing, too) and makes the alt-right just as bad as the Nazis, ISIS, or whatever other nefarious evil one cares to imagine.ReplyDelete
The humanitarian sentiment does not respect any notion of national sovereignty (the humanitarian in America tells the Italian national what is morally permissible RE illegal immigration to Italy) and their moral self-righteousness prevents them from recognising any difference between the Italians and the mass of humanity trying to leave Africa (which would surely be numerous enough to drown Italy forever).
Everyone is entitled to the good life says the humanitarian, and in any case the blame for the fact that many Africans do not enjoy a good life can always be laid at the feet of Europeans (you deserve what you're getting and the Africans deserve to partake of your wealth, and if you disagree you are a racist bigot)
It's all quite astounding how far things have shifted...
I think this self-righteous humanitarianism represents a totalitarian force. It presents itself as unassailably good and kind and generous. Those who oppose it can only ever do so for nefarious reasons, and so the accusations of ulterior motives and moral turpitude fly thick and fast. It's a prime moral sin to deny someone their 'humanity', which is a nebulous abstract thing and therefore easily manipulated.
The long term goal for globalist minded leaders is to create some kind of supra-national central authority so large and powerful that no one could reasonably oppose its appeals to 'humanitarian values'. From that position the globalists can work towards destroying any remaining sense of national kinship and identity in the West and elsewhere through demographic displacement.
I think this self-righteous humanitarianism represents a totalitarian force. It presents itself as unassailably good and kind and generous. Those who oppose it can only ever do so for nefarious reasons, and so the accusations of ulterior motives and moral turpitude fly thick and fast.Delete
Liberalism becomes even more like a religion with each passing day. There is no need to resort to logical arguments or any kind of debate. If you disagree with the moral consensus (a consensus which only exists because the media have manufactured it) then you're a heretic and you don't bother reasoning with heretics, you just destroy them. Liberals don't engage in politics any more - they wage moral crusades. Liberalism isn't an ideology, it's a religious cult.
Have you ever tried to debate a Scientologist?
Open borders, homosexual marriage, feminism and transsexual bathroom rights are not ideological positions. They are religious dogmas. Liberals don't have to debate these issues because they have the force of Revealed Truth. If you raise even the mildest doubts you have exposed yourself as a heretic. Heresy cannot be tolerated.
The odd thing is that these days liberalism functions as a religion but Christianity doesn't. Liberalism roots out and destroys heresy. Christianity embraces heresy and then Christians wonder why nobody takes them seriously.
You can't fight liberalism by political means. You have to present a better and more powerful and more zealous religious alternative. The success of liberalism shows that people don't want politics, they want religion. They don't want debates, they want dogma. They don't want doubts, they want certainties. They don't want democracy, they want authority.
it marks a shift toward a more activist response to what is happening in Europe.ReplyDelete
Ignore the political process because it is rigged and you can't win that way. Elections are irrelevant. Politics is downstream of culture. Try to change the culture.
What the Identitarians are doing has the advantage that it's more exciting and more glamorous than the sordid and corrupt world of party politics. It's the sort of strategy that could capture people's imaginations. Look at history. The campaigns of the environmentalists succeeded that way. As did the Civil Rights movement in the US. And Gay Liberation. They changed the culture and political changes followed as a matter of course. They never gained more than a toehold in the conventional political process but they won.
If such strategies work for evil causes why not use them for good causes?