At the heart of the problem is the rate at which a society can absorb foreign people. When they arrived at a rate that allows them to assimilate to the local culture - to self-identify with it - there is unlikely to be intercultural disharmony. That rate will depend on how different the incoming culture is from the indigenous culture. And probably the most relevant difference has to do with the things people value. As you present it, Europe is allowing immigration from very different cultures at a rate that many societies cannot adequately assimilate. If that is the case, the rate ought to be slowed. Better border control could help in that regard, but another move could be to help people where they are, by investing in foreign economies and following a foreign policy that stabilises - rather than destabilises - the developing world.
Excellent essay! Full of truths. I can think of many other places that are under this forced migration and that will either fight back or disappear as a people. For instance, Quebecois/French Canadians come to mind. Just 8 million of them, french speakers, catholic with its own culture. Currently illegals & legals are inundating them (some 600,000 in Montreal alone in one year). They complain to lack the resources to handle them but it's much more sneaky than appears: I suspect it's a gov plan, plain and simple, to finally do away with this bothersome other part of Canada! Eventually and likely soon enough, they will lose their language, status and be assimilated into the bigger stream. This historically is something the Brits wanted and tried to do for 100's of years and failed. Now, it could happen unless the Quebecois start pushing back. Multicult is great to discover when you take a plane ride and visit other cultures but when they're invited in to your house, it's a whole different matter. Could it be that ultimately, Quebec will break away as you show in the break up of several empires? I enjoy reading your substack!
Think it's important to note that many of the entities and people behind the far right parties taking advantage of the lack of social cohesion are themselves the entities that have pushed for and exploit migrant labour (not to mention are patrons for content creators like Douglas Murray).
Think a huge part of the destruction of Europe also comes from this migration occurring in a period where Europe's left and right wing liberals (the political factions who are relevant for now) have reached a consensus on destroying the state apparatus that a national identity and assimilation program can be formed around. The far right might be in ascendence but I really don't see how long "lets fire the first bullets of a race war" works as a political program when quality of life degradation continues due to the state's capacity being eroded in favour private contracting graft schemes (NHS being a great example of this graft and social vandalism being a consensus between political factions regardless of being pro or anti multicultural)
What makes you think Singapore is successful? The fissures are already present, and the chasm will only grow. Because the rate of immigration is lower than the rate of assimilation.
This is laughable. The alleged failure of the multicultural 'experiment' (due colonalism and exploitation in the first place) and hamstrung by racist immigrant blaming will pale into insignificance with 1.5 billion climate crisis (due to colonialism and exploitation) refugees, mostly black and brown, coming to the northern hemisphere in the next few decades with the failure of the human 'experiment'. https://degrowthistheanswer.substack.com/p/climate-change-is-coming-for-your-654
You are somewhat correct in saying Brexit was about immigration but, it had more to do with the EU setting quotas that were unsustainable. Also some of the European countries like Germany and France did not live up to their end of the bargain.
An immigrant was supposed to be processed in the first country that received them but, instead the bureaucracies were unable to keep up with the migrants applications so many were just filtered across Europe. Britain became the main target because immigrants (mostly illegal) offered superior benefits, healthcare and housing (hotels).
If you consider Britain is the westernmost country, it's no wonder they ended up with the worst of the bunch and the ones the other counties didn't want. Boris Johnson campaigned and was elected on Brexit saying it would save the British tax-payers £300 million a year. They were shocked when the national referendum to leave won by 51%. To make matters worse Johnson and the Conservatives had no clue how to sever ties with the EU.
The likes of Douglas Murray, Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage called the riots "race wars" and blamed immigration because it was much easier than calling the government out for their years of incompetance and mismanagement.
At the heart of the problem is the rate at which a society can absorb foreign people. When they arrived at a rate that allows them to assimilate to the local culture - to self-identify with it - there is unlikely to be intercultural disharmony. That rate will depend on how different the incoming culture is from the indigenous culture. And probably the most relevant difference has to do with the things people value. As you present it, Europe is allowing immigration from very different cultures at a rate that many societies cannot adequately assimilate. If that is the case, the rate ought to be slowed. Better border control could help in that regard, but another move could be to help people where they are, by investing in foreign economies and following a foreign policy that stabilises - rather than destabilises - the developing world.
Excellent essay! Full of truths. I can think of many other places that are under this forced migration and that will either fight back or disappear as a people. For instance, Quebecois/French Canadians come to mind. Just 8 million of them, french speakers, catholic with its own culture. Currently illegals & legals are inundating them (some 600,000 in Montreal alone in one year). They complain to lack the resources to handle them but it's much more sneaky than appears: I suspect it's a gov plan, plain and simple, to finally do away with this bothersome other part of Canada! Eventually and likely soon enough, they will lose their language, status and be assimilated into the bigger stream. This historically is something the Brits wanted and tried to do for 100's of years and failed. Now, it could happen unless the Quebecois start pushing back. Multicult is great to discover when you take a plane ride and visit other cultures but when they're invited in to your house, it's a whole different matter. Could it be that ultimately, Quebec will break away as you show in the break up of several empires? I enjoy reading your substack!
Thanks for the comment
"they could not never use" -- uh ok sure
"rooted" should be routed
Well... Even the best make mistakes...
The actual content of the article is very good. Quite insightful.
Think it's important to note that many of the entities and people behind the far right parties taking advantage of the lack of social cohesion are themselves the entities that have pushed for and exploit migrant labour (not to mention are patrons for content creators like Douglas Murray).
Think a huge part of the destruction of Europe also comes from this migration occurring in a period where Europe's left and right wing liberals (the political factions who are relevant for now) have reached a consensus on destroying the state apparatus that a national identity and assimilation program can be formed around. The far right might be in ascendence but I really don't see how long "lets fire the first bullets of a race war" works as a political program when quality of life degradation continues due to the state's capacity being eroded in favour private contracting graft schemes (NHS being a great example of this graft and social vandalism being a consensus between political factions regardless of being pro or anti multicultural)
What's your view on Singapore? Perhaps the only successful multicultural nation in the world?
What makes you think Singapore is successful? The fissures are already present, and the chasm will only grow. Because the rate of immigration is lower than the rate of assimilation.
This is laughable. The alleged failure of the multicultural 'experiment' (due colonalism and exploitation in the first place) and hamstrung by racist immigrant blaming will pale into insignificance with 1.5 billion climate crisis (due to colonialism and exploitation) refugees, mostly black and brown, coming to the northern hemisphere in the next few decades with the failure of the human 'experiment'. https://degrowthistheanswer.substack.com/p/climate-change-is-coming-for-your-654
You are somewhat correct in saying Brexit was about immigration but, it had more to do with the EU setting quotas that were unsustainable. Also some of the European countries like Germany and France did not live up to their end of the bargain.
An immigrant was supposed to be processed in the first country that received them but, instead the bureaucracies were unable to keep up with the migrants applications so many were just filtered across Europe. Britain became the main target because immigrants (mostly illegal) offered superior benefits, healthcare and housing (hotels).
If you consider Britain is the westernmost country, it's no wonder they ended up with the worst of the bunch and the ones the other counties didn't want. Boris Johnson campaigned and was elected on Brexit saying it would save the British tax-payers £300 million a year. They were shocked when the national referendum to leave won by 51%. To make matters worse Johnson and the Conservatives had no clue how to sever ties with the EU.
The likes of Douglas Murray, Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage called the riots "race wars" and blamed immigration because it was much easier than calling the government out for their years of incompetance and mismanagement.