Is Immigration Still the Operative Term?

By | 2017-06-02T18:30:05+00:00 March 27, 2017|
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

 

We’ve been asked by Democrats and some Republicans to live with massive waves of immigration. But at some point immigration doesn’t begin to describe what’s happening, both with illegal and legal immigration.

Let’s call it what it is. A variation of colonization that I call neo-colonization.

Here’s the difference. Immigration in the past has meant that people arrive in the host country, assimilate into its population, share its values and join in the defense of its people as they adopt them as their own. If you come to America you become American.

 

In the past colonization also meant something different. The colonist arrives to establish his own separate and distinct enclaves and communities. Think of the British having tiffin and reading the Times of London in India or Singapore. They maintained their own language, religion and laws, and largely kept to themselves. Or, if they mingled with the natives, it was to advance the culture of the colonial power, to which the natives were asked to adapt. Millions of Indians learned English and the Common Law that way, and that was no bad thing.

What’s going on now is very different. The direction of migration has changed, and now it’s the colonials who are migrating to the former imperial power, or to countries like America which never had a knack for imperialism. That’s why this needs a new label: neo-colonialism.

In 19th century European colonialism, the colonizing populations followed the armies. In 21st century neo-colonialism, the colonizing populations precede the armies.

One might ask, what armies?  But as we have seen in abundance in Europe and in growing evidence in North America, the individual enforcers and warriors of these para-military armies have arrived—and their numbers are growing.

In the infiltration from “south of the border,” these paramilitaries self-identify as narco-gangs, transnational crime syndicates and drug lords. They are heavily financed and heavily armed—in many cases in possession of greater firepower than local police.

In the infiltration from the Middle-East and North Africa, these proto-armies self identify as Islamic apocalyptic jihadists of various stripes. Some are directed from foreign states (Iran) or quasi-states (Islamic Caliphate). Many are simply self-radicalized by their own interpretations of ancient scriptural texts, encouraged and inspired by imams preaching from within the neo-colonial settlement.

What all these enforcers, jihadists, gang bangers, organized criminal syndicates and mini-armies share is zero allegiance to the host country, contempt for the laws and culture of the host country, disregard for the inhabitants of the host country and the intention of establishing permanent, alternate settlement and de facto political control within the national boundaries of the host country.

Witness the so-called “No Go Zones” all across Western Europe. In theory these zones remain within the political, legal jurisdiction and control of the host country. But in reality citizens of the host country rarely access these zones, and when they do, it’s only on terms set by the neo-colonizers themselves. Police, by and large, stay out—ceding these zones to the alien law of the enclave population. If and when police are required to enter these zones, such as when it was imperative to track down the terrorists who bombed the Brussels airport, they can only do so as heavily armed SWAT or paramilitary teams, which must then be hastily extruded after the specific operation.

Over the past decade the neo-colonial settlement of Europe has proceeded apace, with notorious “No Go Zones” in Molenbeek, Belgium; Rinkeby and Husby in Sweden; Preston in the U.K.; Gelsenkirchen and Duisburg in Germany; more than nine hundred areas across Europe. Once tranquil Sweden now endures the sad sobriquet of the rape capital of Europe.

It also spills over to people within the “No Go Zone.” Last week’s Islamic murderer in London was home-grown but spent time in Birmingham, which some have described as a “No Go Zone.”

This has not been confined to Europe. Though not yet as autonomous and entrenched as their European counterparts, more than two dozen enclaves have taken root, in Texas, South Carolina, Georgia, California, Virginia, New York, and especially in Dearborn, Michigan, where much of the resettled population is governed by Sharia Law.

The enforcers and jihadists, not content to remain within the confines of their own “No Go Zones,” are putting the host nation and its people on notice. “This is no longer your country,” they are saying. “It’s ours.” This is the endgame of the colonial enterprise—conquest.

Colonialism is politically incorrect these days, but the British who brought their institutions to India left it a better country. The former colonies of Singapore and Hong Kong regularly score at the top of measures of economic freedom. Neo-colonialism represents a reversion to the colonist’s culture, as well as a betrayal of American nationhood.

That’s why our sanctuary cities are seditious, outlaw cities, protecting and fostering foreign influence and infiltration, introducing alien law.

Donald Trump has courageously taken a stand against illegal immigration. That’s just a start, however. If the sanctuary cities want to pretend they’re not part of America, they can’t complain when federal aid is denied them.

 

About the Author:

Rabelais
Rabelais is the nom de plume of a writer living in the heartland.
  • Rog

    Good thing we have mobs of Antifa thugs to fight off the islamofascists when the shit hits the fan.

  • Jim Wiggins

    When I saw the headline, I thought the term the writer was going to put forward was “invasion”. Without thinking about it too much, I think you could make a case for that: a, or the, leading segment of some immigrant groups seeks to act to gain control of the country or a part of it, to the detriment of the present occupants. The current citizens are seen as having an inferior claim to rule and to occupy the land unjustly. After the invasion is completed, the current citizens will have a subordinate position. The invasion is done outside of the law and seeks to de-legitimize it, preparing the way for more entrants. To be fair, only a minority of immigrants support such goals, but there’s the truism about most revolutions being executed by a minority. The other immigrants will presumably support their leaders in the future. While considerably more inflammatory, “invasion” seems to capture the writer’s point better than the word chosen.

  • Brother John the Deplorable

    Still operative?

    Uh, “immigration” hasn’t been le mot juste in the Southwest for at least 35 years, and probably more. What the federal government has done to this country — just in this area alone — has been treason without equal.

  • Molenbeek is a “No-Go Zone”?

    I took a pleasant walk through Molenbeek two days after the terrorist attack at the Brussels airport after flying into Belgium one day after it. Spent a few hours there, had some Turkish pastries.

    Molenbeek is not a No-Go Zone.

    Also, there are now regular daily military patrols throughout the city, not only at the metro or train stations but all over the streets. The Belgians have wisely decided that an asymetrical war requires their armies patroling their cities, not sitting in barracks.

    Colonialism was a moral crime on the part of the British (amongst others). You are correct that the present migration is in some respects a product of this association, but one need not praise colonialism to blame terrorism.

    American nationhood is based in a rebellion against a colonial empire in favor of an American republic rooted in foreign ideals (Roman and Greek to be exact).

    Of course President Trump is right to insist that cities enforce immigration law, but there is no need to construct some sort of apologia for British colonialism to defend American republicanism or lament the migrant crisis in Europe.

    • Beauceron

      What a disingenuous response.

      First, as I am sure you must be aware, “no-Go Zone” means no go for the police, not average people. Second, your one-off one day visit does not counterbalance the hundreds of stories that say the exact opposite of your post.

      Read this, for example– no far-right publication either:

      http://www.politico.eu/article/molenbeek-broke-my-heart-radicalization-suburb-brussels-gentrification/

      • There is a police station in Molenbeek. I read the article and it does not say the opposite of my post.

    • Adele Moran

      Since you are wearing ethnic camo (going by your avatar!), of course there is no such thing as a “no go zone”. That would only be for White people.

      Also, White people aren’t used to living with “regular daily military patrols”. Are you fucking kidding me? We Whites have for the most part NEVER lived that way. Now, because you monstrous savages are in our countries, we are losing EVERYTHING that we hold dear.

      And yeah. On whose moral code was colonialism a crime? The moslem moral code? The hindu moral code? The buddhist moral code?

      WHOSE MORAL CODE????????

      • The Christian moral code.

        • Adele Moran

          GOTCHA! Where the hell in the bible does it say “Thou shall not colonize?”

          • It probably doesn’t, but I’m Catholic. We don’t read the Bible literaly. We read it carefuly and above all pray it.

        • Dragblacker

          I guess the Byzantine Empire was heretical.

          • Insofar as political bodies calling themselves Christian violated Christian teaching, then yes. But this is not necessarily reason for controversy. Christianity calls for, amongst other things, periodic confession. Imperfection is an accepted part of it. The problem with praising British colonialism as moral on principle is that it is akin to saying that one SHOULD sin because if one does not, then how will one ever be able to go to confession? Of course you can make a long list of excellent achievements under a given colonial empire – yet this does not mean colonialism is a moral good in principle.

          • Dragblacker

            We’re not talking about the morality of colonialism, even though one can make the argument given the state of certain places on Earth. The point is that there were benefits; even the people who whine about it indulge in its products without shame or irony.

          • I do not know of any benefits of colonialism and am not sure which people indulge in its products without shame or irony. To my mind colonialism as such did not produce anything much beyond trouble. Colonialism, like slavery, is one of those institutions which are the shame of humanity. America was founded in rebellion against the claims of colonialism and rightly so.

          • Dragblacker

            If you don’t know you’re either being deliberately obtuse or you’re not paying attention.

          • Would you characterize Mark Twain or Joseph Conrad as deliberately obtuse or not paying attention either?

    • Sean

      If you have to have daily military patrols in the city to make it safe for citizens to walk around, then it’s a no-go zone.

      • If you stop walking around a city or refuse to defend a city because you are scared of terrorism, it is the end of your civilization.

        • Sean

          That’s not relevant to the point.

          Let me repeat: if you need the protection of daily military patrols, then it’s a no-go zone by definition.

          • The definition of no-go is that you are not allowed to go there. You are allowed to go into Molenbeek, therefore it is not a no-go zone. Unless we suddenly take “no-go” in the sense that people talk about bad restaurants “no one would ever go there”. I take the notion of a “no-go” zone to be literal: a place cordoned off by law or in practice.

            By your definition – Israel is a no-go zone. I have been there too, as have others.

            I understand the point of cities becoming more dangerous due to mass migration and the dangers of a lack of assimilation. But we have to stick to reality and not get carried away. A sense of proportion is healthy.

          • Sean

            Okay, so Molenbeek is a Go-With-the-Protection-of-Daily-Military-Patrols Zone, like Israel or Northern Ireland. I stand corrected. That sure sounds normal and sane, so congrats to all these areas in Europe that have joined that august club.

          • Obviously it is an abnormal situation and the result of thoughtless multiculturalism and open-borders. Again – as I said in my original post – I support President Trump’s policies, including with regard to “sanctuary cities.” I think it is simply important to not get hysterical.

          • timcat

            Peter – are you a Muslim ?

    • Dragblacker

      “Colonialism was a moral crime on the part of the British (amongst others)”

      1) No worse than what any other power did since the dawn of mankind.

      2) All of the colonized love Western technology anyway.

      • There is a difference between understanding historical events and endorsing them. I would think, however, that it should not be a controvercial statement – particularly amongst Americans – to state that colonialism was immoral.

  • Beauceron

    When I look at the immigration/neo-colonization issue, it seems to mad that I start resorting to conspiracy theories to explain why it has not been stopped.

    Someone, some group, some ideology, is trying to destroy the West.

    • Nuther G. Mule

      The Founders foresaw the risk – enemies of the Constitution, both foreign and domestic. Foreign, such as the spread of European socialism, Islamic terrorism and the “invasion” from our southern border – and domestic, such as those progressive leftists that embrace the foreign enemies ideals and whose end justifies any means to tear down what was built and remake it to align to their values, ideals, or ideology – however gradually (by intended or unintended consequences) or aggressively they can muster. They march us toward totalitarianism with a sad or happy story about “green” this and “green” that while inserting a faceless and corrupt central government into every aspect of our lives and more and more of our wallets.

  • Dan Schwartz

    Swedish Feminists Flee Suburbs Due to Islamic Fundamentalists

    Feminists in Stockholm are leaving areas like the notorious migrant-heavy no-go zones of Husby and Tensta because they say religious fundamentalists now rule those suburbs.

    Nalin Pekgul is a self-described feminist and former member of parliament for the left wing Swedish Social Democrats. For over 30 years, she lived in the Stockholm suburb of Tensta but says that she no longer feels safe there. She claims Muslim fundamentalists have taken over and she doesn’t feel she can visit the centre of Tensta without being harassed, Swedish broadcaster SVT reports. [link]

    According to Ms. Pekgul, the situation for women in public life in the area has deteriorated over the past several years. She noted that there has been a rise in religious fundamentalism amongst the men in the area, many of whom come from migrant backgrounds. Pekgul attempted to combat the trend by organising coffee shop meetings but soon abandoned the idea.

    “In Tensta I am a known face and I have no desire to stir up trouble when I get harassed,” Pekgul said explaining why she no longer goes into the centre of the suburb. When asked if she will remain in the suburb, she said: “I always hope that it will blow over. One should never forget that the vast majority here are cursing the fundamentalists.”

    Zeliha Dagli, a former Left Party politician, did end up moving from the no-go suburb of Husby. Dagli described Husby as having self-appointed “morality police” who attempt to control women’s behaviour in the area.

    Aggression toward feminists, in particular, became an issue she said. “There were rumours that we wanted to take away women’s veils,” she said. “They said that I should keep myself, and then I did not feel so safe anymore.” (more)

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/31/swedish-feminists-flee-suburbs-due-islamic-fundamentalists/?utm_source=TheDeplorables

  • CincyGal

    I think I would call it an invasion. One point overlooked by our Heartland Rabelais is that many Americans are armed. We are not the helpless victims I fear many Europeans are. The most surprising people have concealed carry permits and are out & about while armed. (I myself do not have a ccw permit – I get far too many speeding tickets to have that associated with my license plate!) In Europe, there is a long history of peasants deferring to the local aristocracy and waiting for their leaders to act. Here, we have a far different tradition. One I hope will ultimately save us. But it won’t if we do not believe we’re worth saving.

  • usamopatriot

    Stop giving handouts to the parasites and their motivation to come here will fall by 80%. Ban all mosques and sharia in any form. Muslims by and large are 7th century parasites and they cover it by lying to us. Taqiyya.