Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

> When "some intellectuals," (even if not all), and "left-wing" ones to boot, start to believe something, you know it's serious.

You know that reality has set in with unusual severity.

Posted by Bob Hawkins at December 3, 2004 07:11 PM

A European is just an American who hasn't been mugged yet!

Posted by Mike Puckett at December 3, 2004 07:44 PM

It's been so long since left-wing European intellectuals had any truck with reality, that when they start claiming to believe something that I know is true, I habitually start questioning what I know is true.

Posted by McGehee at December 4, 2004 07:09 AM

I think there are two possibilities:

First, the E.U. may try to install some half-assed measures in an attempt to show that they are 'doing something' about this problem. Long term, this kind of thing would only make the problem worse.

Alternately, like a pendulum which has been pushed too far to one side, they may overcorrect, and actually allow *less* freedoms to Muslims than the U.S. Maybe something like the French Headscarf Ban, but with more ramifications. Mandatory registration? Restricted Travel? Forced Deportation? Could be shades of the 1930's.

I'd say that their chances of splitting the difference between the two extremes are unlikely, at best. One advantage they may have is that independent countries can enact various measures and the rest of the E.U. can pick and choose among the most effective. This assumes, of course, that there's sufficient time, intellectual honesty, and lack of ego to allow for them to learn from each others' mistakes or successes.

Like I said, unlikely at best.

-S

Posted by Stephen Kohls at December 4, 2004 01:01 PM

Mr. Kohls wrote:

"Alternately, like a pendulum which has been pushed too far to one side, they may overcorrect, and actually allow *less* freedoms to Muslims than the U.S. Maybe something like the French Headscarf Ban, but with more ramifications. Mandatory registration? Restricted Travel? Forced Deportation? Could be shades of the 1930's."

Maybe so, but what if we are witnessing the beginning of a culture-wide debate, in the West, of just what "overcorrection" means when talking about Islam. Maybe we are going to come to a humane accomodation with that culture, or maybe Islam will prove to be a pill too big for modern secular liberal democracies to swallow. Do we dare allow any Muslims to immigrate to the West, or remain here, at all, for our own good? Does Islam have any capacity to mutate into something more closely resembling the mainstream Christian Protestant sects' mildness, and conciliation?

I don't necessarily like saying this, but Islam might demonstrate to us the proper and necessary limits of secular tolerance.

Posted by Neuroto at December 4, 2004 01:19 PM

The problem is not just radical Islamism, but Tribalism in general. The problem is not new e.g. in the USA: KKK, Black Panthers. Or in Europe. The issue is this sort of behaviour is not just tolerated, but promoted via pop musicians, TV and cinema. These are the new guides of our youth, deserted by their parents in a jungle without values. Cancers of primal counter-culture which seek to overthrow by violence and chaos the principles of democratic society and secular liberalism we won in the Enlightenment.

- Left-winged European and damn proud of it.

Posted by Godzirra at December 4, 2004 04:21 PM

“There is no French, Dutch or other European dream”

I know that's true (I used to live in Germany), but my first thought is still: How unspeakably sad. Posted by Barbara Skolaut at December 4, 2004 05:20 PM

If the Liberal PC weenies in the E.U. are waking up, how long before it FINALLY sinks in here in North America. I say North America because our Canadian and Mexican friends need to join us in the fight for existence. Other wise they sink too!!

Posted by Steve at December 4, 2004 06:31 PM

You may say there is no European dream, but the EU was built on a dream. A dream of peace and prosperity for Europe.

Posted by Godzirra at December 4, 2004 06:36 PM

And there lies the difference. American dream is [i]personal[/i]. You build it for yourself, and see the tangible results. EU dream is collective.

Posted by Ilya at December 4, 2004 07:03 PM

An excellent point. And I think Uncle Joe taught us all we need to know about countries built on collective dreams, or dreams of collectives, as it were.

Posted by Carl Pham at December 4, 2004 07:09 PM

Besides that, collective dreams do not hold allure for most of people, at least not for very long. "What is in it for me?" is a very human question, and where there is no tangible answer, the dream is quickly forgotten. And whatever dreams recent immigrants from Muslim countries might have, I do not believe they ever gave any thought to "the dream of European Union" at all.

Posted by Ilya at December 4, 2004 07:23 PM

I don't see how the tension between Western culture and Islamic culture, such as they are, warrants elevation to the status of a military "war". OTOH, it does appear to have the same status as wars on drugs, AIDS, and terrorism. Do we have a "war" between rural and urban society? Or between Chinese and Western culture?

It doesn't sound any different than any other episode of large-scale uncontrolled immigration that overwhelms the host country's ability to assimilate. Similar problems (eg, substantial crime due to immigrant gangs) resulted in severely reduced immigration for several decades from the 1920's to 1950's in the US. Restrict immigration and the problems should diminish.

Posted by Karl Hallowell at December 4, 2004 07:28 PM

This book is unevenly written however it is informative on the subject.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1585423459/qid=1102222382/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-4912532-7192622?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

What is fascinating is how the book explains differing meanings given to the word "freedom" - - the author asserts that Europeans are more likely to describe social entanglements as liberating and how the very idea of being "alone" would have seemed insane to our European ancestors 500 years ago.

The ancient Greeks had a saying: A man without a city is either a God or a beast.

Very interesting stuff I suspect shall become increasingly relevant. Here is a tidbit. Add the US & EU prison populations into the unemployment figures and EU unemployment is not as much higher as everyone thinks.

We Americans imprison our unemployed (and have a larger military) and therefore our employment statistics look that much better. ;-)

But its all just lies, damn lies and statistics after all.

Posted by Bill White at December 4, 2004 09:17 PM

And there lies the difference. American dream is personal. You build it for yourself, and see the tangible results. EU dream is collective.

What is the American dream anyway? Accumulating personal wealth? Having enhanced liberties? These people are immigrating to the EU for the same reasons, and they hardly seem uplifting.

Posted by Godzirra at December 5, 2004 10:05 AM

The American Dream is the American Dream. The European Dream is the European Dream. They can co-exist. I'm American, and as long as they don't actively seek to hinder us in the current war, I have no problem with the Euros. None. Let the Europeans, as Europeans, create heaven on earth, or go to hell, as fate decrees. Same for us. The topic of Rand's post, let us please remember, is what is to be done about the Muslims?

Posted by Neuroto at December 5, 2004 01:26 PM

If you are talking about the Muslim fundamentalists in our midst, I think the obvious answer is to crackdown on actual physical violence (stonings, etc).

I suppose some things can be done:
Citizens should not be allowed to carry guns without a permit. To get a permit they need a very good reason. Citizens should not conceal their faces, unless they have valid health reasons for doing it. We already have national ID cards in most Europeans countries. This would be ok for most of us in Europe, although I suppose you people in the USA like guns for some nostalgic reason. :-)

Regarding the other issues, they are more delicate. Most actions I have seen proposed can be considered censorship in a way. e.g. forbidding obvious religious symbols or the promotion of violence. I know in Germany for example certain violent or vandalist acts are censored on TV. Like a scene in one of Pink's music videos where she stabs a switchblade on a school door. I tend to dislike imposing censor rules, because they can be so easily abused and used to buildup authoritarian regimes. I prefer to crackdown on harmful actions instead.

Posted by Godzirra at December 5, 2004 02:35 PM

I'll weigh in with what I think is a moderate comment.

Islamism -- one form of totalitarianism -- is a real horror.

Why do people from areas where Islam dominates flee to Europe? It could be they recognize, in some way, the shortcomings of their own societies.

What about the ones who then attack the societies they have joined in some fashion? Well, they've got a lot to learn. How can we help those folks learn more? And stop cold those who won't learn? (Hopefully the latter types will be a small minority.) Since we've got the better ideas and are fundamentally stronger, let's try listening to all their complaints, correcting our failures (we do have them) as best we can and then seeing how many of them join us. 10 to 1 is pretty good odds -- even in Western Europe. 100 to 1000 to 1 are a whole lot better.

Posted by Chuck Divine at December 5, 2004 05:41 PM

"Citizens should not be allowed to carry guns without a permit. To get a permit they need a very good reason."

Well, in Europe, it is almost impossible to cary a gun for any reason peroid yet gun control did nothing to save Mr. Van Gogh.

Criminals perfer helpless unarmed victims and Eurpoean gun laws serve to enable the strong preying on the weak.

Posted by Mike Puckett at December 6, 2004 08:07 AM

Well, in Europe, it is almost impossible to cary a gun for any reason peroid yet gun control did nothing to save Mr. Van Gogh.
Criminals perfer helpless unarmed victims and Eurpoean gun laws serve to enable the strong preying on the weak.

He was shot and stabbed, so he would have died without a gun anyway. Besides, the police caught the killer.

Iraqis own Kalashnikovs and they hardly make them safe from criminals.

Posted by Godzirra at December 6, 2004 09:25 AM

He was shot and stabbed, so he would have died without a gun anyway.

How do you know this? He was stabbed after he was shot. Had he not been shot, there's no reason to think that his attacker would have been able to approach him to stab him.

Besides, the police caught the killer.

Oh, well, that's all right then.

Are you really saying that he wouldn't have minded being shot and stabbed (and murdered), as long he knew that the killers would be caught? That there's no need to do anything to prevent people from being shot and stabbed?

Posted by Rand Simberg at December 6, 2004 09:43 AM

"Iraqis own Kalashnikovs and they hardly make them safe from criminals"

Strawman argument, most Iraqis are not carrying them. I could own the far side of Pluto for all the good it would do me billions of miles away.

How do you know Van Gogh could not have sucessfully defended himself if he had the means of force?

Still, I wonder how many people openly carriing an AK-47 have been mugged for smack money.

It is still blatantly apparent that the Netherlands strict gun control laws did nothing to preserve the life of Van Gogh and did nothing to prevent a radical islamiscist from obtaining arms.

Gun Control is a make believe feel good philosiphy that breaks down when it makes contact with the real world. The law of supply and demand trumps any arbitrarty restraint of a device or substance.

Posted by Mike Puckett at December 6, 2004 10:08 AM

Godzirra
"You may say there is no European dream, but the EU was built on a dream. A dream of peace and prosperity for Europe."

Hunh. A document written for the EU pols by one of their think thanks concluded (I summarize, greatly) that the average citizen of the EU wanted no truck with such a dream, that there was no common history to unite the EU, no common vision, no sense of manifest destiny. A Scot is not a Finn and neither of them WANT to be a EUsian.

Yet the EU must be carried forward regardless because it's for their own good. Man, that sounds like tyranny to me.

Posted by Brian at December 6, 2004 11:47 AM

Are you really saying that he wouldn't have minded being shot and stabbed (and murdered), as long he knew that the killers would be caught? That there's no need to do anything to prevent people from being shot and stabbed?

Murders can happen in any country. The difference is if the perpetrators can carry on their nefarious activities or not.
So I am just pointing out that justice, emanating from the rule of law, is being served to criminals. Unlike in Iraq.

Strawman argument, most Iraqis are not carrying them.

You could have fooled me. Any marketplace is chock full of automatic weapons.

Still, I wonder how many people openly carriing an AK-47 have been mugged for smack money.

It just means you are that more likely to be killed before they pry your belongings from your cold dead hands, rather than "just" beating the crap out of you. Because smart and skilled thieves can steal without resorting to violence.
For an individual to try to stand out alone against a horde is at best heroic, at worst damn foolish. This is why society created the justice system and police officers. People which actually are trained in doing this sort of work, are properly equipped (one would hope) and have the numbers to make up for it.
The President of the USA, supposedly the most well protected person in your country, does not carry weapons and relies on professionals to do their job (even then, things can go wrong). These professionals usually comb the places where the President makes speeches for weapons. In Europe, we have the same security benefits your President has, albeith under more severe economic constraints.

It is still blatantly apparent that the Netherlands strict gun control laws did nothing to preserve the life of Van Gogh and did nothing to prevent a radical islamiscist from obtaining arms.

Did I claim perfection? I know better than to claim that. You can always rely on the black market to find such items. For a price. The difference with Gun Control is that the price is higher. Obscenely higher.

Gun Control is a make believe feel good philosiphy that breaks down when it makes contact with the real world. The law of supply and demand trumps any arbitrarty restraint of a device or substance.

Yeah, tell me that again next time some disgruntled employee in the USA goes on a random shooting spree with an automatic weapon that he legally purchased.

I submit to you that there is, in fact, Gun Control in the USA. AFAIK a private citizen cannot own large calliber howitzers, tanks, nuclear weapons, etc.

The only difference is here in Europe, we can shoot rabbits using a simple shotgun. No need to use an AK-47. I've always heard the US military can only hit targets with a lot of led fired (the land that gave birth to Gatling and Vulcan cannons), I guess US citizens need their AK-47's so they can have a chance to hit rabbits as well as the Europeans do with their shotguns. ;-)

Posted by Godzirra at December 6, 2004 12:08 PM

"Did I claim perfection? I know better than to claim that. You can always rely on the black market to find such items. For a price. The difference with Gun Control is that the price is higher. Obscenely higher."

What is obscenely higher? AK's can be had on the international black market for a couple of hundred dollars.

"Yeah, tell me that again next time some disgruntled employee in the USA goes on a random shooting spree with an automatic weapon that he legally purchased."

No US citizen has ever gone on a shooting spree with a legally purchased automatic weapon. This is a patently false statement.

Posted by Mike Puckett at December 6, 2004 12:34 PM

"The only difference is here in Europe, we can shoot rabbits using a simple shotgun. No need to use an AK-47. I've always heard the US military can only hit targets with a lot of led fired (the land that gave birth to Gatling and Vulcan cannons), I guess US citizens need their AK-47's so they can have a chance to hit rabbits as well as the Europeans do with their shotguns. ;-)"

Or perhaps most Americans understand firearms ownership is not justification of or predicated upon the ability to hunt animals.

Posted by Mike Puckett at December 6, 2004 12:36 PM

...the average citizen of the EU wanted no truck with such a dream, that there was no common history to unite the EU, no common vision, no sense of manifest destiny. A Scot is not a Finn and neither of them WANT to be a EUsian...

There is plenty of common history. Most of us used to be Roman provinces. All of us have Christian majorities, we all have democratic parliamentary systems, we have been all touched by the renaissance, secular liberalism and nationalism (both good and bad effects). Several of us used to have colonies at a point or another.

If you want common cultural points today: our youths are all a bunch of heavy beer drinkers which dance to rave sound. We all like to watch football (soccer for you Americans) or formula one. We have a highly integrated GSM mobile phone network which truly allows voice communications anytime, anywhere we travel inside EU borders.

It is just that there was been no galvanizing event so far. A trial by fire. Can't say I am unhappy about it. Such events tend to be quite distressful. In the meantime, the concrete that binds us all together is getting harder.

Yet the EU must be carried forward regardless because it's for their own good. Man, that sounds like tyranny to me.

Wrong. The EU is being carried forward with the democratic consent of the citizens of the EU. The process is complex and tedious because it is being done under the rule of law and democracy, rather than the force of arms, like for e.g. the USA were formed.

Posted by Godzirra at December 6, 2004 12:44 PM

Godzirra
"I've always heard the US military can only hit targets with a lot of led fired (the land that gave birth to Gatling and Vulcan cannons) "

Whatever. We're also the country that reinvented modern sniping. I rate myself as no more than a so-so shooter but I could easily shoot above 240 (out of 250 possible) on the Marine Corps Known Distance range, and without fail I could land all 10 of my shots from the 500 meter line in the 5 ring.

"Wrong. The EU is being carried forward with the democratic consent of the citizens of the EU. The process is complex and tedious because it is being done under the rule of law and democracy, rather than the force of arms, like for e.g. the USA were formed."

How nice for you to think that way. Regardless, the study done for your political masters (and what a farking tedious piece of work it was) said otherwise. You're free to go to hell in your own way, but I give even odds the EU will end it's days as a gray and depressing tyranny.

Posted by Brian at December 7, 2004 05:40 AM

Post a comment