Several days ago, German teenager Bibi Wilhailm described the threat from Muslim immigration; the hundreds of ensuing sexual assaults, rapes and other outrages. She was banned from Facebook but not before she shared her fear and begged German men to stand up and fight back. “Men, please, help your women. Help your children. I am so scared” … she pleaded. Danish journalist Iben Threholm joined in and blamed feminism for destroying European culture and creating a society of spineless men who cannot defend their own women against Muslim outrages.
Imagine if this was happening in your neck of the woods, or in my case, Old Town Pasadena, the Santa Anita Mall, the train stations, Downtown LA or LAX. Image your ten year old girl being harassed on her way to school, and the mayor of your town doing nothing except to say “She should go a different way” (as happened in Bad Schlema, Germany)
Now imagine the police did not have the will, or approval of politicians, to enforce the law. What if the highest officials in the land approved of more immigrants; a constant flow, never assimilating, always angry, hostile, imposing medieval values and demanding welfare? Imagine the press turning a blind eye to all this in the name of “political correctness” and “multiculturalism”.
In Sweden, after Muslim gangs had taken over Stockholm Central Station, two hundred Swedish men wearing masks descended upon the area and cleared out the Muslim terrorists. They called for all Swedish men of all ages and good faith who “love Sweden” to join them.
After the 200 cleared the central station, they issued this statement:
“Enough is enough … today 200 Swedish gathered to stand against the North African “street children” that ravage the capital’s central train station. The police have clearly shown that they lack the means to prevent their rampage, and we now see no other alternative than dealing out ourselves the punishments they deserve.
Sweden is not as it once was. Every day we wake up to new murders, robberies, rapes, and other abuses. Perpetrators often escape punishment by claiming that they are under 15.
Police no longer have the stamina to prevent and investigate the crimes.
Our spineless politicians … weak judicial system … and lying media do not surprise us anymore.
We refuse to accept the repeated attacks on and harassment of Swedish women.
We refuse to accept the destruction of our once safe society.
It is our duty to fix the problems.
We who gathered here today are not your politicians, or your journalists, or your police.
We are your father, your brother, your husband, your colleague, your friend, and your neighbor.
Bibi Wilhailm – your men have come. Iben Threholm -you are not forgotten.”
The behavior of the Muslim immigrants should not surprise anyone. Their violence and degradation of women is normal throughout the Mid-East. It is an extension of their religion. What may astonish us is the passive response by European politicians, police, intellectuals, and media when such behavior is imposed in their countries. Are these people not the descendents of the Vikings? What happened to their spirit?
Perhaps there is an answer.
Sweden and Europe have for generations lived under socialist style governments. The more socialist a country is, the more it provides for the “needs” of its citizens and the less the citizens have to do for themselves. The general expression for such control is “statism”. Since the government does not produce anything, providing for “needs” means “transferring wealth created by others”. The government also regulates the behavior and expression of its citizens, not just in enforcing laws necessary to a civil society, but in promoting the desired social agenda. Unlike in America, free speech is NOT considered a basic human right. Although elections are held, the system of subservience to government remains inherent, no matter the result. Thus it becomes an illusion that the people “rule themselves”.
Writing in his book “Democracy in America” (Vol. 2, Book 4, Chapter 6) circa the 1830s, Alexis de Tocqueville called such an illusion “soft despotism”. Soft despotism is different from “hard” despotism in the sense that it is not obvious to the people. Says Tocqueville:
“After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd.”
Why would people willingly submit to such control?
“They want to be led, and they wish to remain free. As they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They … console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain. By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master and then relapse into it again.”
(My comment: The people have deceived themselves. It is not the “people at large who hold the end of his chain” but intellectuals in universities, media, and government whose views pursue a leftist agenda often contrary to the general will of the people)
Notice then what happens to the character of the people:
“The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it “prevents existence”; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd”
(My comment: “prevents existence in the sense of preventing growth)
The history of socialism is one of failure. In France, those who are successful see the writing on the wall leave their country in droves. The ultimate failure is a “stupefied” people who see no value in having enough children to continue their culture. All socialist cultures in Europe will sooner or later be extinguished, demographically)
Another failure, currently on display in Europe, is the rejection by the intelligentsia of common sense, replacing it with a social agenda based on the illusionary goal of “equality”. Common wisdom easily foresaw the inability of the Muslim immigrants to peacefully assimilate; their religion teaches dominance, not compromise with other cultures. The intelligentsia refused to see it.
So basically, socialism (aka “statism”) fails for two reasons:
It fundamentally weakens the character of the people. Secondly, the intellectuals and bureaucrats who administer rule are never of sufficient intelligence or character to know and pursue what is best. Their arrogance is such that they really think society cannot function without them. Their own interests, passions, greed, and inferior intelligence doom the socialist state to ruin.
What happened in Sweden is inspiring, in a way. Women cried out and a slumbering spirit from a past age awakened in the hearts of 200 men. Their story is just beginning and a valuable lesson for America. For we are in a pivotal election cycle at a time when socialism has indoctrinated the minds of America’s youth; and when a self proclaimed socialist seeking to be president argues against what has made America the greatest nation on earth.