November 14, 2010

The NYT on Thilo Sarrazin, again

In the New York Times, Michael Slackman delivers yet another deeply researched, tremendously well-informed, empirical-minded news article on the complex subjects being currently discussed by one million book buyers in Germany:

The debate started off boring and slow with Thilo Sarrazin trying to bullshit everyone with a bunch of smart talk: 'Blah blah blah. You gotta believe me!' That part of the controversy sucked! But then the Chief J. just went off. He said, 'Man, whatever! The guy's guilty of being a Nazi! We all know that.' And he sentenced his ass to one night of rehabilitation

80 comments:

Anonymous said...

One argumemnt which adds noise to the data:

It is particularly difficult for children of immigrants to succeed in the german education system due to its early triage process.

A longitudinal study would add a great deal to the discussion.

Anonymous said...

We're going to see scapegoating followed by forcing muslims to wear some sort of identifying mark on their clothing followed by pogroms, internment and then mass death. There are already Muslim ghettos. Germany (and western Europe in general...) has been through this before with a religious minority -- I think you know who I'm talking about. From socialism to fascism to democracy and right back to fascism, time really is cyclical and human beings never change.

Anonymous said...

LOL

Anonymous said...

Interesting to see that the world's mosy pompous and stuck-up newspaper, that insists it is a 'paper of record', which is full of over 'intellectualized' editorial and opinion seems to think that bitchy personal abuse worthy of an adolescent girl at a the school prom, passes as reportage and journalism.

Jeb said...

I didn't think the article was quite as biased as Steve seems to be suggesting. I think a reader new to the topic would think "hmmm, this Sarrazin probably does have some evidence to back up what he's saying" and as for the shunning, it would sound like it isn't having very much effect, and that S. is having lots of fun anyway. All in all, I would not say that the article does much to re-create the wall of taboo that stops people from saying what S. is saying (in any case, Germans don't read the NYT).

As to substance: Does S. really have much evidence on *intelligence*? Lack of assimilation, high welfare rates, bad conduct--these things are probably undeniable. Whether he does or not, I could even imagine that by going so far as to diss the intelligence of Muslims, S. may have actually made it much easier for people to make the less inflammatory (and better justified) claim that Islamic immigration is anyway a clear disaster due to lack of assimilation. What the Germans need to do next is to create buy-out programs for immigrants to return to their home countries: win-win.

idealart said...

Steve, your drollery has reached Derbyshirean levels.

Le Mur said...

Yet another catty, pointlessly fact-free article from the NYT. Their displeasure was demonstrated, apparently the only point of the article.

Kylie said...

Dare I hope this thread will not be hijacked by someone eager to enthuse about Islamic music which is doubtless one of the peaks, if not the acme, of Germanic culture?

James Kabala said...

I actually thought it wasn't that bad by New York Times standards.

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

Nice. Slackman manages to pull a Reductio ad Hitlerum by the first sentence: "THIS quiet, orderly man, who lives in a quiet, orderly house, in a very quiet tree-lined neighborhood..."

Nazi allusions! High alert! DEFCON 5!


"With the certainty of an accountant adding up rows of numbers, Thilo Sarrazin has delivered his conclusion in a book that has sold over one million copies, forced him to quit his job at the German central bank..."

Lose my job but sell a million books? I'd take that bargain. And the job loss merely amplified his message, and his royalties.

Mike Courtman said...

Does anyone know if Sarrazin's book is, or is going to be, available in English?

I'm interested to see if he concurs with the idea that multiculturalism is particularly incompatible with high tech industry. Note how industry is now dominated by the most homogenous countries like Sweden, Italy, China, Korea and Japan while the more multicultural countries like Britain and U.S have suffered the greatest industrial decline.

Also, has anyone noticed how the reliability of German cars is going down the toilet. Even if I had plenty of money, the only European car I'd consider buying would be a Skoda.

headache said...

gotta keep those pesky krauts down. lest they start another world war..

Whiskey said...

The Daily Telegraph had a story on Muslims burning poppies during Armistice Day, saying British Soldiers Burn in Hell.

It did not go over well with the populace. The change in tone was striking. The police kept the English Defense League away from the Muslims, but the desire to intimidate IMHO backfired into widespread anger.

If you are an ordinary Briton, you can figure that no Muslims in Britain means a far lower tax burden and more money to be spent on YOU! Being called Racist! when Muslims burn poppies in perhaps Britain's most important remembrance day is now a non-issue.

Germany has a very fragile banking system that has trillions in bad bets on the US Housing Market, Greek Bonds, Irish Bonds, and the like. Muslims crowd out assistance to the famous Mittelstand and thus Germany's economic heart, by being a drain on social welfare. Merkel's government is fragile. Sarkozy "got away with" (the EU dropped the idea of prosecuting him) deporting the Gypsies.

The power of PC depends in large part in folks not wanting to rock the boat and lose out on the good times rolling. But not so much in hard times. It is always, all about the money.

Tom in VA said...

"I got my law degree from Costco."

On another note, thanks for the recommendation on Caldwell's "Reflections on the Revolution in Europe." I'm in the middle of it now, and it's very good.

helene edwards said...

"With the certainty of an accountant adding up rows of numbers ..."

The guy can really write, can't he?

Anonymous said...

I'm actually relieved, having thought your quote was from the actual article! (I'm not surprised by any idiocracy in our culture anymore, though I wondered how the Times would allow the word 'bullshit' to go through.) Still, the article deserves a good fisking (haven't used that word in a while).

Anonymous said...

I do not see what you did there.

Anonymous said...

My old high school takes the next step toward Idiocracy: students can't fail!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/13/AR2010111304100.html

Hail said...

When I click the link, a popup advises me to read:

Nazis Were Given 'Safe Haven' in U.S. It appeared on A1, the front page, Nov.14th. The sidebar reports it is the most-read story today.

This is troublesome because:
1.) It is not news and does not belong on A1 [exposed to potentially millions], except to "keep Nazis in the 'news'." The well-informed already know about Operation Paperclip. It is history, not current events.
2.) Placing this non-story on A1 is a hollow attempt to reinforce the notion that all history departs from "the Nazis". To wit: How many times have communist "war criminals" been given A1 space? Is it somewhere between -1 and 1?
3.) The story's implication is one of tabloid-style irrational paranoia (or, more likely, willful deception): "The USA collaborated with Nazis".
4.) Continuing from #3: So they're evil, and we're evil. We've got to work hard hard hard to make up for this Original Sin. More money to Israel, more money to Tim Wise. Full speed ahead!

Anonymous said...

Germany has already shut the door on immigration. In fact, there's been negative immigration for the past several years. For Turks, there was negative immigration of about 10,000 in the previous year.

Germany's major source of migration are mainly other European countries, especially those with large ethnic German populations. Turkish migration occurs in significant numbers as well, but restrictions have curtailed it quite a bit in the last decade. At this point, more Turks are leaving than arriving.

Germany's immigration restrictionism is a combination of the social conservatism of the right combined with the aversion towards foreign workers from the labor-dominated left. If the left weren't skeptical of labor migration, Germany probably wouldn't have been able to restrict migration to this extent.

Also, Turks, about 2/3 of the Muslim population, tend to be more westernized than other groups of Muslims and a little bit more orderly and entrapranuerial. The other large Muslim group are from the Balkans and they're also relatively secularism (by Muslim standards), but have a major problem with gangsterism and aren't so nice.

Germany's main issue isn't Muslim migration, which has stopped, but the unassimability of the current Muslim population and its high birthrate. Sarazzin's concern is, in the long term, what can Germany do with a relatively fecund, but low human capital and culturally foreign population. Germany has tried to pay its Turks to leave, with some success. However, there are a lot of Muslims and foreigners who just won't leave Germany, even if offered money to get out. Germany is not sure how to handle this.

All in all though, Germany is a sensible country, especially by Western standards. I hear a lot of you badmouth the Europeans, but most European countries are pretty sensible in terms of their immigration policies, with Spain and the UK now moving rescticionist. It's pretty much the U.S., the Anglosphere (Canada, Australia, New Zealand), and Sweden that maintain insane immigration policies. Other than that, common sense is prevailing on immigration, with Germany and Denmark leading the way. David Cameron and Sarkozy are showing some common sense, but the U.S. remains completely hopeless.

One more thing: How does the New York Times feel about Israel's demographic policies? Israel restricts immigration to only people of Jewish origin, deports illegal aliens and their children, refuses to give the Palestinians citizenship, and pays Orthodox Jews to have large families (Palestinians are not eligible for these payments). I'm wondering how Michael Slackman thinks about this?

Anonymous said...

Devastating takedown!

My favourite line from the aptly named Slackman is this penetrating insight: "His living room has lots of books on shelves, a few paintings and prints on the wall and a large flat-screen television. There are no personal touches, no family photographs, though he says his hobby is photography."

I mean, what kind of sick weirdo...?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Sarrazin's great 'sin', from the article:

" Mr. Sarrazin has made it acceptable for the German everyman to criticize a specific minority group, and to make sweeping statements about that group’s intellectual capacity."

If the German everyman finds his voice and acts accordingly, the next thing you know he'll derail some shysters' gravy train!

David said...

Wow. They paint him as a total kook and a evil and dangerous man. Who lives on a tree-lined street...and opens his door to strangers. Why not print his address, too?

The desire for his death leaps off the page.

One gets the strong sense that writer Slackman wanted to write: "Nutty Nazi scum!" over and over, but his editor restrained him and made him insert other words as mere filler and euphemism.

The NYT's Jews. So very worthy of one's trust.

Anonymous said...

lots of commenters brought the anti-Semitism; quite a gambit!

Anonymous said...

The funny thing about Germans is that they have very severe restrictions on scientology, viewing it as a dangerous cult, and they even tried to prevent Tom Cruise from playing Stauffenberg in Valkyrie. I'm not a big fan of scientology either, but it's caused a lot less damage over the years than Islam. Why are Muslims given so much more deference than scientologists or gypsies?

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

It seems to me the biggest weakness in immigration laws, especially in Europe, is the so-called "family reunification" policy - which often means "reunifying" a husband and wife who have never met, or only barely, and whose marriage was arranged, and whose marital partner is not infrequently a close relation.

European countries need to make a simple amendment to their laws affecting spouses and immigration: no one, any of whose parents or grandparents immigrated from outside the EU, may import a spouse. This will go a long way towards aiding assimilation and to reducing numbers of new immigrants.

The law shouldn't respect ethnocentrism anyway, but even if it did the ethnic minorities in EU countries are more than large enough for young singles to find a romantic bird of their own feather without importing one from abroad.

Whiskey said...

See Victor Davis Hanson discuss the decline of California into Mexifornia in his latest column on Pajamas Media. Much the same as Sarrazin.

It is about the money. Lots of poor people who don't assimilate and remain permanent burdens on a Welfare State and a declining White Majority into minority. California has a Mexican majority student K-12 population. Will the White voters (only 40% of Mexican parents are qualified to vote, meaning 60% are illegals) vote higher taxes for themselves to support illegals and their kids?

Nope. And even if they did, Mexicans are not known for love of learning, high educational achievement, or producing technology winners.

Anonymous said...

I think that Germany should recruit young Americans of German descent to bolster their population. They'll give German passports to people in eastern Europe whose ancestors left Germany hundreds of years ago but not to Americans whose ancestors left much more recently for Milwaukee and St. Louis.

Anonymous said...

"Why are Muslims given so much more deference than scientologists or gypsies?"

Maybe because Muslims are much more likely to kill people who publicly say things that offend them?

asdafasfasf said...

"I didn't think the article was quite as biased as Steve seems to be suggesting."

But the article does imply... Germans are going back to their 'evil ways'. It's as if Germans should not touch any controversial issue--even if it's true--because Germans tend to be extreme by nature and don't know when to stop.
It's like saying an alcoholic should NOT even think of drinking EVEN IF a glass of red wine or a shot of liquor a day is good for one's health because he doesn't know when to stop.

Though this kind of thinking can go to far, I suppose what Germans did in the 20th century was pretty ghastly. Because Germans are a great people, when they go bad, they go bad in a great horrendous way. I personally wouldn't worry but NY Times is owned by Jews who got it really bad by Germans.

And maybe we can make a similar arguments about blacks and Jews.
We can say libertine freedom is often good for many peoples but generally not good for blacks. As Steve once said of New Orleans during Katrina, blacks have this tendency to 'let the good times roll.' And if you look at what democratic freedom often leads to in Africa... shiite!!

And there are some commentators--even respectable ones--who've argued that it's not a good idea to spread liberal democracy to the Middle East or Muslim world since them fellers just can't handle it.
Democracy leads to free society and social order in the West but only leads to violence and fundamentalism in the Middle East--so critics say. Many people on both left and right have said Iraq was better under Hussein since them Iraqis JUST CAN'T HANDLE FREEDOM.

The logic so far:

1. Give Germans opportunity to think of race and it leads to world war and holocaust.

2. Give blacks beer and freedom, and there's a riot goin' on. Or you end up with something like Haiti or modern Zimbabwe.

3. Give Muslims democracy, and it's explosions and burkas all around.
(So, Muslim world is better under secular tyrants like Assad and Mubarak.)

Okay, what about Jews?
What happens when Jews get radical and gain elite power? Well, what happened in Russia? A totalitarian system with maybe 20 million dead.
So, if Germans should never get near racial ideas(lest they bring back Nazism), maybe Jews should never get near radical ideas and gain elite power(lest they bring back Marxism-Leninism).
I mean we don't want another holocaust but we don't want gulags and the Great Famine either.

asdfasdfadsf said...

***Mr. Sarrazin's great 'sin', from the article:
" Mr. Sarrazin has made it acceptable for the German everyman to criticize a specific minority group, and to make sweeping statements about that group’s intellectual capacity."
If the German everyman finds his voice and acts accordingly, the next thing you know he'll derail some shysters' gravy train!***

But it's okay for SWPL liberals to call Christian conservatives dumb dumb dummies. What have liberal Jews been saying about people like Sarah Palin and other Alaskan conservatives? Hmmm?

asdfasdfasf said...

"I'm interested to see if he concurs with the idea that multiculturalism is particularly incompatible with high tech industry. Note how industry is now dominated by the most homogenous countries like Sweden, Italy, China, Korea and Japan while the more multicultural countries like Britain and U.S have suffered the greatest industrial decline."

No, US is by far the hightech leader, and that won't change since we have the Jews, many smart whites(and some smart Asians as well.) What we've been losing is manufacturing jobs for middle Americans. Hightech is booming still in the US. No one is even close.
Israel is also a hightech leader because it has ashkenazi Jews.

adsfasdfasdf said...

By the way, hasn't David Brooks written along the lines of Steve Sailer a few times? How come NY Times keeps him on?
And there are plenty of Israelis in Israel who go on and on about Arabs being dumber, lazier, worthless, etc.

The problem is not WHAT was said but WHO said it. Germans are not allowed to do so.

Nanonymous said...

With just a little bit of smart marketing, Sarrazin's book can be a big hit in the USA. Certainly every publisher realizes it. So it does look like a curious market failure that there is still no word about its English translation.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Captain Jack hit the nail on the head. Family reunification is what drives so much of the immigration to the West. In the case of Europe, their relatively tight immigration laws are rendered impotent by huge amounts of marriage/spousal migration. This spousal migration has 2 drawbacks -

1.) Muslim immigrants want their children to marry spouses that are "uncorrupted" by Western culture. So there is endless amounts of chain migration from their home villages in Pakistan, Turkey, the Maghreb, etc.
2.) Immigrant Muslim spouses have old world values and want to have lots of kids. So birthrates remain high.

If 2nd Muslim kids married out 2nd gen Muslims, there'd be lower birthrates and less chain migration to Europe. There also would be a much smaller Muslim population today in the EU.

The UK Tories use to have a law called the "Primary Purpose Rule" that prohibited its immigrants, particularly South Asian Muslims, from bringing over spouses for the purposes of economic migration. Essentially it made spousal migration very tough if it appeared the spouse was coming over to enjoy the UK's higher standard of living, which kept a lot of highly fecund Muslim immigrants. When Labor took power under Blair in 1997, they scrapped this rule. The Tories kept arguing to bring it back up until a few years ago, but now seem to have given up the fight.

Anonymous said...

I missed the joke, the article and your summary seemed like 2 different things.

The International Jew said...

Anonymous -

"refuses to give the Palestinians citizenship, and pays Orthodox Jews to have large families (Palestinians are not eligible for these payments). "

You're O for 2.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East to grant "Palestinians"(within the 1967 lines) citizenship. In fact, all the surrounding Arab countries have laws EXPLICITLY denying "Palestinians" citizenship. (NOW can you say "apartheid"?)

"Palestinians" within the 1967 lines also receive all the same social welfare benefits as Jews.

But wait - Isn't this article about Germany?

Anonymous said...

the IQ gap between ethnic Germans and German Muslims is certanly as large as that between US blacks and whites, hence has gargantan implications, especially given Muslim birth rates and the current rising demands for ethnic quotas in government hiring.

(Some northern German cities claim IQ averages as high as ca 110, the average German Turk is probably around 80-85.)

The Northern Africas who are turning much of Paris, Brussles, Rotterdam, and Malmö into Euro Detroits have even less intellectual potential than the Turks (the majority of German Muslims).

I am afraid Sarrazin is right here.

In private conversation, dedicated veteran schoolteachers shake their heads in sustained disbelief: Muslim students are incredibly slow mentally and resistant to learning.

The "promising Muslim students" featured in some German TV docs resemble the "brilliant black students" we have seen in US TV docs on ghetto pilot schools: astonishingly dull by German standards.

But German standards are in decline, young people are discovering that stupid is groovy, perhaps encouraged by the hip hop violent arrogance of their Muslim counterparts (its like young whites idolizing violent rappers in the US)

The Muslim Mayor of Rotterdam commented recently on the "youthful offenders" (Muslims account for the vast majority of crime in Europe now, up to 90% in some towns) being studied for their psychological traits that they were simpy to stupid to be taught any skills at all (an ethnic Dutch politican would have done jail time for such a statement).

Fred said...

"With just a little bit of smart marketing, Sarrazin's book can be a big hit in the USA."

Doubtful, because it's written for a German audience and almost certainly refers to a lot of inside baseball about German politics and society that Americans wouldn't get. What a publisher could do is sign Sarrazin to write a similar book, expanding his idea to the West in general, instead of just Germany. That book would most likely be more popular somewhere like the UK or France than in the U.S. though, since those countries have a lot more Muslim immigrants.

Anonymous said...

"Does S. really have much evidence on *intelligence*?"

I have seen data on the IQ scores of non-European immigrant men in Sweden (military data).

0.7 sd lower than natives if I recall correctly.

ATBOTL said...

"David Cameron and Sarkozy are showing some common sense, but the U.S. remains completely hopeless."

Not really, these two are purely engaged in political posturing while the over all level of immigration remains as high as ever.

Anonymous said...

We're going to see scapegoating followed by forcing muslims to wear some sort of identifying mark on their clothing followed by pogroms, internment and then mass death. There are already Muslim ghettos. Germany (and western Europe in general...) has been through this before with a religious minority -- I think you know who I'm talking about. From socialism to fascism to democracy and right back to fascism, time really is cyclical and human beings never change.

How did this pathetic, liberal excuse for a human being creep in here?

P Coderch said...

I am going to learn German so that I can read this book.

Anonymous said...

Germany has already shut the door on immigration. In fact, there's been negative immigration for the past several years. For Turks, there was negative immigration of about 10,000 in the previous year.


Source please!

Wandrin said...

"But wait - Isn't this article about Germany?"

No, it's about the attitude of the people at the NYT towards Germany and Germans - an attitude of original ethnic sin that applies to the Germans but doesn't apply to the descendents of those responsible for the Bolshevik holocaust.

David said...

>dedicated veteran schoolteachers shake their heads in sustained disbelief: Muslim students are incredibly slow mentally and resistant to learning<

Whites are incredibly slow mentally and resistant to learning - when it comes to HBD. They are stuck on the idea that it's "immoral" to think other races are different from them. This stupidity has a long pedigree; it isn't the result of modern "anti-racism" laws; in fact, the creation of such laws is facilitated by it.

Many white people have a hole in the head - i.e., an actual mental defect - when it comes to race.

Bruce Banner said...

The dirty secret of Turkish immigration in Germany is that nearly half of "Turks" are in fact Kurds. Kurds have a lower IQ than ethnic Turks, particularly western Turks.
In any case, even Kurds are preferable to Moroccans, Algerians, Pakis and the rest of the Muslim crowd.

Svigor said...

All in all though, Germany is a sensible country, especially by Western standards. I hear a lot of you badmouth the Europeans, but most European countries are pretty sensible in terms of their immigration policies, with Spain and the UK now moving rescticionist. It's pretty much the U.S., the Anglosphere (Canada, Australia, New Zealand), and Sweden that maintain insane immigration policies. Other than that, common sense is prevailing on immigration, with Germany and Denmark leading the way. David Cameron and Sarkozy are showing some common sense, but the U.S. remains completely hopeless.

No, no, no. That's impossible. See, the only reason Europe even exists is so certain people can shift blame by saying "Europe's doing the same thing as the US." So I don't care what you have to do, but you have to fix your rhetoric.

Svigor said...

One more thing: How does the New York Times feel about Israel's demographic policies? Israel restricts immigration to only people of Jewish origin, deports illegal aliens and their children, refuses to give the Palestinians citizenship, and pays Orthodox Jews to have large families (Palestinians are not eligible for these payments). I'm wondering how Michael Slackman thinks about this?

He thinks you're an anti-Semite for even thinking that, much less bringing it up. This is the second time I've had to correct you, for one post. Please clean up your act.

Svigor said...

But wait - Isn't this article about Germany?

Lol, yes, this article (written by an Ashkenazi fellow and published in a paper owned by an Ashkenazi family, in an industry dominated by Ashkenazis, on a topic of central importance to Ashkenazi Jewry) is indeed about Germany.

Svigor said...

the IQ gap between ethnic Germans and German Muslims is certanly as large as that between US blacks and whites, hence has gargantan implications, especially given Muslim birth rates and the current rising demands for ethnic quotas in government hiring.

But let's not operate under the illusion that the gap between Germans and Turks, should it prove as wide as the gap between sub-Saharan Africans and Europeans, is as significant; sub-Saharan African mean IQ apparently falls below the threshold for non-basket-case civilization, while the Turk mean apparently does not, which is an important distinction.

adsfasdfasdf said...

"With just a little bit of smart marketing, Sarrazin's book can be a big hit in the USA."

"Doubtful, because it's written for a German audience and almost certainly refers to a lot of inside baseball about German politics and society that Americans wouldn't get. What a publisher could do is sign Sarrazin to write a similar book, expanding his idea to the West in general, instead of just Germany. That book would most likely be more popular somewhere like the UK or France than in the U.S. though, since those countries have a lot more Muslim immigrants."

It should be made into a documentary. Jared Diamond's book was a best seller but reached most people through National Geo documentary.

dsafasdff said...

"the IQ gap between ethnic Germans and German Muslims is certanly as large as that between US blacks and whites, hence has gargantan implications, especially given Muslim birth rates and the current rising demands for ethnic quotas in government hiring."

IQ is influenced by culture and genetics. People without proper study attitude do worse than those with. Similarly, physical strength is natural ability and training. When Mike Tyson didn't train properly, he lost to Buster Douglas, a real palooka.


My guess is Turks are not that dumb. They just don't give a crap about studying and don't exercise their minds. In the old world, they were at least under traditional authority and had some sense of discipline. But in Germany, they are like in a twilight zone. They now have the freedom--which they use to slack off--but they don't have enough appreciation of German society/culture to work hard at fitting in. So, they lost the discipline but haven't gained higher understanding either.

asdfadsfdsf said...

Two different mindsets.

Germans who never forget the Holocaust.
Turks who never remember the Armenia genocide.

Udolpho.com said...

The cultural differences are far more important than IQ. A society can manage IQ within a certain range--when it gets too wide there are problems, but cultural differences fracture the body politic and allow the managerial elite to run everything, as they do in America.

I swear you allow millions of persecuted religious ethnics into your country and they just never forgive you. They set about destroying your society with rancid multiculturalism.

Anonymous said...

The backward Turkish community in Germany calls attention to large differences in intelligence between some different groups of Whites. The few IQ studies that we have of European populations both showed that ethnic Germans are the smartest non-Askenazi Jewish Whites. Ethnic Germans probably have an average IQ of about 102-103. This is least ten points higher than Southeastern Europeans (Romanians, Bulgarians, Greeks, the Balkan populations) and Turks.

When you consider that most German Turks were poorly selected (from economically backward eastern Turkey), then there's probably as much as a 15-point IQ gap between ethnic Germans and ethnic Turks/Kurds in Germany.

The fact that White America is basically the product of Northwestern Europe makes these IQ differences an irrelevant issue.

Anonymous said...

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,703805,00.html

According to the German newspaper Spiegel, Germany is experiencing negative immigration of Turks.

M said...

European countries need to make a simple amendment to their laws affecting spouses and immigration: no one, any of whose parents or grandparents immigrated from outside the EU, may import a spouse. This will go a long way towards aiding assimilation and to reducing numbers of new immigrants.

Tough to do when that would contravene the EU wide supercessionary human rights law.

But yes. The most significant other area of abuse would be skill/education programs in which suspect documents are produced from suspect institutions - this should be dealt with by creating more latitude for governments to put prospective immigrants through supervised testing in their field or at least a basic IQ test. But I digress.

Though I think if anything it would be easier to say that noone may import a spouse. If a person comes to live in the country and obtains naturalisation or subsequently marries, then that is fine, but no one should be granted leave to stay in a country as a spouse. Exceptions for spouses of extremely highly skilled immigrants could be made, but I think that would make a good basic law.

(Also, in terms of spouses remember that South Asians in general are the ones for this, more than Muslims per say - this is much more common in South Asian Hindu groups like Patels and South Asian Sikh groups like Singhs than Middle Eastern moslems or even African moslems. Not that other "Muslims" and other ethnic groups don't do this [and these folks frequently make up for this by purchasing marriages, which is more difficult, but probably surprisingly less so than would be expected!]).

Anonymous said...

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2010/05/welfare-system-could-cause-israel-to.html

"Officially, Israel's unemployment rate is about 8%. But that doesn't include Israeli citizens who are not trying to find work, either because they feel disenfranchised, such as many Arab Israelis, or because they've chosen a life of state-subsidized religious study, such as many ultra-Orthodox Jews."

"Reasons differ for the non-employment of Arabs and ultra-Orthodox Jews.

Over the last 30 years, the percentage of working ultra-Orthodox men has decreased because of government programs that subsidize their religious study, experts say.

Such programs are now facing a backlash from Israel's secular and non-Orthodox citizens. "


"But defenders of the ultra-Orthodox credit them with preserving Israel's Jewish identity, saying that without the high birth rates of ultra-Orthodox families, Israel could see an Arab majority in future generations. .. "

When Mr. Slackman calls out Israel for using its Orthodox population to perserve Jewish demographic dominance, then we'll stop noticing the hypocricy.

By the way, I agree Israel is vastly superior to any of the neighboring Middle Eastern countries. The problem is that U.S. is vastly superior to Mexico in its treatment of immigrants, but its anti illegal immigration laws are termed "racist" by the NYTimes and the U.S. political/media establishment. Yet everybody from Larry Summers to Alan Dershowitz to Cheney to Obama to Harry Reid to Nancy Pelosi seems to be willing to step up and defend Israel.

The point isn't that Israel is bad. It's not. The point is the toughest defenders of Israel then turn around and badmouth Pat Buchanan, Tom Tancredo, and Thilo Sarazzin for wanting Israel-style policies. Which is ironic, when you consider that Muslim immigrants are a threat to Jews and will vote for anti-Israeli politicians.

I will also add that many of the worst offenders are non-Jewish. For example, Governor Huckabee wants to deport the Arab population out of Israel, but let "undocumented migrant laborers" get an amnesty. What the heck?

Even countries like Sweden, with negligible Jewish populations, pursue absolutely insane policies.

Personally I don't think anybody here has a problem with Jewish people. The problem is with establishmentarians, most of whom are gentile, that display immense idiocy and hypocricy.

M said...

As an aside, when it comes to Europe, Muslims are problematic, but I'm not sure whether Middle Eastern and South Asians Muslims or Africans are more problematic.

Weird American neocons like Whiskey tend to be all like "Rah, Muslim threat" to the extent that you wouldn't even think there were any Africans at all (probably plays better with White Americans who have tender, slightly guilty and paternal feelings towards Black Americans but not the man in the gold chain, I guess), but there are, and they're significant in number.

Muslims tend to do the "like ultra orthodox in Israel" thing more (lots of babies, lots of religion, lots of benefits, not much work), but other than oppressing one another all the time (and occasionally the locals for good measure), don't actually commit many crimes and are reasonably good at schoolwork (as good as can be expected).

On the other hand, while Africans are pretty assimilated into Western culture, and at least are ultra religious in an comprehensible fundy Christian, prosperity cult way, rather than a weird medieval herder way, they are much more criminal and violent and occasionally chop one another up to put in a calabash while chanting some mumbo jumbo. I'm not sure if they have as high benefit use rates as muslims (they have lower fertility I think - "god and society commands you to be fruitful and multiply">"strong sexual appetite" basically), but I'd be surprised if they didn't.

Anonymous said...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130649146

Before coming to Germany, skilled foreign workers from non-EU states have to prove that they make more than 66,000 euros a year in order to get a specialized work permit. Only a tiny number met that requirement in 2009. In addition, that permit is limited to just five years of employment.

Siemens, one of Germany's largest companies, currently has some 3,000 job openings, most of them for engineers. Siemens' Mark Langdorf says the immigration restrictions are onerous, outdated and risk hurting business. "From a business standpoint, it would be rather compelling when the political framework for the whole immigration scheme would change to give a better framework for talented people to come to Germany," Langdorf says.

For immigrants already in Germany, getting citizenship is just as hard; they must have lived in the country for eight years, prove command of the language, pass a test and prove full, self-sustaining employment before they can become naturalized citizens.

Until January 2000, German citizenship was based solely on "blood rights," meaning only children of German citizens were granted citizenship. Since 2000, it's become a little easier. But there are still big hurdles. And children of immigrants are not automatically German citizens. One of the parents has to have lived here for three years prior to the birth, and then citizenship is given only provisionally.

Largely lost in the debate is the fact that immigrants are not invading: Last year, nearly 40,000 Turkish immigrants left Germany and returned home, including some highly skilled workers — that's 10,000 more than arrived in 2009.


Germany has some remarkably sane immigration policies. Perhaps they could even loosen up a bit in terms of foreign workers, since 66000 Euros (~90K a year) is a high threshold. Or maybe not, considering that havoc H1B is creating in the U.S..... The point is that German politicians are better than other European politicians, who (with the exception of absolutely insane Sweden) are better than American politicians. America's political class are bufoons and should be swapped for Sarazzin, Sarkozy, and David Cameron.

corvinus said...

Germany has already shut the door on immigration. In fact, there's been negative immigration for the past several years. For Turks, there was negative immigration of about 10,000 in the previous year.

Source please!


It's true... I read a few newspaper articles about that, including one from Spiegel. I tried to find them just now, but they were from a few months ago and I couldn't. But I did find this:

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=more-and-more-greeks-seek-work-in-turkey-2010-11-15

Anonymous said...

Btw

http://www.economist.com/node/17468554?story_id=17468554&fsrc=rss

"A week earlier, Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, mentioned Mr Florida in an article in the Times. Staff in Number 10 enthuse about an economist who “describes life as it is now, not as it used to be.”"

"Mr Florida’s definition of creative goes beyond the obvious artists and musicians to include anyone open to new ideas. He says businesses must give space and flexibility to these freethinkers, and that cities must attract lots of them to be successful. This means they must be green, clean, tolerant and cultured, typically with large gay and ethnic-minority populations. This has led to him being attacked from the right for his pro-gay and pro-immigration stance, and criticised from the left as an advocate of elitism and gentrification."

This is what Cameron's commitment towards lowering immigration means. The PR chump.

Anonymous said...

German newspapers are a bit more balanced.

Still, the view that there are serious problems with immigrants is also widespread -- even though Mesut Özil was one of the German national team's stars in the last World Cup and Sibel Kekilli is a television star. Instead of such celebrities with Turkish backgrounds, many Germans are apparently more likely to think first of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who, in 2008, told Turks living in Germany: "No one can expect you to subject yourselves to assimilation, because assimilation is a crime against humanity."

Very few US reporters have seen fit to mention that Sazzarin wants Germany to import more Jews, because he thinks they are more intelligent.

That last bit is either raging anti-Semitism or a source of pride, depending on who says it.

Anonymous said...

I keep hearing lots of thing about Cameron's immigration policies in the UK. The cap is being lifted from 2600 per month to 4000 and intracompany transfers are exempt. However, there is apparently going to be a salary requirement to keep out non highly paid workers. Also, the right to permanent settlement will be taken away from students and foreign workers.


This strikes me as reasonable. I'd prefer more restrictive immigration policies, but keeping foreign workers and students from permanently settling is a good first step. There appears to be some movement toward restricting marriage visas too. Also, immigration minister Damian Green keeps reiterating the call for 40,000 net migration per year, which is encouraging.

The Tories are basically a pro-business party, much like the Republicans. So I can somewhat sympathize with Cameron. The main question is this: Will David Cameron implement immigration policies to stop the demographic transformation of the UK? Given his large spending cuts (welfare is a major driver of immigrant fertility) and desire to restrict permanent migration, he's showing some common sense. He could do better (ie cut immigrants off welfare completely, go for 0 net migration, and pay some of the worst cases to go back), but I wouldn't mind a Cameron-style immigration policy in the U.S. It'd be far preferrable to the insanity that currently is embraced as conventional wisdom.

In the U.S., a Cameron-style immigration policy would be demagogued as racist and would be completely unembraced by either party. So be happy with what you got.

Anonymous said...

According to the German newspaper Spiegel, Germany is experiencing negative immigration of Turks.

A link that works, please!

corvinus said...

According to the German newspaper Spiegel, Germany is experiencing negative immigration of Turks.

A link that works, please!


http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,554612,00.html

It seems that Turkey is attracting immigration from Europe for the same reason the South is from the rest of the USA: lower cost of living, among other things.

Anonymous said...

The dirty secret of Turkish immigration in Germany is that nearly half of "Turks" are in fact Kurds. Kurds have a lower IQ than ethnic Turks, particularly western Turks.
In any case, even Kurds are preferable to Moroccans, Algerians, Pakis and the rest of the Muslim crowd.


I would like to see a source for this please because based on my extensive travels to Germany and meeting with many Turkish Muslims in Germany, I find this very hard to believe. First of all, most of the Muslims in Germany speak Turkish fluently and self-identify as Turks. Kurds are just as proud of their heritage as the nationalistic Turks yet they would never identify themselves as Turks even if they spoke perfect Turkish.

Kurds do have a lower IQ than Turks, especially the secular Turks. I would peg Kurdish IQ at about the mid 80's. Secular Turkish IQ is around the mid 90's to low 100's. But most secular Turks are not migrating to Germany. They have it too good in Turkey.

As an aside, when it comes to Europe, Muslims are problematic, but I'm not sure whether Middle Eastern and South Asians Muslims or Africans are more problematic.

It depends what you are worried about. If you are worried about terrorism, then South Asian Muslims are the worst. If you are worried about organized crime, then don't live near Albanians. If you are worried about theft, then watch out for the Moroccans. If wildings scare you, then so should Somalis. Not a fan of rape? Then you won't be a fan of Arabs.

CJ said...

A link that works, please!

Gotta wonder about the actual brainpower of the Mensa cases around here who can't even script a hyperlink.

Okay, from a Spiegel Online article titled Germany Needs More Foreigners:

...an ever-dwindling number of Turks have been emigrating to Germany. Their net immigration plunged from 10,130 in the year 2000 to 1,746 in 2005. In the meantime, the direction of emigration has even reversed itself. In 2008 -- the most recent year with available concrete figures -- there was a net emigration of 10,147 persons to Turkey.

(Steve, if you already got this link from others then just 86 this one.)

Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure that any resident of an EU country can migrate freely to Germany. The restrictions only apply to non-EU. If one EU country has lax immigration policies then they all do, in practical terms. Lets see Muslim immigration to Germany decline once Turkey becomes an EU member...

eh said...

Like Sarrain himself says, most of the people who dismiss or try to discredit him -- and this is definitely an attempt at that, albeit subtler than most -- have not read his book. Which is surely true in this case as well.

elvisd said...

"I will also add that many of the worst offenders are non-Jewish. For example, Governor Huckabee wants to deport the Arab population out of Israel, but let "undocumented migrant laborers" get an amnesty. What the heck?"

I've seen no indication so far that Mike Huckabee is particularly intelligent fellow.

Anonymous said...

We're going to see scapegoating followed by forcing muslims to wear some sort of identifying mark on their clothing followed by pogroms, internment and then mass death. There are already Muslim ghettos. Germany (and western Europe in general...) has been through this before with a religious minority -- I think you know who I'm talking about. From socialism to fascism to democracy and right back to fascism, time really is cyclical and human beings never change.

Anonymous said...

Germany is experiencing negative immigration and has been for the last several years. The issue is the large Muslim population and its high birthrate. Of course, even at this rate, Germany's non-Western population will remain comparatively small for a while.

All in all, Germany will likely stay German for at least this century. Can't say the same for Sweden.

You know, that information about negative Turkish immigration could've been googled, assuming the link wasn't working...... Anyway, I bet most of you wouldn't have suspected that Germany is that locked down, as of this point.

Right now, other than Sweden, Europe is much more restrictionist than the U.S. The EU, on a per capita basis, takes about 1/3 the immigrants of the U.S. I'd prefer less, but the point is that the U.S. is insane.

Anonymous said...

UK immigration policies are not restrictive, even under Cameron.

If you think they are you have been done by a PR job - if you're an American reading this, don't feel bad, it's not your job to notice the UK is now ruled from Brussels.

Directive 2004/38/EC

Short translation: the EU is a fishing net and UK is a trawler. The immigrants are fish. When a fish gets caught in the net it is hauled in to the UK by 2004/38/EC.

Hence UK's harsh immigration policies are an illusion. All that immigrants require to move to the UK is to be married to someone with an EU passport from any EU state, or be a member of their "extended family".

This means not only does the Somali asylum seeker in Romania who either marries a Romanian citizen, or gets an EU passport from Romania after the regulation few years, get to come to Britain, he can invite his entire extended family over to Britain from Somali.

This is actual source of UK's high immigration. Cameron is doing nothing about Directive 2004/38/EC because he is a career EUrocrat.

corvinus said...

I've seen no indication so far that Mike Huckabee is particularly intelligent fellow.

Well, he *is* from Arkansas...

All in all, Germany will likely stay German for at least this century. Can't say the same for Sweden.

Anyway, I bet most of you wouldn't have suspected that Germany is that locked down, as of this point.


It's the German solution to immigration: throw massive amounts of bureaucracy at the would-be immigrants. Right now, Germany is practically like Japan.

Denmark and Netherlands are the other two previously wide-open Germanic countries who have slammed the gates shut. Both seemed to be loosening slightly, but with Wilders, the latest elections, and the economy, they're as tight as Germany now.

As far as wide-open countries: make that Sweden and Norway. Norway has a strong economy due to its oil wealth, and it's sucking in immigrants on a per-capita basis just as fast as Sweden. I think they let in 60,000 immigrants last year, while Sweden let in 100,000.

Australia was at 300,000... it's just as loony as Sweden and Norway.

Britain lets in about the same number as Australia, so Britain is actually only about a third as bad as Australia, when one considers Britain's population is three times as large.

Canada is in between these two on a per-capita basis, and the USA is somewhat below Britain. Yes, below Britain, Australia, and Canada. And Norway and Sweden.

corvinus said...

Also, somewhat off-topic, but the TSA/Tyner episode reminds me of the Idiocracy scene where Clevon is in the hospital after impaling his crotch on an iron gate.

Anonymous said...

Well Corvinus, if that's the German solution to immigration, maybe us Americans can learn a thing or two.

Do you know if Sweden is planning any immigration cuts, due to the sucess of immigration restrictionists?

In the longterm, Europe should promote aggressive natalist policies, like the French are doing.

The Tories have some serious restrictionists in their ranks. One can hope that they can win sway over David Cameron and bring down net migration. One thing to consider: Until Labor took power in 1997, the Tories were keeping net migration at pretty low levels. So they have good restrictionist credentials, unlike Blair and Gordon Brown.

corvinus said...

Well Corvinus, if that's the German solution to immigration, maybe us Americans can learn a thing or two.

What we in the USA have been doing is twofold: 1) progressively hiking the fees for visas, making it more expensive to immigrate (in 2007, there was a spike in applications to beat a fee hike, and afterwards in 2008 and 2009, applications were lower than in the earlier part of the decade), and 2) letting huge wait times deter attempts to immigrate (which is especially bad for Mexicans and Filipinos who want to immigrate). Unlike human rights groups who bellyache about the long wait times, I don't see them as a bad thing, really. White people don't have many family members TO sponsor, so it doesn't really affect us.

Do you know if Sweden is planning any immigration cuts, due to the sucess of immigration restrictionists?

The SD would have to get into the government, like its sister party in Denmark has done. The Swedish center-right government has however refused to let the SD join them, so I don't see any effect yet. Norway, despite having a restrictionist party as strong as Denmark's, is as loose as Sweden, primarily because it's governed by the left right now.

In the longterm, Europe should promote aggressive natalist policies, like the French are doing.

This would have nothing but a palliative effect. Never underestimate religion as a birth rate booster. Personally, I think the biggest disaster for European birth rates was (wait for it) the Catholic Church's Vatican II, which gutted the church's rites and turned it into a vapid liberal shell of its former self. It nicely explains why Europeans can't breed (and why Latin Americans are getting that way) but Israelis and Muslims can.

The Tories have some serious restrictionists in their ranks. One can hope that they can win sway over David Cameron and bring down net migration. One thing to consider: Until Labor took power in 1997, the Tories were keeping net migration at pretty low levels. So they have good restrictionist credentials, unlike Blair and Gordon Brown.

I think they're tightening up already. The problem is that race-denial and sickening PC is still in full force.

David said...

>We're going to see scapegoating [NOTHING IS EVER ACTUALLY THEIR FAULT -- David] followed by forcing muslims to wear some sort of identifying mark on their clothing [SUCH AS BURQAS OR VEILS IN FRANCE? -- David] followed by pogroms, internment and then mass death. There are already Muslim ghettos [PRACTICALLY AS BAD AS CHINATOWNS, EH? -- David]. Germany (and western Europe in general...) has been through this before with a religious minority -- I think you know who I'm talking about.<

Who, boychick? Who? We're jumping up and down with suspense. Spring the bombshell, quick!