mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
The European Immigration Crisis
EU Projects Three Million Refugees and Migrants by End of 2017
Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Fat_Man

    Maybe we can send Donald Trump to the EU.

  • Andrew Allison

    The fact that the so-called “refugees” are declining offers of asylum in countries other than Germany and Sweden strongly suggests that many of them are economic migrants, not genuine refugees.

    • Fat_Man

      Worse, their economic motivation is to collect welfare checks.

      • http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/author/kwatson/ megapotamus

        In that regard they are true Euros already. Forward.

        • Fat_Man

          True. I do not see any fun resolution of this mess.

  • gabrielsyme

    At least the Roman Empire had sound economic and military reasons to resettle barbarians within the empire. This is pure folly.

    • PennsylvaniaPry

      And the “barbarians” weren’t really all that barbarian. Most of them could speak Latin–their law codes were in Latin after all. Most of them were also Christians–even if they were Arians. The Germanic groups who settled within the bounds of the Empire had been close neighbors for centuries and were fairly easily assimilated, up to a point. What really changed things for Rome was the decentralization of the Empire out of the city of Rome itself in the 4th century. The official “end” of the Western Empire in 476 AD when Odoacer sent Romulus Augustulus off into retirement (with a pension) was a mere local formality for the most part; in practice, the Western Empire had already devolved into smaller political units–and the Roman citizens of each were in the main quite happy not to bear the burden of taxation that the central government had imposed. The real end of the Antique Latin West came about when the Eastern Emperor Justinian reconquered Italy and North Africa, hoping to reconstitute the entire Empire. In the process, he destroyed much of Italy and put an end to the cultural and political continuity of Italy itself.

      • PennsylvaniaPry

        In other words, the situation today is worse.

        • http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/author/kwatson/ megapotamus

          Except for the civilizing, mind-focusing effect of firearms, thank God for ’em. Forward.

  • WJ Alden

    The demographic impact of this invasion is far larger than what it appears. At most Germany has about 10 million men ages 18-38. German government estimates predict 1.5 million arrivals this year, 75% of whom are men roughly those ages. These refugees, mostly Muslim arrivals in a single year, will be 10% of men ages 18-38. They will soon be competing for jobs. They will soon be petitioning to admit their wives, children, arranged brides, etc. They will soon be rapidly outbreeding the native Germans.

    Consider the demographic impact. Consider the economic impact on wages. This is a full-scale invasion of Germany, and open war on the wages of lower skilled German men.

    • Fat_Man

      They are not going to compete for jobs. German industry has no need for unskilled labor and the only eduction these dudes have is memorizing the Koran.

  • Section 9

    This period in European History is starting to resemble one vast Weimar Continent.

  • fenster moop

    I find it interesting that even in this welcome articulation of a skeptical POV the author still can’t summon up the words to name the cultural conflicts that are heading towards a boil. It’s all politely a matter of Europe being “poorly set up to receive” migrants in such large numbers, the threat to Schengen, the worrisome rise of right parties, etc. We tip-toe around the central question for fear, I suspect, of the charge of nativism. That’s still toxic in the best precincts. Orbanism is what other people do and the notion that Europe needs to be defended is still kind of reprobate. I think that will need to change–indeed, if you oppose the rise of nasty and aggressive nativism you might need to embrace a better version.

    • http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/author/kwatson/ megapotamus

      Oh, the rise of the Right! How we must fear that! Yet it is the Left (the Leftwing really) that has brought us here, mitigating the usual reflexive aversion. Hmm. Yes, the job of separating Average Mohammed from the Jihadis would be difficult even if such a distinction exists. Evidence for it is… thin. One could, with plausible optimism, weed out the non-Muslims from the horde. But that would be discrimination. And you know we can’t have that. Forward.

    • circleglider

      Indeed. Gallagher and the rest of The American Interest crowd can only identify “the rise of right-wing parties” as the chief risk from increased immigration.

      At least they appear to recognize the insanity of economic forecasts which predict immigration will increase growth. TAI’s overriding concern remains institutional stability. Can’t lose any tenured jobs in the academy or the bureaucracy!

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    This will damage both the European Cultures that accept all these immigrants from the Inferior and Incompatible Islamic Culture, as well as the Nation’s these immigrants call from, as their ambitions will no longer motivate improvements in those Nations. Because of the adoption of Socialism since WWII, Europe is already doing extremely poorly, adding aliens from the backward Islamic Culture will only further damage the once successful national cultures of Europe.

  • http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/author/kwatson/ megapotamus

    That ‘backlash’ which put immigration nearly on hold has proven to be quite salutary. But it is a bit late for such an action in Europe. Even if the necessary political institutions gave up their brain-dead philanthropy overnight, the columns are already in motion. Only Turkey could really stem the flow and only if they really, really wanted to. Since they fired the starting gun, that seems unlikely and the millions could only be slowed while the gleaming incentives of the West beckon. Jobs? Shirley, you jest. The Muslim is an invader and seeks nothing you or I would recognize as gainful employment. They come to empty whatever coffers they find, fortify whatever enclave they land in and begin the not-too-difficult task of converting the Euro atmosphere into something more amenable to beheadings, defenestration and FGM. Only force can stem the tide and then not in combat but in something like The Highway of Death in the first Gulf War but against boats, roads and busses rather than armored military vehicles. The time for mitigation was decades ago, fellow babies. Things are going to get worse before they don’t get any better. Forward.

  • FriendlyGoat

    This article seems to dread the rise of far-right parties in Europe, and yet this publication generally favors right-side solutions perhaps including the idea of forcibly repelling the in-migration to Europe. Certainly I don’t discount the problems Europe is facing with this, but I don’t guess I understand a fear of right-side parties and a hope for right-side approaches at the same time.

    Long term, we need a messaging war against belief inIslam itself, with some hope that larger and larger regions do not become uninhabitable simply because of Islam gone wild. Otherwise, the places to run away from get bigger and the places to run toward get over-run, no?

    • f1b0nacc1

      The reason for rise of the right-wing parties is simplicity itself: they are willing to acknowledge that the problem exists, and they are willing to do something about it. The Left and Center in the EU pretend that there is no problem and that those who think otherwise are hopelessly racist. This doesn’t leave a lot of room for those who can see the reality of the threat to go to, other than the right wing.
      I suspect that this explains the popularity of short-fingered vulgarians like Trump….

      • FriendlyGoat

        This still doesn’t explain TAI playing both sides of the street by fretting over far right politicians while hoping for them, It doesn’t explain either why you seem to think Trump is going to actually “do something about” immigration while your last line does not seem to be complimenting him on his vision.

        • f1b0nacc1

          There are a great many people who believe that ‘doing something’ about immigration is a necessity. I am a great believer in what Fred Thompson used to refer to as ‘High walls, but wide gates’, i.e. making it easy for those to enter the country legally, but taking a firm and uncompromising stand against illegals. Others are more extreme, such true nativists, for instance, and I have little patience for that sort of thing. All of us, however, find ourselves in opposition to the position of the various elites (whether they are the multi-culti left or the ‘chamber of commerce republicans’) who want open borders and simply ignore the consequences of this policy.
          Trump and his ilk represent ignorant nativists, and I have no time for them. Sadly however, a lot of people are finding themselves forced to choose between the open borders crowd and the nativists (like Trump or the far right in the EU), and see trump as the lesser of two evils. I don’t believe that Trump would actually do very much (his policies are a tissue of nonsense barely worthy of the name), and would likely support almost anyone (other than Hillary) running against him, but a big part of his appeal (as is the case with the BNP, UKIP or the various nativist groups in the EU) is that they at least address this problem, and don’t just ignore the concerns of voters. TAI might engage in a lot of handwringing about the far right (most of whom aren’t all that far right, the various nativists group in Western Europe, for instance, are fairly left-wing economically), but they also note that by ignoring the legitimate concerns of large groups of voters the ‘responsible’ parties are pushing those voters into the arms of the far right.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I really think the “Chamber of Commerce” Republicans would be FINE with high walls and wide gates. Donald Trump calls it sending everyone home and then “letting the good ones come back”. In the George W. Bush era, this same thing was also called “guest workers”. The C of C gang wants adequate honest field harvesters, but even more they want lots and lots of legalized guest workers in all parts of the talent spectrum—-think H1B for all types of occupations.

            The problem is that Donald Trump is now quietly allowing HIS followers to believe he is not only going to banish the “rapists”, but also banish the foreign workers who both occupy American jobs but also hold down the whole wage curve. Nothing could be farther from the truth of what Donald and a GOP Congress would do. The icing on the cake would be broad-based tax reduction on all streams of income from business. Then the American workers are not only pushed out of their jobs, but the “savings” to business from doing it can be increasingly just “kept” by the shareholder class. “Get those 40% taxes down to 25%, or 20%, or even 15%”, they say. That would be “sweet” for sure.

            The same people who will lower taxes will increase guest workers.

            Meanwhile, Europe has an economic problem with immigrants but a drastically-worse problem with the religion in the heads of their particular immigrants.

          • f1b0nacc1

            You obviously know very little about the Chamber of Commerce types in the GOP and comparatively little about the GOP in general)…they absolutely would HATE ‘the high fences and wide gates’ proposals (this is not idle speculation, they hated it when Thompson discussed it in the early 2000s) as it would not give them the bottomless pit of cheap labor that they want. The Tech Titans (you know, the folks who adore H-1Bs, and who are overwhelming Democratic supporters…people like Brin, Page, Zuckerberg, Gates, etc.) want H-1Bs, but they don’t want these folks to have any legal status higher than that of a standard helot….after all, if they did have legal status, they wouldn’t accept the conditions imposed upon them as H-1Bs. This isn’t about conservatism vs liberalism, or even racism per se, it is about who can benefit from cheap labor, and that cuts across all those dividers.
            I will ignore your usual fixation on tax rates except to point out that this had nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. The Tech Titans are hardly supporters of lower tax rates, but they love the idea of guest workers. Just because their guest workers are higher paid, doesn’t make them any less abusive…
            Europe’s problem is similar to ours (they have a massive need for cheap labor, especially given their greying population), and they like us have a political class on the left that is married to this idiotic multi-culti nonsense as well. There problem is more immediate and severe, but ultimately it isn’t all that different than ours.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Let’s play a game at Congress. Let’s mention “guest workers” who are well vetted on security matters and who go in out the wide gate in the high wall. I’m betting Republicans are on board in a New York minute.

          • f1b0nacc1

            Actually, you will both win and lose your game. The Chamber of Commerce GOP types (largely those who are in the leadership…example = Boehner or McConnell) would likely support the position you describe…I suspect Rubio would be a supporter as well. The Tea Party types strongly reject it, for reasons that I should think would be obvious. Another example of this would be Cruz. Basically the GOP ‘pro-business’ types (as opposed to pro-market, a very different thing) would likely be on board with what you describe, but then again the evil Tea Partiers would reject it.
            Now what I find amusing in this is that you ignore that the BIGGEST supporters of guest workers are the strong Democratic supporters in the tech industry, as well as the multi-culti left (what WRM calls the Gentry Liberals). These folks strongly oppose those tax cuts you hate so much, but desperately want open borders so they can get all the cheap labor that they want.
            It simply isn’t as clear cut as you would like to believe it to be. I for instance (and I am hardly that unusual among those on the right) want deregulation on a very large scale, significantly lower taxes across the board (and the removal of the loopholes that encourage crony capitalism to flourish), but also want strong restrictions AGAINST the use of guest workers as the process is inherently exploitive. So how do you pidgeonhole me?
            A very wise man once said, “You can have democracy, immigration, and multiculturalism….pick two” The real trick is which two get picked…

          • FriendlyGoat

            Well, I don’t “pidgeonhole” you. I wish you were a reliable vote for either Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton—-depending on which is nominated. But, based on our many discussions, I’m going to guess that won’t be the case.

            You are correct that many in the Tea Party have different ideas from those they support with votes and money in the GOP. Somehow the Tea people have the idea that a far, far, right politician somehow represents THEM more than a medium-right politician does. Beats me as to why. Those far-far-right politicians actually talk about tax cuts so egregious that they would keep killing the Tea folks for generations. The Tea folks, in general, are too confused to know that high-end tax cuts work exactly backwards of the positive claims made about them by Republicans. Actually “most” people are similarly confused, but the Tea people will defend their confusion in Tricorn hats (which is nuttier by a degree.)

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service