I didn’t look beyond the headlines the “Anti-Semitic habits of mind die hard in Europe” story, assuming this was actually a case of Islamic or Muslim anti-Semitism. rooted in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, not the 20th century European variety, which was largely racial (and economic) in character. Looking a little deeper I see little reason to change my mind.
Sure, there are a few left-wing European anti-Israel Palestinian sympathizers, but does that have anything to do with those murders in France? The NYT seems to have assumed so at first but turns out they were mistaken. (I believe this was the third time in a month the NYT had jumped the gun on what it assumed was a racial hate crime story: they seem to live off this stuff and it is not good for the country (our country) or their own credibility. God they piss me off sometimes.
Also, I took exception to this sentence: “Europeans have committed an act of criminal folly: they opened their doors to an immigrant population they were not prepared to accept,”
It turns out to have been folly perhaps, but unless they had knowledge aforethought (or whatever the phrase is) it was hardly criminal. They didn’t know how hard the challenge of human biodiversity really is, on both sides, and not only in Europe but anywhere. We’ve been kidding ourselves or deluding ourselves with wishful thinking — that’s folly — but it only becomes culpable when you have enough evidence to know better. There’s no going back however and the centuries long slog of assimilation and integration has barely begun. I don’t think we should encourage more immigration however. That just makes the problem more difficult and suits nobody’s interests.
Suits nobody’s interests? I take that back. Multi-racial multi-culturalism does suite the interests of our plutocratic elites since it makes it almost impossible for ordinary working people to come together to defend their interests. Divide and conquer and all that. I wish the NYT would write that story up.
Greed knows no limits.