RUTHFULLY YOURS

European leaders talk about two things these days; preserving European values by taking in Muslim migrants and integrating Muslim migrants into Europe by getting them to adopt European values.

It does not occur to them that their plan to save European values depends on killing European values.

The same European values that require Sweden, a country of less than 10 million, to take in 180,000 Muslim migrants in one year also expects the new “Swedes” to celebrate tolerance, feminism and gay marriage. Instead European values have filled the cities of Europe with Shariah patrols, unemployed angry men waving ISIS flags and the occasional public act of terror.

European countries that refuse to invest money in border security instead find themselves forced to invest money into counterterrorism forces. And those are bad for European values too.

But, as Central European countries are discovering, European values don’t have much to do with the preservation of viable functioning European states. Instead they are about the sort of static Socialism that Bernie Sanders admires from abroad. But even a Socialist welfare state requires people to work for a living. Maine’s generous welfare policies began collapsing once Somali Muslims swarmed in to take advantage of them. Denmark and the Dutch, among other of Bernie Sanders’ role models, have been sounding more like Reagan and less like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.

Two years ago, the Dutch King declared that, “The classic welfare state of the second half of the 20th century in these areas in particular brought forth arrangements that are unsustainable in their current form.” That same year, the Danish Finance Minister called for the “modernization of the welfare state.”

For years, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has served as a welcome counterpoint to Barack Obama, and the object of wistful musings about what a fine President of the United States he would have been, if only he had been born south of the border: generally realistic about the jihad threat, determined to do what was necessary to meet that threat, and a strong supporter of Israel.

But now Canada at last has its own Obama: Justin Trudeau. And that means that Canada, like the United States, faces deep trouble ahead.

The new Prime Minister of Canada, like Obama, has consistently downplayed the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat and ascribed it to other causes. Christine Williams, a Canadian journalist and a Federally appointed Director with the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, has noted that in the wake of the Boston Marathon jihad bombing, Trudeau issued a bizarre statement: “There is no question that this happened because of someone who feels completely excluded, someone who feels completely at war with innocence, at war with society.”

“Refugees” plundered a train’s dining car and threatened the staff. Railroad employees had assured all “refugees from Syria” that they would not be thrown off any train if they lacked valid tickets. This led to thousands of people claiming to be from Syria in order to get a free ride.

The police have about 17,000 deportation cases piled up. Despite the government’s request for a clampdown on people staying in Sweden despite having received deportation notices, more and more people are staying in the country illegally. 54,00 people have refused to leave the country after being denied asylum since 2011.

Per Gudmundson of the daily Svenska Dagbladet questions the repatriation of ISIS combatants to Sweden: “Who is in charge of the security aspect? Anyone can pretend to be a defector.”

On September 3, a 37-year-old man with a serious criminal record was shot dead in a car in the Stockholm suburb of Hässelby Gård. His two small children were sitting in the back seat at the time, but were physically unharmed. A witness told the police that the youngest child screamed: “Help, help, they’ve killed my daddy!” A 23-year-old man, suspected of the murder, is now in custody, but vehemently denies the charges. Concern about safety is now growing in Hässelby Gård, which was the scene of another shooting in June, when two girls crossing the town square were wounded in crossfire.

The victory of Canada’s Liberal Party under Justin Trudeau in Monday’s election was only surprising to those who were keen to present the election as a close horse race. Writing a few days ago, I foresaw a Liberal near majority, while I feared what proved to be the actual outcome: a solid Liberal majority.

On the adage that governments defeat themselves, after almost ten years of Conservative government, 2015 was likely to be a Liberal year. This was only obscured by the anomalous result of the 2011 election, which saw the left-wing New Democratic Party installed as the official opposition and the Liberals as a third-place rump.

The election marks a return to form for Canada’s politics. A dominant Liberal Party, a strong Conservative opposition, and the New Democrats permanently in third place. The parties shifted places almost exactly from 2011. In popular vote in 2011, it was roughly Conservatives 40 percent, New Democrats 30 percent, and Liberals 20 percent. In 2015, Liberals won 40 percent, Conservatives 30 percent, and New Democrats 20 percent. The 2011 outcome was almost entirely due to the volatile Quebec electorate; this time they gave Liberals a majority of the province’s seats, but again showed their eccentricity by giving the Conservatives twelve seats, up from five in 2011. The Conservatives lost seats in every other province and were wiped out in four.