The Wages of Altruistic “Virtue” by Edward Cline
https://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/
The governments of Europe have chosen altruism as the basis of their foreign policy vis-à-vis immigration. Angela Merkel of Germany especially has implemented the Stoic philosophy of Epictetus (c. 50 – 135 AD) and Marcus Aurelius of enduring without complaint the evils of an invasion by Third and Fourth World Islamic savages, because it is their Kantian “duty” or decreed categorical imperative for Germans to surrender their country, their lives, and happiness to the welfare and contentment of the contemptuous poor, the “oppressed” and the “needy.”
One of Epictetus’s Stoical “Golden Rules,” loosely translated, was: Be prepared to be self-sufficient unto oneself. Which is ancient but good advice, except that in Merkel’s “new” Germany, an individual should also flourish enough to support his enemies, the “refugees.” He is prohibited from deciding what is “sufficient.”
Kant’s “Golden Rule” of the categorical imperative is:Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law. (1785 – Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals).Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law of nature.
The etymological and ethical root of altruism is:
“unselfishness, devotion to the welfare of others, opposite of egoism,” from French altruisme, coined or popularized 1830 by French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798-1857), with -ism + autrui (Old French altrui) “of or to others,” from Latin alteri, dative of alter “other” (see alter). The -l- is perhaps an etymological reinsertion from the Latin word.
The word was coined by the French philosopher Auguste Comte in French, as altruisme, for an antonym of egoism.
So much for this brief lesson in philosophy. What have Europeans (and to a lesser extent, Americans) gained by their experiment in unlimited immigration altruism? The wages are high – in death, destruction, rape, crime, and parasitism by the invading savages as a “right” or “entitlement.” Let’s take a look of the benefits of personal and national selflessness as a virtue. Keep in mind, selflessness is also a paramount Christian virtue even among atheists and agnostics. Also, the “refugees welcome” crowd, at least in Europe, is shrinking:
Rapes in Sweden have skyrocketed by a shocking 1,472% since the mid-70’s, with 6,620 sexual assaults being reported to police in 2014 compared to just 421 in 1975. The country is now known as the rape capital of the west.
“77.6 percent of the country’s rapists are identified as “foreigners” (and that’s significant because in Sweden, “foreigner” is generally synonymous with “immigrant from Muslim country”), writes Selwyn Duke. “And even this likely understates the issue, since the Swedish government — in an effort to obscure the problem — records second-generation Muslim perpetrators simply as “Swedes.”
Rapes occurring in and around migrant camps are now so prevalent, that authorities in Germany are covering up details of incidents so as not to “legitimize” critics of mass immigration.
On the other hand, Swedes are awakening to their dilemma.
Wennerlund didn’t mind Christian immigrants, but he believes it’s not working with the Muslims, even though Sweden has had a Muslim population for decades. “Often they don’t want to come here and change,” he says. “They want to change us. And we don’t want to be changed. So that’s a conflict.”
To Sweden Democrats and their supporters, immigrants are distorting Swedish society beyond recognition.
“Immigrants are in general a little bit more criminal than Swedes born in Sweden, and that’s a fact,” party leader Jimmie Akesson recently told the BBC. “You can see it especially in violence, rape and so on.”
Of course others dispute that claim. Nonetheless, the Sweden Democrats want to cut immigration by 90 percent. And they are willing to take dramatic steps to make it happen.
Across Sweden, three mosques were firebombed in the span of a month.
“Every time I wake up, I’m very afraid to check my telephone to see that something happened during the night,” says Omar Mustafa, president of the Islamic Association of Sweden.
At an interview in his Stockholm office, he says that although Sweden has a history of racism, “this year, and this time especially, it’s the most scary time actually. People are really afraid, and people are actually talking about moving from Sweden.”
But the Mainstream Media, so obviously and justifiably despised by President Trump, refuses to report much about how especially Sweden has become the “rape capital” of the West. Allen West reports:
The Gatestone Institute says, “Forty years after the Swedish parliament unanimously decided to change the formerly homogenous Sweden into a multicultural country, violent crime has increased by 300 percent and rapes by 1,472 percent.
In an astounding number of cases, the Swedish courts have demonstrated sympathy for the rapists, and have acquitted suspects who have claimed that the girl wanted to have sex with six, seven or eight men.”
Here’s another “interesting” fact. Not only does it appear that the Swedish government may be trying to prevent its citizens from knowing the truth by not collecting data and calling all rapists “Swedish men,” it passed a law in December of 2014 making it a CRIME for citizens to criticize the government’s immigration policies and/or “insulting” immigrants. If that doesn’t convince you that “progressive” politicians will go to any length to protect their insane ideologies and PC dogma I don’t know what will.
This suppression of vital information and the introduction of punishment for “defaming” Muslims is also a government policy in Germany. The Washington Post reported in January 2016:
German authorities, meanwhile, have reached a deal with Facebook, Google and Twitter to get tougher on offensive content, with the outlets agreeing to apply domestic laws, rather than their own corporate policies, to reviews of posts.
As Western Europe’s most populous nation grapples with a historic wave of mostly-Muslim migrants, politicians and activists are decrying a rash of incendiary speech bubbling to the surface of German society. In a country whose Nazi past led to some of the strictest laws in the West protecting minorities from people inciting hatred, prosecutors are launching investigations into inflammatory comments as judges dole out fines, even probation time, to the worst offenders.
Critics call it the enforcement of political correctness, raising the question of what constitutes hate speech and sparking a national debate over free expression. Germans have been outraged, for instance, by reports of more than 100 sexual assaults and robberies in the city of Cologne allegedly committed by gangs of young Arab and North African men on New Year’s Eve. Some Germans are questioning whether their online comments could be taken down, or whether they could be charged with incitement, for publicly pondering whether refugees could have been among the assailants.
“It’s not politically correct to say anything against migrants. We don’t have freedom of opinion anymore. #Cologne,” Tweeted a German user from Hanover going by the handle Pulvermann.
Soeren Kern on Gatestone reported in September 2015
Although the rape took place in June, police kept silent about it for nearly three months, until local media published a story about the crime. According to an editorial comment in the newspaper Westfalen-Blatt, police are refusing to go public about crimes involving refugees and migrants because they do not want to give legitimacy to critics of mass migration.
Police in the Bavarian town of Mering, where a 16-year-old-girl was raped on September 11, have issued a warning to parents not to allow their children to go outside unaccompanied. In the Bavarian town of Pocking, administrators of the Wilhelm-Diess-Gymnasium have warned parents not to let their daughter’s wear revealing clothing in order to avoid “misunderstandings.”
Meanwhile, the raping of German women by asylum seekers is becoming commonplace.
At the same time, growing numbers of German women in towns and cities across the country are being raped by asylum seekers from Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Many of the crimes are being downplayed by German authorities and the national media, apparently to avoid fueling anti-immigration sentiments.
I think that is enough about how the European welfare states sustain the attacks on indiginous populations. One practice in Islam, however, does not get enough or any media coverage: honor killings. A DW report from 2004 discusses the “problem” or crime in “Europe Grapples with ‘Honor Killings’“:
Police officials from EU countries met at Europol headquarters on Tuesday to discuss “honor killings,” a disturbing problem on the rise in Europe’s mainly Middle Eastern, Arabic and Asian immigrant communities.
Fadime Sahindal, a 26-year-old Turkish university student with a Swedish boyfriend, was murdered by her father in Sweden in 2002. He insisted she marry a man from Turkey.
In Britain last year, Abdalla Yones, a Kurdish Muslim who stabbed his 16-year-old daughter, Heshu, 11 times and slit her throat after she started a relationship with a Christian boyfriend, was jailed for life.
“Honor killings,” as the phenomenon is known, usually involve women being murdered, usually by brothers and fathers, for having sex outside marriage, dating, refusing an arranged marriage, wanting to go to university or even having been raped. The practice is not uncommon in traditional, male-dominated Arab societies.
Though experts say that honor killings are on the rise in Europe, the problem is hobbled by a lack of awareness, mainly because the issue remains largely hidden from public view. In 2000, the United Nations estimated that around 5,000 girls and women in at least 14 countries, among them Pakistan, Jordan and Turkey, were killed yearly because their families felt they brought dishonor on them.
But statistics in Europe are hard to come by given the fact that some honor-related crimes are recorded as simple murders or domestic violence.
But with the mass immigration of Muslim “refugees” to the U.S. and Canada, “honor killings” are becoming standard news fare – or not. Farhana Qazi in The Islamic Monthly revealed in June 2014 in “America’s Honor Killings A Growing Reality”:
For the past five years, there has been at least one case of honor killing each year in a different U.S. city. In 2008, teen sisters in Texas had allegedly been shot dead by their father because they had boyfriends. In Georgia, Sandeela Kanwal was strangled by her father because she wanted to leave an arranged marriage. The pizza-shop-owner father, Chaudry Rashid, told the police, “She [my daughter] wasn’t being true to her religion or to her husband.” She was 25 years old. A year later, twenty-year old Noor Almaleki was run over by her father in Arizona for falling in love with Marwan. In New York, Aasiya Hassan was beheaded by her husband for allegedly seeking a divorce. She was 37. And this past week, Amina Ajmal testified in a New York courtroom against her father for killing her boyfriend’s relatives in Pakistan. The cases involving girls from Pakistan is a chilling reminder of the New York Times front page photograph in May 2014 of a girl brutally beaten outside a courtroom in Lahore (my birth city) for marrying a man of her choice.
Billy Hallowell in The Blaze in November 2015 reported:
A report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Justice and released earlier this year found that there are an estimated 23-27 honor killings annually in America, though the numbers are not “completely reliable” due to a variety of challenges, according to a Fox News report.
The document, titled, “Report on Exploratory Study into Honor Violence Measurement Methods,” was commissioned by Westat, a research group.
It found that there are essentially four types of honor violence that are frequently discussed and perpetuated: “forced marriage, honor-based domestic violence, honor killing, and female genital mutilation.”
While not strictly an “honor killing,” but rather a plain and gruesome murder.
There was also the 2009 case in which Muzzammil Hassan, a Muslim TV executive, beheaded his wife in Buffalo, New York, after she allegedly requested a divorce.
In the meantime, WND’s Leo Hohmann reported in October 2015:
The U.S. government has resettled more than 110,000 Somali refugees since the early 1990s and shipped in another 8,858 during the most recent fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, according to U.S. State Department data.
Ann Corcoran of Resettlement Watch discussed the U.S. government’s deliberate plan to salt the country with mostly Muslims hostile to American culture and its political structure:
As the United States plans to take in about 2,000 Syrian refugees this year — out of the nearly 4 million who have fled the country’s civil war — Ann Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch is warning that resettlement efforts are merely attempts to create Democratic voters out of Muslim refugees who are using migration as “a form of jihad.”
Corcoran told Iowa talk radio host Jan Mickelson on Friday about her resistance to refugees from Muslim countries being resettled in her western Maryland community and throughout the country, saying that resettlement programs are a Democratic effort to gin up votes while pushing “the whole multicultural meme” on communities like hers.
“I think that it is partly driven by progressives looking for reliable left-wing Democrat voters, that’s a driving force,” she said, “I think there’s a certain amount of just wanting to rub diversity in the noses of conservative communities and places where there isn’t a lot of diversity and just bringing them in and push the whole multicultural meme on us.”
She warned that the refugees themselves have even more sinister motivations: “I can say from the standpoint of the Islamic reason for doing this, is that Mohammed told his followers to migrate to create an Islamic state throughout the world, and that’s exactly what they’re doing. Migration [hijra] is a form of jihad.” [brackets mine]
The U.S. government’s deliberate dumping of unassimilable Muslims into the U.S. is not driven by altruism (though it may claim humanitarian motives), but rather by policy decisions made by especially former Obama appurtenances moved more by malice for America than by any “benign” manifestation of “doing good” because moral categorical imperatives impelled them to. Their “self-esteem” is dependent on how much they can sacrifice and “transform.”
Untouched by the consequences of their malevolent policies, these “virtue signaling” creatures are the only real collectors of the wages of altruism – together with Islam.
Comments are closed.
