Millions Will Migrate to Europe

From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Fri, 2007-03-16 14:49

A quote from The Daily Telegraph, 16 March 2007

At least 2.2 million migrants will arrive in the rich world every year from now until 2050, the United Nations said yesterday. Britain's population will rise from 60 million to approaching 69 million by 2050 – almost entirely because of immigration. The latest figures from the UN's population division predict a global upheaval without parallel in human history over the next four decades. […] [T]ens of millions will migrate to Europe and America, while the indigenous populations of most countries in the rich world will either stagnate or decline.

planet earth #5

Submitted by marcfrans on Mon, 2007-03-19 22:51.

@ King Cobra

1) There is no "inaccuray" in my assertion that India remained poor over the past half century because, after independence, it chose the soviet development model of central (production) planning and of import substitution. There is broad agreement among serious development economists that that was the single major explanatory factor, based on both theory and on econometric (statistical) empirical evidence. We could of course discuss at great length the various reasons as to why that choice was made, and I agree with many of your comments on that subject. But the unfortunate fact remains that the Indian 'elite' (with Nehru at its head) then made that particular fateful choice.

2) It is quite understandable that the soviets made a tremendous effort to seduce India at the time of independence, and it is also understandable (but not excusable) - with the 'negatives' of colonialism still so fresh in the minds (and a concomitant refusal to consider any 'positives') - that India's first independent rulers made such a choice. Most other ex-colonies made similar choices at the time, and most have come to regret it (India, much later than many others).

3) I think that India's best minds TODAY realise that "the Non-Alignment Movement" has always been a farce, and today certainly more so than in the past. But it took the change in economic strategy in China for that realisation to take hold in India. India does not risk being "crushed" by any democratic "superpower", but will continue to face 'a thousand cuts' by various totalitarian ideologies in its neighbourhood, be they internal (communist 'naxelites' etc..) or external (muslim phantasies and/or chinese nationalism). I have repeatedly expressed my belief that geopolitically the next great conflictual re-alignment in the world wil be between the emerging China-Eurabia axis and the democratic alliance of INDIA+USA+Japan+Australia. (Last week's Japan-Australia security 'treaty' is only the latest confirmation). The only remaining major uncertainty is how different parts of Europe will configure in that slowly emerging pattern. I suspect that we do not differ significantly w.r.t. that broad assesment.

4) One note of caution. India's economic "liberalisation" remains a fragile thing and remains limited to a few economic sectors only. India unfortunately continues to be saddled with one of the most inefficient and bureaucratic public sectors in the world. However, if it can keep its democratic politics alive, then there remains great hope that its economic future will be secured. The recent ongoing losses for democracy in Europe, particularly in terms of the narrowing of freedom of speech and of political association, should act as a warning to others (especially India).

@ Planet # 5

Submitted by King_Cobra on Tue, 2007-03-20 00:17.

@ Marcfrans

Agree but my point was,there was only one choice, dictated by prevailing circumstances,as there was no concrete support from the West.

Agree, perhaps it was Mrs Gandhi's obstinacy and the Soviet's stranglehold that proved costly.

3) I think that India's best minds TODAY realise that "the Non-Alignment Movement" has always been a farce, and today certainly more so than in the past.

Agree but at the time it seemed like a comfort zone, perhaps.

But it took the change in economic strategy in China for that realisation to take hold in India. India does not risk being "crushed" by any democratic "superpower",

Agree but my point was referring to the 'Cold War 'period.

But will continue to face 'a thousand cuts' by various totalitarian ideologies in its neighbourhood, be they internal (communist 'naxelites' etc..) or external (muslim phantasies and/or chinese nationalism). I have repeatedly expressed my belief that geopolitically the next great conflictual re-alignment in the world will be between the emerging China-Eurabia axis and the democratic alliance of INDIA+USA+Japan+Australia. (Last week's Japan-Australia security 'treaty' is only the latest confirmation). The only remaining major uncertainty is how different parts of Europe will configure in that slowly emerging pattern. I suspect that we do not differ significantly w.r.t. that broad assesment.

Agree

Agree.

planet earth #4

Submitted by marcfrans on Mon, 2007-03-19 17:12.

@pvdh

It is a bit unfortunate that our conversation over "populaton pressure" is sort of lost in the middle of this torrent on the ages-old conflict between muslims and hindus on the Indian subcontinent. But, I recommend - for once - the comments of the Kapitein on The Economist , which were very perceptive, and of course Iqbal continues to illustrate the typical muslim who is incapable of any selfcriticism and who will selectively 'parrot' rather than seeking factual 'truth'.

You continue to present strawmen.

1) I did not (claim to) advance any "argument" against any "warning". And I certainly do NOT believe that "God's providence" will "solve all of our problems". They are our problems, not God's, and it is up to us to solve them. For instance, the problems associated with the "immigration alarm" are real and are not going to be taken care of by any "providence", but will only be taken care of if mankind can show some common sense (and can stop scapegoating others for 'own' problems).

2) Let's deal with some of your wrong preconceived notions. On what basis do you call me "a Christian"? Did I ever claim that? I certainly grew up in a culture imbued with judeo-christian values, but at an earlier time than you, and your perception of "christian values" differs significantly from mine. It is remarkable that you, who are imbued with naive-left ideology and anti-religious feelings, claim to know that Christianity is about an obligation "to prevent Malthusian catastrophe". My understanding of the many (seemingly and partially contradictory) lessons one might discern from the New Testament's parables have nothing to do with marxist notions of 'societal problems' (like for instance Malthusian catastrophes) nor with politics, but rather have to do with matters of personal morality ('gedragscode' if you will). It is quite possible (no, it is likely) that Kardinaal Danneels' views today might be closer to you than to me, but that is the Cardinal's problem (and yours), not mine.

2) History teaches that the actual population level will continue to fluctuate around the (moving) sustainable level, so that "Malthusian catastrophes" will continue. This has nothing to do with my personal morality, nor with yours. In my view, history also teaches that there is more empirical evidence for the notion that "history will repeat itself" than for the notion that "human nature will change". In recent years real famines have occurred, and are occurring, in places like North Korea, Ethiopia, and Sudan (among others). They reflect cultural (political) behavior patterns, and have nothing to do with "migration". Nor will migrations change such occurences in the future. If you think that similar occurences will not take place in the future, either in the same places or elsewhere in the world, then I think you are blind to the lessons of history. Moreover, one should recognise that there are many other manmade "catastrophes" besides the Malthusian one (of population pressure and food supplies).

3) I am glad that you now recognise that migration will make the world's population pressure problem worse. But you are still very wrong about the "motor" behind large-scale migration. That motor is certainly NOT "famine". North Korea, Sudan and Ethiopia are not the 'sources' of current large migrations. The migrants from the Third world are typically not the starving, but the opportunistic who see a chance to get a better deal, and who are dynamic enough to take serious risks to get that 'deal'. They are thus the more 'dynamic' who want to take a shortcut to wealth. The longer road is to change own cultural behavior patterns in their own societies to make them work or function 'better'. The source of largescale migrations is thus to be found in the immigrants-importing West. It is the combination of (1) selfish behavior by 'capitalists' (who want to get private 'cheap labor' and will off-load the social costs to 'government' (i.e. to those suckers of taxpayers) and (2) naive-left politicians and opinionmakers who have naive views of the rest-of-the-world. Countries that enforce their own laws (e.g. China, Japan, Mexico, etc...) simply do not have these migration problems. And the potential migrants themselves know very well where they have a 'chance' to break-in and where they do not.

@ Planet Earth #4

Submitted by King_Cobra on Mon, 2007-03-19 23:32.

@ Marcfrans (in all earnest)in light of the fact that I am not a model building Economist, please help me out here to build a picture so that I could perhaps follow some of your thoughts.

Do you accept that for the West affluent and technologically advanced, it constantly needs to sell its goods to new and emerging markets, and without the other markets opening up it wouldn’t be so rich and develop further, so it is a matter of give and take, or as Economists would say ‘Supply’ and ‘Demand’.

Most of the Aid given by us to the developing nations is tied to various conditions of them opening their markets to us, so in fact,ultimately we are not the masters of our own destiny, and have to bring ourselves to trade, which as you are well aware is not only of tangible goods but also resources which could be natural tangible elements and ‘humans’, and it is human nature to be opportunistic, we have always been, why is it an issue with us when others become opportunistic, what are we so scared of, is it competition, sharing or what?

I accept your assertion that we have to educate the third world to close their borders, something I said to @ Yitzhak Submitted by King Cobra on Sun, 2007-03-18 12:01.,how do you propose to deal with 'human nature'

Do you think that if we had level playing fields in terms of ‘economics’ and open boundaries that most of the desire to emigrate would disappear, except for those ones that aren’t economic but preference (such as choice of weather etc, one of the key reasons for us Brits to go abroad, ‘Sun’), I believe that the more one attempts to keep people out of somewhere or something the more they would attempt to get in or out as the case may be, just like most prisoners would attempt a breakout, human nature wouldn't you say?

Do you accept/ agree that had the West helped India after the Independence instead of giving it the cold shoulder, then a lot of the ‘opportunistic’ immigration would not have taken place and it would have been a self sufficient nation?

What in your opinion would happen if we all closed our borders and repatriated all immigrants to their countries of native origin? Do you envisage perhaps two or more worlds figuratively speaking and what would it be like to live in such an environment?

How would you address the problem given your own criteria 1) are you advocating paying higher wages for labour in your economic model, wouldn’t this have an impact on the overall cost of any commodity produced by us and thus make our products uncompetitive, how would we sell our products to the rest of the world, possibly in a market flooded by cheaper Chinese goods? Assuming we don’t allow the social costs to be dumped on the governments or tax payers, what impact would that have on the economy and more to the point to the overall cost of the product(s)?

2) What do you think is the reason for the naïve left politicians for not pursuing similar models as the Chinese or Japanese and close our markets to their goods and enforce similar laws?

Finally, again hypothetically, speaking if ever the roles are reversed at some stage in the future and the East overtakes the West in all aspects, then how would the West react, and don’t you think we are deliberately keeping them starved of the technology and progress so that we could benefit from it and isn’t it also the case that ‘heads’ we win and ‘Tails’ we win, a win, win scenario for us.

We need to make our minds up whether we want them as beggars and therefore always attempting to break in or as equals or even better off so that they can shut their borders just like we are contemplating.

@ KA - Disproportionate Blame

Submitted by King_Cobra on Mon, 2007-03-19 12:50.

@ Kapitein

While I completely disagree with you on nearly every issue, I agree that Hindu nationalists are not the West's "natural allies." Nor do I believe that Muslim Indians should bear disproportionate blame for the tensions and conflicts in the subcontinent.

Apart from the external interference by Pakistan and the Middle Eastern extremists and Underworld gangsters there are those in India who are actively engaged in bringing down the HN and are behind a lot of the conflicts and tensions which is then blamed on either the HN or RSS or SS.

This exact enactment is happening in the West now, so don’t be fooled by all the false claims and propaganda put out by people like Sam Iqbal who either are actively involved or are ignorant of the facts and just spew what they are fed by the Pakistani and other Muslim governments’ around the world. If I hadn’t spend those years in India in the thick of it I would have believed some of the crap that is fed to the rest in the west.

Just for your information, while I was in India over the 9 or so years, I was made an ‘honorary’ member of the RSS so I do have first hand knowledge and experience of what I am talking about, trust me don’t fall into the trap of the sweet talking Muslims, portraying themselves as ‘Victims’, though I do accept that a lot of Muslims living in India are not trouble makers but are themselves victims of the radical Islamists, who use them for their own political aims.

The Hindus in India are fed up of their Muslim Problem but are unable to eradicate it, because of the one universal commodity ‘OIL’, don’t forget they have been suffering Islamic Terrorism long before 9/11 and 7/7, here is what some Indian Businessmen told me last year in light of the Mumbai Train Bombings, reflecting on the article by the Telegraph journalist Peter Foster claiming that there weren’t many Muslims employed in the Commerce and Civil Service.Their Reply was;

It is the Muslims themselves to blame for it, firstly most don’t consider Education a priority as they are mainly tradesmen passing their skills down the generations, secondly, they are no longer trusted because of the terrorist activities, when I said that certainly, not all are terrorists, the reply was, tell us which one of them is, as none of them advertise it on their forehead “ I’m a suicide bomber” so we avoid them like the plague, they also have a tendency to support Pakistan’s aims and objectives making them unemployable in positions of national importance and security.

It is the same over here,ignorant Muslims who failed to understand which side their bread is buttered ended up screwing matters not only for themselves but also for millions of other immigrants inc other Muslims, this whole terrorist movement is directed by Pakistan and the Middle East against the rest of us, and they brainwash those like the British Born Muslims to carryout their plans, same as in India.

The West has known for a long time about Pakistan's role in Global Terrorism but kept quiet,as it wasn't enacted on it's own land, and I naively thought that 9/11 was the turning point, but Pakistan still enjoys all the support and Financial Aid, which it uses to arm its Nukes, and assists other Islamic countries too in their Nuclear Quests.

If you had paid attention to all those held in G.Bay you will have heard of their 'Pakistani' connection with regards to training and funding etc, so please don't, consider India and the Hindus' as the perpetrators of the tensions within it's own country, it is the intentions of not only the Islamic World but also China to destabilise India.

Finally, I have mentioned this before, it is my opinion that we in the West some 60 yrs ago backed the wrong horse (Pakistan/Islam) and it has come back to haunt us.

@ Sam

Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Mon, 2007-03-19 01:35.

While I completely disagree with you on nearly every issue, I agree that Hindu nationalists are not the West's "natural allies." Nor do I believe that Muslim Indians should bear disproportionate blame for the tensions and conflicts in the subcontinent. However, with regards to your featured Economist article:

The Economist: "...until the arrival of Turkey and Ukraine as full members in 2025. The accession soon afterwards of the first North African country, Morrocco, helped to prolong Europes boom..."

Neither Turkiye nor Morrocco are European states. Therefore this is not a European Union; rather it is a regional economic bloc without theoretical limits on its boundaries i.e. a precursor to a world state.

The Economist: "At the same time politicians in Brussels and Washington, grappling with the blocked ME process, had a eureka moment...so it was that Israel and Palestine became the EU's 49 and 50 members..."

Again, neither Israel nor Palestine are European states. Furthermore, I fail to see how their addition would: (a) resolve existing territorial disputes between the two, (b) provide the Palestinians with effective and efficient representation, (c) correct existing socio-economic disparity between Palestinians and Israelis, or (d) allow Israel adequate power to ensure that it remains a Jewish state. Moreover, this article ignores the socio-political facets of massive population influxes of non-Europeans, especially Muslims. The Economist subscribes to a liberal perspective, which essentially is a universalist worldview that is opposed to any form of communitarianism that does not encompass all of humanity, such as nationalism, tribalism and regionalism. Although socialism, liberalism and religion are all universalist worldviews, they nevertheless oppose one another.

@ KA - Hindu Nationalists

Submitted by King_Cobra on Mon, 2007-03-19 12:20.

Hi Kapiten

KA>While I completely disagree with you on nearly every issue, I agree that Hindu nationalists are not the West's "natural allies.

I think your assertion about the ‘Hindu Nationalists’ and the ‘disproportionate’ blame on Muslims for tension in India are both flawed.

[Hindu Nationalists = HN] I think you are applying a broad brush definition to this organisation, which in general is the cry of the ‘Marxists’ and ‘Islamists’ in India because they are opposed in principle to the main proposal of the HN of the introduction of a ‘uniform civil code’ within India, at present the Muslims and the rest are governed by separate personal laws based long ago in history. HN claims that all other countries including Pakistan, Middle East and the West have a uniform personal law, what is wrong about having one in India? As we are not advocating "Racial Nationalism" but "Cultural Nationalism"How can ‘Cultural Nationalism be fascist?

HN wants a uniform law to govern all the people of India by the same yard stick, that is not fascist or extreme right wing, those who want to tarnish their reputation use this soubriquet, as they have their own hidden agendas such as the extreme left wing Marxists and the Islamic Extremists, all other moderate and non prejudicial critics of the HN do not consider them as ‘Fascist’ or right wing in the same sense as we in the West know it. The Marxists and Islamists are up to their usual mischief in trying to stir up "double standards" claim against the Hindus in the political and academic dialogue.

The most annoying stance in all this is that of the Indian Academe and Polity, who are actively engaged in discrediting the organisation as ‘Fascists’, one for the Muslim vote and the other which has roots in being too far up its own backside to be unable to see reality. They too have political pressures to evoke such propaganda, as the various organisations such as the RSS (meaning National Self Servants) and Shiv Sena have been grouped together under the the same umbrella and are condemned by the two main critics because they all support the Jewish State of Israel, and claim that the most of the world recognizes Israel’s role in fighting ‘Islamic Terrorism’ effectively and ruthlessly in the Middle East and as India and Israel are both fighting a proxy war against terrorism, therefore, we should learn a lesson or two from them. We need to have close cooperation with them in this field. This is unpalatable to both the Marxists and Islamists.

The HN is also accused of being right wing by the Islamists because of the dispute about the demolition of ’Babri Mosque’ in 1992 by a Hindu Mob in ‘Ayodhya’, which they claim was built on the site of an ancient Hindu Temple of Lord Rama, which was razed and built over by one of the Mughal Emperor namely Babur. This event has been the bone of contention between not only the people of India but believe it or not, all the Muslim nations have blackmailed India and threatened to stop oil and other trade if the Indian government allows the reconstruction of a Hindu Temple and as the HN supported the Hindu claim as being historically correct, they earned the name tag of ‘fascists’

planet earth #3

Submitted by marcfrans on Sat, 2007-03-17 23:16.

@ pvdh

Perhaps you are being a bit simplistic here, or is it a bit 'facetious'?

1) Contraception and abortion are as old as mankind. Granted that contraception is more 'effective' today, which strengthens your position, but abortion is also more 'effective' (in the sense of less dangerous to the mother) today, which weakens your position. Moreover, there is much more 'at play' here, and many factors will influence a society's willingness or desire to reproduce and maintain itself, or not, as may be the case. There is a wide disparity in birth rates among different societies, and today in most both contraception and abortion are available.

The USA cannot "prevent" the UN from doing anything in this kind of matter, and I have no doubt that various UN organs do engage in such activities. But, the USA can of course refuse in participating paying for such activities. Are you in favor of forcing governments to pay for activities which they find morally reprehensible? That would be a kind of USSR system on a worldscale, wouldn't it? The USA certainly has no indigenous "unrestrained growth of population" problem, and it can hardly be blamed for being 'attractive' as an immigration destination for most of the world's population. However, the USA could be blamed for its lack of effective control of immigration, because in failing to control that immigration 'effectively' it is certainly contributing to excessive rapid growth in its own population and outside (by providing an escape valve for other societies). I know, you refuse to face that fact, but unrestrained immigration is a major contributor to the overall world's population growth.

2) Obviously several factors simultaneously allowed for breaking through the Malthusian equilibrium in the west and elsewhere (I said "...modern medicines ETC..."). Also, obviously, the world's sustainable total population level will continue to evolve in line with economic and technological progress. Warnings about "...pollution, declining food resources..." are almost as old as mankind too. 'Alarmism' in general is as old as the world.

3) None of this is to deny that there are not significant problems of pollution and population density, for instance in parts of China, Africa, South America etc...But to blame the USA or "Christian conservatives" for that, is ridiculous. Why don't you blame any of these particular societies for their incapability to develop cultural behavior patterns (including economic and political systems) that maintain a proper balance between their population levels and resources, instead of looking for false scapegoats? That would be a more accurate (closer-to-home) explanation. Neither the USA nor Christian conservatives are a source for imbalance between their own resources and their own population levels. They preach an 'ethos' of hard work and selfreliance and selfresponsibility. In fact, they are also a major source of assistance to alleviate the needs of others in the rest of the world. They are by far net givers of aid, not net recipients of aid, and moreover they do it largely on a voluntary basis.

The 'original' subject of the article was "millions will migrate to Europe". I have absolutely no difficulty recognising and agreeing with your contention of the existence of problems of pollution and of population pressures in parts of the world, although I consider your 'explanation' faulty. But, you seem to have a mighty mental difficulty with accepting that "the migration of millions to Europe" can only make the world's population pressure problem worse. Obviously in Europe itself, but outside as well by providing an escape valve (temporarily). Now, why is that? Dogmatic thinking perhaps.

re: planet earth.

Submitted by peter vanderheyden on Mon, 2007-03-19 10:16.

@marcfrans

That Alarmism is as old as the world is a very poor, yet often used, argument against any warning. As a matter of fact it can perfectly be used against “the migration alarm” too. It’s a kind of “believe” that God's providence will solve all of our problems.

But it’s not that sentence in your response that worries me the most. It’s this one:
“Also, obviously, the world's sustainable total population level will continue to evolve in line with economic and technological progress” . On it self the sentence only states the obvious of course. It’s like saying that by poring water into a can the level of the water will evolve in line. But it’s not the “sustainable total population level” that is the problem it’s the "total population level" versus “the sustainable total population level” And as the former is growing exponentially, and it is a 100% certain that there is a maximum to the later, the problem is obvious. As a matter of fact, to talk only about the “sustainable level” is like saying that the real level will stay in pace. Which is true due tot the Malthusian catastrophe. If the level of the population rises above the sustainable level, famine and diseases will reduce it again far below that sustainable level. As a Christian, however, you would suspect that doing what ever you can to prevent the Malthusian catastrophe, is an obligation. Except if your confident that God’s providence will solve everything of course. But I’m pretty sure that doesn’t apply for you.

And finally:
Yes, the migration will make the world’s population pressure problem worse. But if the motor behind the migration will be famine, there will be very little we can do about it. Last summer we had people storming the fences around Ceuta. That is only a small example of what is going to happen. Economic refugies are dying en mass trying to cross the Mediterranean See in not see worthy boats. For the most of them, it’s the choice between a certain death, and a small chance of survival. How are you going to stop this?

confused

Submitted by maxfusion on Sat, 2007-03-17 19:19.

If Islam is the only true religion, and the cornerstone of great social structures, why are millions a year migrating from its cradle?? Just wondering.

@Sam Iqbal

Submitted by perfektm on Sat, 2007-03-17 08:31.

Iqbal...

I am also a Asian... and i think you have no right to blame West. The Peoples who were to blame are already dead.... why are you blaming the new generation, which has hardly to do anything with this...

anyways iqbal ... imperialism, colonialism.... this is what you are refereeing.... then Islam has its own brand of colonialism and imperialism.... what was ottoman empire doing.... or should i speak about 1000 years of all shit you have done in India...

Sam.. in short, The West had already apologized for its Mistakes.... but look at yourself.... you guys are still the same..... the intolerant, hateful, rapers, murders, racist, greedy, pedophile......

when Muslims will apologize for the crimes they had committed for humanity ? in case of West... then let me tell that West where nearly all Non-Muslims have already forgiven them... because they had changed. and all peace loving peoples can already feel it...

but Iqbal.... how come "non-imperial Islam"... still trying to remount caliphet ?

As i said in past, i will repeat it again Sam...

You are just a Thug...A Jihadi thug

so what make Islam different from other religions...

Church, temples, Gurudwaras.... these all places are home of god..... but Mosques? well I think Mosque is the only place which call to kill innocent peoples.....

where you blame west to be imperialist for things... look who is doing lootings ?

where you tag Jews as blood thirsty, look who is killing others.... its well known that you muslims slaughter throats of infidels with satanic verses...

and in case of Gujarat riots... what you highlighted for 2002 killings of Muslims... then let Muslim tell what really happened to Gujarat of Gandhi? who betrayed Gandhi... he had approached with to Muslims... though radical Hindus had told him not to believe any Muslims. they told that Christians can live in peace with others but not Muslims. and see it was true, during Pakistan as well as many other riots in india, yes Gujarat had changed things, because now hindus also had tajen weaponary......

You are blaming Christians inside a Christians country without looking your bloody past....

you Muslims demanded Pakistan... you got that... even after that Gandhi said the remaining Muslims will love Hindus & India...here is the Muslims of Gujarat..... where your mosque had asked to kill Hindus... and you burned a train, from where everything started....
http://www.ibnlive.com/news/5-years-on-gujarat-willing-to-forget-not-forgive/34986-3.html

when you blame Christians.. then we also know who started massacring Serbians... ending in Bosnian-Serbian conflict.

Here is ramadi.. where again your holy place... a Mosque is calling to kill infidels...

Ramadi shootout

so i will that i salute those fighting Nazi scums (Jihadis)left from WW2.....

http://www.veoh.com/videos/v3073783P3ZdQbD

Fallujah shootout

and ...

From Population control is a must...
"this makes it even more imperative that India and China achieve economic take off and bring millions of people out of poverty."

Those are non Muslims in India, who are following Population control... Muslims are still breeding with more then 10 kids per polygamic family. and at last you live in state taxes & making crimes....

perfektm

Submitted by Vincep1974 on Sat, 2007-03-17 19:15.

That was a great message. Thank you.

@ Vince

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Mon, 2007-03-19 00:34.

Are you Perfektm's mother by any chance?

Happy breakfast reading

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Mon, 2007-03-19 00:51.

I was reading the following article in the Economist this weekend and thought about you lot on the BJ. Happy reading and hope you don't choke on your cornflakes! (Bacon rolls for the more pious of you). Enjoy!

The European Union at 100
Is the best yet to come?

A centenary celebration in 2057

"The EU is celebrating its 100th brithday with quiet satisfaction. Predictions when it turned 50 that it was doomed to irrelevance in a world dominated by the US, China and India proved wide off the mark.A turning point was the bursting of the America's housing bubble and the collapse of the dollar early in the presidency of Obama in 2010. But even more crucial were Germany's and France's efforts later that decade, under Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy respectively to push through economic reforms.

These reforms produced a sharp fall in unemployment just as Europe began to enjoy a productivity spurt from the spread of information technology. The eventual result was a growing labour shortage which was not resolved until the arrival of Turkey and Ukraine as full members in 2025. The accession soon afterwards of the first North African country, Morrocco, helped to prolong Europes boom.....

At the same time politicians in Brussels and Washington, grappling with the blocked ME process, had a eureka moment...so it was that Israel and Palestine became the EU's 49 and 50 members..."

Viva le Europe!

On a more serious note, this weeks economist (March 17 - 23) has an excellent critique of the EU at 50.

Have a good day!

That Economist article shows some of Europe's pathology

Submitted by Rob the Ugly American on Mon, 2007-03-19 02:45.

It seems Europeans see the world as a zero-sum game; in order for them to again have relevance, other powers must decline, bad things must happen to the other. Increasingly, it seems Europe views bad things happening in the US as a necessary prerequisite for its own power to grow. Why not instead see the world more as a place where lifting others up helps us all? Rather than fear the billions that are being lifted out of poverty in Asia, view them as potential sources of innovation? Who knows, maybe the cure for cancer or a truly efficient automobile might come from someone whose parents were subsistence farmers. The key is to make the world more interconnected, not play the old European domination games of rising at the expense of others.

vincep1974

Submitted by perfektm on Sat, 2007-03-17 21:49.

I am in Love with Europeans...
so it was my duty to defend those values which had brought us together.... the world is continuously changing... and we have to tell people that they have to feel the changed Europe... and this is also what integration teaches me....

So its somewhere my Duty from every aspect :)

Imperfktm

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Mon, 2007-03-19 00:32.

Imperfkt. You speak with a forked tongue.

P: Iqbal...I am also a Asian...

Me: Great. Fantastic. Just a question. Why do you arse lick the very people who would boot you out of Europe if their aspirations of a White only continent came true?

P: i think you have no right to blame West. The Peoples who were to blame are already dead.... why are you blaming the new generation, which has hardly to do anything with this...
anyways iqbal ... imperialism, colonialism.... this is what you are refereeing.... then Islam has its own brand of colonialism and imperialism.... what was ottoman empire doing.... or should i speak about 1000 years of all shit you have done in India...

Me: The people you refer to, the Mughals and the Ottomons are now dead. Why are YOU blaming the new generation? Just re-read your bio. You talk about stuff from 700 years ago man. Bloody hypocrite.

P: Sam.. in short, The West had already apologized for its Mistakes.... but look at yourself.... you guys are still the same..... the intolerant, hateful, rapers, murders, racist, greedy, pedophile......
Me: You mean like your brothers in Shiv Sena, RSS and the BJP. Take this for example;
“Riots, communal violence have become a sad reality of India’s life. There are many an observations
pertaining to the riots. The major one being that after every riot BJP in particular becomes stronger in that area. Also that the majority of the victims of riots in India are Muslims. The data from1961 to 1992, shows that during these four decades 80 percent of victims of communal violence have been Muslims. During the 1984 Delhi riots nearly 4000 Sikhs were done to death. In a similar vein another minority; Christians saw the ghastly burning of Pastor Graham Stains along with his two minor sons.”
Read more here: http://www.countercurrents.org/comm-puniyani020504.htm

@ Sam Iqbal re :Imperfktm #1>

Submitted by King_Cobra on Mon, 2007-03-19 14:49.

1.Sam it’s called arse licking as you have put it but ‘loyalty’ which isn’t a trait strongly associated with Muslims is it now.

2.Really now Sam, but then again so are some of the things you are saying are now ancient relatively speaking why are you harping on about them then, anyway, most people give examples and mostly factual whether ‘historic’ or otherwise as a way to back their claim or point and hope that everyone learns from history, as not to do so like the Muslims is suicidal and stupid.

3.Well Sam, firstly all this is history as you said why mention it, nevertheless, if you ever had the ability to be honest and objective and got your head out above the bull that you and many Muslims are fed by Pakistani Government then you would know the truth, in any case I now understand that you don’t belong to the terrorists as otherwise you would have known the truth about not only of the involvement of Pakistan and external Islamic forces in ‘Terrorism’ but also in ‘Subversive’ activities and yes sadly all that you mention is a reality but only because it is perpetrated by the Muslims whether they are internal or external.

Then what would you call what is has been happening in Pakistan for over 50 yrs or so, or haven’t you looked into your own backyard, didn’t you see the News only last week and notice it is happening there, what about Baluchistan and Peshawar not so long ago? At least India is a ‘Democratic and open’ country not something one could attribute to most Islamic Despotic Dictatorships.

4.Of course they are, this goes to prove my point, most are actively involved and the innocent ones suffer because they haven’t the balls to stop the radical extremist bastards who never get involved themselves as they are enjoying luxuries and the spoils in Dubai, Islamabad or Riyadh etc.

There you go again, digressing from the issue in hand and attempting to cause rift between the Hindus and Sikhs again, it is well documented as to why those riots took place, wasn’t Pakistan behind it, as I recall it was funding the ‘Sikh Extremism’ and a call for homeland, it has also been documented that the Sikh were given training in Pakistan.

Most of India’s problems are in existence because of the influence and active involvement of external forces who are busy creating divisions between the good people of India including the Muslim population.

Just like people in the West who react to the appalling activities of the Muslims after the suicide bombings and terrorism, Indian people and parties have done the same, so Sam if as I said you want to lay blame for all the ills of communal violence between various races within India then ask your friends in Pakistan to stop meddling in other Sovereign Nation’s internal affairs.

Oh and by the way look into Pakistan’s and other Islamic countries’ record with regards to the persecution of Christians before you have the gall to highlight an incident which is a ‘CRIME’ not a national policy of HARRASSMENT.

Oh By the way, having trouble thinking about the @Follow on – Cricket issue on Victory for Pigs – French ban the Soup? NO REPLY , I REST MY CASE, YOU HAVE JUST PROVED MY POINT ABOUT YOU MUSLIMS ALWAYS AVOID ANSWERING DIRECT QUESTIONS AND DIVERT ATTENTION BY JUMPING FROM ONE TOPIC TO ANOTHER.

Look Iqbal, the point is simple and it is this, Muslims have been for centuries and still are a major problem within the world, sadly, wherever you guys go you screw up matters, lets see where in the world there aren’t problems and aren’t attributable to Muslims;

India =Yes
Middle East =Yes
Far East =Yes
Europe =Yes
America =Yes
The Old Soviet Block Countries =Yes
Africa =Yes

Get it , the Equation is simple MUSLIMS=PROBLEMS, MUSLIMS=BACKWARD THINKING, MUSLIMS=INCOMPATIBLE,MUSLIMS=BARBARIC

Until you lot learn to discard, out dated Islamic thinking and become progressive thinkers,it will always haunt you and sadly,your lot will make life hell for the rest.

@ King Cobra

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Mon, 2007-03-19 16:00.

KC: At least India is a ‘Democratic and open’ country not something one could attribute to most Islamic Despotic Dictatorships.

Me: Try telling that to the people of Assam, Kashmir, Orissa and of course the Tamil Eelam. Anyway, most ME dictators are not Islamic but secular.

KC: innocent ones suffer because they haven’t the balls to stop the radical extremist bastards who never get involved themselves as they are enjoying luxuries and the spoils in Dubai, Islamabad or Riyadh etc.

Me: Agreed. Political Islam must be defeated at all costs.

KC: There you go again, digressing from the issue in hand and attempting to cause rift between the Hindus and Sikhs again, it is well documented as to why those riots took place, wasn’t Pakistan behind it, as I recall it was funding the ‘Sikh Extremism’ and a call for homeland, it has also been documented that the Sikh were given training in Pakistan.
Most of India’s problems are in existence because of the influence and active involvement of external forces who are busy creating divisions between the good people of India including the Muslim population.

Me: Merely, trying to point out that religious intolerance is NOT an Islamic monopoly, particularly in India.
Also, You sound like an Arab blaming Mossad for all the problems in the ME. Again, you fail to provide any evidence to back this point.

KC: Oh and by the way look into Pakistan’s and other Islamic countries’ record with regards to the persecution of Christians before you have the gall to highlight an incident which is a ‘CRIME’ not a national policy of HARRASSMENT.

Me: Accepted. I believe that Indians of all religions and ethnicity are a wonderful, vibrant people who have bought so much to the world. Also, I hope India achieves economic prosperity which lifts millions out of poverty.

KC: Oh By the way, having trouble thinking about the @Follow on – Cricket issue on Victory for Pigs – French ban the Soup? NO REPLY , I REST MY CASE, YOU HAVE JUST PROVED MY POINT ABOUT YOU MUSLIMS ALWAYS AVOID ANSWERING DIRECT QUESTIONS AND DIVERT ATTENTION BY JUMPING FROM ONE TOPIC TO ANOTHER.

Me: I am still trying to put something together to reply to your earlier post.

KC: Muslims have been for centuries and still are a major problem within the world, sadly, wherever you guys go you screw up matters, lets see where in the world there aren’t problems and aren’t attributable to Muslims;

Me: Gross over-simflications and generalisations. According to you, nationalism, statehood, tribalism etc have a nothing to do with the mentioned conflicts. You now compel compel the following tedious, but necessary, recitation of non-Muslim terror groups: Aum Shinrikyo (Japan, Russia); ETA (France, Spain); Communist Party of the Philippines; various splinter groups of the IRA (Ireland); Kahane Chai (Israel, West Bank); FARC (Colombia); Kongra-Gel (Kurds in Turkey and other countries of the Middle East); Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka); National Liberation Army (Venezuela); Revolutionary Nuclei (Greece); Revolutionary Organization 17 November (Greece); Sendero Luminoso (Peru); United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) (Colombia) and so on.

KC: Until you lot learn to discard, out dated Islamic thinking and become progressive thinkers, it will always haunt you and sadly, your lot will make life hell for the rest.

In essence, I detest political Islam and hope it is defeated. However, there is nothing in your post which shows I am wrong. You parrot the usual Islamo-phobic nonsense without providing any evidence to the contrary. However, I think you make some valid points. I will off course write back to you within 24-48 hours regardin our earlier exchange.

Thanks

@ Sam Iqbal

Submitted by King_Cobra on Mon, 2007-03-19 18:19.

Me: Try telling that to the people of Assam, Kashmir, Orissa and of course the Tamil Eelam. Anyway, most ME dictators are not Islamic but secular.

What exactly do you want to tell these people, they are an integral part of India and have their own elected respective governments, along with the National Assembly in New Delhi. The problem mostly is created by the aspirations of a few idiots backed up by external powers who have illusions of a separate Assam etc, Kashmir too is a victim of Pakistan's indiscretions as it is behind the incitement and exploitation of the people of Kashmir as is well documented in the UN did accede to India but Pakistan couldn't digest that fact and has since been interfering. Just because most people are Muslims doesn't automatically that it should be handed to Pakistan, just as people of Bradford or Blackburn can't expect to become an Islamic country or a part of Pakistan on similar grounds. You have conveniently forgotten the plight of the Hindu Kashmiri Pundits plight, they have been and still are being persecuted by the Muslim Extremists within their own country.

Which ME country is secular? please revisit that, most of them award no rights for any other religious group but Islamic, which one of them has religious freedom, does anyone of them allow Hindu's the freedom to practice,NO oh you mean pseudo secular? only as far as everyone is Islamic secularism applies.

Me: Merely, trying to point out that religious intolerance is NOT an Islamic monopoly, particularly in India.

Mostly it is due to external elements, I have said it clearly in my rants, just as it is being perpetrated over here in the UK directed from Pakistan and ME,you can hardly blame the Hindus' they have co existed without too much trouble for centuries. Your comments to imperfktm did not demonstrate the same eloquence or elegance as above, I seriously can't fathom out whether it is your desire to be frolicsome, and does it come as second nature or are you deliberately trying to p*** people off by provocation to generate a reaction and if it is the latter, then it is juvenille, and is not enhancing the debate, in my humble opinion.

Also, You sound like an Arab blaming Mossad for all the problems in the ME. Again, you fail to provide any evidence to back this point.

What part of the rant sounds like an Arab and which part don't you follow and seek Evidence? Most of what I have mentioned is a historical fact.

Me: I am still trying to put something together to reply to your earlier post.

This is exactly, the reply I was expecting,just like David Cameron you dished out a statement about a wish list without substantive thought behind it, or policies dare I say but never mind I will in all sincerity be extremely interested to hear the substance to back your intent.

Me: Gross over-simflications and generalisations.According to you, nationalism, statehood, tribalism etc.

But it is that simple when it comes to the problems between Islam and the rest, and we were in the main discussing the issues with Islam and not the rest, you are going off at a tangent once again, if however, we were discussing the issue of general conflicts in the world then surely what you say would be of significant relevance but in the context of the so called 'Islamic' problem. I'm sure you would accept that.

You have to prove your intent, go on I am here giving you an opportunity to demonstrate it, I don't doubt your sincerity only the 'WILL', how long before you Succumb to the dark side(pardon the pun)?

I told you before about my right wing Islamo-phobic reasons, but nothing I have said is either parroting or without basis and you know that in your heart, most of what I say is what I have personally experienced or reasearched, admittedly, we all use historic data as well to back our arguments, it called the 'Norm' not Parroting, but still give me specifics that you need evidence for.

It is not a matter of who is right and wrong, historical events are facts and it is a matter of how we interpret it, for instance, those from the radical Islam would have never agreed to anything I have said, but you have,as in your experience and knowledge it seems right, similarly, when you go to the depths of anything, as your experience grows and with an open mind objectivity then you will find the truth, as they say 'Seek and you shall find' just need the will power to accept it.

My Pleasure

@sam iqbal.... you porkistani

Submitted by perfektm on Mon, 2007-03-19 06:42.

Thanks sam for such a touching answer, you just have tried again to play divide and rule policy, for what British are defamed for... though you were also using it for centuries and your ancestors had played that a lot too.... but it will not work at least on me...so here is my answers

>>It is you who is a violent, racist, intolerant, religious extremist, not I.
I told you in advance, give respect get respect... you started it... so you deserve the same back... Gandhi tried a lot with love with you Islamofacist... and we know, you don't understand that language.

>>SAM : Great. Fantastic. Just a question. Why do you arse lick the very people who would boot you out of Europe if their aspirations of a White only continent came true?

ME : why are you licking jihadi asses SAM, anyways in case of me... i am not here in Europe to conquere this continent, but your reply tells your mentality completely, that you are here with a dream to islamize europe, and then mount caliphet... i am here just for earning a better life, and i would like to go back to India after my retirement... even if i died in Europe, then too i will like to get my last rituals on shores of Ganges, so don't worry about me and as you pointing out the words like boot out of Europe... then its European continent, we Indian also had done this in past, i will accept it as Europeans had make one more score equal, if something like this happen....but our score is still to be balanced, though it happened 700 yrs back, as well as 70 yrs back.... and even happening today.

anyways surprise... your words matches well with this documentation
>>SAM : The people you refer to, the Mughals and the Ottomons are now dead. Why are YOU blaming the new generation? Just re-read your bio. You talk about stuff from 700 years ago man. Bloody hypocrite.

well sam, perhaps your dung filled skull misses something called brain. Anyways Sam crusade was also 700 yrs ago... haven't Muslim leader blamed Christians for that? 700 yrs or 7 yrs... its not an excuse.... I had forgiven West, because they had changed.... but why should i forgive Islam ? Christians says ignoring history will promote one more holocaust, but Muslims openly say to make one more holocaust.... so i know where i have to go...

Oh by the way sam..... check this too.... REAL PICTURE OF WHAT ISLAM IS ALL ABOUT

and SAM.. come on, British colonialism was also not that bad, it was starting of downfall of Islamic empire... though it was insane, but it had served a good reason.. that is liberation of many peoples from Islamic enslavement..

>>During the 1984 Delhi riots nearly 4000 Sikhs were done to death. In a similar vein another minority; Christians saw the ghastly burning of Pastor Graham Stains along with his two minor sons.”

Oh, thanks for data SAM... isn't congress a party from anti-Hindu secular party, which hide Muslims mistakes on name of secularism.... if i am right Gandhians had never spoken against you. anyways Sikh riots in 1984 were after cause by congress, not by RSS or BJP. and in case of Pastor Graham Stains... so i will say that whole BJ knows that i apologized for that issue long before.... and we know that we are fighting fascist like you who just promote lies, terror, crime, rape, taqiyya, pedophiles ......

>> Err, what do you have to say about this.
what should i speak, RSS has its own headquators, and we Hindus don't allow them to use our temples for such thing... but the videos i posted shows how muslim mosques announce to kill kufir..

By the way... its too long you are speaking... so i think i have a open a chapter here.. so the Christian here can tackle the problem... and i had a faith in them...RSS like groups point out terrorism in east India, especially in Indian state tripura...in which Christians are active.. and Your Muslim group called tablighi Jammat again is the lifeline of this terror organization... like it serves LTTE... the question again raises... why Muslims are involved in all terrorism.. where we condemn all form of terror... you Muslims? what you do... we haven't seen any Fatwa against OBL... go and get it.. then speak further...

in short we have to conclude that Islam brought nothing good in this world....

@ Perfektm

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Mon, 2007-03-19 14:01.

Please stop posting your personal porn collection on this blog.

The fact you hold such a vast array of such material only stregnthens my opinion that you and your ilk are the best friends of the Jihadists. You fall for their propaganda and itch for the fight, promoting the clash of civilisations ideology. Therefore, I concur that you are no better than the people you castigate.

Anyway, to show my reconciliatory intentions, I have a joke for you. Since you continuously bring religion into every post, I thought you might appreciate this:

Did you hear the story of the dyslexic agnostic?

She sat up all night wondering if there was a dog!

Imperfktm 2

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Mon, 2007-03-19 00:34.

P: You are just a Thug...A Jihadi thug

Me: It is you who is a violent, racist, intolerant, religious extremist, not I. I wish peace and goodwill to my fellow mankind. I seek reconcilliation. My glass is half full. Judging from your posts, you are a violent homicidal war mongering, war loving buffoon, who should have the courage of his convictions, grow a spine, pick up a gun, go to Iraq and fight those “bad and nasty” Muslims on behalf of the neo-con ideology you profess to be so in love with.

P: so what make Islam different from other religions... Church, temples, Gurudwaras.... these all places are home of god..... but Mosques? well I think Mosque is the only place which call to kill innocent peoples.....

Me: Err, what do you have to say about this. Taken from the London Times.,
“Various other Christians have been under increased oppression since the nationalistic Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party came to power federally in 1998.
During the first half of the year 2000, there were 35 violent incidents which targeted Christians. These include bombings, church arson, beating deaths, and assaults. Roman Catholic Archbishop de Lastic stated: "There is a definite strategy and plan at the national level -- these forces at work want to intimidate Christians." Protestant and Catholic leaders have blamed the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). This is a Hindu spiritual group, from which the current ruling political party grew. The All India Christian Council wrote that Christians are "sick of the statements and are not fooled by the utterances of the central government." Herod Malik, spokesperson for the United Forum for Catholics and Protestants said: "We are scared. We have to go to international organizations because we have no faith in the Indian government."

P: where you tag Jews as blood thirsty, look who is killing others

Me: … My best friend is Jewish and I have not killed anyone.

P: and you burned a train, from where everything started....

Me: I did not burn a train, honest. Anyway, the Karsevaks in the train are hardly the nicest or politest in the world. The Government enquiry concluded that the fire in the train was the result of an accident on board and the Hindu nutters on the train, on their way to destroy a mosque, naturally came to the wrong conclusion. No amount of finger pointing and scapegoating of Muslims will change that.

P: when you blame Christians.. then we also know who started massacring Serbians... ending in Bosnian-Serbian conflict.

Me: I am too young to remember the Bosnian War fully and have never studied or researched the background, historically or politically. So I refrain from making rash judgements on a subject I can confirm I know little about. However, from general knowledge, show one link or source (must be credible and unbiased) which provides irefutable evidence that the Balkan War was an Islamist plot to murder all Christians in the region and forcbly convert them. And heres me thinking that it all related to statehood and the succession of Bosnia & Herzegovina from Yugoslavia along ethnic lines; ie Muslim-Croat and Serb.

P: Those are non Muslims in India, who are following Population control... Muslims are still breeding with more then 10 kids per polygamic family. and at last you live in state taxes & making crimes....

Me: Another precious “fact” from Imperftm. Illeterate fool. Read the Daily Telegraph article. India’s population is to grow from 1 billion at present to 1.7 billion by 2050. At present, Muslims constitute 12% of India’s population. I reckon you got your sums mixed up here. Must try harder.
By the way, in the Islamic World, polygamous marriages constitute only 1–3 % of all marriages. (Sourced this from Ecyclopedia Britannica and also backed by figures from Wikepedia.)

Keep writing man. You are a (dis)credit to BJ.

Return to planet earth #2

Submitted by marcfrans on Sat, 2007-03-17 00:00.

@ PVDH

It is almost unbelievable that you attribute population pressures in the world to "Christian fundies". It is the victory of naive-left dogma over empirical observation.

Malthus already in the 19th century knew about the inevitability of "population equilibrium". Population can expand because the economy can expand, and if the economy cannot expand then you will have a population 'crisis', succeeded by another economic expansion, to be followed by another 'crisis', and so on...

Let's face some facts, will you?

-- In modern history, it is only in the (formerly) 'christian' west that the (local) population is declining despite the absence of economic and/or natural 'crises' (that historically were necessary for such a development of population decline to occur). There is nothing similar happening in the rest of the world (outside the west, east-Asia, and Russia). You should also know that the continuing total population growth in the west is now almost entirely the result from third world immigration.

-- Before 'globalisation' (naive-left ideology) and technological advances made mass migration possible, there always was some kind of Malthusian population equilibrium in existence in most societies, which might have contained wealthy small 'elites' but where the bulk of the population lived at or near subsistence level. If temporary 'favorable' factors allowed for population increases, they were almost always followed by 'crises' (wars, famines, epidemics, etc..).

-- The world's population was little changed for millenia. Perhaps, more than 90% of the current world population level of 6 billion took place only in the past 1 or 2 centuries when the west was able to break through the 'old' Malthusian equilibrium and introduced modern medicines etc... to the rest of the world.

-- So, the problem is clearly "immigration", and not "unrestrained population increase". The latter 'pressure' has and always will exist in subsistence economies. It is the developed west that had broken the Malthusian population equilibrium, but that - because of misguided ideology of immigration and multiculturalism - is now feeding more population growth at home (through immigration) and in the rest of the world by providing an 'outlet' or emigration valve.

@marcfrans

Submitted by peter vanderheyden on Sat, 2007-03-17 20:53.

Marcfrans:
it is only in the (formerly) 'christian' west that the (local) population is declining despite the absence of economic and/or natural 'crises' (that historically were necessary for such a development of population decline to occur). There is nothing similar happening in the rest of the world (outside the west, east-Asia, and Russia).

Me:
I know, and we all know why. It's only since the invention of effective contraception and abortion that the population growth in those countries stopped. It's the USA, under pressure of right wing Christian conservatives that, prevents the UN from spreading contraception like condoms within the third world countries.

Marcfrans
The world's population was little changed for millennia. Perhaps, more than 90% of the current world population level of 6 billion took place only in the past 1 or 2 centuries when the west was able to break through the 'old' Malthusian equilibrium and introduced modern medicines etc... to the rest of the world.

Me:
Not medicines but improved food production was the main key to breaking trough the existing Malthusian equilibrium. But it is obvious that there has to be somewhere a new equilibrium point. As a matter of fact, looking at the warming of the earth, the returning draughts, the steep decline in fishes in the oceans and the “nothing to lose mentality” of the Africans that come across the see, the equilibrium is not far away. If it’s not food, it will be space that will make us reach the equilibrium. If the population of south America keeps growing at the same speed; within 500 years the all continent will be covered with a mountain of human flesh growing into space at the speed of light. Impossible of course because the Malthusian plafond will be reach much earlier because of food. Within a few decennia maybe a century. So the problem of this planet is certainly not immigration. It’s overpopulation, global warming, pollution and the rapid decline of food recourses.

Return to planet earth

Submitted by marcfrans on Fri, 2007-03-16 23:19.

@ Iqbal

1) Parrotting some of the perverse selfhatred of certain western media is not going to make you an expert on economic development, nor is it going to make you a "winner". Underdevelopment is as 'diverse' as the world is diverse, so one has to be careful with generalisations. To simplify matters, let's focus on China and India, which together represent one third of the world's total population.

China is growing rapidly today, but still remains a very poor country in per capita income terms. This poverty is essentially a result of the imposition of communism after ww2, and the follies of Mao. Other 'Chinese' societies which escaped communism (e.g. Taiwan and Singapore) are today much richer than mainland China, which proves the point. However, since the Chinese started economic liberalisation in the early 1980's, parts of their economy have started to grow rapidly. However, since there are no signs of any political liberalization, it is very UNlikely that the Chinese miracle will be able to continue into the higher stages of a services-dominated economy. On the contrary, European (e.g. Germany) and Asian (Japan) history shows that rapid economic growth divorced from political freedom leads to disaster. It will not be different in China.

India remained poor over the past half century because, after independence, it followed the anti-market soviet economic model of central planning, and the then fashionable development model of 'import-substitution' (instead of export promotion to competitive world markets). Economic liberalization started there in the early 1990's (a decade after China and partly in reaction to 'China'). Since India has retained its democracy (bequeethed by the British but maintained by the Indians) it is now already leapfrogging China in certain advanced services-sectors, and has undoubtedly much better prospects for the long term.

The still-low per capita income levels in both China and India is thus a reflection of the socialistic/communistic development models they chose over half a century ago. Their recent rapid economic advances are the result of economic liberalisation. Your references to "capitalism, anti-social behavior, stuffing GDP cake in mouths, 'Irak', oil grabs, colonialism, etc.......the list is endless....." are all besides the point. They are nothing but mindless 'hot air', a reflection of ignorance fed by ideologically-silly media (and parts of academia).

2) You seem to enjoy stating that "the winners are now looking like the losers". How ridiculous! Which western country is showing 'immiserizing growth', or is getting poorer? If some of them might end up "losers" it will have nothing to do with their economic policies, but everything to do with the importation of destructive cultural behavior patterns, i.e. with lack of sensible immigration controls. They might become losers because they are loosing the democratic character of their cultures. Some of the media nonsense that you are parroting is a good indication of that.

@ re> Return to planet earth

Submitted by King_Cobra on Mon, 2007-03-19 21:10.

(in all earnest)

@ Marcfrans (In all earnest)

Most of what you say makes sense but I would like to point out one slight inaccuracy in your assertion about “India remaining poor because half a century it chose an anti-market Soviet Economic it seems that you are making a case of a deliberate decision by India, however, my belief is that it wasn’t through choice and it wasn’t exactly the case that we left it any option other then to accept the Soviet model as the We failed to support India, with either substantial financial aid or with technological assistance.

At that time the Soviet’s grabbed the opportunity to help India to take advantage of India’s resources in return for assistance in other fields, remember India hardly had any infrastructure, no agriculture programmes (for years it imported grains from the rest of the world), poor transport systems, and a lot of problems for which there were no obvious solutions, and millions of people expecting Nehru’s government to deliver, How? The cold war meant that the Soviet’s exercised it’s will in persuading India to accept its ‘communist’ economic model, it all seemed to make sense then in India’s hour of need to except whatever help that was available, (who looks a gift horse in the mouth at a time of possibly a national crisis.) The Soviet Union obviously, took advantage and tied India with treaties (some proved expensive later)India was astute enough to realise that it couldn't pander to either of the 2 major Superpowers and was working towards the 'Non Aligned Movement' to avoid being crushed between the two powers.

India’s ‘Defence’ weaknesses also were exposed during the 1961 war, no one came to It’s aid when the might of the Chinese Army came marching into Tibet, with all it’s military might, the West stood by and allowed the humiliation of a ‘Democratic’ country against a ‘Socialist/communist’ country, even the Soviet Union was reluctant to stand up to the Chinese and hence led to the occupation of Tibet.

However, this episode taught India an almighty lesson and I believe was the turning point,it in the face of all adversity set about to stand on its own feet, it knew that it had to use all that was at its disposal from whee ever it could lay its hands on, blatant 'opportunism' some would say, I agree but isn't it what everyone does?

The only reason why Mrs Gandhi pursued the Soviet model even further (admittedly a mistake) was because of her annoyance with West's impotence of the past and then in assisting India and the pressure of the Soviets to maintain their stranglehold to keep India as an ally to fulfil its agenda, they did however, help India with weaponry, outdated industrial and commercial technologies over the next several decades.

It wasn’t very visionary of the West to have missed the golden opportunity to harness the resources of such a nation, it kept on making errors of judgement one after another, soon after the Chinese escapade it was Pakistan’s turn and we chose to back the wrong one.

Here the West made two major errors of judgement, a/ it chose not to back ‘Democracy’ but Dictatorship and b/ inadvertently pandered to the Communists.

And as you say when it chose to liberalise, it didn’t happen by accident, it was the realisation by the West mainly Britain and Europe initially, of an opportunity squandered in not to invest in India and the huge potential it had as an emerging market, with the West’s experience of the new generation of educated Indians and their potential made them queue up to fund all the programmes, it was also an opportunistic time soon after the death of Mrs Gandhi, and the close association of her son Rajeev with the West, brought down the barriers, while almost simultaneously, the mighty Soviet Union was crumbling and everyone was feeling very optimistic about the future, rightly so.

the real cause...

Submitted by Armor on Fri, 2007-03-16 17:51.

" Tens of millions will migrate to Europe and America, while the indigenous populations of most countries in the rich world will either stagnate or decline. "

It is useful to make estimations of future population growth in the third world. Besides, Europeans should be aware of the consequences of the crazy immigration policy. But we cannot possibly predict how many million immigrants will move to Western countries or be sent back to their home countries in the near future. It depends entirely on politics.

Contrary to what the article says, the real cause of immigration has nothing to do with poverty and overpopulation. In fact, it isn't the poorest people who migrate to Europe. The real cause of immigration is far-left ideology in the western media and governments. Immigration will stop when Europeans start rebelling against the malice and stupidity of the extreme left.

JimMtnViewCaUSA wrote: "It seems that you can take immigrants, even a lot of immigrants if they accept the proposition that they are the ones to join the existing culture, not that they will supplant the existing culture."

Why should we care about the culture of the people who are replacing us? Anyway, the idea that the Africans and the Chinese can marry each other in Europe and create something that will look like the civilization of our European grand-parents is a joke. Besides, I like the way Europeans look. Especially blue eyed girls from Northern Europe.

the real problem...

Submitted by peter vanderheyden on Fri, 2007-03-16 17:15.

The real problem in the article is not immigration; it’s the unrestrained growth of the population. Who cares where they are going to live, there is simply not enough food for everybody. The Christian fundies of the right don’t want to hear of birth control. They are very upset when some left people don’t mind gender abortion to much. They don’t like the distributing of condoms by the UN against aids. Those morons are the biggest mass murders ever! They prefer the devastating famines, riots and plagues that are eminent, instead of efforts to keep the world population down. Worse! They want to counter the growth in the Middle East and Africa, and fight the aging of the population in the west by calling are own citizens to procreate more! All that because some guy 2000 years ago wrote “Go Forth and Multiply”

Right on Jim & Peter

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Fri, 2007-03-16 17:22.

At last. People with intelligence. All is not lost.

"Give us your poor..."

Submitted by JimMtnViewCaUSA on Fri, 2007-03-16 16:38.

It seems that you can take immigrants, even a lot of immigrants if they accept the proposition that they are the ones to join the existing culture, not that they will supplant the existing culture. While it is a bonus to get skilled labor rather than "detritus", after a generation or two, the children of the immigrants always seem to turn out to have the normal complement of human talent...

I will not argue that large-scale immigration brings no friction. It does. But when the immigrants arrive with an attitude of joining instead of replacing, the friction is manageable.

In Reply to Sam Iqbal

Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Fri, 2007-03-16 16:15.

Sam Iqbal: "Population control is a must for all regions. However, the first step away from this sort of destruction is for the rich to admit that their 200 year endeavour to stuff as much of the GNP cake into their mouths as they possibly can without paying any social cost what so ever, has in fact endangered everyone including themselves."

Are you referring to imperialism and colonialism? These activities were the hallmark of every single human community, however, the European nations were clearly the winners. Moreover, the motivations for conquest were not only about material gain, but also included living space, martial pride, and megalomania on the part of many leaders.

Sam Iqbal: "That's the root course of the problem: capitalism and the rich’s greedy, anti-social behaviour that goes with it."

Actually, Capitalism, which is merely free-marketism, is opposed to the planned and asymmetrical economic systems that imperialism created, which do not allow for comparative advantage to flourish. Greed is omnipresent in all forms of human societies, it is a personal characteristic that cannot be changed by legislation or indoctrination.

Sam Iqbal: "On another note, this makes it even more imperative that India and China achieve economic take off and bring millions of people out of poverty."

If New Delhi and Beijing had liberalized their economies beginning 50 years ago, instead of pursing disastrous economic policies (especially in Maoist China) the task would have been completed. However, for both of these to fully industrialize, the impact on the environment and on natural resources around the world (inputs) will be catastrophic.

In Reply to the Captain

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Fri, 2007-03-16 17:21.

KA: Are you referring to imperialism and colonialism? These activities were the hallmark of every single human community, however, the European nations were clearly the winners. Moreover, the motivations for conquest were not only about material gain, but also included living space, martial pride, and megalomania on the part of many leaders.

Colonialism in the main. Domination of African, Asian, ME society; theft of resources, labour, markets and territory and the imposition of socio-cultural, religious and linguistic structures on the conquered population may have been hailed as a success at the time but the balance of powers are shifting. The “winners” are now looking like the losers.

I note you advocate the boycott of trade between EU and Arab nations in your declaration of independence post. How then do you suggest the economic empowerment of societies such as Egypt and Iran to keep hold of their populations? Young people wish to move to the US and EU primarily for material wealth.

KA: Actually, Capitalism, which is merely free-marketism, is opposed to the planned and asymmetrical economic systems that imperialism created, which do not allow for comparative advantage to flourish. Greed is omnipresent in all forms of human societies, it is a personal characteristic that cannot be changed by legislation or indoctrination.

I was referring here to instances such as the Iraq war and the resultant oil grab. The ME is in my opinion in the midst of an energy war which will eventually consume the big players; US, EU, Russia, China, India for a monumental battle over scarce energy resources (Refer to Peak oil theory). And yet no one on this blog supposes that ME migration is essentially a result of devastating wars, horrendous economic sanctions and the support of undemocratic regimes by Western governments to suit their economic interests. Corporates and their desire to enrich shareholders will use every possible underhand devious method going to get their greedy paws on cash without a singe thought to the social fabric of the societies they operate in.

KA: If New Delhi and Beijing had liberalized their economies beginning 50 years ago, instead of pursing disastrous economic policies (especially in Maoist China) the task would have been completed.

I doubt it. 50 years ago most Indians and Chinese were illiterate. The West was still rebuilding post WW2. Even 10 years ago the majority of Indians were illiterate. Prosperity and economic success comes only when countries can begin to improve healthcare systems, infrastructure, education, women’s rights, property laws etc. This requires political stability and access to capital markets, free from outside interference. The US (especially) has a disgraceful record of interfering in the politics of sovereign countries.

KA: However, for both of these to fully industrialize, the impact on the environment and on natural resources around the world (inputs) will be catastrophic.

Which is why we should listen to Stephen Hawkings and colonise the moon.

Inevitable?

Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Fri, 2007-03-16 15:58.

Perhaps indigenous Europeans will deter these rent-seekers from coming. After all, immigration is supposed to bring in skilled labor, not be an open door for the detritus of the world. Immigration, instead of performing its socio-economic tasks, has become a method through which some irrational form of human social justice is achieved.

Population control is a must

Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Fri, 2007-03-16 15:56.

Population control is a must for all regions. However, the first step away from this sort of destruction is for the rich to admit that their 200 year endeavour to stuff as much of the GNP cake into their mouths as they possibly can without paying any social cost what so ever, has in fact endangered everyone including themselves. That's the root course of the problem: capitalism and the rich’s greedy, anti-social behaviour that goes with it. On another note, this makes it even more imperative that India and China achieve economic take off and bring millions of people out of poverty.