History will judge the folly of Angela Merkel’s policy like the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq. While attempting to assuage German guilt for the Holocaust, she has imported the most virulent anti-Jews possible.
Chaos and Violence: How New Year’s Eve in Cologne Has Changed Germany
Lucia Keller is a Cologne taxi driver. On New Year’s Eve, two women climbed into her car and asked to be taken to the other side of the train station. They said they were afraid to go through the station because of what was going on inside.
Police lost control of the situation at the Cologne train station on New Year’s Eve. But they did make several arrests and also checked the documents of over 70 people. Many of them, according to a police report, appeared to be refugees.
What should be done? An attempt at complete honesty would be a good start. Germans are not children who need to be protected from the truth for well-intended reasons. And part of the truth is the fact that politicians like to talk about integration but have not yet given any indication that they understand the magnitude of the challenge facing them. Another part of the truth is this: German society is becoming increasingly divided.
Sweden Tells Refugees `Stay in Germany’ as Ikea Runs Out of Beds
Germany’s Gathering Clouds of Discontent
OCT. 29, 2015
Hamburg, Germany — IT’S getting darker and colder here in Germany, and it’s not just because winter is coming.
The collective summertime optimism generated by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open-door policy for refugees has soured. Ominous street protests, outfitted with mock guillotines, are now almost daily occurrences. In Dresden, during a gathering of several thousand citizens who purport to defend Western civilization against the influx of barbaric Muslims, a man held up a homemade gallows with a dangling sign reading, “Reserved for Angela Merkel.”
And they’re angry about more than just refugees. Around the same time, in Berlin, protesters rallying against the proposed trans-Atlantic free trade agreement carried a guillotine. Its bloodstained blade carried a warning to Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel of the Social Democrats: “Watch out, Sigmar!”
Of course, every cause can attract idiots of one kind or another. What’s worrying is that these fantasies of violence are the extreme expression of a sentiment that, in milder gradations, is taking hold of ever-larger parts of German society.
While only a minority of the protesters would be likely to agree that Ms. Merkel and Mr. Gabriel are traitors and need to be punished accordingly, most would probably agree with the larger point, that Ms. Merkel’s government has gone too far on the things that, until now, were modern Germany’s leading attributes: free trade and open borders.
What we see on the rise, in other words, is not the anger of a classic loony fringe, but rather mainstream people striking out at elites who they believe have lost touch with reality and common sense. To many here, the refugee crisis, the euro crisis, the Ukraine crisis and the threats seen in an unleashed global capitalism have converged in a fundamental question: Do the mighty still know what they are doing?
This is a question that touches upon the core connection between people and government. And it is why Ms. Merkel has more to lose than a couple of popularity points in opinion polls. Once citizens get the impression that those in charge are losing control, the general acceptance of democratic representatives will give way to loathing.
Indeed, it would be generous to say that Ms. Merkel knows what she is doing. On the big questions of our time, she is merely hedging her bets and hoping for a good outcome.
In the euro crisis, she has put a wager of 72 billion euros of German taxpayers’ money on the bet that the Greek state and economy will recover. In the Ukraine crisis, she has placed the livelihood of many German export companies on the bet that Russia will back down in the face of European sanctions.
And now, as up to 10,000 refugees enter Germany every day, she has placed a third bet. “We will manage this” was the chancellor’s central message when asked why she temporarily suspended immigration controls.
This last bet is the riskiest of all. First, it is not only about money, it’s about identity. “We don’t want to manage this at all!” replied a leading politician of the anti-establishment party Alternative für Deutschland to Ms. Merkel. Before 8,000 cheering followers, he invoked the dangers of ethnic dissolution and loss of the “Heimat,” or homeland. In response, the crowd chanted “We are the people,” emphasis on the “we.”
Ms. Merkel’s second refugee risk: Her “we can manage this” promise is up against the clock and the approaching winter. As the public services struggle with the refugees already here, it is unclear if they can find decent accommodation should the rush continue. That raises the prospect of a winter of discontent, with angry Germans facing off against irate immigrants.
The third risk is that Ms. Merkel may have a better sense for global than for local challenges, hearing but not understanding the strain placed on municipalities by the influx. In a recent Facebook post, Boris Palmer, the mayor of the prosperous university town of Tübingen, warned: “We can’t manage this.”
As a prominent member of the liberal Green Party, Mr. Palmer is the last person to stir up xenophobia. Yet even he has warned that the refugee crisis means that “the social peace in this country is at stake.”
The roulette wheel of Ms. Merkel’s refugee gamble is still turning, but it has already changed Germany’s political landscape. The frustration felt among Germany’s traditional center-left and center-right voters has dislodged them from their traditional parties. To them, the fringe parties — Alternative für Deutschland on the right, Die Linke on the left — offer quick and easy certainties: no to refugees, no to free trade.
Both populist parties will get their big chance next year, when Germany holds elections in three federal states. Sadly, it is likely that in their rage to punish the establishment, many Germans will fall for the seduction of the populists, pushing the country into the illiberal, reactionary direction it has so long struggled to avoid.
Jochen Bittner is a political editor for the weekly newspaper Die Zeit.
Jan 12, 2016
Georgie Anne Geyer
WASHINGTON — The real surprise about the New Year’s Eve riots targeting German women, now definitely attributed to Middle Eastern and North African immigrants, is why there should have been any surprise at all.
Yet for days, everyone on the scene was amazed. And worse, they were silent, even though the police — finally! — released a report about a chaotic and shameful evening in which women were forced to “run a ‘gauntlet’ through masses of heavily intoxicated men that words cannot describe.”
The police in Cologne did not even mention the assaults for days — until the press did and so many women came forward. Later reports added that the police had not called for backup. Still later reports had the innocents-at-home asking in Germany, had men who came to Europe supposedly for refuge attacked hundreds of women in front of the exquisite Cathedral of Cologne, the greatest insult possible?
Then, little by little, it began to dawn on people at the dawn of the New Year — and perhaps also the dawn of a new European age — that their assumption that Middle Eastern men would act just like European men was what was fatally flawed. Even as the mayor of Cologne was advising women to keep “an arm’s length” from men, other voices were more appropriately worried.
The right-wing Alternative for Germany party blamed Chancellor Angela Merkel’s liberal “multicultural” policies for the assaults, declaring on its website that the “violence of New Year’s Eve was the first result of a dangerous mix of uncontrolled immigration, inexcusable failure of government and political interference.”
And Mina Ahadi, head of a campaign group, the Central Council of Ex-Muslims, spoke of the “problem” radicalized Arab and other Muslim men often have with women. “For them, women are dirty,” she was quoted in the Financial Times. “They are sex objects to be enjoyed in the home and allowed outside only in the burka and in the company of a man.”
I have covered the Middle East in long visits since 1969. I find it fascinating, and often, emotionally engaging. But one of the first things a correspondent learns is, “Don’t get in the middle of an Arab crowd.” The advice was sound.
Recall, please, the case of Lara Logan, a beautiful and respected CBS foreign correspondent, who was sent to Cairo in February 2011 to cover the first blossoming of the Arab Spring, where 100,000 or so people jammed Tahrir Square.
Although Lara had taken every precaution, she soon lost her guards and fellow journalists as the celebrators of “liberation” turned to murder. First her clothes were torn off her, her panties ripped into ribbons; then they were “raping me with their hands” and smashing her muscles, as she later testified in a “60 Minutes” interview.
In the end, “they were trying to tear off chunks of my scalp; they had my head in different directions … holding big wads of it, literally trying to tear my scalp off my skull. … I thought, not only am I gonna die here, but it’s gonna be just a torturous death that’s going to go on forever and ever and ever.”
After about half an hour, Lara was helped to escape the horrors of “Liberation Square,” but only through the intercession of black-robed Egyptian women. She was in the hospital at home for days and still suffers from the grotesque attacks.
And Egyptians, in everyday life, are the sweetest and kindest of the Arabs. While the Syrians have always had a reputation similar to the Iraqis, whose demographic history they share, as a clever, but cruel population always ruled by a dictator.
In allowing into their country this mixed bag of Syrians, Iraqis, Nigerians, Eritreans and Arabs of all stripes — the great majority of them young men — the Germans obviously did not understand that this sort of attack happens regularly across the Arab world. Even more interesting, it now turns out that they have already occurred in Denmark, Sweden and other European countries with Middle Eastern immigrants, not to speak of Stuttgart, Hamburg and Berlin for that selfsame New Year’s Eve “celebration.”
In every case, the story was also the same: The authorities and the police did not want to feed any prejudice against immigrants or refugees. So, let the women of Germany absorb the follies of the high-minded!
Giving form to the fantasies of multiculturalism is the idea that all men (and supposedly, all women) are alike. Culture? Oh, that will fall off! Historical memories? What are those compared to our noble intentions? Experience? Heck, maybe those men in Cologne had headaches when they went out this New Year’s, or they were going to the cathedral to understand Christianity better!
Europe this New Year’s thus began what is surely going to be a long journey into remaining Germans, French and English, or becoming, and in the not-too-distant future, a mishmash of peoples whose values and virtues are simply to be stomped upon by foreigners with their own agendas.
Last spring, the hour was early; now the hour is already late.
MUSLIM GANGS PLUNDER GERMAN CHURCHES
Proceeds bound for the Islamic State
Mass immigration is on the verge of DESTROYING Europe, blasts LEO MCKINSTRY
SEVERAL millennia were required to build European civilisation but its impending destruction has been the work of just a few years, carried out by a cadre of irresponsible, unpatriotic and deluded politicians led by German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
By LEO MCKINSTRY
PUBLISHED: 08:25, Thu, Nov 5, 2015 | UPDATED: 09:05, Thu, Nov 5, 2015
Dressing up their vandalism as compassion and their cowardice as moral superiority, these leaders have created an immigration crisis so profound that the very existence of our European culture and heritage is under mortal threat.
The tragic paradox of the obsession with free movement and the abolition of national identities is that Europe in any meaningful sense will probably cease to exist this century.
As the social revolution accelerates traditional values of democracy, freedom and solidarity will be replaced by conflict, sectarianism, oppression and intolerance.
Increasingly Islamified, barbaric and poverty-stricken, Europe will become indistinguishable from large swathes of North Africa and the Middle East.
Even the stupendously high levels of mass immigration over the past two decades are now dwarfed by the colossal flood of new arrivals that has occurred since the early summer when Merkel made her woefully illconceived pledge that Germany would welcome anyone claiming to be a refugee.
She may have thought that the open-door policy would provide a counter to Germany’s appalling record of aggression since the 1860s but in reality by wrecking Europe’s social fabric she has added to the long catalogue of Teutonic crimes.
It is thanks mainly to her that so many African, Asian and Middle-Eastern migrants are coming to our shores. In October alone a record 218,000 of them crossed the Mediterranean, more than the entire total for 2014.
Absurdly some metropolitan elitists complain that Britain has failed to join in this demographic upheaval since our Government has said that we will only take 20,000 refugees from Syria over the next five years.
This ignores the crucial fact that the current annual immigration rate is officially more than 630,000-a-year, with most of the new settlers hailing from outside the EU. How many more are Britain and Europe expected to take?
The potential influx is almost limitless. The United Nations says that globally there are at least 60million people classified as refugees while more than 1.2billion live in dire poverty. But the numbers are already proving catastrophic.
A mood of fear hangs over disintegrating Europe. In southern Spain there have been attacks on churches by Islamists, including damage to an ancient sanctuary and Arabic graffiti sprayed on walls.
Ultra-liberal pro-immigration Sweden has seen some Muslim neighbourhoods in its cities turned into no-go areas, while Malmo has one of the highest rates of rape in the world.
The fraught scenes of chaos in Eastern Europe are replicated at points on the British border, such as Calais, where the vast 6,000-strong migrant camp descends into even greater squalor and tension.
But 95 per cent of the squatters there are not refugees but are tough, fit young men mainly from Africa who have no right to be in Europe at all. If our politicians had any guts they would close down the camp and deport its freeloading residents.
But instead the British taxpayer is being asked to fork out £3.6million a year for improvements at the camp, which will only attract more. The same tensions can be seen at a British RAF base in Cyprus, where a group of migrants are being given shelter and food after landing on the island.
Instead of showing any gratitude some have created disturbances and burnt their tents, hardly the behaviour of people genuinely fleeing persecution. “We want to go to England,” said one, displaying a spirit of petulant entitlement.
It is clear that Europe is now unable to cope. The Greek island of Lesbos has run out of burial space, while tiny Slovenia has 13,000 migrants passing through its borders every day, also setting fire to tents.
Even Germany is struggling. There have been mass brawls at several migrant reception centres and in a chilling echo of the country’s totalitarian past the German authorities are seizing property to provide accommodation for the arrivals.
In one startling symbol of how European society is being overwhelmed the village of Sumte in the north-east is about to see its population increase by 700 per cent through the import of 750 asylum seekers.
As winter approaches and the weather worsens the migrant crisis is set to escalate. A new wave of sentimentality will be unleashed by much of the media, peddling manipulative images of the suffering of the refugees.
Eager to parade their humanitarian credentials politicians will open the doors even further and impose even greater burdens on European taxpayers. So the cycle of decline will gather momentum. None of us ever voted for our demise.
But without any democratic mandate that is what the politicians have inflicted. One nurse in Germany, who is being evicted from her Nieheim flat so it can be used for migrants, told a reporter last month: “I find it impossible to understand how the city can treat me like this.”
Her experience could be a metaphor for the peoples of Europe. The scale of this political treachery is almost incomprehensible.
Victor Davis Hanson commentary: When troubled people flee, they always head west
Monday September 21, 2015 6:09 AM
There is a tragic monotony to the latest massive human migration, this one involving Syrians fleeing their war-torn country.
Whether the migrants are from Mexico, the Islamic world or elsewhere, it is always the same: Migrants flock to the West.
Mexicans who elect to leave their country do not hop trains to Guatemala. Fleeing Libyans do not head for the Congo. And Syrians do not go to Russia or China.
Migrants — many of them young men — come in such numbers that Western immigration laws are often rendered null and void. Western nations tend to apply their exacting immigration laws only to the much smaller number of immigrants who obey the law.
Sometimes the exoduses are because of endemic poverty, usually brought on by the utter failure of non-Western governments to provide jobs, security and basic social services. Sometimes tribal, religious or drug wars cause the exoduses.
Yet neither the Latin American nor the Islamic world analyzes why millions of their own are fleeing to cultures that are usually criticized — other than an occasional half-hearted whine about the legacy of imperialism, colonialism and a potpourri of other historical grievances.
Nor does the deer-in-the-headlights American or European host dare to remind newcomers that its uniquely Western menu — free-market capitalism, private property, a free press, meritocracy, consensual government, religious tolerance, equality between the sexes, and individual freedom — draws in people, while the antitheses repel them.
The mentalities of both the Western hosts and the non-Western migrants have become predictable.
Many ordinary middle-class Westerners oppose massive influxes of immigrants. These citizens do not like seeing laws rendered null and void. They fear that their schools, health facilities, legal systems and social services will be overwhelmed and left unable to effectively serve their own middle classes and poor.
The masses in the West have learned such caution from experience. The sudden appearance of huge numbers of immigrants — when coupled with poverty, lack of language facility and little education — for decades afterward has impeded easy integration, assimilation and intermarriage within Western society.
As a result, a divisive, salad-bowl multicultural separatism often arises.
Given the challenges of facing strange customs, traditions and languages, guests naturally find it difficult to achieve rapid parity with hosts. It is soon forgotten in the first generation that being in the underclass in the West was once thought better than the alternative back home. That paradox is soon forgotten by the often disgruntled — and less desperate — children of migrants.
Millions of immigrants to the West soon sense that their own lack of parity and sheer numbers can translate into a powerful political constituency — all the more so if it stays angry, unassimilated and occasionally replenished by new waves of arrivals.
Western elites in politics, journalism, academia, religion and the arts snipe at their own supposedly illiberal majorities. How dare these cruel hearts question the wisdom of accepting legions of anonymous newcomers.
Yet too many elites unfortunately are poseurs. These privileged Westerners assume that the real consequences of unchecked migration should always fall on others who are less sophisticated and who lack the elites’ capital, education and influence to find everyday exemption from the real-life consequences of their own idealism.
Should Harvard or Oxford open their ample campuses to migrant tent cities, should the wealthy in Malibu and Monaco allow their beaches to become refugee campgrounds, should the Vatican turn its vast plaza into beds and soup kitchens for thousands, then a member of the elite might not be so jaded about the vast abyss between what is lectured and what is actually done.
Non-Western countries are even more two-faced about immigration. Saudi Arabia, for example, has not used its trillions of petrodollars to take in fellow Muslims from neighboring countries. But it has offered to build 200 mosques in Germany. The Saudis logically assume that unassimilated young male Muslim immigrants in Europe will be ripe for the Saudis’ own brand of extremist Islamic chauvinism and resistance to Western modernism.
In the case of Mexico, it expects that the United States would never treat immigrants in the manner that Mexico deals with migrants.
Not long ago, the Mexican government printed comic-book-style manuals on how to enter the U.S. illegally. Apparently, Mexico does not want to retain its own citizens.
We all lie to ourselves about immigration. The world over seems to want what often-complacent, affluent Westerners take for granted. But no one dares to say why this is so, or why some are driving out — and others are drawing in — millions on the move.
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution.