6411 stories
·
2 followers

Anti-Immigration Party Surges as Merkel Wins German Election

1 Share
(John Hinderaker)

Europe has never been as committed to democracy as the United States. Its elites let people vote, but some issues they are not willing to allow to be decided by the masses. Thus, at quite an early stage, European liberals decided that immigration was too explosive an issue to be committed to the democratic process. Europeans were going to get mass immigration whether they wanted it or not, and anyone with reservations about that decision was deemed part of the “far right.”

This stratagem has mostly succeeded, at least temporarily. Few if any mainstream parties have been willing to oppose, or even question, mass non-European immigration. This left the large number of Europeans who wanted their countries to remain more or less as they have been unrepresented, except by upstart parties that may or may not be “far right” on any issue other than immigration. The danger, obviously, is that by consigning the immigration issue to the “far right,” Europe’s elites may inadvertently, and needlessly, strengthen the otherwise insignificant elements that are, actually, far right.

In Germany, no mainstream party has been willing to stand up to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s importation of nearly a million immigrants and refugees, nearly all Muslims. So opposition has come from the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which was founded in 2013 as a Euro-skeptic party, but now has taken on the immigration issue. Germany’s national election took place today, and the main story line is AfD’s strong showing:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel won a fourth term Sunday, but now faces the tricky prospect of forming a coalition with two disparate new partners after voters weakened her conservatives and a nationalist, anti-migrant party surged into parliament.

Merkel’s center-left challenger, Martin Schulz, conceded that his Social Democrats had suffered a “crushing election defeat,” with projections showing the party’s worst performance in post-World War II Germany.

That’s a good thing.

The biggest winner was the four-year-old Alternative for Germany, or AfD. It finished third after a campaign that centered on shrill criticism of Merkel and her decision in 2015 to allow large numbers of migrants into Germany, but also harnessed wider discontent with established politicians.

AfD got 13% of the vote. Germany’s “discontent with established politicians” was reflected in the fact that both Merkel’s center-right Christian Democrats and the center-left Social Democrats saw their vote totals decline substantially.

So is AfD really a far right party? The left-wing BBC bitterly opposes anti-immigration parties like AfD and tries to put the party in a bad light, for the most part unsuccessfully:

AfD also adopted some of Pegida’s anti-establishment rhetoric, for example the slogan “Lügenpresse” (“lying press”), which has echoes of the Nazi era.

Apparently you can’t question the establishment press without being a Nazi. Some American liberals say the same thing, but no one believes them.

Germany must reintroduce permanent border controls and the EU’s external borders must be “completely shut”, AfD says. …

AfD argues that Germany must set up a new border police force. Frauke Petry, who stepped aside from the AfD leadership earlier this year, even said German police should “if necessary” shoot at migrants seeking to enter the country illegally.

Emphasis in original. This tells us what we already knew, that AfD is anti-immigration. The BBC evidently considers the idea of shooting at people trying illegally to enter Germany shocking. But if people insist on entering a country despite that country’s laws, isn’t shooting them “if necessary” the last resort? Isn’t that why border guards are pretty much always armed? A country whose border guards could do no more than wave at foreigners and implore them not to enter the country would not–to put it mildly–have secure borders.

AfD says that “Islam does not belong to Germany.” More specifically, the party’s manifesto says:

That statement may be controversial, but it is hardly radical, and evidently a great many Germans agree with it. More:

AfD would ban foreign funding of mosques in Germany, ban the burka (full-body veil) and the Muslim call to prayer, and put all imams through a state vetting procedure.

“Moderate” Muslims who accept integration are “valued members of society”, the programme says. But it argues that multiculturalism does not work.

Those proposals wouldn’t fly in the U.S., but they cannot fairly be considered extreme. AfD has, however, had some unsavory moments unrelated to immigration:

Mr Gauland also drew criticism for declaring that Germans should be “proud” of their soldiers in both world wars. While SS units were notorious for German atrocities in World War Two, the regular armed forces also committed many war crimes.

Earlier another top AfD politician, Björn Höcke, caused outrage by condemning the Holocaust memorial in Berlin. He told supporters that Germans were the “only people in the world who planted a memorial of shame in the heart of their capital”.

Whether these few comments by AfD leaders are symptomatic of an underlying neo-Nazi tendency, I don’t know. To the extent that they may be, it illustrates the peril of suppressing and stigmatizing discussion of Germany’s immigration policies–which are, in my view, extreme and ill-advised. Doing so inevitably drives voters who are opposed to mass Islamic immigration into the arms of the only political leaders who are willing to give voice to their concerns.

Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
2 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Civil War on the Left, Part 48: Asian Supremacy?

1 Share
(Steven Hayward)

Are Asians an oppressed minority in America, or not? We know for a fact that elite universities are nowadays discriminating against Asian applicants in much the same way they discriminated against Jewish applicants decades ago. But didn’t a lot of Asians historically suffer the same kind of discrimination that Irish, Italian, and other immigrants nowadays considered part of the world of “white supremacy”?

For example, there’s a little noticed passage in Justice Harlan’s famous dissent in the notorious Plessy vs. Ferguson “separate but equal” decision, which is most often rightly recalled for the clarity of Harlan’s argument that “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.” A few sentences later, however, Harlan adds:

There is a race so different from our own that we do not permit those belonging to it to become citizens of the United States. Persons belonging to it are, with few exceptions, absolutely excluded from our country. I allude to the Chinese race.

Well. That certainly sounds like garden-variety racism directed against people of Asian origin. (You usually find this paragraph in Harlan’s dissent is omitted Con Law casebooks, which is one reason I dislike most Con Law casebooks.)

The identity politics left doesn’t quite know what to do with Asians in the hierarchy of grievance-mongering and oppression Olympics. At least if this article from the always rewarding EverydayFeminism site is a guide to things:

Asian Americans: 10 Warning Signs That Show You’re Siding With Whiteness

By Ayesha Sharma

. . . [B]eing a non-Black South Asian from an upper-class immigrant household, I assimilated so hard that I came to identify almost completely with the white people around me. . .

It also led me to experience a comfort with whiteness which I now am realizing has been hugely self-destructive for my personal growth, self-acceptance, and ability to engage with other people of color.

I want to speak to those of you who are interested in thinking about your race more critically, and understanding how we as Asian Americans can be complicit in siding with whiteness. . .

We think we’re a model minority, but many of us don’t realize that we have histories and present realities of oppression and resistance as part of our experience.

There follows a list of ten ways Asians are complicit in white supremacy. Number 7 is my favorite:

7. When we identify with white systems of thought

Our privilege leads us to identify with systems of thought like political conservatism, white liberalism, and white feminism. . .

For example, if we identify with feminism that is actually white feminism, then we continue to not only delegitimize our experiences as Asian American people, but we can largely overlook the urgent importance of practically applied intersectionality in our politics.

Okay, I’m confused, too. I thought “political conservatism” and “white liberalism” were very different things. Simple question: Are Asians part of white supremacy, or are Asians another minority oppressed by whites? (See Justice Harlan above.) And if they are an oppressed minority, shouldn’t Asians receive affirmative action preferences?

Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
3 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

AWESOME: STEELERS PLAYER AND FORMER ARMY RANGER ALEJANDRO VILLANUEVA DECIDED TO STAND FOR THE ANTHEM…

1 Share

AWESOME: STEELERS PLAYER AND FORMER ARMY RANGER ALEJANDRO VILLANUEVA DECIDED TO STAND FOR THE ANTHEM AMID #TAKETHEKNEE.

Flashback: Obama Names Steelers’ Owner Ambassador to Ireland.

Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
4 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Tim Tebow and Colin Kaepernick are two sides of the same coin

1 Share

Some of the hotter memes to pass through social media since President Donald Trump’s castigation of NFL anthem protests all involve Tim Tebow. People have been putting up images of Tebow kneeling during games faster than a dealer passing around a new narcotic, suggesting the ex-NFL quarterback never got a fair shake in the league, and intimating his out Christianity is one reason why he was so divisive. There’s definitely a large nugget of truth to the claim, but the same could also be said about Colin Kaepernick. The two quarterbacks appear to cause the biggest schism between fans, with Tony Romo a very close third, but they’re pretty much two sides of the same coin. It’s an uncomfortable truth for those who enjoy professional football, however, it’s one which needs to be acknowledged.

The first is their college careers. Both Tebow and Kaepernick were dual threat quarterbacks in college, who ran about as much as they threw. Their stats are strikingly similar, with both players rushing for almost 60 touchdowns in college, while Tebow tossed six more TD’s than Kaepernick. What’s interesting is Kaepernick has the edge in passing and rushing yards, having thrown 800 more yards than Tebow and rushed for over a thousand more. The biggest difference between the two is obviously hype, and awards. Tebow played in the SEC for the Gators, meaning he got to be on TV much more than Kaepernick’s Wolf Pack did in the MAC. He also won the Heisman, and was a finalist for two others. The closest Kaepernick got to an award was being on the Manning and O’Brien award watchlists.

The similarities are the also the same in the NFL Draft. Scouts praised both for their leadership qualities, work ethic, height, and arm strength. Both were criticized for playing in a non-pro style offense, decision making, and delivery issues. Yet two teams took a risk on Tebow and Kaepernick, with Tebow going 25th overall to the Broncos, while Kaepernick went 36th to the San Francisco. It’s pretty interesting to see how their careers keep mimicking each other, even into the NFL. Kaepernick has had a longer career, and NFL playoff wins, but Tebow won one playoff game in three seasons and both rushed for at least a dozen TDs.

It could be argued Kaepernick and Tebow’s successes (and failures) are because of how coaches used them. Broncos Coach John Fox was willing to Tebow-ize the Broncos offense in their only season together, and Kaepernick’s greatest success came with Jim Harbaugh as his coach. When Tebow was sent to the Jets, he hardly touched the field, even though he started two games and got to do the occasional trick play. I remember there being questions as to why the Jets even traded for Tebow, if they weren’t going to play him. Kaepernick’s stock fell through the floor when Harbaugh left, and other coaches came in. Does this mean both Kaepernick and Tebow are system quarterbacks? Yes. In all honesty, both players deserve to be in the NFL, if they can find the right situation. There has to be a coach out there willing to use Tebow’s strength as a runner and a deep passer, and Kaepernick’s success with the 49ers with Harbaugh can’t be ignored. This is an indictment on NFL coaches who are too focused on making their offenses a specific style, instead of figuring out ways to successfully use both quarterbacks. It’s disappointing to both players and shows a lack of thought process in the NFL.

The biggest similarity between both quarterbacks are their PR issues (yes, even Tebow!), and the fact they were pushed by the media. Tebow was heralded by ESPN during his college and NFL tenure, while Kaepernick became a media sensation because of his decision to sit during the National Anthem. The PR issues are because of their fans and/or detractors. Tebow’s legion of fans are well known, as plenty of Christians have flocked to him because of his outspokenness regarding his faith. That’s caused others to bristle at Tebow’s success, not because they don’t necessarily like Tebow, but because there’s this idea his fans are annoying. Kaepernick has been praised and vilified for kneeling or sitting during the Anthem, with people on the left loving what he does, while people on the right are a bit more angry. It doesn’t really matter whether either Tebow or Kaepernick are right in their actions. The fact they had their legion of fans so hellbent on pushing the quarterbacks meant it would be a headache for teams to even consider signing them.

I’ve no problem with either player, even if I believe they’re more products of the system they were in, and I don’t mind the fact both of them have been known for their activism. I tend to agree a bit more with Tebow, than I do Kaepernick, but it doesn’t bother me both have decided to stand firm in their beliefs. They both deserve another shot in the NFL, if they can find the right situation.

The post Tim Tebow and Colin Kaepernick are two sides of the same coin appeared first on Hot Air.



Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
6 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

THE HILL: Trump stirs backlash feuding with NFL, NBA players. Related: Now I’m no Scott A…

1 Share

THE HILL: Trump stirs backlash feuding with NFL, NBA players.

Related:

Now I’m no Scott Adams, but it does seem to me that this is a fight Trump can’t lose, and that the NFL can’t win.

UPDATE: Kurt Schlichter weighs in:

Plus:

What the left wants is to take advantage of the conventions of bourgeois society while attacking them. But I think they’re running out of room. I don’t think they’ll like the result. Neither will I, of course, but they neither consulted me nor heeded my warnings.

Or as summed up in this classic Iowahawk tweet:

Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
9 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

WELCOME TO THE KANGAROO COURT. I’LL BE YOUR KANGAROO. Ashe Schow: A Campus-Rape Official Who Diss…

1 Share

WELCOME TO THE KANGAROO COURT. I’LL BE YOUR KANGAROO. Ashe Schow: A Campus-Rape Official Who Disses Men Online.

Can male students expect a fair process when a member of the school’s department responsible for handling sexual assault accusations has posted anti-male sentiments online?

This year Northwestern University, above, hired Kate Harrington-Rosen as its Equity Outreach and Education Specialist for the Office of Title IX/Equal Opportunity and Access. In this capacity, she is responsible for “developing and delivering training for students, faculty, and staff on Title IX policy and procedures, as well as tracking and assessing education and prevention efforts across campus,” according to the Evanston, Ill., school.

Her “about” page on Northwestern’s website mentions Harrington-Rosen’s web sideline the Not Sorry Project, which the school said aims “to give space and voice to women, femmes, and other marginalized groups.” But the Not Sorry Project includes content that could be considered anti-male.

The project, active on Facebook and other social media, features artful posts on what people are “not sorry for” — including dissing men. They are typically described with the term “cis” or variants to mean males who identify with their birth sex.

In one anonymous post, the words “I’m not sorry that cishet alpha men are trash to me until proven innocent” appear over a background image of flowers.

Harrington-Rosen and her co-founder express similar views in the “Friday Not Sorry List” jointly credited to them. In one dated July 7, the pair wrote: “I’m not sorry (or sad) that I have very few cis male friends.” On July 14, they wrote: “I’m not sorry that none of my friends are cis straight men.”

On Aug. 18, the two wrote in their Friday list: “I’m not sorry for capitalizing on your white guilt to get you to give money to causes I care about.”

On Sept. 15, the two wrote: “I’m not sorry I’m skeptical of procedure and neutrality.”

Other posts express similar “not sorry” views about general issues. But there are no posts showing negativity toward women specifically.

Northwestern’s Title IX operation seems bad even by the not-very-demanding standards set by other schools.

Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
9 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories