Sunday, July 08, 2007

92% of British imams foreign-born, 94% speak other than English

Muslim integration into British society is unattainable. This isn't helping matters:
Lord Ahmed's comments come as a survey suggests imams lack professional and language skills to tackle the threat of radicalism among young British Muslims.

Only 8% of imams preaching in British mosques were born in the UK, it found. Research at 300 mosques by Chester University for BBC News and the BBC Asian Network also indicated only 6% speak English as a first language.
It's unattainable, that is, unless Britain becomes fundamentally Islamic, both socially and demographically.

The moral and spiritual leaders of Britain's Muslim population are overwhelmingly enmeshed in the Islamic culture of their South Asian and Middle Eastern homelands. More than three-fourths have been in-country for less than a decade, and nearly half have been in the UK for less than five years. Only a pittance are even able to communicate in the UK's official language.

The idea of assimilation is silly given such strong cultural (consanguinity, the power of kinship, and Islam), economic, and innate (IQs about one standard deviation below that of European Brits, physical appearance) as is. That the growth of the Kingdom's Islamic population is continuing while turning not to European norms and values but to those imported from their places of origin is just piling on.

Islamic leadership in the heart of Europe telling Muslims living there that the places they've settled are deplorably in need of the civilization of their native homelands is unarguably not helping integrate Muslims living in Britain. But the BBC's insinuated prescriptions are not doing so, either. Notice how it is assumed in the excerpt above that these foreign-born Islamic experts (the article states "The imams were 'overwhelmingly' qualified in the traditional Islamic curriculum...") will speak in favor of 'moderation' and 'integration' if only they learn English!

Knowing the language of the enemy is critical for a successful fifth column. This is a great demonstration of propositionalist fallacy. The belief that presenting an entire population with some idea (or in this case, even more superficially, merely with a communicative tool) will alter the very fiber of that population's being smacks of the same quixotic idealism that led the US and Britain into believing they could construct a liberal, functioning pluralistic society in the heart of the Middle East.

That the leaders of Britain's Islamic population are so removed from mainstream Western culture may have a silver lining. In Germany, a disconnected Turkish underclass has been willfully augmented through immigration for the last fifty years. The second- and third-generations are not only increasingly turning toward their ancestral home for influence, they have come to resent their designated place at the bottom of Germany's socio-economic ladder (similar to what has taken and will continue to take place among the US' growing Hispanic population):
Germany needed workers. Turks needed work.

So starting in 1961, the country invited Turkish ''guest workers" to come do the dirty jobs that Germans didn't want. ...

Nobody grasped that the country -- and the continent, because neighboring nations soon undertook similar experiments -- was on the brink of a transformation whose effects are still reverberating across Europe.

The hostility toward and burden placed upon the host country by the underachieving foreign population inevitably grows by generation. The absolute increase in standard-of-living that was sweet enough for the first-generation to bite their lips isn't present in subsequent generations. But by the time it is recogized and reacted to, the decision to allow immigration has produced an almost intractable result--contemporary Berlin or Los Angeles.

The audacity and mendacity of these migrants, coupled with their vicious and persistent domestic terrorist activity, provides some political impetus for opposing their migration in the first place. It's not just 'nativism'--it's security, the preservation of freedom, and the sustainability of a liberal society. The magnanimous tolerance of the Anglosphere is enormous. But even it can be pushed to the limits.

It's long past time for separation. Germany's Turkish population hasn't assimlated. Nor has France's North African population. South Asians in Britain are showing no signs of integrating, either. Only conflict and the degradation of the Occidental way of life can come from a continued forced meshing of Islamic society in the heart of the West.


JSBolton said...

The more tolerant and open a society is towards foreign hostiles, the more it gets characterized as exclusionary and intolerant, and even becomes more harsh-looking from its past openness.
Japan and SKorea and many other prosperous societies which are lacking in openness. are not going to be daily called nativist, racist, xenohobic, etc., since there is no honest impulse behind such smear offensives. Europeans don't have black populations of any size, so they are in a position to hoot and howl over America having so many blacks in prison and back on the chain gang. It's always about who can smear whom, with rational arguments forsworn, and with only one winner from the exercise: the power-greedy.

JSBolton said...

Instead of a move towards pacifism, as if sincerity were present in those appeasement policies, another outcome could be one like Israel and Gaza, with moslem enclaves in the role of