Monthly Archives: September 2017

Europeans the Greatest in Everything since the Beginning

Posted on by

Europeans the Greatest in Everything since the Beginning

by Ricardo Duchesne

Steven King ignited a hysterical backlash in the summer of 2016 when he modestly asked, in response to a journalist who made a comment about “old white people” making up the majority of the GOP:

Where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you’re talking about? Where did any other subgroup of people contribute more to civilization?

When moderator Chris Hayes asked, “Than white people?”, King added:

Than Western Europe itself. That’s rooted in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and the United States of America.

At this point the panelists started speaking over each other in a frantic state, with some reporter asking: “What about Africa?” What about Asia?” Before cutting to a commercial and ending this dangerous line of conversation, Hayes said:

Let me note for the record that if you’re looking at the ledger of Western Civilization, for every flourishing democracy you’ve got Hitler and Stalin as well. So there’s a lot on both sides.

Apoplectic Reactions Against King

The next day the media together with academic servants of the state unleashed a barrage of articles denouncing King as “racist” and “mentally stunted”. Varying “lists” of the contributions of non-Europeans to “civilization” and to “modern society” appeared everywhere. A white female from Salon, after producing a list about non-European contributions to “humanity”, “first civilizations”, “citizen rule”, “written law”, “tools”, “surgery”, “numbers”, and “Christianity” itself, concluded:

Although “old white people” may be responsible for the GOP today, they are nowhere near responsible for humanity’s most important historical achievements.

Academics, with their usually condescending (and supercilious) tone, questioned the “idea that there is a separate and unique Western  civilization”. UCLA’s Lynn Hunt explained to a Time journalist, how the idea of the “rise of the West” was “invented” after WWII as a way of countering challenges against European colonialism and the “fear” that the West was “declining”. The concept of the West is “problematic”. Was Ancient Greece really Western? What about the contributions of Muslims to “some central points” of Western history?

Lynn Hunt, who herself has written a Western civ textbook, happily conceded to a journalist that the teaching of Western civilization has been replaced by “World History”, because “we have things in common with people everywhere” and such a course, the journalist agreed, “is more welcoming to students whose backgrounds could be traced somewhere other than Europe”.

Only an editor by the name “Akhilesh Pillalamarri” acknowledged “the Scientific Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, and the Enlightenment” as “unique contributions of the West”, while adding that “civilization itself arose in the Middle East ,” and that without non-European contributions to

the domestication of crops and animals, the first weight and measures, the first bureaucracies, organized government and religion, writing, and the wheel…algebra, distillation, and advanced astronomy and navigation…Western civilization, and indeed the modern global civilization build largely by the West, would have been impossible.

Most supporters of Western uniqueness would be satisfied with Pillalamarri’s assessment as fairly accurate, including his listing of “China’s many contributions” such as the invention of paper, printing, gunpowder, the compass, and clocks.

My View on Western Uniqueness

We should not be satisfied. In my books The Uniqueness of Western Civilizationand Faustian Man in a Multicultural Age I emphasized the “continuous creativity” of Europeans from ancient Greek times to the present. I also went back to the revolutionary contributions of pre-historic Europeans in the domestication and riding of horses, their co-invention of wheeled vehicles, their principal contribution to the “secondary-products revolution“, their invention of chariots, their creation of the most dynamic language in history, the proto-Indo-European language, their nurturing of the only true aristocratic culture in history (in which rulers were not despots but first among equals), their origination of the first heroic and tragic literature, and, most important of all, their responsibility for the appearance of “self-consciousness” in history, which laid the foundations for the Greek Miracle.

I highlighted the scholars who wrote about the Greek invention of secular observation of nature, the invention of mathematical proof, the invention of artistic realism, the invention of prose writing, the invention of historical writing, the invention of politicsthe invention of infantry warfare, the production of the highest sequence of the greatest thinkers in history, the Hellenistic Revolution in Science, not to mention technological and economic novelties.

I also mentioned the Roman contribution of the first rationalized legal system that recognized each citizen as a legal person, Rome’s unsurpassed engineering, aqueducts, Latin literature, and rational infrastructure of war-making as well as the greatest empire in human history. I argued that the Middle Ages were one of the most creative periods in history as evidenced by the invention of universities, corporate autonomy of the church and towns coupled with the “first modern legal system“, the invention of mechanical clocks, the scholastic method of investigation, the best water mills, Romanesque and Gothic architectural buildings unsurpassed in history, the three field system of agriculture, an entireRenaissance in the 12th century.

The West is filled with “origins”, “transitions”, “inventions”, “renaissances”, “discoveries”, and “revolutions”: the Printing Revolution, the Portuguese rounding of Africa, the discovery of the New World, Cartographic Revolution, the Italian Renaissance, the invention of perspective painting, the Copernican Revolution, the Newtonian Revolution, the Military Revolution, the Glorious Revolution, the French Revolution, the First Industrial Revolution, the Second Industrial Revolution, the German Philosophical Revolution(s) from Leibniz to Kant to Hegel to Nietzsche to Heidegger, the invention of the Novel, the Romantic Rebellion, the Darwinian Revolution — to mention a few.

Meanwhile, the Rest of the world remained stuck without any major novelties after the inventions of the Bronze Age that we associate with the rise of civilization as such. There was change, but no revolutionary novelties, no major thinkers, no major scientists, no major artists. There were a few philosophical reflections by Muslims out of their reading of Aristotle early in the Middle Ages, and some novelties in pharmaceutical ingredients and optics. The Chinese also produced a few trinkets by way of water clocks, firecrackers, and paper. But Chinese “development” consisted only in demographic expansion, intensification of rice farming, and the building of big ships called “junks“.

Western Accomplishments Are Exponentially Greater

St Jerome in his study

The immense and continuous breakthrough of Europeans in all fields of human endeavour can only be properly captured when we zero in on particular philosophers, painters, novelists, mathematicians, logicians, musical composers. Even the startling lists that Charles Murray produced showing, for example, that the giants for each of the natural sciences (the top twenty in astronomy, physics, biology, medicine, chemistry, earth sciences, and mathematics) consisted of Europeans with the exception of one Japanese, do not capture adequately the originality of European greatness. His statistical calculation that 97 percent of accomplishment in the sciences occurred in Europe and North America from 800 BC to 1950 is obviously revealing.
.

So is his observation that the sheer number of “significant figures” in literature in the West is 835, whereas in India, the Arab World, China, and Japan combined the number is only 293. The same is true of his observation that the West produced 479 major figures in the visual arts as compared to 192 for China and Japan combined (with no significant figures listed for India and the Arab World). And the observation that the West produced all the great figures of classical music.

It is also very revealing that, according to my estimations, 95 percent, and most likely 98 percent, of the great explorers in history were European.

Still, these numbers don’t capture the qualitative originality of European greatness. Measuring European greatness has always entailed an evaluation of the way artists, novelists, philosophers, composers, mathematicians have occasioned a breakthrough, a new way of explaining history, a new style of poetic expression, a whole new philosophical outlook. In contrast, the measurement of non-European greatness tends to be about men who were good at following an existing tradition, perfecting an existing style of painting and poetic expression, reinforcing the unquestioned thoughts of sages.

The standards for Western greatness are far higher. Here is a glimpse of European greatness in classical music. We learn that in Claudio Monteverdi (1567-1643), pioneer of opera, “for the first time in history there was a complete unity between dram and music”. We learn that “it is harmonic intensity above all that sets Bach’s music apart from that of his contemporaries…In Bach’s music a completely new harmonic language is forged […] There is no music in the literature that has Bach’s kind of rightness, of inevitability, of intelligence, of logically organized sequence of notes”.

When Haydn started, “the new music — the music of the style galant — was in its infancy and Haydn put everything together. It is not for nothing that he is called the Father of the Symphony. With equal Justice he can be called the father of the String Quartet…Rococo is left far behind; this is Classicism of the purest kind, and the music is big”. Beethoven, “from the beginning he was a creator, one of those natural talents, full of ideas and originality […] Then came Eroica, and music was never again the same. With one convulsive wrench, music entered the nineteenth century”.
Berlioz “was a natural revolutionary, the first of the conscious avant-gardists…Uninhibited, highly emotional, witty, mercurial, picturesque, he was very conscious of his Romanticism […] he was in every way a revolutionary, fully prepared to throw established and even sacred notions into a garbage can“. Chopin “was not only a genius as a pianist, he was creatively a genius, one of the most startlingly original ones of the century […] For the first time the piano became a total instrument: a singing instrument, an instrument of infinite colour, poetry, and nuance, a heroic instrument, an intimate instrument”. [The above citations are from The Lives of the Great Composers, 2006].
This kind of originality can be found in all the arts and sciences of the West. Actually, the entire history of physics, chemistry, biology, geology, historical writing, logic, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, economics, geography, is dominated by Europeans from beginning to end. After all, these disciplinary fields were all invented by Europeans.

Why this is so should be the mother of all historical questions. Yet even the thought that Europe was slightly greater terrifies an academic world obligated to push a multicultural mandate in education. This explains the hysteria against King.  Talking about European greatness is now identified as “mentally stunted”.

The only unique contribution Europeans are allowed, known as the “great divergence”, is the Industrial Revolution, with perhaps permission to connect this revolution to the rise of modern science. But students are quickly reminded that China is now surpassing the West in industrial development.  Jack Goldstone and Kenneth Pomeranz are two prominent names behind this historical revisionism. They say the West was merely different in reaching an industrial state first thanks to the exploitation of the Americas, the availability of coal in England, or the “fortuitous” development of an instrumentalist-engineering science in the 1700s. A few critics are begging for the inclusion of Western liberal institutions in the assessment of this divergence. But all in all, the uniqueness of the West is now suppressed.

This is what diversity enrichment entails.

Foolishly Lax Security in Admitting Syrians: ISIS Has 11,100 Blank Syrian Passports

Posted on by

 

 

 

Foolishly Lax Security in Admitting Syrians: ISIS Has 11,100 Blank Syrian PassportsISIS TERRORIST


Report: ISIS in possession of more than 11,000 blank Syrian passports

Source: World Tribune
Islamic State (ISIS) holds some 11,100 blank Syrian passports which German authorities fear could be used to bring potential terrorists into Europe, a report said. The passports, stolen from Syrian government sites, are genuine identity papers that have not yet been filled out with an individual’s details.

Jagmeet Singh And The Rise Of Identity Politics In Canada

Posted on by

Jagmeet Singh And The Rise Of Identity Politics In Canada

by Brad SalzbergCultural Action Party

Jagmeet Singh
Slick Suit Singh — Future Prime Minister of Canada?

Every social movement has its heroes. Within the spectrum of Canadian political correctness, this role is currently fulfilled by Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. His incessant promotion of all-things multicultural — in particular a fervent dedication to our Islamic and LGBT communities — has advanced a globalist agenda to the extent that to even question its motives draws the wrath of social justice warriors from coast to coast.

Yet, being a most insatiable collective of hyper-aggressive globalists, this social dynamic is incomplete. What is required, of course, is a leader to emerge from one of Canada’s coveted Third World communities.

This is not Justin Trudeau, but it is NDP leadership candidate Jagmeet Singh. Clad in slick suits and designer turbans, Mr. Singh recently became official poster-boy for Canada’s diversity industry. It is indeed a privileged position, as the standards held for “traditional” Canadian politicians do not apply to “multicultural” politicians such as Mr. Singh.

Recently, a protestor interrupted an NDP event in Brampton, Ontario. A woman got onstage and began to aggressively question Mr. Singh regarding his position on issues relating to Islam, and Sharia law in particular. Granted, the approach was ill-advised, as the spontaneity of her inquiry was not a proper platform in which to address sensitive issues of this nature.

Within a democratic political environment, however, a candidate running for office is required to address the concerns of their constituents. Jagmeet Singh did nothing of the sort. Rather, he waxed philosophical regarding the need for all Canadians to “love each other.” A noble thought, yet one which entirely evades the issues. Recently, Mr. Singh released a public statement that he opposes a motion put forth by the provincial government of Quebec requiring public servants to reveal their face when administering services to clients. After months of inquiry, our protestor wanted answers — yet none ever arrived.

The result of her interruption of the meeting was universal condemnation. Media attacked her. Liberal politicians vilified her. All of a sudden, Singh was catapulted to a position not unlike that of globalist messiah. He had single-handedly defeated the bad, bad racist. Victory was assured, and Mr. Singh was declared a hero.

Canadian “identity” politics have changed the nature of political discourse in Canada, and not for the better. Time was when the main issue within politics were issues — for example addressing public concern, as well as one’s duty to constituents. Times have changed. Today, after a forty year program of diversity indoctrination, the main issue is the identity of a politician.

Within contemporary society, Third World political figures are depicted as vital and brimming with benevolence. Conversely, Anglo-Canadians politicians — save Justin Trudeau — are old and tired. At present they are something of a political dinosaur. On the other hand, Singh and others like him are rendered untouchable. If one dares speak against them, prepare to be branded a racist.

What privilege! Protected by a teflon-coating of political correctness, identity politicians are accountable to no one but their own particular community. As for the Anglophone minority in Mr. Singh’s riding of Brampton, Ontario — a riding where over 90% of constituents are of Third World origin — these people have no choice but to grin and bear it. Any dissent amongst the ranks will bring the inevitable accusations of bigotry, and the rest. Talk about being placed in social straight jacket.

Since gaining office, Justin Trudeau has been a pin-up poster boy of culture-eroding globalism. Naturally, this is not good enough. For Canada’s diversity-bandits, nothing ever is. What is required is the real deal. A non-Anglophone, Third World Canadian leader of the variety we find in Jagmeet Singh — the NDP’s answer to their political failings of the past decade.

Singh is a social justice weapon-in-waiting. It is he the liberal left is placing on a political pedestal as an example to all Anglophone and Francophone Canadians, and the message is: do not mess with us, because we hold the most powerful weapon in modern-day Canadian politics — a “silver bullet” known as the accusation of racism. As for social and political issues, let them go gentle into that good night along with all forms of traditional Canadian identity. Canada now has a globalist messiah in the form of NDP candidate Jagmeet Singh. The post-modern promised land of Justin Trudeau’s “new” Canada await

Build a Wall: Stop the Illegals — protest outside Ahmed Hussen’s office

Posted on by
 Build a Wall: Stop the Illegals — protest outside Ahmed Hussen’s office
 
Category: Uncategorized | Tags: ,

Justin Trudeau’s Rousing Pro-Refugee Rant

Posted on by

Justin Trudeau’s Rousing Pro-Refugee Rant

 
by Tim Murray

Justin Trudeau

Ijust saw Trudeau’s press conference in Kelowna. It is obvious that flake-head has, after two years, learned his lines well, as one would expect of a former high school drama teacher. His impassioned rant about Canada’s “values” and tradition of “welcoming” refugees and immigrants pushed all the right emotional buttons and employed all of the standard cliches. When he was done, I was looking for a quick path to the bathroom. Fortunately the lid was up.

This man actually believes that Canada alone has discovered the perfect formula for making hyper third world immigration “work.” We know how to do it right. We know how to “integrate” migrants. How many migrants you ask? As many as want to come.

At that point, reporters jumped in to ask him why, if that is the case, that he has sent out emissaries to tell would-be refugees that “we have rules.” We welcome and will continue to ALL those who are fleeing persecution, war and disaster, BUT they must follow the “rules.” What are these “rules” you ask? Well, it usually goes like this. You put one foot on Canada’s soil and say, “I am applying for refugee status,” and you’re in. Then you get food, lodging and a work permit while you wait.

If your claim is rejected, you apply for an appeal. More time to settle in. If that too is rejected, you receive a deportation order. And then, in half the cases, you don’t show up for your “removal.” Chances are that you go to a big city (eg. Toronto) and melt away into the background. Since the government doesn’t keep track of who leaves the country, they won’t even know if you left or not. Moreover, you can rely upon quisling city councils to declare their cities as “sanctuaries” where local law enforcers are instructed NOT to cooperate with border security agents. In the meantime, if you can put down roots by siring a Canadian’s kid or having his baby, you’ll be harder to eject. Especially if you can find a credulous cleric to champion your cause and an idiot journalist or TV reporter to pull heartstrings. Churches come in handy that way, don’t they? Harbouring liars and law-breakers in the name of Christ.

Theoretically, TV and press reporters have an obligation to hold politicians’ feet to the fire, but in matters of immigration and refugee policy, that is seldom the case. They typically don’t press home the attack. In this case, obvious follow-up questions to Trudeau would have been, so you welcome the world, all the tens of millions of people who are fleeing awful circumstances, but you assure us that they will be processed according to the rules. How many resources would it take to do that in an expeditious way? How much would it cost Canadian taxpayers? If 5 million Haitians, 50 million Central Americans, 1 million Afghans, 5 million Syrians, 20 million Africans and 30 million Asians want in, what will be the price tag? A trillion dollars? 5 trillion? 15 trillion? Enough to double the federal debt?

Other questions would be, what do you mean by “integrate”? Integrate into what? Our mainstream culture? But you said that Canada doesn’t have a culture. And then you spoke of our “core values.” We have core values but no culture? Or is it that we have a culture but no core values? You continually tell us that “Diversity is Our Strength.” But how diverse shall our ‘diversity’ be?

Thanks to the policy of mass immigration we went from 6 to 260 ethnic enclaves since your father left office. Are you aiming to make it 460? Will we be dialling 15 for English? Will we driving on both the left and right sides of the road as we please? Will some be practicing FGM according to their preference? Will MPs be able to give their maiden speech in Tamil or whatever their mother tongue was? Will some be able to practice polygamy and collect federal money for each wife? And — the million dollar question — will there be diversity of thought and speech in your Canadian utopia?

I think we already have the answer to that one.

But alas, no reporter can be found to pose such questions. We don’t make journalists like that anymore. Instead we have virtue-signalling parrots of political correctness sculpted by Institutions of Higher Indoctrination. I don’t know what they teach in journalism school these days but I doubt that independence of mind is a course requirement.

More sickening than Trudeau’s rant is the certainty that the anti-immigration perspective will never be given equal time to make its case. Particularly not on the CBC, which is in large part funded by people whom the Prime Minister calls “angry white bigots.” They want our taxes, but they don’t want our opinions. But who does? I mean, we only reflect between 40-60 percent of public opinion on most points. No wonder polling firms refuse to run our questions.

If you are looking for a political vehicle to give voice to your concerns on this issue, don’t look to Andrew Scheer’s Official Opposition Conservative Party. As reflected in his choices for the Shadow Cabinet, immigration-reformers, aka “the far right,” are not welcome in his “big tent” party. He is determined that his party not be portrayed as ‘anti-immigrant,’ ‘racist’ or heartless. The name of the game is not to salvage what remains of Euro-Canadian heritage, but to defeat Justin Trudeau. To do that, CBC panelists insist, the Conservatives must be Liberals. Wait, do you mean they’re not Liberals already?

Let’s be honest. Is the nauseating cant that issued out of Justin Trudeau’s mouth in Kelowna any different than what came out of the mouth of Conservative Jason Kenny during his tenure as Minister of Immigration and Multiculturalism? Is Conservative Chris Alexander’s or Lisa Rait’s or Michael Chong’s world view substantially different than Boy Wonder’s? Is dog excrement so different than cat excrement?

We need a revolution folks.

CFIRC PROTESTS INVASION OF ILLEGALS — IMMIGRATION MINISTER AHMED HUSSEN’S CONSTITUENCY OFFICE

Posted on by

CFIRC PROTESTS INVASION OF ILLEGALS — IMMIGRATION MINISTER AHMED HUSSEN’S CONSTITUENCY OFFICE

Canada First Immigration Reform Committee

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 905-566-4455; FAX: 905-566-4820

Website: http://cafe.nfshost.com

Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director

 

September 9, 2017

 

For Immediate Release

 

The Canada First Immigration Reform Committee is protesting today  at 2:00 p.m. outside the constituency office of Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen (99 Ingram Drive) in Toronto.

 

We are here to protest the utter failure of this Moslem, Somali refugee, immigration lawyer to protect our borders from a stream of illegals pouring into Canada, mostly through Quebec. Over 7,000 have entered since early July putting a huge strain on housing and social welfare. When he was appointed minister earlier this year, we had our doubts but wished him well. Sadly, he has proved himself a captive of his pro-invader background and totally unable to STAND ON GUARD FOR CANADA!

 

Canadians have been sickened by pictures of highly paid Mounties carrying suitcases for many well dressed Haitian illegals. They should have shoved them back across the border.

MOUNTIES WELCOME SOMALI ILLEGALS

Canadians have been further sickened by pictures of Canadian soldiers who should be building a fence or wall, instead erecting tents to house the invaders. Meanwhile Gen. JonathanVance, the Chief of Defence Staff of the Canadian Army prances in the Ottawa gay pride parade with Justin Trudeau while his country is invaded.

MOUNTIES GREETING ILLEGALS

The Trudeau government has shown no will to resist the invasion. A safe country treaty with the U.S. requires a would-be refugee applicant to apply in the first safe country he arrives in. For these Haitians and others streaming across the Quebec border, that would be the U.S. If they cross at a proper border crossing, they should be turned back. However, should they cross 100 yards away from a border crossing, against all logic, we pretend we don’t know where they come from and let them make a “refugee” claim. They are criminal illegals. They should be turned around and sent back.

 

Ahmed Hussen, Justin Trudeau, the RCMP and the Canadian Army have utterly failed to do their duty to STAND ON GUARD for Canada and for the Canadian taxpayer.

 

The illegals will cost the Canadian taxpayer hundreds of millions in welfare, legal aid, medicare, dental care (better than for Canadians on welfare), language and skills training and, of course, processing. Appeals can stretch their stay, even if rejected, to more than 5 years in Canada.

 

It’s time to retake control of the borders. Deport all illegals. Build a fence or wall and turn any intruder back to the U.S.

 

CONTACT: Paul Fromm, Director — 416-428-5308

 

–30–