GameBanshee Forums

As promised, here's a thread to discuss the views of Pim Fortuyn, and not him, alone: but the entire concept of immigration into Europe. (The thread title is derived from Fortuyn's book, Against the Islamicization of Our Culture.) No spamming, please, and let's keep it friendly and conversational.

I think anti-immigration sentiments are typical in any situation, not just in Europe. For instance, there are some Americans who believe that immigrants are taking jobs away from existing citizens and legal residents and that immigrants are the reason why __________ problem exists.

This, of course, is hogwash, but is still a fairly common response. The majority of immigrants are generally of lower classes and are mostly unskilled labourers. There are exceptions, but by and large, immigrants do the jobs that existing citizens and residents don't want to do (menial tasks, migrant farming, etc.). The United States heavily utilised immigrants in factories and other wage-slave environments during our industrialisation period.

It is my understanding that Europeans also use immigrant or resident aliens in much the same role; Germany for instance was the destination of many Turkish workers and labourers in the 70s and 80s (maybe still today; I don't know).

Like in the US, it seems that Europeans are getting on the nationalist, anti-immigration bandwagon. Immigrants are also generally an easy target; they tend to dress differently, they speak a funny language and they often worship a different god. This makes them a very convenient scapegoat for nationalists, regardless of any truths.

EDIT-I like you, fable, but don't expect me to suck up to you by telling Your Ancientness how fair-minded and informed you are just because you're a mod.

Could someone post a bio of Fortyun? Since from what I understand he is much less clear-cut negative as Le Pen is.

From what I heard he is anti Muslim, but Pro Jewish. Also, of course, the fact that he is a homosexual puts him on the opposite side of most anti- minority groups.

It was weird, cos' just last week I got a Time magazine which had an aarticle on Le Pen, and in it it had a very short summary of other controversial figures in Europian Politics. Fortyun was one of them- and it was the first time I've heard of him. So when he was shot, I looked in the time I read the day before, and found his name. To me it seemed like very coincidential, that right after Le Pen rose to international fame (or Infamy) Fortyun was shot.

Originally posted by Morlock

From what I heard he is anti Muslim, but Pro Jewish. Also, of course, the fact that he is a homosexual puts him on the opposite side of most anti- minority groups.

First of, I don't think this is what Fable wants to discus. But I feel like replying.

I never heard about him beiing Pro Jewish and this sounds strange to me. I'd say he isn't, since it makes no sence to me. Perhaps you do have a point about him being anti "anti- minority groups". But he never openly used his homosexuality (is this a word?)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Fortuyn mostly ment IMO was the following.

(please note that this is not my opinion, but (what I believe to be) his opinion.)

- There are to many immigrants coming to The Netherlands. It's a small country and there is just no more room.
- Immigrants don't bother to adapt to the Dutch culture and laws.
- They generally have a low education. Because of this they easely fall back on criminal activities.
- The culture (not the Islam as a belief) is out of date. Beiing gay ISN'T a disease (unlike an Imam recently said on tv), women DO have the same rights as men.

Ofcource Pim Fortuyn had many more points in his campain (like school quality). But this is about this part and his books.

I find it rather depressing that immigrants are STILL being used as targets. People are people are people.

The isolationist policie many first world nations are developing, following the US's example, are no surprise to me. Neither is that fact that Islam is again being targeted. The major military action of our decade (yaya, its 2002, so what) has been against fanatic muslims. This is before my time for sure, but I'm pretty confident that anti- German sentiment were dominant during the late 40s and early 50s. The media loves this stuff.

Like I said, first world nations, EU, Canada, US etc are all under the opinion that allowing "lesser" peoples into their borders will lower the quality of the nation they have worked so hard to achieve.

Originally posted by Obsidian
Like I said, first world nations, EU, Canada, US etc are all under the opinion that allowing "lesser" peoples into their borders will lower the quality of the nation they have worked so hard to achieve.

Well, there are more ways to view this. If there is a war, I agree people can come here for safety. But if the war is over and all is safe again, I feel they must go back. A nation can't be rebuild if nobody is there to rebuild it.
But people who come to (in my case) Holland to make easy money shouldn't be allowed. They must build their own country to have an stable economy. Some countries get financial help and some don't. Not everybody in this world can come to America or Europe because of it's economicly healty state.

Speaking as a Brit who have probably one of the more lax immigration laws - and one of the most generous welfare states - in Europe, I can understand - in a way - how some of the ignorant over here become xenophobic. Our problem is we have a more sympathetic foreign policy than we do domestic, and this creates animosity. As a result, those that come into our country tend to be driven into their own communities, rather than integrated. This is a shame, and only furthers the divide.

Speaking from personal experience, my husband and I have both worked and paid our stamps since leaving school. He was made redundant while I was still part-time after having our first child. We were told we could have no help from the state since I was earning too much part time. My wages barely covered our mortgage and food bills then, never mind anything else. Yet he still had to 'sign on' to get his stamp covered (about £5 per week as an unemployed person) for the period he was unemployed.

With situations like this, it is easy to become disillusioned and believe that our Government is readier to support those seeking asylum than it is it's own nationals who have worked and supported it. And it is felt we are taken advantage of as a country. I used to work with a Nigerian lady in my time in the Passport Agency. She was Nigerian born and a British citizen, yet was quick to denounce anyone claiming asylum from Nigeria as making false claims - since her opinion, at that time, was that there was no need to seek asylum from Nigeria.

Well I think the European countries are kind of responsible for this.

You guys did come to our empires and destroyed them and took our wealth and glory and took it all back home. Now we want some of what is ours back.

But I think it has got to do with having colonized other parts of the world.

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield

You guys did come to our empires and destroyed them and took our wealth and glory and took it all back home.

Mind telling us where you mean?

Originally posted by Rob-hin


Mind telling us where you mean?

I think he means that Europeans took (read plundered) a lot of asian natural resources, and took them back to europe.

In Holland it's called the golden-age
In Asia it's called tyrannie

Originally posted by Stilgar


I think he means that Europeans took (read plundered) a lot of asian natural resources, and took them back to europe.

In Holland it's called the golden-age
In Asia it's called tyrannie

You got that right.

But let's keep this thread, if we may, on the opinions of Fortuyn and others with similar views, about Europe becoming "Islamicized" through immigrants who refuse to change their cultural ways when they move in.

Originally posted by fable
But let's keep this thread, if we may, on the opinions of Fortuyn and others with similar views, about Europe becoming "Islamicized" through immigrants who refuse to change their cultural ways when they move in.

Okok, I think I have an opionion about this that's worth posting.
First of all I want to mention that I do not think that some religions or races are superior to another.

I haven't read Fortuyn's book about islamicization, but i think i can quess what he means.

What you see is that alot of islamitic (hope this is correct english) people live in the same area.
This is because most of them don't have a lot of money, and thus the live in the cheaper houses.
And because the all live in the same area of the city, you'll see a complete islam area appearing
(I think you can compare it a little with the "china-towns" in america.
Here they don't have to talk dutch, so it takes longer for them to learn the dutch language, all the kids go to the same school, so there isn't a lot of intergration.

Teenages of turkish or morracan often hang arround in groups at malls, so they seem thratening to a lot of people.

Conclusion: there is very little intergration, and thus people never get to realy know the culture, and people always fear what's new or different from them!

As a conservative muslim, who just got back from a disco 2 mins ago - it is 1 pm now - ironic no?

I will take a shot at this. Muslims don't assimulate into the host nations culture and society in general. Like the Turks in Germany, the Mahgreb in France, the Pakistanis in the Uk etc. We stick to our culture and ways. Why do we do so? I would put it under nostalgia. Since the immigrants leave their home land, they want a better life in Europe, but they don't want to give up what makes them Arab, Pakistan and over all muslim.

Islam is a way of life, you don't pick and choose what you want. It is like the military. Once you are in, you follow it completely and accept it, without question. The cultural differences between the Islamic world and western European society are various and they are at the for front of society.

The first is the emphasis on religion. I have muslim friends who are married to swiss women, the women are all muslims. The kids are muslims and they all come for prayers every friday. In western europe, religion seems outdated (in my opinion). Muslim it is exact opposite. Islam and religion are time less. Also with Islam you have a great deal of cultural habits.

Drinking is obviously one, most muslims don't drink. I personally think if you drink Alcohol you are breaking a cardinal sin, and thus can't call yourself a muslim. But I have no right to judge. In Europe drinking is common if not the norm. This is not lets go and get pissed, it is a social thing. If i go out with my friends, a couple of bars are always on the hit list, i don't drink alcohol, but that doesn't stop me from going through the social process.

Many muslims in Europe have never stepped in to a bar. Also there is cultural aspects, where muslims, arabs pakistanis, indonesians, africans, open their own places and head over there all the time. In Geneva there is 1 hang out, where all the arabs go, it has specialized in the hottest and best arab tunes etc. It is specifically catering to the arab community, and it does well. All the arabs head there, (myself when i feel like it). Many europeans do show up, but it is mainly an arab joint.

This also begs the question do you have to adapt to the culture in which you live? Do you have to integrate and assimulate?

Good post, CM. You raise alot of interesting points.

Let me put my two cents into this one (please keep in mind these are only my opinions. I have no data to back up anything I say). I think Europe, and the Netherlands in particular, are undergoing a cultural upheaval that its governing class are unprepared to deal with. On one hand, you have a secular society where political correctness is the norm and the only thing considered intolerable are the "intolerant," that is, people with non-negotiable moral and societal convictions based on religious belief rather than on the established relativististic philosophy. On the other hand, you have thousands, if not millions, of immigrants coming who hail from countries whose culture lies diametrically opposed to political and moral relativism. As CM wrote, the emphasis, or the number one thing they have in common and reinforces their identities both as individuals and as a community, is their religion. Europe by and large has become an irreligious society, having rejected its Judeo-Christian past in favor of... I dunno, something similar to the Buddhist faith where there is no God, no judgment, and no cogent sense of good and evil, right and wrong, moral and immoral behavior. In a nutshell - anything goes, as long as you don't hurt anybody else. The emphasis of the culture is definitely NOT on religion, unless of course that religion is the religion of the Self. If anything, fundamentalism is increasing proportionate to militant atheism. It's not so much that Muslims DO NOT want to integrate into the culture - it's because they CANNOT, at least without great difficulty considering the way they've been raised, and what they've been taught to believe about how the home, the family, and the community should be structured. A self-focused religion must seem as ludicrous to them as organized religion is to most Europeans intellectuals.

Now I think European politicians and the media, predominantly and enthusiastically left-wing, have painted themselves into a corner by enshrining multi-culturalism and tolerance as one of their governing principles, making it a political death wish to voice opposition to their policies, and wielding such emotionally loaded and character assassinating words like "racist," "fascist," "intolerant" against people who disagree. Net result? Rampant immigration, and a silent, simmering protest of the kind that motivated 18% of France's electorate to cast their ballots for Le Pen. Now 18% might not seem much, but 18% probably represents between four to six million people, not including the thousands who didn't vote, or who were made to feel like fascists if they didn't vote for Chirac. In the midst of the influx of so many immigrants, I think the native populations feel their politicians have rejected, or are rejecting their everyday concerns (etc. rising crime rates and unemployment originating from immigration) in the interest of a greater cause - the natural working out of their political ideology. It never entered the minds of their leaders to ask what the populace thought about increased immigration, probably assuming they would show the same character of tolerance demonstrated in other areas of European social life. But even if they did, anti-immigration sentiments is anathema to leftist thought, concerns are dismissed out of hand as xenophobic. Consequently, the problem remains unaddressed. Politicians remain shackled by their politics, immigrants remain shackled by their culture, and the host populations have no option but to look for alternative solutions anywhere they can find it. And if their search happens to take them to leaders in the mould of Le Pen and Fortuyan... then so be it.

... I dunno, something similar to the Buddhist faith where there is no God, no judgment, and no cogent sense of good and evil, right and wrong, moral and immoral behavior.

@Eminem, do you know the famous Five Precepts? No killing; no stealing; no sexual immorality; no telling lies; no drinking alcohol. These guide all lay Buddhists as well as monks. Buddhism is about transcending illusion, but that doesn't mean it provides an excuse for riding roughshod over conventional legal or social systems, or cultural beliefs. The basic principle of Buddhism, compassion, would in itself run counter to that.

My correction's done. Back to our theme.

Originally posted by fable
... I dunno, something similar to the Buddhist faith where there is no God, no judgment, and no cogent sense of good and evil, right and wrong, moral and immoral behavior.

@Eminem, do you know the famous Five Precepts? No killing; no stealing; no sexual immorality; no telling lies; no drinking alcohol. These guide all lay Buddhists as well as monks. Buddhism is about transcending illusion, but that doesn't mean it provides an excuse for riding roughshod over conventional legal or social systems, or cultural beliefs. The basic principle of Buddhism, compassion, would in itself run counter to that.

My correction's done. Back to our theme.

Not so fast!

It's my conviction (and the conviction of many philosophers, both ancient and modern) that if a religion has no objective basis of morality (read: God), what one person considers wrong and immoral can be construed as right and just by someone else. There is no standard of judgment. The famous Five precepts are similar to the Ten Commandments, but whereas the precepts are anchored in the basic principle of (subjective) compassion, the commandments of the Torah are rooted in the first commandment which presupposes the idea of an divine, just, ultimately objective Lawgiver.


"In his best Forrest Gump drawl"

"And that's all I have to say about that."

Originally posted by EMINEM
Now I think European politicians and the media, predominantly and enthusiastically left-wing...

I don't know which European countries you are talking about, but it is certainly not the case in UK. Here, it is predominantly right-wing, particularly newspapers. Current "New Labour" government is certainly not left-wing (at all), and it has lost quite a lot of support from "old" Labour supporters, who you can consider "left". "New Labour" was successful because it managed to move to the centre, pushed Conservatives from centre-right to further right, causing them to loose their stance.

Since centre-right Chiraque stays on and the right wing media owner PM in Italy, with small matter of Blair with support of the Sun and the Mirror in UK ( ), I think it is premature to say European politicians and the media are predominantly and enthusiastically left-wing.

@Eminem, I'm perfectly willing to discuss Buddhism with you, but please, open another thread. If you're going to bash it here, that interrupts the flow of these comments. And I can certainly post plenty of rebuttal material against what you state, which will enable you to do the same, if you so wish, and keep us both quite happy.

@Minerva, you left out the hybrid centrist-far right government in Austria. And the media moguls that control a fair percentage of the press in several of the biggest European nations (and for matter, in the US and Australia) are extremely conservative. As you point out, the illusion of a predominantly leftist media in Europe is just that, an illusion.