Free speech under attack yet again

It has been my opinion for many years that we in the West tend to shoot ourselves in the foot. Instead of addressing problems that a majority of people perceive as such, but are afraid to say so openly or publicly, we just sweep anything that is inconvenient or politically incorrect under the rug. For example, we can’t say that crime is on the rise, because official government sources tell us with their (doctored) statistics that this is not the case and because most of the crime today is committed by members of various ethnic groups, which makes it politically incorrect to even think that crime may be a problem.

When it comes to immigration, refugees and terrorism, we are similarly and constantly muzzled. To say that immigration in virtually all Western countries isn’t working the way it should and that the host country hardly ever benefits anymore these days is considered blasphemous. In our fight against Islamist terrorism, we keep inflicting more harm on our ourselves by invoking human and civil rights than the terrorists could ever hope to achieve themselves. Thus, we must open our doors to boats full of potential terrorists and/or bogus refugees, who thumb their noses at our official immigration rules. In Canada alone, immigrants who don’t pull their weight cost the taxpayers $18 billion a year or so, and that doesn’t include the immense cost related to crime and bogus refugees that we are expected to feed, clothe and house.

While it’s true that we are all members of the human race, there is no denying the fact that there are tremendous differences among people. This is so not because of some racial or racist theory that would classify some as inferior or superior, but because of the different circumstances in which people are born and brought up. Religion, such as Islam, certainly plays a big role in whether an individual is capable of leading a self-sufficient life according to Western standards or not. Radical and conservative adherents of Islam, for example, still live in the 7th century. They’re free, of course, to choose their religion, but I find it sad that they shouldn’t realize how limited they have become in their capabilities and opportunities as a result of it. Rather than joining us in the 21st century, they still wrap their womenfolk in cloths and, if they feel like it, stone them to death.

Imagine you brought someone from the past – e.g., Stone Age, Middle Ages – into the present day. They couldn’t possibly be expected to absorb the change (and shock) and, consequently, would become a burden, if not a danger, to the rest of us. But this is what governments do through immigration every single day. We bring those “time travellers” into our time and then feign surprise at their inability to integrate or play by our rules. This is, in effect, what Thilo Sarrazin, a member of the German central bank, has recently said, and for that he’s faced threats and calls for his career and life to be ended.

What’s always fascinated me is that the same ethnic group of immigrants can act differently in different countries. In the United States, for example, Muslims are much more likely to be assimilated into the mainstream than in Europe or Canada. In Vienna, Austria, for example, at least one entire district is now firmly in the hands of Turkish migrants, who regularly intimidate and threaten, with guns and knives, what’s left of the local population, telling them that their “days are numbered” and that they, born Austrians, should “get out of [their own] country, because it now belongs to Turkey”. Yet woe anyone who says that this is a problem. Woe anyone who dares to place the blame squarely on the shoulders of one specific ethnic group. People are mad, and in the process actually becoming racist and filled with hate, because they are not allowed to address these issues in the name of political correctness, which is, of course, a mental disease.

The situation in Vienna is not all that different from what one finds in Germany, Sarrazin’s home. He said he made his comments to draw attention to a major problem that makes him fear for the future of his children and their children. And the middle-aged socialist – yes, he’s a socialist! – does have a point. If there were the idealized utopia of perfect multiculturalism where everyone lives and coexist in peace and harmony, we could easily open all our borders and discard all rules and laws governing immigration. But such a place or society doesn’t exist, nor will it ever exist.

It’s hard to see why anyone would support multiculturalism. Even Tony Blair, while still Labour prime minister, said that multiculturalism doesn’t work. It makes even less sense when you consider what motivates those who support the concept: they always go on about how beautiful it is to see people from all over the world mixed together in one place (a veritable “United Nations”), yet immigration, if it is to work, must entail assimilation and integration, thus leading to the same bland hodge-podge everywhere. Where does that leave the much-touted mosaic of cultures? Particularly so, as many immigrant groups arrive for the sole and specific purpose of eliminating the host country’s culture, rather than absorbing everything that’s good about it.

People must be able to vent and speak the truth (as is or as they see it)

Where are we and as a society headed when we are constantly told to shut up about the truth and actual facts? What makes it even worse is that the “other side” is allowed to post online calls for jihad and the murder of infidels on websites, while the authorities usually do no more than shrug. But if a member of the “native” population uses a lot more moderate language – i.e., without calling for violence and slaughter, unlike the “other side” – and merely points out that there is a big problem, that individual can face harassment in the form of being dragged before one of the kangaroo courts (“human rights commissions” in Canada) or facing criminal charges for spreading “hateful” messages.

One Canadian blogger recently had his account suspended by his US-based host, after one individual had complained to the host company, BlueHost, about the blogger’s alleged offence he’d given. Leaving aside that the blogger should be happy to be rid of BlueHost, the worst and most unreliable host service I have ever encountered (their servers break down several times a day and also shut down after midnight), we must ask where that company in the US gets off shutting down a blogger in Canada under some alleged laws or customs that don’t even apply to the host company’s jurisdiction in the US.

The complainant’s argument was that he felt offended – by others quoting him and his own writing! Let’s just repeat it one more time: there is no right not to be offended. At best, even under American law, this constitutes nothing more than a civil matter to be disputed between the two parties, but not criminal matter. Therefore, BlueHost had absolutely no right to suspend the blogger’s account, a move that would be warranted only in serious cases, such as fraudulent impersonation or infringement of proprietary rights.

I have been reading that blogger’s site for some time, and while he doesn’t shy away from harsh words and allegories, at no point in time has he ever broken the law, for example, by calling for someone else to be harmed or killed. All he did was vent about the problems we face in Canada on a daily basis. Let’s assume he is wrong about most things. Who cares? What matters – to him – is that he sees things that way, and if it makes him feel better to let off steam by posting a few harsh words on a blog, then let him be and leave him alone. I am not implying that this would necessarily apply to him, but I can certainly see how others, of less stable mind, could turn their efforts to actual violence against others if they weren’t allowed to preserve their “sanity” by writing a few nasty words or paragraphs on a website once in a while. In my view, if you tell people to be quiet all the time, they will eventually blow up and do something they and others will come to regret big time.

All those suffering from the mental disease political correctness should seek professional help, and be terribly ashamed of themselves. This includes BlueHost, but also the German chancellor Angela Merkel, who has called for Sarrazin’s ouster and essentially called him a “dangerous” man. I wonder which of the two has brought more dangerous harm over Germany in recent years … .

Tagged as: Free speech, Mental disease, Political correctness