The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Integration vs. Assimilation

Clarion recently sent this to  readers:

Does integration prevent
radicalization?
We want your views
My
comment, edited for typos, went as follows and it may or not be published in Clarion:
If
we are speaking of Muslims, I would say no. Muslims would need to repudiate
Islam or leave it as apostates. Because Islam is a totalitarian ideology melded
to the “religion” of Islam, such an action would require intellectual honesty,
a fealty to reality, and a dollop of courage in the face of death threats
prescribed in the Koran
or leave it as apostates.  I also base my conclusion on the record of crimes by jihadists who are
first- or second-generation Muslims, a record compiled and documented by
Clarion and numerous other sites that report on the rapes, murders, knifings,
and suicide-bombings committed by Muslims who have resided in the West for any
measurable time. The more barbarous the origins of these Muslims (Somalia comes
to mind, and there is also a racist element in Somalian crimes against
Westerners), repeatedly commit the most heinous crimes and plead ignorance of
Western mores and standards of behavior. The authorities and the MSM jump on a
“mental illness” explanation before a victim is taken away in an ambulance. 
Islam does not prepare average
Muslims for any degree of intellectual enquiry on any subject, especially when
it comes to the multitude of contradictions and fallacies inherent  in the “faith”
which would leave Socrates or Aristotle massaging their heads. Islam is
anti-mind to the core, and does not much tolerate Muslims who “want to know.”
Islam is a mortal enemy of free minds. This will help to explain why Muslim
populations in Western countries represent a “silent majority” reluctant to or will
not condemn jihadist outrages, and this silence is to my mind tacit approval of
the
crimes, even
when Muslims are collateral victims of terrorist attacks (as there were on
9/11, e.g.). This tacit sanctioning may be based on fear of reprisals or on an
inbred indifference to the death and suffering caused by terrorism. Islam is,
among other charges one may level against it, profoundly anti-life and
anti-individual, and so I shall always remain “Islamophobic.”

Is it envy or is it hatred of the good for being the good?


Clarion
prefaced its article with:
We recently reported the FBI has an
ISIS “kill list”. Many on the list belong to non-Muslim groups trying to help
young Muslims integrate culturally into American society. Pro-jihadi websites are urging
American Muslims to undertake “personal jihad” against those who are
helping Muslims study or settle in the United States. They know that one more integrated US
Muslim is one less Jihadi fighter.
Integration and education will help
combat the influence of radicalist ideology
.
Do
YOU think that integration of young Muslims into American society will prevent
their radicalization?
Please
email your comments to info@clarionproject.org.
Information we gather will be used to help our research and your comments may be
published on our website unless otherwise stated.
I
have always had a major problem with the employment of the terms
“radicalization” and “extremism” when critics of Islam attempt to pigeonhole
Islam into separate compartments,  thus divorcing the actions from the thoughts
that inspired them. Islam is nothing if not “radical” (in the political sense,
and even in the ethical sense) and practicing the ideology in any degree is
inherently “extremist.” Just as an average, due-paying member of the Nazi Party
couldn’t be more “radicalized” than he already is (whether or not  he joined the Party under duress or
voluntarily), radicalized Nazis had their share of crimes and atrocities of the
type committed as policy by the SS or the Gestapo. One could say the same thing
about being “radicalized” by Communism; if your sympathies lie with the
ideology then you’re in the club, whether or not you participate in firing
squads or smash the windows of Jewish shops in Berlin or in manning gas
chambers. 
The
term used by Clarion, “integration,” is likely used by it as a synonym for “assimilation.”
I fail to understand the purpose of the substitution when the term assimilation has been used more often than
integration when describing the
purported adoption by “refugees” and “migrants” of the culture and mores of a
Western country. To assimilate the
new culture and mores is a voluntary
action, while to integrate “refugees”
and “migrants” connotes government action, a policy very similar to the American
practice of “bussing” school children to far away schools to achieve “racial
parity.”
However,
given the resort to force employed by especially Germany it boils down to the government
adopting a policy of integrating the indigenous population to Islamic and Sharia
culture and mores. This is being accomplished by censoring social media and by penalizing
indigenous Germans (and Swedes) who speak out against the government-fostered
invasion of the country by hordes of “migrants” openly hostile to and contemptuous
of Western values and for objecting to being forced to subsidize the invaders’ “resettlement”
with welfare benefits, expropriated property to feed, clothe, and house them,
and so on, only to see the coddled beneficiaries turn on indigenous Germans and
Swedes in daily commissions of harassment, sexual crime, robbery, vandalism, and
even murder. 

The smiles soon vanished after the first episodes of rape and murder.


The
terms employed by Clarion have another cause, which may or may not be acknowledged
by the parties who want to hear what readers have to say: the unchallenged role
of altruism in the Continent’s push
for “integration.” Indigenous populations are being asked to sacrifice their
lives and identities for the sake of those who possess neither, Islam placing
no value on life, or on Muslims having no identity except as commutable, anonymous
ciphers of an anti-life philosophy/religion. After all, we have seen repeatedly
in news reports a complete absence of gratitude by the “migrants,” and instead regular
assaults on their  involuntary
benefactors not only by the “refugees,” but by the governments, as well.

Previous

What Donald Trump Should Be to Americans

Next

Review: Western Values Defended

2 Comments

  1. Edward Cline

    Just a note: In Clarion's context, "integrate" implies (without being specific) that individuals may retain their belief in Islam and coexist peacefully in society with non-Muslims. To "assimilate" means to adopt at least in part, or implicitly, the pro-individual, pro-freedom principles of the larger society. So, in this context, "integration" is not necessarily "assimilation." The Boston Marathon bombers dressed and acted like American "dweebs" or "geeks," but at their core they were anti-American.

  2. Edward Cline

    If you are Swedish or German, and unless your governments or Mark Zuckerberg/Merkel block the links, you might find these reports informative and scary.
    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8663/germany-migrants-rape

    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8619/sweden-asylum-seekers-violence

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén