This is not intended as a post about President Trump’s recently reported remarks about “s**thole countries,” but about what a Catholic cardinal, Timothy Dolan, said in response to those remarks. The Cardinal tweeted that Martin Luther King Jr., were he alive today, would remind people that “no country is a ‘hole,’ no person unworthy of respect.” In this post, I’d like to explain why I think the Cardinal is perfectly right on the second point and absolutely wrong on the first. I’m also going to try to define a “hole,” and make a tentative list of countries which I think would qualify, at the present time. Readers are welcome to disagree, of course.
Background
Claims that President Trump, in a meeting with lawmakers last week, described Haiti, El Salvador and various African nations as “s**thole countries” have been described by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham as “basically accurate.” Let me note for the record that Senator Graham, unlike Senator Richard Durbin, who was also present at the meeting, stood up to President Trump directly when he asked why America was taking so many immigrants from these countries instead of countries like Norway. “Diversity has always been our strength, not our weakness,” declared Senator Graham. Trump has since walked back his comments, saying that he wants immigrants to come to America from everywhere. Not being an American, I have absolutely no desire to lecture Americans about which countries they should accept immigrants from, or how many people they should take. I’ll just mention in passing that about 60 million immigrants have arrived in the United States since the Immigration and Nationality Act was passed in 1965, and that of the 1,051,031 immigrants who became new legal permanent residents of the U.S. in 2015, just under 10% came from Africa, compared to 42% from other American countries, 40% from Asia and 8% from Europe. I should also add that of the 244 million international migrants worldwide, 19.1% reside in the U.S., where they make up 14.5% of the population, compared to just 10.3% of the population of Europe (2015 UN figures). In short: claims that America is not pulling its weight do not seem to be warranted by the facts.
Frankly, I was baffled by the U.S. media’s characterization of President Trump’s reference to certain countries as “s**thole countries” as racist. Have they forgotten what the term means, I wonder? OxfordDictionaries.com defines racism as “prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.” Trump’s angry outburst was (a) directed at countries, not at “someone”, (b) directed at nations rather than races, and (c) completely devoid of the ridiculous claim that some races are “superior” to others. Likewise, Republican Rep. Mia Love’s vehement insistence that people in struggling countries are “good people” was perfectly correct, but beside the point: good people do not necessarily make a good country. A country, like a cake, is more than the sum of its constituents. Culture matters. Systems of government matter. Good people can have the misfortune to live in a country whose culture is toxic or whose government is tyrannical and evil. That doesn’t reflect on them as individuals, but it does reflect on their country.
There seems to be a strange idea circulating about that if you insult a country, you automatically insult its people. Nonsense. If you insult a country, you insult its government, not its people. The Soviet Union was a terrible country. That doesn’t mean the people living in it were terrible; it means that its government was terrible (in fact, downright evil). The same goes for Mao’s China.
So, how should we define a “hole”?
After reading about Cardinal Dolan’s response to President Trump’s recent remarks, my first reaction was: “You’ve got to be kidding me.” So North Korea is not a “hole”? Seriously? You must be joking, Your Eminence.
But then I started thinking, “How would one define a ‘hole’?” The definition which first sprang to my mind was an intuitive one: a “hole” is a country that you would never want to visit, even with all expenses paid (including plane fares, food, accommodation, trains and buses and time off work). However, I soon realized that you might be willing to visit any country, no matter how awful, if you had a nice enough hotel and plenty of armed security guards accompanying you, to protect you from danger. So I decided to stipulate that if you were visiting these countries, you had to take your family with you, and you could not travel as part of a guided tour, or take a bodyguard with you, or stay in a luxury hotel. That would be cheating – as would spending all your day hanging around inside expensive stores, museums or churches, or riding around in a chartered taxi. Instead, you had to spend as much time as possible outside, in the company of the local people. Also, you could take a guidebook, a phrase book or an electronic dictionary with you, but not one of those fancy smartphones that spits out whatever you want to say in the local language (how lazy is that!) How many countries would you cross off your list then? And which ones?
There were some countries I was pretty sure I’d never want to visit, even if you threw in some extra cash: North Korea, Afghanistan and El Salvador, to name a few. But I realized that despite my travel experience (I’ve been to over 30 countries), there were a lot of African countries which I didn’t know enough about to be able to decide whether I’d want to visit them or not. Would I want to visit Nigeria, for instance? It’s a vibrant, go-ahead country with a booming economy, but it has also been subjected to raids by the militant group Boko Haram in the north. Hmmm.
Crime and violence
So I did some digging around. I looked at the list of countries by intentional homicide rate, and I found that of the top 20 countries, a total of 17 were either in the Caribbean [US Virgin Islands, Jamaica, Saint Kitts & Nevis, Trinidad & Tobago, Bahamas, Anguilla, St Vincent & the Grenadines, St Lucia and Montserrat], Central America [El Salvador, Honduras, Belize and Guatemala] or South America [Venezuela, Brazil, Colombia and Guyana]. Just two of these 20 ultra-violent countries (South Africa and Lesotho) were in Africa. One (Tuvalu) was in Oceania. Topping the homicide list was El Salvador, with a homicide rate of 108.64 – over 22 times higher than America’s and nearly ten times that of the Central American nation of Panama (11.38). The intentional homicide rate for number 20 on the list (Guyana, in South America) was 19.42 per 100,000 or about four times that of the U.S. (4.88), 20 times that of Australia and the U.K. (0.98 and 0.92, respectively) and over 60 times that of Japan (0.31). But if one is going to draw a line, it shouldn’t be an arbitrary one, so I decided to make an intentional homicide rate of 20 per 100,000 my cutoff point, leaving me with 19 countries, since Guyana was the only country on the list that fell just below that threshold. I would regard the level of violence in these top 19 countries as unacceptably high, meriting “hole” status in my book. Poverty does not account for it: as we’ve seen, as the very poorest countries in the world (which are mostly in Africa) don’t even figure on the list. Culture seems to be a more likely cause, when we consider the geographic distribution of the countries in question.
In all fairness, however, I should mention that there are plenty of Latin American and Caribbean countries which are not “holes” by the definition I’ve proposed above: in South America, Guyana, French Guiana, Bolivia and Suriname (with rather high homicide rates of 10 to 20 per 100,000), as well as Paraguay, Uruguay, Ecuador, Peru, Argentina and Chile (with fairly moderate homicide rates of less than 10 per 100,000); in Central America, Mexico, Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Panama (homicide rates all between 10 and 20 per 100,000); and in the Caribbean, 14 countries with homicide rates ranging from 17.39 (Dominican Republic) down to 2.78 (Martinique). Haiti belongs in this group, with a homicide rate of 10.04.
I was not successful in finding an online ranking of countries by their overall crime rate (which, by the way, is hard to measure, as international statistics are not always reliable, so it’s a bit like comparing apples and oranges), but I finally came across an article by the insurance company Clements Worldwide, which listed the five countries with the highest crime rates (excluding theft) as South Africa, Honduras, Venezuela, Belize and India. The Wikipedia article on crime in South Africa is pretty sickening:
Around 49 people are murdered in South Africa every day.[6]… In the 2016/17 year, the rate of murders increased to 52 a day, with 19,016 murders recorded between April 2016 to March 2017.[11]…
The country has one of the highest rates of rape in the world, with some 65,000 rapes and other sexual assaults reported for the year ending in March 2012, or 127.6 per 100,000 people in the country.[14][15] The incidence of rape has led to the country being referred to as the “rape capital of the world“.[16] One in three of the 4,000 women questioned by the Community of Information, Empowerment and Transparency said they had been raped in the past year.[17] More than 25% of South African men questioned in a survey published by the Medical Research Council (MRC) in June 2009 admitted to rape; of those, nearly half said they had raped more than one person.[18][19] Three out of four of those who had admitted rape indicated that they had attacked for the first time during their teenage years.[18] South Africa has amongst the highest incidences of child and baby rape in the world…
Kidnapping in South Africa is common in the country with over 4,100 occurring in the 2013/2014 period, and a child going missing every five hours.
In the light of these facts, I find South Africa’s recent protest against President Trump’s “s**thole” comments to be disingenuous and hypocritical.
Regarding crime in India, the same article notes:
Sexual assault is a major concern in India. More than 33,000 rapes were reported in 2014.
The rate of these assaults is increasing. Rape is one of India’s most common crimes against women.
When evaluating whether a country is a “hole,” one obviously needs to consider whether it is a safe country for women and girls to visit. At the present time, India fails to meet this criterion. See also here.
The Safety Index and the Global Peace Index
I also had a look at the Safety Index developed by the travel company SafeAround. Of the 34 countries identified by SafeAround as dangerous or extremely dangerous, 19 were in Africa (actually, SafeAround lists 20, but Yemen is actually in Asia), 12 are in Asia, 2 (Ukraine and Russia) are in Europe, and 1 (Venezuela) is in the Americas. The 12 Asian countries are Syria*, Yemen*, Afghanistan*, Iraq*, North Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Lebanon, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikstan, Myanmar and Uzbekistan, while the 19 African countries are South Sudan*, Central African Republic*, Somalia*, Democratic Republic of the Congo*, Libya, Sudan, Burundi, Mali, Eritrea, Nigeria, Mauritania, Cameroon, Guinea-Bissau, Niger, Rwanda, Ivory Coast (Cote d’Ivoire), Egypt, Djibouti and Guinea. I’ve asterisked the 8 countries which are very dangerous (deep red) and have a Safety Index of 20 or below. By comparison, Denmark’s is 94.7 (at the top of the list), the USA’s is 67.6, and even El Salvador’s is 50.7, while Mexico’s is 45.8 and Haiti’s is 41.9. I would unhesitantly classify the 8 asterisked countries as “holes,” and some of the remaining 21 dangerous countries as well. Since Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Pakistan all have a Safety Index of well below 30, I’ll count them as “holes” and make 30 my cutoff point. The remaining dangerous countries are more closely bunched together, and have a Safety Index of 30 to 40, so I won’t count them as “holes.” Actually, I’m being very lenient here: countries such as Burundi, Ukraine, Mali, Eritrea, Venezuela, Nigeria, Russia, Iran and Lebanon all fall on or slightly above the cutoff point, with values ranging from 30 to 35.
The Global Peace Index, in its 2017 report, lists 14 countries which it defines as having a “very low” state of peace: North Korea, Russia, Pakistan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ukraine, Central African Republican Republic, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, South Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria (in descending order). A further 19 countries were listed as having a “low” state of peace: Bahrain, Azerbaijan, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Chad, Eritrea, India, Philippines, Egypt, Mali, Burundi, Mexico, Venezuela, Israel, Palestine, Colombia, Turkey, Lebanon and Nigeria (again, in descending order). Two African countries (Botswana and Sierra Leone) received a rating of high, as did five Asian countries (Bhutan, Singapore, Malaysia, Qatar and Taiwan) and two Latin American countries (Chile, Costa Rica and Uruguay). Interestingly, the United States’ ranking was 114 out of 170 countries, while China’s was 116. I think it’s fair to categorize countries with a very low state of peace as “holes.” That includes Russia, Ukraine and Pakistan.
A list of “holes” that we’ve identified so far
So where are we now? Using intentional homicide rates, the top five crime rates, the Safety Index and the Global Peace Index, we have arrived at the following list of “holes”:
Europe (2 countries):
Russia and Ukraine.
Asia (7 countries):
India, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea and Pakistan.
Latin America and the Caribbean (16 countries):
Caribbean: US Virgin Islands, Jamaica, Saint Kitts & Nevis, Trinidad & Tobago, Bahamas, Anguilla, St Vincent & the Grenadines, St Lucia, and Montserrat.
Central America: El Salvador, Honduras, Belize and Guatemala.
South America: Venezuela, Brazil and Colombia.
Africa (8 countries):
South Africa, Lesotho, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Somalia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya and Sudan.
Oceania:
Tuvalu.
Why poverty makes more “holes”
Are we done yet? No. Extreme poverty can also make a country a “hole.” So I had a look at the Wikipedia’s list of countries by GDP per capita, as measured by PPP. Actually, there were three lists, put out by the IMF, the World Bank and the CIA. In the end, I decided to use the CIA’s list, because it contained the most countries (198 altogether). I then pondered where to draw my cutoff point. Some useful reference points were provided by the following countries: North Korea 1,800 dollars, Afghanistan 2,000 dollars and Zimbabwe 2,100 dollars. I think most people would consider these countries to be economic hellholes, quite apart from their political systems or their lack of safety. But then again, Uganda’s per capita GDP in PPP terms was the same as Zimbabwe’s. I finally decided to make 2,000 dollars per capita my non-arbitrary cutoff point. It’s a pretty modest cutoff point, really, when you consider that Bangladesh has a per capita GDP (in PPP terms) of 3,600 dollars. That of Africa as a whole is 6,136 dollars. India’s is 6,200 dollars, that of the Philippines is 7,300 dollars, while even El Salvador’s is 8,500 dollars. Of the 26 countries with a per capita GDP of 2,000 dollars or less, 22 are African countries (South Sudan, Benin, Rwanda, Burkina Faso, Mali, The Gambia, Ethiopia, Comoros, Sierra Leone, Togo, Guinea-Bissau, Madagascar, Mozambique, Guinea, Malawi, Eritrea, Niger, Liberia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi, Central African Republic, Somalia), two are Asian (Afghanistan and North Korea) and one is in the Americas (Haiti).
So the bad news is that Africa now has 26 “hole” countries: South Africa, Lesotho, Libya, Sudan, South Sudan, Benin, Rwanda, Burkina Faso, Mali, The Gambia, Ethiopia, Comoros, Sierra Leone, Togo, Guinea-Bissau, Madagascar, Mozambique, Guinea, Malawi, Eritrea, Niger, Liberia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi, Central African Republic and Somalia. That’s nearly half of the countries of Africa. (These 26 countries have a combined population of around 523 million, or around 43% of the total population of Africa.) Also, Haiti has been added to the list of Caribbean “holes,” on account of its very low GDP per capita.
There is some good news on the horizon, however: real GDP growth rates per capita (PPP) for many African countries are spectacularly high. Here are the World Bank figures for annual growth rates for the period 1990 to 2014: Equatorial Guinea 17.79%, Cape Verde 7.81%, Mauritius 5.72%, Ethiopia 5.43%, Uganda 5.41%, Ghana 5.09%, Lesotho 4.88%, Tunisia 4.85%, Burkina Faso 4.76%, Chad 4.74%, Nigeria 4.71%, Rwanda 4.71%, Morocco 4.61%, Seychelles 4.53%, Egypt 4.24%, Namibia 4.22%, Tanzania 4.17%, Zambia 4.07%, Malawi 3.61%, Mali 3.45%, Sierra Leone 3.36%, Benin 3.26%, Mauritania 3.26%, Algeria 3.21%, Swaziland 3.00%. That’s 25 out of 54 countries in Africa with a real GDP per capita (PPP) growth rate of 3% or more. [Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn’t list any figures for the CIA.] [Updated – VJT.]
What that means is that many African countries which are “holes” now, because of their very low GDP per capita, won’t remain that way for very much longer. In ten years, the list of “holes” will be much shorter. (For example: a country with a current GDP per capita (PPP) of 1,228 dollars, which is growing at 5% per year, will reach 2,000 dollars and climb out of “hole” status in the space of just ten years.)
UPDATE: The bad news, however, is that if we look at the world as a whole, we find that its GDP per capita (PPP) grew at an annual growth rate of 4.34%, which was exceeded by just 14 of these African countries. Also, if we look at the 42 countries whose GDP for per capita (PPP) grew at an annual rate of less than 3% for 1990-2014, we find that 19 of those countries were African countries: South Africa 2.82%, Senegal 2.79%, Kenya 2.76%, Republic of the Congo 2.59%, Guinea 2.18%, Cameroon 2.14%, The Gambia 2.14%, Togo 2.08%, Djibouti 2.05%, Niger 1.98%, Gabon 1.89%, Cote d’Ivoire 1.88%, Comoros 1.54%, Guinea-Bissau 1.48%, Madagascar 1.23%, Burundi 0.53%, Zimbabwe 0.39%, Central African Republic -0.07%, Democratic Republic -0.39%. What’s more, nine of these countries belong to the 22 countries identified above as having a GDP per capita (PPP) of 2,000 dollars or less.)
Low freedom ratings make three more holes in Asia, and one in Africa [UPDATE]
A country may also be described as a “hole” if it is totally unfree. Freedom House, in its 2016 Table of Country Scores, gives 10 countries (not counting disputed territories such as Tibet, Crimea and Pakistani Kashmir) the worst possible rating (7) in all three of its categories: political rights, civil liberties and freedom rating. The countries are Syria, Somalia, Eritrea, North Korea, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Sudan, Central African Republic, Equatorial Guinea and Saudi Arabia. Most of these countries are already on our list, but four are not. Three of these (Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Saudi Arabia) are in Asia, while one (Equatorial Guinea) is in Africa.
So, what counts as a “hole” and how many countries are “holes”?
We now have two European “holes,” 10 Asian ones, 17 from the Americas, 27 from Africa and one from Oceania, making a total of 55, out of 200-odd countries. (Updated) That’s about a quarter of the world’s countries. A “hole” can be non-arbitrarily defined as a country which:
(i) has an intentional homicide rate of at least 20 per 100,000 people; or
(ii) has a very high [top five] overall crime rate (excluding theft); or
(iii) has a Safety Index of 30 or less; or
(iv) has a Global Peace Index of “very low”; or
(v) has a GDP per capita of 2,000 dollars or less in PPP terms; or
(vi) has the worst possible rating (7) from Freedom House in political rights, civil liberties and its Freedom Rating. (Updated)
Whose fault is it, and does it matter?
Finally, I’d like to reiterate that calling a country a “hole” doesn’t necessarily mean that its misfortunes are entirely, or even principally, its fault. Some countries are innocent victims of meddling by foreign powers; others are victimized by dictators that seize power.
Nevertheless, if we’re really being honest, I think we’d have to admit that in today’s world, most countries’ troubles are largely home-grown, being generally caused by dysfunctional cultural values, religious bigotry and political corruption. It is easy to point the finger of blame at outside forces: the legacy of Columbus, or of slavery, or of colonialism, or of Pax Americana. And let us acknowledge that tens of millions died as a result of the conquest of the Americas and the slave trade, not to mention the awful toll of colonialism in the Belgian Congo and in British India.
But let’s face facts: Columbus lived 500 years ago, slavery was abolished in most countries well before 1900, and the majority of African countries have been independent for at least 50 years. There has to be a time limit on blaming past injustices for present misfortunes. If 50 years isn’t enough time for a country to turn itself from a “hole” into a thrifty but economically and politically stable country, then I ask: what is?
“What about poverty in Africa?” you ask. Surely the West is principally responsible for that? The Wikipedia article Economy of Africa paints a different picture, however. Consider this inconvenient fact, taken from the article: “Although Africa and Asia had similar levels of income in the 1960s, Asia has since outpaced Africa.” It’s surely fair to ask why. The article continues:
“One school of economists argues that Asia’s superior economic development lies in local investment. Corruption in Africa consists primarily of extracting economic rent and moving the resulting financial capital overseas instead of investing at home; the stereotype of African dictators with Swiss bank accounts is often accurate.”
That sounds like a home-grown problem to me.
Colonialism is often blamed for Africa’s woes. But consider this fact:
“Analysis of the economies of African states finds that independent states such as Liberia and Ethiopia did not have better economic performance than their post-colonial counterparts.”
The effects of colonialism were decidedly mixed. The colonialists did lots of evil things, but it was what they didn’t do that caused more harm to Africa, with many historians arguing that they should have done more to develop Africa’s infrastructure and open up the continent:
Historians L. H. Gann and Peter Duignan have argued that Africa probably benefited from colonialism on balance. Although it had its faults, colonialism was probably “one of the most efficacious engines for cultural diffusion in world history”.[30] These views, however, are controversial and are rejected by some who, on balance, see colonialism as bad. The economic historian David Kenneth Fieldhouse has taken a kind of middle position, arguing that the effects of colonialism were actually limited and their main weakness wasn’t in deliberate underdevelopment but in what it failed to do.[31] Niall Ferguson agrees with his last point, arguing that colonialism’s main weaknesses were sins of omission.[32]
Language diversity is also a huge problem in Africa:
“African countries suffer from communication difficulties caused by language diversity. Greenberg’s diversity index is the chance that two randomly selected people would have different mother tongues. Out of the most diverse 25 countries according to this index, 18 (72%) are African.[40] This includes 12 countries for which Greenberg’s diversity index exceeds 0.9, meaning that a pair of randomly selected people will have less than 10% chance of having the same mother tongue. However, the primary language of government, political debate, academic discourse, and administration is often the language of the former colonial powers; English, French, or Portuguese.”
Maybe some readers would still argue that the West (including America) should give more money to Africa. Not so fast:
“Growing evidence shows that foreign aid has made the continent poorer. One of the biggest critics of the aid development model is economist Dambiso Moyo (a Zambian economist based in the US), who introduced the Dead Aid model, which highlights how foreign aid has been a deterrent for local development.”
Economic protectionism in developed countries hampers Africa’s growth, as well:
“When developing countries have harvested agricultural produce at low cost, they generally do not export as much as would be expected. Abundant farm subsidies and high import tariffs in the developed world, most notably those set by Japan, the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy, and the United States Department of Agriculture, are thought to be the cause. Although these subsidies and tariffs have been gradually reduced, they remain high.”
Trade, rather than aid, is the best way to help Africa escape poverty. To the extent that the West is harming Africa, it is largely by refusing to trade with it. And if there is one country that deserves much of the credit for Africa’s astonishing growth in recent years, it is China, which has stepped up its volume of trade with Africa and invested heavily in local infrastructure.
A plea for balance
As for US intervention in El Salvador: let us remember that its UN-brokered peace agreement was signed back in 1992, more than a quarter of a century ago. Despite decades of peace, the GDP growth rate in El Salvador averaged a measly 0.72 percent from 1990 until 2017. That can hardly be America’s fault. Nor can the sky-high homicide rate be blamed on America.
And let’s hear both sides of the story, too. Quartz magazine has just published a long and indignant tirade enumerating the past wrongs suffered by Haiti at America’s hands, including a 19-year occupation by U.S. marines from 1915-1934, during which thousands of innocent people died under a racist government. But the article fails to mention that the U.S. occupation dramatically improved the island’s infrastructure: “1700 km of roads were made usable, 189 bridges were built, many irrigation canals were rehabilitated, hospitals, schools, and public buildings were constructed, and drinking water was brought to the main cities.” Let’s give credit where credit’s due, I say. And let’s also ask, fearlessly: what is it that continues to hold some countries (like Haiti) back, long after the Marines departed?
And above all: let us not be afraid of calling a “hole” what it really is. Before we can change the world for the better, we need to confront it in all its ugliness. And with that, I’d like to conclude my response to Cardinal Dolan. Over to you.
Wrong. You have decided that America is not shithole, base on your own contrived criteria. I have provided statistical evidence that supports the position that America is a shithole.
Relevant bit I am responding to:
I humbly submit: your heart is in the right place: however, your solutions are neither necessary nor sufficient
I never heard of John Ogbu until I stumbled across this article on a very Right-Wing site
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ogbu
https://pjmedia.com/trending/no-jaylen-brown-racism-is-not-why-blacks-underperform-in-school/
I think we in Canada should strongly consider banning immigration into our peaceful and stable secular country from the shithole country of America, with it’s appallingly high level of violent crime and religious fanaticism:
http://news.gallup.com/poll/9016/worlds-apart-religion-canada-britain-us.aspx
Let’s employ the Malmoe, Sweden “criterion”
Is there any public venue in America where it is unsafe for a practicing Orthodox Jew to wear a kippah?
Is there any public venue in Sweden where it is safe for a practicing Orthodox Jew to wear a Kippah?
I remember cycling to the European Parliament in Strassburg and passing by a synagogue. I stoped to chat with a gentleman exiting the building with his two sons, all wearing Kippot
I asked him about safety; and he pointed to the 24/7 contingent of military required to guard the building… full combat gear!
I asked him about safety without armed protection
His answer was disturbing: he suggested there were still several places in France where it was still safe
Excuse me!? This is the new normal!?
Of course Jews are not alone. Just as Jews before them, Christians are gradually adjusting to an evolving new normal in France. In Paris, entire police-no-go neighbourhoods (banlieux) are unsafe for native French. If French had women dare to use public transport through such neighbourhoods, they are obliged to wear head scarves or fear attack
When I returned to my cousin’s house, I narrated my day’s lesson
She turned around and attacked me for being “racist”
I asked her if any of the facts I presented were in error.
She replied the facts were correct, but no clear conclusions could be drawn! To do so would identify recent arrivals as “other” compared to native Europeans and the different status quo before migration was significant in demographic terms
I asked her point blank: was she advocating a post-modern post-nation United States of Europe where French, German, etc national identities were relegated to the dustbins of history
She indicated that was Europe’s new direction and all right thinking Europeans were on board, and any who were not on board were by definition neo-Nazi racists.
She was not a racist apparently for holding new-comers to a lower standard of conduct. To her, multiculturalism was a means to impose the lyrics of John Lennon’s song “Imagine” on an otherwise reluctant European lumpenproletariat
There was almost a zen-like beauty to the simplistic lack of elegance to her binary thinking… hmmmm. “Thinking?”… well for lack of better words.
I was reminded of the bleating sheep in Orwell’s book Animal Farm
Tom, where are you getting your information? I live in France, and this sounds bollocks to me.
Oh c’mon, Alan. Be reasonable. Do you really expect us to take the word of someone who actually lives in France, over that of someone who’s read stuff on internet about what is happening in France?
Meanwhile, in that shithole of a country, the United States of America:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/14/jews-will-not-replace-us-why-white-supremacists-go-after-jews/?utm_term=.880f9e81923b
Interesting argument
This is a non-problem with a Swiss solution.
In Switzwerland it is the custom for teachers to greet students at the classroom door
Two vetted immigrants refused, justifying their reluctance based on sincerely held beleifs regarding women’s inequality
Parents were contacted. Parents upheld their children’s belief-system. Right to Swiss citizenship was immediately revoked for the entire family on the justification the family clearly would be unable to integrate into Swiss society
Another example:
Two Muslim girls indicated they refused to swim with the whole class if boys were also present at the swimming pool.
Again parents were contacted and again their status was revoked. The family now faces the prospect of returning to Aleppo when danger has subsided
The real irony: Aleppo swimming pools are no different than Swiss pools
That’s been tried. It didn’t work.
What happens is that those fine white Christian folk pull their kids out of the schools, and put them into private schools. Then they vote for politicians who will reduce the funding for public schools.
It won’t work. It will be described as welfare, and we will hear stories about “welfare queens”.
It won’t work. Those fine white Christians will criticize it as reverse racism.
This, too, will be attacked as “reverse racism”. The funding for the program will be meager. And those students will get their “free education” at crummy schools staffed by mediocre teachers.
Those ideas have been tried. They failed, because this deeply racist society would not permit them to succeed.
And misogynist! But the winds of change are starting to blow.
Last time I read… Strassburg was still part of France
And Kehl (just across the border) was just as European as Strassburg
Until last year, I held residence in both
FTR- I thought you were not going to respond to any of my posts as they were all bilge
Here is a public challenge
Find ANY statement in this post addressed to you that could in ANY way be construed as specifically hostile to Islam or Muslims
And I will pay $100 to the charity of your choice in your name. Tzedakah indeed!
If you fail to respond – your failure to fulfil the prophet’s exhortation tongood works and charity can only indicate a concession of defeat on your part
I will accept the moderators’ ajudication In this matter
You can’t change the things you can’t change.
Niebuhr said it better:
I just checked. You are correct; but you claimed:
I don’t recognise this narrative. Can you support it?
Alan
I parsed my words very carefully
I have given up on the French Press but I have cited much of the German Language Press including sources from Austria, Switzerland as well as Germany
Scroll back
The last post you are reacting to provided three data points:
The opinion of a Jew exiting a synagogue in Strassburg with his two sons , when I asked him about what I had read in the press: The fact he and others dared to emerge in public wearing kippot indicated a prima facie case my data collection in the German Press was in error
His answers assured me they were not
He then volunteered the information regarding French women in Parisian Banlieux. I have visited Paris first hand but never visited the banelieux in question. I was gratified to have independent confirmation of data I had already acquired
Now read carefully what I said above
The plight of the Jews in France is bad, but not yet dire. The trend is however worrisome and already there is talk of a Jewish exodus from France. Marseille in particular … the situation there is already dire. (BTW another city where I lived for a while)
The situation of native French has a way to go before reaching the same level of immanent crisis the Jews are already experiencing in France
That all said,your answer still surprises me given France’s newfound tradition of urban bonfires involving automobiles on New Year’s
Is it possible you have been acclimatized to the new normal in France
Here in Canada, we do not witness military patrols in full body armour with automatic weapons reinforcing police patrols
Just in front of the statue to General Leclerc, I stopped to chat with one such military patrol, a group of four
I asked them if their presence was really necessary; the streets seemed safe enough
Their leader (I am unsure his rank) appeared very astonished and asked me if Inhad just arrived from Mars
He asked me if I had head of the attacks in Nice, Paris, Brussels etc… or wether I ever bothered to read a newspaper
He was most emphatic… France was in a state of alert for good reason… c’est la guerre
… his words, not mine
The most disquieting data point I provided was my cousin’s reaction which corresponded to the blathering of the Left!
Again, scroll back: I have provided enough confirmation and you too have surely encountered the same
FTR: when dropping by another cousin nearby Düsseldorf, he and I decided to visit a police-no-go zone… an entire city: Duisburg
I do not recommend the experience
I invite you to search the Internet
Duisburg Al Qudstag
…Hamas hamas juden auf den gas
Kafka could not make this up i his worst nightmares
Overturning vehicles and erecting barricades are an old tradition in France.
TomMueller,
This deserves a longer reply than I have time for at the moment. Bear with me.
There is only one way to describe the European Left
“Useful Idiots”
Is Europe confronting an invasion?
Europeans such as the bishop of Szedek think so; but any who dare make any such suggestion publicly are pilloried as “racist”…
The real irony? Leftards have admited as much: they are openly proud of an deliberate effort to make Europe multicultural in order to achieve a post-modern non-national United States of Europe. Macron and Markell will go down in history as Europe’s greatest swindlers since 1945! I have already provided enough evidence: just scroll up.
Well who to ask? Is history repeating itself? Are we witnessing a reprise of the Barbarian crossing of the Danube in 376 and the Barbarian Crossing of the Rhine in 406? Did an ancient version of multiculturalism destroy the Roman Empire. A repetition of which is sure to destroy Europe again and bring on a New Dark Ages? Some think so including the leaders of the Vizegrad nations. Sure sounds racist, now doesn’t it?
I dunno, how about taking Erdogan at his word:
Rome does provide a lesson of history! Let’s get real here: the West has a moral imperative to rescue any and all confronting genocide. Failure to provide adequate rescue will result in enmity persisting for generations, even after a belated offer of refuge.
The West must rescue the ME from bloodbath (No differently than it did in Cyprus) and stop genocide. Failure to act in timely fashion has already resulted in the creation of implacable foes bent on our destruction. We must act differently and decisively, if only for our own self preservation.
You are correct to point out that this delightful French tradition is not restricted to New Years
https://www.google.fr/search?q=france+belgique+autos+feux+bruler+2018+magasins+saccages&prmd=niv&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjr_MyP3unYAhVJd6wKHWrUDhUQ_AUIESgB&biw=667&bih=375&dpr=2
I will do you one better
This delightful French tradition is no longer unique to France! For some reason invoking correlation if not causation, this tradition just recently has been embraced by Sweden
https://francais.rt.com/international/30058-stockholm-brule-epidemie-voitures-incendiees
What do you propose? The Cyprus model of separating two populations seems incompatible with the complexity of the ME, multiple independent nations, most heavily armed, at least one nuclear power, vast oil reserves used by many nations outside the ME. Lots of players in the game.
Well, if we look at the Left-Wing/Hillary Clinton-loving Utopias like Detroit and Baltimore, and generalize it to the rest of the USA, it’s understandable one might come to that conclusion:
Ever been to Trump loving West Virginia ?
“The less-than-500 counties that Hillary Clinton carried nationwide encompassed a massive 64 percent of America’s economic activity as measured by total output in 2015. By contrast, the more-than-2,600 counties that Donald Trump won generated just 36 percent of the country’s output—just a little more than one-third of the nation’s economic activity.”
What the fuck are you talking about exactly?
Top ten of the most christian countries: https://www.therichest.com/rich-list/the-biggest/the-10-most-christian-countries/
Look how many of those are ‘holes’ according to Torley.
I’m parsing your “parsed” as “chose”.
I missed those citations.
Je suis entre vos mains.
Parsing, I would suggest “anecdotes”.
When tourists visit any major city, they are not normally shown the less salubrious areas where the untermensch live.
OK
Well the story of French Jews and their betrayal and transport to German death camps facilitated or at least unopposed by non-Jews is a stain on French history that is only now being faced
Interesting! Yesterday I had lunch (bourride – it was fearsome, I’m only just ready to eat again) with a friend and her current companion, a Marseillan. We had to set ground rules – no mention of trump, Macron or Brexit. His overt and casual racism still shocked me.
Imminent is the word. It is also the wrong word. There is no Jewish crisi in France. Many French, especially the older generation, are racist, but it is “Arabes” and gypsies they rail against.
It’s not the norm. It does happen. Park a shiny car in poorer areas of any major European city. Inequality shoved in the face gets a response.
France is not Paris, Paris is not France. I’m privileged to live in a virtually crime-free community yet many old people live here in fear of crime.
Canada is a very civilised country. My brother, whom I visit on occasion, has lived there trouble-free for nigh on fifty years and I don’t recall him mentioning armed police. Where I live, the police keep a very low profile, so low they are invisible.
There have been several terrorist attacks, Charlie Hebdo, Bataclan, Nice that have resulted in a national alert. Another friend’s partner works for the douane and she has had to carry a firearm at all times including when off duty(much to my friend’s concern!). This is, to a certain extent, window-dressing
Sure. Self-justification.
There isn’t “the Left”.
Luckily, no. I haven’t been struck by lightning either. I’ve come close! Whew!
This is alarmism. Terrorist strategy is effective when the most amount of panic and over-reaction is produced from an isolated albeit lethal incident.
I’m Canadian. i agree immigration should be banned for a while. Even 40 years ago. yet not from Americans. they are okay.
America is the greatest country that ever existed on earth.
morally, intellectually, wealth, cool things, fun, and has always been the good guy save occasions when led astray .
canada is number two.
Canada, except the French canadians in the begining was settled by a fleeing Yankee population from the American revolution. then further heavy yankee immigration dwarfed that in ontario and the maritimes.
Only after that did the identity groups from great britain start coming in. about 1840 or so.
thats why Canadians speak with the same accent as yankees.
they prevailed in stamping the nation with their moral and intellectual standard. all the rest just assimilated into that. nobody ever contributed anything to canada save in actual numbers of people.
so saying america is a HOLE is saying canada is a hole.
I don’t know your identity but you know know nothing of cAnadiamns/French canadians if you say there is a difference between us and yanks.
its wrong to call nations shitholes because its too much a reflection on the people.
these nations have no reason to have been great. they will be someday along with everyone.
Asian nations are doing better now but were very third world just 100 years or 50.
We need to see nations as a reflection on its people but see the people as able to raise their moral and intellectual curves, on a graph, and a rising tide will fix everything.
dazz,
Your top 10 list measures “the largest national Christian populations in the world,” rather than the countries with the largest proportion of Christians. The USA, for instance, has the highest number of Christians of any country in the world, but only 71% of Americans are Christians. The ten countries with the highest percentage of Christians are:
1. Vatican City
2. East Timor
3. Romania
3. Greece (tie)
5. Armenia
6. Grenada
7. Papua New Guinea
8. Greenland
9. Haiti
9. Paraguay (tie)
Only one of these countries (Haiti) is a “hole,” and only because of its extreme poverty.
Hi Neil Rickert,
Re my proposal for abolishing zip-code restrictions, which force black children to attend crummy schools staffed by mediocre teachers, you write:
Can you supply a reference? I was under the impression that the zip-code restrictions were still in force, in the U.S. Or am I mistaken?
It was called “bussing”. Children were taken by bus to other schools, in an attempt to achieve racial balance. It started in the 1960s.
Try this Wikipedia article, which has many links to other sources.
Still, many of those countries you call ‘holes’ have over 80 – 90% christian populations: Brazil 90%, Philippines 85%, Congo 96%, etc…
And what’s the atheist % in those ‘holes’? That should be an interesting correlation to explore: what’s the % of believers in God in those holes and how do you explain that?
dazz, to vjtorley:
Some relevant survey data from Gallup:
Thanks keiths
Gregory Paul has also done some relevant research, described here by Susan Blackmore:
I really like “paradise countries” like US…In 2013 47 million-1/6 of citizens were on food stamps…
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/23/why-are-47-million-americans-on-food-stamps-its-the-recession-mostly/?utm_term=.8bd88a1d2fbd
‘fraid not! By bizarre statistical happenstance, the number of anti-semitic incidents took a transitory downturn. Reason?
The number of Jews are decreasing and those who remain are ghettoizing themselves for safety’s sake!
https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/.premium-what-s-behind-the-drop-in-anti-semitic-incidents-in-france-1.5465733
… well until yesterday
http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Antisemitism/French-Jewish-group-demands-action-following-rash-of-antisemitic-incidents-539326
http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Marseilles-Jewish-leader-urges-community-to-avoid-wearing-kippa-after-attack-441269
BS … the New Year festivities involving car burning only dates back 10 years to Straßburg, but has since spread to other banlieues in all major French cities including Paris.
There is an underlying commonality to the phenomenon. However, the PC police would slash my tires and burn my car if I uttered it loud. I parse my words carefully – I distinguish between Islam and Islamist no differently than I distinguish between German and Nazi. Leftards currently enjoying a throttle hold on politically correctness will brook no such subtleties of distinction and immediately call any such thinking Islamophobic.
https://tinyurl.com/yce5hs8j
WTF!? so my suspicions are correct – you have been acclimatized to a new normal which did not exist two or more decades ago! Those who point fingers at American gun crime ignore the need for police reinforcement by fully armed military in body armor to the tune of 10 000 reinforcements in France alone… and this is OK?! Nothing to see here… move along.
Really? Does that mean there also isn’t “the Right”?!
Try uttering that out loud in company of Gallic sniveling cheese-eating surrender-monkeys!
Well – one thing the “Left” all have in common – including the Watermelon Green on the outside Red on the Inside Environmentalists – “Useful Idiots” They all want to change the EU’s anthem to John Lennon’s Imagine (The old-fashioned but preferable Internationale would be too awkward dontchya know)
https://tinyurl.com/ycav3hka
F…ing Morons!!! Idiots!!!
You really should read this article
https://www.steynonline.com/7298/imagine-there-no-imagination
goddamit!
yeah… let’s all sing Lennon’s Imagine and continue as if nothing is wrong! Yeah – good luck with that!
what gets me is the prostijournalism run by Leftards who sharpened their teeth during the riots of 1968, who still have a choke hold on the press and the universities.
To read the Lügenpresse, there is no problem in Europe.
Data says otherwise! Let us focus on just one country for the moment – a country cited by Trump, whose remarks garnered much snickering from the Leftards who obtusely remain disconnected from reality.
https://tinyurl.com/ybmcpmte
Let’s return to the notion of Islamophobia: A phobia is by definition an irrational fear. The current fear permeating Europe is very real and very rational and on a greater scale than today in Aleppo or in Mosul! At least there is no need of Merkel Lego and armed patrols in those two cities today, as seen today in European cities.
https://tinyurl.com/yamblofw
And why not? Well Trump asked the military two questions:
1 – Can Isis be beat?
2 – What do you need?
In a year – ISIS is done for.
What about Obama? Yeah – let’s discuss Obama’s noble legacy, shall we?
https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-drug-trafficking-investigation/
Don’t get me wrong – Trump is contemptible and unworthy of office. Fact remains he was still better than any of the alternatives!
this is worth viewing
TomMueller,
It’s been said that I paint with a broad brush but Tom you’re far ahead of me in that respect. I’m at a loss to understand why you ask me to read an article by some Canadian political commentator of whom I’ve never heard when were discussing France. Perhaps you could enlighten me on that.
Mosul , Fallujah, Raqqa fell before Trump, Isis area of control was shrinking before Trump took office.
Frankly – I am dumbfounded you would ask!
My thesis has been consistent:
Leftards have a stupid and venal agenda. Their embrace of multiculturalism is simultaneously incoherent and suicidal.
When reality bites Leftards on their collective ass by bloody inconvenient truths such as escalating terrorist attacks, Leftards respond as “useful idiots” by hitting the streets in massive demonstrations and singing John Lennon’s song Imagine
The article you question is by an Canadian expat currently living in America citing a controversial Canadian observer expounding on exactly just what I described, and making exactly the same conclusions as I have made above, but in more succinct terms.
All three cities you cite were still under ISIS control when Obama handed office to Trump
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/world/rise-and-fall-of-isis/?utm_term=.18634ab269c1
I will concede that ISIS was already in retreat when Trump took office. My point was simply that the prolonged bloodbath in Syria was put to a quick and immediate end by Trump.
My apologies, you are correct with the exception the eastern part of Mosul was not under ISIL control.
If one ignores the role that Russia and Iran and Assad played in the conflict. And ignoring the continuing bloodbath due the the Assad regime which the emphasis on ISIL indirectly aided.
I ask because I am confused as to what you are exercised about.
That is not a thesis. Who are “leftards”? The “right” and “left” grew from seating arrangements in the French National Assembly after the 1789 revolution. You make it sound like a World-wide conspiracy.
Unless you want to firm up on who “leftards” are, this reads as incoherent hyperbole.
Sounds like great credentials for pontificating about European politics.
If this is what you’re capable of, I recommend you go back to Breitbart where these sorts of posts are lauded as patriotic MAGA material.
In my presentation of my logic – I have buttressed every premise with ample data. If you have any issues with either the data I cite, or the interpretation of the data: I await correction.
Failing that: I thank you for implicit and public concession of defeat.
Hmmmm… I beg to differ with your interpretation:
I suggest that Russia and Iran were both instrumental in enabling Assad in prolonging both the destruction and the bloodbath.
Alan – if you cannot be bothered to read my links, there is no point in continuing.
Leftards? Definition?
here ya go:
http://www.european-left.org/about-el/member-parties
http://www.european-left.org/propos-de-la-ge/documents
Like I said – all singing from John Lennon’s hymnal
Regarding the Canadian ex-pat: Mark Steyn is a brilliant political commentator who has published five widely read books and has achieved celebrity status in many (albeit more conservative) circles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Steyn
His insights are refreshing to say the least. I referred you to just one column he wrote, because his wit and analysis were scintillating… parenthetically, quantum leaps in superiority over Breitbart, a rag which has descended into yellow journalism for which I have no respect.
TomMueller,
Never heard of the organisation. Had a look at the list of chairpersons. None of them are familiar. Why should I be concerned about an organisation about as famous as the Discovery Institute?
Your understanding of what a ‘public concession of defeat’ means is as pathetically defective as your understanding of all the other things you’ve blabbered about on this thread, including, but not limited to, racism, multiculturalism, democratic values, Islam, data, and leftwing politics. Your posts have been little but insulting bloviations. Not just ignorant, which could be forgiven, but mean-spirited and obnoxious. Paranoid too. I’d actually feel sorry for you if these posts weren’t so assholish—in addition to expressing so much fear.
Also ‘logic’–you should really learn what that word means before tossing it around like a poor ragdoll.
Whilst I’ve never been there (the closest I’ve been is looking at Goat Island), I do try and keep up with the ups and downs of US politics. I’d say “superior to Breibart” is a very low bar! 🙂