www.adamyoshida.com

Saturday, November 05, 2005
Blood on the Streets of Paris
The time has come for the use of violent force to quell the riots in France. Indeed, the time came days ago but now, I fear, we have reached a moment where the future of Western Civilization can be secured only by the shedding of blood. I say this with regret, but full of the conviction that conflict today will prevent a great tragedy tomorrow.

By now the situation is well-known to all. After the deaths, nine days ago, of two Islamic youth in what can only be described as an active example of evolution-in-action (hint for future: electrocution = bad) the various Moslem malcontents of France began what, at this point, can best be characterized as a French Intifada.

The French Government is, not unnaturally, trying to play these events down. However “Intifada” is exactly the correct label to place upon these disturbances. We have, in recent days, seen the burning of hundreds of cars, stone throwing attacks against the police, sniping against the police, and the lighting of people – including one female bystander – alight without cause. Moreover, the demands of the rioters are increasingly beginning to become clear. The ultimate goal of those looking beyond the window they’re about to smash is for the French authorities to cede civil authority over various areas of France inhabited by Moslems (presumably while continuing to pay the costs of welfare).

This is a dangerous time for the future of the West. It is very possible that, all tough talk aside, the French might make some concessions to the rioters. Indeed, given the history of the French, it is more likely that they will do so than they will not. However, in the French do give in to Islamic demands, it will truly and fully inaugurate the process of the Israelification (or Ulsterization, if you will) of Europe – leading to an age where Islamic outrages are followed by mild European push-back, tough talk and finally concessions. Those who have laughed at conservative fears of a future Moslem Europe need look no further than France today to see how it could happen.

Imagine, for a moment, if the French authorities were to concede civil authority over various areas of France to the 10% of the population which is Islamic. What happens in two decades when 20% of the population is Moslem (a virtual certainly)? The only option, in that case, would be to cede more of France to them. And what after that? Given present fertility rates and immigration patterns, many of us alive today (including myself) could live to see the day when Moslems become a majority in France.

And, as goes France, so will go other parts of Europe. If the French concede to their Moslems some form of civic autonomy, soon the Moslems of Italy, Denmark, Holland, Britain and elsewhere will be rioting for the same – if it isn’t simply handed to them by fearful and cowardly politicians in advance. If France gives in, then it becomes likely that Europe – like Israel – will gradually be chipped away at by the insidious forces of Islam. Inch by inch, the Moslems of today will achieve – with the help of craven and guilt-ridden European politicians – what their forbearers could not achieve through war via demographic conquest.

We cannot rescue France now, as we rescued them in the World Wars. There is no practical way. The French will have to do it on their own – and their reliability remains doubtful, at best. But it is in their hands now.

Order must be restored to the streets – we cannot allow the Moslems to create Palestine on the Seine. It would be the beginning of the end.

There is now only one way to restore order – with shot and shell. As harsh as it sounds, there is now no alternative to blood running in the streets of Paris. Indeed – it is now the preferable option. Even to allow the riots to simply recede – followed by concessions – would be to postpone the date of the cataclysm to come.

The French need to send in the army with live ammunition – ready to do their duty. It is essential to the future of France and to the future of Europe that a message be sent and that immediate steps be taken to repeal the Moslem foe. This begins with the restoration of order – but it does not end there. Given the dire situation of the French (with one in ten people being a Moslem and that number rising) there is no other option, really, but to both cut off further Islamic immigration and then to conduct mass deportations. It may not be practical to deport every Moslem – but a large number of troublemakers will have to be removed, perhaps even some who are formally citizens of France.

Steps of these sort are the only way to save France from the fate which she is marching towards. No other way can be found of restoring the nation and saving it from destruction.

The time has come to discard sentimentality and to accept that, for the future to be saved, lives will have to be lost.
Comments:
Adam Yoshida, the living proof that excessive masturbation really does make you go mad and blind.
 
Seriously, Adam, get a life. You've written essentially the same goddam thing three times allready. What you don't realize is that no one cares what you think and no one is ever going to take your whackjob advice. How much do you want to wager they won't be marauding the streets, indiscriminatly shooting everyone brown in sight, like you so heartlessly suggest? Ain't happenin' buddy. The reason no one listens to crackpots is because is because they're crackpots.

And besides that, you've completely missed the entire point of the event, this isn't a riot simply participated in by moslems, many are arab indeed, just as many are african, this riot is about the lack of oppertunity afforded the minorities in those areas. The poverty is rampant there and racism is typically in plain view daily. For as much as europe likes to harp on the US for it's race-related problems, on the whole the US has at least examined the problem, it seems, while france has allowed it to fester and percolate.

At any rate Adam, I've spent some time going back in your archives, and you have a powerful tendency to completely mininterpret a situation and then cry wolf about it. (Remember when the eastern north american power grid went down and you thought the "islamofascists" were launching some sort of retarded "tek-attack" when really, it was some overgrown trees and a computer bug.) Go home little boy, no ones listening anymore.
 
What's truly amazing about the 3 posts in a row on this is the glaring absence of posts about say... the aftermath of Katrina in the United States.

Why does Adam hate America and love the French?
 
The obvious answer is "because he's Canadian", but I suspect he won't thank me for pointing it out.
 
damn yoshi, do you have anything intellectual to write, as opposed to say, calling names? Either make your point and debate maturely or go the hell back to middle school. At least the other two made an attempt at rational though. You're an embarrassment.
 
I must say that Yoshi's comments are at least as informed and relevant as Adam's own posts... I think that might have been an insult. :)
 
If insults are the only way of defending your argument, then your argument is wrong. I've not seen a rebuttal from you as to the article, but I can almost respect timmah as at least he defended his statements, but then after a step forward, he took two back by making personal attacks against Mr. Yoshida. As trendy as that seems to be among the politically saavy today, it makes civilized debate (debate where you can honorably change your mind) very difficult. That's why social progress has stagnated and mannequinism (bloc voting and hard line party polarization) has taken root. I'm sure we can all at least agree on this much.
 
If insults are the only way of defending your argument, then your argument is wrong. I've not seen a rebuttal from you as to the article, but I can almost respect timmah as at least he defended his statements, but then after a step forward, he took two back by making personal attacks against Mr. Yoshida. As trendy as that seems to be among the politically saavy today, it makes civilized debate (debate where you can honorably change your mind) very difficult. That's why social progress has stagnated and mannequinism (bloc voting and hard line party polarization) has taken root. I'm sure we can all at least agree on this much.
 
Erm, excuse me but i'll resort to personally insulting any psuedo-intellectual who advocates the killing and deportation of scores of people. Somehow I think my barely personal attacks are completely overshadowed by the real shame here, which is that that sort of massacre is treated as a valid contingency plan for what is basically a poverty riot. That kind of thinking is shameful and evil. It's funny you haven't commented on the idea as you defend him as well. Possibly because it's indefensible to anyone but a sociopath.
 
What on earth is the point of trying to debate rationally (or, if you will, 'intellectually') with someone who has proved time and time again that he is totally impervious to reason? (Not to mention facts, logic, sanity, you name it).

I don't know how long you've been reading Adam's screeds, but they almost invariably reach the conclusion that the only possible solution to whatever problem he's discussing is a generous dose of widespread and indiscriminate violence by the authorities (who are invariably absolutely correct in everything they do, especially if George W Bush is in charge). It's essentially a vision of the world as shoot-em-up video game.

As a result, I would respectfully suggest that the only truly rational, intellectual response to Adam's rants is to laugh at them. Hence my response. Timmah420 hasn't been posting here long enough, which is why he's still vaguely attempting a sensible debate, but he'll change too, believe me.
 
Yoshi's right: when faced with this level of boneheaded ignorance, what's the point?

Just to give a single example, Adam is obsessed with stressing repeatedly that the rioters are Muslims, as though this was all part of some wider Al-Qaeda inspired plot against Western Civilisation – even though this is absurd as describing the 1981 Brixton rioters as 'Christians'.

In actual fact, their religion is largely irrelevant (except insofar as it's been an excuse for the authorities to ignore and/or belittle them over the years), and French Muslim leaders have even gone so far as to issue a fatwa explicitly condemning their behaviour ("It is strictly forbidden for any Muslim... to take part in any action that strikes blindly at private or public property or that could threaten the lives of others") – oddly enough, Adam has completely ignored this somewhat telling detail.

But I doubt this will make much difference as it seems pretty clear to me – and Timmah420 and most other commentators who are more interested in facts than inflammatory rhetoric – that the motivations for the riots are almost entirely derived from poverty and the kind of officially-sanctioned discrimination that makes it virtually impossible to escape this poverty trap.

If you want further proof that this isn't religiously or ideologically motivated, watch Mathieu Kassovitz' brilliant 1995 film La Haine - which so alarmed Jacques Chirac with what we now know was its all too accurate analysis of the likely outcome of festering resentment in Paris' outer suburbs that he insisted that his entire Cabinet watch it. Much good it seems to have done them – but they can't pretend that they weren't warned.

All of which provides ample evidence as to why Adam's suggestion of indiscriminate slaughter followed by mass deportation is not only ridiculous but actively counter-productive: Sarkozy's verbal rhetoric has already done enough damage. Look at how the British government handled the aftermath of Brixton for a far more constructive lesson in how to handle civil unrest sensibly and constructively, and with demonstrably beneficial effects (an American architect of Rudolph Giuliani's zero-tolerance policies paid a visit to Brixton in the 1990s, expecting to see some burnt-out war zone – instead, he said it was more like Greenwich Village).
 
Of course, Adam won't believe the likes of me - so I'll post the leading article from today's Daily Telegraph. Not only is this the most conservative newspaper in Britain, it was also formerly owned by one of Adam's idols (Conrad Black), and hasn't noticeably changed its editorial line since its departure:

France has had a week and a half of rioting. It is spreading, there is no end in sight and the government appears powerless to stop it. We are witnessing the breakdown of the contract between the state and Europe's largest immigrant population. That, as the Bill banning the hijab in schools reminded us, is on one side the acceptance by newcomers of a strictly lay entity in which no exception is made for different religious communities. In return, they are supposed to enjoy the benefits of a republic based on the revolutionary ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity.

Despite much controversy at the time, the Bill has been implemented with remarkably little fuss. It is not the hijab that lies at the heart of the present trouble. It is, rather, the failure of the state to fulfil its side of the bargain. The first generation of immigrants came to France to meet a demand for foreign labour. The second and third generations find themselves trapped without work in the estates or cités built for their parents and grandparents. To compound matters, the unemployed have become dependent on welfare. These two factors produce a feeling of helplessness, which in turn engenders a hatred of the state.

Nicolas Sarkozy, the interior minister, goes on about zero tolerance of violence, as if that were a remarkably bold policy. It is, rather, the very least to be expected from a man in his position and one that, over the past week and a half, he has seemed incapable of implementing. But beyond the obvious need to contain the rioting, the state must loosen its rigid labour laws, which make it difficult to sack - and therefore risky to take on - employees. Joblessness is high in France as a whole and about twice the national average among the immigrant communities.

The government should also reconsider a housing policy that has created ghettos with the demographic profile of the Third World and a morale-sapping dependency on welfare. These circumstances are propitious to criminality.

Dominique de Villepin, the prime minister, has held an emergency cabinet meeting, and yesterday President Jacques Chirac called a special meeting of security officials. There is talk of accelerating a social cohesion plan. This sounds, however, like another top-down solution in which alienated communities will be the recipients of public funds, thus strengthening the bonds of dependency.

What is required is the creation of conditions for enterprise that will allow those stuck in the cités to break out of drear desperation through work. This was the advice given by this newspaper during the 2002 presidential election and the 2005 constitutional referendum campaign.

The French government is now learning the cost of ignoring it.


All of which is little more than a series of statements of the obvious, but I thought I'd post it to make clear that not all conservatives are bloodthirsty genocidal maniacs. Indeed, credit where it's due, it was Margaret Thatcher's government that commissioned the Scarman report following the Brixton riots - and France desperately needs a similar top-to-bottom analysis to get to the bottom of exactly what sparked this off.
 
And here's a more specific riposte to Adam's demented frothing, from the BBC's veteran foreign correspondent John Simpson.

There is a great deal that has to be changed. I have seen many times for myself how the CRS [Compagnies Républicaines de Sécurité], the deeply aggressive and ferocious force of riot police, have attacked Muslims and Africans in the streets in times of trouble.

Last April, Amnesty International singled out the violence and racism of the French police towards the non-white people of the suburbs for particular criticism.

Nicolas Sarkozy, the Interior Minister, now seems to be playing politics with the situation by appealing to the most basic and resentful attitudes of conservative France.

Much of the violence on the streets of France's cities is mindless; some of it is malign. But simply stamping it down will not work - and anyway the CRS and the civil police have tried that, and their toughness has only made things worse.

 
Post a Comment