Sweden took in 162,000 Muslim migrants in 2015 — 494 got jobs

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

margaret murders in sweden by a muslim

In lieu of the jizya, there is welfare. It is the duty of the Infidels to pay for the upkeep of Muslims, as that Qur’an verse makes clear. UK jhadist Anjem Choudary said in February 2013:

“We are on Jihad Seekers Allowance, We take the Jizya (protection money paid to Muslims by non-Muslims) which is ours anyway. The normal situation is to take money from the Kafir (non-Muslim), isn’t it? So this is normal situation. They give us the money. You work, give us the money. Allah Akbar, we take the money. Hopefully there is no one from the DSS (Department of Social Security) listening. Ah, but you see people will say you are not working. But the normal situation is for you to take money from the Kuffar (non-Muslim) So we take Jihad Seeker’s Allowance.”

Malmo Refugees Welcome Sweden

“Sweden Took 162k Refugees Last Year, 494 Got Jobs,” by Jacob Bojesson, Daily Caller, June 1, 2016 (thanks to Steve):

Just 494 out of the 162,000 refugees who applied for asylum in Sweden in 2015 have managed to get a job, according to government figures released Tuesday.

Refugees are eligible to work while their applications are pending as long as they can show a valid identification document and haven’t been rejected for asylum in the past. A majority of asylum seekers would qualify for a work permit, but the national migration office was only capable of issuing one to one-third due to the high demand.

“There was an incredible amount of people who applied for asylum in Sweden, and for us to be able to register everyone we had to disregard certain areas, and employment was one of them,” Lisa Bergstrand, officer at the Swedish immigration office, told Swedish public broadcaster SVT. “We do what we’ve been told to do.”

Getting migrants off welfare and into the job market has been a problem for most European countries during the ongoing refugee crisis.

Germany announced reforms to its labor laws in May to make it easier for migrants to enter the job market. Migrants are exempt from minimum wage regulations and thousands of  “one-euro jobs” —  in which refugees can work for low wages of between $1.13 and $2.80 per hour — have been created.

The center-left government in Sweden has proposed a reform to asylum laws to force migrants into the work force. If an applicant can’t support himself after three years in the country, they won’t be eligible for permanent residency if the reforms pass.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany To Strip Job Protection From Citizens To Make Room For Refugees

San Jose: Muslim chases, tackles Trump supporter after rally, then brags on Twitter

Terror scare on UK-bound flight after Muslim passenger screams “Allahu akbar” and “Boom”

Muslim chases, tackles Trump supporter, brags about it on Twitter

According to Gateway Pundit, the attacker appears to be a Somali Muslim from Minnesota named Seyfudin Mohamud. Gateway has that, plus more photos and video, here.

Whether you love Trump or hate him, this is a destructive new feature of American politics. Trump enjoys huge popular support (whether or not it is enough to win him the Presidency), and in response the Left has grown even more thuggish and authoritarian than it already was. Their attack against Trump and those who support him has two prongs: the media claim that his appeal reveals a broad strain of “racism” and “bigotry” among ordinary Americans, and the physical menacing of those who, despite this opprobrium heaped upon their heads, continue to support him.

Those who hate Trump, whatever their own perspectives may be, and who love a free society should be disturbed by this violence. If it continues, those who dissent from the Leftist mainstream line will not only be demonized and marginalized as spreading “hate” — that has been going on for years — but will be aware that by their dissent they are putting themselves in very real physical danger. We’re sliding toward a Leftist autocracy in which “right-wing” dissenters are defamed and brutalized. This is the biggest story of this Presidential campaign year, but the mainstream media is not only not reporting on it, it is aiding and abetting it.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany: Refugee background checks “unaffordable”

Sweden took in 162,000 refugees in 2015 — 494 got jobs

RELATED VIDEO: Latino for Trump confronts anti-Trump protester

Here are the still images of anti-Trump Muslim “Houdini” chasing and tacking a Trump supporter leaving the rally in San Jose, California.
ss1

ss2 ss3 ss4 ss5 ss6

Do Facebook and Twitter want foes of jihad dead?

Over at PJ Media, I discuss a new example of the double standard Twitter and Facebook employ regarding those whose views they dislike:

Obaid Karki

Obaid Karki, @stsheetrock on Twitter.

The antipathy of Twitter and Facebook to conservatives is well-established. The social media giants’ hatred presumably therefore also applies to opponents of jihad terror, who are universally classified as “right-wing,” however absurd the label.

But do Twitter and Facebook draw the line at death threats against them?

The question arises because of one Obaid Karki, @stsheetrock on Twitter, who describes himself thusly:

I Ain’t Anglosexual Liberal Hippie, Neither Wolf nor Dog, I am a coyote. A Paulite Picassoic Provocateur Constitutionalist Libertarian.

Any doubt that he is quite spectacularly insane will be removed by a perusal of one or both of his incoherent and gleefully obscene websites. Karki is engaging in some bizarre parody of a deranged imam, or perhaps he is trying to make some other kind of inscrutable humor. One of his websites is titled “Obaid Karki St.Sheetrock’s Painfulpolitics Offensive Comedy Hepcat.” The offensive comedy is there, in spades.His other site is called “Suicide Bombers Magazine”, and bears this heading: “Dislaimer: we swear on Elvis’s pickled penis that ‘non-sapient beings’ I mean animals harmed during IED kahbooom.”

Hmm.

But just because Karki is insane or possibly joking doesn’t mean that he can’t be dangerous — especially if he is also making specific calls for people to be murdered.

Last Saturday, he posted this:

Robert Spencer mustn’t [be] featured but lynched from his scrotum along with Zionists scumbags, Pamela Geller, Pat Condell, Daniel Pipes, Debbie Schlussel and JIHADWATCH Jackass duo Baron Bodissey & Geert Wilders for inspiring Anders Behring Breivik to [kill] innocent students in 2011.

Actually, neither Bodissey or Wilders run Jihad Watch — I do — and I didn’t inspire Breivik to do anything, but there is no arguing with a crazy person. But what is interesting about Karki’s post, aside from his loony language, is that he posted this call for me and others to be lynched on Twitter, which has a clearly stated policy against death threats.

Per “The Twitter Rules”:

Violent threats (direct or indirect): You may not make threats of violence or promote violence, including threatening or promoting terrorism.

I therefore duly reported Karki’s threat, but as of this writing, it has not been taken down (in fact, Karki has since posted it again, and has posted variants of it several times).

Maybe Twitter is just slow to deal with the large number of complaints it receives? To buy that argument, you have to buy that they have a two-year backlog.

On May 12, 2014, Karki also posted this:

Robert Spencer must be arrested and lynched along the Zionists Dumbasses Daniel Pipes, Geert Wilders and JIHADWATCH …

You can see from this 2014 Twitter exchange linked above that several people claimed they reported Karki for this threat, as did I.

Not only does Karki still have his Twitter account — while many conservatives have lost their accounts for far less — but the 2014 threat remains there.

Hold on — I misspoke above.

I meant to say you would have to buy that Twitter has a three-year backlog of death threats to police.

Here, read a Karki tweet from September 18, 2013:

Robert Spencer must be shot head not only for comparing Alnoor 24:35 to Corinthians 11:14-15 satanically but for …

So now you have an example of how Twitter responded to death threats against a political opponent.

How about Facebook?

Not only is Karki on Twitter, but he also has a Facebook page containing the same lurid and paranoid content — including the threats. He did claim he was temporarily barred this Sunday:

I am axed outta Facebook for 7 days …

… but, I just read that on his Facebook page. What exactly this axing entailed remains unclear.

At least the social media titans are consistent. The site Epoch Times reported last March:

[W]hile Twitter says it is making strong efforts to shut down terrorist accounts, activists say that not only is the microblogging company not taking down the accounts that matter, but it has even been shutting down accounts of users trying to report terrorists.

The age of Obama has featured a rapid decline in appreciation for the freedom of speech. College students and — in many, many cases — their professors routinely avow that “hate speech is not free speech.” They cannot grasp that if they get their wish allows whatever the government subjectively deems “hate speech” to be criminalized, and the foremost protection against tyranny will have been removed.

At that moment, free society literally ends….

RELATED ARTICLES:

CFR’s Max Abrahms claims Syrian jihad groups growing because they’re moderate

London, Ontario police cars marked in Arabic above Canadian flag

Question: Is Donald Trump Taking a Wrecking Ball to the Democratic Party?

I have written that Donald Trump is leading an insurgency.

If you Google the words “Trump” and “insurgency” you will get over 650,000 links to articles and commentary. I recently said to a friend that Donald Trump has gone from being a candidate for the Republican Party nomination for President to the leader of a movement. That movement has now turned into an insurgency within the Republican Party and led to anarchy within the Democratic Party.

First here are definitions of words I use:

Insurgency is a “rebellion against an existing government by a group not recognized as a belligerent.” Insurgency is synonymous with dissent, insurrection, mutiny, revolt, uprising, defiance and disobedience.

Anarchy is a “state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.” Anarchy is synonymous with lawlessness, nihilism, mobocracy, revolution, insurrection, disorder, chaos, mayhem, tumult and turmoil.

Populist is a “member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.”

Is it Trump who created an insurgency or is Trump following the lead of a growing populist insurgency that was already taking place?

I have written that Trump leads his followers by following their lead. The movement began during the Presidency of Bill Clinton and continues today. It is a struggle between the individualist and the collectivist.

In an article titled Trump Changes Democratic Party Too Dick Morris writes:

Trump’s candidacy and its challenge to the economic and social establishments of America highlights how close Hillary Clinton is to both. She is the candidate of the status quo in a country seething with a craving for political change.

Trump is the sole provider of change in this election. Clinton may trot out her little bitty programs of incremental change, creeping forward from the Obama agenda, but it doesn’t come close to the full-scale assault on income inequality, crony capitalism, free trade giveaways, rampant illegal immigration and political correctness gone berserk that the populists of both parties want.

But Trump is doing more than driving populist Democrats into Republican arms. He is separating the establishment left of the Democratic Party from its populist base. His candidacy separates the blue-collar social populists from their partisan moorings even as his economic populism appeals to the Sanders left.

A new Democratic Party is emerging from the wreckage.

The recent attack against Trump supporters at a rally in San Jose, California shows how far toward becoming a party of anarchists the Democrats have become. This form of public violence against those attending a political event is anti-thematic to American populist values and beliefs in both political parties.

The clearest example of how out of touch Democratic leaders are with their populist base may be found in the response of the Mayor of San Jose to the violence at the rally. San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo, a Democrat supporting Hillary Clinton, told the Associated Press that “[A]t some point Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,” blaming the Republican’s presence for inciting the violence.

This is blaming the victim of rape for the sexual assault, the gun for the shooting or those attacked for the actions of the mob. 

What San Jose reinforces is the Trump Insurgents versus the hard leftist Democrat Anarchists on the streets. Continued violence can drive moderate populist Democrats to the Republican party.

trump supporters young

Trump supporters. Photo: Facebook.

Donald Trump has tapped into the “Individualism Movement.” Trump’s life is the embodiment of the individualist. Trump has been rich, then poor and then rich again. He has done this not with government handouts, but rather despite the government.

Members of the Individualism Movement go by many names: Silent Majority, TEA Party Patriots, Constitutionalists, Blue Dog Democrats, Anti-Establishment Republicans, the working class and Blue Dog Democrats. They embody the insurgency.

Is Trump the new populist or the old individualist?

Here are just some of the reasons Trump is different from Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders:

  1. Not a career politician.
  2. Not politically correct.
  3. Isn’t influenced by money or big donors.
  4. When he sees something he says something.
  5. Turns his negatives into positives.
  6. Attacks against him consistently backfire.
  7. Fearless and is therefore feared.
  8. Has broad populist appeal due to his forthright comments.

Each of these are indicators of individualism on steroids.

Donald Trump is saying what people have wanted to say but have been afraid to do so. When Trump speaks he is not speaking to the media or the elite, he is speaking to John and Jane six-pack. He is speaking to each an every American.

It appears that Donald Trump is fundamentally transforming both the Democratic and Republican parties.

QUESTION: Is Donald Trump Taking a Wrecking Ball to the Democratic Party?

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Student Activists are Really Radical Today

Students at Yale wants to “De-Colonize” English Dept Curriculum

Black Lives Matter’s LGBTQ Agenda

No Surprise That Gun Prohibitionists Endorse Clinton

BELLEVUE, Wash. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Today’s endorsement of Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton by two major gun prohibition lobbying groups should come as no surprise, considering her highly-publicized attacks on the Second Amendment, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said in response.

As reported by the New York Times, Everytown for Gun Safety President John Feinblatt declared in a prepared statement, “Gun Sense Voters have a champion in Hillary Clinton. Our litmus test is simple: does a candidate side with the public or with the gun lobby? Hillary Clinton passes that test with flying colors.”

“It’s no surprise that the gun prohibition lobby has a litmus test based on erosion of the Second Amendment, and it is less of a surprise that Hillary Clinton passed it with flying colors,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “If there were any remaining doubts among American voters about Clinton’s intentions if she wins in November, these endorsements make it clear that she is determined to rip the right to keep and bear arms from the American fabric.”

Early last fall, Clinton was caught on audio at a private fund raiser declaring that “The Supreme Court was wrong on the Second Amendment.” Gottlieb said today’s endorsements by Everytown and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America – two organizations supported by anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg – amount to “damning proof” that a Clinton presidency would pose a direct threat to the individual right to keep and bear arms.

“Today’s Washington Examiner noted that Clinton has promised to push gun control on her very first day in office,” Gottlieb noted. “That’s not a sign of leadership. It’s a symptom of fanaticism against a fundamental individual civil right.

“Throughout her public career,” he observed, “Hillary Clinton has never been a friend of gun owners, and today’s double endorsement merely confirms that she is their avowed enemy.”

ABOUT THE CITIZENS COMMITTEE FOR THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NRA Response to Gun Control Lobby’s Endorsement of Hillary Clinton

Hard-line Hillary Bashes Heller Again! Calls Supreme Court’s Decision “Terrible”

“Journalists” Renew Attack Upon “Assault Weapons”

What “Strong Case” for Gun Registration?

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of the National Rifle Association.

When Employers Compete, Workers Win — When They Can’t, Workers Lose by Donald J. Boudreaux

David Henderson does a very nice job summarizing why stripping workers of the right to offer X as part of an employment contract makes most workers worse off, even if the intention of the government officials who do the stripping is to help workers — and, indeed, even if a Nobel laureate economist misses this reality.

Here’s another part of the picture.

Workers’ bargaining power ultimately is tied positively to workers’ alternatives: the greater the number, and the better the quality, of a worker’s employment options, the stronger is that worker’s bargaining power. If many different employers are competing for your services — each by offering you good pay, good benefits, and good work conditions — you as a worker have splendid bargaining power.*

It follows that government interventions that reduce the creation of good jobs— that is, interventions that reduce firms’ incentives to create better opportunities for employing human labor — reduce workers’ bargaining power. In turn, it follows that if overtime-pay arrangements of the sort that emerge in the absence of government restrictions on employment contracts are for many firms and workers the most efficient sorts of labor contracts available — as they are likely to be in a competitive economy — then government prohibitions that make those contract terms illegal will reduce firms’ efficiencies and, hence, dampen their willingness to create new jobs that pay as much as jobs would pay in the absence of those prohibitions.

Put differently, government restrictions that shrink the ways that employers can squeeze more efficiency into their operations shrink the number of jobs that are created, or reduce the maximum pay that employers can offer to employers who perform newly created jobs.

Over time, therefore, regulations such as the newly imposed overtime-pay diktats dampen workers’ bargaining power by reducing the number of high-as-possible-quality jobs created by employers. With fewer such jobs, there’s less competition for workers.  And with less competition for workers, workers’ bargaining power shrinks.

Note that empirically documenting this reduced competition for workers, as well as documenting its effects on workers’ pay (lower than otherwise), fringes (lower than otherwise), and work conditions (worse than otherwise) would be practically impossible. Because the consequences of these diktats play out fully only over a long span of time, it is simply too difficult for an empirical investigator to uncover, amidst all the countless other changes that occur in the economy, the details of what pay, fringes, and work conditions would beotherwise — that is, had such diktats not been imposed.

Yet unless you think you can say nothing absent empirical evidence about the effects on workers’ well-being of a reduction in the intensity and quality of competition for labor, then you should worry that these new overtime-pay diktats will, over time, make many workers worse off than they would otherwise be.

* Note that if, in this situation, you as the worker (whose services employers are competing for) agree to reduce the value that you will receive on one margin (say, pay) in order to increase the value you will receive on another margin (say, working conditions), it would be wholly mistaken for an outside observer to notice your agreement to work for lower pay and conclude from that observation that youremployer has undue bargaining power over you. And it would harm you if this outside observer, arrogant in his or her ignorance of the details of your and your employer’s affairs, orders your employer to increase your pay to some level higher than you agreed to accept.

Cross-posted from the indispensable Cafe Hayek.

Donald J. Boudreaux

Donald J. Boudreaux

Donald Boudreaux is a senior fellow with the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a Mercatus Center Board Member, a professor of economics and former economics-department chair at George Mason University, and a former FEE president.

5 Ideas at the Heart of Socialism by Lawrence W. Reed

The good news is that more millennials are skeptical of economic intervention than trust the government to improve anything. The bad news is that a growing minority of young voters embrace the term socialism, which has an increasingly positive connotation even with those who don’t identify as socialist. The popular candidacy of Bernie Sanders has fueled the S-word’s redemption, but the process was already well underway in the last presidential election. A 2012 Gallup poll found that 53 percent of Democrats and 39 percent of Americans more generally had a positive reaction to the word socialism.

Political labels aside, the real danger of socialism lies neither in its formal definition nor in its evolving connotation in the rising generation. The danger lies in the ideas at the heart of socialism.

As FEE’s president Larry Reed writes in this 2011 essay, “If socialism comes, it will come because men choose to embrace its principles.”

A century ago, those principles were openly called socialism by their American advocates, but that term fell out of favor, first when the Socialist Party of America steadfastly opposed US involvement in World War I (resulting in a vicious crackdown by the federal government, including the illegal imprisonment of Socialist Party leader Eugene Debs), then later when Bolshevik revolutionaries seized power in Russia and the word socialist came to describe America’s authoritarian enemies in the Cold War.

The First World War is now a distant memory, and ever more voters were born after the fall of the Soviet empire. Historical amnesia is taking the sting out of the word socialism. Meanwhile, Senator Sanders has presented “a democratic socialist program,” according to emeritus history professor Lawrence S. Wittner, “in tune with the views of many Americans: universal healthcare (Medicare for All); tuition-free public college; a $15/hour minimum wage; increased Social Security benefits; higher taxes on the wealthy; big money out of politics; and a less militaristic foreign policy.”

Many antisocialists embrace the opposition to militarism (see, for example, Larry’s own “Antiwar Hero”), but despite the foreign policy positions of Debs and Sanders, the main ideas of socialism, whether under that name or any other, are about growing the government’s power and reach into the economy and reducing individuals’ freedom to decide the fate of their own property in voluntary exchange.

If the ideas at the heart of socialism are “in tune with the views of many Americans,” then identifying and challenging those ideas are essential to the struggle for liberty.

B.K. Marcus


A belief that I stress again and again is that we are at war — not a physical, shooting war, but a war capable of becoming just as destructive and just as costly.

Ideas have had earthshaking consequences.

The battle for the preservation and advancement of liberty is a battle not against personalities but against opposing ideas. The French author Victor Hugo declared, “One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas.” This statement is often rendered as “More powerful than armies is an idea whose time has come.”

Ideas have had earthshaking consequences. They have determined the course of history.

Feudalism existed for a thousand years in large part because scholars, teachers, intellectuals, educators, clergymen, and politicians propagated feudalistic ideas. The notion “once a serf, always a serf” kept millions of people from ever questioning their station in life.

Under mercantilism, the widely accepted concept that the world’s wealth is fixed prompted men to take what they wanted from others in a long series of bloody wars.

The publication of Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations in 1776 is a landmark in the history of the power of ideas. As Smith’s message of free trade spread, political barriers to peaceful cooperation collapsed, and virtually the whole world decided to try freedom for a change.

Marx and the Marxists would have us believe that socialism is inevitable, that it will embrace the world as surely as the sun will rise in the east tomorrow. As long as men have free will (the power to choose right over wrong), however, nothing that involves human volition can ever be inevitable. If socialism comes, it will come because men choose to embrace its principles.

Socialism is an age-old failure, yet the socialist idea constitutes the chief threat to liberty today. As I see it, socialism can be broken down into five ideas:

1. The Pass-a-Law Syndrome

Passing laws has become a national pastime. Business in trouble? Pass a law to give it public subsidies or restrict its freedom of action. Poverty? Pass a law to abolish it. Perhaps America needs a law against passing more laws.

Almost invariably, a new law means: (a) more taxes to finance its administration, (b) additional government officials to regulate some heretofore unregulated aspect of life, and (c) penalties for violating the law. In brief, more laws mean more regimentation, more coercion. Let there be no doubt about what the word coercion means: force, plunder, compulsion, restraint. Synonyms for the verb form of the word are even more instructive: impel, exact, subject, conscript, extort, wring, pry, twist, dragoon, bludgeon, and squeeze.

When government intervenes in the free economy, bureaucrats and politicians spend most of their time undoing their own handiwork. To repair the damage of provision A, they pass provision B. Then they find that to repair provision B, they need provision C, and to undo C, they need D, and so on until the alphabet and our freedoms are exhausted.

The pass-a-law syndrome is evidence of a misplaced faith in the political process and a reliance on force, which are anathema to a free society.

2. The Get-Something-from-Government Fantasy

Government by definition has nothing to distribute except what it first takes from people. Taxes are not donations.

Perhaps America needs a law against passing more laws.

In the welfare state this basic fact gets lost in the rush for special favors and giveaways. People speak of “government money” as if it were truly free.

One who is thinking of accepting something from government that he could not acquire voluntarily should ask, “From whose pocket is it coming? Am I being robbed to pay for this benefit, or is government robbing someone else on my behalf?” Frequently, the answer will be both.

The result of this fantasy is that everyone in society has his hands in someone else’s pockets.

3. The Pass-the-Buck Psychosis

Recently, a welfare recipient wrote her welfare office and demanded, “This is my sixth child. What are you going to do about it?”

An individual is victim to the pass-the-buck psychosis when he abandons himself as the solver of his problems. He might say, “My problems are really not mine at all. They are society’s, and if society doesn’t solve them and solve them quickly, there’s going to be trouble!”

Socialism thrives on the shirking of responsibility. When men lose their spirit of independence and initiative, their confidence in themselves, they become clay in the hands of tyrants and despots.

4. The Know-It-All Affliction

Leonard Read, in “The Free Market and Its Enemy,” identified “know-it-allness” as a central feature of the socialist idea. The know-it-all is a meddler in the affairs of others. His attitude can be expressed in this way: “I know what’s best for you, but I’m not content to merely convince you of my rightness; I’d rather force you to adopt my ways.” The know-it-all evinces arrogance and a lack of tolerance for the great diversity among people.

In government, the know-it-all refrain sounds like this: “If I didn’t think of it, then it can’t be done, and since it can’t be done, we must prevent anyone from trying.” A group of West Coast businessmen once ran into this snag when their request to operate barge service between the Pacific Northwest and Southern California was denied by the (now-defunct) Interstate Commerce Commission because the agency felt that the group could not operate such a service profitably.

The miracle of the market is that when individuals are free to try, they can and do accomplish great things. Read’s well-known admonition that there should be “no man-concocted restraints against the release of creative energy” is a powerful rejection of the know-it-all affliction.

5. The Envy Obsession

Coveting the wealth and income of others has given rise to a sizable chunk of today’s socialist legislation. Envy is the fuel that runs the engine of redistribution. Surely, the many soak-the-rich schemes are rooted in envy and covetousness.

Civilizations have been known to crumble under the weight of envy and the disrespect for property it entails.

What happens when people are obsessed with envy? They blame those who are better off than themselves for their troubles. Society is fractured into classes and faction preys on faction. Civilizations have been known to crumble under the weight of envy and the disrespect for property it entails.

A Common Thread

A common thread runs through these five socialist ideas. They all appeal to man’s darker side: the primitive, noncreative, slothful, dependent, demoralizing, unproductive, and destructive side of human nature. No society can long endure if its people practice such suicidal notions.

Consider the freedom philosophy. It is an uplifting, regenerative, motivating, creative, exciting philosophy. It appeals to and relies on the higher qualities of human nature, such as self-reliance, personal responsibility, individual initiative, respect for property, and voluntary cooperation.

The outcome of the struggle between freedom and serfdom depends entirely on what percolates in the hearts and minds of men. The jury is still deliberating.

Lawrence W. Reed

Lawrence W. Reed

Lawrence W. (“Larry”) Reed became president of FEE in 2008 after serving as chairman of its board of trustees in the 1990s and both writing and speaking for FEE since the late 1970s. Follow on Twitter and Like on Facebook.

America: The Sleeping Giant of Greatness

Many Americans annually honor our fallen military heroes on Memorial Day.  There are moments of thankful prayer, the visitation of historic sites, flying Old Glory, ect.  There are also the usual sad sack sorry losers who attempt to mar the holiday with progressive inspired acts of pure bad taste and evil.  One such case was a multi-state rampage of thugs who destroyed historic grave markers of heroes who died, so that even those who chose the path of evil to have a good shot of experiencing a great American life.

I want to personally express my thanks and gratitude to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice.  Whether it was during the founding of this great republic, or the horrendous Civil War that was waged to preserve the union, then to eradicate slavery.  We must not forget those who gallantly battled and won against Germany’s Kaiser regime, during World War One.  We are forever indebted to the Greatest Generation for taking down the triple threat of evil during World War Two.  Whether it was Hitler’s Nazis of Germany, Emperor Hirohito’s mighty military in the Pacific Theater, or Mussolini’s minions of Italy.  Thank you, for without your magnanimous efforts, America the beautiful would never have become the greatest super power the world had ever known.

Originally, Memorial Day was called Decoration Day in the United States in the immediate aftermath of the United States Civil War.  It was a tradition initiated by General John A. Logan, leader for Northern Civil War Veterans.  Abraham Lincoln said, “highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom-and that government of the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

The original purpose intended for Memorial Day was to insure that Americans would not only remember those who died for the cause of protecting our republic from enemy aggression, but also to preserve liberty and justice for all.

Since America’s infancy, over 1.3 million of our fellow countrymen and women have given their lives so that we all might be free to experience liberty.  The blood of American soldiers has been spilled on both United States and foreign soil.  God has blessed America by giving us men and women who put our republic above self-interests and who were willing to sacrifice their lives for our God given rights.  America has been endowed with the right military leaders and commanders in chief during our darkest hours.

Men like George Washington, General George Patton, General Dwight Eisenhower, President Ronald Reagan, President Harry S. Truman, General Paul Vallely and many others who made tough decisions that helped America reach or exceed her potential while preserving her for future generations.  Because of the efforts of these and many other great Americans our republic has been a solid republic for quite some time now, hopefully she will reemerge as a constitutionally limited republic that we can keep, as Benjamin Franklin encouraged Americans to do.

We find such men and women heroes at places like Gettysburg, Normandy, Bunker Hill and elsewhere.  But when it comes to preserving our republic, it goes beyond just winning wars and putting the kabash on those seeking to kill, steal from and destroy America the beautiful.  President Ronald Reagan correctly pointed out that freedom as never being more than one generation from extinction. He also stated, “We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream.  It must be fought for, protected, and handed on to them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children, what it was once in the United States of where men were free.

Unfortunately today, America is precariously close to toppling over the brink into the abys of existence as the former envy of the world nation of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness where the unalienable rights of individuals were once recognized.  In recent years, up to 40% of Americans are now in favor of the opposite of unalienable rights recognition, free market economics, Christian virtues, and even positive American history.  Sadly, most government school students are no longer even properly instructed on American history.  Thus their faulty judgement as adult voters for example over the pass to presidential election cycles, for example.  Some students are indoctrinated against America to the point, they prefer sharia law bullies running around, illegal immigration into the U.S., and government oppression against prosperity and good private sector healthcare.

Despite all of that madness, I for one am encouraged by the awakening of the sleeping giant of millions of Americans who are working through various means to rekindle the flame of Liberty and justice for all, throughout our republic.

Stay tuned America, believe it or not happy days will be here again as the sleeping giant of greatness reawakens right in our midst.

CENSORED: Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic Video

CENSORED by Facebook: Video on Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic

On Tuesday, the European Union (EU) announced a new online speech code to be enforced by four major tech companies, including Facebook and YouTube. On Wednesday, Facebook deleted the account of Ingrid Carlqvist, Gatestone Institute’s Swedish expert.

It’s no coincidence. It’s political censorship. It’s outrageous. And it’s contrary to our Western values of free speech, political freedom and the separation of mosque and state.

Facebook blackballed Ingrid because she had posted Gatestone’s latest video, called “Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic,” in which Ingrid asks: Where did peaceful, low-crime Sweden go? Why does Sweden now have the second-highest number of rapes in the world, after only Lesotho?

After enormous grassroots pressure from Gatestone’s readers, the Swedish media started reporting on Facebook’s censorship. Facebook then put Ingrid’s account back up.

Facebook and the EU have backed down — for today. But they’ll be back. What should we do? There is only one thing we can do: continue to produce our well-researched reports, and even more videos!

We need to win the battle of ideas. Can you help?

Where did peaceful, low-crime Sweden go? Why does Sweden now have the second-highest number of rapes in the world, after only Lesotho? Here is Ingrid Carlqvist of is Gatestone Institute

RELATED ARTICLES: 

The Face of Evil: Surveying the ISIS Killing Fields in Northern Iraq

1 Year After Steinle Death, San Francisco Unveils Immigration Policy Keeping ‘Sanctuary’ Protections

Georgia: Muslim woman in burqa attacks family with American flag

ABOUT THE GATESTONE INSTITUTE:

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

  • Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;
  • Human Rights
  • A free and strong economy
  • A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world
  • Energy independence
  • Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily report, www.gatestoneinstitute.org, that features topics such as military and diplomatic threats to the United States and our allies; events in the Middle East and their possible consequences, and the transparency and accountability of international organizations.

U.S. Muslim group equates Jewish Halacha/Catholic Canon Law with Islamic Sharia Law

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a U.S. based Muslim organization founded in 1994, has published its 2016 Questions for Local City Council, Mayoral, State Legislative & Gubernatorial Candidates Running For Office and a Candidate for Public Office Religious Pluralism Pledge.

In a press release CAIR states:

CAIR seeks to empower the American Muslim community with its questionnaires toolkit by providing sample questions for local city council, mayoral, state legislative, gubernatorial, and congressional candidates running for office.

Candidate responses to CAIR’s election questionnaires will assist American Muslims in evaluating each candidate’s leadership criteria and their ability to unite and engage the community on policies and programs that meet Muslim needs. The questions and the issues included in the questionnaires emphasize the American Muslim community’s concerns, as well as those of its civil rights, immigrant rights and worker rights allies. [Emphasis added]

Discover the Networks reports that, “Despite its attempt to portray itself as a champion of Muslim civil rights, CAIR espouses radical views and has publicly endorsed radical militant Islamic groups around the world. According to many terrorism experts, CAIR is on the wrong side of the war on terrorism.”

The candidate questionnaire and candidate pledge are counter intuitive to those who understand Islamic (shariah) law.

David Yerushalmi in a 2008 column titled Shariah vs. Jewish Law wrote:

I have written extensively on the question of the practice or advocacy of Shariah by Shariah authorities as a violation of the primary federal sedition statute (i.e., 18 U.S.C. § 2385) on the grounds that throughout the long 1200-year history of the development of Shariah, and across all five major schools of Shariah jurisprudence, five salient facts are embedded in a deep consensus among all authoritative Shariah authorities:

[1] The telos or purpose of Shariah is submission. Shariah seeks to establish that Allah is the divine lawgiver and that no other law may properly exist but Allah’s law.

[2] Shariah seeks to achieve this goal through persuasion and other non-violent means.  But when necessary and under certain prescribed circumstances the use of force and even full-scale war to achieve the dominance of Shariah worldwide is not only permissible, but obligatory. The use of force or war is termed Jihad.

[3] The goal of Shariah is to achieve submission to Allah’s law by converting or conquering the entire world and the methodology to achieve this end (by persuasion, by force and subjugation, or by murder) is extant doctrine and valid law by virtue of a universal consensus among the authoritative Shariah scholars throughout Islamic history.

[4] The doctrine of Jihad is foundational because it is based upon explicit verses in the Qur’an and the most authentic of canonical Sunna and it is considered a cornerstone of justice: until the infidels and polytheists are converted, subjugated, or murdered, their mischief and domination will continue to harm the Muslim nation. And,

[5] Jihad is conducted primarily through kinetic warfare but it includes other modalities such as propaganda and psychological warfare.

Dr. Bill Warner, using a real life example, shows how non-Muslims react to the demands of the Sharia, in particular, what non-Muslims need to understand about how necessity can abrogate obligation in this video:

The candidate questionnaire asks:

3. Do you agree the U.S. Constitution and state laws are not threatened by citizens privately following their own religious laws, such as Jewish Halacha, Islamic Sharia or Catholic Canon Law, as long as such religious laws comply with U.S. code?

The question equates Jewish and Catholic beliefs with that of Islamic (shariah) law. But are they equal?

Once signed do these two documents require candidates for public office to submit to Islamic law?

Is signing the pledge and answering yes to all the questions in the CAIR candidate questionnaire promoting sedition?

It would appear so.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

The Face of Evil: Surveying the ISIS Killing Fields in Northern Iraq

1 Year After Steinle Death, San Francisco Unveils Immigration Policy Keeping ‘Sanctuary’ Protections

Georgia: Muslim woman in burqa attacks family with American flag

RELATED VIDEO: CAIR tells Muslims to Defy Customs Agents

Hey Clinton, Sanders Supporters: ‘It’s Not Racist To Put Americans’ Jobs First’

LOS ANGELES, California /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) launched a radio ad today in Los Angeles reminding Californians that putting Americans’ jobs first isn’t racist. The commercial features civil rights leader and former Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Executive Director Frank Morris and is running on multiple radio stations in Los Angeles, including the top urban contemporary station.  The ads are scheduled to run for the next week.

“Many of my Democratic brothers and sisters have unknowingly become pawns of Wall Street and the US Chamber of Commerce open border propaganda machine,” commented Frank Morris, civil rights leader and member of Californians for Population Stabilization.  “They’re labeling slower immigration policies racist when less immigration would mean more jobs and better wages for minorities in California.” Morris continued, “People need to realize that Wall Street wants more immigration so there are more of us competing against each other for jobs.  That keeps wages low and corporate profits high.”

As the California primary has approached, protests have proliferated throughout the state with much of demonstrator’s ire directed at Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and his inflammatory comments many have labeled racist.  Demonstrators have also conflated Trump’s rhetoric with his proposed policy of reducing mass immigration, calling slower immigration policies racist.

Morris commented, “Donald Trump is dead wrong to make sweeping generalizations about specific groups and should be admonished if not repudiated for doing so.  But people need to recognize that the policy of reducing mass immigration has merit.  It’s not racist to put the job interests of American workers first. That’s just common sense.  It would be nice if Hillary and Bernie stepped up and called for less low skilled foreign workers, not more.”

Both Clinton and Sanders support amnesty for eleven million illegal aliens.  Both support President Obama’s executive actions for millions here illegally, giving them legal authorization to compete for American jobs.   And both Clinton and Sanders have promised to double down on President Obama’s executive actions if elected.

“Traditionally, our Democratic leaders have stood up for working class Americans but in this case, Clinton and Sanders policies would hurt African Americans and Hispanic Americans,” commented Morris.

As of April 2016, more than one million Californians were still unemployed with hundreds of thousands more under-employed or having given up looking for work.  And while the state’s overall unemployment rate has been improving, African Americans and Hispanic Americans aren’t faring as well as whites.   In 4Q 2015, the unemployment rate for African Americans was 10.9%, Hispanic Americans 7.2% and whites 4.4%.  Californiacontinues to have one of the highest African American unemployment rates in the country.

“How can our leaders call for more immigration, more foreign workers when millions of Americans still can’t find jobs?” asked Morris.

To learn more, visit CAPSWeb.org.

RELATED VIDEO: Was an Endless Flow of Immigrant Workers who Take Jobs and Suppress Wages Dr. King’s Dream?

Undoing the Damage of the Obama Regime: Disproportionate Discipline in Education

Certain students see themselves as “untouchable.” Oklahoma City Schools and other school districts forced to adopt the Department of Education’s “steps of action” can expect similar outcomes. As others have pointed out, all students, including minority students, are harmed when criminals and criminals-in-the-making are allowed to control our schools. One civics lesson students need to learn is that under our system of justice, the punishment fits the crime, not the race. That should be the policy of the next administration. The next attorney general should lift the diktats and restore justice in our schools.

On April 20, the U.S. Department of Education announced that it had reached an agreement with the Oklahoma City Public Schools to “address disproportionate discipline of black students.”  In chilling language, the press release stated, “Before the Department’s Office for Civil Rights had completed its probe, the district expressed an interest in resolving the case voluntarily.”

The school district was “voluntarily” resolving the case after feds charged that “black students were considerably overrepresented in all of the district’s disciplinary actions.”  They found that in the 2014/2015 school year black students accounted for 42 percent of in-school suspensions even though they represented only 26 percent of the population. Patterns of discrimination were also alleged for 2011/2012.

An early signal of this backwards thinking came on February 25, 2012, when Eric Holder, then Attorney General, gave a speech advancing the “school-to-prison pipeline” theory that claims that higher rates of punishment, which are due to racism, lead to higher drop-out and imprisonment rates. In January 2014 he put school districts on notice with a memo that stated that it is a violation of federal law to punish certain races more than others.  A particularly Orwellian section read, “Schools also violate Federal law when they evenhandedly implement facially neutral policies and practices that, although not adopted with the intent to discriminate, nonetheless have an unjustified effect of discriminating against students on the basis of race.”  In other words, in defiance of logic, the “effect,” the statistical outcome, can determine whether policies were neutral or just “facially neutral.”

Such an argument would be a hard sell with obvious and serious crimes, such as assault.  So the Department focuses on violations that are minor and open to interpretation.  The memo asked school officials to give a second look to such offenses as “being tardy to class, being in possession of a cellular phone, being found insubordinate, acting out, or not wearing the proper school uniform.”

The Department also charged Oklahoma City Schools with lack of clarity on “parameters of certain disciplinary actions . . . such as ‘defiance of authority’ and ‘disrespect.’”

Such infractions can fall under the category of “willful defiance,” which a number of school districts in California are eliminating as a category for punishment. The Daily Caller reported in May 2015 that Oakland schools were joining a number of other California districts in lessening or eliminating punishment for such behavior as ignoring or swearing at teachers, sleeping, or texting.

As part of its “voluntary” compliance agreement, the Oklahoma City school district has agreed to take “twelve steps of action,” including hiring a “discipline supervisor” and expert advisors; training staff, students, and parents; and making other efforts to change school “climate.”  “Resources” for “positive discipline” are offered at the Office of Civil Rights’ “Rethink Discipline” website.  It, however, only provides links to videos and left-wing groups.  One, Teachers Unite, promotes “restorative justice,” a practice that often involves a lot of talking and “apologies.”

The Link to Black Lives Matter

The basis for such harmful policies—the idea that black students are punished disproportionately because of their race—is not borne out by the evidence.  A 2014 study in the Journal of Criminal Justice showed that suspensions were given on the basis of students’ behavior.

It is radical groups, like the Black Lives Matter movement, that are providing the charges, according to A.P.Dillon, a North Carolina blogger, researcher, and writer.  She exposes the agents promoting the “school-to-prison” pipeline theory, a term coined by radical sociology professor Nancy Heitzag in 2009.

Dillon has been writing about a case in Wake County.  In January 2014, the North Carolina NAACP, the ACLU, and several “school to prison” groups filed suit against Wake County Schools and the Wake County Sheriffs alleging a “pattern of discrimination and unlawful criminalization.”

In an April 15, 2016, blog post on a public hearing on school discipline, Dillon provided additional information on the left-wing groups that provide the “statistics” behind the complaints.  These include Youth Organizing Institute, NC HEAT, Education Justice Alliance, Dignity in Schools, and Coalition of Concerned Citizens for African-American Children. The students who make the complaints have been indoctrinated and radicalized by such student groups as NC Student Power Union, remnants of Occupy Chapel Hill, the Southern Vision Alliance, NC HEAT, and Youth Organizing Institute.

I wanted to know who brought charges in Oklahoma City and how many schools are being investigated, but received no reply to multiple telephone calls and emails to the Department of Education.

The Outcomes?

What will the outcomes be?

We can get a foretaste from Minneapolis schools, whose superintendant, Valeria Silva, led the way.  Silva sees “defiance, disrespect, and disruption” as “subjective behaviors.”  In 2011, the district adopted a “Strong Schools, Strong Communities” plan that replaced suspension for “continual willful disobedience” with “restorative justice.” For $2 million, “diversity” consultant Pacific Educational Group taught teachers that their “white privilege” distorted their judgment.

The result, as Katherine Kersten reports, is that certain students see themselves as “untouchable.”  High school students, who come to school only for the free breakfasts, lunches, and WiFi, roam uncontrolled through hallways.  They invade classrooms, riot, and body-slam teachers.  In elementary schools, students spew obscenities, knock over chairs and trash cans, and attack each other, as teachers stand by helplessly.

Oklahoma City Schools and other school districts forced to adopt the Department’s “steps of action” can expect similar outcomes.  As others have pointed out, all students, including minority students, are harmed when criminals and criminals-in-the-making are allowed to control our schools.

One civics lesson students need to learn is that under our system of justice, the punishment fits the crime, not the race.

That should be the policy of the next administration.  The next attorney general should lift these diktats and restore justice in our schools.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research website.

Census Bureau: Illegal immigration has surged by 57%

Today, President Obama said “Right now, the number of people trying to cross our border illegally is near its lowest level in forty years.”

These are the current immigration rates according to the latest data culled from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey by the Center for Immigration Studies:

  • Legal immigration: 1 million per year
  • Illegal immigration: 550,000 per year

immigration under obama

“Census: Illegal immigration up 57% to 550,000, one new Albuquerque A YEAR”
Washington Examiner

The report dispels projections that immigration — legal and illegal — would drop due to a pull back in immigrants from Mexico. Instead, it has grown with new countries in Latin America, Cuba and Asia fueling the surge, said the CIS report titled, “New Data: Immigration Surged in 2014 and 2015.”

“New Data: Immigration Surged in 2014 and 2015”
Center for Immigration Studies

At the same time as illegal immigration has increased, the number of new permanent legal visas issued overseas and long-term temporary immigration (e.g. guest workers and foreign students) have also increased somewhat. We estimate that 2.03 million new legal immigrants entered in 2013 and 2014, compared to 1.6 million in 2012 and 2013.

“Immigration figures highest since Clinton; new arrivals less likely from Mexico”
Washington Times

“The idea that somehow the era of mass immigration is over is wrong,” said Steven A. Camarota, a demographer and research director at the center. “Basically, a decline from Mexico has been replaced by increases from elsewhere.”

“Legal and Illegal Immigration Surges Over Past Two Years”
Breitbart

The 3.1 million new arrivals of 2014 and 2015 represent a dramatic increase compared to the prior two years when 2.3 million entered in 2012 and 2013.

“U.S. Immigration at 15-Year High With 3 Million Arrivals Over the Past Two Years”
MRCtv

CIS estimates that about 1.1 million legal immigrants and 550,000 new illegal aliens settled in the United States annually in 2014 and 2015.

“U.S. Census Data: 57 Percent Increase in Illegal Immigration in Two Years
The New American

The report attributed the increase in immigration to several factors, including cutbacks in border and immigration enforcement, an improved economy (which attracts more immigrants), and the “expansive nature” of our legal immigration system (especially for long-term temporary visas such as guest workers and foreign students).

“CIS: Immigration Levels Increased 39% in Last Two Years”
NumbersUSA

This immigration increase can be attributed to lack of interior enforcement, the Obama administration’s catch and release policy for border apprehensions, and anincrease in temporary worker visas passed by Congress in last year’s omnibus bill.

“New Analysis: 3.1 Million Immigrants Arrived Over the Past 2 Years”
Conservative Review

What this report also demonstrates is that illegal immigration is increasing precisely during the most protracted rise in legal immigration. Apologists for illegal immigration often contend that this odious phenomenon is a symptom of not allowing in enough people through legal channels. The reality is the opposite: the more we make America the prime destination for millions of people from third world countries the more people will be incentivized to leave their desperate straits and join their family members at all costs.

“Illegal immigration has exploded 57% in less than two years with at least 550,000 new illegal aliens pouring into US”
NumbersUSA tweet (with chart)

“How could the lack of legal immigration be the cause of illegal immigration when legal imm. is at an all time high?”
Daniel Horowitz tweet

“GRAPH: Immigration (Legal and Illegal) Surged in 2014-2015 (in millions)”
CIS tweet

“Well, so much for the “immigration wave is over” narrative.”
Mark Krikorian tweet

RELATED ARTICLES: 

The Face of Evil: Surveying the ISIS Killing Fields in Northern Iraq

1 Year After Steinle Death, San Francisco Unveils Immigration Policy Keeping ‘Sanctuary’ Protections

Georgia: Muslim woman in burqa attacks family with American flag

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is Gabriella Garcia holding a sign with “la lucha es de todos”, which translated means “the struggle is everything”, outside of a political rally for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump rally in Dallas, Texas 0n September 14, 2015. A man holds a sign “America sin Trump” translates to “America without Trump”. Photo: REUTERS/Mike Stone.

Nuit Debout: Up All Night[Mare]

According to the calendar established by the Nuit Debout [standing up all night] movement, today would be the 78th of May; the world began on the 31st of March when protestors against a lukewarm labor reform bill set up shop at Place de la République to formulate a new world. Labor reform is a sure fire spark for mobilizing the masses here in France where Marxist economics is as solid as the paving stones that are thrown at the police. According to the latter day French Marxists, the common people have been crushed under the heel of unbridled capitalism ever since…. the end of WW2… or maybe since the 19th century. The last straw, they claim, is this attempt by a nominally Socialist government to deliver the working class (which now includes almost everyone) into the jaws of finance, management, and globalization. Did the Hollande government hope the bill would be swallowed by naming it after the recently appointed Labor Minister, Myriam el Khomri? It didn’t work.

Initially, free market capitalists had a favorable opinion of the proposed reform that would have introduced a bit of flexibility in labor relations. But the idea that small companies would more readily hire if they could more easily lay off workers when business was bad is poison to the Marxist-Leninists. It would reduce the already beleaguered employees to servitude, they declare. And they won’t allow it.

As is its wont, the government diluted the bill, losing support from the right while energizing opposition at the far left of its shaky majority. Debate in the Assembly was axed by the “49.3” option that gives deputies the choice of accepting the bill or bringing down the government. The opposition’s no-confidence motion didn’t pass. The rebellious faction of the majority was only two votes short of submitting its own no confidence motion. One more instance of getting nowhere fast.

The real action was in the streets, where the el Khomri bill served as a handy pretext for the burgeoning convergence of revolts. Branded as a refreshing ex nihilo creation of youthful idealists, Nuit Debout attracted abundant media attention. Our own little Place Tahrir! Journalists love to fraternize with these populist manifestations…unless and until they turn on the media, punch them in the face, smash their cameras and mikes. Enthusiastic uncritical coverage is their best option for maintaining safe access. Nothing is better than youth for branding a movement. Witness the image of Aylan drowned on a Turkish beach that opened Western nations to a battering ram of physically fit young men of combat age that pushed their way up from Greece to Germany in the summer of 2015 [see the Humanitarian Jihad chapter in Black Flag].

The media concocted a flattering trendy image of Nuit Debout by a combination of clever camera angles and judicious choices of unofficial spokespersons, relayed by commentators and public opinion all the way from the president to the average citizen. Most of whom had not set foot in the occupied square. Days and nights went by without producing a single quotable Great Idea, but the aura of a touching search for higher truth, greater social justice, a more perfect democracy was maintained. The proof was in the numbers: night after night, Nuit Debout enthusiastically filled the Square. Who cared if “up all night” was a giant nuisance for people living around the Place de la République, bashed by high decibel techno concerts from dusk to dawn?

When thuggish violence hitched on to the bandwagon it was dismissed as opportunistic mischief, on the margins of the real thing: folkloric booths, sloppy graffiti, grimy tents, and the pretentious General Assemblies. Emerging at midnight from the entrails of Nuit Debout, “smashers” attacked the police for hours on end with iron bars, rocks, glass bottles, firebombs…  Self-proclaimed as an open to the winds movement with no leaders, no vertical structure, Nuit Debout, the ultimate in “participative democracy,” was excused of responsibility for the “marginal” elements that attack the police and destroy public & private property, particularly banks. Disclaimed by some but not all of the moderates, the masked men of the armed branch slip in and out of the conglomerate, expressing with blunt objects the verbal hostility of Nuit Debout rhetoric. Hundreds of policemen have been injured, some critically. When asked if they condemn the violence, unofficial spokespersons give Mohamed Abbas type answers: I condemn all violence, the violence of unemployment, the violence of globalization, discrimination, income inequality, the violence of police brutality, disproportionate force… Nothing is their fault. When a homeless man stabbed a fellow-in-misery “on the margins” of a Nuit Debout General Assembly in Bordeaux, they said “He’s not us. The homeless come because there’s a free meal.” There are commissions on housing, legal aid, what have you, but a real creepy homeless thug doesn’t belong.

Opposition to the el Khomri labor law was the spark; revolution becomes the goal. There is nothing the current government could do to satisfy the hunger of these jusqu’au boutistes sitting cross-legged on the cold paving of Place de la République a few meters from the makeshift memorial to the victims of jihad murders. Nuit Debout by the light of day is not a pretty sight. Around the pedestal of Marianne, the symbol of the French Republic, flowers and candles have been replaced by heavy handed slogans, posters, declarations, and threats from the bitter-enders. Clusters of layabouts, neither young nor idealistic nor visibly dreaming of a beautiful new world, sprawl at the feet of the Republic, drinking and scowling. Up close and real, the occupation is a sad spectacle of vintage revolt, a convergence of lost causes driven by an occult leadership of middle aged losers that can’t get 1% of the vote in free and fair democratic elections, and a rising bunch of ambitious new firebrands manipulating a small core of earnest seekers of truth and a bright future. Pauperized college graduates and young professionals, under-skilled lower middle class job seekers floundering in a depressed economy, adolescents embarking on life’s adventure, bobos thirsty for social justice, non-starters haunted by the specter of unemployment are drawn into a farcical replay of outworn platitudes.

It’s political pedophilia, this convergence of every retrograde movement — communists, anarchists, apartment squatters, and a long list of antis: globalization, private property, war, weapons, capitalism,-rubbing up the misguided energies of young justice-seekers. Branded as fresh, new, and hopeful Nuit Debout is a rehash of all that has failed.

April 16: To my knowledge, the only person who was aggressively kicked off the Nuit Debout occupied premises, is Alain Finkielkraut, philosopher, writer, member of the Academy, and Jewish. I had made a tour of Place de la République earlier that day. The first thing I saw was BDS Queen Olivia Zemor and her little princes decked out in green Boycott Israel t-shirts with sparkling clean keffieh around their necks milling around the shiny green BDS truck decorated with Israeli atrocity photos. To the extent that any factual statement can be made about Nuit Debout, they have apparently welcomed BDS into the fold of convergent causes. By the light of day the heart of this brave new world is a sorry sight. Stupid graffiti all over: on the paving, the newly installed massive wood benches, the street lamps, the fancy metro entrance, and the Marianne itself. Sloppy makeshift booths in the style of the Calais “jungle” with less imaginative graphics. The place reeks of piss, marijuana, and imposture. Shop windows around the square and down the adjoining streets are tagged, cracked and/or boarded up. The terrace of the 4-star Crowne Plaza Holiday Inn is deserted, a glass partition is smashed. Every morning, municipal workers come and clean up the mess.

On January 11, 2015, millions of Parisian people stood up (= debout) against jihad. In November, 130 people were murdered in the vicinity of Place de la République; the spontaneous standing up was not possible, because the president declared a state of emergency. People came anyway, left candles, flowers, and scrawled messages. The nation was dumbstruck, the government appeared to be resolute. What has become of the popular resolve and President Hollande’s solemn promise to defend the nation? Though much has been done, often out of the public eye, to dismantle the jihadist cells, political squabbling weakened the sense of resolve. Under pressure from the far left of the fragile Socialist majority, the promised measures were diluted and went down the tubes. Then, protests against the labor reform bill took center stage. Literally, at Place de la République. Effectively turning its back on resistance against jihad violence.

Squatting the memorial square, the pretentious movement that is supposedly imagining a better world, deliberately ignores the immediate and present danger of Islamic conquest. Daesh isn’t the enemy. It doesn’t even exist in their world view. The enemy is the capitalist, the financier, and representative democracy. They are against the state of emergency like the labor reform bill; it’s only purpose, they claim, is to repress us. The amorphous conglomerate of movements describes itself as pacifist while stimulating and generating violence that mobilizes and attacks law enforcement. Despite the nightly pitched battles with the police, the Occupation is authorized by an indulgent government.

This retrograde social protest serves as a vector for the mistreatment and humiliation of the police that we must rely on to protect us from the next jihad attack. Hundreds of thugs bash, burn, and pound; a handful of are arrested every night. Most, we can assume, will escape with light or no punishment. TV broadcasts show these battles, police on the run for hours on end, unable to stop the destruction, holding up their shields against rocks and paving stones. Hooded masked (often with keffieh) thugs running wild, triumphant, fearless. And many “legitimate demonstrators” staying on the scene, walking in and among these fights, making no attempt to stop the thugs.

In a nation of over 66 million, with free elections, free press, and all the liberties that go with it, a shapeless conglomerate, a miniscule minority claiming to express the will of the people, arrogant young men and women sit in a public square and demand immediate compliance. Offered a microphone, one after the other, they parrot the same tweet-format declaration: we demand the immediate withdrawal of the bill. No modifications, no negotiations.

And, what a coincidence, to find BDS among the sour notes. On the 15th of May, its popularity flagging, Nuit Debout picked up steam with a world-wide celebration of the 5-year anniversary of Podemos, an outgrowth of los Indignados of the Puerta del Sol in Madrid. The French version, les Indignés, was inspired by a thin bestselling treatise by the late Stéphane Hessel whose major target of indignation was the State of Israel. Olivier Besancenot, another recycled agitator dug up by the media to praise Nuit Debout, is the former presidential candidate of the toothless New Anti-capitalist Party that provided cover for the pro-jihad anti-Jewish stampedes in the summer of 2014, when the black flag of jihad was flown on the Marianne. Student leaders in these protest movements often work their way up in the leftist ranks. Julien Bayou of the Green Party, deputy mayor of Paris, active in the Jeudi Noir apartment squatters commando, was on board the Gaza flotilla a few years ago.

Today, May 18th, police unions demonstrated all over France. Since Nuit Debout converged with the trade unions on May Day, strikes, demonstrations, and violence have spread and intensified.  As could be expected, the smashers also turn against the trade union security details. More than 300 policemen have been injured, some critically. In Nantes, 5 or 6 thugs jumped on an isolated policeman as he stepped out of his patrol car. They knocked him down, tore off his helmet, and smashed him in the face and head with iron bars. One 18 year-old has been charged with attempted murder in that case.

After six weeks of constant humiliation of law enforcement, the Police Chief is determined to show the appropriate severity. He announced that 40 individuals have been banned from certain arrondissements where labor unions will be demonstrating this week. Isn’t this pathetic? Isn’t it pathetic when the men and women who are supposedly standing ready to counter the next jihadist onslaught are reduced to congregating right there, at Place de la République, to beg for a bit of consideration?

The collective “Urgence: notre police assasine” requested authorization for a counter demonstration under the nose of the police unions. The request was turned down. So they came anyway. Several hundred. Turned away from Place de la République they gathered nearby in front of the Bourse de Travail, where they scuffled with police before marching toward the Quai de Valmy on the St. Martin canal. A patrol car returning from a mission that had nothing to do with today’s demonstration, innocently driving along the Quai, triggered the rage of the collective against police brutality. A woman who witnessed the scene said, “They were angry, they saw the police car, it was like a red rag in front of a bull.”

They started hammering the car with iron bars, smashed open the windows, tried but failed to grab the cops out of the car, smashed the rear window, and threw a firebomb into the car. The policeman and woman managed to escape without getting their heads smashed. They were armed, explained the Police Chief, but they did not use their weapons because they did not want to kill anyone.

Daesh distributes its atrocity videos, and our newscasts dispay the humiliation of law enforcement. Won’t our aspiring local jihadists relish these scenes broadcast daily on French television? Aren’t they drooling at the sight of that flaming car, those smashed windows, those bashed ATMs, those hefty paving stones and murderous iron bars?  Can you hear their sneering laughter at the sight of the earnest young and not so young, sitting on the pavement as if it were desert sands, repeating outworn slogans and lost in magical thinking?  Sitting ducks!

PS: One of the Nuit Debout non-leaders (nothing is vertical in their ideal world), François Ruffin, a journalist from Amiens (we say “the provinces”), editor & chief bottle washer of a magazine called Fakir (pronounced Fa-Keer in French), inspired by Michael Moore, made a “direct action” (in the words of another non-leader, Frédéric Lordon of Le Monde Diplomatique) film, Merci Patron, showing how he tricked Bernard Arnault, CEO of LVMH, into giving €45,000 to a couple of workers that had been ruined when LVMH delocalized the production of Kenzo suits from France to Poland, then to Bulgaria and soon to Greece. Ruffin, who says the suits cost €30 to make and sell for €900, made a profit of €500,000 on the film. In a recent issue of Fakir, Ruffin quotes at great length his comrade Iglesias of Podemos who, in turn, praises to the heavens his role model: Lenin. It all adds up!

Nidra Poller is an American novelist and journalist living in Paris since 1972. She publishes regularly in the Wall Street Journal Europe, New English Review, and other outlets.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Family Security Matters. Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

Radical anti-Trump Illegal Immigrant Voter Activation Committee Formed

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced the launch of a new voter activation committee ‘Building Bridges, Not Walls‘. Its purposes is “to combat the anti-immigrant policies that will no doubt be included in the national Republican Party platform and be exploited by GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump.”

“Building Bridges, Not Walls is about Californians rising to the occasion and fighting for candidates and policies that will move America forward,” Villaraigosa said. “Californians want to step up and respond in every way possible to protect our families, friends and neighbors from the threat of Donald Trump’s scapegoating anti-immigrant politics. I am proud that the people of California are so generous in their giving to campaigns and causes, but we have more to offer than just our pocket books. We have the power of passionate people who will engage on a person-to-person level to mobilize and turnout people to vote.”

Antonio Villaraigosa

Antonio Villaraigosa

According to Discover The Networks:

At a 1996 Latino and Immigrant Rights rally in Washington, DC, Villaraigosa shared the stage with Augustine Cebeda, “Minister of Information” for the radical Latino group The Brown Berets of Aztlan. Cebeda was known for having stated, in the past: “Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out [of the U.S. Southwest]! We [Mexicans] are the future…. You old white people, it is your duty to die.”

An advocate of racial preferences and welfare benefits for illegal aliens, Villaraigosa said in 1997:

“Part of today’s reality has been propositions like 187 [to deny welfare benefits to California’s illegal aliens], propositions like 209 [to abolish racial preferences in California’s public sector], the welfare reform bill [of 1996], which targeted legal immigrants and targeted us as a community…. Today in California in the legislature, we’re engaged in a great debate, where not only were we talking about denying education to the children of undocumented workers, but now we’re talking about whether or not we should provide prenatal care to undocumented mothers. It’s not enough to elect Latino leadership. If they’re supporting legislation that denies the undocumented driver’s licenses, they don’t belong in office, friends…. If they can’t stand up and say, ‘You know what? I’m not ever going to support a policy that denies prenatal care to the children of undocumented mothers,’ they don’t belong here.”

[ … ]

Villaraigosa’s first act as L.A. mayor was to require all government employees under his jurisdiction to sign an ethics pledge. Meanwhile, rumors of Villaraigosa’s own marital infidelity had been circulating for years. In July 2007 he finally admitted to an affair with Mirthala Salinas, a television reporter for the Spanish-language network Telemundo. The affair constituted not only an ethical problem in the mayor’s personal life, but also a political conflict of interest in light of the fact that Salinas’ employer, NBC Universal, was campaigning for the authorization of a $3 billion development plan for which it needed Villaraigosa’s approval.

During a series of mass immigration rallies in the spring of 2007, Villaraigosa sided with the protesters who were demanding expanded rights and privileges for illegal aliens. At a May 1 rally in Los Angeles, unruly demonstrators hurled makeshift projectiles — including rocks, sticks, frozen water bottles, and bottles filled with urine — at police officers, who eventually were ordered to end the rally and to arrest anyone engaging in violence. In the process of trying to quell the mayhem, the police officers at the scene suffered more injuries than did the protesters. But three days later, Villaraigosa addressed another crowd of pro-immigration activists at MacArthur Park in Los Angeles, telling them, in Spanish, that he condemned the manner in which the L.A.P.D. had dealt with the May 1 situation, and he accused the officers of having broken up the rally without cause.

In 2008 Villaraigosa served as a co-chairman of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign.

The campaign will begin by targeting voters in Arizona, Florida, Nevada and Colorado, but will direct its efforts towards “wherever it is needed to stop Trump.”

Villaraigosa stated, “Building Bridges, Not Walls is about standing up and saying, ‘Enough!’ We will help mobilize the passion we see in Californians who say ‘No!’ to Trump and direct it – through calls, texts and emails – towards swing states where it matters most.”

It appears that Democrats have drawn a line in the sand on immigration. Their position for the November 2016 presidential election is open borders, or else.

RELATED ARTICLE: San Jose protesters attack Trump supporters with punches, eggs