Nah no need, plus the Malaysian societal model shows how mass immigration can take place, create great economic wealth via cheap labour and not displace the natives permanently as long as the migrants are limited to the urban centres and do not take over the country. It still leads to tension, but less so, they only had about two or three race riots (that's in the past, not likely to happen in the future) and severe endemic corruption (past, present and future, caused by wealthy minorities without political power and political majorities without economic power sharing the same space), which is actually a lot better than they could be doing considering they've been very close or jumped in and out of civil wars and coups. Also they're getting more religiously conservative, but they're still not attacking non-Muslims for now so they're still moderate.
And integration is something that is pretty inevitable for as long as you maintain a majority with migrants who are not isolated and who actually want to integrate, and have something to integrate into. There's two big problems I see, with those who view their countries of destination as sheep to be harvested and those who view them with outright enmity. Malaysians would not mind little Chinatown Britcommunes anymore than they already have them, but if Brits arrived in their millions and started attacking their Islam for not being toleran enough, stealing their shit and enriching their schoolgirls, true jimmy rustling would begin
Also more race riots
It's hilarious to read about how about over 50 years ago the Malay and Hakka were arguing over whether they should protect Malay privilege
WHY DIDN'T THEY CHECK IT
Sounds bad on paper and it is, but again it could be much worse, like in Indonesia where the race riots turned into race war and their Chinese got genocided and their perps are still in power
http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21667969-floundering-government-risks-igniting-ethnic-tensions-playing-fireSheeeit is tense though. Oh, yeah and on that note of British colonial migration strategies - Malaysia is one of those interesting examples, as I suspect the British strategies have been studied well by the likes of Russia and the EU (not surprising given how many are educated in the UK). For continents like Australia and North America the strategy was pretty simple, displacement and devolution, mass settling of Europeans and displacement of the natives to create a new state with new people, and devolution to stop them from seeking full political independence like the Americans. That one has been in use by humanity since the Babylonians. With India, given how much the people of the Indian continent outnumbered the British the British adopted the strategy the Mughals used and perfected it, using local rivalries, cultural differences (of which there are immense quantities), caste and religious differences e.t.c.
Basically exploit fracture points to maintain division whilst privileging certain groups over others. Like in Cyprus where the Greek Cypriots were put under the charge of the Turkish minority; divide and rule. And today's Western political doctrine is nearly exclusively about exploiting fracture points, pitting woman against man, BAME against Yuropoor, homo toleran against hetero toleran, Palestinians are oppressed supporters vs Jews are oppressed supporters e.t.c.
The only politicians who rise above his are el teflon juan banterist civic nationalists who give zero fucks and smooth over the fracture points the same way Indian nationalism bound so many different people together under one common ambition.
In regards to Malaysia in particular, with the British influence in southern China and their rule over parts of India (and later most), in order to feed labour demands in Malaysia, the British encouraged Indian and Chinese migration to Malaya (as an aside, I am amused reading reports written 200 years ago by British observers believing that Africa would not in fact ultimately belong to Europe or even to Africa, but in fact belong to China once the Chinese emerged from their cultural darkness that treated original thought as an offence. Today they have emerged, and their predictions ring true). This migration was pretty much for straight economic exploitation of cheap labour from people from strict, regimented and orderly societies (self-policing), much in the same way that the EU argued for mass immigration to create a cheap migrant underclass for economic exploitation. But the British Rajahs were of the mindset that they had to protect the natives who had entrusted them with their Kingdom from exploitation, so importing workers was clearly (I seriously don't get this argument?) a better alternative. The thing about that though is that as urban environments increasingly became more important than the countryside, all the Chinese and Indian workers who were formerly given little more regard than Russian serfs, had now become a wealthy mercantile class with advanced Western education, job diversification and social advancement. By the time Malaya became independent there was a large wealth discrepancy between the affluent, skilled and highly educated minorities vs the rural, relatively poorer, traditionalist, islamist natives with all the political power. You can see where that's going, same situation as poor Germans with political power and wealthy Jews without, poor Turks with political power and wealthy Christians without e.t.c.
But it all turned out better than expected and it gave the world Singapore, so yay.
So then looking at the EU what are they doing? Well for starters they're a part of the movements that advocate abandoning your roots and reforging Europe into one state, one people with the mentality Rolepgeek summarized well:
"Tradition can go to hell. Forge a new tradition, damn it. Forge a new one with every generation."
But by attacking its roots, the EU loses its claim to being European and so there is no convergence point the same way the Indians were capable of moving past religious, language and cultural barriers to form one united Indian state. If they had waited and had proved competent and caring for the welfare of Europeans they very well could have got to the point where people did not call them the Commission, but instead called
us simply "Europe." But they fucked up.
Encumbered by nationalism the Commission has either ignored them and continued with mass immigration or pursued it as a direct attempt at reducing the nationalists to irrelevance by playing the numbers game with displacement, gambling on migrants lending them their support based off of carefully controlled identity politics. That was certainly the strategy adopted by Labour in the United Kingdom as an attempt to divorce themselves from their working class vote and an attempt to permanently sever the right wing's ability to rule the country, only it resulted in Labour losing both the migrant and working class vote and I don't see the EU not falling for the same mistake. That's the problem with complacency and luxury, you take it all for granted, whilst migrants and the working class had to claw for every inch of ground they gained. It's long been joked that rich purple-haired white girls should be glad that their marxist revolution can't happen, as they'd be first to have their assets repo'd by Commissar Cletus and Jamal. The big EU pillars raise their children to have no loyalty to anything (and if you're really poz'd begin teaching marxist narratives whilst they're young), their parents raise their children to have no loyalty to anything (if they raise them at all or are not just a broken, divorced family because even husband and wife have no loyalty) and so their children grow up without guidance and with serious identity issues (gotta get that while guilt Sweden for all the Finngolians you killed) in an environment full of people who have families, have their traditions, have strong work ethics, strong morals and ambitions unbridled by a fear of their own success. These children will see three paths to walk, suicide, joining the progresiv bandwagon or taking the strong horse offered by migrant conservatives. Just look at who the converts are in Germany, France of UK - they all have commonality in being mostly white, mostly young, mostly women, mostly repulsed by how their own culture offers them nothing but sexual and substance degeneracy alongside vapid materialism.
Speaking from personal experience there's nothing more hilarious than seeing an American drinking beer in an East London bar in a room full of peeps drinking coke - the only thing more hilarious is then seeing that dankyank try to peer pressure em into drinking
All you're doing is making a future in which your children are undisciplined, have no culture, no identity, no community, no morals or ethics, no faith, philosophy or creed, cannot even take refuge in being a majority anymore and cannot compete with newcomers who have achieved more - yet must compete. Loads of unaccomplished youths with no identities and nothing to live for can turn sour pretty quickly. What if the bread and circuses end?
Author
Topic: The friendly and polite Europe related terrible jokes thread (Read 1104136 times)