Fingers in the Dyke: Dutch Fear Rising Ethnic Tensions
From the desk of Paul Belien on Sun, 2007-01-14 22:02
The Netherlands may soon witness an outburst of ethnic violence. An official report published last Wednesday states that “tensions between various ethnic and cultural groups of youths are seriously underestimated.” The report points out that the Dutch authorities fail to grasp the gravity of the problem. It warns the government in The Hague that if nothing is done the country will soon witness situations similar to those in France. There violent clashes, which erupted in late 2005, have led to the police abandoning immigrant suburbs to gangs of Muslim youths, who have now taken over effective control of more than 750 French urban neighborhoods.
Following the 2004 assassination of Theo van Gogh by a young Moroccan immigrant the Dutch minister of Integration, Rita Verdonk, installed four so-called “intervention teams for interethnic tensions.” The teams are made up of social workers whose task it is to advise local authorities on ways to deal with groups of unassimilated and criminal youths. In major Dutch cities many of the young people are not of indigenous Dutch extraction. In Amsterdam 55% of those under18 are immigrants, mainly Moroccan, Turkish or Antillean (West Indian). In Rotterdam the number has surpassed 50%. Everywhere this percentage is rising dramatically. Dutch society has failed to inculcate the children of immigrants with Dutch values. Perhaps the latter was simply impossible. There are 1 million Muslims on a total of 16 million inhabitants in the Netherlands. At over 6% of the population this is proportionally the largest Muslim immigrant population of all Western nations, except for France which has 6 million Muslims on a total of 60 million inhabitants. The Muslims are younger than the indigenous population and tend to be concentrated in the cities.
Dick Corporaal, the coordinating president of the intervention teams, told Dutch national radio on Wednesday that “multicultural tensions between youths threaten to lead to an uncontrollable situation.” He warned that the problem is not restricted to cities but is also beginning to affect towns in the more rural areas. “The municipal authorities have no idea about what is going on,” Corporaal said about the rising tension. He advised the government to devote more funds to youth work and to increase the number of intervention teams. He also accused the local authorities of treating all troublesome youths similarly, while according to him different approaches are needed when confronting the various groups: Moroccans, Antilleans, Turks and “Lonsdale youths” [The latter are indigenous Dutch hooligans]. Corporaal also emphasized that each ethnic group itself is not homogeneous and should not be dealt with as such.
The intervention teams recommend an expansion of the social worker approach to defuse the situation. This is a typically Dutch way of doing things, which is widely applied, even among Dutch troops in Afghanistan who prefer to have tea with the Taliban rather than fight them. Last year the police of The Hague sent officers on a “cultural training” trip to Morocco because, as Gerard Bouman, the The Hague police chief (who has meanwhile been promoted to head of the Dutch state security services), said, “Criminal Moroccan youths […] do not behave like indigenous Dutch. They rave about Moroccan culture. Hence, we have to know the latter, too.” In Morocco, the Dutch police officers discovered that their Moroccan colleagues were astonished to hear that the Dutch have problems with criminal Moroccan youths. In Morocco officers are known to beat the hell out of criminals.
Corporaal’s recommendations, however, do not seem to go down well with many ordinary native Dutch. A poll conducted by Elsevier, the largest Dutch weekly, indicates that 80% of its readers prefer a “harsh treatment” of troublemaking youths rather than “sending in more multicultural intervention teams.”
Meanwhile, in order to reduce tensions between immigrant youths and white native hooligans, a Dutch high school, the Hoofdvaart College in Hoofddorp, which lies between Amsterdam and Haarlem, has prohibited the wearing of Lonsdale cloths by pupils. Lonsdale is a British clothing brand whose sweaters and jackets are said to be popular with the far right because the brand name includes the letters NSDA, one letter short of NSDAP, the German acronym for Hitler’s Nazi Party. According to the school, wearing Lonsdale is a “provocation and is offensive to others.” Two years ago, however, a report of the Dutch state security services found that the majority of those wearing Lonsdale gear are not far right fanatics.
The official Dutch worries about rising hostility in immigrant communities towards the hitherto predominant culture in the Netherlands are also discernible in the fifth annual report of Tjibbe Joustra, the National Anti-Terrorism Coordinator. Late last month the government submitted the report to the Dutch Parliament. Joustra writes that he is especially worried about the rise in so-called “living room marriages” (informal Islamist weddings conducted at home). This phenomenon is “more widespread” than previously thought, the report says. Last week Joustra’s spokesman said “We knew these weddings occurred in certain circles, but we have indications that they are also on the rise elsewhere.” He referred to a growing group of underage Dutch girls, 16 or 17 years old, who convert to Islam in order to marry young Muslim men with whom they have fallen in love. “The women get isolated from their families. The isolation leads to radicalization.” The report of the National Anti-Terrorism Coordinator says there were a number of “living room marriages” within the Hofstad Group, the circle around Mohammed Bouyeri, Theo van Gogh’s assassin.
Joustra’s report sees the rise of “living room marriages” as one of many indications of the growth of radical Islamism, especially Salafism, in the Netherlands. According to Joustra Salafists are very active among youth groups in the main Dutch cities, but also increasingly in other parts of the country. “We are aware now that young people can radicalize very fast,” Joustra’s spokesman said. “This can happen within a couple of months.”
Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Wed, 2007-01-17 16:20.
You forget that notions of equality, equity, and human rights are derived either directly from Christian tenets or indirectly through the fusion of these principles with the scientific method by philosophers such as Aquinas, Locke, Hobbes, etc. For pre-modern humanity, God held the auctoritas and potestas (at least in eternity) to dictate such rules as "thou shalt not kill," which if implemented purely by human beings, would result in disagreement, debate, and violation.
As with everything, there are pros and cons, and every theory which seeks to gather together all of the positive aspects of its predecessors and ignore the negative ones in a bid at perfection has resulted in horrifying excesses in practice.
Defend Science not mythology
Submitted by Amsterdamsky on Wed, 2007-01-17 11:32.
siegetower - "Defend Christendom. Defend Jewry. Oppose socialism in Europe."
Defend Science not mythology. Religion is the problem not the solution. No religious group supports democracy and freedoms and left to their own designs would install a theocracy in europe again and usher in yet another Dark Ages.
For example the human chimera research ban in Britain flies in the face of science. The arguments banning it are straight from the bible. Anyone that wants to use the bible as a scientific reference for law is either insane or retarded.
In Response to joeu:
Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Tue, 2007-01-16 04:17.
Firstly, changing human migration patterns, multicultural policies, and the internationalization of business are all facets of what we term "globalisation." However, these trends may correlate but do not have a cause-and-effect relationship f.e. free trade does not necessitate open borders; accepting refugees does not necessitate that they do not have to assimilate into their host society.
Secondly, the internationalisation of business activity is almost entirely done by Western corporations and foreign direct investment remains majorily concentrated in North America, Western Europe, and East Asia (e.g. Japan and the NIEs).
Thirdly, while non-Westerners want access to Western living standards and control over Western policy through demographics (i.e. immigration and political activism), it is certainly Westerners that are advocating a global state or a world without borders; it is Western academics who believe that they can transform the entire world into either the United States (liberals) or the European Union (socialists). However, the non-Westerners remain ethnocentric, nationalistic, and supremacist in some cases.
Lastly, while Europe may endure a civil war with its non-White and Muslim population or colonisers, never forget that they are merely acting in the interests of themselves and their communities; the problem is Westerners refusing to act in their own interests.
Response to response
Submitted by joeu on Wed, 2007-01-17 16:36.
Another 'well said' with one note:
"...accepting refugees does not necessitate that they do not have to assimilate into their host society."
The lack of methods to encourage/mandate assimilation (in the US) is more necessary now than in the past waves of immigration. Before, one had no link to the old country whereas now it is a phone call and plane ride away. That there are no mandates is the fault of Western elites refusing to act in their peoples interests.
I quote Bart
Submitted by siegetower on Mon, 2007-01-15 11:37.
I quote Bart Kachelaar: "Mohammed Bouyeri was born in Amsterdam, so he did not actually ever immigrate."
He is not ethnically Dutch. Therefore he is an immigrant by any other measure than the corruptions that are multiculturalism and cultural marxism. Just as if an average Dutch person emigrated to Egypt or Saudi Arabia. They are not ethnically an Arab, a Jew or a Copt, and therefore would be an immigrant. Future generations of their children would also be immigrants, unless they totally integrated and assimilated into the existing society.
Defend Christendom. Defend Jewry. Oppose socialism in Europe.
Multiculturalism vs. Monoculturalism
Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Mon, 2007-01-15 08:12.
The entire globe outside of the European and Western states is engaging in monoculturalism with astonishing aggression considering that extermination camps and gas chambers are not in use. While we may feel sympathetic towards the underdogs, such as the Kosovar Albanians and Bosniaks, it is clear that they are no different than their enemies, they merely lost. Only the West believes that nations and race are non-existent and irrelevant: not to the Chinese, Arab-African militias, Latin American mestizos, etc., etc.
Rather than converting the rest of the world into a unified multicultural state, the West is only converting its own states into depots for the rest of the world's excess population, which then seeks to disenfranchise indigenous Westerners and exploit Western resources for their own individual and group wants, whether it is remittance payments to support their homelands or welfare cheques.
The West is being colonised; for those states that extricated themselves from European colonialism only relatively recently, it is a death knell. Nor are the new colonialists even tied to the West by shared bonds of culture or ancestry. While the world should not be remade in the image of American-imposed liberal democracy like Iraq, Iran, the Central American states, and others, the West has a right to popular national sovereignty and self-determination also.
Submitted by joeu on Mon, 2007-01-15 20:18.
An interesting article about a small village on the Mexican coast described the villagers fight against a new road from being built. The road would greatly increase new development and outside influence with corresponding loss of local control. The villages were set against it because they knew it would destroy their way of life.
Globalization and multiculturalism is a single-minded business affair that creates more power for international overseers and disenfranchises everyone else.
And, as you point out, it is a plague mainly on Europe and the otehr Western states.
Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Mon, 2007-01-15 05:50.
Agreed. The problem has surpassed cultural and jus solis bounds; it is in fact one which is increasingly based upon observable aesthetic differences i.e. race and phenotype.
Submitted by Bart Kachelaar on Mon, 2007-01-15 01:34.
Mohammed Bouyeri was born in Amsterdam, so he did not actually ever immigrate. This is true for most of the "young immigrants" mentioned in this article, which uses the word immigrant as an imprecise translation of the Dutch allochtoon.
This is not just a problem with immigrants; events have already moved beyond that.
The majority of young Dutch
Submitted by Sam Iqbal on Sun, 2007-01-14 23:48.
The majority of young Dutch born immigrants are not religious at all. Infact they are anti-religion. Just as your Lonsdale Youths are only Christian by heritage - same applies to criminals from Turkish and Morrocan backgrounds in Holland and France.