On Gypsies, Jews, Muslims and Violence against the Majority

George Handlery about the week that was. Rejection, quotas, under- and over-achieving minorities. Exploiting refugee status. When cowardice is masked as tolerance. Old procedures for new crimes? Health care, the budget savings and the deficit.

1. The hope of an easily attained good life and ignorance regarding the country and the working of advanced societies attracts large numbers of Gypsies to Canada. At this time, the place of departure is Hungary. With the help of totally distorted reports of the situation prevailing in there and also aided by a skill to say the right things at the right places, the Roma arrive. They travel with tourist visas and upon their arrival, they request refugee status. This is generally refused because Canadian Immigration knows that Hungary, but also the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, etc. are “safe countries”. The Gypsies’ movement-to-paradise is aided and amplified by shady organizations. They feed the eager press with stories of persecution at home while they recruit candidates for export and generously organize their trip. A profit is made as the migrants to the land of milk and honey sell their possessions at a discount. Doing so means burning all bridges to proceed on a road that leads to nowhere. As a result, after their forced return, these “refugees” are totally destitute. Reportedly, Canada is considering the reintroduction of visas – a requirement that had only been suspended a few months ago.

2. With the Gypsies, the countries of central and east central Europe harbor the continent’s most problematic, but by virtue of its numbers most weighty minority. The case of this ethnic group, which, coming from India, had entered, the region in waves before the 15th century is in some ways unique. It differs from the dilemma presented by those groups of the region that dominated for centuries a settled area and where now they might be a majority. The Gypsies have developed an imported exaggerated sense of separateness. Thereby they have been successful in resisting personal and collective integration and settlement. In the eyes of the majority and the Roma community, the many that have integrated have ceased to belong to the minority.

Correctly, the reader might think here of the Jews who have maintained their unique identity for a longer time than the Gypsies had. There is, however, a significant difference. Unlike in the case of the Gypsies, nowhere did those Jews that remained identifiable represent a subculture whose features would have prevented success in a modern setting. Admittedly, the anti-Semites saw a “Jewish problem” and accused the Jews – as do the vocal enemies of the Gypsies – of being bloodsuckers. That, however, is the point where the parallel ends. If Jews were put under pressure it was partly to prevent them – as they managed to do in some now ignored places and instances – from integrating and even assimilating themselves. In modern times, the hostility was fed by the over-achievement of Jews. Accordingly, hostility arose because of the eminent success of Jews to adjust to the consequences of the industrial revolution. Therefore, this resentment was provoked by the collective over-achievement of Jews and their surpassing the accomplishments of the more tradition-bound and less mobile majority. This resentment expressed itself in the passing of quotas that limited the admission of Jews to the universities and curtailed their representation in prestigious professions.

Especially currently, the resentment of Gypsies is not fueled by their over-achievement by those who might feel outsmarted by them. Gypsies are disliked because of their inclination to organize themselves for violence against the majority. Among the charges is that they cultivate a subculture that approves a way of life based upon illegal activities whose target is the majority. Cultural self defense that rejects schooling achieves that the Roma are self-excluded from modern activities. The resulting under achievement finds reinforcement in welfare legislation that rewards failure through the welfare payments.

3. Much is disturbing about the Obama administration’s decision to try in a civil court Islamists terrorist apprehended by the cursed Bushies. For one thing, the justice systems that grew out of the Magna Charta’s tradition, nurtures a prejudice. It is that the government might use courts to intimidate political opponents by prosecuting them. That means that for the accusing state it is made especially hard to prove its – politically suspected – charge. This “bias” is meant to protect normal citizens against the politically motivated charges of government intent to liquidate its critics. Furthermore, such courts are meant for action against normal lawbreakers. They are, therefore, not ideally suited to serve as tribunals that proceed against conspiring political criminals that the terrorists are. By handling caught-in-the-act terrorists as “suspects” in normal cases, the charge brought against them will be more than diminished. Proof will be dismissed, and often, through its scrutiny, it will impair national security. Furthermore, the judgments will handle unusual crimes as though they would be normal misdemeanors. Their point is that those tried are the deluded warriors of their personal war (therapy might be a cure!) that aims at the destruction of our civilization. Giving them the protection meant for chicken thieves implies that the crime, the court and the procedural limitations, are out of tune with reality.

4. Tolerance is one of the most notable product of our civilization and it is worthy of being regarded as a value to be defended. Unfortunately, tolerance is often invoked when something should be protected in order to continue with our way of life – including the practice of tolerance. In these cases, tolerance is devalued to serve as a slogan that masks either confusion or cowardice. Tolerance is often demanded for elements that feel they wage total war against the side that is asked to be tolerant in the face of attacks on its substance. In such cases, tolerance means to be asked, in the name of our own principle by those who reject it, to cooperate with an effort aimed at our destruction.

5. The idea is wide spread that the radical extremism of some Muslims residing in advanced societies is to be ignored. The advocates of this response assume that the upshot of the demonstrated good will and tolerance will be moderation. Naturally, it is true that resistance will anger fundamentalists and they will, therefore, express that sentiment by hostile actions. A “stop and desist” can only be implemented if the propaganda of violence is met with a response whose terms block the jihad. Since we are dealing with misguided fanatics, this will take long and it will demand sacrifice.

6. At last, some good news for the American reader. I hear that the campaign to revise the health insurance system has used the Swiss “sister republic’s” case in its support. Ms Ruth Dreifuss, the Minister in charge of the project has praised her policy in the LA Times. Among other things, the measures implemented by her and the course she advocates for others was originally sold because it was said to result in savings. If true, that would support the US thesis that no new federal debt will result. Here the merciless fact is that, instead of contracting by about 10% as promised in 1994, health insurance costs have risen consistently. Seventy per cent is the magic number. This year we had an increase of 10%. More is promised. As things stand, next year my wife and I pay for an average coverage within an excellent health-care system more than a thousand dollars/mo. Add a yearly $600 deductible and ten per cent of all subsequent costs. This must be a saving. The question is: compared to what?


just experience it


Please forget your ideological "real conservative"-nonsense: come and live in my street in Flanders, or some other part of europe, in a street with roma's. I know many people who altered their opinion in just a few minutes.

So . . . Hungary's a "safe"

So . . . Hungary's a "safe" country for gypsies? The same country where the Jobbik wields considerable influence among the people and police unions, if not the government itself?

I've heard no mention of Italy's anti-Roma legislation. Would you like it if you were part of a minority that were subject to mandatory fingerprinting?

Looks like conservatives have abandoned the Brussels Journal, with all due respect. Such viewpoints hand the argument to the liberals and undermine conservatism.

"Would you like it...?"

@ olog-hai: No one expects predatory aliens to "like" the measures a people takes to defend itself against them. You seem to be urging conservatives to renounce self-defense in order to ingratiate themselves with liberals, who are attempting to re-make (i.e., destroy) Western nations by flooding their populations with aliens who become clients of the welfare state. Conservatives should decline the invitation.

To Vilmos Soti RE: Jews, etc.

Individuals and groups, including nations, rise and fall.  We all know instances of businesses that emerge competitive and dynamic, and mature to be uncompetitive and maladaptive, struggling to keep market share much less aggressive expand as before; and so too have polities behaved.


Until relatively recently, there were no “brain drains” via emigration; rather, the most capable merely labored within the constraints imposed on them by their community.  Historically, European Jewry was in no position to promote individual success.  Young Jews with great potential experienced the same encouragement and discouragement from their family and peers, but had to suffer the additional burden of discrimination and oppression from Christian societies.  However, the Jewish emphasis on education and ethnic nepotism – itself a consequence of marginalization and segregation – created a nurturing environment that survived pogroms, etc. 


Of course, one might argue conversely that Jewish success across so many indices is in their blood.  Jews are, after all, descended from the Phoenicians that established a trading empire in the Mediterranean and colonies from Cyprus to the Iberian coast.  The history of Rothenberg is instructive in this regard, as Jewish communities kept appearing in this town after successive pogroms, due to its strategic location on the intersection of important German trade routes.  Despite the hazards, Jewish merchants traversed Europe and Asia, expanding commerce e.g. the Silk Road.  As with the British, Dutch and Germans in South Africa, the Jews have adapted to and thrived everywhere.  Have the Roma or the Africans?  Absolutely not. 


And yes, the Jews have hammered down nails that stuck out: ask any Christian ;)

Regarding the Jews. If you

Regarding the Jews.

If you look back at history, then you will realize that successful talents are concentrated in space and time. Some examples: Ancient Greeks, Dutch painters, Italian Renaissance artists, German/Austrian composers, Italian opera composers, etc. This clustering tells me that there is an inordinate amount of talent everywhere but ... we waste it. I can safely state that humanity loses 99.9*% of talents. It also tells me, that helping "developing" (read third world) countries with money is a waste. They live in such a state because there is something wrong with their culture.

A question. Why successful talents are clustered?

1. In some cases, because they are a few people who can spot talents and know how to bring it to surface. One incredible example is Szechy Tamas who raised a long line of very successful Hungarian (Hello Mr. Handlery) swimmers.

2. They are *ALLOWED* to rise above the rest. If this doesn't happen, then the society will stagnate and drive away its smartest people. Such a society deserves its fate.

3. What happens, and this brings me back to the Jews, when there is a minority which is far more successful in locating, raising, and letting go talents, then the host country? I believe this is one of the present reasons of the growing Jew hatred in Europe. The Jews are more successful than the rest. Not because they conspire, not because they steal, but ... maybe because their culture doesn't treat successful people as nails sticking out whom need to be hammered back?


KA on "Duly Noted: On Gypsies..."



1.  I recall being disgusted by the pressure from Prague to lift the Canadian visa requirements, as the Czech government was cynically passing its Roma problem to Canada by encouraging Roma “refugees” to emigrate, even leveraging its EU membership to “bleed off” its undesirables. 


2.  Indeed, there is no comparison between the Roma and Jewry, unless one is driving home the almost universal intolerance to stateless peoples.  Interestingly, after Lechfeld, the Magyars settled, intermixed with the Slavic and Avar population base, and established a nation state in Pannonia.  Perhaps the Roma should have done likewise…


3.  Prosecuting Islamist paramilitary members who have actively committed acts of aggression is incredibly wrong.  I recall that the incarceration and trial of Saddam Hussein was fraught with criticism from various jurists and quasi–jurists, which invariably ended after his execution.  Unless Obama is aiming for a Stalin–esque show trial, his ratings will be better for it if he just signs their death warrants and is done with it.  None of these captured irregulars can be rehabilitated or repatriated.  Al–Qaeda is transnational and the Pashto have no state.  The Romanian insiders were onto something when Ceausescu and his wife were unceremoniously gunned down; aside from scant conspiracy theories that they are still among the living, who is decrying their brief “trial”?


4.  Agreed.


5.  For centuries, treason was treated in a uniform manner.  Would–be traitors such as Guy Fawkes understood the consequences of treason.  It is time that “homegrown” Islamists suffer the martyrdom they are so eager for.

Liberal hubris

@KA: The long episode of the captivity of the jihadists, with its controversies over law, procedure, interrogation methods, location of incarceration, etc., demonstrates classic liberal hubris regarding our ability to control outcomes, which typically results, through overcomplex plans, in unintended destructive consequences. All the criminals should have been shot on the battlefield. None should have been accepted from other governments. Let them execute their own prisoners.

A government cannot wield a scalpel, only an axe. Liberals do not understand this. They think they are great geniuses who can come up with solutions to every problem. Reality is is a much bigger genius and always has the last laugh.

Re: KO

A government cannot wield a scalpel, only an axe. Liberals do not understand this. They think they are great geniuses who can come up with solutions to every problem. Reality is is a much bigger genius and always has the last laugh.

Well said. Reminds me of a quote by the great GK Chesterton:

"No society can survive the socialist fallacy that there is an absolutely unlimited number of inspired officials and an absolutely unlimited amount of money to pay them."

The great G.K. Chesterton

Thanks, atheling. Have you read Chesterton's Ballad of the White Horse, about King Alfred the Great's defeat of the invading Danes? I have friends who are devoted to Chesterton and attend the Chesterton Society. What is his strongest point, according to you?


The gypsies are indeed a huge problem, I know, they live in my street with 10 children in one house, or what used to be 'my' street: the pollution, noise, and deterioration is just unimaginable. And I consider myself lucky because they seem to be the so-called middle-class of roma's so the light version of Roma lifestyle: they have cars and wear quite modern clothes (at least the men & children, not the women). I don't know where they come from, how they came here, and what our 'leaders' (european and national) are planing to do with them but it's just madness. EU says that gypsies are 'a special concern' for them but that only means that they are handing out money & and houses. Houses with are basicly destroyed within one month: the family next to me throws teabags and diapers on the roof, to give a little example.... Little children (3-6 years) walk over the streets like there is no traffic, it's just insane. It's a problem without solution: people with a parasite sociopathic lifestyle that just don't want to improve their lifes. The only thing you can do is get them out of your countries and your historical territories. It's the problem of some eastern european countries, let them deal with it, or send them back to Rajasthan, they will quite easely fit in there.

RE: Duly Noted

1. My own view is that the Gypsies live in their own world. If they want an end to the prejudices against their people, let them begin by reforming themselves. Either they submit to the laws of their "guest" countries if they wish to preserve their identity and traditions within the legal boundaries as determined by local law, or they give up entirely on their backward and insupportable nomadic way of life and settle down like civilized Western people, ensuring that their children receive a good education and integrate themselves into society.

Of course there will always be people who hate the Gypsies due to their Asiatic racial background. The same argument was used to justify hatred against the Magyar in the past as well, regardless of the fact that the Magyar have lived in Europe since the 9th century A.D. and were christened before the Poles and Lithuanians were.

Although race and ethnic realities ought not be denied, I believe Conservatives should not base their view of others on racial grounds but on the willingness of minorities to assimilate, to pay respect to their guest countries, and to defend their new homeland against hostile nations.

The latter, I believe, is the ultimate test of true integration. Any minorities that have their reservations or are opposed to the idea of defending (note that I'm not arguing against conscientious objectors here, I am talking about a "just" war situation) their new country have no business living there and should return to where they came from.

In the case of the Gypsies, however, the problem is that it is impossible to say where they ought to live then. The Jewish people have a clear and well-documented historical connection to Palestine, as well as a religious connection with the Holy Land. But to my knowledge - which, I admit, is limited on this particular subject - nothing comparable exists with the Gypsies.

2. Good point. Unlike many other minorities, the Jewish people - at least religious ones - believe it to be their duty from the Torah to respect their Gentile homeland, and not to wage war against or destroy their Gentile compatriots.

4. Tolerance - like liberty - without any moral boundaries, fuelled by moral relativism, equals licentiousness and anarchy. This modern and twisted notion of "tolerance" cannot be tolerated by civilized men and women who are devoted to the endurance of individual liberty and civil order for the sake of their country's, their families', and - ultimately - their own well-being.