Neo Marxist nonsense

Submitted by Reuben Horne (Australia), Oct 2, 2006 at 05:00

Ed,

The modern scientific method is the result of the work primarily of one man Karl Popper who during the earliest stages of his philosophical evolution was a communist. After he philosophically evolved beyond the narrow confines of the diseased thought you now exhibit he noted that the major flaw with communism as with any ideology was that it simply did not allow its precepts to be put up to the test. One of the points he made in this regard was that after the fat and happy proleteriat in the west failed to rebel the communists (or left wingers, socialists etc) started looking for a new exploited and downtrodden mass and formed the thesis that the new proleteriat that were being exploited were these poor countries overseas who were somehow being exploited by the wealthier ones. That also the wealth of the western countries was not the result of endogenous revolution and reorganisation but simply taken from the poorer ones. As an economist I have to disagree and so did Popper. If anything the poverty of the poorer countries is more the result of a complete lack of attention from the more developed west. We interact with only those people we need economically and leave the rest to fend for themselves.

But the illusion of the wests culpability has proven robust even in the face of little evidence to sustain the deranged theory it is a central tenant of the modern neoMarxist politically correct left. The muslims thus become vicitms even when they rape, slaughter and pillage - motivated to criminality by poverty rather than radical religious palava. Wake up and smell the coffee. Muslims miss out on many of the economic opportunities they could have because of two major factors (1) population explosion without concommitant increases in the amount of capital equipment or land for production (2) a failure to adapt to modernity and produce sufficient amounts of tradeable product that they might exchange for luxury's - this last point in the context of religious extremism can manifest as outright hostility to modernity. Even as they hate us and our technology they use it to kill us. Both problems are rooted in religion.

Unfortunately your theory governs European immigration policy which flies in the face of 90% of the popular opinion on the question of Islamic migration in just about every country which suffers from an excess of said phenomenon. Defeating the notion we live in democratic regimes Middle Eastern migration is a field not decided by the people or their representatives but the left wing idealogues. So we bend over backwards and make room to accommodate these downtrodden masses only to find that they are so hostile to our way of life they form a fifth column in our society. Street crime, rape, theft, riots and murder are the payment for our kindness. Then we get told once again somehow it is our fault for not including those who don't seem to want to be a part of our society in our society. In this never ending tautological excercise of self blame that you seem to want us to subject ourselves to never is the question addressed - what about the other side of the equation? What are the Muslims saying, doing and believing? What is their end of this mess? Answer those questions and you'll see they carry a fair portion of the blame for its creation - I'd say oooo about 100%

Cordially,

Homefront.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".