Reply to Ray Exley

Submitted by KW (Denmark), Nov 16, 2006 at 09:16

"You seem to be trying to argue details, while ignoring the major points of the original article"

An argument is built upon the details. If the details are wrong, the conclusions derived from them have no basis.

"In summary, the ruling class of Europe has so many different fears and a lack of creative thinking, combined with blaming the US for their problems"

This is simply wrong. There is no 'ruling class' in Europe, except the people (maybe an exception could be made in the specific case of the UK), and neither are problems generally blamed on the USA. Moreover, I would argue that the political approach to problems is at least as 'creative' as the liberal view often espoused by Americans that, 'if there is a problem, the market will fix it, so the state had best do nothing'.

"Europeans refuse to deal with the real problems of their economies, and the attempts they have made have created the seeds of the countries' destruction in the forms we currently are familiar."

This is both simplistic and wrong. Europe is not homogeneous, and the economies of the north, from the Nordic countries to the British Isles, are generally doing well. The problems in France and Germany are well known, but are primarily a result of rigid labour markets, and specific problems in eastern Germany.

"They should have planned for a steady state of numbers of peoples, and created an Economy that would work without imported hostile workers."

Your idea that European economies rely on 'imported hostile workers' is, again, wrong. Immigrants, many of whom do not work, or work in low-paid jobs, contribute less to the economies of Europe than they consume, in terms of direct state support and public services. The reason Muslims are allowed to immigrate to Europe is not because we 'need' them in any sense (economic or otherwise), but for humanitarian reasons.

"I think the original author missed one of the more important problems, which is the state dominance of the media in most countries of europe. The european media is used by the political entitled class to protect their interests, while they do nothing to fix the problems of Europe"

I must assume you have no familiarity with the media in Europe. State media are funded by the state, not run by state, which is a very important difference. Politicians are criticised extensively by both state and private media, and indeed, the media tend to treat politicians with less deference than their American counterparts do. Moreover, the broad access to media from various countries gives a broader perspective than could be attained from only national sources.

The major difference between state and private media is that state media, in a democracy, are required to maintain neutrality. This means that, whereas private media sources tend to take a 'party line' reflecting the views of the owners, state media cannot do so. Those of us who choose to get news primarily from state media are thus presented with both sides, not only the side we agree with.

"while the media is used to feed the same lies that the US is the cause of all the evil in the world and europe as a way of seperating the european masses from understanding that their problems are of their own leaders creation, and can only be fixed by them. Both the ruling classes and the indoctrinated masses prefer not to face their problems, but to blame them all on the US."

I'm sorry, but this simply bears no resemblance to reality. I don't know anyone who doesn't blame our politicians for economic and social problems. If anything, the politicians are blamed too much, because increased globalisation has drastically reduced their ability to manage the economy, and the economic cycle. International treaties, eg relating to refugees, have also constrained their ability to fully control immigration.

I apologise for the long-winded nature of this comment, but your view of Europe almost exactly parallels that of Mark Steyn, which is to say, is completely at odds with reality. When almost every assumption you're basing your analysis on is wrong, you cannot expect to draw meaningful conclusions from it.

---

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".