From Norway with (nonconsensual) love
May 30th, 2011 by Unamused
The word “racism” is now meaningless in Norwegian as well, reports a reader via email from the land of snipers and black metal. (What do you mean, I don’t have a thorough understanding of Norwegian history and culture?)
Below is his translation of an article, “Chaudhry accuses FrP of racism,” from the Aftenposten (“Evening Post”), Norway’s largest newspaper. Note that the “FrP” is Norway’s “Progress Party,” which values individual rights, a free-market economy, small government, restricted immigration, and law and order. Since its inception, the FrP has resided on the political fringe because of its stance on immigration, i.e. its failure to recognize the wonderful, unspecified benefits of filling your country with the kind of people who build the kind of countries those same people are desperate to escape from. Since 2005, however, as Europe has begun to realize (and pay) the true cost of “diversity,” the FrP has flourished as Norway’s second largest party (currently the most popular among secondary school students).
[Subtitle:] Member of Parliament Akhtar Chaudhry (Socialist Left Party) accuses the Progress Party of racism after Per-Willy Amundsen said that Muslims have the lowest workforce participation rate.
“This borders on racism,” said Chaudhry to Dagsavisen.
Akhtar Chaudhry is a Pakistani immigrant and 4th Vice President of the Norwegian parliament.
He is also a whiny little bitch who seeks to undermine Norwegian values (like the separation of Church and State, women’s rights, and not stoning homosexuals) by shutting down debate and suppressing dissent with accusations of discrimination.
Chaudhry is distressed and concerned, and draws parallels to the growth of National Socialism in 1930s Germany. Amundsen’s comment is not in good taste.
Note the appeals to emotion: “distressed and concerned,” “not in good taste” — as if Chaudhry’s (fake) sense of propriety and (fake) distress define the limits of free speech.
“It’s completely borderline. [Note that completely almost racist is still not racist.] If you switch out ‘Muslims’ for ‘Jews’ in the criticism, you understand the importance of what is being said,” says Chaudhry.
He’s absolutely right: if you switch our “Muslims” for “Jews” in the criticism, and see that the result is a false statement, you will understand the importance of addressing Muslim immigration.
He is referring to Amundsen’s comment yesterday that Muslim immigrants have the lowest workforce participation rate. Minister of Labor Hanne Bjurstrøm (Labor Party), and Geir Bekkevold, political immigration speaker for the Christian Democratic Party, distanced themselves from the statement.
Here’s why Amundsen is right, and also why he’s on Unamusement Park’s List of Cool Norwegians (along with Max Manus, Roald Amundsen (no relation?), all the Vikings, and of course anyone who reads this blog):
Amundsen is standing his ground and insists that he’s not racist.
“I disagree entirely. I am referring to public statistics. It’s clear that the immigrants in Norway with the lowest workforce participation rate are from countries in the Muslim world,” says Amundsen.
Amundsen is backed by the Central Bureau of Statistics. According to CBS, immigrants from Somalia have a workforce participation rate of 31.9 percent. In other words, almost seven of ten Somalians are unemployed. The next lowest countries on the list are Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Morocco, Turkey, Kosovo and Iran.
“The eight countries with the worst workforce participation rate are Muslim countries. That speaks for itself,” says Amundsen.
Remember: pattern recognition is racist.
Here is the article’s ending:
He also says: “Suck it, Chaudhry. If you and I had been born 70 years earlier, you’d be telling us how ‘distressed and concerned’ you are that I said Germans have the highest Holocaust participation rate. ‘It’s completely borderline! It’s not in good taste! Waaaaah!'”
At this point, Amundsen made an unprintably obscene gesture in the direction of Chaudhry’s seat in the Parliament Building, sang the national anthem with the voice of an angel and the raw power of a proud Norwegian muskox (bringing tears to this reporter’s eyes, and the eyes of every other true Norwegian within singing distance), performed a vigorous Norwegian folk dance, and declared the interview terminated.
Full disclosure: this reporter is now deeply and profoundly in love with Mr. Amundsen.
Oh, wait. That’s my fantasy ending. Here is the actual ending:
He also says that Islam’s view of women is a hindrance to their employment.
News of Norway
Yes, I follow the Norwegian news. Who doesn’t? (Google’s suggestion, based on my browser history: “Showing results for I hate all the Muslims and wish they would just go back to Johnny Arab land as soon as possible. Search instead for news of Norway.”)
FEMALE ANNOUNCER: In Oslo, all sexual assaults involving rape in the past year have been committed by males of non-Western background [meaning non-white]. This was the conclusion of a police report published today.
MALE ANNOUNCER: This means that in every single sexual assault in the last five years, where the rapist could be identified, he was a man of foreign origin [meaning non-white].
MALE REPORTER: The young girl we are about to meet was raped about two years ago. As she entered her apartment she was assaulted, and endured hours of threats, violence and rape by a [non-white] man unknown to her. She will be struggling with this experience for the rest of her life.
YOUNG GIRL: I have found it difficult to go out shopping on my own because I felt anxious. I was simply too afraid to go out the door, and had problems contacting and speaking to friends and family, and simply to live a normal life.
MALE REPORTER: In April, a few weeks ago four women were assaulted and raped on the same night [by non-white men]. None of the [non-white] perpetrators has yet been found.
Well, you can start with racial profiling. Call it “community policing” or something. Then round up all the young Muslim men for questioning.
Today Oslo police presented the total figures revealing how in the past year all sexual assault involving rape had been committed by men of non-Western background [meaning non-white].
FEMALE POLICE OFFICER: Many of the [non-white] perpetrators who commit these rapes on the edge of [white] society, often unemployed [i.e., too lazy to get a job; would rather live off white Norwegians’ tax dollars], arriving from traumatized countries [which, of course, excuses anything they do to their White oppressors — I mean, it’s not like it’s non-white people are the reason non-white countries are so “traumatized” (read: shitty).] In the past five years, it has often been asylum seekers.
“My country is mean to me! Waaaaah! Let me in to yours! I promise I won’t rape anyone! Waaaaah! Do you have welfare applications in Farsi? Waaaaah!”
MALE REPORTER: This girl was raped by a [non-white] man of Pakistani heritage. She is an ethnic Norwegian [i.e., white], as are almost all victims who are assaulted and then raped.
That sounds almost like discrimination.
YOUNG GIRL: He said that he had the right to do exactly as he wanted to a woman. [“Why?”] Because that is how it was in his religion. Women did not have rights or opinions. He was in charge.
Hey, who are we to judge?
Oh, right: we’re rational, moral human beings, whereas these people are objectively inferior savages. That’s who we are to judge.
FEMALE POLICE OFFICER: The way women are viewed [by non-whites] is at least one of the questions we have to ask in order to understand the motive of the [non-white] perpetrators. …
The motive, incidentally, is sex. It’s just that they’re not decent-enough people to suppress their animal instincts.
… It should not stand on its own, as a stigma [meaning we should never incorporate race and religion into police work, no matter what the cost to real Norwegians], but it is an element we must have the courage to address.
Well, you could start by (a) calling them what they are (Muslims, non-whites), and (b) not excusing them as “asylum seekers” from “traumatized countries.”
Your mission, should you choose to accept it
Here’s what I want you to do, you compassionate reactionaries: bring up this video in conversation. Real live conversation. Not on the Internet. You could wait until someone starts talking about Europe, or the Middle East, or immigration, or women (“speaking of which…”), or just start a conversation about it (“hey, did you know that…”).
After all, it’s just an interesting statistic you heard on the news. You don’t have to “defend” it. It’s not a political philosophy or a policy proposal — but see below.
Suppose you do bring it up, and someone says “so what?” Well, I tried having this conversation with myself, which is
- probably a sign of mental illness, and
- a good way to practice debating.
Warning: CR is compassionate, so he emphasizes the positive (crime prevention, women’s rights, preserving one’s culture), but of course he’s also a reactionary, so he probably goes much further than you’re comfortable with (outside the Internet). Consider him an upper bound on acceptable debate.
CR: Hey, so I saw this news report that says every rape in the capital of Norway in the last five years was by a non-White immigrant. Check it out.
SLAWB: So what?
CR: Excuse me? [I usually feign innocence and confusion after saying something provocative.]
SLAWB: What’s your point? We should just kick all the immigrants out of Norway?
CR: I didn’t make any suggestions for immigration policy. I just thought you’d like to known, ’cause you’re into, like, women’s rights and stuff. This is pretty much the number one way to identify rapists in Norway: they’re foreigners. Seems like women should be aware of that.
SLAWB: You can’t identify foreigners just by looking at them! How could you tell the difference between a Norwegian and a German?
CR: I wouldn’t be trying to tell the difference between a Norwegian and a German. [I try to shut down straw man arguments as quickly and directly as possible. “That’s not what we were talking about.”] If I were interested in avoiding rape, I would be trying to tell the difference between a Norwegian and a Turk. Or an Iranian. Or an Egyptian.
SLAWB: In other words, you want us to start using racial profiling to target Muslims!
CR: Oh, you’re saying all the rapists are Muslims? [If you deliberately avoid mentioning the problematic group you’re actually talking about, like Muslims in Europe or Blacks and Hispanics in the USA, it guarantees that your opponent will be the first to bring it up. Then it’s their idea, not yours, and you can just run with it, as follows.] Well, I guess that makes sense, considering what countries they come from.
Anyway, is this “racial profiling” anything like “sex profiling,” where you “target” men because they’re so much more likely to commit crime than women? Because that kind of profiling seems pretty reasonable: if one group of people is committing nearly all the crimes, then you should probably pay more attention to that group. Like men (sex profiling), young adults (age profiling), and Muslim immigrants (ethnic profiling). Or do you think we should be just as worried about an 80-year-old Norwegian grandmother committing rape, as we are about a 20-year-old Turkish man?
[Asking questions, even obviously rhetorical questions with only one sane answer, is weak: it gives your opponent the chance to answer you. That is why I never give anyone the chance to answer my rhetorical questions.] I don’t know about your idea of kicking them all out of the country, but maybe we could just deport the illegal immigrants and the ones with criminal records, then stop any new ones from coming in.
SLAWB: Most of those immigrants are poor refugees who just want to escape from injustice and lead a better life, the kind of life you were privileged enough to be born into.
CR: It seems to me that being poor and wanting a better life don’t excuse you from committing sexual assault. I’m no expert on fashion, but I always thought women kept their money in a purse, not in their vaginas. [I actually say stuff like this. Your mileage may vary.]
Anyway, it’s interesting you mentioned that they’re escaping from “injustice” in their home country: a country filled with people just like them. Same race, same ethnicity, same religion, same culture. People just like them are committing injustices against them. So they flee. They flee to a nice country like Norway, with nice people and a nice culture. And what’s the first thing they do there? Rape spree.
I mean, if they’re committing about 100% of the rapes, it stands to reason that the rate of sexual assault has gone up, like, infinity percent since they got there. Maybe the reason their home country is so bad is… it’s full of the same kind of people who are fleeing it and coming to Norway. Everyone wants a better life… especially the ones who don’t deserve it.
Based on this news report, it looks like these immigrants aren’t assimilating into the wonderful, privileged society of Norway. They’re not changing. They’re bringing their third-world problems with them. So as more and more of them pile into Norway, Norway is going to look more and more like a third-world country. Meanwhile, Afghanistan and Pakistan are still going to be third-world countries, so rather than raising up the foreigners to our level, we’re letting them drag us down to theirs.
The Norwegians were leading a “better life” because they weren’t committing all these injustices against one another. Good for them. They’re entitled to keep living their privileged lives the way they’ve always lived them, with each other. They do have that right. Let the Muslim immigrants — especially the poor ones, the ones who get on welfare the moment they arrive, the ones who commit most of the crime — let them stay in their own country, with their own people, and fix it up so it’s as good as Norway. Don’t bring them to Norway, so they can drag it down until it’s as bad as… whatever. Syria, I guess.
SLAWB: [head explodes]
Try it yourself. Write a dialogue, or have a real one.
For extra credit, re-read this post and identify all the signs of the Dark Triad in my writing. (That’s narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy: self-obsessed; deceitful and exploitative; and thrill-seeking and callous. Huzzah!)