Tag Archives: Sub-Saharan Africa

INVASION OF THE WEST

Our 5-year-old grandson, Leeson, has a lot of sense.

On Wednesday, I was watching the news on CBS at 7am.  Quite some time was spent on divided families at the border.   Leeson had just come downstairs and was playing with his toys close to the TV.

At one point, a member of Congress described the President in most unflattering terms.   Leeson immediately said I shouldn’t watch the news any more because all the people on it are always saying bad things.   He asked that I switch to cartoons, which I did.   The day immediately improved and continued to get better as I took him fishing in the afternoon, away from any “Breaking News” on my phone.

In the evening, instead of watching “DW News” and the “BBC” on PBS (each offers a 25-minute international news summary), I went to the pub with a friend.   Again, it was infinitely preferable to watching the news.

The last few days has been quite depressing.   Once again, I feel like I’m living through the last days of the Roman Empire.   Rome, you will remember, was invaded by the “barbarians,” non-Romans who got into the empire and eventually took over.

You would think we would have learned the lesson.   But no, we haven’t.   In the United States, approximately two-thirds of voters want the “barbarians” to come in and take over, although they wouldn’t express it in so many words.   They basically want families breaking the law by illegally entering the country to be able to remain and stay together, receiving free education and health care at public expense, joining gangs, sending money back to their country of origin, etc., etc.

It’s not just an American problem.   Western European nations are also finding it impossible to stop the flood of immigrants from poorer parts of the world.   The so-called “refugees” from the Middle East and Africa are mostly economic migrants, looking for more money and an easier life.

Prior to World War II, this problem did not exist in the West.   But after World War II, with the creation of welfare states, especially in western Europe, there has been a flood of people into western countries.   An additional factor has been what is sometimes called “white guilt” over past “sins” (colonialism and slavery mostly).

LACK OF CLEAR THINKING

An article in the Wall Street Journal last Friday warned that Social Security and Medicare (almost free medical care for the elderly) will soon be broke.   The only solution, claimed the writer, was more immigrants.   Younger people would pay the taxes that would keep both programs growing. (“Social Security needs immigrants,” George Melloan, WSJ, 6/15).

Such articles only encourage the invasion of the West.   Here’s another in today’s Wall Street Journal:

Aging America 
“The surge of retiring baby boomers is reshaping the U.S. into a country with fewer workers to support the elderly – a shift that will add to strains on retirement programs such as Social Security and sharpen the national debate on the role of immigration in the workforce.   For most of the past few decades, the ratio of retiree-aged adults to those of working age barely budged. In 1980, there were 19 U.S. adults age 65 and over for every 100 Americans between 18 and 64, census figures show.   That number barely edged up over the next 30 years.   But there has been a rapid shift since then.   By 2017, there were 25 Americans 65 and older for every 100 people in their working years, according to new census figures released Thursday that detail age and race for every county.”  (Matt Murray, The Ten-Point).

What is more logical is that, in order to grow the economy, there should be an end to abortion.   This would give the US at least another million people a year, providing the young workers that are needed to fund social security and Medicare.   How come the writer of the article never thought of this?

What’s happening in the world is this – while people in the West severely limit the size of their families, people in poorer countries do not. Inevitably, the surplus people in less developed countries move to the richer nations.

In Africa, people want to have lots of children to take care of them in old age; in the Middle East, the reasons may be different – the Palestinians want to outnumber the Israelis, for example, to overwhelm and overcome them in a future conflict.

An additional factor is that many of the poorer countries in the world are “failed states,” with few economic opportunities and a great deal of political uncertainty and gang violence.   People want to flee these bad situations, but their culture doesn’t change when they move to the West.   Inner cities struggle with ethnic gang conflict.

“The existential question, however, thus remains:   How does the West, America included, stop the flood tide of migrants before it alters forever the political and demographic character of our nations and our civilization?   (“Trump and the invasion of the west,” Pat Buchanan, 6/19).

CHANGES IN EUROPE

European attitudes toward migrants are changing.   As I write, the future of German Chancellor Angela Merkel looks very uncertain, as her coalition falters over the issue of migrants; meanwhile, the new Italian government is refusing to accept any more refugees while committing itself to expel over half a million people, mostly from Africa; Austria has turned against refugees and seems set to join the Visegrad Group of four nations who share the same approach;  the United Kingdom, which managed to preserve freedom of speech during England’s “darkest hour,” reacts to any bad news on migrants by limiting freedom of expression.   Populism and populists are on the rise.

If Austria joins the Visegrad Group, it will make a total of five nations.   These eastern European nations seem likely to be the eastern leg of the revived Roman Empire, predicted in Daniel 2.   The prophecy talks of two legs with ten toes.   According to Wikipedia:

“the Visegrád Group . . . is a cultural and political alliance of four Central European states – the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, that are members of the European Union (EU) – for the purposes of advancing military, cultural, economic and energy cooperation with one another.”

Of interest, all five countries are Catholic and a century ago, they were all partly or wholly in the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

The migrant crisis is a major concern shared by these nations, all of whom want to preserve their Catholic and cultural heritage.

MINGLING WON’T WORK

Daniel’s account from the sixth century BC even prophesies that mingling of the races will be a major problem in Europe at this time. “And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile.  As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay.”  (Daniel 2:42-43)

Verse 44 shows that this prophecy is for our time today.   This verse shows that the revived Roman Empire will re replaced by the Kingdom of God. And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.”

Will the Kingdom of God be a multicultural paradise?   Will political correctness be the law of the land?

While the Bible tells us that “God shows no partiality” (Acts 10:34), we are also reminded in the same book that He created the nations and set their borders.   Discrimination is wrong, but integration just isn’t going to work!

“And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their pre-appointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings.” (Acts 17:26)

Footnote:   As I write, the local news is reporting that the “Asian and Hispanic” population in Michigan is rising, while the number of Caucasians is falling.   The invasion continues.

—————————————————————-

STATS SAY IT ALL ON AFRICA

“In 1960, the entire population of sub-Saharan Africa was around 230 million people.  Today, it is roughly 1 billion.   According to the United Nations, by the middle of this century, it could well reach 2 billion.   In 50 years or so, more than half of the world’s entire population growth will be in Africa.   Two fifths of the world’s population will live on the continent.   A couple of generations ago, sub-Saharan Africa had no cities with populations bigger than 1 million people.  Today it has dozens.   (“How long before the world’s youngest continent revolts?” – Daniel Knowles, Unherd, 6/19)

————————————————————————

KIM JONG WON

President Trump’s approval rating over North Korea is now at 55%, after what is perceived as a successful summit in Singapore.

The Economist had a different view.   It’s cover this week shows the two leaders meeting in front of the two flags, with the headline: “Kim Jong Won.”   That wasn’t the only humor in the magazine, inspired by the summit. A cartoon on page 6 showed Kim Jong Un telling his military that if they cooperate with the US, President Trump will treat them like “close friends and allies,” at which point a collective groan of “Oh no,” goes up from them all.   Allies of the US haven’t done too well lately.

————————————————————————-

COMING UP – ONE MORE HUNGRY NATION

Little noticed by the press is that South Africa is moving toward the confiscation of white-owned farms, confiscation without compensation.   It has even been suggested that all property owned by people of European descent should be seized by the state and redistributed.

This has already been done, in neighboring Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia).   The result was that millions of people starved to death, while the farms were simply un-used.

Most African farmers are subsistence farmers, meaning that they just grow enough for their own needs.   They do not farm on a commercial scale, like white farmers.   Rhodesia became the breadbasket of Africa due to its white commercial farmers; the only time the word “basket” is used now is in describing the successor country of Zimbabwe as a “basket case.”

Why should South Africa be any different?

Meanwhile, also from South Africa, comes this news:

Only five out of 696 hospitals‚ clinics got a ‘pass mark’ in SA               6 June 2018

“According to the Office of Health Standards Compliance (OHSC) report‚ only five of the 696 hospitals and clinics it inspected in 2016-17 complied with the Department of Health’s norms and standards to achieve an 80% “pass mark.”

(https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2018-06-06-only-five-out-of-696-hospitals-clinics-got-a-pass-mark-in-sa/)

——————————————————————

THAT LOW FERTILITY RATE AGAIN

“They shall commit harlotry, but not increase;
Because they have ceased obeying the Lord.” (Hosea 4:10)

Nearly twenty years ago, the CDC released an ambitious proposal to “eliminate syphilis from the United States.”   The plan seems to have worked rather poorly.   Soon after the proposal’s issue, infection rates began to head in the wrong direction and then worsened.  From 2000 until 2016, the most recent year for which data are available, the rates of syphilis quadrupled.   Congenital syphilis, a nearly eradicated condition in which the infection is passed from mother to fetus, has also sharply increased – by nearly 28% from a low base in one year.   That is distressing not only because the disease is easily detected and treated by course of antibiotics, but also because afflicted mothers have a 40% chance of a stillbirth.

“The problem is not only limited to syphilis.   Other sexually transmitted diseases (STD’s) are roaring back. Rates of gonorrhea, after a brief period of decline, surged 46% since 2010.   Chlamydia, an extremely common STD which can result in female infertility, has nearly doubled since 2000.   Nearly every sort of American has been affected.”   (“Rash behavior,” The Economist, 6/16)

——————————————————-

DEMOCRACY IN REVERSE

“Indices of the health of democracy show alarming deterioration since the financial crisis of 2007-8 . . . The Economist Intelligence Unit . . . has 89 countries regressing in 2017, compared with only 27 improving.” (“How democracy dies,” The Economist, 6/16)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

INDIAN SUMMERS & HOME FIRES REVIEWED

indian-summers-series-1-3260

It’s hard to imagine that the British drunkards, fornicators and adulterers on “Indian Summers” could have run an empire, but that’s what the latest offering on PBS’s Masterpiece Theater is having us believe.

I’m sure that some of that went on, as it has done in every nation, but surely not everybody?   Even the resident missionary in Simla has had an extramarital relationship.

Sunday’s episode went so far as to suggest that there was one law for the Brits and one for the natives, that innocent until proven guilty did not apply to Indians.  Indian writer Dinesh d’Souza once wrote that one of the greatest gifts the British gave India was the legal system, including this very point.   Equality before the law is a basic principle of English common law, thanks to the Magna Carta, which is being remembered this year, 800 years after its signing.

I’ve written before of how in the last days of colonial Rhodesia, a young white male who murdered a black taxi driver was hanged for his crime.   The fact that he was white was no excuse.

“Indian Summers” also gives the impression that the British oppressed the Indians.  Difficult when the Indians outnumbered them 1,200 to 1.

And if the Indians hated the British so much, why have so many moved to England since independence?

A more accurate portrayal of British history can be found on the BBC World News channel.   “The Birth of Empire” is a documentary series on the British East India Company, the biggest commercial enterprise in the history of the world.   It started as a trading company in 1600, during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, and was so successful it ended up running the sub-continent.

Eventually, the British government took over the responsibility of administering the Indian empire.

Note the following quote from Indian writer Dinesh D’Souza:

“Despite their suspect motives and bad behavior, however, the British needed a certain amount of infrastructure to effectively govern India.  So they built roads, shipping docks, railway tracks, irrigation systems, and government buildings.   Then they realized that they needed courts of law to adjudicate disputes that went beyond local systems of dispensing justice.   And so the British legal system was introduced, with all its procedural novelties, like “innocent until proven guilty.”   The British also had to educate the Indians, in order to communicate with them and to train them to be civil servants in the empire.   Thus Indian children were exposed to Shakespeare, Dickens, Hobbes, and Locke.   In that way the Indians began to encounter words and ideas that were unmentioned in their ancestral culture:   “liberty,” “sovereignty,” “rights,” and so on.

“That brings me to the greatest benefit that the British provided to the Indians:   They taught them the language of freedom.   Once again, it was not the objective of the colonial rulers to encourage rebellion.   But by exposing Indians to the ideas of the West, they did.   The Indian leaders were the product of Western civilization. Gandhi studied in England and South Africa; Nehru was a product of Harrow and Cambridge.  That exposure was not entirely to the good; Nehru, for example, who became India’s first prime minister after independence, was highly influenced by Fabian socialism through the teachings of Harold Laski.   The result was that India had a mismanaged socialist economy for a generation.   But my broader point is that the champions of Indian independence acquired the principles, the language, and even the strategies of liberation from the civilization of their oppressors.  This was true not just of India but also of other Asian and African countries that broke free of the European yoke.

“My conclusion is that against their intentions, the colonialists brought things to India that have immeasurably enriched the lives of the descendants of colonialism.   It is doubtful that non-Western countries would have acquired those good things by themselves.   It was the British who, applying a universal notion of human rights, in the early 19th century abolished the ancient Indian institution of suttee — the custom of tossing widows on their husbands’ funeral pyres.   There is no reason to believe that the Indians, who had practiced suttee for centuries, would have reached such a conclusion on their own.   Imagine an African or Indian king encountering the works of Locke or Madison and saying, “You know, I think those fellows have a good point.   I should relinquish my power and let my people decide whether they want me or someone else to rule.”   Somehow, I don’t see that as likely.

“Colonialism was the transmission belt that brought to Asia, Africa, and South America the blessings of Western civilization.  Many of those cultures continue to have serious problems of tyranny, tribal and religious conflict, poverty, and underdevelopment, but that is not due to an excess of Western influence; rather, it is due to the fact that those countries are insufficiently Westernized.   Sub-Saharan Africa, which is probably in the worst position, has been described by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan as “a cocktail of disasters.”  That is not because colonialism in Africa lasted so long, but because it lasted a mere half-century.   It was too short a time to permit Western institutions to take firm root.  Consequently, after their independence, most African nations have retreated into a kind of tribal barbarism that can be remedied only with more Western influence, not less.   Africa needs more Western capital, more technology, more rule of law, and more individual freedom.”      (“Two Cheers For Colonialism,” Dinesh d’Souza, 5/8/2002).

I couldn’t have put it better myself!

_______________________________________________________________________

A more accurate Masterpiece Theater presentation is the series “Home Fires” which has been showing immediately prior to “Indian Summers.”   This series, which ended its first season last night, is set in an English village during World War II.   The program revolves around the Women’s Institute and its efforts to help the war effort locally by growing and canning food, knitting and sewing, and raising funds to buy ambulances.

With many of the men in their lives fighting on the front lines around the world, the ladies are faced with a whole series of difficult challenges, including food rationing and the preparation for bombing raids.

The series ended with hundreds of planes of the Royal Air Force flying overhead on their way to fight the Battle of Britain.   The villagers are contemplating the reality of a Nazi invasion with all the changes that would bring.

It’s well worth watching and is available on DVD and Netflix.