Using the Assertions Made in An Article About Belgium, Can an Argument be Made that by Allowing Small Enclaves and Microcosm Communities of Fundamentalists to Exist, we are Creating a Path to Our Own Destruction?
LostMessiah, March 28, 2016
Please note that while we are focusing strictly upon the Fundamentalist ultra-Orthodox in this article, the same thesis might apply to every community in which members are not integrated, are permitted to speak in their own languages, are permitted to abide by their own laws and are not required to integrate into mainstream society. Our thesis could just as easily apply to the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints, the Scientologists, the Moonies, the Fundamentalist Muslims and the list goes on.
An article , in the New York Post, Brussels is what happens when liberals don’t push immigrants to integrate, written by Amir Taheri, dated March 27, 2016, posits the thesis that the explosion in Belgium is the direct results of not pushing immigrants to integrate. The article suggests that by allowing different cultures and religions to form their own enclaves or states within the greater country, “otherness” is encouraged and integration discouraged. The article further posits that by accepting the “otherness” in Islamic terms, the subjugation of women with hijabs, arranged marriages, studies in different languages, a country not only allows the “others” to strengthen its religious “otherness” but also encourages it to establish a political ideology. Once that political ideology gets strong enough, as a logical conclusion, though not necessarily stated in the article, the positions of the immigrants as “others” and the national society as “mainstream” run the risk of getting reversed.
“What happened in Brussels was a co-production by adepts of two sick ideologies.
The first one is Islamism in its many versions, including Khomeinism in Iran, Talibanism in Afghanistan, Salafism in Arab countries, Boko Haram in Nigeria, and ISIS and its offshoots across the globe. It will remain firmly in place until it implodes under the weight of its savage contradictions, as did the old Soviet Union, or is defeated in a war as was the case with Nazi Germany and imperialist Japan.
The other co-producer, the mushy and politically correct “liberal” ideology that has seduced segments of opinion in Western democracies, can and must be combated by all those who wish to protect the democratic system in an increasingly dangerous world.
In Brussels, it started in the 1960s when the postwar economic boom created a shortage of workers.
Like other Western European countries, notably Germany and France, Belgium had to import workers on a massive scale….
By the 1990s, most of the factories had disappeared, but the immigrants remained. By then Islam was Belgium’s second-largest religion, now accounting for over 700,000 people or 6.2% of the population. Of these, almost half live in Brussels, counting for 28% of the total population of the city, and guarding the demographically declining districts from “falling” to the Flemish.
One of the districts is Molenbeek, now infamous as the Belgian capital of jihadism, where more than 100,000 mostly North African Muslims live and where the perpetrators of recent terrors attacks against Paris and Brussels lived and hid.”
While the Post article takes the perspective of blaming a liberal ideology on the problems within Europe, not only Belgium. We feel that even if blame were removed from the equation, the problem that exists now is one that needs a resolution before all of Europe gets blown up by suicide bombers. Moreover, in a very general sense, we see numerous similarities between the Islamists and the ultra-Orthodox Jews, though recognizing that the methods of “otherness” and the results of that “otherness” are, at least for now, dissimilar.
“The Belgian multiculturalist elites, making a fetish of the concept of “otherness” corrected that lacuna by financing courses in Islam, encouraging the building of mosques and Koranic schools and even subsidizing pilgrimages to Mecca. The welfare industry also had an interest in protecting the “otherness” of the immigrant community where unemployment was rising, reaching over 40% by the end of the 1990s. In some cases, four generations of a family could be found on the welfare register in the context of their cherished “otherness.””
The New York Post article could very well be applied, quite aptly to the ultra-Orthodox radicals who have taken over cities like Lakewood and Toms River, New Square, Kaser, Monroe-Woodbury, Kiryas Joel, Monsey, Baltimore, London, Antwerp, Jerusalem and many other places. They enclose themselves in small enclaves, dress differently, speak Yiddish rather than English and do not teach their children subjects which would allow for those children to integrate, assimilate or sustain themselves as adults. In our view, this is quite deliberate.
According to the article:
America’s strength comes from its multiculturalism, but that’s only true only when all its people, all its races and religions, believe in the same values. Liberals fetishize separation, arguing that immigrants don’t need to learn English, don’t need to stop subjugating women with hijabs and arranged marriages, don’t need to become citizens. They encourage otherness rather than integration. They want immigrants to change the country, rather than the other way around. They say Islam is not the enemy — but that’s only true if Islam is a religion and not a political ideology bent on undermining democracy.
Brussels is the result of this thinking. It’s what happens when immigrants are allowed to construct their own state within a state, not pushed to become part of a nation.
In the case of the Fundamentalist ultra-Orthodox Jews, many of the communities in which they live are now their own separate and distinct “other” “state within a state.” They do not share the same belief in the same values as those “outside” of their small enclaves. Moreover, we cannot fool ourselves into overlooking the political strength they have garnered and the notion that they are, little by little becoming their own political ideology hell-bent on undermining democracy. The simplest example of this is the notion of Mesirah which demands (or so it is threatened) that members of the community not report crimes to the non-Jewish “outsiders.” That is one tiny example of the many instances in which ultra-Orthodox fundamentalist Judaism is no longer simply a religious belief and set of values, but is metamorphosing into its own political entity. We have seen this referred to as the “bloc” but it is far more nefarious in our view.
We believe, that while radical ultra-Orthodox Jews are less likely to blow themselves up to destroy the foundations of a country and its civilians (suicide is strictly forbidden), the drain on the healthcare system, Medicaid, school aid, and other welfare systems has the same destructive affect, albeit non-violently. We share the view, respective of the ultra-Orthodox, of the New York Post article that by allowing immigrants to create microcosm societies within our States, rather than implementing a program of integration, we will be guilty of our own demise.
We espouse the viewpoint of the New York Post article in its position that if the ultra-Orthodox, juxtaposed with the Islamic extremist, communities are not held accountable to our laws on all fronts, the potential for destruction increases. We strongly believe that by allowing children to grow up speaking their own language with little or no command of the English language, that by failing to teach our children, that by allowing women to be subjugated to men, forbidden from driving or walking outside of the confines of their communities sans male escorts, that by failing to enforce laws that demand financial accountability, that by allowing children to continue to get abused, both physically and sexually, we are allowing if not encouraging exactly what happened in Belgium to happen in the United States, just in the form of financial decimation.
In one community, New Square, a man was burned for not davening in the same synagogue as the rest of the community, action that was sanctioned by the great Rabbi of that community. Upon the arsonists release, he was celebrated a hero, unsettlingly similar to the martyrs of radical Islam. If Rabbi Twersky can justify sending out his boys to blow up their “heretics”, what is to stop them from one day deciding that violence on all fronts is permissible?
It is about time that we look to what could be the future of our country, whether in the form of financial demise or an upsurge of violence, and make changes to our overall ideology of tolerance taken to the nth degree. We were a country founded upon the separation of Church and State. It is about time we enforce that separation and demand our classrooms not pander to “otherness.”
Whether those of us as Jews want to admit this to ourselves or not, it is difficult to ignore the similarities between what has occurred in Belgium and throughout much of Europe with the Fundamentalist Islamic Groups; and what is happening in the United States and other places throughout the world with the fundamentalist Ultra-Orthodox Jewish groups. Until we take action, which we believe begins with education, demanding that ultra-Orthodox children be taught secular subjects and the English language, placing their religious teachings secondary to required secular education within the United States; than the cycle will continue.
For the entire article from The New York Post, click, Brussels is what happens when liberals don’t push immigrants to integrate.