I commented inter alia on the kerfuffle over Ben Carson's saying he would not want a Muslim in the White House.
What this little fuss brought to my mind was one of the catch-phrases we throw around out here on the Dissident Right. The catch-phrase is: "This is what separate countries are for."Read or listen to the whole thing.
I really have no idea whether Islam per se is a good thing or a bad thing. Having not much interest in religion, I've never looked into the question. A lot of people seem to find comfort and consolation in Islam, and structure for their lives. Jolly good luck to them.
Here's a thing I'm certain of, though: Mass immigration of Muslims into non-Muslim nations is a very, very bad thing; also a very, very stupid thing. It's had dire social consequences wherever it's happened.
I speak with some bitterness here. The country of my birth, to which I have the usual sentimental attachment, has been destroyed by mass Muslim immigration. The tsunami hasn't come crashing ashore yet, but its forward progress towards the picnickers on the beach is now unstoppable. If you go to a big hospital in a British city, the geriatric ward is full of old white English people; the ob-gyn ward is wall to wall burkas and headscarves. The country's gone; there are just a few years left. It's a tragedy, the death of a nation … by suicide.
Things aren't quite so bad in the U.S.A., but we're doing our best to get there. This was all unnecessary. Sensible immigration policies this past fifty years would have spared us a world of troubles, present and future, including this silly business about Ben Carson's remarks, as well as much greater horrors like 9/11.
If we'd had sane immigration policies this past fifty years, with Muslim settlement held to a few hundred a year, we'd be able to have real politics, using election campaigns to discuss social and economic issues in a spirit of common understanding. Instead we have to waste time on this multiculti tag-wrestling, while real topics get left out.
Imagine a U.S.A. with, say, only 30,000 Muslims — 0.01 percent of the population. In an America like that, nobody would bother about Islam. Much of the vast national-security apparatus of snooping and wiretapping would be unnecessary. We'd have some of our liberties back.
We'd have our Constitution back, too. The constitutional provisions for freedom of religion would have full force, as the Founders intended them to, in a nation where esoteric non-Christian religions were the confession of a tiny, insignificant demographic fringe. American tolerance, fairness, and generosity would have full scope to exercise themselves. You can be generous to a tiny minority, without fear there will be blowback from your generosity.
In that nation the question Ben Carson was bombed with wouldn't have been asked, not even by a lefty hack journalist trying to embarrass him. In that nation we wouldn't have to listen to hypocritical lectures from Muslim-supremacist gangs like CAIR, funded with Saudi money.
In that America, in fact, people probably would vote for a Muslim presidential candidate, in the unlikely event that one showed up. Why not? Conscious of being in an extremely small minority he'd mind his manners with exquisite care, out of respect for the majority.
I'm dreaming, of course. That's not the country we live in. Thanks to the mad, evil 1965 Immigration Act, we live in a country of warring tribes vying for supremacy over each other.
Well, we still have our Constitution and our laws. They don't permit religious tests for public office; but they also don't prohibit us denying our votes to members of noisy, demanding, dangerous minorities we don't trust.
In this America, I'm with Dr Carson.
Note too, please, that in the world of that other America, the 0.01 percent-Muslim America, Islam would be openly and enthusiastically dominant in the forty-odd countries where it is a majority faith, with no complaints from me or anyone else.
That's what separate countries are for.