In part one of the social and political analysis of the migration issue as the most recent attempt of the hegemonic class to effect complete control over societies so as to transform them into wealth-producing machines and into power for that class (transforming illegal usurpation into legal and legitimate claim), we showed how that has so far been achieved through the ages by putting to use the same recipe or scheme on an international scale.
In part two of our analysis we shall focus on the effects and consequences of such a recipe (which in our days is applied through the migration issue and which has as a pretext the twisted, biased and preferential application of the Human Rights and aims at the economic disjuncture of native Europeans, among others). We shall thus have occasion to explain a number of social phenomena and social pathologies which are considered syndromes (i.e., a set of symptoms which do not allow for isolating the cause of such pathogenesis). We shall also see what we, as Citizens, can do (in groups or individually) about it, and how to make sure that our actions will be to our benefit and will not be usurped for the sake of others.
Developmental social science (be it psychology, sociology or political science) tells us, and very correctly so, that a healthy society develops on the basis of parameters linked to the climate, the environment / feedback with other Peoples / societies and the time span in general that this society has existed, solving or bypassing challenges and obstacles that are at times threatening to its existence. In this manner endogenous cultures have developed and continue to develop since these societies evolve as a result of the geopolitical factors and the potential of these societies to expand their economic production base. That is why in certain cultures, for example, which developed in response to particularly hot climates, apparel and the sense of dignity, even if present, express themselves in a way totally different from this of cultures which evolved in other climatic conditions or demanded particular skills for survival or activities from their members.
Also, and because usually these geopolitical conditions do not change dramatically but gradually in a particular area, on a geographic basis alone, a number of distinct developing societies which have coexisted sharing borders with one another and so act, react and develop simultaneously, are also similar to one another in many respects. That is why Mediterranean cultures, even if distinct and unique share a number of common elements that make it possible for the members of these cultures to communicate well. The same happens with the societies of Northern Europe, of central Asia of the Far East, etc.
Careful: The fact that two adjacent cultures may be antagonistic (for example Chinese-Japanese, Italian-Greek-Turkish) does not mean people of these cultures cannot communicate well. Good intercultural communication is a function of the fact that both cultures react similarly in similar stimuli the meaning of which both cultures commonly accept as of high, medium or small importance, having only a few differences in this respect.
Ethno-national identities develop in this way, which represent the apex of every national culture and contain the sum total of directives for the individuals who reside on the land where this ethno-national identity developed, so that these individuals may develop their personalities most effectively, and via such personality development of each new generation, allow for the culture itself to develop.
For this reason, ethno-national identity is the sine qua non for the prosperity of a People: It affords these people the tools and prescribes the sum total of behaviors that will secure access to and acceptance by their own social community and to a certain extent, by the neighboring communities. This identity prescribes the way of social action and development of a People. When this endogenous culture is held in disdain or gets disrupted by the sudden, uncalled for and unnatural, imposition of a alien culture, completely at odds with the endogenous one, serious problems ensue with the individuals who were brought up in the latter.
To begin with, there is an immediate attack and undermining of the sense of self-esteem and developmental dynamism of these individuals on whose backs the alien culture is loaded, and this undermining commences along with a sense of fear for and a feeling of restriction in their own freedom of movement and of trespassing and violation in their physical but also ideological space. This means that the performance of this community of people who find themselves invaded or subverted culturally, falls meteorically since these individuals are prompted to stop and reexamine their own sense of common sense and intake of the events occurring in their own space, those events that so far they had been able to account for on the basis of their culture.
Why does this happen? Because in every historical circumstance that a race/group of races/societies enforces themselves onto another (either through conquest, colonization or immigration), a number of mechanisms activate that help enforce the alien intruding mass into the endogenous, preexisting one: An emotional blackmail takes place that always reduces the value of the pre-existing culture, so as to prompt its adherents to accept and tolerate the enforced one. In case of conquest, the culture of the conquerors was projected as the developed and superior one (for example, the culture of the English colonialists). In the present case of the migration issue, the culture of the host nations is accused of being inhuman or racist or generally anti-humanitarian if members of such culture display a preference for their own rather than the culture of the colonizing migrants.
In this way, all value systems, the way of life, the way of work, appreciation of work, stances towards fellow being and the manner of raising children are disrupted and questioned, and so the very bases on which human intelligence (academic/cognitive/emotional) develops, collapse. Individuals who fall victims to such questioning develop to become weaker personalities, functioning at a lower level of cognition and assimilation of knowledge and methodology (hence the pandemic of special educational needs (SEN)) and are more likely to offer themselves to manipulation, as much to this of particular individuals, as to this of self-imposed sources of ‘authority’ who could not have possibly been able to assert themselves on these individuals if the latter had maintained their value system and boundaries specified by their own endogenous culture. The association of the rise in the incidence of SEN as an immediate symptom of societies who are victims to such cultural colonization enforced by the migratory flows of the last approximately twenty years is very easy to confirm. This phenomenon is very intense in countries/cultures where the migrants have developed non-assimilable cells bounded by their own culture, and who are many times aggressive and hostile towards the host culture and its members (for example, the high incidence of SEN in Britain, after the mass settlement of Indian and Pakistani non-assimilable enclaves, and similar phenomena in France, and certainly now in Greece).
On the contrary, this intense cultural contrast and antagonism does not affect the migrants themselves because in any case they are bounded by two basic world stances that protect them from the catastrophic effects of cultural adulteration and imposition: First, they take it for granted that the ‘others’ are different and so whatever is expressed by those ‘others’ against the migrants is taken by the latter as yet another sign of their own difference and as irrelevant to their personalities. Second, their continuing existence in a host country to which they have managed to migrate, is in itself a considerable success, which affords them the possibility for other successes. This belief affords the person much greater self-confidence and motive for further exploits. Those two stances hold for every migrant, be it conqueror, migrant or asylum seeker. Up until the worsening of the Migration Issue as this has come to be, the migrant and the refugee adopted those two stances first, to become economically prosperous (and many of them, such as Greeks, also to succeed academically / culturally) and second to assimilate at least as regards their outbound behavior with the host population (barring particular exceptions among certain migrants who, in the present Migration Issue have been the majority in those incoming migratory flows), as long as this was in concord with the host society. In other words, host culture prior to the Migration Issue was not under threat by the migrants because the migrants themselves had targeted success using such measures of success already ingrained in the host culture, and had prioritized their sojourning and return to their country of origin when success under these criteria had been achieved.
Thus, the incidence of Greeks becoming successes outside rather than inside Greece can be accounted for. Apart from the clientelist networking that is a reality in Greece (this also occurs in other European countries/ the US/m Canada, etc), the Greek abroad gets rid of the locally-imposed obstacles, since he himself (she herself) is a migrant and gets guided by these two world stances, along with another facilitating principle, of aiming to become assimilated in the host society as a successful member of that society without harbouring any subvertive intentions for the culture of that host society (he/she is usually positively disposed towards it).
In the current case of the Migration Issue, a third principle has been added, which is the toxic one: migrants believe they will impose their own culture on the social space they occupy while they themselves will reap the benefits of the host culture and of their members, without recognizing it or giving credit to it. In other words, these types of migrants share the logic and mentality of the conquerors of old, and their weapon, instead of brandishing any high-tech war technology used by the old conquerors on the basis of which they won battles, is the Charter of Human Rights. In part one we explained how the Charter of Human Rights is used as a weapon against those who set them up in the first place (because in general the countries of origin of these migrants and their culture has not developed to such a degree so as to recognize protective Human Rights regardless of gender, social class or age). We could even suggest that there lies the reason why they abuse such sacred institution that recognizes Human Value, because their culture does not share a parallel system of values that enjoys their respect. In other words, in cultures that have not yet developed so as to recognize that restricting socially and imposing a dress code to a human being on the basis of her gender difference constitutes an assault to her personality and a demoting of that person to the level of an inbred animal, it is logical to assume that adherents of such cultures will wish to do the same to other social groups that offer themselves to be categorized as inferior or as conquerable. If such attitudes are also prescribed by religion (something that happens quite intensely with Muslim people) then, there is a serious obstacle to assimilation of these people to any host society.
Who however affords them this third toxic principle that activates in them a sense that they are inherently superior and that therefore they have a right to impose on foreign lands their own culture and way of life? Who cultivates in them the attitude of a conqueror?
It is clear that alone those migrants could not have possibly caused the successive shuttering of European host cultures and of European everyday life, even if they did possess this third toxic principle. If they were left alone, without any support, these migrants would have been forced either to assimilate to the host cultures as has always been the case, or get expelled from it. Also, they could not have been so many, so frequent and so capable in arriving in these host societies seamlessly, transversing in the process so many countries away from their own, many of which are hostile and dangerous to them or more conducive to their move (due to distance and common, mutually accessible cultures).
These people are helped both to successfully complete their great trek, which in the case of an average migrant would have presented insurmountable obstacles, particularly in case of pregnant women or small children (in the older migrations, migrants were mainly men, while now a much greater proportion of women and children accompany men). Those who help them settle as conquerors and inhibit or suppress host societies’ rejection mechanisms for individuals bearing such hostile attitudes (and therefore allowing for the host culture to be directly attacked), are the particular NGOs, the organized church and world organizations: These are the very places where members of the hegemonic classes are to be found, as we have seen in part one of our article. It is these people who blackmail the citizens into failing to buttress their own Human Rights, as well as showing respect for those Human Rights of the migrants. It is them who degrade the host culture as one of secondary importance compared to these of the migrants (hence, the phenomenon of the ridicule of European culture and expression of Christianity as a show of ‘civilization/progress while similar disdain towards the cultures of migrants is immediately reprimanded and rejected as offensive and a show of (Western) barbarism).
Both the Church as well as the NGOs are funded by governments on basis of taxation and the property of native citizens. This is huge funding that the People know little about or condone. Based on these funds, the Migration Issue is supported and the migrants are settled, as we have described above and allows them to operate under the three world stances or principles, and behave with open hostility towards the native People. Only in Greece there are more than 300 NGOs all of whom in one way or another support the migrants, subvert Greeks, their history and culture and undermine from the inside every national issue, a practice which could lead to the fragmentation of Greece, such as the Skopje Question, the Turkish Question, the Albanian Question, the so-called minority question, etc. Such state funding flowing into these NGOs assumes such proportions that cutting it short could have ridden ourselves from loaning and would have allowed covering of the state deficit in three years at the most, in other words, the time that PASOK now claims it needs to do things that come to naught, as far the state deficit is concerned, but during which the rest of the Greek People will be economically drained.
If we also calculate state funds that flow into free medicare (not to the free medicare that every human being is entitled to, but for costly operations such as artificial insemination); to fringe benefits; for uncontrollable births; for travel expenses; education expenses which in fact require extra funding so that the state can teach children of other cultures and language, while such funds were originally destined for children of Greek culture and language (which is methodologically wrong, regardless of how a true educational scientist sees it, because it is harmful to the Greek children as well as the migrant children and generally degrades educational quality and brings forth even more SENs); unemployment benefits; asylum seekers benefits; social solidarity benefits/ disability benefits/ integration benefits and a host of like programs which are funded from the taxation of Greek people; we would have ended up with a surplus. One of the main reasons why state benefit offices have gone practically bankrupt, and the Greek people will soon find themselves without pensions, are to be found precisely in these schemes for illegal pensions, sustenance programs, NGO funding, medicare provisions extended to illegal and unregistered beneficiaries, etc.
In fact, in other words, under the pretext of the Migration Issue and the use of migrants who are hostile to the European cultures and the host population, migrants who are qualitatively different from older migratory flows, and who behave as beneficiaries and not as guests, the hegemonic class achieves the following:
1. Straggling of the economic power of Peoples, both through the draining of the state capital, as well as through the undermining of businesses and property of Citizens via the illegal supply of services and trade.
2. Degrading and disdaining all safety valves that the culture itself has developed over the years so that the People can secure a degree of independence and reference point, in other words, a form of control towards the hegemonic class.
3. Degrading of critical thinking, of cognitive level and of sovereignty of the People due to their inability to anchor themselves to a single value system but are instead forced to short circuit their thinking rendering themselves manipulable and conquerable.
4. Restriction to access to education of the People and cognitive development, due to the high incidence of SENs which are a direct result of low quality teaching as this is in turn the result of a curriculum of simultaneous instruction of diametrically opposed cognitive sets of knowledge and skills (a precondition of failure in education).
5. Luck of logic in everyday life which dictates that in different settings, different stances are required (family, school, workplace, peer group) that leads to fear and reduction of intelligence and increase in hostility.
6. Restriction of access for the People to Rights they had shed blood to extract and win over from the hegemonic class, such as the Right to work, work protected and guaranteed by the State (8-hour work day, 5-week day work load, fair taxation of the self-employed, equal chances for all businesses, etc).
7. Attacks and disdain towards the native Citizens, who are told that they are of limited capacities, abilities and quality in relation to the migrants, who always enjoy a silent but positive handling by the state (plus their support from the Church, GNOs and Charities), a fact which, apart from the fact that it sets in motion a self-fulfilling prophecy, sets the ground for the native Citizens to accept their official serfdom as beings inferior to these of the hegemonic class, who had to do without slaves during the last two-three centuries.
8. Rise in the incidence of unpunishable criminal activity and delinquency in the areas that used to be safe and secure some time back, a factor that causes insecurity which in turn strengthens all negative influences on the perception and learning ability of the Citizens, but which also serves the purposes of the hegemonic class by actually facilitating a redistribution of property at zero cost, since every area that is ghetto-ized loses in land value to such an extent that Citizens are forced to sell out once expensive and prestigious pieces of land to move to another place, with a property much devalued compared to the original one. To do this, these Citizens mortgage the rest of their property and their life to the banks and so in this manner the hegemonic class succeeds to steal with time the sum total of the economic power of every Citizen.
So far the reader should have isolated the common denominator – the key – via which all the above are enforced: It is the acquiescence, complacence and concession of the native Citizens that all these relayed to them via the representatives of the hegemonic class are important and should be regarded with seriousness. And since a key can be used to open but also to close a door, what the native Citizen needs to do, either individually or in groups, is to stop accepting and believing the accusations and impositions that take place via the Migration Issue in combination with the economic issue.
Every culture comes with a potential for development, and every generation of its members shapes and re-shapes the sum total of this culture so that it becomes more feasible and responsive to the signs of the times. But, ITS BASIC FRAMEWORK, ITS BASIC PRINCIPLES ALWAYS REMAIN UNADULTATERATED. It is just the way that these principles are expressed that changes: the principle of equality and treating people equally on the basis of ethics and common sense has always been part of the Greek culture, even when women had no equal rights to those of men. Even then the above principle of equality, even if not precisely deliberated on this issue, was fast included in the application of that principle along with the evolution of thought. Its inclusion was also aided by political circumstances instead of addressing the issue of protecting the totality of Greek society from conquerors, imperialists and traitors. What we mean in a nutshell: we by no means disdain our culture for the benefit of another, which serves the needs of another People in a far land, which may or may not be as developed as ours, or reacts following a completely different logic from the one we follow and were brought up with. That foreign culture may even never had a way to react to the same stimuli that simply did not have occasion to present themselves in the geopolitical and social circumstances that these people have had to cope with.
We adopt only characteristics and resolutions that serve our life without feeling that we must disdain and degrade every behavior and every stance dictated by our native culture because in this way we help our culture develop rather undermine it. We cherish and feel proud about our culture. Because of it, older generations have been able to survive under extreme adversity. We also respect every other culture because it, too, has developed to serve its People somewhere else, but we stop there and then. As the old master painters exchanged solutions in technical issues related to painting but never abandoned their own style or genre for the sake of adopting that of their colleague, and in this way their own style perfected itself and became even more impressive rather than die out (as well as that of his colleague if he also had kept the same perspective), so must we as carriers of our own culture (our own style and genre of life and being around and develop as a People) must also be similarly preserved.
In short:
1. We tolerate absolutely no transgression or violation of the Constitution just to show that we are not racists (or for no other reason for that matter).
2. We do not accept to be called racists simply because we do not condone mixing of our cultural environment and its turning into something that is no longer Greek.
3. We do not allow any degradation of the quality of our life to become hostages of migrants (illegal or not) so as we will not be called racists.
4. We do not put up with accusations that we violate Human Rights of the migrants when we try to safeguard our own. The Law is clear and the Bill of Human Rights similarly so and unequivocally state that the freedoms and demands of every single citizen stop short of infringing upon the Rights and Freedoms of others.
5. We consciously bring back the logic and definition of words: We do not accept to be called rightwing extremists or even Nazis (!) because we insist that democracy means majority rule and that the wish of that majority be followed, with the minority opting for either following that majority rule or leave.
6. We by no means tolerate any attempt at ridiculizing our National symbols, be they National or Religious by nobody (Citizen or no Citizen) and we do not tolerate any attack on them by nobody, since our Constitution is crystal clear about the place these symbols must have in our State and in our culture. In the same way we respect the religious freedom of everybody else, without however allowing for offense towards our State and its stance.
7. Since we enforce our Constitution on every one within our State jurisdiction, we do not allow any unequal treatment of any body, neither do we allow preferential treatment of anybody but remain pursuant to the principle of proportionality.
8. Our education is clearly defined by the Constitution, which demands cultivation of a Greek identity and Christian culture. We do not allow our schools to refrain from teaching this very principle, and at the same time respect pluralism and multiculturalism as this is defined in a well-governed Democracy.
9. We define Humanitarianism to mean that every Human Being has the right to enjoy expression of his/her own culture and of his/her personality in his/her own land, and thus we demand from the countries of origin of these migrants to take on their responsibilities and provide their Citizens with the necessary instead of shouldering these responsibilities on to other societies which have never interfered or intervened in anyway in the internal affairs of these countries.
10. Because the Constitution demands equal treatment for all, we in turn demand a complete check of the financial and business dealings of all the members of the NGOs, we check the funding flow to flush out the ones indirectly or directly responsible, and whenever we discover (and as we shall show in our next series of articles, there are many such betrayals) embezzlement, theft, undermining, exploitation of the economic, social, historical and strategic stance of the Greek people for self-generated purposes, we demand immediate restitution and ousting of these people as traitors and their persecution by the Greek State to the full extent of the law.
Translation offered by Michael T.