Even the media can no longer suppress the fact that there is a migration crisis in Europe and that the problem is one which reduces to Islam. Indeed, The Islamic Question is becoming for Chancellor Merkel what The Jewish Question was to one of her more notorious predecessors in the Chancellorship of Germany. Her Final Solution is, however, markedly different.
While Merkel and her EU sidekicks insist ever more Islamic ‘refugees’ pour across the parlous borders of Europe, the east of that continent is emerging as a dissenting bloc unwilling to follow the playbook. Poland will not take refugees due to ‘security fears’. Chechia, Hungary and Romania have all resisted the open door policy of the Fourth Reich. But what of the rest of the world? Are Muslims able to treat those countries outside Europe as the mix of youth hostel and mosque they are creating out of central and western Europe?
Last year, Costa Rican president Luis Guillermo Solis responded to a request for asylum for Syrian refugees, the same human detritus Europe has prioritised after the collapse of yet another failed Muslim state. His response should be noted by the dissident Right in Europe and in The United States.
Initially, Solis’s Foreign Ministry spokesman made an announcement seemingly in line with Costa Rica’s Constitution.
Article 31 of that document reads that ‘The territory of Costa Rica shall be a shelter for all those persecuted for political reasons…’ Syrian refugees, he said, would be accepted in Costa Rica, and provided with food, shelter and assistance in finding employment. This is a magnanimous gesture in a Third World country which, although it is experiencing economic growth which outstrips that currently found in the EU, still has basic infrastructural problems and none of the ability to make generous welfare payments that the European countries enjoy.
A few days later, however, President Solis himself stepped in, and the announcement he made – as well as igniting the cries of ‘Islamophobia’ so familiar to European ears, should be compulsory reading for the European elites. It is worth reading in full:
“In regards to Syrian refugees, we are in a very different cultural area from their own, and there isn’t a community of reference that can give them welcome… We are a multicultural country with communities of very different origins, but the Syrians are not one of those communities, thus any group of people who come from Syria would not find the sociological, religious or cultural shelter they would require to live normal lives.
“I would rather maintain a very serious, responsible and articulated policy in handling immigrants or those asking for political asylum [rather] than playing with people who have very great needs and even greater expectations that would end up in a country that is not adequate and where they would be condemned to discrimination. I do not want an act of humanity to end with the construction of ghettos in Costa Rica.”
I am unable to find this short speech in the original Spanish, and we must beware of examining and perhaps betraying nuance in translation. But when set against the simpering justifications and outright lies spewing from the EU leviathan’s mouth, Mr. Solis’s pronouncement is remarkable for several reasons.
Firstly, cultural difference is the Costa Rican President’s first point of reference. In Europe, the idea is peddled by the Left and their outriders that all cultures are essentially the same but for some minor differences, perhaps, involving cultural froth such as dress and diet. This is manifestly untrue. Islam is a wholly different culture from Judaeo-Christian tradition, no matter how many mealy-mouthed social justice workers try to tell you that The Bible is just as violent as the Koran. ‘We are in a different cultural area,’ says Mr. Solis, continuing that ‘there isn’t a community of reference that can give them welcome.’
Of course, Mr. Solis is a politician, and thus expert in obfuscation. Here, too, lines must be read between. Claiming that Syrians would not be happy in Costa Rica hides his real agenda, that they and Islam are not wanted in a religiously trouble-free country. The Syrians would not, he goes on to say, ‘find the sociological, religious or cultural shelter they would require to live normal lives.’ Funding this apparent compassion, however, is the recognition that Syrians, and Muslims in general, do not live normal lives when set against civilised countries. Mere cultural difference is not enough to debar an ethnic group from seeking asylum. One doubts Mr. Solis would have turned about face if the refugees were a group of Icelanders or Swiss.
Mr. Solis also isolates an aspect of Islamic migration which has been ignored in Europe, and which is now leading the EU towards inevitable civil war. The President would prefer an ‘articulated’ policy, ‘rather than playing with people who have very great needs and even greater expectations’ than Costa Rica would be prepared to provide. We have seen in Europe that ‘refugees’ do not arrive with a willingness to co-operate with their new hosts. They do not arrive with gratitude in their hearts. They do not arrive with a sense that their culture might not fit, and that certain aspects of the way they behave may not be acceptable in a strange land.
Instead, they arrive with a list of grievances, many with mischief and worse on their minds, and they are armed with the realisation that it is possible to play cards with a deck in which every card is the race card. There are communities who fit in to Costa Rica, says President Solis, but the Syrians are not one of them.
Of course, the outcry caused by the President’s intervention and reversal of policy caused is entirely predictable to a European. His statements were called ‘xenophobic’ and, inevitably, ‘fascist’. One Tatiana Gamboa said that ‘He [Solis] even says he does not want Costa Rica to become ghettos’. He doesn’t, of course, say anything of the kind. He said that he does not want ghettos in Costa Rica, and implies that he particularly would not want Islamic ghettos. Perhaps he knows something of Bradford, of Malmo, of Molenbeek. Ms. Gamboa goes on to say that Christians and Muslims co-exist in Syria, so why not in Costa Rica? She is, of course, lying. If twenty five Syrian Christian villages razed to the ground in February of this year alone is peaceful co-existence, what might ethnic and religious cleansing resemble?
President Solis has done what none but a handful of European leaders have had the courage to do; he has said no to Islam. It will be interesting to note any sly penalties the Costa Ricans might pay for failing to respect the ummah. Certainly Costa Rica, like all countries, will only be under increased pressure in the future to take in refugees as more and more of the Muslim world finds itself ill-equipped for the demands of modernity, and its implosion has to be dealt with by the civilised world, the dar al hard deemed so miserable by so many Muslims. As for claiming political asylum rather than return to a civil-war-torn country, it may well be something I will have to look into myself in the not-too-distant future.