Europe Risks Starvation?

Thanks to unbridled immigration, Jerri believes that most of Europe is now at risk of starvation and governments, socialist or not, will just sit back and let it happen -- like they did in 1847 when Ireland was hit by the potato famine -- because western civilization, based upon capitalism, cares only about profit.

“In terms of food security,” says Jerri, “the UK and Germany are now worse off than North Korea, Nepal, Kenya, Ethiopia and Colombia; Italy and the Netherlands are now worse off than Sri Lanka, Peru, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela; Belgium is now worse off than Hong Kong, Chile, Burma and Uzbekistan; and Switzerland is now worse off than Haiti, Guatemala, Rwanda, Jordan, Madagascar and Somalia.”

“Shifting a mass of starving people from non-sustainable nations (particularly China, India, Japan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Vietnam, South Korea and the Philippines) to sustainable nations, particularly marginally sustainable nations in Europe, was a short term 20th century solution that, in the long term, has caused the host nations not only to sink as far as food security is concerned but also to sink in terms of political and social stability as well,” says Jerri. “Thousands of non-Europeans pouring into Europe are being kept wholly on social welfare, and because less people in their homelands creates more breeding space, the nations they originally came from become more unsustainable than ever.”

“It will be a totally inflammatory situation for interracial relations in Europe when the food wars break out.”

“Also, allowing 91 unsustainable nations to become nutritionally dependent upon 72 sustainable nations in a spirit of globalized dependency has long term problems, too. Only one of the top ten dependent nations, China, has instituted measures to become nutritionally self-sufficient by limiting its population. The other dependent countries continue to expand their populations beyond the capacity of their arable land, and will continue doing so as long as they receive cheap food from sustainable nations and have opportunities to emigrate.”

“Increase the price of food and cut off opportunities to emigrate,” says Jerri, “and these nations will be forced to help themselves rather than accept parasitic status, and you can see this happening already.”

“In feeding these increasingly populous dependent nations, the sustainable nations are being forced to increase the yield of their arable lands by using dangerous agricultural practices. Increasing use of pesticides and fertilizers are poisoning the environment, and how many crops can be produced in a year without severely affecting the earth itself, not to mention water supplies and air quality?”

“Contrary to popular opinion, agriculture is not an environmentally friendly industry, and cheap food from sustainable nations does not come without political strings attached,” says Jerri. “Who wasn’t appalled by the food for oil scandals?”

“Europe does not have the arable land capable of supporting its present population,” says Jerri. “Most of Europe’s food is imported, and should a crisis occur in any one of the nations providing the food, Europe risks massive starvation and the breakdown in civilization that goes with it.”

See also:

• emigrate to a food secure nation!
• Echoes of Ireland’s Starvation
• time to stock up on food?
• one child is enough
• go forth, multipy and starve
• globalization promotes starvation
• are we a plague on the earth?

does westernized constitute western civilization?

There is a big difference between being a western nation and being 'westernized'. The adoption of western architecture and technologies - or food or clothes - does not make a nation part of western civilization.

Japan, for instance, is highly westernized, yet remains uniquely Japanese.

Christianity as opposed to Paganism was one of the distinctive founding bases of western civilization in 675AD, but this distinction has progressively eroded over the years to the point where it is more a force in Africa and Asia than it is in Europe.

The Orthodox Christian populations of Turkey and Russia split from Europe centuries ago to form their own distinctive civilizations, so being Turkish or Russian or European was far more distinctive than being Christian - and as far as Western civilization was concerned, being white was far more important than anything else.

To qualify as being part of western civilization up to 1918, and largely up to 1945, was - in order of importance - to be ethnically white, geographically European and culturally Christian.

The differences between the pre 1918 and the post 1945 western nations are so obviously different - like chalk and cheese in some nations - that 'western' civilization is no longer an appropriate umbrella term.

Many nations these days are 'westernized', but it is still commonly understood that Western civilization resides primarily in Europe.

what's the new basis of western civilization?

Through immigration of non-white races, the concept of racial purity and superiority - the same concept that keeps other civilizations proud and strong - is being largely destroyed, along with Christianity, in all western nations.

In place of Christianity and racial purity, the new western nations espouse:

racial diversity;
cultural diversity;
religious diversity;
equal opportunity,
affirmative action;
political correctness,
globalization;
open immigration; and
extensive welfare and human rights programs.

These factors most definitely separate and divide western civilization from other civilizations - in that no other civilization would dream of implementing such crazy, liberal ideals - but what is the cohesive force that keeps western civilization together?

What is the essence, what is the unique feature of the new western civilization that distinguishes it from other civilizations and protects it from extinction?

Diversity? How can diversity be a cohesive force?

In the event of war with a civilization from which most immigrants came, what side would they be on?

will the european union save western civilization in europe?

The EU is developing as a major geographical region, but geography may not be enough to distinguish Western civilization from, say, Islamic civilization - particularly when Islam is fast becoming a major religion in Europe and the largely Islamic non-European nation of Turkey is in the process of joining the Union.

Far from saving Western civilization, the EU may, in fact, be in the process of creating a new civilization; or, more likely, it is in the process of becoming absorbed into the Islamic civilization in much the same way as Australia is in the process of becoming absorbed into the Chinese civilization.

Drop someone in the middle of Paris or London and they wouldn't know where they were - Baghdad, Cairo or Beirut; but drop someone in the middle of Tokyo and there would be no doubt of the location.

France is one western nation that is doing something tangible to protect its western culture; but, like the Maginot Line, the steps it is taking to protect itself are far too late and are doomed to failure.

Furthermore, for a nation like France which is politically secular but essentially Christian to prohibit all appearance of religious dress or icons in public school children - Islamic, Jewish and Christian - is as ridiculous as India forbidding sacred cows in the street in deference to the growing number of Indians who eat beef.

Hinduism and sacred cows distinguish India from other cultures. Similarly, Christianity distinguishes France from India, and if Christianity is no longer a distinguishing feature of French western civilization then what is? Surely not the Eiffel Tower!

How can the EU save western civilization in Europe when western civilization no longer exists in a racially and culturally pure form?

Bearing in mind that the EU was never set up to protect western civilization, it should come as no surprise that it has shown little interest in preserving it.