Since the spring and summer of 2015 Europe has been the target of millions of people headed over from Asia and Africa, a phenomenon we can safely qualify as invasion. We should ask the fundamental question: what is the theoretical basis upon which we can interpret and handle migration?
Currently there are two main approaches in Europe. One is the mainstream liberal – or rather neo-liberal – position that while these migrants arrive in groups and are seemingly well-organized, they are ultimately independent individuals and their cases should be evaluated as such.
This is a classical human rights premise, shared by the European Union, international media, the left, the United Nations and of course George Soros’ global network. A rather distorted version is the one in the U.N. migration pact which says migration is a fundamental human right, regardless if it is motivated by actual persecution or just economic and existential reasons.
The national-conservative approach, on the other hand, while acknowledging the human rights aspect, also looks upon migration as a clash of groups, nations, cultures and civilizations with diverging values. It is also looking at ways for the majority hosts to preserve their culture, religion and value set.
The liberal approach to migration fails to comprehend the crucial issue that migration does not consist of a collection of individuals but groups with different cultural and religious beliefs that represent an existential threat to the host societies. It is also a question of dominance and survival or, more bluntly, the spread of Islam and Europe’s future.
This may seem surprising, but migration is primarily a question of numbers. As long as it remains a sporadic phenomenon, the host nations have a chance to individually integrate them into its society, avoiding the formation of groups separated from the mainstream of the society.
When tens, hundreds of thousands or millions are coming, the situation becomes radically different, though – which is the case right now. These groups have no intention to integrate into the legal, religious, social and cultural order of the society. On the contrary: they will attempt to assert increasing influence on the majority and ultimately take over power.
Experts say that the threshold is somewhere around ten to fifteen percent: if the mass of migrants exceeds that mark for a sustained period of time, change can become irreversible.
History is offering us the learnings on a platter, showing the results of indiscriminately taking in everyone based on a misguided Wilkommenskultur. As opposed to the liberal view, the national-conservative approach is the one that grasps the essence of migration and any solution can only come from this direction.
Title image: Migrants on the Hungarian border in 2015 (MTI/Zoltán Máthé)