Pauline Hanson is as usual being roundly abused for expressing a viewpoint unpopular with the would be ruling class of SJWs, race baiters and other such mentally defective rabble as make up the left wing of politics today. She has said Australians should not accept Afghan refugees into their country. To be more accurate, Ms Hanson is really confronting the overarching consensus that to do so is the only option, because “it is the humanitarian thing”.

Liberals in New Zealand have expressed their emotions over the photo of around 650 Afghans crushed into one US cargo plane, and deserting their country as the Taliban take over. They shed tears at the sight, and say we must allow more refugees in. Emotion is one thing of course, and objectivity and reasoning are other things. Better conclusions arrive when the latter means are used to drive decisions.

There is no overwhelmingly rational argument for allowing refugees into a country, especially when their culture is so very different from the host culture. So we should at least be able to discuss the issue sanely, without the outpouring of reasonless emotion, mainly hate and disrespect, that is being heaped upon Ms Hanson. She has a valid point and it should be debated.

People initially thought Twitter was a place where such debates might take place, but is has for sometime been evident that this is not so. Twitter is today basically a left wing controlled message board, and it exists for people to post the news that their cat has died. Others will then post comment on this issue, and either express immense sympathy for the loss, or find reason to criticise and hate on the cat owner for some perceived mistake in looking after the cat. Hence the reaction to Ms Hanson on Twitter is about 95% emotion driven hate and revulsion. Unfortunately, this den of insanity counts a lot with some powerful people.

We should discuss the issue of Afghan refugees outside the emotional paradigm of the dead cat on Twitter, and instead use calm and reason to decide the best course. In regions of the internet that the left like to describe as extremist, there is the view that all emigration is bad. “Always sink the ships” is an historical reference to the Roman’s mistake in allowing Visigoth refugees to enter their region, only to lose that region and the lives of 50,000 Roman soldiers from a later uprising of those refugees. (see video below)

We have modern day examples of this kind of event, not so severe in terms of lives lost, but in principle still quite similar. Even in New Zealand, there are instances of people we gave refuge to who are today conversely hating upon our core values and the people who made this country a safe and orderly place that could provide that refuge.

Stark examples are Golriz Ghahraman, who was granted refuge from the barbarism of Iran’s religious leaders, but constantly attacks our society and its traditions, and allies herself with overseas forces who would do us harm, if they could. In fact the Green Party houses quite a few such examples who also campaign hard against our customs and traditions (note their contempt for Winston Churchill) and ally themselves with global groups who want to destroy nation states.

Twitter abounds with immigrants to New Zealand (or refugees) who daily heap hate and scorn upon “old white men” who built this country, many of whom gave their lives to defend it. Or upon Christian conservative women who are perhaps the most widely despised group.

A Muslim refugee was given a job working in parliament and then worked vigorously for the banning of Christian customs there. Muslim pressure groups, mainly immigrants or refugees, are currently driving the push for alien-to-our-culture “hate speech” laws.

Leftist narratives are rife with conflicts of logic and reason and one of the most obvious right now is that everyone is allowed their tribe other than Christian Europeans. In fact rational people could be forgiven for thinking the left’s enthusiasm for refugees is driven by their insane need to hurt this particular tribe.

The struggle in Afghanistan is many faceted, however the West, whether what they did was right or wrong, never once had as an objective the installation of a totalitarian dictatorship as now exists. The Taliban were armed against the Russians when the Russians were the bad guys. The more moderate factions of Afghan society were armed and assisted when the Russians were gone and the Taliban became the bad guys.

Its fine to say in retrospect that the US should have done what was necessary after 9/11 and then got out soon after. However they didn’t and until Donald Trump, there was no resolution on leaving. Thousands of Western lives were lost trying to install a democracy that it is now obvious the Afghans did not want. Trillions of dollars were spent on a mission that was never succeeding, and our western govts lied to us when they told us it was.

Western efforts failed, and all of those lives and trillions of dollars were wasted. There was no Afghan Army. They were never going to fight the Taliban. There is not even a country. It is a region made up of a stone age illiterate warring tribes.

In the majority, they don’t care about being subjugated to radical Islam. They don’t care about the education or emancipation of women. The men would not even fight for their wives and sisters and daughters after the West left trillions of dollars worth of fighting equipment for them to use. Instead they fought each other to flee on departing aircraft.

Why the hell would we want these people in New Zealand? Surely, by now, after all of those western lives and dollars, we should acknowledge that Afghanistan is not our problem, and neither are its refugees. You may not agree with this sentiment, but it is surely not unworthy of debate.

Right across the West, we have our own problems. This comment below a Patrick Buchanan column here sums it up perfectly. It references the US, but it applies to us all-

The retreat from Afghanistan is just a punctuation mark. What we’re witnessing is the end of the US empire, with all the alien rulers, corrupt judges, illegitimate government, incompetent generals, foreign profiteers, and hordes of invading migrants, moral degeneracy, and declining religious faith, morale, and national confidence that usually comes with these events. If historically these do not turn around, so we might want to stop thinking in terms of “preserving” and “conserving” and “restoring” that which has destroyed, and start thinking in terms of separating and building anew with the benefit of the lessons learned from the decline and fall of the United States of America.