Sign Me “Human”

The yellow starIt appears that a modern EU version of the Nuremberg Laws is being formulated in Europe. A 21st century bureaucratic Brussels equivalent of the Ministry for Racial Purity is under construction.

But this time Europe is following the American model, instead of the Nazi one: instead of the purity of the Herrenvolk, a fair distribution of racial spoils will be the goal.

The first news we received of this came in an email yesterday from a concerned mother:

My son lives in Sweden and he just told me that one of the newspapers says that the EU is concerned about discrimination and will have a survey asking people what their race is. Some Swedish politician said that if this is allowed they will soon have passports stamped Jew. I told my son when he receives it to answer the question with the answer Human Race. If enough people do this they will have to decide that there is no such race as human, or ask nationality. This is as far as I am concerned a way to pass special laws protecting Muslims.

Sorry I don’t have more info. I am sure you can track it down.

God Bless.


P.S. Sorry for any spelling errors, but I am furious.

Yesterday evening I asked my Swedish correspondents to see what they could find out. LN supplied a link to a Swedish newspaper story, and Carpenter has translated it.

From yesterday’s Aftonbladet:

The EU now wants to register which racial group you belong to.

“It’s madness”

EU wants to reduce discrimination – by registering which race you belong to.

“I guess they’ll soon begin stamping “J” in Jews’ passports once again,” says MEP Christofer Fjellner of Moderaterna [the Moderate Party].

– – – – – – – –

It is in the proposal of the EU’s new discrimination directive the rather controversial program is found. In the document, for instance, it’s written that “The European Parliament recommends the member states to consider collecting statistical information on how different racial and ethnic groups are represented.”

Could be legislated

“This is to measure discrimination. But it is madness, even if the intentions are good,” says Cristofer Fjellner. “It’s just the fact that they use the concept of race feels very odd.”

Despite this, the report was adopted by a vast majority. It now goes further to the EU-commission who, to all appearances, will bring a proposal of legislation.

“If it gets adopted, SCB [Statistiska Centralbyrån – Swedish official bureau of statistics] will have to begin collecting such information and sending it on to Brussels” says MEP Carl Schlyter of Miljöpartiet [the Environment Party].

The Swedish MEPs look worriedly at this development. “It is unpleasant” says Cristofer Fjellner.

I did my own research and found this press release from the EU parliament dated September 27th:

No let up in fight against racial discrimination

The European Parliament adopted an own-initiative report on the application of the Racial Equality Directive of 2000 with 500 votes in favour, 46 against and 24 abstentions. MEPs believe more needs to be done to implement the directive in full, notably on issues such as legal redress, the burden of proof in racial discrimination cases, awareness-raising, data collection and the independence of anti-discrimination bodies.

Directive 2000/43/EC (see link below), known as the Racial Equality Directive, was due to be implemented by all Member States by 19 July 2003. The directive was revolutionary at the time of its adoption because it did not limit protection against discrimination to the area of employment but also covers social security, education and access to housing.

However, according to the draft report of the Civil Liberties Committee, authored by Kathalijne Buitenweg (Greens/EFA, NL), questions remain as to the directive’s real impact.

I’d agree with that last sentence, but not for the reasons given by the EU. I’d be concerned that the same pernicious system that we have here in the USA — disproportionate allocation of resources based on ethnic identity — will be adopted in Europe.

But the mandarins of the EU believe that they can use their system to combat — wait for it — discrimination:

Not all Member States have fully implemented it in their national law. Not many cases are brought to court, which the rapporteur believes may be due to the length and complexity of the procedures. Proving discrimination is notoriously difficult, and the directive’s rules on the burden of proof have not been properly applied in some Member States.

Data on race and ethnicity — a useful tool, despite concerns

The collecting of sensitive data, which could be needed to establish indirect discrimination or to assess the extent of discrimination in society, continues to raise concerns and fears in many Member States. The committee “underlines that additional guarantees should be provided for data on race and ethnicity, as these data could be diverted and used for other purposes in the justice and home affairs field” but it does believe such data — for example, statistics on racist crime and on employment — are needed as a tool to combat discrimination.

Now we get down to the nitty-gritty of this deal. Countries in Europe, bowing to their PC Multicultural idols, do not gather crime statistics based on race or ethnic origin. That’s one of the reasons why it’s so hard to get exact numbers on the incidence of violence by Muslim ethnic minorities — the data are simply not collected. Everyone knows that the rate of immigrant crime is vastly greater than the proportion of the population, but no one can say exactly what it is.

And the EU wants to keep it that way. Its citizens and taxpayers will be required to deliver benefits by the dump truck load to the protected ethnic groups, but will be forbidden to look at the crime and mayhem the immigrants commit.

And here’s a final little fillip from the wizards in Brussels:

Independence and funding of equality bodies

Although nearly all Member States now have bodies responsible for equality issues, the report questions whether all such bodies will be able to carry out their functions independently as required by the directive, and whether these bodies have sufficient funding to operate effectively. MEPs believe the Commission can play a role in monitoring the independence of these bodies.

This is truly Orwellian. The directive requires the bodies to operate independently. The Commission will act to enforce the independence of these bodies, and monitor their independence.

War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Subordination is Independence.

My correspondent is right: when this process reaches its full flower, there will be no more Human Race.

There will be the Ummah Race and the Kuffar Race.

How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world, that has such people in’t!

13 thoughts on “Sign Me “Human”

  1. On any forms I fill out where questions of race are asked, they invariably offer hyphenated American choices, or white. For example, Asian-American, African-American, etc.

    I always skip the “White” box and check off “Other” and write in “European-American”.

  2. So you’ve got that nonsense over there already??? – What kind of questions might that be? (If you read Danish – that’s easy – I’ve blogged on the issue here.

  3. “” Countries in Europe, bowing to their PC Multicultural idols, do not gather crime statistics based on race or ethnic origin. That’s one of the reasons why it’s so hard to get exact numbers on the incidence of violence by Muslim ethnic minorities — the data are simply not collected. Everyone knows that the rate of immigrant crime is vastly greater than the proportion of the population, but no one can say exactly what it is. “”

    On my Reconquista post about Muslims and sex crime I sort of found a way around that by linking police crime statistics per London borough, with census data on proportion of Muslims per London borough.

    But I’m the first to admit that it wasn’t entirely satisfactory.

    We need proper statistics – you can’t argue with numbers.

  4. Rather than crime statistics based on ‘race’ wouldn’t it be more relevant to base it on ‘religion’?

    No, that would be racist.


  5. Human” is the best answer, and one I’ve used, as well.

    If it is a no-choice-but “Other” type of form, then “Wise” should suffice.

    This fragmenting of Humanity into (thereby) warring segments is just a “divide and conquer” trick.

    Screw with the effort.

  6. Races… I didn’t know we humans were like dogs or horses. Great.

    I shall put “penguin” on all of those forms, should they ever appear.

    Though, I’ve always been wondering about that “Afroican-American”, “Asian-American” thing. Heck, I’ve seen people turn it to “Chinese-American” or what not. It’s funny, you can’t say “Black”, because it’s “racist”, but you can say “white”. Eh? Doesn’t make much sense to me, but eh…

    To be frank, whether they’re African-American or Asian-American… I don’t give a damn. For me they are American.

  7. “You can’t say black”? That’s new to me. Most people I’ve encountered have no problem with it. But maybe it depends on the individual and/or where you live.

    On all documents requiring race to be specified, those of us born in North South or Central America should state: Native American.

    And that would be lying, or at best sophistry – pretending not to know that compound phrases can be more than the sum of their parts.

Comments are closed.