Steyn: The Difference Between England and Europe

It’s time we had a good laugh…even several of them.

This video is from 2013. But that’s Mark Steyn for you: his truths don’t stale-date. If you look at the comment section, you’ll notice that people are still coming in to respond. The latest one is dated yesterday.

Come to think of it, YouTube’s comment sections are the perfect place to be as free as you want with language. [Of course they will take down videos that violate some p.c. norm or other. I never have quite gotten the hang of YouTube’s rules.]

32 thoughts on “Steyn: The Difference Between England and Europe

  1. I remember from my distant past reading of a London Times headline, around 1900,

    “Heavy fog enshrouds Channel; Continent Cut Off”

  2. I’ll probably be banned for this, but truly, as I walked into the kitchen to sit down at the counter and “check in” with GoV, among my select favorite sites, I was thinking of Coq au vin. But not in the culinary way. I was thinking also of my next target practice.

  3. Mark Steyn is spot on! Multiculturalism is an article of Faith founded on total ignorance of other cultures. It is based on an inadequate understanding of human beings.

    Christianity teaches that all people are equal (in the eyes of God – and in the West – before the law). But what are people equal in? We share the same emotional natures. We all feel love and pain and anger etc.

    What we DON’T share are our ways of thinking and our beliefs and values. And that is what makes the difference between a culture which treats women like [offensive material] and one that respects their rights, for example. Why would we want to give equality to the former, unless we are stupid?

  4. Thank you for the Mark Steyn video. I’ve read him but never heard him speak before. Very good, double-good in fact.

    Does it ever seem to you all that this is a long, weary, uphill road we are on? Those of us who do not want to see freedom become some memory of the distant past? Those of us who would like to live free, mind our own business and live our own lives, without having to watch around the next corner for the next Hmm — I’ll leave that to your imagination.

    I grew up with Lone Ranger and Tonto, also other assorted good guys battling the bad guys (1950’s style) — and today well, the bullets and bombs and death are real.

    I’m definitely going to church on Sunday.

    • So do you think the simplistic black & white reductionism is correct e.g. savage “Injuns,” nothing to do with the context of Manifest Destiny?

      • I’m not afraid to say it, “Muslim”: American Indians WERE savage compared with Europeans. That’s just objective history.

        American Indians committed genocide frequently against each other, before and after European arrival. This is widely confirmed by archaeology, by information given to European explorers and colonists by Indians, and by oral histories of the Indians themselves. Many Indian tribes developed torture to an elaborate art, and women and children were very enthusiastic participants. Many tribes also practiced cannibalism and human sacrifice.

        And then there’s the great technological lag compared with Europeans. Sorry, but Mesoamerican pyramid-building doesn’t match up to what was going on in Europe.

        “Muslim,” if you want “simplistic,” then read PC tracts which are disguised as history. I’ll stick with real scholarship.

        • Don’t you think that the takeover of the Americas e.g. Manifest Destiny in North America was just more efficient applied savagery too?

          Real scholarship, if we can reach that, without being bogged down by partisan squabbling, will show us all (humans) as savages.

          Darwin’s “Origin of the Species” shortened title is perhaps euphemistic whitewashing as well.

        • ‘Muslim’ can’t handle the simple fact that some cultures are superior to others. What a horrible thing to say. Not! It’s simply fact.

          Would ‘Muslim’ rather be living in a village in (islamic ) southern Morocco – or in a prosperous, secular Western country?

  5. I have listened to that talk a number of times over the years since I first saw it, it never gets old and shows the brilliance of Mark Steyn, I laugh out loud in about 7 different parts of that talk, pure gold, absolutely wonderful and thanks for linking it again, started my morning off with a good laugh.

    I live in France and I try to explain the difference between the English and the rest of Europe in terms of being free before the law instead of being given the right to do things and it can really be like head butting a wall at times, but I got some neighbours to understand it, which was rather fun I can tell you.

  6. The problem is not multiculturalism. The problem is allowing undesirables migrants to stay permanently because of the wrong public policy. The cause if far left liberalism. There are many migrants that work hard, law abidding, speak the local languages and contributing to the society. It is not fair to blame this group of people.

      • It’s a question of degree and of where the line is. I think that this is best illustrated by showing two extremes:

        ACCEPTABLE MULTICULTURALISM TO ALMOST EVERYONE: bring your yummy food, thank you.

        UNACCEPTABLE MULTICULTURALISM TO ALMOST EVERYONE WITH A BRAIN: don’t bring a crummy attitude towards women, including your own.

        The question is of where to draw the line. The [left-leaning foolish people] are now willing to tolerate maltreatment of women, which is really shocking.

        The more important question is making the line clear. I’ve used the examples above because I think that they should be uncontroversial. *Surely* nobody things that the British food scene hasn’t been improved by multiculturalism. And in the domain of food, the attitude of the “multikulti” people *is* correct: one isn’t better than the other, it’s just a question of taste and personal preference, nothing to argue about. The more the merrier. I, for one, hate traditional “anglo” food. I’m glad for the alternatives. No harm is done. That far, I agree with them.

        But let’s continue the food example a bit farther: it doesn’t extend to foods that are dangerous or prepared in an unsafe manner.

        The problem happens when the attitude towards food, choice of paint colours, hair styles, and favoured music is extended towards ALL life choices where there *IS* a difference and things are *NOT* equal.

        An obvious example is the attitude towards women. Multiculturalism is *NOT* welcome in that respect. No thanks. Leave that where you came from.

        These lines need to be defined clearly. And to be made clear to new arrivals. The “core values” shouldn’t encompass all of life’s choices, but they do need to be enforced.

        • There is not problem eating International Foods due to taste and preference, but as soon as the food is certified Halal, then it becomes an issue of principle.

          • LOL!

            Personally, I hate cheese, which is why I’m very partial to the foods of cultures that don’t eat a lot of it. That’s the only aspect of multiculturalism that I can say has been a definite benefit, no doubt about it.

            As an aside about Halal, I find it amusing how despite the large numbers of Muslims in Canada Halal isn’t a big deal even among many observant ones. Even more amusing, they largely rely on Kosher certification. See here for example:
            Good thing those “pesky Jews” are around… to keep things Halal for the Muslims!

    • The problem is unpunished law-breaking, savage behaviour, lack of mutual respect & trust. back to civility instead of savagery.
      This afflicts all cultures & entertainment industries dehumanising the good & glamourising the dark base side of our nature e.g. gangsterism & sexualising & monetising everything. Baby girls with lewd labels is not innocent fun.

      • You’re quite right that this “afflicts all cultures”. But what you neglect to mention is that it does not afflict all cultures equally. Cultures in which Islam is dominant and where the Shari’ah prevails are without exception more brutal, repressive, and sexually violent towards their female populations than are cultures without those characteristics.

        This is also true of large Muslim enclaves within non-Muslim countries. Wherever Islam is the dominant ideology and the Shari’ah is revered, women are brutalized and repressed to a greater extent than in the host society. There are no exceptions.

        • Since, I’m not a professional, privy to complete figures, I would personally be cautious for claiming empirical certitude.

          Anecdotally, I with my limited personal experience, & basing my views upon secondary & tertiary (probably biased) sources, would tend to agree. The Muslim world is at a low point, & has been for a few centuries, though there are probably rays of light.

          The cultural aspect may be linked to the historical foundational cultures e.g. tribal.

          I don’t agree with the “no exceptions statement” e.g. India has horrific misogyny, especially in rural areas, with unique manifestations. In the West, in urban ghetto areas, we appear to see a gangster rape culture. Similarly, the sexual objectification & drink-drugs culture are ubiquitous, where virginity & “prudery” is despised.

          I have to remind you again of the unfortunately legalistic sounding caveats, for the more we know, the more we realise that the less we know.
          Peace be upon you & yours.

      • Unpunished law breaking? The problem is, what law breaking should be punished? Only sharia law perhaps? Perhaps what you’re thinking of as law breaking is no law breaking at all under sharia.

        As long as people are allowed their own de facto parallel sharia law based legal and enforcement system, there will be plenty of “unpunished lawbreaking” from the standpoint of de jure national law.

        • Most of us reasonable human beings are not two alien species who disagree about every jot & tittle just for the sake of ego or ideological fanaticism, life is too short.

          We can & probably do agree, shock horror, on the sad state of our world, if not its root causes.

          The lecherous filthy swine who attacked those native females should be punished by the law of the land.

          The last point does not make sense to my tired mind.

    • The definition of multiculturalism isn’t that you have various cultures that integrate based on common ground, it’s ghettoization and de facto segregation where you have parallel societies and even parallel legal systems existing in the same country. No-go zones and tolerance for lawlessness are the definition of European and British multiculturalism.

      By that definition, yes it IS the problem.

      If people from various cultures in the same area would assimilate and integrate socially and legally this was never called “multiculturalism”, it was simply called assimilation. Multiculturalism specifically refers to a policy of tolerating the complete refusal to integrate and assimilate even to the absurd point of allowing parallel legal and law enforcement systems to exist.

      • Non-integration is obviously a disaster.

        It’s clear that some groups integrate better than others to a given culture. That is something that isn’t, but should be, taken into consideration in immigration policy.

      • I do not share your definition of multiculturalism. Its not just islam and christianity. I have lived in hongkong, taiwan and singapore and there is no problem that people of diverse cultures (asians, caucasians, muslims, buddhists, christians) getting along well.

  7. After all this time someone who has probsbly been visiting here for a while writes “The problem is not multiculturism”. Do you look sad all the time and cry Obama gun tears?

    • Naturalallies: You do realize that your comment is provocative, hmm? And it could reasonably be inferred from your remark that your purpose was to provoke another person.

      Instead of the rhetorical provocation, why not spend the intellectual effort to explain why you disagree…look at commenter Mike’s response as an example of what I mean.

    • Different cultures can coexist peacefully except the one that supports plundering and raping. However, the cause of the problem is the traitor within who opened the door to anyone (ie no background checks whatsoever) in a careless manner for reasons that few knew.

  8. It is not self-evidently true that multiculturalism or ‘diversity’ is an intrinsic good. And l’ve never heard a cogent argument that makes a case for it.

    Mark Steyn says, in effect, that it’s just a touchy-feely hunch which all right-thinking people want to pretend is an axiom of civilised life.

  9. It’s not self-evidently true that multiculturalism or ‘diversity’ is an intrinsic good. And l’ve never heard a cogent argument that makes a case for it.

    Mark Steyn says, in effect, that it’s just a touchy-feely hunch which all right-thinking people want to pretend is an axiom of civilised life.

Comments are closed.