Eastern European countries attacked because they do not want to lose their identity again
Here we go again. Once again the mass media that obey the dogmas of politically correct and cancel culture are launching heavy accusations at the nations of Eastern Europe, due to the hard line they have adopted on the problem of irregular (or illegal, if you prefer) migrants. The images of migrants in the no man's land between Belarus and Poland are endless, and the expressions of indignation that accompanied them are endless.
Yet something is not right in this prepackaged picture. I wonder, in other words, whether or not a legitimate government, such as that of Warsaw, has the right to decide which and how many people can legitimately enter its territory, and when.
Of course, this presupposes that the States have their own territory which must be defended, when appropriate, even with arms. And it also presupposes that national identity is always and in any case a precious asset, and that one should not listen too much to the calls for total and indiscriminate acceptance that Pope Bergoglio, to cite only the most famous example, launches in practice every day.
According to the aforementioned mainstream media outlets , the collapse of the Berlin Wall would have buried not only communism in those countries, but also the very idea of "solidarity".
Strong thesis, and which deserves a reply. According to some well-known journalists, Italian and non-Italian, almost all the nations that were once incorporated into the Soviet bloc and the defunct Warsaw Pact have "lost their soul". This interpretation tells us that they are regressing towards forms of xenophobia that have been considered dead for decades. In fact, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Bulgarians and Poles do not want to know that they are receiving masses of migrants in their territory who are manifestly alien to their traditions and culture.
It is therefore necessary to understand "which" soul the Eastern European citizens would have lost and, above all, if they really have lost one. Or if – a much more likely case – it is we, citizens of Western Europe, who lose their souls.
If we observe the situation without starting from prejudices taken for granted, and without assuming that those who preach total and indiscriminate openness are automatically right when they silence those who have different opinions, the picture that emerges is much more varied.
Vast sectors of public opinion in the Western world (including the United States) have been preaching the uselessness of borders or, even better, the moral misery of borders for decades. It is a style of thinking that focuses entirely on a simplistic form of cosmopolitanism and on an ill-conceived multiculturalism, in which any distinction must be abolished. The defense of borders, which logically also implies that of cultural identities, is an abomination to be rejected without delay, as if the aforementioned cultural identities were not a natural product of historical evolution.
It should be remembered that the Soviet empire was basically based on not very dissimilar assumptions. Even if, in that case, the push towards standardization had behind it the Marxist narrative, based on the attempt to abolish national differences in the name of a hypothetical classless (and exploitative) world society.
But no one can think of that for Hungarians, Poles, Czechs, etc. the collapse of the Berlin Wall represented exactly the recovery of their repressed and debased identity for almost a century. Rather strange – at least in my opinion – that this fact is not understood by many loners in the media and print media . Is it really so difficult to understand that the invasion of thousands and thousands of people, coming from totally different backgrounds, worries so many in Budapest, Warsaw, Prague or Bratislava? And not only in government buildings, but also (and above all) among ordinary people?
It seems to me that there are other elements of strangeness in this tragic story. And so I argue that, to be bizarre, it is rather the attitude of governments like the Italian one, which little or no seems to care about identifying who arrives. This means that it is more rational to find methods – perhaps artisanal – to proceed with the identification of migrants. And, if the Czechs use markers, I wouldn't bother the Nazis, the SS, and whatnot. Nor am I too surprised that the Poles impose a total blockade on their border.
Only a country like Italy, which has long since renounced enhancing its national identity, can welcome everyone with a light heart. And I don't think that's a good thing. Also because every day we have before our eyes the example of foreigners who want to live with us, but without giving up a single comma of their customs and traditions. The endless lines of veiled women who flock to the reception centers confirm this all too well.
What risks, today, who dares to say these things? The marginalization, in the first place, aggravated by the painful photographs that the newspapers slam on the front page to support the thesis of acceptance without limits. It is no longer possible to use expressions such as "our home" and "their home" as they overflow from the limits of politically correct. The problem is that it happens not only in Rome, but also, unfortunately, in the high-rises of the European Union in Brussels.
The post Eastern European countries attacked because they don't want to lose their identity again appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL https://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/paesi-dellest-europa-attaccati-perche-non-vogliono-perdere-di-nuovo-la-loro-identita/ on Fri, 10 Dec 2021 03:51:00 +0000.