Speaker 1: I want to welcome everyone back to the Pegana Show.
John Field houses back. How's it going on, John John Well,
sir cool? All right. We're gonna read this, uh, this
article here by Martin Van Krevel called Warren Migration. It
appears in I think it's volume ten of There Will
Be War, which was put together by Jerry Jerry Pornell. Yes, sir, okay, No,
I was gonna ask you, you know, to talk as
you know, give us an introduction into Van Krevel, then
Pornell the work, because you're the one who introduced me
to you know, to this work.
Speaker 2: So yeah, go right, sure, yeah, just real brief introduction
that I know we're going to talk a different time
about Pornell. But this is volume Pornell of Jerry Pornell's
There Will Be War. Jerry Pornell, you can look up
the Wikipedia who he was. He's most famous as being
a science fiction writer. Most of his career he was
basically doing strategic forecasting and you know, future studies for
the Air Force and NASSA and whatnot. He was actually
the guy in charge of the Human Factors Lab during
the Apollo projects of the guys who assessed astronaut candidates
whether or not they would become astronauts. Which the most
important thing about that is, this is a guy who
wrote sci fi who literally selected who would get to
go into space. And he never actually opened any of
his speeches with that, which tells me more than anything
about the man. So Jim Bang commissioned him to write
a bunch of well, originally one volume. It was a
anthology of called Their Rull Be War, which would be
about the future of armed conflict. Excuse me, and Portnell
took a combination of science fiction writing some of his
own stuff, some other people's stuff, along with nonfiction essays,
you know, actual real world essays, some of his own stuff,
a lot more of other people's stuff, and it was
based around a specific topic. He either some cases he
would solicit stuff and say, hey, write me something on this.
Usually it was somebody he went out there. He either
got their work that they'd already written, or he said
he wanted something on a specific theme from people he
you know, both fiction and nonfiction that he said thought
had somebody really important to say with that, and either
they wrote it specifically or in the case of this,
I think it's more of a case of Van Krebled
took what he had on there on the shelf and
probably just turned it into an essay that meant these requirements. Well, sorry,
I'm a little sick, so I'm a little short of breath,
so I have to pause in between. So yeah, there
was one volume. Then they did another eight volumes after that,
up to nine volumes. Walk came down in ninety one,
and there wasn't much of a market for people talking
about war in the future after ninety one to about
I don't know ninety eight ninety nine, because we all
thought that we had reached the end of history and
there would never be war again, and we were always
proven wrong anytime people think there will be an end
of war, because again, only the dead have seeing the
end of war. The tenth volume came out twenty ten
sometime Fox Day Castilia House got the rights to republish
the first original nine volumes from Pornell. Jerry. Actually, doctor
Pornell included a new intro to a number of those books,
and like I tell people, just reading the intro and
conclusions to those anthologies as some of the best writing
on strategic thinking that I could recommend to anybody. So
he republished those nine books and then he published a
tenth volume which this comes from. And here we are
sadly Jerry Pornell died. I believe in twenty seventeen. Castilia
House has released one or two new anthology of the
same type under different supervision. They've actually talked about releasing
an eleventh volume because they have the rights from port
Neells's state to do stay, but that hasn't happened, so
that's the there will be war. I didn't know if
you had any other questions or comments, but that's.
Speaker 1: Sir, No, that's great. You can still like go on
Amazon and by the by the paperbacks and everything, so
they are available. But you know, you can also find
if you look online, you can find them. Why don't
you give us an introduction about Van Kreveld and this
essay in particular.
Speaker 2: Sure, okay, Martin van Kreveld, he is in Israelia story
and yes he is Israeli. Yes he is Jewish. Born
nineteen forty six in the Netherlands, Rotterdam era area. Excuse me,
obviously that's a really interesting time to be born as
a you know, a Jewish person in the Netherlands. I've
heard it alleged that his parents he was actually born
in a concentration camp. I don't know if that was
or wasn't the case. Keep in mind that immediately postwar
a lot of the refugee centers were literally they took
people who were in camps of various types and moved
them next door into wherever the into the barracks, wherever
the guards have been located. So when you say he
may have been born in a concentration camp, that doesn't
necessarily mean behind the wire, but that's his birth nineteen
fifty they immigrated to Israel. Van Krebld actually has an
interesting biography that was published by Castelia House with an
audiobook for version that, sadly I think Amazon has taken down,
but if you can get the chance to get it
from Castillia House's really great book for an intellectual historian,
which back up a second. The reason I recommend this
and one reason I tell people to go read Van
krebl is these probably the premier scholar of insurgency and
nonstate warfare in the world right now. So that's what
makes him important. That's why he's taught all kinds of
you know, unusual places like the Marine Corps Amphibious Warfare College.
He's taught a lot at either him directly or you know,
using his materials as taught at US Army or excuse me,
you a United States Special Operations Command. He's taught at
the Mesa's Institute. So again he's an interesting guy. He
will engage with lots of people who wouldn't necessarily you
would think you would engage with. But heways back to
his bio. Yeah, he immigrated Israel nineteen fifty. Weird time.
He was born with a cleft palada that made him
unfit for military service, which in Israel it's always been
kind of weird to not serve because the implication is
you're a draft dodger. But being medically exempt, he got
to finish his bachelor's degree early and he actually got
to start grad school early and go ought to get
his PhD and come back, and he was probably the
youngest PhD in Israel at that time, just because again
he didn't have to go through military service, which he
went to London School of Economics. His PhD thesis was
on excuse me, the Behrmacht in Greece and Italy. Excuse me,
Greece and Yugoslavia during the Second World War, which bring
how he got into military history, which people point out
the one scholar in his country of his time without
a military record. It's kind of a little ironic that
he's the guy most known for military history, but that's
what he got into. Long story, Throughout his career, he's
always been known as sort of the guy who either
not necessarily pushed the envelope, but the guy who took
hardcore scholarship into sort of like the peripheral subjects of
military history that civilians don't generally pay attention, Like you
looked at Command in War literally has a book called
Command in War which deals just that, the history of command,
What is the nature of command? How do we develop commanders?
How have we attempted to develop or people attempted to
develop commanders in the past, What are the consequences? He
got another book on logistics, The History of Military Logistics,
which it's been pointed out that at that time it
was only the second scholarly textbook on a scholarly research
excuse me, scholarly book on military logistics in the world.
There was somebody in the Austro Hungarian Empire produced a
book earlier in the twentieth century, but nobody really paid
attention to that. And again, logistics drives war and army
travels on that stomach. As a remind everybody. Nobody likes
to talk about logistics, but things like food and ammunition
matter a great deal if you want to win a war,
especially if you have you know, advanced weapons system If
you can't, I tell people it's you can have a tank,
you can have a fighter plane, you can have the
best you know systems in the world. But if I can't,
you know, put fuel and ammunition in your tank or
a fighter playing which you have is a giant paperweight.
He also did he did a history of the is
the Israeli military. He did some really cool work that
I actually used in my grad school research about the development,
the professionalization, development of officer training in the West, which
is really interesting because long story is short, most of
the West we pretend that we're imitating Prussian German military
culture while really doing a lot of French military culture
combined with a lot of managerialism, and that sort of
accounts for a lot of our problems in war. Probably
the thing he's most known for is ninety one he
did a book called The Transformation of War that gets
into again what it says, you know, what it says
in the box, transformation of war from a traditional convinctional
war into unconventional war. And then what we were beginning
to see in ninety one, which we've very much seen
since then, is non state actors becoming combatants, you know,
groups like Hezblat and whatnot, and the you know, the
breakdown of the station between when is a true state
and what is a non state actor. From there, he
sort of expanded his thesis into the rise and decline
of the state, which is how he got in with
the thesis, guys. And at a certain point in between
all those things, he started writing about, you know, the
history of equality in the West, history of feminism and stuff,
which really made a lot of people unhappy because essentially
he was accused of becoming an extreme far rightist, whereas
he would just say he's being intellectually honest based upon
the evidence. So he's extremely critical of fieminism as well
as a lot of the complaints and things like mine,
affirmative action and minority politics. He's known a lot for
criticizing things like that, So yeah, that's the man, that's
the work. And again part of why we're why we
know about this guy, why he became so influential is
Israeli academic or Israeli academia. Rather, the language of academics
in Israel is English. Obviously they speak Hebrew as the
first language. But keep in mind throughout Western countries there
are only so many languages that are used for high
level academics because again, if you have a small population
language then nobody else speaks. It doesn't do you any
good to just do academics in your language, so you
tend to do one of the Big four or five,
like English or French or Russian or Spanish. In Israel
uses English academics are used as English language for academics rather.
So that's how we got to know him. This book,
excuse me, this essay, it's deals explicitly with the concept
of war and migration. It is titled War and Migration.
The very short I would say conclusion to it if
you have you know it's too long for you to read,
which we're going to read it for you, is that
war and migration are fundamentally the same things. If you
have mass migration, especially assisted mass migration into an area
with a host population has no connection to you, where
you're a foreign outside force migrating in, whether you intend
to or not substantively, that it's no different than warfare.
And I think that pretty much sums it up, Sir.
Speaker 1: I think it's interesting that his family moved to Israel
in nineteen fifty and he would come to the conclusion
that a mass migration into an area would be considered war.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I think he actually deals with that issue directly.
And here one of the things he brings up in
his biography is his father joked routinely that they moved
to Israel just because they didn't want to feel like
they were Jewish anymore. He comes from a fairly assimilated family.
He describes himself as a Dutch Calvinist who happens to
be an atheist Jew. He says that explicitly in his biography.
He's one of those people who would say it's almost
sort of an accident of ancestry that his family is Jewish,
and he's not anti Semitic in the slightest. He's not,
you know, he's not a self hating Jew in any
sense of the word. But he's somebody's very honest that,
you know, Judaism is it's not really a defining aspect
of himself so much as it's the religion that defines
so much civic life in his country. And even then
he said, he said his family would probably much rather
have stayed in the Netherlands, but it wasn't you know,
exactly the greatest time to be there for anyone. And
the fact that he could get to the kid to
Israel's sponsor to go to Israel, his family get sponsored
to go to Israel, whereas they couldn't get sponsored someplace
like the United States, is just the way it happened
in the accident of history.
Speaker 1: And didn't he write a book that basically pretty much
got him banned from Germany?
Speaker 2: Well, my understanding is the book is actually illegal in
Germany or they, or at least I know the original
cover is illegal called Hitler in Hill, Hitler in Hell.
Excuse me, got some shortness of breath because I'm sick
right now, Yeah, which is also published by Castali House.
When I spoke to him, he described it as an
autobiography of Hitler because he said, you know, as a
military historian who did so much of World War Two,
everybody said he needed to do a biography on Hitler,
and he made it clear that it's like, what was
he going to say new that nobody else had said,
And he said he decided he was going to do
it as a fictional autobiography. The thing is one of
the issues of any time you you actually understand the
target of your research, you very much have to make
whatever effort you can to see from there will view
their perspective. You know, one of the things that our
friend Dale Cooper has gotten a lot of hate for
recently is, you know, explaining what the issues were concerning
Germans in Germany in nineteen forties. Well, Van Krebled is
one of the people who did this a lot earlier,
probably a lot deeper than any of our friends have done,
and consequently he made a lot of enemies. It's just
Van Kreveld being Jewish, being Israeli and his parents are
being survivors of the Holocaust. It's you can't really throw
many stones at in at least nothing will really stick.
Speaker 1: Gotcha, all right? And sorry, man, If I had have
known you were sick, I would have postponed this.
Speaker 2: I it's complications about a case I did not know
until like twenty minutes ago.
Speaker 1: Okay, all right, I'm gonna start reading and stop me
whenever it seems like mister Parnell throws a gets a
little boomerash in the introduction here, or so if you
want to stop at any time there, Like I said, I.
Speaker 2: Love Pournelle and I tell people to read them, but
not all of his stuff is the greatest stuff ever.
Speaker 1: All right, So this is Parnell's editor's introduction to Warren
Migration by Martin van krebbl. Martin van Kreubled is arguably
the world's most pre eminent military historian. Here he presents
us with an analysis of Warren migration and reaches the
inevitable conclusion war is often indistinguishable from migration, although sometimes
it takes longer. The Governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jandal, himself
an assimilated child of immigrants, says that migration without the
intent of aim assimilate assimilation is invasion, an act of war.
It is often said that the United States is a
nation of immigrants. This is true enough, but it is
a nation created by the melting pot by assimilated immigrants
who entered legally and came to be Americans, or at
least were not opposed openly opposed to the idea. As
Bill Buckley said, one could study to become an American
in a way that one could not become Swiss or
a Swede. Assimilation was not always easy, and for freed
slaves it was difficult, but it was generally the goal.
The story of America and migration is as old as America.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I was just going to say, just the idea
that in a European country you can't become you know,
Swiss or Swedish. You know, we've seen a complete attack
on that principle in the decade since then.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I would wonder if I wonder if Pornell would
still feel the same way about after witnessing what's what's
been happening, whether he'd feel the same way about all this.
Speaker 2: Probably more insistent about it being war.
Speaker 1: The more recent migrants do not all accept the assimilation
as a goal. They seek to preserve their diversity. E
pluribus unim is not the goal of the caliphate. Open
rejection of toleration without dimitude is proclaimed. The United States
faces numerous decisions after migration, immigration, and assimilation. Doctor van
Krevel gives us crucial information on the history of migration
from the times before the Trojan War to the present.
Starting the body of the text Warre and Migration by
Martin van Krevel, Warre and migration have always been closely related.
The relationship was recorded as early as thirteen hundred BC,
when we were informed the Israelites followed Moses out of
Egypt to embark upon the enterprise and ultimately led them
to the promised land of Canaan. As you will no
doubt recall, they promptly conquered it, and since that time,
for over thirty three hundred and fifteen years, the link
between war and the large scale movement of people from
one place to another has never been broken. Yet, despite
the way these mass movements of people have had a
profound effect on human history, there has never been a
systematic effort to explore the ways in which the two
great phenomena, war and migration interact. This essay is a
preliminary attempt to rectify the situation. One from the Exodus
to the Greek, From the Exodus to the Great Trek.
The Old Testament tells the famous story of the Israelites,
which begins sometime around eighteen hundred BC, when Canaan was
visited by famine. This caused a patriarch, Jacob and his
extended family to travel to Egypt, where they and their
offspring were initially welcomed but later enslaved. Four centuries later,
having multiplied considerably, a leader by the name of Moses arose.
Under his divinely inspired command, they left Egypt. He's jumping
out and ignoring a big part of the story, but
that's okay. I would hope most people know the story.
After crossing the Red Sea, they marched into the Sinai Desert,
where God, who was waiting for them, gave them the Pentateuch.
From the desert, they proceeded very slowly to what is
known today as the Kingdom of Jordan. It is said
that Moses must have been the first general staff officer,
for who else would have required forty years to cross
what is actually a very small desert.
Speaker 2: It's a professional inside jog.
Speaker 1: And after finally arriving on the threshold of the Holy
Land four decades later he died. His successor Joshua, who
subsequently proved to be a formidable military commander buried Moses
then led the Israelites across the river, and is a
Canaan proper. These intrepid immigrants swiftly conquered the land and
settled it after killing or enslaving most of the inhabitants.
Whether or not the tale of the conquest of Canaan
is historical has been debated for generations, and particular scholars
have questioned whether the Israelites could realistically have fielded a
six hundred thousand man army, not counting the women and children.
Israel's first Prime Minister, David Bengurion, fancied himself a biblical
scholar and considered six thousand to be a more acceptable figure.
You brought him into a media conflict with Israel's Orthodox rabbis,
who consider literally every word of the Old Testament to
be gospel truth.
Speaker 3: That's a funny, uh yeah, And keep in mind the
context of in israelis he's basically pointing out that internal
society being divided between those who are religious and those
who aren't.
Speaker 2: And the biggest issue in modern Israel has always been
that non religious people are always making religious based arguments
that they don't get believe in in any other circumstance.
Speaker 1: Yeah, even I read Shahak's book Jewish History Jewish Religion.
He makes that point throughout. But for our purposes it
does not really matter whether the story is historic, historical,
or symbolic. Still less do the details concern us. What
is important is that, after all these years, the story
of geographical relocation and conquest is still commemorated by all
Jews around the world. In other words, myration was war
in fact, in so far as ancient war frequently involved
not only soldiers in armies, but entire nations who left
their homeland mitmann undros undewagen with man and horse and wagon.
As the Germans say, war was migration.
Speaker 2: And this is, more than anything, is the most important
part of the essay. If you got this, highlight this
right here, I would tell the reader that is the
fundamental thesis of this essay.
Speaker 1: The exodus was far from the only episode of its kind.
For example, the Doririans are believed to have entered Greece
from the north in the years around eleven hundred BC,
as with the conquest of Canaan. The question of whether
the Dorian migration really took place or not has been
much disputed Thucydides has the following to say about the
topic of the introductions to his book on the Peloponnesian War,
quoting the country now called Hellas had no settled population
in ancient times. Instead, or was a series of migrations,
as the various tribes, being under the constant pressure of
invaders who were stronger than they were, were always prepared
to abandon their own territory in the belief that day
to day necessities of life could be secured just as
well in one place as in another. They showed no
reluctance in moving from their homes, and therefore built no
cities of any size or strength, nor acquired any important resources.
Where the soil was most fertile, there were the most
frequent changes of population, as in what is now called
Thessaly in Boetia. In most of Peloponnese, except Arcadia, and
in others are the richest parts of Hellas. For in
these fertile districts it was easier for individuals to secure
greater powers than their neighbors. This led to disunity, which
often caused the collapse of these states, which, in any
case were more likely than others to attract the attention
of foreign invaders. There's a lesson for today, isn't it.
I guess that's eternal, ternal lesson.
Speaker 2: Very little in human nature has ever changed.
Speaker 1: It is interesting to observe that Attica, which because of
the poverty of her soil, was remarkably free from political disunity,
has always been inhabited by the same race of people. Indeed,
this is an important example of my theory that it
was because of migrations that there was uneven development elsewhere.
For when people were driven out from other parts of
Greece by war or by disturbances, the most powerful of
them took refuge in Athens. As being a stable society.
They then became citizens and soon made the city even
more populous than it had been before, with the result
that later Attica became too small for inhabitants, and colonies
were sent forth to Ionia.
Speaker 2: Without getting too bogged down in the weeds of Greek history,
for an American especially, it's important to understand Greece obviously
number one. The area extended far beyond what's modern Greece, right,
so Asia Minor, you know, the whole peninsula that makes
the bulk a Turkey. He was historically part of Hellas
and it started to extend north and east into the Balkans.
But anyways, that are very jagged coastline, which means, despite
being a relatively small country, you have huge coastlines throughout,
some of which actually lead to inland rivers that go
pretty deep inland, and within the country itself proper, you
have a few very fertile areas combined with lots of
areas that are either relatively mountainous, very rough, or somewhat arid.
So it's a weird population center situation in Greece historically,
where you have some areas that support large populations, a
coastline that you can use to go basically anywhere in
the world, and large parts of the interior of the
country that are just rough that nobody really wants to
live there.
Speaker 1: There are other examples besides the Israelites and the Dorians.
The Etruscans migrated from Armenius to central Italy around eight
to fifty BC. According to a recent study, the.
Speaker 2: Guy Gales's outs pronounced I don't know if these the
same gales from Ireland in Scotland.
Speaker 1: That's what I was wondering. The Gaels launched numerous attacks
on the Hellenistic kingdoms and the Balkans and Asia Minor
in the third and second centuries BC, although they were
ultimately repulsed. And in fifty eight BC, as Caesar tells us,
the Helveti wished to migrate from their homeland in southern
Germany to southeastern Gaul and asked him the newly established
Proconsul of Gaul, for permissions across the Roman occupied territory
on the way. After he refused to grant it, they
fought him, were badly beaten, and were forced to turn back.
That failed migration triggered a whole series of wars, which
ended in the Roman conquests of the entirety of Gaul
within six years. The nomadic Arabs, who occupied much of
the territory of the Byzantine Empire in the sixth and
eighth centuries, provide another informative example. So did the Magyars,
whose original home was in the southern Ukraine and who
reached what is Hungary today in the tenth century AD.
Their westward migration was halted in nine fifty five when
they were defeated at the Battle of Lechfield near present
day Augsburg. The Mongol and Manchurian conquests of China twelve
o five to seventy nine and sixteen eighteen to sixteen
forty four, respectively, also led to large scale migrations as
various people retreated to the west, displacing other nations in turn.
Speaker 2: And just for context, say, the huns advance into Western
Europe probably was a consequence of much earlier expansion from
what is currently Mongolia, you know, putting pressure in their homelands,
the Hawnish homelands.
Speaker 1: The largest and most famous migratory episode, if that is
the correct label for a process a stretched out over
several centuries, was the so called Vulgar vander Rung, the
migration of people. It's entirely transformed Europe from about the
middle of the second century AD to the middle of
the sixth century, destroying countless old polities and creating an
equally large number of new ones. Driven out of the
East by their more formidable neighbors, wave after wave of
barbarian tribe crashed into central and western Europe. Some bypassed
the Roman Empires to the north, whereas others crossed its
frontiers and entered its territory to wage war on the inhabitants.
The Saxons reached Spain, the Visigoths southwestern France, Spain and Portugal.
The Vandals invaded North Africa. The Burgundians, whose original home
was in Poland, traveled to the land that is now
named after them, Burgundy. The Huns, whose original habitat was
the Caucaus Caucasus. Is it Caucasus and never remember how
to pronounce you.
Speaker 2: I think it's usually Caucuses.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, because that makes it sound plural. That's why
it doesn't sound right in my head.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is where we get the word Caucasian though, correct.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: The Huns, whose original habitat was the Caucasus and Central Asia,
traveled west, slaying and conquering everyone and everything on their way,
until a coalition of Romans and Visigothts finally stopped them
at Cologne in four point fifty one, but the defeat
of Attila did not, by any means, put an end
to the series of migrations. The Huns were followed by
the Lombards, the Lombards by the Bulgars, and between them
they changed the maps and the very name place names
of Europe.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and just so they know, the Huns obviously the
Huns we know about, who probably had from Central Asia
putting pressure again, probably an expansion out of what is
now Mongolia. But the voltagurvonder Rung, that's literally the Germanic
people's migrations, and which is a huge part of what
destroyed the Roman Empire. It's also why we're speaking, you know,
a bastardized Germanic language in English.
Speaker 1: All these migrating people, as well as many others that
could be mentioned, were relatively simple tribal societies. In terms
of organization, technology, military civilization, literature of the arts and
the like. They could not match the settled, more civilized
societies they encountered and often conquered. The Book of Joshua
describes Canaan as the land bristling with fortified cities, and
yet they were quickly defeated by the nomadic Israelites at
a time when Roman power, encompassing practically all the lands
around the Mediterranean, was approaching. In Zenith, Rome's enemies in
Germany and Gaul consisted of endlessly shifting tribes who lived
in wooden huts. Four centuries later, the Germanic Visigoths sacked Rome.
The Huns Ammianus Marcellinius Marcellinus says were a race savage
beyond all parallel. He described them in distinctly unfavorable terms, quoting,
they are certainly in the shape of men, however uncouth,
and are so hardy that they require neither fire nor
well flavored food, but live on the roots of such
herbs as they get in the fields, or on the
half raw flesh of any animal, which they merely warm
rapidly by placing it between their own thighs and the
back of their horses. They never shelter themselves under roofed houses,
nor is there even to be found among them a
cabin thatched with reeds. But they wander about, roaming over
the mountains and the woods, and accustom themselves to bear
frost and hunger and thirst from their very cradles, just.
Speaker 2: To a point when he talks about, you know, sitting
on stuff on horseback in order to make meat edible
if you salt it, and then you do that, it's
called jerky.
Speaker 1: The anonymous Roman author of De Rebus Belicus Riding early
in the fifth century a d. Speaks of other migratory
tribes of baying barbarians, baying may have been all the
these barbarians were capable of, but they did so with
sword in hand. Although the process might take time, such
as the five hundred and fourteen years separated the Simbrian
War from the Sack of Rome, very often the barbarians
eventually managed to defeat their more developed opponents and take
over their lands. There are two cardinal factors that explain
the frequent victory of the simple and less civilized migrants
over their more sophisticated stationary opponents. First, while the settled
societies enjoyed technological superiority in terms of jewels of energy
available per capita, the primary sources of mechanical energy were
stationary devices such as windmills and water mills. When it
came to war, In battle, which are intrinsically mobile, both
the civilized soldiers and their barbarian enemies depended entirely upon
the muscles of men and beasts. As a result, most
of the technological advantage enjoyed by the civilized societies was
irrelevant because it could not be brought to bear on
the battle field. Second, the migrations were usually long drawn
out processes, Though armed invasions and battles were frequent, there
were also long periods of peace. Therefore, there was plenty
of time for both sides to take each other's measure
and to learn from each other. Renegades and captives taken
a war often played a large role. This exchange of
information almost invariably worked to the benefit of the less
civilized parties. For example, the Mongol armies which conquered China
and came close to overrunning Europe in the mid thirteenth
century included many specialists who utilized technologies learned from the Chinese,
including various types of siege engines. Two hundred years later,
the Ottoman Turks did the same in their westward drive
towards Constantinople and beyond.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is a really important part to understand that
migration is conquest. The assimilation by the migrants is a
huge part of how they win the Siege of Constantinople.
Most of the artillery pieces were actually manned by Christians
and basically all of their cannons were produced by Christians.
The Mongol cons quest of China, all the siege engines
were you know, various Chinese people, usually ethnic Chinese specialists,
and even then the Germanic migrants, migrations. We know, just
upon some weird y half of groups you see in
parts of Europe that they had to have picked up
and assimilated some amount of people in their migrations and
integrated them into the migrant cultures. So you know, in
boasts of the words, the ability to assimilate is part
of how you conquer the enemy.
Speaker 1: The migratory phenomenon was nuts. That's yeah, that's uh, learning
the language, looking like them, dressing like them, and sometimes.
Speaker 2: Key technologies, right, Like one of the most obvious ones
are if you were talked to a military store and
maybe not to the layman, is you know, different ways
of putting devices on horses or animals, you know, like
I think it was the Onns who actually introduced the
stirrup to Western Europe, which you know may not sound
very important to us, but understand, until you put a
stirrup on the horse or on the saddle, you know,
a cavalryman couldn't use a lance and couldn't charge with that,
which meant that prior to that, cavalry was mostly something
used for scouting and on the screens the outside of
a formation, where suddenly, with a stirrup you start getting
bigger and bigger cavalry and eventually like heavy armored knights
in the Middle Ages. So yeah, technology is a huge
part of what spreads, and it's not something that's readily
apparent at the time. A lot of times.
Speaker 1: The migratory phenomenon was not solely a Eurasian one. Africa
also abounds with stories of armed migration, some historical, other's mythological.
Three thousand years are said to have passed since the
bound Tu tribes began expanding out of their oridgetional homelands
in what are today Cameroon and Nigeria, and now they
can be found all over the central and southern parts
of the continent. The Zulu established Quaisulu Nation in South
Africa after migrating southward along Africa's east coast. Many of
these migrations bear strong resemblances to the exodus described in
the Pentateuch. In every case, the movement was said to
be have been initiated by one or more gods. On
their way, the migrants witnessed many different miracles which confirmed
that there were in fact they were in fact doing
the right thing. One of the best known African migration
tales is that of Ashanti, a marshall tribe that migrated
westward from Ghana into the Ivory Coast, who on their
way received Sikadoi the Golden Stool, a royal and divine
throne believed to have housed the spirit of the Ashanti people.
One of the last and most peculiar African migrations was
the Trek of the Boors. The Bores were European settlers
of Dutch and Hugenot descent who left Cape Province in
order to remain independent in the face of a growing
British presence there. The Trek lasted from eighteen thirty five
to eighteen forty six and was unusual in the sense
that the Boers set out to settle in lands inhabited
by less civilized and less technologically advanced kafirs, mostly Bantu
and hot and taught tribes, thus reversing the usual pattern
of migratory conflict. But like these less civilized antecedents, the
Bores never hesitated to use their superior arms against anyone
who stood in their way. The Trek also resembled other
previous migrations in the sense that the migrants were strict
Calvinists who believe they acted under divine guidance. Visiting the
region around Pretoria back in late nineteen ninety four, I
saw the famous Monument to the var Trekkers. It must
be said, to the credit of the African National Congress
who took over South Africa after apartheid, the region's new
rulers have not demolished it yet.
Speaker 2: Deep in mind, these things were written in twenty seventeen
at the latest. Dints before you know a lot of destruction,
and part of it, I think has to do with
the fact that the more monument is sort of in
the middle of nowhere, and urban blacks probably don't want
to visit that area.
Speaker 1: So migration was war and war was migration. Aside from
relatively equal situations in Africa and North America, when tribal
societies fought each other, militarized migrations were chiefly a matter
of less developed mobile societies attacking more developed, settled civilizations.
That likely explains why in the more technologically advanced parts
of the world, migration wars came to an end in
the fifteenth century, as the history of the American West illustrates.
Once tribal warriors were able to lay their hands on
modern weapons, particularly firearms. They quickly learned to use them
just as well as their opponents. But what they could
not do was produce to weapons and require ammunition for themselves.
The development of firearms was a decisive shift in the
balance of power towards more technologically advanced societies, particularly those
of the West. How long this advantage will last as
in open question, but there are indications that it is
already on the wayne. Section two Ethnic cleansing. Thucidides illustrated
how the process works in both directions. Migration usually leads
to war, but war can also lead to migration. For
after war takes place, one of the common consequences is
the forced migration that is currently known as ethnic cleansing.
Some of the earliest migrations of this kind are recorded
in the Old Testament. The Assyrian kings had an established
policy of exiling half the population from the lands they conquered.
One they followed after conquering the Kingdom of Israel. A
century later, the Babylonians sent part of the population of
Judah into exile after subjugating that kingdom. The small quasi
Jewish communities in Kurdistan, as well as the larger pre
nineteen forty eight ones in Iraq are said to consist
of descendants of the Israelites forced to leave Israel by
the Assyrians. Both empires have made a habit of bringing
in other peoples to take place of those that they
had exiled. Thus, the Samaritans, a small community of under
a thousand people who currently live in Israel and the
West Bank, are believed to be descended from settlers brought
into the region by its Assyrian conquerors during the seventh
and sixth centuries b C.
Speaker 2: And part of this too, the unstated part, is internal
Israeli politics about who's really Jewish, which has always become
an issue, especially after the last major Jewish populations have
migrated to Israel in the United States. So it's you know,
they're looking at smaller and smaller populations and arguing amongst
themselves so whether or not they're really Jewish and whether
or not they can really be assimilated into Israel.
Speaker 1: The spectacular reliefs that the British museum that originally decorated
the palace of the Assyrian king Senekareb reigned seven oh
sixtus s eighty one BC at at NINEVAH provide us
with some idea of what Nessyrian ethnic cleansing operation may
have looked like. The subject of the release is the
siege of Lackish, a city in the Jidean plane in
seven oh one BC. In addition to the military operations,
they also show us what happened to the prisoners and
deserters who left the city. Men were decapitated. There are
a lot of headless corpses lying around or impaled. Women
and children were left more or less unharmed and were
taken away by the victors, accompanied by wagons laden with lute.
Since Lakish was never rebuilt, the captives presumably went to
places from whence they never returned. This suggests that women
and children represented the majority of those who went into exile,
although accounts from the Old Testament suggest that on at
least some occasions men were spared to share their fate, very.
Speaker 2: Often depending on the fane skills their ability that were
wanted by a conquer.
Speaker 1: The Romans preferred not to exile those they defeated, but
to subjugate rule and levy taxes on them. Ciso called
such taxes a perpetual penalty for defeat. However, during the
period between two hundred BC and one twenty a d
they regularly took enormous numbers of prisoners. These prisoners, men, women,
and children, were then transported to the slave markets, especially
the famous ones of roads in Dellas, and sold there.
Entire communities, including great cities such as Corinth and Carthage,
were left almost devoid of inhabitants. This conquest, best based
slave trade, brought a wide variety of different tribes, cultures,
and religions together and transformed Rome, the greatest slave market
of all, into a new Babylon. The men who followed Spartacus,
the Thracian gladiator who led the great slave revolts against
Rome in seventy three to seventy one BC, came from
many different lands. Spartacus's goal was for them to all
return to their countries of origin, but his men refused,
preferring to stay in Italy where they could kill, pillage,
and rape. They were eventually defeated at Bronzanium by eight
legions led by Marcus Licinius Crossus, and hundreds were crucified
along the Appian Way. Spartacus himself is believed to have
been killed in the battle, but his body was never found.
Speaker 2: That's part of why we say there's only one successful
slave revolt in history, that's Haiti. And again the Spartacus
revolt could potentially have been successful, but they decided they
just wanted to hang out and loiter in the area
that they just escaped from, so they were destroyed in
the open.
Speaker 1: In sixty six to seventy AD and again in one
thirty five to thirty seven eighty, the Jews of Palestine
rose against their Roman conquerors. The Romans suppressed both rebellions
and responded by engaging in extensive ethnic cleansing. Hundreds of
thousands of people were driven out, and, to use an
expression coin, nearly two thousand years later, Jerusalem was made Judenfrei.
Jews were prohibited from living in the city and even
entering it. Such episodes are by no means rare in history.
The reason so many Jewish examples exist is that despite
the forced migrations they experience, they managed to preserve their
religion and their ethnic identity. Other peoples forced to leave
their homelands were either less fortunate or less determined. That
does not necessarily mean that Jews kept their race pure However,
for as modern genetic studies show, Jews settled in different
countries tend to genetically resemble the host populations more than
they do each other.
Speaker 2: And again, he's willing to stick a thumb in the
eye of sort of mainstream opinion in his own country.
Speaker 1: Not all forced migrations were the results of war. For example,
throughout the Middle Ages and the early Modern period, Jews
were regularly expelled from many countries, but this had little
to do with war. During the century and a half
after the Reformation, there were reciprocal expulsions of Catholics by
Protestants and Protestants by Catholics throughout Europe. The most famous
example of these forced migrations was Louis the Fourteenth decision
to revoke the Edict of Nantes in sixteen eighty five,
which resulted in four hundred thousand Hugenots being exiled from France.
Even in Switzerland, the Cantons were divided on the basis
of being Catholic or Protestant, and much smaller force migrations
took place. Large scale ethnic cleansing again raised its ugly
head during the early years of the twentieth century. The
Balkan Wars led to the expulsions of Muslims from the
Balkan states that broke free of the Ottoman Empire. Soon
after the outbreak of World War One, the Turks, fearing
lest the Christian Armenians might aid and a bet the
Russian enemy, enacted the first modern genocide. Hundreds of thousands
of Armenian men were massacred. The rest of the population
was expelled and driven to the Syrian desert, where they
were left to die. The Turks also expelled the Jews
of southern Palestine and drove them from the drove them north,
although some were taken to Alexandria Egypt by American ships.
No sooner had the Great War ended than the Cirks
again initiated a massive ethnic cleansing campaign, this time against
the Greeks of Western Anatolia. This region has been home
to important Greek communities for over three millennia, but barely
five thousand Greeks remained there today.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I see, Dale Cooper's got a really good episode
with Jacko Willink about the Armenian genocide. But one of
the consequences of this is that's why you have ethnic
Armenian communities throughout the former Soviet Union, not just in
Armenia proper, but other places. You have ethnic Armenian communities
are big in Israel, you have them big in a
number of other countries. And even then, the issue of
who is considered Greek, the Turks actually called them Romanois
I literally called them Romans, which was a Greek speaker
of the Eastern Orthodox Church. So a lot of times
that's the only thing that firmly finds who's Greek in
Asia minor, just because most of the people who were
Turks or call themselves Turks aren't even really descendant from
the Turkish people proper. There, you know, descendants of Greeks
who converted and had some amount of intermixing with outsiders.
So again, war our migration is war.
Speaker 1: The period nineteen nineteen nineteen twenty one also witnessed the
expulsion of Hungarians from Romania and of Germans from what
had been West Prussia and Cilicia but was claimed by
Poland after the war. Twenty years later, the jack Boot
was on the other foot, having defeated the Poles Hitler
to expelled the masses of them from the western from
Western Poland and replaced them with Germans. He also expelled
the Jews of Alsace, Lorraine, driving them into France, after
which they were subsequently re expelled to the gas chambers
in Eastern Europe. As these events touch upon one of
history's most infamous crimes, it is important to note that
the series of complicated campaigns of expulsions directed primarily against
Europe Europe's Jews and Gypsies and Slavs, that ended in
the murder of millions could never have taken place if
it had not been for the cover provided by war.
In Hitler's mind, the war and the and lo sung
de Judenfraj or Final Solution of the Jewish Question, were linked.
Speaking to intimates in August nineteen forty one, the Fear
of the Third Right claimed the fact that so many
Germans had lost their homes after World War One justified
the humane expulsion of Germany's Jews. Five months later, at
the von Se Conference, the policies that lay the foundation
for the Holocaust were worked out in detail.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again that needs to be very much understood
by Americans. I'm not in any way justifying any of
the genocides of the twentieth century, but keep in mind
that there was a situation post World War One where
large portion, maybe even the majority, of ethnic Germans in
Europe lived outside of Germany, Austria and Switzerland proper.
Speaker 1: There were more forced migrations to the east. After being
unexpectedly attacked by his ally Hitler in violation of the
nineteen thirty nine malotsof Ribbentrop, pack Stalin ordered the evacuation
of the tatters. Should that be is that tatters or tar?
It should be pronounced totter, the totters totter, Yeah, from.
Speaker 2: The half breed descendants of Mongols.
Speaker 1: Okay from the Crimea. His rationale was the same as
many others before him. He feared the totters might join
the advancing Germans. But the expulsion of the totters from
was nothing compared to the huge migrations that took place
from nineteen forty four to nineteen forty six.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and to his point, a large number of totters
did side with the Third Reich. Yeah, and again these
are the half fredscendants of Mongols.
Speaker 1: As the Soviet Red Army marched west towards Berlin, it
was often joined by local militias in the Eastern European
countries that occupied. Twelve million Germans were driven out of
their homelands in Romania, Hungary, Ygoslavia, Slovenian Croatia, Czechoslovakia, Poland,
West Prussia, East Prussia, and Cilicia, and about one six
of them died in the process. As the war came
to an end, tens of millions of people were on
the move across the continent. Refugees, slave workers, former concentration
camp prisoners, prisoners of war. Almost all had nothing but
rags to their names and were trying to either escape
the advancing Russians or simply return home.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again that this part cannot be really emphasized
enough because it's something Americans we like to think that,
you know, the war ended in nineteen forty five with
this beautiful parade, and suddenly there was peace throughout Europe,
which is complete and total bullshit. And you know, obviously
everything the Red Army was doing, you know, in their
territory of operation, which again Daryl Cooper has a really
good episode on this called The Anti Humans. But we
tend to think of countries and their borders on the
ground being very concrete, while ethnic groups are kind of soft,
whereas Eastern Europe it's sort of the opposite. Ethnic groups
tend to be fairly cohesive, fairly distinct. But even if
you have a distinct country, you know where does the
border end. That changes a lot throughout history, especially in
Eastern Europe. To the point with Ukrainians, there's all the
Ruthenian people absolutely exist throughout history. The numbers of them
that are called Ukrainian is always a matter of debate.
But because Ukraine literally means the borderland. But where exactly
is the Ukraine? Well, it's somewhere between the eastern part
of Russia and you know, central Poland, and that's gone
back and forth throughout history, which is part of the
current fight in Eastern Europe. That to be clear, I
don't have any side in that fight. But again, there
are ethnic groups that are on both sides of different
lines throughout the world, throughout Eastern Europe, with huge number
of ethnic Germans that have been there for centuries, who
stylein forcibly moved west towards into Eastern Germany or excuse me,
into what became the Democratic Republic of Germany East Germany.
And keep in mind some of these groups had been
gone for so long that they never even bothered to
speak proper modern Germany, which was an invention of the
you know, the nationalist movements of the nineteenth century. There
had been German languages, there are German languages, but you know,
a formal German hadn't been established. So these are people
in some cases had hard times even communicating in proper German,
who were, you know, uprooted from places they'd been for
four hundred years or so. So it is impossible for
Americans to understand the amount of forced migration that took
place after the ind of fighting in World War Two.
Speaker 1: Well, he talks about people trying to escape the advancing Russians.
Here famously, there are many reports of well, there are
reports of a few camps that were liberated and the
prisoners chose to escape with the German Is rather than
wait for the Russians to show up.
Speaker 2: There are multiple cases, in some cases maybe half or
more of the prisoner population going with them.
Speaker 1: The force migrations in ethnic cleansing did not end in
nineteen forty five. The nineteen forty seven Indo Pakistani Wars
divided British India into two different countries and caused millions
of people terrified by the interreligious violence to cross the
newly established frontier between India and Pakistan in both directions,
triggered by the flight of ten million Bengali refugees from
what was then known as East Pakistan. The Third Indo
Pakistani War, which broke out in nineteen seventy one, brought
about the creation of the independent Bangladesh. After the Pakistani surrender,
the refugees returned and a smaller, though still considerable number
of Pakistanis were driven out of Bangladesh into West Pakistan.
The end of the Vietnam War led to the expulsion
of two hundred and fifty thousand ethnic Chinese.
Speaker 3: Is that ho.
Speaker 2: Oh? I think it's oh yeah, Chinese And they don't
even usually use that. Usually they call them young in
real life. But yeah, there are huge numbers of ethnic
Chinese in Southeast Asia, and despite being there for centuries,
they are still distinctively ethnic Chinese, despite the fact that
the average American thinks that all the East Asians look
the same.
Speaker 1: The end of the Vietnam War lands of the expulsion
of two hundred and fifty thousand ethnic Chinese ho from
that country, as well as the migration of the two
million Vietnamese boat people, over half of whom ultimately settled
in the United States. The nineteen eighty Russian invasion of
Afghanistan caused as many as a million Afghanis across the
border into Pakistan's northwestern provinces. Despite being settled in refugee
camps there, they eventually came to jeopardize their host control
over the region, a problem that may very well present
itself in other parts of the world in the future.
Some of the wars that have taken place in Africa
since the nineteen seventies, particularly those in the Sudan Eritrea, Somalia, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi,
the Congo, Liberia, Angola and Mozambique, also led to enforced
migration on a massive scale, and after forty two year hiatus,
ethnic cleansing returned to Europe when, following the death of
longtime dictator Tito, Yugoslavia broke up. When Bosnia Hers and
no Colovino, whose population is predominantly Muslim, declared independence from Belgrade,
the Serb minority and the province embarked on an all
out effort to avoid coming under Muslim rule. Their efforts
were supported by the Serbian government under Slovan and Melosovich,
who provided its kinsmen with men, weapons and money. The
Bosnian War, which lasted from nineteen ninety two to nineteen
ninety five, witnessed widespread ethnic cleansing. The war was brought
to an end by NATO aircraft launching air strikes at
the stronger Serbian forces. It later turned out that there
was little difference between the two sides, both of whom
committed atrocities, including mass execution. The number of people who
displaced who were displaced by that war has been estimated
at two point two million, including two hundred and fifty
thousand Serbs who were driven out of the Krajina Pryina.
Speaker 2: Thank you just because I watched CNN in the day.
Speaker 1: That fact did not prevent the world, with President Clinton
at its head, from pointing to the Serbs as the
culprits and condemning them by every available means. The current
wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and several other countries in
Asia and Africa are also creating large numbers of migrants.
Often they are prepared to do almost anything to escape
the fighting, even though life is a refugee is a
perilous endeavor. Women are in particular danger, as they run
the risk of being kidnapped and sold as prostitutes. According
to the New York Times, there are currently sixty million
people who have been forced to leave their homes. That
represents just under one percent of the entire global population.
Of the sixty million homeless, one third are refugees who
are presently living abroad. The remaining forty million have been
displaced by the civil war but remain inside their own countries.
Since the figures include millions of children who were born
to refugees, even second generation refugees, or displaced people after
they fled, it is possible that they are inflated. That
is especially true in the case of the Palestinians, whose
number whose number the Palestinian authority puts at an incredible
at a literally incredible six million. Yeah, that number is
literally incredible. However, there is every sign that the number
of displaced people is only going to grow and increase
the size of the global mass migration in coming years.
Speaker 2: Like I said, there's always a lot of subtext with
his writing.
Speaker 1: Same with Littbakret Litwakret.
Speaker 2: Yeah, which again both of them are reading people we should.
Speaker 1: Read yes, absolutely. For example, Israel's war of independence, which
the Palestinians call the Nakba Catastrophe, actually led to the
expelled of about six hundred thousand people. The June nineteen
sixty seven war created at most another three hundred thousand refugees. Nevertheless,
do the refugee camps near Jericho have become ghost towns
and have largely remained so to the present day. As
of twenty fifteen, large numbers of Palestinian refugees are scattered
in the Gouza Strip, the West Bank, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon,
while others have joined the ongoing Muslim migration to Europe
and the United States because Israel's Arab neighbors find it
useful to have no intention of permitting it to go away.
The plight of the displaced Palestinians is both the most
persistent refugee situation as well as the one that has
attracted the most sustained international attention. Unfortunately, the future does
not bode well, since the possibility that Jordan will eventually
fall to diesh Isis is all too real. Should that
come to pass, it is not inconceivable that the government
in Jerusalem would deem it necessary for reasons of national
security to drive out the two million Palestinians in the
West Bank as well. Yeah, huh he is.
Speaker 2: Uh, it was, And I guess we're probably near the
point where we want to take a break. But part
of what you have to understand about voud Kravel is this,
despite being a national security historian who does so much
on special operations, he is really persona non grata with
the Israeli Defense Force. So he's known for having a
lot of sources who are again because everybody serves in
the military, veterans who give him information and leaked documents
to him. But the formal IDF has repeatedly criticized him
about all kinds of things, to the point that he
was not allowed to give speeches to like IDF officer
schools because they were worried about him starting fights.
Speaker 1: That's great, all right, we'll cut it here and pick
up for part two. I think we can get through
this in two parts, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, let me see you just pulling up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, see how many pages we have left?
Speaker 2: Yeah, we only got like five pages left.
Speaker 1: You want to finish it now?
Speaker 2: Yeah, we can do that.
Speaker 1: Okay, have you got time?
Speaker 3: Yeah? All right.
Speaker 1: Three voluntary war related migration. Though the use of force
is war's outstanding characteristic, not all war related migrations are
carried out by force. Very often people decide to leave
a war torn region out of their own free will.
One reason for doing so, which played an important role
during the twentieth century, is the desire to avoid conscription.
In the decades following the development of the French Revolutionary Army,
conscription became common throughout Europe and was origidly enforced. Many
of those willing to evade force evade forced military service
went to the USA, the British colonies in Latin America.
Speaker 2: A huge portion of the American excuse me, ethnic German
migration in North America was from people who wanted to
avoid conscription. Ironically, a huge amount of the of israelis
And I tell people, if you ever get a chance,
watch the Travel Channel. Inevitably you'll hear about somebody from
Israel who's got to go back to take over a
family business. And the unstated part is this is somebody
who went abroad for school, made sure they were gone
so long they couldn't get drafted. And now that they're
old enough and they can't be drafted. They're going home
because you know there's no risk to them.
Speaker 1: Today, Eritrea is the country that produces the largest number
of refugees trying to avoid national service, military or other.
The country is governed by a desk spot named isaiahs Afwerki.
Freedom and human rights are unknown. Men and unmarried women
are conscripted, often for life. This has caused thousands of Eritreans,
particularly young men, to flee to Ethiopia. From there, they
usually continue on towards any other country they can enter
legally or illegally.
Speaker 2: Again, another part of the subtextas he's from a country
that tries to have universal conscription to include women.
Speaker 1: War also leads to migration in another way. From the
earliest days of war, Victoria's soldiers have been besieged by
the women of the defeated in search of safety, food,
and not least sheer masculine force. Yeah, that's a very
that's him being diplomatic.
Speaker 2: What a polite way to say that.
Speaker 1: That still remains the case. Armies often prohibit frightenization, as
the Allied ones did in Germany after World War Two.
Some states even forbade marriages between their troops and women
from the occupied population. Usually these efforts are to no avail.
In World War Two, American soldiers overpaid, over sex, and overhear,
as their British allies described them, often had the time
of their lives. After the war's end. Most of them
eventually returned home alone, but an estimated sixty thousand American
soldiers brought back a signorina or a Freudlein as a
wartime soir.
Speaker 2: Eventually, it got so common for them to seek other
ways of getting their girlfriend's home that eventually the occupation
command just abandoned the restrictions and allowed them to marry.
Speaker 1: But bubbah. The Korean War is known to have produced
an even larger migration, most likely because of the ban
on marrying Japanese women. Japan served as a principal US
base during the Korean War was lifted from nineteen forty
two to nineteen fifty two. The number of Gis who
married foreign women was around one million.
Speaker 2: That's also a very polite way of saying that a
generation of Japanese men had largely been.
Speaker 1: Destroyed the wars in Southeast Asia from nineteen sixty five
to nineteen seventy five. That involved about two point five
million American troops generated another crop of war brides, but
although the phenomenon is not entirely unknown, in Afghanistan and Iraq,
it is much less common. The difference is that Muslims
are extremely jealous of their women and segregate them as
much as possible. Hence, the US military, in the hope
of not further inflaming the occupied populations, has done its
best to discourage the troops from fraternizing with the local women.
Much more important than either of these forms of post
war migration is the kind which is driven by the
hope of a safer, more orderly, and more prosperous life abroad.
This describes the majority of modern migrations. Their destinations are
primarily the rich countries of the West, as well as Australia.
Migrants with a Christian background are normally absorbed without too
many problems, especially if they are white, as refugees from
the former Yugoslavia are. However, the Lebanese Christian the aspora
has shown that even those from Arab backgrounds can adapt
to the West. Hindus and Buddhists also tend to do well.
Speaker 2: Just for a completely unofficial point, of reference. I have
never met people were quite as racist as Arab Christians
who moved to the West.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I know, a couple.
Speaker 2: Off white nationalism or off white supremacy.
Speaker 1: By contrast, most Muslim migrants are fanatically opposed to any
kind of cultural assimilation. Using their mosques as community centers
and accepting religious imams as imams as their leaders, they
actively resist any attempt to integrate them. Some even begin
proselytizing for their way of life, as they have every
right to do in a democratic country. I love that sentence.
Speaker 2: He is incredibly is sometimes polite with how he says
offensive things, but he is blunt.
Speaker 1: Their objective is to spread their views on what the
late Samuel Huntington used to call identity. Identity, as Huntington describes,
it includes the relations between God and man, the individual
and the group, the citizen and the state, parents and children,
husband and wife, as well as differing views of the
relative importance of rights and responsibilities, liberty and authority, equality
and hierarchy.
Speaker 2: The simple fact that he cites Huntington says a lot
about his intellectual position.
Speaker 1: It also includes general relations between sexes, as well as
the rights of homosexuals, as well as many of the
rights many Westerners hold deer in both their private lives
and at the socio political arena. As of twenty fifteen,
Muslims form about eight percent of the population of the
European Union. I wonder what that is now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that is also why the unofficial reason why basically
everybody opposed Turkey's admission into the European Union because Turkey
would immediately become the most populous state in the European Union,
so it would be a huge shift in balance in
terms of Muslims there. I will say that, keep in
mind because citizenship laws are so much different in Western Europe,
that eight percent probably does not reflect huge numbers of
long term migrants, to include people who are, you know,
their third generation in a country, who are not citizens
of their respective countries.
Speaker 1: In large cities, especially wealthy ones situated on important communication
lines for featuring seaports, the percentage of Muslims tends to
be much higher. In some cities, entire neighborhoods have been
taken over and reshaped in accordance with the migrants' preferences.
These neighborhoods, such as Tower Hamlets in East London and
the Kurrigham district in Brussels have assumed a decidedly Mohammedan character,
complete with mosques, veiled women and Muish moisans moisans calling
the faithful to prayer. Most of those neighborhoods are slums
where the inhabitants tend to be unskilled, under educated, and unemployed.
Many of their residents cannot even speak the language of
their hosts. Further hitting the situation, the newcomers lose their
accustomed control over wives and children, who tend to be
more amenable to integration. This ongoing intra family conflict not infrequently,
at least to domestic violence. Muslim immigrants often feel underprivileged
and discriminated against, even though they are living off the largesse.
One might even say the tribute of the people whose
lands they occupy or are occupying.
Speaker 2: I was going to take a moment to point out
that the issue with language not only do they do
a poor job of adopting the language of their host country,
the fact they're cut off from the education system in
their original country of origin. Large number of their children
don't grow up speaking you know, proper Arabic or do
or whatever. So you get a lot of people who
speak the equivalent of I don't know what's the best
way to say ebonics, except they're not obviously black. They're
speaking a non language that's of such a poor qualility
that it's like they're not educated in anything.
Speaker 1: What's interesting here is when he talks about the losing
losing control to becoming a customed and becoming integrated. That's
exactly what happened to the Jews when they were in
countries that liberalized. They were able to come out from
under the uh under the power of their rabbis, and
they basically that they would then petition for their own
rights to get away from their rabbis.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is a secular person who's ethnically Jewish who
you know he would probably say that explicitly.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but what was this one further complicated the situation.
The newcomers losed our custom control over wives and children.
It's send to be more amenable to integration. This ongoing
intra family conflict not in frequent, at least a domestic violence.
Muslim immigrants often feel underprivileged and discriminated against, even though
they were living off the largest One might even say
tribute to the lib I already read that sorry. It
is true that only a small person serge of the
immigrants in question turn to violence, let alone politically motivated violence.
But it is also true that in all the countries
to which they have immigrated, Muslim immigrants are committing crimes
that a rate that far exceeds the native population. A
portion of this crime represents a continuation of politics that
is indistinguishable from terrorism and will inevitably lead to harsh
countermeasures and eventually reprisals.
Speaker 2: Again, migration is war.
Speaker 1: The present situation is more than a little reminiscent of
past migration inspired wars and bodes ill for the future.
It is estimated that as many as five million of
France's Muslims already live in zone zones orbanes, sensibly where
the French police and government have relatively little control, what
we call no go zones. The modern form of economic
migration is not caused by war, but it is threatening
to turn into a cause of war, and as has
happened many times before. An informative exams of how minority
majority conflict can lead to violence can be seen in
the sixteenth century France. For thirty years following John Calvin's
break from the Roman Church in fifteen thirty, Catholics and
Huguenots looked at each other with increasing mistrust. This mistrust
occasionally sparks sporadic violence, and over time the violence gradually escalated.
In fifteen sixty two, with the Ugenots outnumbering with the
Eugonots numbering twelve point five percent of the French population,
full scale war finally broke out. The religious issues were
intertwined with political differences in foreign powers such as England
Spain and England Spain, the Low Countries, various German princes,
and even the Papacy were drawn into the battle. By
the time Henry the Fourth was finally able to put
an end to the Eight Wars of Religion in fifteen
ninety eight by issuing the Edict of Nuntis, more Frenchmen
had been killed than in any other conflict prior to
World War I, including the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. Conclusions,
war is far from the only cause of migration. Other reasons,
primarily economic, have always played an important part in encouraging
people to leave their native lens, as the examples of
the Puritans and the Hugonots show religious motives can also
be a factor. Yet, even when these other reasons were
the cause, war and migration have been closely linked in
various and complex ways. At some times, war and migration
were essentially the same, as in the Great Migration of
peoples during the first few centuries after Christ, the Arab
expansion after six point thirty two a d. The Maggiar
invasion of Europe, the Mongol invasions of China, and the
movements of many African tribes from one part of the
continent to another. At other times, the relationships between the
two phenomena were more complicated, such as ethnic cleansings that
rendered war unnecessary or took place after war's end, massi
avoidance of conscription, or soldiers bringing home concubines and war brides.
These various forms have often intermingled. All appear regularly in
the annals of human history, and all will doubtless will
doubtless continue to do so in the future. The only
thing that changes in their relative importance at any their
only thing that changes is their relative importance at any
given point in time. As far as the West is concerned,
the most significant migration today is the massive influx of Muslims.
The reason is that, unlike the people of the secularized West,
Muslims take their religion and the way of life it
prescribes seriously. As a consequence, they are much harder to
integrate than other more malleable immigrants.
Speaker 2: Understand, this is basically the only reason anybody in the
establishment in the West is concerned about this issue. It's
also a large part of why, you know, parts of
the interior of America, like the South, especially why the
establishment hates us is because where people who still believe
in religion and still live it as opposed to just
treating it as a window, dressing them means nothing.
Speaker 1: For the present. It would be going too far to
say that the refuge It would be going too far
to say that the refugees, as well as those who
are responsible for their plight back in their homelands, are
actively waging war against the West. They lack the leadership
and organization required for the effective large scale violence at
war entails. However, it must be recognized that more than
a few in their midst are not averse to using
violence in order to achieve their aims. They have, after all,
invaded numerous countries without regard for the will of the
people of those countries, and their presence is no less
likely to spark resistance than armed invasions of the past.
Since war, as Klaus klaus Witz teaches, has a built
in tendency to escalate, the resistance can be expected to
graduate into all out armed conflicts over time, especially as
seems likely if the influx continues and all the valiant
efforts at integration proved feudal from Berlin to Jerusalem. Let
those with ears to listen, listen and that's it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, the.
Speaker 1: What was I going to say?
Speaker 3: There?
Speaker 1: The if we see this now? Yeah, there there are
reports coming out of Springfield that Haitians are just walking
into gun stores and they're selling them guns.
Speaker 2: Mm hmmm. Well again, I mean part of the problem
is if you were not to sell them, you know,
one report to the ATF and you're probably going to
lose your license because race is now the sin.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, I mean FFL officially, anybody who holds an
f FL is allowed to refuse sale to anyone for
any reason. Yeah, that is officially.
Speaker 2: Officially, But if that reason is racism, you know, suddenly
all of your justifications go out that's the magic word
that ends up their magic word, that is the state
exception in contemporary society.
Speaker 1: And also he mentions that they have no leadership to
expect them to wage war, they have no leadership they
have well, I mean it almost seems like they do now.
I mean if they're being flown in here, yeah, and
given basically given places to live and given vehicles, and
they're allowed to buy they One may not say that
some that power is colluding with them to commit violence,
but one could say that power is definitely creating the
opportunity and then looking the other way, and not only
looking the other way, but would do anything to if
somebody were to get jammed up by the law, to
make sure that they walk away.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and leadership doesn't have to always be internal. It
can be external. It can even be hidden. As much
as I generally think most conspiracy theories are bullshit, that
doesn't mean that people don't conspire and that some of
these actions don't achieve some level of scale. So Yeah,
whether or not it's explicit, I think a lot of
it is in a thousand or probably a billion, you know,
little nudges along the way to produce a result. Which
functionally is the same thing. Again, migration is war, and
you know, very little in human nature has ever changed,
and we continue to be human, which, again I think
progressivism is largely a rejection of the fundamentals of human nature.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I appreciate. I appreciate you bringing this one
up and bringing it to my attention so that we
could get out here and read it, for joining me,
for comments on it, and yeah, we'll do this again
real soon. I appreciate it and hope you feel better,
right problem, Take care man, Thank you.
Speaker 2: Don