Editor’s Note: Originally there were two videos accompanying this post but they have both been deleted off of Youtube since then and therefore cannot be embedded on the page.
Angela Merkel recently referred approvingly to a book entitled “Visions 2050 – Future Dialogues”. It is a report from a company called “Triad” produced for the “Council for Sustainable Government”. It states that in 2050 the term “Migrant Background” will be meaningless, because every person in German will have migrants in their background.
The prospect of zero Germans having full European blood in forty years time is quite interesting (and frightening obviously). In this context, where the report is lauding it as something to aspire to, it seems a bit far-fetched (what about all the ethnic German’s alive right now who will still be white German’s in 2050?). In real life however, with one million “refugees” coming into Germany per year, 700,000 of them being men between the ages of 17-40, it seems quite plausible. Already in nations such as Germany and Sweden, there are or will soon be more males of military age (18-30) from immigrant backgrounds than native European backgrounds.
In researching this report, the only possible rejoinder I could foresee might be that the report is a collection of various participant’s individual visions for the future of Europe, however it seems to be unified and the various reports seem to all endorse a similar vision.
In another infamous, during a question and answer session, a middle-aged German woman very sincerely asks the Chancellor a question about the future of Germany, and states that she is afraid of Islamization and what it would entail. The response from Angela Merkel is confused, but quite revealing as to her thoughts on the matter. She states that there is no debate that “Islam belongs to Germany”. She also says that “fear” is “no way” to govern a country or make decisions. She claims that most terrorism is confined to the Middle-East rather than Europe, and ends her response by stating that Europe’s history of “bloody conflicts” means that it would be “arrogant” to look down on other cultures for their own violence. The use of the word “arrogant” seems to be very deliberate, and directed at the woman who asked the initial question.