“Could be Just the Beginning”

Beginning of WHAT, pray tell? They forgot Voltaire’s burning desire the defend to the death anyone’s right to offend, this is what European societies get for trying to regulate freedom of thought to advance politically correct proclivities. In Norway, an “Immigrant’s Political Party,” essencially a vehicle for political influence for those who choose to exclude themselves from the larger society, is forming. From without.

For the Aborigines, the incentive to defend against genuine overbearing social proscription has long since been gone. Holding certain political positions is unlawful because specific groups of people have legal protection against simple criticism. Saying certain things is placed on par with violence against protected classes. Surely thinking about anything tangentially related to, say for example, criticizing the cost of a pro-gay policy or it’s impact on others, is synonymous with hate-speech.

The party is still developing its policies but improving the rights for immigrants is its main concern.

Butt says Norway has much to learn from the Pakistani culture, particularly concerning the treatment of elders. He said families cared for their elders in Pakistan, while in Norway they are placed in nursing homes where integration is non-existent. Therefore the Independent Labour Party has proposed to set up separate nursing homes for Norwegian nationals and immigrants.

“Separate but equal”, and the wholly owned responsibility of the state – all in the interest of the good of man, or some other specious notion that they otherwise lectures others about. As for the kinds of social commitments that European society inspires in the appreciative newcomer:

The official election campaign will be launched in Pakistan on Thursday (April 30). Butt, known as a political journalist and actor before migrating to Norway in 1974, will launch the campaign on Pakistani TV.

So that they can speak to their potential voters in a language they can understand, which is not likely to include the language of the place they live. What’s interesting is that the only argument in defense against a protected class (who don’t need it) seeking excessive leverage is the complaint can only come from another protected class who don’t need it.

In all of this rationalization of rights, the notion of universal rights in a society, and the rights specific to a citizen, got entirely lost on the road to their “rights nirvana”, probably because those that demand those privileges can’t differentiate an inalienable right from anything else, and certainly don’t know their value to a good society.