No "there" there.

Frank Furedi accurately ascribes Europe's woes to the Europeans' loss of any sense of purpose about their own culture(s). He seems a bit too sanguine about the extent to which unassimilated Muslims would be assimilated if there were a more vibrant European culture. The occasional civilized Muslim, i.e., westernized Muslim, should not blind us to the fundamental incompatibility of Islamic doctrines with Western ones. Thus, Muslims would be just as resentful and subversive if European society did not have the problem it does and they will continue to be a critical problem in Europe whether or not Europeans get their act together ideologically.

The problem Mr. Furedi describes is thus the problem of an ineffective counterforce to Muslim who have no intention whatever of assimilating. Lacking a sense of its own value, Europe simply cannot bring itself to say "Assimilate or leave."

The U.S. has the same fundamental weakness. The canary in the mine on this point is the flaccid response of Americans to the violation of their international borders. Liberal psychological workers will charge patients all kinds of money to hear about the importance of "boundaries" in personal relations but this simple -- and undeniably salutary -- concept has no application to border enforcement in either the liberal mind or even the mind of Red State America.

Yes, there are some furious, wide awake Americans out there but the recent battle over the Bush-Kennedy amnesty cram down required a huge effort by relatively few of them when it was really an initiative that no politician should have even dared to think about. Not, that is, if American citizens loved anything more than HDTV, Nascar, and foo'ball, could stop whining for five minutes about the lack of health care paid for by someone else, could muster five minutes of critical thought to analyze a Michael Moore/Algore/Oliver Stone movie, could name the country from which the United States obtained its independence in the 18th century, or could figure out the front end of a baseball cap.

Maybe I'm just cranky today. That must be it.

Be that as it may, I recommend Mr. Furedi's analysis of the failure of intellectual leadership in the West:

Blaming immigrants for ‘overwhelming’ or ‘undermining’ traditional European culture is to look for external causes of Europe’s current malaise. Instead of raising tough questions about the European elites’ own responsibility for their societies’ loss of direction, many critics focus myopically on the behaviour and cultural habits of the non-European immigrant.

This immigrant-blaming has become more intense following the events of 9/11: apprehension about mass immigration now focuses almost exclusively on the culture and religion of new arrivals, especially those who come from the Muslim world. Today there is much public handwringing about a possible re-Islamicisation of Europe.

* * * *

There are many young immigrants in London, Paris or Berlin who are more than willing to embrace a new way of life [???]. Unfortunately, European societies seem incapable of providing people with a vision that might inspire them. It is not surprising that some immigrants find it difficult to take to a culture that is clearly so confused about itself; nor should we be shocked to discover that immigrants can even become repulsed by what they perceive as a way of life without meaning. [Though not repulsed enough to move to a superior country without such contemptible problems.]

* * * *

The current state of political and cultural confusion suggests that public life lacks purpose, perspective and meaning. And most governments try to get around this problem by avoiding it. Their self-conscious celebration of diversity is the clearest expression of their evasive strategy. Celebrating the many is a largely meaningless act; it simply says: ‘We are not all the same.’ ‘Diversity’ is only a statement of fact – and to turn a fact into an ideal is to avoid coming up with real ideals altogether. More specifically, diversity policies spare the authorities from spelling out what defines their societies. That is why the French policy of assimilation and the British pursuit of multiculturalism have such similar outcomes: both policies, though seemingly different, are about avoiding the hard task of saying what it means to be British or French, which would raise the question of meaning in an acute form. Neither Britain nor France seems able to inspire young immigrants to embrace their ways of life.

To put it bluntly, today Europe appears to have very few values to share.

How about, "very few values to impose." Forget "share." "Impose" has a nice ring to it, don't you think?

"The end of Europe?" By Frank Furedi, Spiked, 8/13/07 (emphasis added) <-- The Brussels Journal.