After the Gold Rush.

After the Gold Rush.

Exodus, migration or immigration; make a choice?

After the gold rush was a song from 1970 by a Canadian singer/ writer Neil Young with lyrics that can overall be interpreted in different ways. The Interpretation of such has been largely concocted in fanciful ways, that even the author admitted too much later, it was not written with any meaning hidden or not in its intention; never the less it is seen as an inspiring mystery piece of musical creation but it has not stopped a bit of creative licence being taken with the pros.

Some have it that the song makes reference to the Californian gold rush of 1848/49 that caused so much environmental damage but which eventually led to the creation of the 31^st state in the USA, of California in 1850, with the introduction of waves of mass migration; an influx bringing in labour and diverse investment contributing immensely to its eventual wealth.  Although during the short frenetic episode of the ensuing work and hardship, it was driven by the predominance of male participants of which a very few become rich, the majority were driven to early destitution. During this violent transitory phase there was a scarcity of female participants in the gold rush with the proposition that although they were not actively dissuaded, they were not welcome unless they offered utility effectiveness or unsavoury service, in any event females were not a key contingent and potentially not an important loss at the time of this initial escapade to the initial push towards state hood. It maybe that their lack of involvement was just a factor of equality misogynous elements at play then, or that they had more sense, or a greater appreciates of the risk not to be willing female interlopers; whatever the reason they were simply not there in number. The search for enduring wealth that gold seemed to offer was an abject failure for many and the damage that gold rush caused pales into insignificance when compared to the effects of the black gold rush over the15th to 19^th centuries, that of the slave trade. This again benefited a few at the cost of many yet had a far less self deterministic discriminating gender bias but afterwards left a huge socially costly legacy that has not been eased up to the present date. 

Another interpretation of the lyrics offers an environmental apocalyptic collapse for humanity to some form of interceded redemption for a few. It may also paint a view not related to the gold rush directly but to a pessimistic one that evoked a much earlier period from the pale faced influx, the invasion of the conquistadors and pillage of the whole ‘new world’ with even more devastating outcome for the indigenous civil populations.

There are other interpretive liberties taken with the supposed meaning of the song and some conventional ones stem from the phrase     “look at mother nature on the run in nineteen seventies” which was perhaps a catch all philosophical warning to the Vietnam war with agent orange, or environmental degradation or might it be to the oil crisis in 1973 or the rise of neoliberal economics that was given its head. The nineteen seventies was the period, some would propose was picked to frame it as a prophetic reference to the beginning of the worlds current multiple crises. However one sees the resonance in the lyrics of the song and the dubious postulated interpretation being attached to it, what it does do, at least in the title of the song, raises a quandary; what comes after the gold rush?

For the past 4 years the movement of peoples from one country to another to be relocated in Europe has accelerated. It has become a human tidal wave casually wrapped as potential immigrants or mass opportune migration. From one particular area as the consequences from the Syrian conflict, tens of thousands are taking a risk and hundreds are dying in the attempt to escape. Within this wave is a mixture of people from other areas not directly affected by conflict; yet still they move en mass. 

In viewing the sorry state of such mass migration, one cannot help but be struck by the fact that the vast majority of the people on the move are young unaccompanied males. It must raise the question why does this seem to be the case? Leaving aside the physical effort required to make the journey from the countries they come from like Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Somalia et al, many of whom are not strictly likely to be identified as being of applicable refugee status; or consider the presumed financial expenditure required to afford to pay ‘traffickers’, why are there so few females? Are they to weak to make an arduous and dangerous journey or unable themselves to pay for a means of exit?

Might it be that the reason that there are so few females not seen in equal number has more to do with the culture of the countries involved in the migrations? That they are not allowed to leave; not valuable enough to waste funding on, do not have a choice, are stuck with the offspring and not willing to put lives at risk? Or they are required to have to wait to be called forward in the event of the male successful relocation?

From interviews of some of the invasives it would appear that they are seeking a better life for themselves and family. Escaping from something or other, all wrapped in the mantle of assumed refugee status.  The unwise welcome mat thrown out this month by Deutschland’s Ms. Merkel, miscalculates the intense pull factor and the expedient two way social media power of legitimate (or not) settlers who may already be ensconced in a safe haven and the interested parties of the denuding lands. The message was, welcome, come, the streets are paved with gold, you will be given all that you need, opportunity abounds – no effort required. Well chancellor Merkel may have had the idea of filling east Deutschland to lift population deficit there but within a short while was soon under pressure to spread the load outwards to unconvinced neighbours.

So for all those that seek to move into Europe, at the last estimate some 500 thousand in just this year, it does appear that there is an envisioned gold rush on; to take any given opportunity that offers rewards not obtainable in their own land. How can there not be considering the state of the nations they are retreating from and in that there must be growing concern for the Western Europe, both in how long can the invasions last, for how many and how to afford the cost.

Like the gold rush of old, when the seam soon runs out, when the black gold is no longer required, when the land cannot offer sufficient resources to nourish all; expectations can only be shattered.  Not being a believer in the current phase of humanity munificence shortly to be severely tested in this age of inopportunity, strained as it is just now with vacillating opinions now being expressed over the occurrences observed with the invasion (for that is what, in another age, it would be called but now called immigration or large migration) the unopposed mass movement of peoples with dreams and desires of an open Eldorado, who may have little regard for what or where they are deliriously moving into, points to many of them being bitterly disappointed in their gold rush.

There has been a level of incompetence displayed by politicians of the European countries, in their inability to quickly seize the importance of what is taking place. They have no overall agreed format for what has been unfolding in the movement of peoples over the past decades. It has for them been applicable to the gold rushes of old, with labour being the gold, for although there is an accepted code for looking to assist refugees driven by war, there has been no great expression of interest in the immigration, migration of peoples providing it was a manageable uncontested slow trickle. But increasingly it has become stressed. This demand for ‘manpower' suited the labour demands of industry, the labour demands of consumerism, the replacement requirement of lower birth rates, the so called benefits of multiculturism and bolstering falling economies. In some respect they acted rather like the now uncontrolled traffickers using labour as a source of wealth. Might one not suggest these factors are a modern fashioned gold rush?   

    

So now even if history cannot point to the dangers of unintended consequences, with the underlying tension being observed with injecting replacement labour into European countries, there ought to be apprehension for what happens after the gold rush. The old idea of multiculturism should not any longer be given any real credence. While immigration numbers were small and manageable, offering some degree of assimilation, it is already apparent that this has not been overwhelmingly successful. Why therefore should it be any different with the injection of tens of thousands in one movement at a time when increasing numbers of Europeans are becoming less affluent? With the pressures of economic augmentation abandonment, it may yet lead to outbreaks of dissent of the disfranchised.

Even if it is possible to offer temporary refuge and safety to hundreds of thousands of people in accommodating countries within Europe it is instructive to observe that most of those seeking a ‘better life’ seem to avoid closer safe havens of muslim countries like Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Egypt, Turkey or any of the other eastern state-lets and not forgetting Russia which has a vested interest in the Syria problem. Yet Jordan, a small country, is being strained with a lack of resource to provide for people a temporary safe sector and the major muslim ones are not offering to take any. Again, why should this be? The conclusion must be that to provide a safe haven for other muslim brethren in any volume, could be destabilising for the host as the migration would not be welcome. Underlying the lack of local refugee assistance lays the endemic problem with islam and its followers. 

It is a religion fragmented into sects, each believing that their own interpretation on islam is correct. Modern ideas of democracy, tolerance of new and changing ideas are not accepted. This means that the ways of western liberal democracy and secularism does not make a good fit. Since we see that different branches of islam sort their differences by repression and aggression with great social unrest In their own lands, it is useful to wonder if such methods of solving problems may travel with them. Long established tribal customs are not easily transformed. What a religion actually says can become a perverted tool to support ancient tribal mores and customs.

Regrettably internecine religious tribal warfare of the Middle East caused by the perverse interpretation of “un-peaceful” Islam that many muslim prefer to hold fast to, might not be overcome for generations. Even those who live in the west benefiting from the secularism that underscores their potential opportunity and safety, are suspiciously incapable of leaving aside the tribal divisions and it is made obvious with some females ‘choosing’ to hide behind the covering of the female face while using modern makeup and a long costume to hide designer jeans, it may be a move to have surreptitious modernity for them. But why hide it? This uncalled excessive demonstration of modesty, not specifically demanded from their Koran, is one that puts them in the willing path of seeking the worst aspect of islam, their own suppression. Would they risk uncovered exposure in the path of extremism? 

Do Europeans really understand what is taking place, that there is a gold rush of ideology over practicality, that there will always be a price to pay after the gold rush, whatever it looks like.

© Renot 2015 SS

269151900