Challenged by the horde that inundates it, Europe positions itself in its favored pose. It happens to be the inactively enjoyed prone position. As a college wrestler this writer learned that only two shoulders on the mat are worse. Being in a predicament is not the worst scenario: liking the idea is what will really do you in.

As things stand, Europe and Western Civilization seem to be in trouble. It might be unkind to inject here, but if Europe decides to sink, at best, the U.S. likely to get wet.

Official Europe, which is not the aggregate of her population, dislikes to admit it, but the laming vicissitudes come from unwanted, illegal and by choice unmanaged assertive immigration. Right here we hit upon misleading verbal fog. If “immigration” is the proper term, then by the same logic, burglars are “guests.”

Mass migration, as a challenge, or in the parlance of the professional moral vanguard, as a blessing and an opportunity, is unkindly growing into a quandary. Yes, the daily diet of governance is the contest problems. However, the reaction to Europe’s inundation, rates above the level that makes politics interesting. Presently, the quantity and the “quality” of the pushy mass threatens to undermine that fruit of Judeo-Christian culture that became Western Civilization. Integration is limited by the proportions of the groups involved. Beyond that, the traits of imported cultures and the qualifications of entrants also pose limits.

Provoked by its unwelcome success, occidental culture is belittled by multi-culturalists and One-Worlders. Oddly, the accomplishments of that civilization convince successful cultures around the globe to import its salient features.

What explains the scorn for the way of life that defines modern times and that enables societies to escape historic oppression and misery? Is it popular sovereignty and capitalism that explains Marxist inspired hostility? The dogma of the denigrators holds that nothing is worth defending if it provokes anyone. Beyond this, all cultures being equal regardless of their results, their clash is denied. Therefore, the slight difference is unworthy of preservation. This transmutes multiculturalism into a form of war against the forces that gave us the modern world.

It is worth our while to assess the inflow that challenges Europe and other world neighborhoods. Presently, western Europe’s leaders undermine their credibility and invalidate the trust upon which democratic-consensual systems rest. Blinded by their fact-defying complexes, elites on the defensive induce a break-down of the systems they dominate and make some of their subjects feel that the choice is future victimhood or arson now.

While the timid attempt to cling to theoretical fictions to cope with the invasion prevail, the pressure rises on the dam that is about to burst.

Even if camouflaged the mainline media, Europe’s leaders are losing their hold. Soon “Average Joe” will connect the dots and proceeds to identify the source from which the pestilential stink of the rot emanates. Ultimately, the threat of apocalypse should the people disobey, will stop working as a magic wand. The intimidation that blocking migrant treks in the Balkans “leads to war” will only convince Luxemburg’s eurocrat Foreign Minister who warned that “The European Union can break up … if isolation instead of solidarity … becomes the rule.” In time, that threat might sound like a liberation.

PM Cameron, listing the changes needed to avoid a “Brexit,” has put the matter succinctly. Many problems do not need “more Europe” but demand “less Europe.” The mismanagement of the economy — think of sinking Greece — is matched by the bureaucratic centralism endeavoring to move the continent toward an “ever greater” union. Add the attempt to reduce sovereign nation states to administrative districts. Append that with the migrant crisis, and you know why the “Economist’s” recent cover story “the indispensable European” provokes smiles. Merkel’s praise is a lullaby for committed editors while the “uncouth masses” drift away from the anointed. There are situations in which insider wheeling-dealing makes problems grow like weed.

If the break-down-in-progress has a face, then it is Merkel. If the phenomenon has a home, then it is in Germany.

As we size up that crisis, Premier Orbán’s assessment that we face a German problem sounds ever more convincing. It was Merkel’s defiant “the right to asylum knows no upper limit” and that “we will manage” which converted a leak into a predictable inundation.

It was these bragging and good-sounding sentences, spoken by someone who forgot that politics is about knowing limits, that opened the floodgates. Obviously, Merkel who directed Europe, lost track of salient facts. One of these might have been that she is the Chancellor of the Germans and not elected, Allah willing, by folks on their way to her.

For the time being, their insider myths separate Europe’s ruling elites from reality, and after its break-through, from the reckoning. To be candid, what is called politely a “myth” is a delusion located between a fantasy and an outright lie. It is shrouded in hasty, but always pusillanimous measures. We may observe that, decision making needs to anticipate the future which makes it vulnerable to the unexpected. Once, however, the real world sends signals that his policy fails, the politician must make corrections. This demands that natural pride be overcome. This statesmanlike “courage” is sorely missing in the circles that lead Europe.

Pasted together, the following allow, for an estimation of the trap into which the unaware are steered by those that trumpet far-sighted leadership.

The — officially denied — “asylum chaos” is not an accident. It is a latent failure that is built into the system and the assumptions of the political class.

Constant warnings not to associate terror and uncontrolled migration defy common sense and protect those that have caused the problem by proclaiming that “all are welcome.” The migrating masses, even if labeled as “refugees” — which most of them are not —are underrated as a threat to social services and security. This can be done because they are upgraded to be “qualified specialists” needed by the economy. Actually, they are at best a supply of unqualified workers of the sort that is, even if native, redundant in a modern economy.

Now, to the related subject of integration. If after a decade, a group’s unemployment rate is at 80%, then amalgamation seems to be limited to the inclusion into welfare and the criminal justice system. The unpleasant experience of Europe is that some cultures settled as a group will be resistant to integration not to mention assimilation. Since the ‘60s, Germany could not integrate its Turks. The outstanding case is furnished by the Gypsies who remained separate, poor outsiders after a millennium. Is this important? You bet. Check the Honor Roll of the latest killing in your neighborhood. It is a list of unintegrated Muslims.

Exhorted to be, regardless of what may come, tolerant, Europeans can hope that their “guests” will eventually tolerate them once they are settled. The “voluntary” no to display Christian-tainted folklore, such as nativity scenes — but a yes to Ramadan — are bad signs. So are nixed crosses in classrooms. Therefore, the wags wonder when four legged pigs will be banned.

It is being pretended that the Islam-shaped mass will be unable to fit into modern society. Regarding employment and values, that may be true. However, the migrants show in another area excellent understanding. They skillfully utilize the opportunities democracies provide to ignore their laws which is to be followed by the overthrow of freedom as a system.

Can it be a surprise that it is reported that regardless of the proclaimed “culture of welcome,” the demand for pepper sprays has risen by 600% in Germany.

Speaking about. Germans show difficulties to deal with their political class and sacrosanct national myths. This being so, the voters like to vote for those that promise that everything will remain as it is even if these then proceed not to leave anything unchanged. It seems that, once again, in the name of its people, German leaders have overestimated its possibilities. The loss of realism precedes the crash. The danger is that, defying Merkel, not Islam will become German (“Islam is part of Germany”) but that Germany will be swamped by Islam.

Much of the suicidal self-deception that characterizes the mismanagement of the crisis and the collapse of the regulations of cross border traffic, finds an expression in the distorted terminology with which the matter is handled.

It begins with the name of the phenomenon. In PC, migrants are refugees and refugees are, regardless of everything, “Syrians” and “good.” Lies that repackage the facts are a dangerous deception as the manipulators tend to believe the dogmas they had created. Clouded visions directed at far away clouds create the likelihood of slipping on the cow-dropping close by.

After the slaughter in Paris, much of the press talked about a “Frenchman.” It took days before it got out that his name was Omar something. The EU finds it “problematic” that “unauthorized” migrants are criminalized by the term “illegal.” Blame the word and overlook the action behind it, seems to be the idea. Another cute one is the dance around the word “fence.” Months ago, to cope with the invading, lawless and hostile mass, Hungary proceeded to reassert control over who enters her territory –this quite in tune with EU rules. So a fence was erected to close the “green” border while leaving the normal crossing points open. An outcry made comparisons to concentration camps and the Iron Curtain. Now “everybody” builds or plans fences. At least as long as the spade is not called a spade. Therefore, Austria, originally insultingly critical of PM Orbàn, calls her fence a door created to protect migrants. There are, apparently good fences that Socialist erect, and bad fences raised by “the extremists” of the “vast right wing conspiracy.”

From the outset, Western Europe’s leading circles have refused to acknowledge the migration’s size and concentrated on managing the inflow as “travel agencies of migration.” At the same time, they chose to ignore the control of the trekkers, to say what happens to those that arrive, and to set limits to the incursion. A Merkel quote expresses this. “I do not care whether I am guilty of the inflow of refugees. The fact is that they are now here.” In a talk show she revealed that she does not even wish to discuss the trifle of “numbers.”

The operative principle seems to be “everything to nurture the problem, nothing to solve it.” The cuddling explains why, in Germany’s case alone, the year’s estimate went from 400 thousand to eight, then over a million, and to its plural in the future. Does this sound inexplicable? It might not really be. Hard-to-integrate migrants — therefore elements that are likely to be state-dependent, dissatisfied and resentful of the successful — are, once made into citizens, leftist voters.

The theater of absurdities brings further scenes. This one is comic if you are a bystander, but now that the invitation has produced an unwanted swarm, operation “damage control” is on. Thus, “Mutti /Little Mother” Merkel as she is called along the “Balkan Route,” is underlining to reluctant neighbors the need for “a fairer distribution in Europe” of refugees. “We must speak …. about the fact that …. how we deal with refugees is a …. question for all …. member states.” Merkel called for a mass and it came: now others shall provide room and board.

Meanwhile, EU leaders meet with their African and Near Eastern counterparts to petition these to please take back those of their citizens that deemed ineligible for refugee status. For good reason, repatriation is not welcome. Even if on welfare, the migrant is able to send home sums that are impressive there. It is another matter that these transfers induce more people to stumble to Europe. The Union could react by stopping “development aid” to recalcitrant countries. However, this it can hardly do as, in PC terms, this would be termed to be “colonial-style extortion.”

Now to the good news. Mass migration creates a lot of new jobs. Attorneys that represent refused applicants are in demand. Translators are wanted. State migration bureaucracies need to be staffed. Housing is to be provided, emergency camps need workers, and schools look for teaches to respond to the special needs of pupils. Ergo, there will be plenty of public-sector jobs for friends and cousins that will know how to vote to keep the new money to come in.