The Race

Thursday, July 27, 2006
Fjordman provides a bleak yet trenchant observation concerning the probability of Muslim ascendancy in Europe:
The less control the authorities have with Muslims, the more control they want to exercise over non-Muslims. As problems in Europe get worse, which they will, the EU will move in an increasingly repressive direction until it either becomes a true, totalitarian entity or falls apart. This strange mix of powerful censorship of public debate, yet little control over public law and order, has by some been labelled anarcho-tyranny.
Do the socialist ninnies currently in power in a number of European countries truly believe that their multicultural transnationalism will save them from the sword?

Fjordman is certainly on the mark with his observation concerning the First and Second Amendments. Being able to seperate the Islamic savages from the tepid moderates and to explain clearly that their murderous acts are entirely consonant with a religion developed for tyrants and slaves allows one to maintain clarity when considering the appropriate level of distrust required to deal with them. Cobras are far more trustworthy.

34 comments:

CF said...

I think this is absolutely the most important article I read all day, Rick. I have been watching this phenomenon develop over the last 2 years. Maybe we ought to run arms in to the EU..or help the right learn how to win elections, starting with assistance to bloggers there who are far behind us.

I cannot find fault with Fjordman's article at all.

Rick Ballard said...

He's been doing some pieces at Gates of Vienna that are excellent. I really don't care if a tranzi wants to have his throat cut for multiculturalist ideals but putting people in jail for calling rabid rats rats - with the justification that you might offend the rat - is incredible.

Apparently indoctrination functions better in Europe than it does here.

Skookumchuk said...

Rick:

Apparently indoctrination functions better in Europe than it does here.

This belief in a single, coercively enforced unifying doctrine to govern all of European beliefs, laws, and morality goes back a long way - at least as far back as the respublica christiana of the High Medieval Papacy.

Trasnational progressivism is but the latest in the long line. It is however pretty thin gruel in comparison to the earliest such attempt and so we are apt to question its staying power. Especially today, in the face of the obvious Islamic challenge, something the founders of the EU experiment could not envision.

The problem is that Europeans have lost the emotional and moral vocabulary we use to define and sustain concepts like individual freedom and civic responsibility. They had given responsibility for all that to their new God who has suddenly failed. Now what?

Rick Ballard said...

"Now what?"

They get to play Eloi and Morlock for a while? A child mentions that the socialist emperor is not just naked - he's been dead for years and really stinks the place up?

I suppose that eventually the 35% of the populace necessary to effect postive change might wake up but there is little sign of awakening at this point. What does come after nihilism? Only the absolute security and peace of the grave as far as I can see.

Knucklehead said...

The Brussels Journal also does some interesting work on this topic.

Do the socialist ninnies currently in power in a number of European countries truly believe that their multicultural transnationalism will save them from the sword?

Well, in a word, yes. Even among the most "conservative" elements of Euro society there is a VERY strong and religiously held idea that the salafist violence coming from the Islamist world right into the cities of Europe and everywhere else is the result of forces external to the perpetrators. They really believe that if they refuse to engage in "the cycle of violence" that it will dissipate and cease.

There are several forces at work in the Euro mindset. Some of it is just outright cowardice or, at the very least, a nearly pathological avoidance of conflict. Much of Euro society will suffer anything to avoid conflict. They relentlessly drive their societies to "consensus" - they convince themselves that they all agree and then all get in line according to the consensu. There's little or no debate about anything, they just agree to agree.

But that only explains some of it. Some of it, and oddly enough this comes from the some of the bravest and most free thinkers among them, is an esrtwhile, determined pacifism. Having disdained Christianity they have latched on to "turn the other cheek" or, perhaps more accurately, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" with a fervor that is nothing short of religious although they sneer at the comparison.

But that still isn't all of it. Another thing at work is a relentless adherence to the "European Dream". Euros are quick to mock the "American Dream" that is distorted and caricatured into relentless materialism - the ceaseless and tireless quest for "the good life" of bigger house, more autos, personal swimming pools, TVs as big as walls, etc.

There is an analogous and possibly just as distorted and caricatured "European Dream" and it is, essentially, to achieve complete social and economic stability for all accomplished with 35 hrs/week worktime. All anxiety and almost all non-entertainment effort must be eliminated. This the "Hobbies and Vacations" religion and it is has a VERY wide following in Europe. The adherents themselves will ignore or deny anything that threatens the acheivement and maintenance of this "EuroDream".

The way this shapes their thinking about the salafists and islamothugs and islamofascists among them is rather odd (at least to my way of thinking). It is beyond the EuroDreamers ability to fathom that anyone would willfully go through the trouble and effort necessary to do violent jihad. They more or less honestly believe that if they provide enough welfare and make no demands upono the time and effort of the Muslims in their midst that, eventually, the Muslems will abandon Islam and join the Church of Hobbies an Vacations. It is just flat out incomprehensible to them that it could be otherwise.

Yet another factor at work is the "It's all just business" types. The Euros really do not have quite the same notions of "corruption" as Americans do. I don't mean to suggest that Americans are incorruptible (that's clearly not true) or that Euros are inherently corrupt (equally clearly untrue) but that in some measure Euros view the welfare payments to their Muslem immigrants, and the "foreign aid" payments to the likes of the PLO as a business cost. There's are many times more Arabs/Muslems than there are Jews. And Isreal has little or no petroleum. Fruits and vegetables can come from anywhere. Israel and the Jews are just not an interesting market to these Euros. The Arabs/Muslems are a far larger market and they've got petro to pay. It just makes good business sense to tolerate them and hand over the kickbacks, bribes, and even extortion.

CF said...

There is a far smaller alternative media in Europe; the laws on free speech far slimmer; the Brussels mandarinate has been encroaching on free speecha nd action more every day; and Europeans are more accepting of the myriad ways regulators control their lives.

Can we help them? Can we set up some other way of getting thru to Europeans past the state sponsored and leftist press there?(A sort of Internet Free Europe)

Knucklehead said...

Clarice,

Those are all part of the relentless drive to achieve social consensus and avoid conflict.

What is hard for we Americans to understand is that there really is no "middle" here in the US. There is no list of the Big Things Political and Social that 60% of us agree about. Make up the list and then gather together a representative sampling of Americans who are convinced they are "centrists" and get them discussing the list and you'll have screaming and pushing and even fist-fights in no time at all.

You can absolutely make such a list for Euros, run the same gathering exercise, and find little or no disagreement or contest - they'll be talking about soccer, hobbies, and vacations in a few short minutes. They achieve this by relentlessly stigmatizing disagreement. And when the consensus is under stress, as it must be now given the situation with their immigrants and crime, they will codify the consensus and punish apostates.

They'll tolerate most any little fringe group, even make sure they get a seat or two in their parliaments, as long as they are tiny and whacky enough to not threaten the consensus and rock the boat. If 4% of their populations declares themselves the Pedophile Marxist Transvestite Vampires and demands a seat in parliament, that's great.

If, on the other hand, it starts to look like 20 or 30% of the population is getting nervous and jerky about the muslems and other immigrants or the EU or whatever, steps will be taken to bring them back into line.

terrye said...

I read the book the Planet of the Apes by Pierre Boulle years ago, and the thing that struck me the most about the book was that the people did not fight back. They just let the Apes have it all. I have wondered if the author saw something in European culture in the 60's, a denial of reality that inhibited them and ultimately emasculated the entire culture.

I have a client who is a quad. He is very into sports and movies, anything that might distract him...but his knee jerk reaction to bad news or threat is that it is not there. I think it is a defensive mechanism.

Europe spent so many centuries in war and extremism that sometimes I wonder if they are like that, they just refuse to see the threat. They can not bear the conflict, like the children of alcholics they will go to great lengths to avoid confrontation.

So perhaps the culprit is a combination of guilt and fear and avoidance.

David Thomson said...

“Do the socialist ninnies currently in power in a number of European countries truly believe that their multicultural transnationalism will save them from the sword?”

Yup, in their heart of hearts, they most certainly do. George W. Bush is the true threat to world peace and not Osama bin Ladin and his buddies. Socialist domination will supposedly bring about utopia. Do the Islamic fundamentalist despise women and murder gays? Well, what world do you live on? Are you some sort of reactionary scum bag? Eradicating capitalism will almost instantly entice the Islamists to become warm and cuddly human beings.

Skookumchuk said...

David Thompson:

George W. Bush is the true threat to world peace and not Osama bin Ladin and his buddies. Socialist domination will supposedly bring about utopia.

Your first sentence is certainly true. But I wonder about the second. Maybe as little as ten years ago, perhaps, it was a deeply held belief, but today I wonder if even the elites have the same self-confidence as did the architects of the system, or if the whole thing is just running out of steam.

Of course, European elites have been terrified of America and its potential to disrupt the established order since just before the Revolution. So the early EUtopians certainly saw the threat posed by America, the anti-Europe, and they said so, but thought that through ever closer union they could fend off the rapacious parvenu Americans and simultaneously provide a socialist paradise on earth.

Forget the Islamofascist challenge for the moment. Today every senient person in Europe has at the back of his mind not only the Americans to worry about as always, but also a few billion entrepreneurial Chinese and Indians. And ignoring that triple whammy is a very tall order. They don't seem up to it. They just want to be left alone. Let the neighborhood go to pieces. They'll stay inside, among the bric-a-brac and the doilies on the furniture, maybe venturing out to the mailbox every now and then to collect a check.

The question for us is - how do we deal with the failure of Europe?

terrye said...

david:

I am not so sure they think that. I mean I think that the Europeans believe that if we do away with greed and want the Islamists will still be what they are, but they will be it somewhere else. They will stay in their nasty little world and leave the Euros alone, just don'get them worked up. Like they were animals in a zoo or something.

I am sure they know what Iranians do to gays, but they don't live in Iran so what do they care?

terrye said...

skook:

Yes, that is it. They are afraid.

Look at those pictures of WW2 and we see why. Most of the Europeans alive today did not see that war, but I think there is something akin to genetic memory at work here, they really do want to be left alone. No more they say, no more.

Peter UK said...

To get an understanding of the mechanisms by which Europe arrived at the point where it is now.I don't share the author's analysis of the position as it now obtains,but understand that the curents exist to take us into that dystopia state which he envisions.
Firstly,immigration is not confined to those from Muslim countries,there are large numbers coming from new EU member states,such as Polland and in fact immigrants are a most heterogeneous group of people,Hindus form a large proportion of the immigrant "community".
It has to be remembered that mas immigration has never been voted on or supported by the indigenous populations,whilst the UK has seen waves of small scale immigration over the centuries,there has never been the influx which has occured since the end of WWII.
This provides a good date point for a brief history of how we got here.
Firstly there was the "Windrush" of citizens of former colonies,firstly the West Indians,enticed to Britain to work on the buses,similarly Asians came to work in the cotton mills.It was said that they were to do "the jobs we wouldn't do",but in fact,the reason was to keep wages down,for the same way Irish navvies came to work on the canal and railway building in the 19th century.They were young fit single men who could,sleep in minimal lodgings,who could live on less money than a man with a family.
Then came the Ugandan Asians who were mostly professional and business people with families,this group has since thrived.
To overcome any resistance to immigration government used two basic methods,one the doctrine of racial equality,enforced by the then,Race Relations Board,established by Harold Wilson's Labour government,and positive prpaganda about immigrants,the Asians were called the "New Jews" who would be a general good to the nation.
In the same way that if one appoints a "Witch Finder General" he will find witches,so a Race Relations Board will find Racism,from then on race relations was a growth industry.
It also provided a stick to beat anyone who questioned mass immigration, Enoch Powell was driven from the Tory party for his river of blood speech.
The left,siezed racism as a superb Gramscian tool for undermining national institutions,but mainstream politics has been hoist with its own petard.
In the normal run of things,immigrants start at the bottom in their adopted countries and work their way up,for the first time,due to economic changes or cultural isolation some second generation immigrant groups begam rejecting the place of their birth,the politicians answer to this,discrimination because of race.Vast amount of money were thrown at the problem,to no avail,there must be hidden discrimination said the politicians.The eductaion system was revamped to iron out this wrinkle in an otherwise immaculate concept.Any rumblings of discontent from any source were stamped on ruthlessly,positive discrimination was introduced,community leader from the immigrant groups inducted into the Establishment,unfortunately,politician being what they are,could not see that Anglo-West Indian peer cut no ice with those from the Indian Subcontinent.Gradually representatives of all the ethnic groups were co-opted into [ositions of influence.
Sadly this had no ameliorating on those communities who were disaffected.
Whilst all the above methods had been tried and had failed,it was also becoming apparent that these same disaffected groups did not want all the good things on offer nor did they wish to comply with the laws of the land,again,politicians applied the same tried and tested failed policies.
Meanwhile discontent was rising,the government had lost control of the borders,the Welfare state seemed to have an obligation to house,feed,educate and minister to the health needs of whoever turned up on these shores,in a nutshell people were noticing vast swathes of the inner cities were a foreign land,some even "no go" areas.
It was noticed tha not a little criticism directed towards the indigenes was in fact abusive,some of it threatening,arousing anger and not a little hurt on behalf of those who had seen the greatest peaceful mass immigration in history.
Sometime in this period,politicians changed from considering the national good to covering up and saving their own tawdry reputations.7/7 was the turning point,how to keep a lid on the problem whilst at the same time protecting an oppressed minority.Obviously offending those who have no respect for the law,who moreover are willing to kill one is out of the question.Admitting that a mistake has been made,well politicians just don't do that,but somehow they have to be seen doing something,and lo! the very mechanism already exists,stiffle debate by invoking racism,express concern that there is no backlash against the Muslim community,keep quiet about the 52 people killed and the 700 maimed and injured.Invite members of the oppressed community to help with solving the problem,being careful not to examine their rhetoric.
In a nutshell,if you can't oppress the ones you can't baby,oppress the ones you can.

David Thomson said...

“Maybe as little as ten years ago, perhaps, it was a deeply held belief, but today I wonder if even the elites have the same self-confidence as did the architects of the system...”

I’m sure they do. These ideologues continuously lie to themselves. They are convinced that things better are getting better. How can they be so naive? They simply blip off their radar screen any contradictory evidence. Utopia is inevitable if capitalism disappears. This fervent secular belief is similar to religious fanaticism.

Skookumchuk said...

Terrye:

Yes, they are afraid. No longer believing in the old and afraid of the new.

A long time ago in my history classes some professor or other would hypothesize about the So-and-So Culture, which about 800 BC seems to have abandoned their old religion and taken up something new.

And there would always be some utterly superfluous, tidy materialistic explanation like a series of crop failures evidenced by the tree rings or their living on the fringes of some powerful empire, or to enhanced economic status by adopting the new religion. The kinds of simpleminded causes that people who find the religious experience totally alien tend to dream up.

Well today in Europe we are seeing the collapse of the old and its substitution by the new right before our eyes. A rare event, like a supernova. We might learn a thing or two.

Skookumchuk said...

Peter UK:

So in the UK (which is where I assume you are) how might the broad middle stratum of Britons in the end react to all this? What are the alternatives as you see them?

David Thomson:

This fervent secular belief is similar to religious fanaticism.

True. My question is how long can it last.

CF said...

PUK, what a well thought out post.

Rick Ballard said...

Peter,

What a horribly great synopsis. I keep trying to tell myself that it can't happen here - and then I see Hillary's picture.

Peter UK said...

Skookumchuk,
There is a small political elite wedded to the status quo,then there is what I call the "librarian classes",those who say,"perhaps sharks behave the way they do because we are not kind enough to them".
Then there are the sane middle classes who have to make a living and know they haveto keep their mouth shut.These are the ones who are emigrating in droves
The working classes are angry to a man,whilst the vast underclass is seething.
This is the class that is producing the most offspring.
My opinion,the Islamists are a noisy minority,thus getting political attention,politicians always buy off those who shout the loudest.At the same time trying to keep a lid on the disaffected majority,but this will not work for much longer.Right Wing parties like the BNP are garnering votes,this in my view will force the major parties rightward.
Other than that,when Middle England has gone,the sharks will eat the librarians,it depends on demographics who the sharks are.


Thank you cf.

Skookumchuk said...

Peter UK:

Other than that,when Middle England has gone...

Is the demise of Middle England inevitable?

Peter UK said...

Rick,
This one? Or something you ate?

Peter UK said...

Skookumchuk,
They are voting with their feet.The word is on the street, wherever Englishmen pass the time of day unheard,"This country is finished".

I hope you Americans take heed it has taken a mere sixty years to pull down the work of centuries.

David Thomson said...

“This fervent secular belief is similar to religious fanaticism.

True. My question is how long can it last.”

You are not sufficiently cynical. The “elites” make sure to protect themselves.
They reside in the safe areas. The Muslim crazies are not their next door neighbors! If they crap really hits the fan---they will move out of the country. Screw everybody else.

Skookumchuk said...

Peter UK:

I hope you Americans take heed...

More than a few of us are. But just hop on the Boeing whenever you can. Also, as we did with the old London Bridge, we can always disassemble Salisbury Cathedral and all the buildings on Princes Street in Edinburgh and bring them over here in advance of their desecration.

I shouldn't be flippant. If Middle England doesn't recover, it would be a profound tragedy that will affect us all. Just the most casual conversations on this board has us talking about Scottish Enlightenment philosophers and De Havilland Mosquitos and all the other things that Britain means to us.

But as an American, personally I must say that Middle England is welcome over here.

Should it come to that.

Though it seems that many UK emigrants would want to seek a middle ground, someplace somewhat socialistic yet also truer to the old core principles - Australia, perhaps.

Skookumchuk said...

David Thomson:

-they will move out of the country.

But where to?

David Thomson said...

“-they will move out of the country.

But where to?”

That’s easy. They will move to countries like the United States, Australia, and perhaps even Canada. Those who are Jewish might emigrate to Israel.

Skookumchuk said...

Although:

Edinburgh Castle rebuilt stone by stone just outside of, oh, I don't know, Nampa, Idaho?

A finally completed Beauvais Cathedral now with air conditioning cooking in the Tucson sun?

The Domino's Leaning Tower of Pizza (we'd have to rename it, you see) on Virginia Street in Reno? There is probably a vacant lot down on the south end, out past the Peppermill Casino someplace.

Imagine the possibilities. :-)

Luther McLeod said...

Late to the thread. But, just have to say;

Excellent and well done appraisal PeterUK.

Depressing, frankly, much like Fjordman's thesis, even with your different take.

But better to face reality than to live in a dreamworld. I must admit to fearing for our future.

And, Peter, you would get used to the 'dry heat' of Tucson.

Coisty said...

This strange mix of powerful censorship of public debate, yet little control over public law and order, has by some been labelled anarcho-tyranny.

The term "anarcho-tyranny" was coined by the brilliant paleocon historian and syndicated columnist Samuel Francis in an extended article in Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture in July 1994. I'm disappointed in Fjordman for not giving credit to the late Dr Francis. Perhaps Francis was too politically incorrect for him and the people who read his articles - many of them the same purging neocons who destroyed the career of Francis. It adds a touch of irony to an article about the suppression of incorrect ideas by the state. Francis was not destroyed by the state but by people who are so powerful within "conservatism" that they didn't need the state to silence dangerous opinions.

Anyway, the original article had nothing to do with Islam. Francis gave numerous examples of "anarcho-tyranny". One was of a man with a sexual fixation on children who had never acted on said fixation - he'd never even been arrested. Somehow his fixation became known to government thugs and so they and the post office produced some child pornography and sent it to the man and baited him over time on how to order more. After this provocation the man did so and was promptly arrested. Although he was exonerated by the Supreme Court he lost his job, his farm, his friends and his standing in the community. Another was about North Carolina freeing violent criminals while cracking down on people were not wearing seatbelts. The BATF featured prominently in the article.

The gist of it was that while the state acted as if it was powerless to stop real criminals (usually non-whites) from commiting violent crimes people who'd harmed nobody (usually middle class whites without a criminal record) were often pursued with extraordinary vigour by state authorities. In both the US and Europe the protected class is any violent criminal who is an ethnic or religious minority. Sadly free speech and freedom in general will not survive multiculturalism. (Lebanon is a perfect example of the impotence of a multicultural state).

Europe, Canada, and the US are well on their way to the rubbish bin of history unless they/we wake up and find the courage to deal with the Camp of the Saints that is so obviously our future. I wouldn't be surprised to some day read that Fjordman has been arrested and sent to a Muslim-dominated prison.

MeaninglessHotAir said...

I hope you Americans take heed it has taken a mere sixty years to pull down the work of centuries.

A Polish friend once told me: "civilization is only one generation deep".

Peter UK said...

MHA,
Our political elites are over educated,or in many cases partially educated cultural barbarians,to use an analogy I have used before,"They are like a child who finds a magnificent antique watch made by a master craftsmen,they take it apart,break bits lose bits,finally it is destroyed forever".The political elites have no undersatanding of what it is they are the elites of,they only see the game.
Consequently social engineering on a huge scale has been undertaken,the tragedy being that those who do this have no knowledge of what the breaking point is,to alll liberal/leftists progress is change,they do not have a clue as to what amount,speed or depth of change can be accommodated by the societies upon which they are inflicted.
Lastly these fools never bear responsibilty for that which they have wrought.

Knucklehead said...

PeterUK,

What is being practiced is not actually social engineering but, rather, social alchemy.

Engineering is the art of the feasible carried out within the boundaries of cost. Alchemy is a blind belief in some impossibility that the practioner has convinced himself is, in fact, possible. The alchemist is not interested in either feasibility or cost, only the achievement of a result that is forever beyond reach.

Peter UK said...

Knucklehead,
So,as i suspected the world is being run by the "Sorcerer's Apprentice"?

Knucklehead said...

Almost, Peter. The world is being run by a bunch of dopes who suffer from stunted intellectual and moral growth. A commonality among them is that they got intellectually and morally wedged at just about the time they were playing Sorcerer's Apprentice.

Either way, though, they're the a bunch of dipshits.