Leave a comment below!
"Let us not pretend that if Chartres were replaced by a mosque it would be none of our business."
That hits home.
"Let us not pretend that if Chartres were replaced by a mosque it would be none of our business."
They'd do it, too. There is ample precedent.
The problem seems to be, as is well documented on this website, more a matter of suicide by the West than conquest by Islam. I don't know that Bat Ye'or's book, no matter how accurate, can change that.
I still have some faith that there are the equivilents of rednecks, white trash, and fighting Irish in Europe that might fight back at some point.
The Nazis drew its hard core members from somewhere; and I doubt that class has vanished. The Serbs tried to jump with both feet on the muslims in Kosovo.
It usually takes the bad boys of the world and a demagogue or two, people with little to lose and a lot to gain, to recapture a homeland (or to take one).
The Dutch who are fleeing are the ones who can. They speak English perfectly and have skills that can travel easily. There must be a lot of Dutch who aren't so blessed.
c matt points out the most essential, but commonly ignored or unrecognized fact about the nature of the process of islamization of Europe. Europe is not caving in under the pressure of the Moslem masses; it is her increasing spiritual, religious, moral, demographic and national implosion that creates the vacuum that draws in Islam. It is the Pull of Europe rather then the Push of Islam which is the true dynamics behind this grotesque phenomenon of civilizational suicide.
Also, I am not really sure if “suicide” is the most apt word here - unless one can speak of a nonchalant, blithe and carefree suicide. Because the prevailing mood here is that there is nothing Christian and Western worth defending and preserving - therefore the Moslem colonization of Europe is by many seen as a blessing, enrichment - a great chance one should welcome rather than oppose. That is happy view promoted by our Quislings. After the collapse of Communism it took for these useful idiots of yesterday only a few historical seconds to find a new master to worship. Unfortunately, it is them that rule supreme in politics, media and the educational sectors. The Quislings are elated and, one hates to admit, very good at their job of spreading optimism and faith in goodness of the de-Christianized Europe.
So it is not a mood of gloom and despair that is prompting the “suicide” of Europe. Rather, as Paul Cella said in his essay on Edmund Burke; “...great civilizations do not so much fall backward into barbarism, as march headlong into it with eager gleaming eyes and sophisticated sermons”. This is what happens in Europe right now. The happy headlong march toward oblivion.
Mark Butterworth,
You are expressing an attitude and ideas which are not only incorrect, but downright harmful and adverse to the effort of those who love and hope to revive Christian Europe. You are suggesting that the noble, just and moral effort of defending our homelands can only be achieved by people who are ignoble, unjust and immoral. And excuse me, but your belief that Europe in order to recover its freedom and greatness must draw from the same human pool as did Hitler is as idiotic as it is insulting.
It hurts and harms those of us here who do what we can to stop the deluge, to open the eyes of our children and our confused youths to the impending catastrophe, to restore pride and love of our great and true Religion, our matchless civilization, our magnificent culture and our singular truths and values. Your cynical and untrue remark is most damaging to our effort.
You, quite directly, support the lies our Quislings spread about the good, honest and courageous men and women here when referring to them in precisely the terms used by you e.g., white thrash, rednecks, bad boys, demagogues - in short, bigots and fascists, a riffraff to be shunned and condemned.
And BTW., I don’t think Charles Martel, the knights of the Reconquista, or Jan Sobieski were demagogues leading the white trash. Neither was Joan D’arc, or more recently W. Churchill leaders of “bad boys”. To recapture one’s homeland you need not a few “bad boys”, as you say, but a multitude of loving and courageous good boys. The “bad boys” usually join the enemy.
It is you right to believe what you want and I am not going to debate it with you. Instead I will kindly ask you to keep it to yourself instead of disseminating the harmful falsity about the identity and character of the patriots of Europe.
T. Hanski,
Well put in both posts. One of the tragidies of modern Europe has been having to choose between rival murder gangs and nothing else. There are alternatives if people would only listen. John Paul II, and, dare I say, the Catholic Church, comes to mind.
You seem to be engaged in this fight to save Europe. What are you doing? What can we (Americans) do?
T:
Brilliant assessment. It concerns me more that the demise is welcomed as some form of "renewel" or "progress" - I can already imagine the sermons - By welcoming our Islamic brothers and partaking of their traditions, we are "growing" and becoming more "understanding" and gasp! "tolerant" - doesn't that sound nice? It would be rude of us to present our civilization as somehow superior or - heaven (or preferred alternative after life existence, if any) forbid - make some sort of claim to know the "truth".
At least if it were recognized as suicide it might cause some to pause. But I do fear you are correct.
But, gents, what are we going to do about it?
I think the most effective means of coping with Radical Islam would be for a country--any sovereign country--to declare as stated policy that radical islamists will be deported. That is define radical islam, then take into custody, and then deport people who belive that way. An explanation of why this is happening should be provided--basically for reasons of self preservation.
I think if one country takes this action, then others may follow. The explanation would go something like "why should we have to take into our country people who believe it is correct to kill or convert us all in hopes that some of them may, thru contact with our democratic and pluralistic society, change their beliefs. No possible positive outcome can come from this kind of immigration., etc."
John Daly,
I, personally, don’t do very much except opening my mouth both publicly and privately insisting that transplanting into Europe an incompatible and historically consistently hostile civilization is an act of treason on a scale without a historical precedence. When you ask what can be done to prevent the inevitable catastrophe, I can only say that as long as people don’t see it as catastrophe, or as matt c puts it: “...the demise is welcomed as some form of "renewal" or "progress” then the main thing to do is to launch the ”Reconquista” of the minds and hearts of young people which have been invaded by the Left in its perpetual and relentless war against Christianity.
I think that civilizations evolve around religions. Christianity is a core of a Christian civilization and the core of Christianity is Christ Jesus. When by the verdict of our Leftist elites Jesus ceases being the Christ and instead assumes a role of “a great moral teacher”, but never greater than Mohammed, Christianity collapses and so does the West.
I may be wrong, but I can’t see how without going back to our Christian roots, asserting our faith and insisting on its supreme and exclusive truth, despite that such assertion implies a total fallacy of Islam, we can reverse the death of the Christian Europe.
Felix, I don’t think you grasp the real nature of the situation. There are no sovereign countries left in the West Europe. There are only sovereign socialist governments here. They are sovereign to such degree that they are not accountable anymore to their people and people’s history. These are liberal leftist governments and they are worshipping a new god of multiculti lunacy. BTW, what does your own government do to stop the invasion of illegal immigrants, or to keep “radical” Moslems out?
Felix, I don’t think you grasp the real nature of the situation. There are no sovereign countries left in the West Europe. There are only sovereign socialist governments here.
Brilliance stuff, Hanski.
T.
You may be correct that I underestimate the gravity of the situation in European counties. And it is true that in the USA we don't deport Islamofascists as a matter of public policy. I think we should.
If I understand you correctly, you are saying that there first must be a Christian revival in post-Christian Europe before any meaningful action can be taken against radical islam. It occurs to me that there may be many secular folks who can perceive the threat from islamofascism, and would go along with the program of deportation outlined above, but you may turn them off by the Christian revival elements. Not that I am against Christian revival, but we need a coalition here, in my judgement.
After all, the Islamists hate Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, humanists, homosexuals, and on and on and on. And they state their prejudices publicy and proudly.
T:
If I remember correctly, you are a Pole. How are your comments received in Poland? We are told here in the USA that Poland is part of "New Europe" which, having lived under tyranny, will not stick its head in the sand in the face of the Islamic threat. Hence it is our ally in Iraq. I also hear, however, that the Iraq war is deeply unpopular in Poland and that the Poles are very eager to join the EU. What's your assesment? Also are there any organizations, movements, etc. which are trying to reclaim minds and hearts of the young?
Felix:
If you ask me any sort of broad coalition like you hope for would be too squishy and multicultural to have much of a backbone. In fact, its kind of what Europe has now. The threat would have to advance much further before any sort of broad coalition would be galvanized into anything approaching effectiveness. By then it might be too late. Remember the Bolsheviks, the Nazis and the Jacobins?
Felix,
If I understand you correctly, you are saying that there first must be a Christian revival in post-Christian Europe before any meaningful action can be taken against radical islam
Perhaps I was not too clear about it. I am not trying to establish some kind of action plan which specifies what must come first and what it needs to be followed with. It is not step by step arrangement. I am not proposing tactics. I should perhaps have said that parallel to our effort for Christian revival we most urgently need to recover constitutionally guaranteed political tools to secure freedom of expression including expressions of outright rejection of Islam, its message, its prophet and its being lethal not only to Christianity, but to freedom of mankind. We need political freedom to secure Christianity and we need Christianity to define what this freedom is.
I think John Daly’s comment above addresses very well your concern that … there may be many secular folks who can perceive the threat from islamofascism, …, but you may turn them off by the Christian revival elements. Not that I am against Christian….
Besides, I think that “secular folk” who are serious about their secularity and also are honest enough to admit that until now it has been the Christian Civilization that proposed, developed and enforced the continuous separation of religion and the state. In short, Christianity provided the environment where they could enjoy and enforce their secularism. Sometimes even at the expense of their non-secular co-citizens. It doesn’t take a very bright secularist to recognize that once Islam establishes itself firmly these folks will be given the option of either converting, or joining Christians and Jews in dhimmitude. I don’t think they can’t see that in that particular historical context Christians are their true allies.
I am aware that there are a number of people in the West so recklessly hateful of Christianity that their secularism is less important to them than seeing Christianity destroyed. They also count on that with time “western” Islam will catch the liberal virus which will weaken and corrupt it, so it becomes an innocuous, colourful adornment of the brave, new, multicultural and godless world. Well, I don’t think we need them in our “coalition”.
John Daly, I must have overlooked your posting addressed to me. I will try to answer it as soon as I can, but right now I have to speed to the airport to pick up some friends.
And lest I forget - C Matt, John Daly and Paul Cella; thank you for your kind words.
T. Hanski,
The Sons of Liberty by general reckoning would be called fascists or brownshirts today. They were tavern fellows and usually known as low company. They bullied those Americans who were Tories and precipitated the Revolution. Until recently, the American army was made up of a great many men easily called racists, rednecks, and white trash.
It's not the professors who go to war for the sake of western civilization. Rome was defended by rough thugs and led by many men no different than warlords.
Daniel Boone was as barbaric and savage as the Indians he fought in order to prevail against them.
The idea that Europe can be saved by decent people is absurd. It is the roughnecks and ill mannered who fight the wars or win the territories.
Islamic aggression will not be turned back by idealistic people, but by hard core roughnecks. If that offends you, so be it.
John Dale,
Yes I am a Pole by birth but I left Poland in my early youth and have been living most of my life in the West - mainly in Denmark. I visit Poland very rarely now so I may not be your best source of information about the advance of Islam there. What I know for sure is that Poles who only a few years ago believed that the Islamization issue is a west European problem are now, one year after joining the EU, getting quickly aware that they have “inherited” their own share of the problem. As a member of the EU they will have to comply with the immigration policies decided in Brussels. Their own, until now relatively small, Moslem community prepares for expansion and is getting increasingly vocal and self-assertive, which rubs many Poles the wrong way.
But what finally sparked off a full fledged debate about wisdom and, indeed, morality of creating massive Moslem presence in that catholic land is the apprehension with Turkey’s impending membership in the EU. Now Turkey has over a few centuries clashed militarily with Poland and it can be said that if there is such a thing as a national collective memory, or collective subconsciousness, then judging from the massive Polish rejection of the idea of Turkeys membership, these memories are well preserved in the Polish collective memory. Poles view the Turkish wars not so much as a long ago resolved conflict between two states, but, indeed, as the clash of civilizations. And not so much resolved as suspended – like a ceasefire. They sense that civilizational clashes are fueled by very different type of forces than those that feed clashes between states and countries. The former are much deeper and basic, and like those that push tectonic plates, hardly if at all understood or manageable - and unlikely to fade away. Not soon.
At present there are two quite well managed and informative Polish blogs exclusively voicing concern with Islamic growth. They are in Polish language. Also, from what I can see the press is very much busy with the topic and since political correctness hasn’t established itself firmly in Poland the debate is much more open and free than in the West. Also, please remember that Poland is still quite catholic and it looks as if great majority of Poles wants it to remain that way. But, of course, both Italy and Spain used to be very catholic in the past…
And yes, Poland supplied troops to Iraq and the vast majority wants the US to succeed. But it is mostly considered an American war - not so much a concern of Poles. The nation is now motivated by consumerism to sometimes awful degree and one must not expect much of solidarity and idealism . Well, Poles have been denied material goods and opportunity for so long, so this is small wonder. I don’t know if really as you say the majority is against the Iraq war. But neither is the American pro-war sentiment overwhelmingly greater than the opposition. But I’d better have it verified. But first I will go back to my guests.
Hey John Daly, go with the driver next time you're in a playoff with Vijay. 
I happen to think that the Cardinals were reacting to this problem and they picked one of their best men to engage it. JPII has laid enormous foundations, being a Pole-his traditions escaped the so-called Enlightenment the Fag End of which rapidly approaches. The birth rate in Europe is far below replacement. Mother nature will not be trifled with.
As usual I come late to the commentary. I too worry greatly about what is to be done to stop Islam from occupying Europe. Islam is our great historic enemy In its essence it cannot be appeased. One either submits to it, or defies it. I am defiant.
We are engaged in a battle spiritual here and our old enemy is making headway because we have cast off our spiritual armour and have embraced the modernist (yet ancient) cult of death. Europe is but the vanguard of the West in this regard. What to do?
The answer is within us. If we do not re-evangelize the West then we will go the way of Byzantium. In that respect all roads do lead to Rome.
Remember that Frederick the Great developed the oblique attack in which his Prussian army shifted its main point of attack at the last moment from the opposing centre of mass to one of the flanks of the opposing armies. Only a truly disciplined and well-drilled army was capable of executing such a maneuver in battle and most opposing armies were not capable of responding to the changed point of impact.
I believe Pope Benedict knows the problem we face and sees the solution. We are about to witness a new counter-reformation aimed directly at the heart, mind and spirit of secular Europe and only obliquely at the threat posed by Islam. Catholics are about to be well drilled in the essentials of our faith and the hope of the West lies in how well we respond on the parade ground to our new Sergeant Major.
Thanks to the almost three decades of spadework undertaken by John Paul the Great the theological fads of the sixties are about to be roughly cast aside as a the Church militant girds its loins for battle. The Church is about to mobilize. May Christ be with her.
Mark Butterworth,
The Sons of Liberty by general reckoning would be called fascists or brownshirts today.
“ called fascists or brownshirts?” Oh…?...by whom? Only by deeply ignorant of what fascism is or by intellectually lethargic. Anyway, would you call them so? Well, I am not surprised.
Until recently, the American army was made up of a great many men easily called racists, rednecks, and white trash.
And now when, according to M.B., the composition of the US army shifted toward decent, ethical, honorable and idealistic, we are all witnessing catastrophic decline of American fighting prowess. A few more years of such development and the Marines will not stand a chance against a pack of English hooligans upset by defeat of their favourite football team.
Ah, now, thanks to M. B’s insight, it is clear why G. W. Bush rushed into the war; Had the French and German succeeded in stalling America for another six months the “rot of decency” would have set in so deeply sissyfying the US to a point they would be a walkover for the Republican Guards. It is good that mr. Bush has seen through the perfidy of Jacques and Gerhard and moved on before it was too late and the American army descended into a state of most perilous decency making it a breakfast for the thugs and bullies of Saddam.
Rome was defended by rough thugs and led by many men no different than warlords.
And no one else?.
Mark Butterworth must have learned his history from comic books, or gossips. Urban legends projected on the screen of history.
The idea that Europe can be saved by decent people is absurd. It is the roughnecks and ill mannered who fight the wars or win the territories.
Hm, M.B. obviously confuses decency with weakness and he thinks ill manners indicative of fighting qualities. Rather revealing of M.B.
He, like a preadolescent over-protected boy, also confuses brawn with brutality, courage with recklessness, manliness with cruelty. As for sacrifice, love, fidelity … well, it seems M.B.’s is unable to discern such qualities in the man fighting for his home, country and faith. Strange…
Anyway, I sent the letter to a few people here (all decent and kind people) engaged in open resistance to Eurabia, but it doesn’t seem they want to take M.B. too seriously. “Waiting for Bully” is not an attitude they want to adapt.
And an interesting remark from a young lady (decent and idealistic) to whom I sent M. B.’s letter: “I would not want to go out with the fellow. I’d worry that if some drunken sod insults or attacks me, my companion would say “sorry love, but I am a decent person not a bully, can’t help you. You will have to wait for some white trash, ill mannered roughneck to save you. Ta, ta.…”
And please M.B. you don’t really offend me or us. You would have to do much, much, much better than that pathetically inadequate and tortuously argued thing you present above.
Mark B:
Look, I don't want to get personal here. You have a point that armies need a fair amount of roughnecks who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty (I was in the Marine Corps not so long ago and don't worry, there are still a lot of rednecks, not to mention homeboys and others who are looking for some asses to kick). They provide the horsepower. But who provides the leadership? Washington, Grant, Sherman or Hitler, Stalin, Milosevic and Radovan Karawhatisname. Your faith in mobs leads to disaster (do a Google search on: history AND "eastern europe" AND 1941-1989). Europe needs to rebuild a decent cultural framework or else its mass movements will continue to be led by maniacs. And we Americans need to take a good hard look down the road to where Europe is going so we don't follow.
T. Hanski:
Maybe when your guests leave, you'll have some time to translate the Polish language blogs. In all seriousness, it would be great to be able to assist this effort rather than just tut-tutting it on our side of the Atlantic. I believe this was the underlying reason for Paul's post in the first place. If anyone knows of anything, don't be shy.
In the meantime, I wish the Poles luck. Perhaps they can redeem things, they certainly have spent enough time on the cross for the sins of western Europe.
Paul,
Keep reminding me about the driver. I get alot of, uh, "memory gaps".
Specifically in France, it is as much a cultural problem as it is a religious one. For the last several hundred years, becoming a member of french society meant adopting French culture as your own-no matter your origin. Skin color, religion, this has not mattered this century. Instead it has become the language, the values of society which have become the identifiers of a member of french society. In the present situation, the French are faced with an increasingly large immigrant population who refuse to be assimilated into the overal populace.
Declining birth rates is a fact in all post-industrial communities. In the US today we rely on immigrants to make up for this. Indeed, it is immigrants, both legal and illegal, that make our system work. Europe on the other hand has no similar mechanisms for integrating people in large groups. In the US there is no one defined culture that all are forced to embrace, although it is highly encouraged. Seperate ethnic groups maintain their individual identity while remaining solid citizens. In France, this is definitly not the case. Indeed, when the mayor of iirc, Marsielles began to meet with leaders of the muslim community in his city, many cried foul. You see, he was legitimizing this division among french citizens, and this was not to be allowed.
I don't know what the eventual result of all this will be. I would think that what will emerge is an combination of how the US deals with immigration and something unique. As the EU begins to bring europe together, pan-national interest groups will begin to form. Initially, the muslim groups will have the advantage because they are all tied together by heritage, but they will be absorbed in time to some new cohesive whole. It's possible this will bring new religiosity in turn in christians. Hopefully, the attitude of europeans toward religion will rub off in the opposite direction and mitigate the fanaticism that infuses too much of islam.
John Daly,
Your faith in mobs leads to disaster
Precisely!
I wish I wrote such succinct, yet civil, letter to Mark B. as you have. Sometimes I do get carried away. But I’ll improve...
And we Americans need to take a good hard look down the road to where Europe is going so we don't follow.
That what I should have said in my first letter to you as an answer to the question in your comment of 11 May: What can we (Americans) do?
Maybe when your guests leave, you'll have some time to translate the Polish language blogs.
I did consider such a possibility, however tentatively, but I gave up for a number of reasons. First, as usually, is lack of time. It is one thing to, now and then; send a comment to a blog, but it is different to have to accurately translate whole articles. Often the articles deal with specifically Polish situation which would need some kind of presentation in order to be correctly understood outside of Poland. Another thing is that these articles very often are commentaries and discussions of English language pieces from American and English media and blogs. (Daniel Pipe’s website, for example, is regularly translated into Polish). And finally, I know that Poles, Czechs, Hungarians are getting together to create a pool of internet based “Islamic invasion” related information and I am going to suggest creating an English language common “face” toward the world. The Poles are working on an idea of hooking up with such sites in Scandinavia, Germany, Italy and, I think, France. I am now trying to facilitate a contact and exchange between the Polish http://www.eurojihad.org/ and the Danish http://www.islaminfo.dk/ if there is good collaboration here we will try to expand further in order to, as said before, create a extensive international web of information and an international forum on the subject of Islamic invasion. Let’s see…Ah and there is this really good Norwegian blog, mostly in English. The scope is rather wide, but Islam is one of the major topics. Absolutely worth checking out. http://blog.bearstrong.net/
In the meantime, I wish the Poles luck. Perhaps they can redeem things, they certainly have spent enough time on the cross for the sins of western Europe,
Thank you so much John Daly! We, well all Europe, need luck, but even more we need your friendship and solidarity and also your patience with our antics. America never let us down before and although it may seem Europe, especially Western Europe, would sometimes prefer not to remember the price you paid for our freedom, quite a few of us here will never forget it.
And, we Poles, are not exactly sinless, so it is not only the sins of west Europe Poland has been paying for.
In all seriousness, it would be great to be able to assist this effort rather than just tut-tutting it on our side of the Atlantic.
How wonderfully American! Thank you Marine!
T. Hanski:
Please let all of us know if you hear of any good English-language European blogs confronting the question of Islam. I will be sure to link to them.
John the (Very Sane):
I agree that Benedicts seems well-focused on the threat of Islam, which is a very good thing.
And let's not be too hard on the Byzantines. They stood against successive waves of Muslim raiders and armies for nearly a thousand years before Western Europe got its act together.
Paul Cella,
It seems that with the rare exception of http://www.bearstrong.net/warblog/ the only English language European blogs would either be British, or Irish. I think Bjoern Staerk of the above mentioned Norwegian site would be someone who would know of them. He would be a god place to start. I will email him and ask.
In the meantime you may want to visit www.secularislam.org/links/index.htm, listing many good blogs. Especially those coming from Asia.
And please read an article The Essence of Nonsense by By Irfan Khawaja - an adjunct philosophy professor at the College of New Jersey. Here it is:
www.secularislam.org/articles/khawaja21.htm
T. Hanski,
No problem. Sounds like you're doing alot of work on this already. I haven't had much time to do more than glance at these links. www.bearstrong.net is not too easy to figure out in a moment. The general tone of www.secularislam.org seems to be heavy on the secular humanist side which hurts Islam and Christianity alike, although "Essence of Nonsense" was a good one. Irfan Khawaja seems to think www.bearstrong.net is unwilling to really tackle Islam and instead hides behind political correctness, therefore www.bearstrong.net is part of the problem. I need more time to digest this stuff before I can comment with something approaching intelligence. Right now it seems to be a mishmash. Of course, time is the big limiting factor here as you have noted. It seems as though you are spending a lot of you own time trying to get the message out. I appreciate it. We all appreciate it (even Mark Butterworth I'll bet) and hope it bears fruit. I know you reply regularly to Paul C.'s blog. I read it regularly. Keep us posted.
Mr. Daly,
Mr. Hanski confuses much of what I have said. You are closer to the gist of it. Soldiers tend to be roughnecks. Officers are a different class of men generally (but not always).
I did not imply that there are no more racists or rednecks in our armed forces, but the professionalism at this time does not openly allow attitudes which were once prevalent.
Our standing armies between major wars were usually or often made up of the dregs of society, but led by professionals who kept discipline.
This is true of just about all armies and societies through history. Many would argue that the decency of our current forces has been a hindrance in many respects to getting the job done quickly with the least amount of casualties.
I don't know what Hanski's project is, but if he wants to save Europe it's going to take some very nasty people (or people willing to be nasty for a time) to do it.
It will take a severe Intolerance of some to overcome the debilitation of of abject Tolerance by many that P. Cella writes about in a later blog.
I don't quite see how any rational person can deny that. Those are the facts of life and "comic book" history.
John Daly,
Sounds like you're doing alot of work on this already
Not enough.
www.bearstrong.net is not too easy to figure out in a moment.
I think its “manifesto” tells it quite accurately.:
“A broad, open public sphere … A place where all issues are discussed freely, … all views are represented…The problem with the media situation in Norway today is uniformity and lack of debate… I care about my views, but I care even more about creating the conditions for discussing those views.”
Although Bjoern refers to himself as “right winger” blog’s many correspondents and associates are of the socialist persuasion of many shades. So in this sense it is “mishmash”. Which is a healthy development considering that Scandinavian, especially the Norwegian and Swedish, media has been monopolized by the dumbest possible strain of Left whose favourite, (after vilification) mode of dealing with dissent is censorship.
I don’t access it too often - only when I need a perspective on a local development more diversified than those shoved down our throats by the liberal socialist media.
Also its audience is rather broad and many w.b. correspondents join it from the outside of Scandinavia. The prevailing tone is civil despite of sometimes quite radical opinions.
Its tone is obviously critical of the development here, but not so much critical of Islam in itself.
We all appreciate it (even Mark Butterworth I'll bet) and hope it bears fruit.
I know and am quite grateful. I also know that Mark Butterworth is very much concerned about the survival of the West although he thinks that we, in order to salvage our civilization need first to descend to barbarity. He is not disturbed by the glaring inconsistency of such belief. Also, he has modified, not so imperceptibly, what he has said in his first posting on the matter and now sends in few truisms and irrelevant to that matter observations in order to dodge my quite clear points. It would be nice if instead of that he engaged squarely my arguments, but I think this will not happen in this thread. Pity, but not really a disaster…
The general tone of www.secularislam.org seems to be heavy on the secular humanist side which hurts Islam and Christianity alike,
Harmful for both? Its proclaimed target is secularization of Islamic society and it seems faithful to that declaration. I don’t think it concerns itself with Christendom.
Also, I consider Islamic civilization to be pathology, which, primarily, hurts Moslems. So “hurting” it wouldn’t necessarily be such a terrible thing. Or to put it some other way hurting Islam would be beneficial to Moslems who are its most immediate victims.
Of course, the best way to go about it would be spreading Christianity among Moslems. But when this is not possible secularization may be the next best approach. Well, well, but this is a topic for a separate thread.
Thanks again for your encouragement.
Hanski is right in saying I notice that ". . . in order to salvage our civilization need first to descend to barbarity."
It's a shame, and an example of how fallen human beings are that they allow that which is good to decay through lack of discipline.
And it only takes an aggressive minority to eventually secure power to itself, because the mass are almost always passive and complacent.
Unfortunately, we can never really salvage a civilization. The very act of doing so alters it. WW2 salvaged liberal democracy, but led to immense social, cultural, political, and legal changes.
The War Between the States salvaged the Union, but at the expense of the people's rights in their states. The 14th Amendment has effectively destroyed the indiviuality of these united states.
In some senses, we won the Cold War, but lost our schools, universities, legal profession, and media to the Marxists. The ACLU won.
If Hanski or anyone can motivate Europeans and Poles to a renaissance of devotion to faith and civilization,
I would be the first to cheer him on. I wish him well, but it will take a very aggressive pursuit of political power to achieve his aims.
Is that possible with a demogogue?
Well, in the US the Republicans have seized control of government in two branches by persevering and civilized means, but what have they accomplished apart from slightly lower taxes and war on terrorists? Nothing. The slide of truth, morals, decency continues apace. The illegal immigrant invasion continues unabated.
I wish humanity were different, but without brutal men and means, even the good we have would not have been accomplished.
Well, the teen pregnancy rate it getting better. The murder rate is dropping. Even the abortion rate was dropping until the Bush recession.
The only differance between today and the past is that we know about things when they happen. A hundred years ago you wouldn't even hear about someone going missing a hundred miles away. A century ago the murder rate in kentucky was three times what it is today, and yet people feel less safe because they hear about every one of these murders.
Personally, I'm happy that the states were finally integrated into the union after the civil war. Without that, we would never have lasted, with competing power blocks of states able to compete against one another with impunity. The opportunity for treason should not be tolerated. The fact that the southern cause was later mythologized does not excuse the fact that it rested on betrayal and slavery.
The fact that you label all those in academia, law and the media as marxists is rather amusing, considering that even the most liberal would be considered moderate in europe. Just because there is anti-socialist fervor here does not make it universal. Indeed, I envy France their socialized health care system.
Also, taxes haven't been lowered. They've been raised and payment is delayed. The deficit means that the cost will still have to be paid, and with interest.
Mark Butterworth,
You really need to introduce both consistency and relevance to your arguments for support of your belief that Europe can not be saved by decent people and needs to wait for thugs, brutes and bullies to "wake up".
Please look at that:
“... in order to salvage our civilization (we) need first to descend to barbarity."
followed by : “Unfortunately, we can never really salvage a civilization…”
followed again by: “WW2 salvaged liberal democracy…”
Well, which is it? It would be so much easier for us to communicate if you would make up your mind about the feasibility of civilization salvaging.
And here:
In some senses, we won the Cold War, but lost our schools, universities, legal profession, and media to the Marxists. The ACLU won.
If indeed such development was the consequence of winning the Cold War would losing the war or seeking appeasement with the Evil Empire somehow prevented the development? And regardless of your affirmative or negative answer to the question; in what way the example supports your conviction that salvation comes through the Bullies?
If Hanski or anyone can motivate Europeans and Poles to a renaissance of devotion to faith and civilization, I would be the first to cheer him on. I wish him well,
OK, THAT I have no problem understanding! Let me then reciprocate with; I, too, wish you well Mark Butterworth. And however sceptical you are of the chances of decent people here to block that hideous islamo-liberal project of eurabia I have no doubt you would welcome our success and do what you can to support us. And for that I am sincerely grateful.
The fact that the southern cause was later mythologized does not excuse the fact that it rested on betrayal and slavery
From the Declaration of Independence:
That these united colonies are free and independent states.
Note - free and independent states (plural), not a free and independent state (singular). A free and independent state cannot commit "betrayal" against another one by leaving a voluntary union, as its loyalty is to its own people, and its union with the other state is voluntary, not compulsory. If there was a betrayal, it was by the union refusing to acknowledge the freedom and independence of the states that wanted to leave it. In that sense, they acted no better than King George about whom they complained a scant 100 years earlier in the same document. Not to mention that we are under a far worse tyranny now by our own government than the colonists were at the time they decided to overthrow it.
That it rested on slavery, in part, no one denies. The South had the right argument, albeit for the wrong end.
C,
If there was a betrayal, it was by the union refusing to acknowledge the freedom and independence of the states that wanted to leave it.
A thought like that appeared to me in the past and I remember asking my American friends about it, but somehow I never got a clear answer. I know very little about the American history except the most basic facts.
Does you Constitution really say in positive language that any state may leave the union whenever it desires so? I'd like to see that clause. Well, but I'd better do some reading.
Commenting by HaloScan
