The Strange Death of Europe
by Douglas Murray
I opened The Strange Death of
Europe already cognizant of the tragedy unfolding in Europe. I hoped that
within its pages I would find some reason for optimism... some glimmer of hope
that the Europeans alive today would not see their world washed over by the
Islamic tide within their lifetimes. As I approached the end, I sensed that the
author himself may have struggled with what message he should leave for the
reader. Alas, barring an unexpected natural or man-made cataclysm that upends
the flow of history, I am forced to conclude, along with the author, that it is
really difficult to conjure any serious hope for reversing Europe’s fate.
It is an understatement to call Strange
Death an important book. It may be the most important book of the decade. It
speaks to the very survival of Europe. We’re not talking about some kind of
academic abstraction. This isn’t a cultural anthropological examination of a
vanishing tribe in the Amazon. This is Europe, the home of western civilization
itself. The United States, Canada and Australia are, after all, merely recent outposts
of the civilization that shepherded mankind to unparalleled technological and
artistic heights over the past several centuries.
Strange Death is an interweaving of
two themes. Murray describes in detail the evolution of Muslim immigration into
Europe over the last two decades. Likewise, atrocities committed by the Islamic
jihadists and Muslim immigrants are cataloged. Murray is a pedigreed and
well-traveled journalist. He augments his analysis of the Muslim presence in
Europe with several personal anecdotes garnered from his work in the field.
Shocking as all this is, the second
theme is actually even more disturbing, and from the standpoint of academic
inquiry, far more interesting: Why is Europe allowing—even encouraging—this to
happen? When discussing what is often referred to as the Great Replacement, the
word “Europe” is now too often conjoined with “suicide.”
For readers whose self-selecting of
news sources precludes contamination from xenophobic, alt-right “fake news”
sources, this language may appear hyperbolic.
If you’re about to stop reading
this review and scratch Strange Death off your reading list, let me try to first lure
you in with some unimpeachable facts.
Following are several statistics
that highlight the degree to which Muslim immigration into Europe in the past two
decades has not only transmogrified the national character of those countries,
but set them on a path to Islamic domination within, in some cases, as already
stated, the lifetimes of people alive today.
- By 2016, 74,000 women in England had been subjected to genital mutilation.
- “Muhammad” was the most popular baby boy’s name in 2017, 2015, and 2014. (In 2016 it was edged out by “Oliver.”) In 2013 it was 28th. In the year preceding, 57th.
- The overall fertility rate in England and Wales in 2016 was 1.81. This includes all people identified as “British.” The rate for Somalis was 4.19, for Afghans 4.25, and Pakistanis 3.82. Given 28 percent of births were to foreign born mothers, it’s clear that the fertility rate of ethnic white British mothers must be close to 1.5, well below the replacement rate. Fertility rates began to nosedive in 1967, when abortion was legalized. To add fuel to the fire of moral and cultural decay, only half of births today are to married parents.
- There are roughly six million Muslims in France, a nation of 65 million. That’s almost ten percent of the population.
- Over eight percent of Sweden, a nation of ten million, is now Muslim.
- In 2015, 163,000 Muslims entered Sweden claiming asylum. An unknown number of others entered the country and disappeared, with an estimated total as high as 180,000, almost two percent (1.8) of the existing population.
- Malmo, Sweden’s third largest city, is now only half native Swedish. According to economists’ projections, within one generation native Swedes will be a minority in every major city in Sweden.
- Ethnic Swedes will be a minority overall in their own country within the lifespan of most of its present residents.
- In Germany, 200,000 immigrants claimed asylum in 2014. In 2015 the number rose to 1.5 million. The following year, Germany permitted only 680,000 refugees.
- In 2016, roughly five percent of Europe was Muslim. The Pew Research Center has produced a study of population projections for Europe in 2050 under three scenarios of continuing Muslim immigration: zero, medium and high growth rates. If immigration were completely halted today (the zero growth scenario), 7.5 percent of Europe would be Muslim by the middle of the century. In the high immigration scenario it almost doubles to 14 percent. In the high projection, one in five Germans and almost one in three Swedes will be Muslim. England and France would have Muslim proportions of 17.2 and 18 percent respectively.
# # #
To erase any doubts you may
have of the disastrous effects this is having, let’s now take a look at the
social and economic toll this demographic tsunami is taking on Britain and the
nations of Western Europe. At further risk of being labeled “Islamophobic,” I’ll
repeat some of the atrocities Europeans have been forced to endure at the hands
of their guests, as detailed in Strange Death.
Sweden’s cost to provide for
immigrants exceeds the budgets of both their Defense and Justice departments.
A school in Rosengard, a district
in the city of Malmo, has not had a student with Swedish as their first
language in 14 years. Ambulance and firefighters refuse to enter Rosengard
without a police escort because the residents attack them.
At the Swedish “We Are Stockholm”
music festival in 2014, gangs of Muslim immigrants surrounded girls as young as
14, molested and raped them. The practice was repeated the following year in
Stockholm and other cities.
In 1975 police crime stats in
Sweden noted 421 rapes. In 2014, 6,620 rapes were reported. By 2015 Sweden had
won the distinction of being the rape capital of the world (technically second,
to the tiny African nation of Lesotho).
In 2016, eighty percent of the
Swedish police forces considered looking for a new line of work because of the
dangers entailed in dealing with the increasingly lawless, migrant dominated areas.
In 2013 Lee Rigby, a young British
soldier on leave from service in Afghanistan was attacked by two Muslim
immigrants. They first struck him with their car, then got out and attacked him
with machetes. They tried to cut off his head, but couldn’t quite complete the
job. The two assailants were British citizens of Nigerian descent, raised as Christians,
but converted to Islam. They were eventually shot by the police, but survived. A letter found on one of them, addressed to his sons, included this
message:
“My beloved children. Know that to fight Allah’s enemies is an obligation... Do not spend your days in endless dispute with the cowardly and foolish if it means that it will delay your meeting Allah’s enemies on the battlefield.”
According to Murray, the letter
closed with a footnote containing almost two dozen references to passages in
the Koran.
Beginning in 2014, outbreaks of
rapes of women and young boys by Muslims exploded across Germany coincident
with the vast numbers of refugees welcomed for asylum. Rapes were committed everywhere:
on the street, in communal buildings, public swimming baths and other public
locations. Similarly across Western Europe.
Norway developed an education program, providing classes for refugee men
on how to treat women. (Don’t rape them. Rape is bad... and illegal, I
presume...) A 33-year-old asylum seeker from Eritrea is reported to have
explained the lack of understanding thusly:
“Men have weaknesses and when they see someone smiling it is difficult to control.”
He further explained the sexual
customs in his native country:
“If someone wants a lady he can just take her and he will not be punished.”
In Cologne on New Year’s Eve 2015,
crowds of men estimated at 20,000 sexually assaulted and robbed 1,200 women in
the main town square outside the railway station. It was later revealed that
similar mass assaults occurred in other German cities that night. A Muslim
‘wilding’ to celebrate the New Year.
In 2016 the rapes and sexual assaults
spread to every one of Germany’s 16 federal states. There were attacks
literally every day. Prosecutions were extremely rare, largely because of the concerted
effort by law enforcement policy makers to suppress the knowledge and data of
crimes committed by Muslim immigrants.
A 24-year-old woman was raped by
three migrants in Mannheim in 2016. She first claimed that her assailants were
German nationals. Later she admitted she had lied because she didn’t want to
“help fuel aggressive racism.” She went so far as to write an open letter to
her rapists and apologized to them. Here is the excerpt that Murray includes:
“I wanted an open Europe, a friendly one. One that I can gladly live in and one in which we are both safe in. I am sorry. For us both I am so incredibly sorry. You, you aren’t safe here, because we live in a racist society. I, I am not safe because we live in a sexist society. But what truly makes me feel sorry, are the circumstances by which the sexist and boundary-crossing acts that were inflicted on me, make it so that you are beset by increasing and more aggressive racism. I promise you, I will not stand by idly and watch as racists and concerned citizens call you a problem. You are not the problem. You are not a problem at all. You most often are a wonderful human being, who deserves to be free and safe like everyone else.”
Rape as a “boundary-crossing act”...
Hmmm... Clearly, it is difficult to find
hope for Europe when confronted with politically correct lunacy of this
magnitude.
# # #
Strange Death is full of reports
like these. I include these several up front in the hope of convincing any
delusional leftist apologists that, first, the problem is real. Not “fake
news.” Assuming this now a thing accomplished,
I turn to the far more compelling question of “Why?” As in, why is Europe, as typified by the
hopelessly delusional rape victim above, welcoming this viper into its bosom?
Murray goes to great lengths to
dissect the zeitgeist that currently afflicts Western Europe. What compels the
European to see rapist as victim; to see black as white, up as down, wrong as
right? To wrap our minds around this question it needs to be said that this is
a HUGE question. It is deep and it is complex. It won’t yield to a single
solution. Furthermore, everyone who looks at it will see it through their own
viewport. There is no right or wrong answer. But it would be incredibly stupid
to throw up the hands in resignation—or worse yet pretend it doesn’t exist or
doesn’t matter—as so many do. Here in the U.S., how often do I read in
a news report comment rejoinder, “Europe’s finished.”? It matters... greatly. We are
talking about the survival of the home of western civilization, which is on track
to disappear within a generation or two. I submit that there is no more
important question for the West to consider.
Murray delves most extensively into
the Question in the chapter titled “Tiredness.” He relies on several historical
references to point to an “exhaustion” that has settled upon the continent. A
spiritual and psychological exhaustion. Its capacity for constructive
self-reflection at a breaking point, Europe has embraced nihilism. The popular
culture is in the sewer. There is no line between the performances of the
latest “pop princess” and soft-core pornography. While its birth rate
continues to dive further below replacement level, it embraces, celebrates and
promotes homosexuality—aka “alternative lifestyles” that by their very nature preclude
procreation.
To what do we attribute this moral
and spiritual vacuum—not to mention the rejection of simple common sense? There
is one obvious culprit: the abandonment of Christianity, the founding
faith. Europe has chosen to discard its religious
foundation that evolved over two millennia; the religion that, grudgingly
perhaps, adapted itself to rationalism and scientific inquiry, and eventually found
a marginal position alongside secular humanism. It has sought enhancements for
the Judeo-Christian definitions of good and evil and replacements for its rules
governing moral conduct and its prescriptions for the purposeful life. Murray
believes all its efforts to do so have failed.
The rejection of Christianity is
not, however, Murray’s big answer for Europe’s spiritual starvation—it is just
the launching point for his analysis of Europe’s failed quest for meaning in
life. He explores the revolutionary and brilliant ideas of Europe’s great
philosophies. Communism, notably, attempted to provide an all-encompassing
solution that failed miserably. To Murray’s thinking, Europe limped out of the
twentieth century in the wake of the two great world wars, emerging thoroughly
exhausted. The continual strife and warfare, resulting in large part from its failures to find the ultimate rational answer
to man’s purpose in lieu of religious dogma, finally caught up with her.
Germany’s self-inflicted psychological
and spiritual neutering after World War II is by now a cliché. Yet it is real,
and perhaps nowhere more exemplified than in the chief culprit of the entire
immigration debacle: Angela Merkel. As head of Europe’s leading state,
Germany’s enduring leader did more than anyone else to embrace the tide of
Muslim immigration. Time and time again,
Merkel “stood up for mercy and compassion,” despite the consequences to her own
people. Germany has a mortal fear of anything that could even remotely resemble racism. And this is why political entities like Pegida, that call for a halt
to Muslim immigration and a reversal of Merkel’s ‘Europe open borders’ policy,
are demonized by the German establishment.
There is another aspect of the
Question that is extremely important to note, and Murray informs with copious
examples. The people of Europe do recognize the harm visited upon them by the
immigrants, and they most assuredly oppose the open-borders policies and the
massive influx of Muslims from the Near-and Middle East and Africa. Poll after poll confirms this.
The people of Europe know of the harm because what they witness on their own streets cannot be hidden, despite the best efforts of a
craven media establishment. But it is the political and intellectual leaders that
are united in pushing these policies, with the collusion of media elites and
the law enforcement agencies.
In response to the machete attack
on Lee Rigby, the British soldier on leave from Afghanistan, Prime Minister
David Cameron, the UK’s Conservative Prime Minister addressed the atrocity outside
10 Downing Street with these words,
“This was not just an attack on Britain—and on our British way of life. It was also a betrayal of Islam—and of the Muslim communities who give so much to our country. There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful attack.”
Recall, the machete attacker left a
note on the victim that listed almost two dozen quotations from the Koran justifying
the slaughter.
The following year, after the
beheading of a British aid worker in Syria by a British-born jihadist, Cameron
said,
“They claim to do this in the name of Islam. That is nonsense. (Repeat after me: ) Islam is a religion of peace. They are not Muslims; they are monsters.”
The fourth estate colludes in this
sham. The media have, quite frankly, lied about the crimes committed by Muslims,
when simply not reporting them became untenable.
Muslim criminals are deliberately
misidentified. In England, so-called “grooming gangs” enticed girls as young as
eleven into becoming drug-addicted sex slaves, prostituted out for money.
Authorities had been warned of this in the early 2000s, but it wasn’t until 2014
that police revealed that organized gangs of African and Pakistani Muslims had
“groomed” over 1,400 non-Muslim white girls between 1997 and 2014. All had been
brutally raped, some had been doused in petrol and threatened to be lit afire.
Some were threatened with guns and forced to watch other girls get raped as a warning to keep quiet. One was even branded with her slave master’s
initial, “M.” Take a wild guess...
The non-response of politicians,
law enforcement and the media is symptomatic of why the problem resists
solution. Sex-slavery of “infidels” is enshrined in the Koran. These child-rapists
and groomers are different than typical perverts and pimps that afflict every
society. A man with an uncontrollable sexual
predilection for children may be filled with guilt and shame over his unnatural
desires, and wish for nothing more than to be rid of them. An Islamic warrior
uses rape to sow fear in his enemy. Rape has always been an instrument of war. The
rape epidemic in Sweden and Germany begs the question—where are the men? Too many of them have been emasculated by feminism, rendering them (figuratively if not literally) impotent. But as the
record will show, any attempts by the men—and/or women for that matter—to defend their
communities from these barbarians are slapped down by their own governmental authorities.
Shocking and shameful... but true.
In 2004 a documentary about
problems in Bradford, now a fully Islamicized city in England, contained a
segment on the groomings. After a pre-broadcast screening, so-called “anti-fascists”
and local police chiefs appealed to the network to drop the documentary. The
segments on grooming were said to be “inflammatory.” The main fear was that the
broadcast was scheduled just before an election, and it might help the fortunes
of the new political party created to combat Muslim immigration and affirm
British identity, the British National Party.
When a Labor MP, Ann Cryer, approached
the issue of the rape of underage girls in her district she was denounced as a
racist and an Islamophobe and had to receive police protection when she made
public appearances.
When the investigation into the
grooming gangs in Rotherham was finally addressed, staff of the local council
described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins for fear of being
thought racist. Others remembered clear direction from managers to not do so.
The investigation found that local police failed to act for fear of accusations
of racism. In reports to this day, Muslims caught engaging in terrorism, violent
crimes and sexual assaults are classified as “Asian” by media outlets like
SkyNews.
The Rotherham grooming cases point
to one of the explanations for the acquiescence of political and community leaders
to sociopathic and criminal activity: fear. And it’s a well-founded
explanation. The whole series of atrocities that began with Dutch filmmaker Van
Gogh’s film of violence against women in the Muslim world, Submission, is a
template for the effectiveness of terrorism. Europeans are afraid for their
lives to speak out against Islam, the religion, or of especially vicious crimes
committed by Muslims.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Theo Van Gogh
In 1993 Ayaan Hirsi Ali came to
Holland requesting asylum from her native Somali to escape a forced marriage.
She was a model immigrant, and took advantage of the university education
system after working factory jobs and learning the language. She received an MA
in political science and eventually rose to enter politics and was elected to
parliament as a member of the Liberal Party.
Hirsi Ali began to question the
faith of her birth after 9/11 and eventually chose to renounce Islam. This
brought her few friends, even among Dutch liberals. What they wanted was a
Muslim immigrant success story—proof that Muslims can assimilate. Others in
that camp wanted her to speak out against Islam to reveal the criticisms that
they themselves were afraid to voice. And as expected the most extreme vitriol
came from the Muslim community itself. After all, under Sharia law, apostasy is
a capital offense. The penalty is death.
One would think that being a black
woman, and one who had been subjected to genital mutilation (common in
Somalia), as well as a non-Christian, would give the Left in Holland cause to
rally around her. After all, a three-fer should be immune from criticism in any
western nation dominated by political correctness.
Hirsi Ali shared the story of her
strange odyssey from Somali refugee to Dutch Member of Parliament in her
autobiography, Infidel. A friend asked her, “Don’t you realize how small this
country is, and how explosive it is, what you’re saying?” To Ali, given the
extreme liberality of Dutch culture, this question was absurd.
It was during this time that Hirsi Ali
began a fateful collaboration with Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh. Van Gogh’s
first notorious act of blasphemy was to put an image of Mohammed on the cover
of his book Allah Knows Best (title translated). He took on Muslim critics on
television programs and public debates, including radical Islamist extremists.
After one such instance his opponent was heard to say, “We’ll get that fat pig
and cut him open.”
Soon after, in 2003, he made the
short film Submission (“Islam” translated into its English meaning) about the mistreatment
of women in Islam, written and inspired by the young Somali immigrant, Hirsi
Ali. Death threats ensued, but Van Gogh foolishly rejected offers of police
security. On November 2, 2004, Van Gogh was brutally attacked while riding his
bicycle. After shooting him, his assailant slit his throat and repeatedly
stabbed him in the chest. Hirsi Ali was named in a letter left by the murderer,
and authorities quickly spirited her out of the country.
Forced to seek government
protection, she had to live in army barracks and safe-houses, and was
eventually allowed to live in a specially protected building. Afraid for their
own safety, her neighbors sued to force her to leave. Eventually, her
citizenship was revoked, and she fled to America. In Murray’s words:
"The country that allowed in hundreds of thousands of Muslims without expecting them to integrate, and which harbored some of the most radical preachers and cells in Europe, withdrew citizenship from one of the only immigrants who actually showed what a fully integrated immigrant to Holland would look like. Hirsi Ali moved to America, becoming, as Salman Rushdie subsequently put it, ‘maybe the first refugee from Western Europe since the Holocaust.’”
# # #
Fear may provide one reason for the
spineless behavior of law enforcement and the media, but it can’t explain the
actions of politicians who willfully initiate policies that encourage and
promote further Islamization of their nations. For this, a more pathological explanation
is required.
Is it possible that some ethnic
European leaders actually want to see their own kind replaced by a population
of non-white Muslims? Why would this be? One simple answer would be that some
white Europeans have “seen the light” and converted to Islam. The numbers may
be negligible, and Murray does a good job of explaining the phenomena, largely
by a personal anecdote. The epiphany comes to the usually twenty-something lost
soul at a moment of disgust while engaging in some useless decadent,
soul-nullifying pleasure-seeking. These may be genuinely transformative experiences,
but they are few in number and don’t account for the behavior of older political
leaders promoting these policies who are set in their ways.
Consider the words of Swedish Prime
Minister Fredrick Reinfeldt from the conservative Moderate Party:
“Only barbarism is genuinely Swedish.”
Or consider the response of
Sweden’s parliamentary Secretary Lise Berg to the question, ‘Is Swedish culture
worth preserving?’
“Well, what is Swedish culture? And with that I guess I’ve answered the question.”
To further illustrate the point of
Europeans simultaneously applauding foreign cultures while denigrating their own,
there’s this from another Swede, Mona Sahlin, the Minister of Immigration. She
told an audience in a Kurdish mosque that many Swedes were jealous of them,
because the Kurds had a rich and unifying culture and history, whereas the
Swedes only had silly things like the festival of Midsummer Night.
Yet another example, this one from
Germany. On Nov. 11, 2015 in Hamburg, Green Party councilwoman Stefanie von
Berg addressed the city council on an issue regarding immigration and said:
“Our society will change. Our city will change radically. I hold that in 20, 30 years there will no longer be (German) majorities in our city ...We will live in a city that thrives on having many different ethnicities; that we have plenty of people and live in a supercultural society. This is what we will have in the future. And I want to make it very clear, especially towards those right-wingers: This is a good thing!”
What accounts for this? In my own
book, Notes From the 3rd Rail: Civilization in the Crosshairs, I coin the term self-othering
to describe the process of self-loathing that afflicts a poisoned culture that
views itself as the ultimate source of evil. It seeks to replace everywhere the
normal with its opposite, elevating the deviant and the depraved over the ordinary
and conventional. Self-othering is manifested through and
explains the source of political correctness.
A slight digression here. Is it a
coincidence that so many of the self-loathing European leaders that figure in
these sordid reports of political capitulation to Islam are women? I think
not. Let me preface this by saying that Murray himself expresses no opinions regarding
any role feminism plays in Europe’s suicide. In my analysis of the disease afflicting the
West I duly recognize the antecedents from mid-century: deconstructionism,
critical theory, and so-called "cultural Marxism" that infected the Academy; and
from there transmogrified into the chaos we see rampant on today’s college
campuses and watch its fruits grow in every dimension of the body politic. But I also
acknowledge another turning point in our more recent past, that I believe set
us on a path of no return.
The late twentieth century ushered
in the “era of victimization” and saw the rise of identity politics and
political correctness, the twin toxins. Power came from one’s association in a
victim group. These privileged (i.e., “protected”) groups appear to be endless,
the latest being those who reject the binary categorization of sex. They assert
that gender isn’t even biological at all, but rather just another “social
construct.”
But one of these identity movements
overshadows all the rest. The societal and cultural changes that it introduced
are far more transformative than any others. I am speaking of course of the
women’s movement. This “identity group” comprises fully 50 percent of the
population. How could it not have the greatest impact? Its political expression
is commonly referred to as “feminism,” but its impact on what ails us is more
than just the result of feminist gender justice. There is also the notion of
feminine—wholly distinct from the politics of feminism. Of the latter, most of
us sensible people are now beginning to see what has been unleashed by its deadly
nature. But this is not the place for a discourse on the evils of feminism.
Murray speaks about the contention
between mercy and justice... towards the immigrants. He concludes that the
conflict between them, eventually won by mercy (by dint of the Christian
compassion lingering in our morality even though we’ve discarded its source),
suffers from misunderstanding the other. He refers to Aristotle’s claim that when virtues
appear to be in contention it is because one of them is misunderstood. Murray
feels that justice is misunderstood in the refugee immigration debate. What is
overlooked is the justice for the German (and by extension, European) people
who have to bear the tremendous cost of the immigration. It’s a cost that is
measured in almost every way imaginable. Certainly financial, but also the cost
to their very way of life—admitting people that cannot assimilate, have no
desire to do so, and in fact hate their hosts and everything about its culture (except
the resources they provide).
Radical as it may sound, I believe in innate differences in
male and female natures and temperament, expressions of and extending from the
biological differences. I believe the age-old definition of marriage and family should
not be changed: the state-sanctioned pairing of a man and a woman for the
purpose of procreating and providing the economic atomic unit from which a
healthy society can be formed.
The female is biologically wired to
love and protect the offspring no matter what. Unqualified love and acceptance
is necessary for the psychological needs of an infant, to know that the world
is a safe place. The strains of that pretty sixties pop ballad sung by Jackie
Deshannon, “Put a little love in your heart,” plays in my ears. Agreed. There is nothing more beautiful in the human
experience than a mother’s unconditional love for her child. But the father enforces
society’s rules... not to run red lights... boys don’t hit girls. Dad
reveals that the world can be a very harsh place, and that the individual must
learn cooperative behavior if he is to avoid the community’s punishment for
anti-social behavior. He must learn to play by the rules.
Of course this is simplistic and of
course there is huge overlap in most of the functions of the parents, and of
course there is variance that occurs in outliers, but generally speaking the
mother and the father have different roles in raising their children.
If the milk of human kindness isn’t
tempered by innate masculine rationalism—tough love on the human scale—anarchy
ensues. This is why there is no evidence of a matriarchal civilization in the
historical or archaeological records. If there were, they didn't survive long enough to leave any artifacts. And
this is why the turn toward matriarchal power structures in the West has led to
social chaos—and now to the even greater threat to Europe, one to its very
survival. Thus Sweden.
In a patriarchal society those male
traits will dominate the complexion of the culture. It is impossible to
speculate on what becomes of a matriarchal society because none have ever
existed—or if one had, it left no mark from which to study. Where are the monuments? But Sweden may
provide a test case. Though not fully
formed, it is the closest thing we have yet seen. However it appears likely that the experiment
will end prematurely. Sweden is on track to become the first European nation to
fall to Islam... btw, Islam is not matriarchal—rather, it is the most patriarchal
society on order.
I contend that the West is in the
process of transitioning into a matriarchal society. In a patriarchal society the
self-identification of the nation is unquestioned. First and foremost, it has a
boundary. Second, a common language. In dealing with immigration, a patriarchal
society would not put the feelings of a refugee ahead of the economic realities
of the breakdown of the border. To the question of the “dreamers,” a woman is
driven by compassion. Her inclination is to put herself in the shoes of the
child, and thus be guided by sympathy. A woman is more likely to go along with
ignoring the law, deeming it subordinate to the immediate needs of
someone’s suffering.
Besides the negative byproducts of feminism
in the West, I believe it is largely the feminine nature of Europe’s female
leadership that is responsible for choosing mercy over justice—overlooking
completely the other side of the justice coin—justice for themselves.
# # #
Murray explores in depth the
cultural underpinnings that have brought Europeans, and Germans in particular,
to this nihilist state. It is a society so weak and bereft of meaning that it
will embrace anything from without that reinforces its lack of self-worth. A
foreign rigid belief system, sure in its certainty with strict rules of conduct
and swift and sure punishments for transgressors, will ultimately prove
appealing to a people that worship at the altar of moral relativism and have
abandoned all restraint, and with it any pretense of purpose for their lives. Is
Islam to be the karmic solution to Europe’s spiritual crisis?
This is how many of the Islamicists
see it. They don’t hide it. They blatantly proclaim it from Speaker’s Corner:
We will out-breed you into oblivion. Your daughters will wear the hijab and breed Muslims—or be our sex slaves. We will abuse your liberal civil rights institutions to bombard and harass you with Islamic preaching. When you try to fight back we will wrap ourselves in your flag and demand protection under your laws... and then we will seek and obtain your prosecution. And when our numbers are sufficient, we will use your silly democracy to vote ourselves into power. And then we will usher in Sharia Law, and you will have a choice: submit, or ....
Meanwhile the police stand by to
protect them should any native ethnic Englishman or European dare to gainsay
them. And if enough naysayers actually organize and try to do something about
the enemy in their midst—usually living off the public purse—law enforcement
will then diligently apply themselves to finding an ordinance violation or some
such other petty reason to “bring them to justice.”
While we in the U.S. litigate over
Nativity scenes in the town square at Christmas, and the ACLU champ at the bit
for any excuse to file a lawsuit against a Christian bakery refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding, Canada and some European countries are voting in
blasphemy laws, criminalizing criticism of Islam. While Piss-Christ and Chris Ofili’s elephant dung-decorated The Holy
Virgin of Mary are granted public funding and celebrated by art houses, Islam is being inoculated against criticism.
Britain First, one such resistance group
in England, videotape Muslim marches and sidewalk proselytizing, as well as
film their own rallies. Donald Trump was roundly criticized by the
mainstream media for re-tweeting a Britain First meme. Britain First leaders Paul
Golding and Jayda Fransen were finally “brought to justice” in March this year
(2018), sentenced to 18 and 36 weeks respectively for “aiming religiously
aggravated abuse at innocent members of the public.”
I am reminded of the 1974 movie Zardoz.
The sci-fi fantasy set in a simultaneously utopian and dystopian future is
typically ridiculed for its psychedelic sequences and dated
visuals—particularly protagonist Zed’s (Sean Connery) cheesy outfit. It is one
of my favorite movies. When I first saw it I was impressed with its originality
but also viscerally moved by its unconscious message.
Ages before the movie’s
present, mankind’s elite achieved immortality through advanced genetics, and
cordoned themselves off from the rest of humanity as the world fell apart. In
the nightmarish hell outside, gangs of “Brutals,” worshipers of the God Zardoz,
ruled the enslaved dregs of humanity with utter ruthlessness. In the final
scene when the Brutals finally breech their sanctuary, the immortals rush to the
barbarians pleading for their execution. They had achieved immortality but
ultimately found it boring, and wanted nothing more than liberation. They
longed for death, which their technology had denied them.
Is this a metaphor for Europe?
Begging to be put out of its misery, welcoming the seventh century Brutals,
followers of the Prophet, as their liberators? Has western civilization finally
played itself out? Say it isn’t so.
- Marcus Clintonius
# # #