, , , , , , , , , , , ,


During this process of Islamisation, a good way of gauging the will to resist in the general population is to monitor the speed of recovery after each individual Muslim outrage; that is, how long it takes for the public to resume its usual apathetic mood after being shocked anew by a terror attack or comparable scandal involving Muslims.

Let’s consider a brief history:

The events of 9/11 – an attack that introduced the concept of Islamic terror to the apolitical everyman – made a particularly lasting imprint on the popular consciousness. Little else was discussed for months afterward, and the resonance of the tragedy lasted for many years.

After that, the Madrid and London bombings, which first highlighted the vulnerability of European states to the foreign elements in their own domestic population, elicited a similar level of shock and anger. Newspapers reported the story for weeks and sections of the public reacted with the ‘Still not scared’ meme on social networks. At the longest estimate though, the tragedy maintained the public’s attention for several months.

When Drummer Lee Rigby was run-over and then savagely beheaded in a South London street by two African Muslim converts, a uniquely intense wave of popular fury shook the United Kingdom. Marches were held, speeches were made; political parties made strident and inspiring statements. It then died away in a matter of weeks.

And over the past few days, two outrages in swift succession: first, the Canadian parliament – the beating heart of an important, first-world country – was attacked by a Jihadist gunman; then, in New York – capital city of the modern West – a Muslim attempted to kill a Police Officer with an axe. Though it’s still too early to say for sure, attention to these latest attacks seems to have lasted barely a few days.

The pattern here is obvious: Years, then months, then weeks, then days… Jihadism – it seems – is becoming assimilated into everyday Western life. This is potentially devastating and for several reasons.

Most of all it is because shock and anger are integral to the psychology of human resistance. Without the thunder of disgust prompted by lynchings (for example), there would have been no popular backlash against the KKK. Without the My Lai massacre, the anti-Vietnam war movement would not have been able to marshal the same energy, and so on.

‘Anger’, Malcom X correctly observed, ‘..is a gift’. It is a gift from the enemy that makes his defeat possible. Without it, we have none of the motivation necessary to launch a counter-blast against those who have wronged us.

‘Islamophobia’ then is less a measure of sentiment than of the Western immune system. When stirred to life, it presents a sign that the body of our culture wants to reject something foreign and destructive to it. And that is the system that is becoming degraded and tired out with time.

The immune system of the Islamic world – by contrast – is still fighting fit. As to why it remains as such – my guess would be that there have not been enough Post-Modern Arab or Persian philosophers to introduce the ‘benefits’ of weakness to it. Here in the West – with our Baudrillards, Derridas and Lacans – many of our brightest minds have been hypnotised into believing the most absurd Orwellian principles; Ignorance is strength, diversity is enrichment etc…

And in believing such things, we forgot how merciless truth can be to those who belittle her.