• About (new)

Defend the Modern World

~ From Communists and Nihilists.

Defend the Modern World

Tag Archives: English Defence League

One Million Girls: A Question of Honour.

23 Monday Feb 2015

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Conservatism, Crime and Punishment, Culture, Defence, Multiculturalism, Muslim Rape, Muslims, Philosophy, Uncategorized

≈ 17 Comments

Tags

Are Muslims bad?, Britain First, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, English Defence League, Grooming gangs, Multiculturalism, Muslim rape, No to Turkey in the EU, Rotherham, Rotherham rapes, UKIP

Rape3

The Arabs, for all their current violence and confusion, abide by a principle that is increasingly outdated yet also thoroughly decent: the principle of Honour.

As concepts go, this one is fairly easy to understand. If you injure an Arab man’s ‘honour’, he will reclaim that honour by injuring yours. If you hurt his friend, he will hurt your friend and so on…

While this might seem barbarian to us, it really isn’t. Some slights are so great that they merit a proportionate response. Call it tit-for-tat, an eye for an eye, or whatever you like. What it is at base is a question of honour. You have harmed me, so I shall harm you.

Bin Laden believed in honour. His credo ‘As you lay waste to our lands, so we shall lay waste to yours.” found sympathisers on both sides of the cultural divide. Despite the hideousness of Islamic terror, one must be intellectually honest and admit that some ideas have a value that survives the disgrace of those who hold them.

Where is our honour? By ‘our’ I mean the Western World in general, but most specifically the British people.

Estimates are being made that up to one million young girls have been molested, raped or assaulted in the past decade by Muslim immigrants. Had this occurred in Pakistan to Muslim children with Shia Muslims as the offenders, the result would be a violent chaos. I am not, of course, suggesting we emulate that kind of justice, but I must ask, where is our retaliation? This wave of sickening crime was surely historic enough to merit an equally historic response.

The very least we could do to reclaim the honour of those girls is to dispense altogether with political correctness where it might interfere with the safety of children. We should be open and fearless enough to advise children of the dangers of approaching or conversing with Pakistani men and politically incorrect charities should be set up to disperse warnings to this effect. Children of both sexes and of any stage in development should be encouraged to inform local authorities of Pakistanis loitering near schools, or if they witness a friend or relative speaking to Pakistanis in any context outside of education. On the internet, ‘memes’ should be produced which (without inciting hatred) warn young users of social media to watch out for cultural warning signs.

Above all, we must be absolutely clear as to what it is that motivates such criminal behaviours. It is the teachings of Islam, the conduct of Mohammad himself, and the punkish immorality of Pakistani Muslims in particular.

If sufficiently widespread, this type of campaign might result in a UK in which Pakistanis no longer feel at home. So be it.

D, LDN.

Don’t Deny Islamic State are Islamic.

09 Monday Feb 2015

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Anti-Modernism, Asia, Culture, History, Islam, Moderate Muslims, Muslims, Politics

≈ 16 Comments

Tags

American Liberty, Barack Obama, BBC, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, English Defence League, Islam and the West, Islamification of Britain, Islamophobia, Multiculturalism, Muslims, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census

21-Isis2-AFPGetty-v2

As I write, the Jordanian air force is bombing ISIS positions in Syria, ostensibly in retaliation for the Nazi-like killing of one of its pilots last week. A photo on the Daily Mail website shows a Jordanian patriot writing a message on a bomb in marker pen (an American tradition) before the vessel that will carry it takes flight. His message reads as follows: “For you, the enemies of Islam”.

I have a feeling Liberals will waste no time in circulating that image. After all, it paints a rather pleasant, reassuring picture. The insinuation is that ISIS (and by logical extension, all radical Jihadis) are just a deviation from the true practice and theory of the Islamic religion.

I’m afraid we must pour water on this hopeful notion. It’s not only wrong but dangerous to believe. Despite the claims of the majority, Islamic State/ISIS are entirely faithful to Islamic teaching and (even at some very brutal extremes) rarely in direct violation of the commandments of the Qur’an itself.

The very video which depicts the burning of the Jordanian pilot is titled “Healing the Believers’ Chests”. If that sounds archaic, that’s probably because it is a direct reference to a Qur’anic verse – chapter 9, verse 14:

“Fight them! Allah will chastise them at your hands, and He will lay them low and give you victory over them, and He will heal the chests of those who are believers.”

If ISIS are not Islamic, or are somehow acting in deviation from the true word of Allah, how might that verse be construed differently? What have they got wrong? To me, it seems pretty self-explanatory, like most of the Qur’an. If I might be permitted to update the language of the verse and make it even less ambiguous, it seems to say

“Fight against the unbelievers and kill the infidel! God will support you from the heavens and ultimately grant you victory, healing the wounds of the faithful.”

What have I got wrong? No doubt, I have taken it ‘out of context’. Yes, that sounds believable enough. Perhaps there’s a ‘context’ in which the exhortation has a less offensive, even defensive character.

However none of the battles described in the Qur’an would have been possible were it not for Islamic provocation. The brave heathens, Christians and Jews of the Arabian peninsula who sought to retain their cultural traditions were themselves acting defensively. The language of Jihad, that is of violent conquest, was openly used by the early believers, and by Mohammad himself.

The sharia law being enforced by ISIS in the territory under its control is also far from unorthodox. Not just in the IS but in Saudi Arabia and Iran, women are forced to conceal their beauty to spare men the dilemma of whether or not to rape them. In many Muslim countries adulterers, blasphemers and libertines are subject to the death penalty, whether enacted with stone, axe or rope. In many countries, thieves have parts of their body crudely amputated (usually before a gathered crowd). ISIS might be overzealous in enforcing these laws, but they are in no way different in their motivation or understanding of Islam.

So if you want to be taken at all seriously, don’t deny ISIS are Islamic. It’s no longer feasible, if it ever was to begin with.

D, LDN.

Knowledge and Ignorance.

24 Monday Nov 2014

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Class, Conservatism, Culture, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Boris Johnson, Defend the modern world, Emma West, English Defence League, Islamophobia, Knowledge and Ignorance, london, Orwell, Oyster card, Pakistanis, race, racism, Subway, TFL, Trains, Transport for London, Tube, Underground

LONDON

I witnessed a slight altercation at the weekend. A brief argument in a tube station between a drunk female native and a believer led to the native stating that he (the believer) ‘shouldn’t even be here’ (‘here’ being a larger area than he perhaps appreciated). Although I generally disapprove of loutish behaviour in public, I must say I quietly approved of this case.

After all, the believer wasn’t alone and the girl was. He backed down and she didn’t. What’s more, he seemed genuinely offended, as if her comment (more of a bark really) challenged something very important in his self-concept. He was also undoubtedly the guilty party, having barged in front of her as she queued at the oyster machine.

Afterwards, the Muslims topped up their cards at a separate machine and then departed, waiting until they were at the turnstiles before having a go back. Their chosen rejoinder was ‘ignorant bitch’ and it fell largely on disinterested ears.

Still, as weak as it was, let’s address the comment here and identify its error.

Nothing in modern life is more infuriating to the logical mind than the misuse (and misunderstanding) of the word ‘ignorance’. We are constantly told (by the press and by minorities) that an offensive opinion is always based on it and that racism in particular is motored by this misdeed alone.

You think intelligence has a genetic cause? Then you’re ignorant. You think Black people commit more violent crime than Whites? You’re ignorant. You think that Muslim terrorists are basing their actions on the Qur’an? You’re ignorant.

The irony here is obvious. Knowledge is now Ignorance (just as Orwell prophesised it would be in a totalitarian state) and Ignorance is now knowledge.

There is a lot to object to in racism, but it is rarely, if ever, caused by the practitioner not knowing something. There is no magical fact that can turn a racist into an egalitarian. It’s crazy even to consider it.

And as concerns Islam, ignorance (of the real kind) is the only reason they are still allowed to live here.

D, LDN.

Citizen Khan: The Funny Side of Cultural Destruction.

17 Monday Nov 2014

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Conservatism, Culture, Moderate Muslims, Multiculturalism, Muslims, Politics

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Adil Ray, BBC, BBC Communist, BBC Debate Islam, BBC left-wing, Blank Space, Citizen Khan, Counter-Jihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, English Defence League, Islamophobia, Multiculturalism, New Series, Priti Patel, Review

p024m36s

I don’t watch much television (I prefer to read), but if I did, I understand that this month I would have been treated to the return of ‘Citizen Khan’, the BBC ‘sitcom’ which introduces (or seeks to introduce) the softer, funnier side of Muslim culture to our cynical, semi-hostile nation.

If you’re not from Britain, it’s probably best to think of this show as the British version of ‘Little Mosque on the Prairie’. Though the storylines are different, the intended political function is the same in both cases: Make Muslims seem capable of humour and integration; disarm the country at large with the use of comedy.

I’ve only watched two or three episodes of Citizen Khan. That was enough to gauge the nature of the thing. It is a very amateurish production and the Islamic element is tacked on in such an arbitrary way as to seem irrelevant.

And that is obviously the point. The message intended is as follows: “Muslims are people, just like you. They argue about who left the toilet seat up, just like you. They use toothbrushes, just like you. They watch X-Factor, just like you. etc…”

This is the great liberal delusion about Islam; the idea that Britain would be the same in a prayer cap as it is in a trilby; that Islam is something private and therefore largely irrelevant to everyday life. This is the lie told by shows like Citizen Khan. Muslims might pray to a different God, but other than that, they are as English as battered fish. I simply don’t buy that, and for evidence, I call to the stand every sentient witness of the modern world.

Of course, I don’t doubt that Muslims who were born and raised here have picked up some cultural practices along the way. But, as the subjects riffed on in Citizen Khan accidentally demonstrate, these are usually the shallow and unimportant aspects of British life, many of which we could do without.

Even if Citizen Khan was funny (and it really isn’t, in any way), British Pakistani life is very difficult to make humorous after Rotherham – after the 1400. How indeed are the numberless victims of the rape-Jihad to feel when watching shows like this?

If British Muslims really wanted to use media to demonstrate their capacity to integrate, they would produce dramas criticising the demonic misbehaviours of their peers. They would own up and examine the rape culture (for once, that term is justified) in the Pakistani hamlets popping up throughout this otherwise harmonious nation.

And they would also concede that we are a long way from being able to laugh at their ways. We have been blown up by them, raped by them, threatened by them innumerable times, insulted and infiltrated in the most destructive ways imaginable. It will take more than jokes about the toilet seat to undo the harm that has been inflicted.

D, LDN.

Intimidation Reconsidered.

21 Tuesday Oct 2014

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Class, Defence, EDL, Islamisation of the West, Multiculturalism, Muslims, Politics

≈ 10 Comments

Tags

Britain First, Britain First Facebook, Christian Patrol, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, English Defence League, Islamisation of London, Multiculturalism, Muslim Patrols London, Muslims

Sharia-zone-4X3

Last year, it was reported in the media that groups of Muslims were patrolling the streets of North and East London with a view to deterring what they considered ‘un-Islamic’ behaviours. These so-called ‘Muslim patrols’ were said to harass local people for such crimes as openly carrying alcohol or looking as if one had consumed it, eating pork, or (as regards women) dressing in a manner unsuited to the expectations of Sharia.

Whilst these patrols have since faded from the news headlines, the response they provoked remains very much alive. For many months now, ‘Christian patrols’ have walked the same areas of London at night ready to oppose acts of Muslim intimidation. Many – if not all – of these demonstrations are organised by nationalist organisations like Britain First, and most of the volunteers are former or current members of the EDL.

Now, while as a Londoner I like very much the idea of direct action, I feel rather ambivalent about some of the details here. One has to wonder whether a ‘Christian patrol’ has within it a different, corrosive potential.

I’ve said before that the answer to Radical Islam is not Radical Christianity. We don’t want to become the kind of crusader civilisation the blockheads of ISIS imagine we already are. A state run along theocratic lines would be as undesirable with blue-eyed, Dutch enforcers as with enforcers of any other kind. The dark age in the West was every bit as savage and untenable as that which envelopes the Muslim world today.

Still, (and here I suppose I flirt with ‘hate-speech’) one must be honest and say that intimidation (as an idea) is not something to necessarily throw out with the bathwater.

It is (in my opinion) only appropriate that a Muslim feel the same discomfort walking down a Western high street in a burka as I would feel walking down a Saudi high street with a hot dog. I don’t belong there and they don’t belong here. Everything they stand for, we oppose. Everything they oppose, we embrace. This is the most straightforward clash of cultures since the British army faced the Zulu.

We must make Muslims uncomfortable and also make them understand beyond any doubt that their acts of violence can be repaid in kind at short notice. Even in London, we still retain the numerical advantage. If they amass against us, how much more convincingly can we amass against them?

The valuable minorities of London are far from wedded to their current alliance with the Muslims. The Black community understands deep-down that Islam would outlaw many of their cultural (and subcultural) practices and that they could only ever be second-class soldiers in any future alliance with it. The most rational interests of the Jews and Hindus are likewise inclined to our cause.

So let’s upgrade the concept of a Christian Patrol to something more universal; a Western Patrol, primed and ready to defend our rights and pleasures by all means.

I’m not a completely literary animal. I am a young man and physical confrontation, with its bruises, shocks of pain and thrilling pulse, is something I rather enjoy. We can’t possibly shy away from it. If we do, our streets will fall to those who do not.

D, LDN.

War Crimes in Rotherham.

01 Monday Sep 2014

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Class, Culture, Multiculturalism, Muslim Rape, Muslims, Politics

≈ 19 Comments

Tags

1400 victims, BNP, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, English Defence League, Grooming gangs, Muslim paedophilia, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census

rape-file_5

I sometimes wonder how those who believe in the liberal narrative regarding Islam (which holds it as an ‘unfairly maligned’ religion of peace) integrate mentally the events reported in the news.

How does a liberal protect his orthodoxy from the rational interpretation of ritual stonings, beheadings and terror attacks? And of what formidable substance does that firewall consist? Emotion? Stubbornness?

Well whatever it is, we will surely see it tested now.

Last week it was reported (I’m pleased to say on many front pages) that the number of girls raped by grooming gangs in the town of Rotherham may amount to more than 1400.

I’ll say that again.

Last week it was reported that the number of girls raped by grooming gangs in the town of Rotherham may amount to more than 1400 (one thousand four hundred).

In 2001, Rotherham had a population of less than 250,000 in its metropolitan district. 1400 as a percentage of 250,000 is 0.56. That’s more than one person for every two hundred. If you live in Rotherham or a nearby region, you will have almost certainly seen a victim in public. You may have spoken to one. Your strangely quiet daughter or granddaughter might be an unreported case. Perhaps needless to add, almost all the victims involved are White British (Anglo-Saxon, Irish, Welsh etc…), and all the men responsible pray towards Makkah.

What are we supposed to call these acts? There are too many cases to call this a ‘spree’, or even a ‘wave’. Not all the gangs involved are connected to each other, so we can’t really call it a conspiracy either.

It is much too immoral for ‘terrorism’. One could reasonably make excuses (as many did) for Islamic violence during the Iraq war. We had invaded a Muslim country, and proud Muslims wanted to strike us back. They had no moral right to, but I can understand their reasoning. That the Rotherham crimes occurred over a period of many years, in times of both hot war and cold peace, suggests that something more longstanding is at issue.

The truth is that we are in a state of cultural war with Islam, and these rapes, like those in Oxford, are simply war crimes.

The Muslims hold us all in aggressive contempt. Our women however are considered especially worthless given that they wear knee length skirts and allow their hair to billow godlessly about their shoulders. They clearly have no pride or spiritual awareness, and so to deflower them by force is perfectly halal.

The men involved will have felt no prompt of conscience as they forced down the defences of their victims. And if such a thing could be made worse, perhaps it is with the thought that the girls were not only raped, but raped hatefully.

In all the commentary on this subject over the past week, only one article (by Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson) has come close to capturing the purple fury of the public mood:

“Men of Pakistani heritage treated white girls like toilet paper.” she raged “They picked children up from schools and care homes and trafficked them across northern cities for other men to join in the fun. They doused a 15-year-old in petrol and threatened to set her alight should she dare to report them. They menaced entire families and made young girls watch as they raped other children… No just God would stand for what they did. “

Hard attention has now fallen and will likely remain on the Rotherham police. They certainly merit it. How difficult could it have been to pursue the leads to their logical conclusion? A stifling atmosphere of political correctness (aided and sponsored by a spineless government and an occupied press) certainly goes some way in explaining it.

Only we who jump such barriers can say clearly what the remedy is to all this. Get them out. Get all of them out and think no extra thought about it. I don’t want to breathe the same oxygen. That we might be called cruel for advocating this policy means nothing to me. To defeat a devil, you must find the devil in yourself.

I could attempt here a few hundred words of horror-poetry speculating what it was like for those poor, undefended children. I won’t be so disrespectful. I will only say that our elite has allowed for the innocent to be made sore, all that it might preserve ideological comfort for itself. There is surely no more contemptible crime than that.

D, LDN.

A Day Out in Tower Hamlets.

20 Tuesday May 2014

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Conservatism, Culture, Decline of the West, Dysgenics, Islamisation of the West, Politics

≈ 9 Comments

Tags

Christopher Caldwell, Civilisation, Coffee, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, English Defence League, Eurabia, Islamisation of London, Pamela Geller, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census

DTGFP_Whitechapel4.jpg  Whitechapel High Street East London

“A boy is stabbed and his money is grabbed and the air hangs heavy like a dulling wine”

Last week, I made what must be my first journalistic excursion for the sole purpose of this blog. It was a Sunday, I had nothing to do and so I ventured out of curiosity into Tower Hamlets; the borough of London now notorious for its advanced and nearly complete Islamisation.

Here are my dispatches.

Alighting at Whitechapel Underground station, I soon found a street-side café at which to people-watch and took up a table seat outside. I must have remained there for at least an hour, drawing deep breaths of mint-flavoured nicotine from my electronic cigarette and staring thoughtfully at the shifting knots of people bumping around the crowded streets.

It’s true what they say about this place of course. I wasn’t expecting anything different. Tower Hamlets today looks aesthetically identical to a neighbourhood of urban Pakistan, the only giveaways being the gravestone coloured sky and skyscrapers rising behind the landscape.

It’s a slum in many respects, and I don’t say that emotively. ‘Slum’ is a word with political as well as poetic functions. It can denote a place where an urban area houses its low-paid but essential workers. Cleaners live here for example, as do the owners of the ramshackle Bangladeshi businesses and trinket stores which blight and degrade the whole of Greater London. The set-up of most of the residences nearby are crowded family cell-blocks with a proud elder generation who work, and an integrated youth who cannot spell ‘work’. That youth is clearly dominant on these streets. Hooded Muslims stroll and loiter on their pencil-thin legs, some of them lairily sipping cans of Red Bull in lieu of alcohol (it doesn’t have quite the same masculinising effect somehow).

Innumerable signs offered the services of ‘English Language Teaching’. From what I heard in the form of conversation, they’re not doing a roaring trade. Internet cafes seem to be another local speciality. One also cannot travel very far without seeing a very dingy, third-world electronics shop, its window blacked out with advertisements for mechanics, plumbers and hookers.

The famed markets of the area also now have a Sub-Continent character. Whatever quality they used to possess has now been traded for quantity. They sell the very basics – meat, vegetables and cheaply manufactured clothes. Abroad from here, Chicken grills, kebab shops and highly dubious ‘Italian’ pizzerias are the main options for food. There is also a co-op supermarket (never a good sign for house-prices in London).

On the Underground coming in, I noticed a police display appealing for information about a ‘serious assault’ – local euphemism for a stabbing. This is nothing to remark upon really. Gang culture pervades the local atmosphere. Bicycles, once a symbol of quaint conformity, now serve as tools of intimidation – as quick getaways from the repercussions of spontaneous violence. Youths on a gang of wheels later approached me and asked for cigarettes. I showed them my e-cig. They seemed to briefly consider swiping it before rolling away passively on their bmxs.

I popped into a corner shop and found to my surprise a fully uniformed shop guard. This is highly unusual but also sadly understandable. In London, shifty drunks tend to loiter by the doorways of such places like unwanted guard dogs. I took my change and was wished a good afternoon by the prayer capped shopkeeper, to which I dutifully smiled and said thank you. I felt a bit like a psychopath, grinning warmly at a man I’d gladly see dragged towards an airport.

Despite looking – and to my surprise – I couldn’t seem to find a Mosque. After turning a few more corners, I did come across a ‘community centre’ (pictured below – photo not taken by me). Judged by its architecture, the building used to be something very different. Perhaps a pub. How depressing.

shoreditch-mosque

When darkness lowered, I caught the train for home. As the train met each station further and further from Whitechapel, the passenger profile shifted less and less Islamic. At Putney, I disembarked, distinctly happy to be back in my own little corner of London, where the twenty first century seems more convincingly to have arrived, and may for some time still persist.

D, LDN.

Obituary for the English Defence League.

25 Tuesday Mar 2014

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Conservatism, Culture, Defence, EDL, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 13 Comments

Tags

Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, EDL, English Defence League, Multiculturalism, Tommy Robinson

ay_110913928

When the Manchester United football team play Manchester City, a physical crowd of 70,000 people is these days almost guaranteed. A similar number can be expected at other rivalrous matches like Everton Vs Liverpool, Celtic vs Glasgow Rangers, Tottenham vs Arsenal, and Chelsea vs Human Decency.

These crowds are not drawn by the promise of entertainment (or at least not by that alone) but by emotion and genuine sentimentality.

Tens of thousands of people, young and old, male and female, show up at football stadiums periodically to unload the kind of hatred, loyalty and aggression that was, perhaps only 70 years ago, confined entirely to the battlefield.

And as on the battlefield, the entrenchment of division over extended periods of time has spilled naturally over into personal animosity. Manchester United fans – for example – are known to detest their Manchester City rivals with a racial intensity, often leading to acts of deranged, pointless violence. The same is true of the other examples mentioned.

Every football club in Britain therefore has its own army fit and willing to engage in massive co-ordinated action. The genius of the English Defence League was to try and tap this enormous resource and redirect the energy expended on the irrational into something rational. To take, that is, the hollow love for a corporation (because that is all modern football teams are) and channel it into a love of country and culture.

Indeed, the original name for the EDL – ‘Casuals United’ – (‘Casual’ is an English phrase for a football hooligan hidden among ordinary supporters by the wearing of inconspicuous casual clothes) suggested a unification of the nation’s hooligans into a common formation; one in which all differences would be suspended under a single banner to combat a menace that recognises no distinctions.

And how it worked!… For while at least.

Crowds came out in thousands. Shivers trickled down the coward spines of Islamists in every city. Streets were, for a while, reclaimed – repatriated to the soil beneath their urban paving and all its socialist rot.

And then in Walthamstow, the Socialists fought back and by numbers the EDL was humiliated in a way it never recovered from.

Months later, sensing the ship he built beginning to waver, leader Tommy Robinson converted to moderation, leaving confused and betrayed masses scrambling for land and meaning.

They have since failed to find any.

The EDL is dead. Deader than the BNP, National Front or any other ‘far-right’ political body to which it was once erroneously compared.

Those armies the EDL plucked from the fancy of sport are now steadily returning to the terraces. All their anger will soon be again directed at millionaires booting a ball of leather on a green-grass pitch, and not spent on protesting the encroachment of a religious community who would forbid such gatherings altogether. A sad irony.

Those who still fancy a fight for cultural survival are turning their gaze to the cultureless Thatcherites of the United Kingdom Independence Party; a clique obsessed by money, Europe and rural freedoms.

I’ve mentioned elsewhere that as it relates to Jihadism, UKIP is a blunt sword. Nigel Farage, his oratorical brilliance aside, is nothing more than a corporate dandy, politically deep and ideologically shallow.

We would of course be better off under a UKIP regime in the short term, but the long term would likely emerge unaffected.

The search for a viable resistance continues. It is to accelerate that search that we should be frank about the EDL’s demise. It has ceased to motivate or to inspire and should now be disbanded.

D, LDN.

If We Do Nothing.

04 Tuesday Mar 2014

Posted by Defend the Modern World in America, Crime and Punishment, Culture, Decline of the West, Defence, Eurabia, Muslims, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 14 Comments

Tags

America 911, anti-Semitism, BBC, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, English Defence League, Eurabia, Islam and the West, Islamisation of Europe, Islamisation of London, Multiculturalism, Muslim demographics, Muslims in Europe, No to Turkey in the EU, politics, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Tommy Robinson

fallenwarrior

Although I write in favour of European self-rescue, it should be clarified that I am under no illusions as to the likelihood of the measures required being adopted, now or in the future.

The chances, to put the matter frankly, of persuading an indoctrinated population to do something they have been conditioned – often since childhood – to regard as sinful, are zero.

Europe’s rescue from Islamisation requires discrimination, on both national and local stages. At the national level, every government must realise that the needs of its historic majority are more its rightful business than the ‘rights’ of a swelling and hostile minority. At the local level meanwhile, people must learn to recognise human difference as something vital to their personal security.

Discrimination however, is – perhaps more than anything else – anathema to the liberal mind. Consequently, even if the thought of European Muslims being sent their deportation papers may thrill the imagination, that is almost certainly where it will remain.

Muslim immigration will probably be halted the first day after the collapse of the European Union, but that will only deal with a hypothetical inflow and will solve nothing as to those already settled. On this point, the most likely scenario is that those Muslims who already live here (and their posterity) will be part of Europe forever.

Sure, the natives will thrash and moan a bit as each demographic milestone is met with grim punctuality; 15%… 20%… 25% etc… But these will be mere imitations of self-confidence, and of those historic conditions that once permitted self-confidence. Much like the re-enactments of medieval battles on a wet Tuesday in Bosworth, these will be resistance-themed carnivals, hemmed in by police and finally dispersed by reality.

000000000000000000000000000000000000

True, it is unlikely that Muslims will capture all of Europe, but it is now almost certain that they will conquer its capitals and other large cities. The demographic material is already in place for the Islamisation of London, Brussels, Stockholm, Oslo, Paris, Berlin, Duisburg, Leicester, Malmo, Marseilles, Luton, Strasbourg, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, the Hague and the urban parts of Switzerland.

These are all famous and historic places, decorated with treasures invaluable to world-history. What will happen to them when they are populated almost exclusively by Muslims?

Students of Asia’s modern history will be familiar with the fate of the Buddhas of Bamiyan; an ancient relic of pre-Islamic culture in Central Afghanistan. As is now notorious, the structure was exploded and the relics entirely destroyed by Taliban militants in 2001.

Just imagine that – the scene and all its details  – for a moment. Picture it in your mind. Now – if you can – try to impose that image onto Rome, London, Paris or Berlin.

Instead of the Buddhas being demolished, imagine the Roman Colosseum, Buckingham Palace, Westminster Abbey, or the Eiffel Tower subjected to the same misfortune.

I can assure you these are not outlandish thoughts. Despite popular misunderstanding of the matter, the 9/11 hijackers did not target the Twin Towers out of hatred of American ‘economic power’. They were rather acting in line with the Qutbist condemnation of idolatry. In Wahhabi Islamism, any great man-made structure that attracts wonder or praise, and that is not built expressly for Islamic worship, is an idol. This is why the Twin Towers were brought low. This is also why the Saudi government – with the consent of the Wahhabist religious establishment – has demolished many ancient buildings connected with the life of Mohammad in Mecca and Medina. Mohammad, you see, is not regarded by Muslims as divine, and therefore any pilgrimage to, or veneration of artifacts associated with him is also considered idolatrous.

000

The Pentagon too, is an idol. It was built to symbolize the power of the American military – the power therefore of ‘men’, and was attacked for these reasons.

One cannot exactly estimate how many of the cultural treasures of Europe would also be considered idolatrous according to this same measure, but surely if the artifacts of Mohammad himself are not considered sacred, then why would the Brandenburg Gate be afforded any mercy?

A successful Muslim conquest of Europe will reset European history at year zero. History shall not be so much as changed, as removed entirely. Europe will be forced to forget itself; that it ever had a history to begin with; just as the Egyptians were made to forget their past, as were the Persians, the Phoenicians, the Babylonians and the Berbers, after they too fell to armies of Muslim conversion.

Away from cultural symbols, the mechanics of society will be greatly affected. Sharia courts will proliferate across Europe (whether governments allow them or not). Genital mutilation will continue in private. In the open, women will be assaulted on an increasing scale. Rape rates will skyrocket. Whatever pretentions a rational feminism ever had will be driven to extremism or else submission. Harassment will forbid native European women from urban centres and thus from commercial employment.

Elsewhere, shops selling alcohol will be vulnerable to attack and boycott. Terror-threats will paralyze subways. Every time Israel defends itself in the Middle East, anti-Semitism will become a violent reality.

There are potential military consequences too. The influential blogger Fjordman has commented on the dire possibility of French nuclear weapons falling into Muslim hands. I’m afraid it isn’t a fanciful idea. All it would take is one rogue Franco-Algerian general and Europe would be under a shadow of destruction.

All that for the false virtue of blind tolerance…

Pessimism like this is not an admirable trait, I know, but it is nevertheless appropriate to the situation Europe finds itself in. I see no sign of a popular movement able to achieve anything of substance on this issue. The EDL is all but finished. UKIP, the party in which so many good people invest their hopes, is practically neutral on the culture clash, preferring to badmouth Poles and Romanians than Pakistanis. In the Netherlands, Geert Wilders was trounced in the national elections. Where now?

As I say, this is a depressing post, but I do believe it pays to periodically remind oneself of the stakes of doing nothing.

D, LDN.

Scottish Independence Would Liberate England from the Left.

18 Tuesday Feb 2014

Posted by Defend the Modern World in Conservatism, Crime and Punishment, Culture, Defence, EDL, Multiculturalism, Restoration of Europe, Uncategorized

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, English Defence League, Immigration, Independence, Scotland, Tory Party, UKIP

0000

The consensus of English elites regarding the potential independence of Scotland – namely that the proposed amputation would prove fatal to the British concept – is misguided, I believe.

While the departure of Scotland would certainly be injurious to the Britain of nostalgia, its effect on the British future is harder to guess. Having studied (albeit briefly) the projected consequences of independence on the UK electoral system, I am personally inclined to estimate a positive outcome.

It’s an open secret in Britain that the Conservative party, despite failing to gain a majority over-all, won the last 3 general elections in England by a fair margin. In each instance, the tories were only denied office (or, in the most recent election, a governing majority) because of the Scottish fidelity to Labour.

With the Scotch vote removed from consideration then, the Political Left in England would have the carpet whipped from underneath them, and the Right would be  granted a new freedom of ideological movement, potentially allowing a move back toward the Tory ideal of low-immigration, low-tax libertarianism.

I’m not personally a Tory – far from it in fact – but as corrupt and slippery as the Conservatives have become, I believe the Political Left and its survival poses a far greater threat to the continuity of Britain (as a material whole) than the proposed autonomy of Edinburgh.

D, LDN.

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Categories

  • Abortion
  • Africa
  • America
  • Anti-Feminism
  • Anti-Modernism
  • Antisemitism
  • Asia
  • Atheism
  • Australia
  • Balance of Global Power
  • Barack Obama
  • Canada
  • China
  • Christianity
  • Class
  • Communism
  • Conservatism
  • Crime and Punishment
  • Culture
  • Decline of the West
  • Defence
  • Donald Trump
  • Dysgenics
  • Economics
  • EDL
  • End of American Power
  • Eurabia
  • Europe
  • European Union
  • Feminism
  • Germany
  • Heroism
  • History
  • Imperialism
  • India
  • ISIS
  • Islam
  • Islamisation of the West
  • Israel
  • Japan
  • Literature
  • Masculinty
  • Moderate Muslims
  • Multiculturalism
  • Muslim Rape
  • Muslims
  • Philosophy
  • Politics
  • Psychology
  • Race and Intelligence
  • Racism
  • Religion
  • Restoration of Europe
  • Russia
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Scandinavia
  • Scotland
  • Sexual Violence
  • Terrorism
  • UKIP
  • Uncategorized
  • Violence
  • White People
  • Zionism

Archives

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Defend the Modern World
    • Join 531 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Defend the Modern World
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...