Horny, Absurd, Priceless: The Europe We Love

Tags

belgian, belgian orgy, brussels, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, EU, Europe, Facebook, France, Islamisation of London, Multiculturalism, new years eve, No to Turkey in the EU, orgies, orgy in belgium police lockdown, Paris, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, terror lockdown in brussels, Terrorism, Twitter

The revelations (or perhaps they are still accusations) that members of the Belgian police force engaged in a sex orgy during the lockdown of Brussels a few weeks ago (prompted by credible reports of an ISIS terror-plot) initially made me laugh. I laughed raucously, along with everyone else, muttering between giggles things like ‘ah Belgians’, ‘ah Europeans’, or even (with conscious inaccuracy) “ah French people’. This is the kind of behaviour English people expect from Continentals. We lazily imagine the citizens of France, Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands (in particular) to be laid-back, cheese-eating nudists; sex-crazed, free-loving atheists; adulterous young poets or elderly lotharios etc.. Such pleasant stereotyping is as old and as traditional as the ingredients of a Cornish pasty.

But after laughing, I was soon overcome with sadness. I couldn’t help but contrast the lovably liberal antics alleged with the reason for their supposed practitioners coming together in the first place. If the charges are true (and I have no way of knowing either way), then the contrast is at once horrifying and revealing. European people of the 21st century engaging in the ultimate acts of liberated modernity, all while their society is menaced by those who would execute a woman for showing too much elbow. When these two ways of living are placed so dramatically and starkly side by side, I can’t help but feel an intense protective anger for my civilisation as a whole.

We are as far away from the Muslims as can possibly be imagined. They are right to call us infidels; for by the standards of their doctrine, we are actively flouting every rotten thing they stand for. We cannot possibly reconcile the Belgian way of life – with all its transgression and experiment – with the Flintstone prohibitions and prudishness of the Salafist (my spellcheck is being Islamophobic here – suggesting I mean ‘salami’) hordes. And I don’t think this incompatibility has ever been expressed so clearly, so beautifully as it was in the situation described.

I love and value the European mindset; the relaxed, pot-smoking, Sartre-reading, café-haunting intellectualism that is so superior to the stuffy Victorianism of our own. I would miss it terribly were it to vanish, or be vulgarised into a spiked fascism of necessity (as may happen in the future).

In tune with this, Bill Maher, US comedian and master of contradiction, caught my attention last year when he reported his fear that European tolerance was under threat from Islam, and not just its political stability or security. This is surely the main issue for us going into this new year. Indeed, this is the great challenge for our generation. To fight effectively against the virus afflicting our society, while preserving the very cause of our infection; namely, our tolerance, our brightside thinking and openness to new ideas.

How I miss Pim Fortuyn more with every year that passes! He saw this all so clearly. But he’s gone now, gone for good, and we have no leader with the clarity of mind to lead us into battle.

Happy New Year.

D, LDN

Advertisement

Yes, Women Can Be Evil Too.

Tags

America, attack isis, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, Facebook, France, instagram, Iraq, ISIS, isis brigade, isis iraq, ISIS pictures, isis sex, isis sex slavery, isis slavery, isis syria iraq, isis terror, isis terrorists, isis women, isis women torture, london, Muslims, Nuke ISIS, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Russia, Spain, Syria, trump, Twitter, UK, USA, women who kill

Over the past two years, a period in world history dominated by economic crisis and extreme violence, the Daily Mail newspaper has published small variations of the same story at least three times. It concerns the shadowy manoeuvres of a sub-division of ISIS called the al-Khansa brigade, notable for being made up exclusively of young women.

According to reports, the al-Khansa brigade is responsible for enforcing a harsh Sharia-compliant lifestyle upon women in ISIS controlled territories. If and when women fall short of Sharia standards (say, by wearing a veil of thin material, leaving it slightly transparent), members of the brigade are said to arrest the offending female and take her to a dungeon, wherein they pinch her, beat her, confine her and otherwise torture her within an inch of her life. If the offence is ‘severe’ meanwhile (some extremity of the body being entirely revealed, adultery, lesbianism etc..) the brigade arranges for the prisoner to be stoned to death.

While some have doubted the veracity of these reports (an understandable position when one considers the record of the Daily Mail), we have every reason to believe this brigade exists, and in the fashion described. Indeed, in an interview with Sky News (later reported in the Independent newspaper), an account of the activities of the brigade was recounted by a woman claiming to be a former member. The woman, then 20 years of age, told the journalists that her job “was to lash women who tried to escape or wore the wrong clothes” and that “the women who were caught trying to escape would receive 60 lashes, while women who simply wore heels or were not wearing the proper Islamic dress known as the abaya, were ‘given the ‘standard’ 40 lashes’.”

(Note: When reading of people being ‘lashed’ in the context of the Muslim world, one should never presume the lash to be a thin, flimsy or light, but thick and heavy like rope. People have died from being punished this way).

Of course it’s easy to understand why (among the thousands of cruelties exacted by ISIS fighters) this particular story has proven enduringly popular. Firstly, it appeals to the darkest recesses of the Western male mind – the unlit zone attracted to Sadism, Masochism and fascinated with the exotic and the forbidden. And secondly, it is because of the natural shock people feel when hearing of acts of brutality committed by the fairer sex, something seemingly incongruous and running against the universal grain.

But is it really so rare?

We in the West have become so used to perceiving women as victims of Islam that we probably forget there are women who want to be Muslim; that there are women who choose for themselves a very extreme interpretation of the Koran, often against the wishes of their spouse or family; in short, that women can be irrational and evil too.

Given this reality, I would say that dealing with Jihadi women should be no more morally complicated than dealing with their male counterparts. There is no feminine value left in the ranks of al-Khansa and so they must annihilated with the same ruthlessness (and with the same weapons) as IS’s frontline troops. If they are captured and refuse to provide information, they shouldn’t be spared ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ either. When you betray your sex to such a dreadful extent, you sacrifice the privileges of being that sex.

D, LDN.

Invasion of the Boat People

Tags

asylum, asylum seekers, BBC, boat people, Boats, boats calais asylum seekers, boats people, calais, Cameron, channel tunnel, Counter-Jihad, david cameron swarm, debate, Defend the modern world, Facebook, France, Immigration, invasion calais, Multiculturalism, Muslims, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, sea, seawater, swarm cameron, Twitter

So, the invasion forces of Africa have now reached the shores of France and seem intent on entering the United Kingdom. As I write, and as even the Prime Minister is now publically lamenting, tens of thousands of Black Africans (mostly Muslim) are attempting to force their way into Southern England, with methods ranging from clinging to the side of lorries, to hiding in cargo boxes and sacks of fruit, to launching primitive boats onto the English channel and rowing up to the English coast.

In Kent, the quiet and genteel ‘Garden of England’, local authorities already describe their agencies as being ‘overwhelmed’ by the hordes of foreign children, homeless, hungry and without a word of English. A local official reported that the number of asylum seekers is “unprecedented” and ‘will cost tens of millions’ to process them, even if their claims are eventually turned down.

Of course, we have no right to be surprised by any of this. When the boats first started coming all those wasted years ago, we knew full well where their cargo desired to end up. No African crosses the Mediterranean to enjoy the marbled romance of Italy, or the cathedrals and sophistication of France. They all want to get to Britain, the pop-cultural lieutenant of America, with our social security, football teams, television, music and cinema. These self-starved, Chelsea-shirt-wearing illiterates don’t just want to live in the ‘West’, but in a country (even city) of their choosing. More than anything else, this pickiness proves their claims of asylum are entirely phoney. If the invading migrants simply wanted to eat and be free from government abuse, Austria would have been tolerable enough for them, to say nothing of Germany, France, Portugal, Italy and Spain.

So what to do? How does Britain get out of this? These questions are only as morally complicated as we choose to make them. The law makes the solution beautifully simple – none of these people have any right whatsoever to enter – let alone reside in – the United Kingdom, and we should deport them as quickly and efficiently as we can arrange. That’s it. No further discussion or thought required. That is what the law demands and what the citizens of this country desire and should be able to expect.

As has now been widely reported, most of the current swarm (and yes, the Prime Minister was right to use that term) are from Eritrea and Somalia, two disastrous attempts at nationhood and each the source of much global disquiet. How could a nation as developed as Britain conceivably profit by the infusion of such material? An Eritrean of 15 years will always be an Eritrean. A Somali of 21 years will always be a Somali. While it’s true that the offspring of such migrants would have the option of being British (it would depend on a secular upbringing and eventual apostasy, not merely the location of birth), that is a delayed reward, and in any case an uncertain one. We don’t need any more Muslims in the UK. We surely have far too many to begin with. End of.

D, LDN.

Hysterical Evil: The Crimes of ISIS.

Tags

American Liberty, Barack Obama, BBC, Beheadings, Britain First, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, France, ISIL, ISIS crimes, ISIS savages, Islam, Islamists, Killings in Syria, london, Mexican, Muslims, Pakistanis, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Savages, Syria, Turkey, Violence

The very least we can do, as human beings coddled in the luxurious safety of the Western world, is to keep the suffering of those in darker situations in our minds and to prevent it from being buried under passing time.

What is going on in ISIS controlled Syria and Iraq defies credulity and logic. There has been no evil of this intensity, industry and sick creativity since the fall of the Nazi Party. No Soviet Gulag ever concealed the amputation of limbs. The war in Vietnam involved no attempt to impregnate the women of the enemy. Only Hitlerism at its most bestial merits comparison with the Islamic State.

Given how frequent the reports of death and destruction have become, it is only human to feel what popular sociologists call ‘compassion fatigue’; the tiring out of the capacity for shock or sympathy. While understandable, I really think we should fight that emotion. These are real people dying, and their suffering only has meaning if it is known and remembered and if conclusions are drawn from it.

Though Satanic from the get-go, Islamic State’s brutality has become distinctly theatrical of late, almost as if the savages are thrilled by the attention of the civilised world.

Today, polished and clear footage shows bearded militants embracing two blindfolded ‘homosexuals’ (the militants are said to have whispered words of forgiveness to the condemned, no doubt to raise hopes of a stay of execution). Shortly after, they are seen pelting the prisoners with sharp desert stones until their heads lose their shape, and dribble with purple blood. After the bodies stop twitching, the stoning relents, and the gathered throngs disperse.

Days before that, a lion-hearted Syrian who had campaigned locally against ISIS cruelty was made to kneel in the desert and shot point blank. Photographs were released of the murder.

Last week, 30 Ethiopic Christians were beheaded on the shores of Libya by ISIS fighters. Denied the most basic allowance of dignity, footage of their deaths was uploaded to the internet shortly afterwards.

Before that, a video depicted a young thief having his hand sliced off and the stump sown back up by an ISIS ‘doctor’ (if he is one, he disgraces the name of medicine). This insanitary and inhuman practice, relative to the other available retributions should perhaps be considered merciful.

Before this, photographs showed how a long line of Coptic Christians were made to kneel on the Libyan shoreline before being almost simultaneously beheaded, the massive ejaculations of blood from their necks turning the seawater deep red.

If ISIS ever had a point to make, they have surely made it.

It is very difficult to find the right words when talking about this. Terms like ‘savage’ and ‘beastly’ may offer short-term satisfaction, but they seem rather too mild when placed in captions under images like those described above. Even ‘evil’ doesn’t cut it; one must be more specific:

When mothers feel their children are threatened (especially newly born children), they can develop what is known in medicine as ‘hysterical strength’ – a superhuman toughness that is impossible under almost any other circumstance (at its most dramatic, a legend describes women lifting up cars to recover children trapped beneath).

ISIS fighters have achieved a kind of hysterical evil; a malice in excess of ordinary human potential. From its energy, it fuels its own perpetuation. Most people could never overpower their conscience to the degree necessary to behead a man in the morning, and then impregnate his daughter at night.

ISIS fighters are high on evil, thrilled by it, addicted to it, no longer fully in control of it, like rabid dogs. Needless to add, they have ceased to possess any human value and have thereby forfeited all human rights. Every further day they live is an abomination.

D, LDN.

Letter to the Jews of Europe.

Tags

ADL, American Liberty, anti-Semitism, Atheists against Atheism, Britain First, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, EDL, France, Germany, Hasbara, Jews in Paris, Multiculturalism, Nazis, Paris Attacks, Pegida, PLO, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census

Ever since the attacks in Paris, the question of whether you, the Jewish people, are safe in Europe has been hotly debated. The actress Maureen Lipmann, the editor of the UK Jewish Chronicle and numerous other public figures have questioned whether there is any longer a place for you on this continent. Even the Prime Minister of Israel, Binyamin Netanyahu has called for your mass emigration to Israel, citing the same security concerns.

After Copenhagen, the second case in swift succession that a Jewish venue has come under attack by Muslim colonists, more of you than ever will be beginning to wonder if such sentiments are justified.

Europe is in a dire condition. I won’t pretend otherwise. Nevertheless, I think it would be a terrible shame is you were to abandon it and its people to cultural desertification. As has been said by innumerable French intellectuals over the past months, a Judenfrei France is not ‘France’ at all. I would extend that even further. A Judenfrei Europe is not ‘Europe’ at all.

It probably goes without saying that had you never settled in Europe, many of the glories of the continent would never have been possible. In European science, medicine, the arts and political thought, you have been a leading edge ever since your emancipation from the Ghettos.

In the aftermath of Paris, it has not been pointed out enough that the supreme work of modern French literature, ‘À la recherche du temps perdu’ was written by an author of Jewish origin; that the halls of French philosophy are similarly decorated with Jewish achievements; that the economic fortunes of Paris itself are entwined with the security of its Jewish community.

The fear you feel is obviously justified. The Muslim conquest of Europe is proceeding at an accelerating pace and challenges everything we hold dear. Ghettos of violent intolerance are becoming a feature of everyday life, not just in France, but in Britain, Germany and Scandinavia too. From these Ghettos, there will likely be further attacks on the general public and on your community in particular. People will die. Women will be raped. Transport networks will be blown up and trains derailed. Perhaps there will one day be an attack on a French nuclear reactor, sending winds of toxic fallout across the nearest residential sprawl.

You could, of course, flee to Israel and from there watch the descent of Europe with a grinning, “told you so..” schadenfreude – but surely this is a gutterish pleasure befitting a people of far lesser qualities than your own.

I understand there is a demographic war in Israel and that an exodus would bolster the Zionist project, but surely your presence in the powerful nations of Europe also lends itself to that project. If you depart, what will become of your reputation or influence on a continent increasingly populated by those who hate you?

We are told repeatedly by the dispensers of Hasbara that we in the West should ‘stand with Israel’ in her times of peril. And that of course is very proper and correct. We should do. But we should also expect reciprocation.

After all, if you go and Muslims remain, Europe will lose a vital and reliable source of resistance. That will leave the prospects of Jihad much brighter and the likelihood of European survival greatly diminished. Even in Israel, the fallout from an Islamified France or Sweden will be felt. Sweden is already voting to recognise a Palestinian state, no doubt under duress from its swelling Islamic population. Without a Jewish-led opposition to such suicidal policies, Israel might find itself left with only Washington as an ally. In my opinion, it would be extremely dangerous to place all your eggs in the basket of a post-Obama, soon to be minority-majority America. Especially one where even the Republican base increasingly jostles for a more isolationist foreign policy.

So don’t flee. Stay here. Lock arms with us. Fight alongside us and be willing to defend our common values. This is your home as much as anyone else’s.

D, LDN

Objections Anticipated.

Tags

anti-Semitism, Arguments against Islamophobia, Britain First, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, France, Germany, Islamisation of London, Islamophobia increase, Islamophobia mainstream, Multiculturalism, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Swiss People's Party

As Islamophobia migrates from the margins of European discourse to breach the mainstream, our opponents on the political Left are busily arming their partisans with objections and counter-arguments. Most of these arguments are (or will be) junk, but we’ve all come across a few that do not sound obviously false, and so let’s arm ourselves in kind, so to speak. Here are three reasonable sounding arguments against cultural preservation, followed by a clarification of each individual issue.

Claim: “People overestimate the number of Muslims in their country.”

Reality:

On the face of it, there is nothing to object to here. People do indeed overestimate the Islamic percentage of their nation’s population. In France for example, the Economist found that ordinary natives believed 1 in 5 French people were of Islamic origin, when the real figure is actually closer to 1 in 10.

As it relates to the larger picture however, this argument means next to nothing at all. History is a work in progress, and the predictions of mainstream demographers all concur that Islam will become a major cultural force in Europe in the coming decades and that it will ultimately find itself in a position to bully its cultural rivals – including secularists, Jews and Christians.

It must also be noted that statistics do not always tell the whole story, especially if numbers are cherry-picked out of their proper context. It’s true that Muslims currently make up a small percentage of passport-holding Europeans. However it is also true that this Muslim population is typically youthful and that the non-Muslim population is quickly aging. With the greatest respect to any older folk reading this, a native over the age of 65 cannot be counted on in a situation of street conflict or civil war – that is, unless the population is armed. To best understand the street-fighting power (and this matters) of European Muslims therefore, the figure of believers should rightly be doubled to reflect the real balance of forces. This detrimental process shows no sign of slowing down, and should native birth-rates recover to replacement level (and they show no sign of doing so) there will still be a very long and perilous period of ‘generational drag’ – a period open for more virile aliens to make their power felt.

Claim: “Muslims are just like Jews of the 1930s. Islamophobia is just a replacement for anti-Semitism.”

Reality:

I fully understand what people mean by this and – looked at with a lazy eye – the claim would appear to be supported by evidence. The cartoons we see depicting blood-thirsty Jihadis are clearly reminiscent (hook-noses and all) of those gruesome caricatures of Jews in Hitler’s Germany. Similarly, the phrase ‘Islamic Menace’ can easily be (mis)heard as an echo of ‘Jewish menace’, ‘Muslim problem’ of ‘Jewish problem’ and so on.

That though is as much as I will concede. Unlike contemporary Islamophobia, the anti-Jewish hate-wave which billowed across the continent in the early Twentieth century was a detailed portrait of human irrationality. Of course the Jews of Germany enjoyed a disproportionate share of influence (as they do today in America), but this is a consequence of talent, rather than conspiracy and this is borne out by the fact that all around the world, there are other ‘Jews’.

As Amy Chua explained in her book ‘World on Fire’, the concept of a ‘market-dominant minority’ is a universal one, and the reactions to it are everywhere the same. In Africa, the Tutsis of Rwanda were the ‘Jews’ – and they were attacked for it by Hutu Nazis. The Chinese minority in the Philippines are hated with a similarly violent passion and Filipino Nazis have called openly for their genocide. The Koreans of south Los Angeles in the 1990s were the ‘Jews’ – and the local Black Nazis reacted in the same time-honoured fashion. Chua’s rule is easy to understand and more-or-less solid: Whenever a racial minority does well, anywhere in the world, the racial majority senses conspiracy and reacts with violent populism.

But Islam is not hated because of envy. In modern Europe, Muslims are disliked because they are a proven threat to civilisation. No country in the world has ever successfully integrated a Muslim minority, or at least not without injury to its native way of life. In China, the Uygurs behead, blow up and enrage the Han majority. Lebanese Maronites have had their tolerance repaid with paramilitary violence. Serbia has been mutilated and half-destroyed. It is not irrational, but the height of clear-headedness for Europeans to resist the same fate.

Claim: “Muslims can be integrated. The reason they have not done yet is because of Islamophobia.”

Reality:

This is a quite ludicrous idea and I include it only because of its popularity. The reason Muslims haven’t integrated into our native culture has nothing to do with the native reaction to their lack of integration. It is frankly surreal to advocate any other way. But given that some continue to maintain this, the best response would be the following counter-interrogation: If Western Islamophobia explains the lack of Muslim integration into Western culture, why have Muslims similarly failed to integrate into Chinese, Thai, Latin American or African culture? Are Nigerians Islamophobic? Is that why Boko Haram exists – to combat reactionaries?

—
Despite the increasing desperation of our enemies, I (like you) take great pleasure in being on the right side of history. When people look back at our generation, whether from the vantage point of a free world or a nightmarish Islamised Europe, some of us will be remembered fondly, and others with contempt. I implore everyone, of any background, to come over to the side of truth if they are not already here. It is not yet too late, but the clock is ticking. 

D, LDN.

07/01/2015

Tags

Al-Qaeda in France, BNI, Charlie Hebdo, Civilisation, Controversy, Counter-Jihad, Dead cartoonists, Defend the modern world, France, Freedom of speech, Holidays, ISIS, ISIS France, Islamic state killing, Jyllands, Massacre, Posten, South of France

“France today is like the fucking Weimar republic.”

So wrote a user of the internet message-board 4chan last month. The thread concerned the rise of anti-immigrant rhetoric across Europe as a whole, and the sentiment quoted met with broad agreement.

The comparison used is certainly an apt one. Modern France, just like Germany in the 1920s, buckles under the weight of a failing economy. Unemployment (though slowly improving) remains a complication to the lives of young people in cities and towns alike. And extremism, on both the left and right, rises rapidly at the expense of a tired-out centre-ground.

One can hope, as one should, that the solution chosen for this malaise won’t resemble the thugs of the NSDAP, but that is far from decided. Marine Le Pen (a very suspicious character indeed) and her party appear likely to reap the political benefit from it. As to whether Le Pen’s newly professed moderation has any link with reality can and will only be revealed by time.

This radicalisation of French politics was thus already underway when an innocent seeming Wednesday became a bloodstain on the national calendar.

In Paris, two Islamist gunmen stormed the office of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and murdered 12 people, many of them noted cartoonists (pictured below). The magazine had been a target for many years, owing to its repeated lampooning of the Islamic prophet and its occupational solidarity with the Danish magazine Jylland Posten.

The aftermath to the massacre proved almost as bloody as the crime itself. Prior to their deaths, the two fugitive gunmen (both Algerian) held up a convenience store and petrol station. After this, they hijacked a car and engaged in a Hollywood-like moving gun-battle with Parisian police. Elsewhere in the city, A third Islamist, connected to the original attackers, took hostages in a Kosher deli. Four innocent French Jews would perish there before the captor could be disposed of.

Although both incidents are equally cruel and equally senseless, the Charlie Hebdo massacre has hit the global imagination hardest. An attack on Jews by Muslims is lamentably predictable and as such breaks no new ground. However, there is something fresh and pathetic about attacking people for drawing pictures. Even the Christians of the dark ages never stooped so low. It goes to show how girlish the Islamic constitution has become that it can now be bruised by the point of a crayon.

The reaction to the attacks internationally has been at once heartening and heart-sinking. While most Brits and Americans have offered their warmest condolences to the French people, others have (disgracefully) opted to bring up myths about Gallic passivity and cowardice. Let’s be quite clear about this: If anyone should ever doubt the patriotism or fighting abilities of the French, let him say so after reading a biography of Napoleon.

Much has been made of the fact that a French Muslim was a victim of this wave of violence. The police officer shot in cold blood outside the Hebdo offices was called Ahmed (thus allowing for the damage-limitation hashtag JeSuisAhmed on twitter). There is no solid proof Ahmed was a devout believer, but even if he was, what can this teach us other than senseless violence produces senseless results?

Though we may never know for sure one way or the other, I strongly suspect ISIS had a hand in this atrocity. The mysterious tweets sent from the (potentially hacked) Charlie Hebdo twitter account reference Caliph Baghdadi, and the professionalism of the massacre itself would suggest training from a quasi-military force.

Whether that is the case or not, there is certainly a bigger picture here. Just as those charity adverts urge of humanitarians, Islamists act locally but think globally. This nasty little attack –  though it was aimed at closing a specific vendetta – was really meant for all of us. The Muslims have made a giant sign for the whole of Europe to see, its huge words scrawled in innocent blood: “Be careful what you say. Be careful what you do. We know you where you live.”

And though Le Pen – with all her vague promises to go easy on the Jews and gays – is really not the answer we are looking for, an answer must still be provided. We cannot seriously be expected to lie back and see our hard-won freedoms smashed into fragments.

D, LDN.

Second Thoughts on the Veil.

Tags

Ban the Burka, Burka, Burka prison, Defend the modern world, Feminism, France, Guardian, Hijab, Imprisonment of women, Islamisation, Liberal Feminism, Liberalism, liberty, Niqāb, veil, West, Western Feminism, Western world

A few months ago on this blog, I wrote that I could not support a move to ban the Islamic veil in Britain. The reasons I put forward in support of this stance were straightforwardly libertarian:

“It’s true that the Burka (actually called a ‘Niqab’) has no place on English streets, and it’s also true that the veil is impractical and hazardous in many social contexts… But that said, I don’t want to live in a country where the government can decide what people may wear… Should we concede to government the power to choose how we dress, there would be no turning back. The outlawing of the veil could soon become the outlawing of hoodies, baseball caps and any other item of clothing which obscures identity.”

Well, I’ve changed my mind. There has been no particular catalyst for this, or at least not one I can identify, but I regard the reasoning quoted above as adolescent and knee-jerk. Those who objected to my post were correct. The veil is a revolting garment, an affront to women and a moral stain on the standard of our whole society. It should be outlawed across the continent of Europe.

In the same post alluded to above, I went on to say that a ban – as well as being undesirable – would be difficult to enforce. This is now an argument that can be turned the other way. A confrontation with Islamic misogyny in England is just what we require, and the more aggressive, public and discomforting to the multicultural idea it is, so much the better.

D, LDN.

Latent Vs Active: A Replacement Typology of Muslims.

Tags

Christian, Christianity, Christianity and Islam, Counter-Jihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Egypt, English Defence League, France, Islam, Islam by country, Lebanon, Multiculturalism, Muslim, Muslim world, No to Turkey in the EU, Organizations, Quran, Religion and Spirituality, Saudi Arabia, Social Aspects, Turkey, United States, World Muslim, Zombies

I’ve mentioned elsewhere that the often proposed division of Muslims into ‘Fundamentalists’ and ‘Moderates’ is unconvincing to me. The distinction is obviously political in origin and obscures more than it enlightens.

I would like therefore to propose a replacement theory, or rather definition, to explain the real difference between the believers who merely pray, and the believers who hijack airliners.

There are, I propose, two distinct types of Muslim in the world; Those who are Latent, and those who are Active. (*There will always be a minority who elude definition).

The Latent Muslim is in the clear majority, accounting perhaps for three quarters of the World Muslim population.

This kind of believer is typically serene and apolitical. He is opiated by his beliefs, rather than stimulated by them. Devout though they may be (and unlike Christians) they often have little curiosity for the battle of ideas.

The Active Muslim – by contrast – is someone whose experience has engaged the less sedating aspects of his faith. He is inclined towards the excitement of violence, death, punishment, procreation and conquest.

These Muslims will fight you until you believe exactly as they do, and possibly even afterward.

Crucially, (unlike with the false Fundamentalist/Moderate antonymy) the Latent Muslim can become an Active believer at any given time. The two conditions are not opposed, merely different, and the Active state is always quiescent in the Latent.

The signature fallacy of EU/US leaders has been to assume that extremism and moderation are real elements of Muslim self-identification; that they are innate, unchangeable and permanent. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

As Daniel Greenfield wrote:

“Politicians… wall off that vast majority of Muslims who did not actually come down to Woolwich and hack at a soldier with a machete and did not fly two planes into the World Trade Center from those who actually did. The hackers and pilots are extremists. The couch potatoes watching at home and cheering them on are moderates. That might be fine if we were discussing a gas station robbery in Cleveland. But to Muslims, Jihad isn’t an act of violence; it’s an act of faith.”

The Latent Muslim, as the name I have chosen implies, is not a moderate. He is unactivated. He lives quietly and habitually, enlivened only by foreign stimulus. It is this Foreign stimulus that tends to change the Latent into the Active. This explains for example, why those Muslims in 99% Muslim countries (Turkey, Saudi Arabia etc..) are largely Latent, whereas those in religiously divided lands (Lebanon, Egypt, Serbia/Kosovo, Britain, France) are more Active.

A more frivolous illustration would involve the mythology of Zombies.

Zombies (in some depictions) are unaggressive and docile among each other, but faced with a thinking human, become drones of monstrous conquest.

In the logic of Zombies, there is no ‘friend or foe’, but simply ‘fellow or food’. And as wrong-headed as we would be to negotiate with the undead, perhaps we’d do better to reconsider our approach with Muslims based on the criteria described.

D, LDN.

Marine Le Pen: France’s Dilemma (and Ours).

Tags

anti-Semitism, BNP, Christianity and Islam, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, France, Germany, Marine Le Pen, Multiculturalism, National Front, Pen, politics, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Semites, Sweden

Is Marine Le Pen ideologically distinct from her father?

This could develop to be the most important French political dilemma in all its modern history.

The consequences of guessing wrongly are too grim to comprehend. If the bet paid off, however, then the bounties would be difficult to overstate.

For some, the future success of Ms Le Pen is the most realistic trigger for a continent-wide shift to nativism and cultural salvation. Unlike the knuckle-dragging failures of the UK BNP, Germany’s NPD or Sweden’s ‘Democrats’, Le Front Nationale is witnessing a consistent rise in national popularity. During the past few weeks, the party even topped a mainstream voters poll; the first time a far-right party in France has done so in living memory.

So why the surge in confidence for a party long written-off as consisting of Holocaust-deniers, scientific racists and German-hating loons?

Immigration is a fairly obvious answer. But this is a problem for every European country, and only in France has the far-right made substantial gains.

The answer is surely Marine Le Pen herself.

A true novelty on l’extreme-droit, Le Pen’s public image has almost supplanted that of the party she represents. From a public relations standpoint, this couldn’t be better news. Instead of skinheads and anti-Semites, Le Front Nationale now conjures up the charms of an expressive, confident, beautiful woman. Indeed, the very fact Le Pen is female appears to change the tone of the party’s policies. The FN no longer seems like hard, violent fascism – but something softer, reasonable and more agreeable.

By-itself of course, this is an illusion. There is nothing reassuring about a woman leading a party, (unless you’re one of those young, masochistic conservatives sent wild by the idea of a fuhrer with great legs). All that matters is the manifesto, and whether the policies contained therein are worthwhile.

So let’s see.

The current manifesto of the FN emphasizes ‘culture’ and the preservation of ‘French Identity’. Strict controls on immigration are demanded, but the old talk of ‘humane repatriation of non-Europeans’ has been excised. Criminal migrants, Islamists and those perpetually unemployed would be deported. The economy would be heavily deglobalised.

There is much in this to like, and much to disagree with. I agree, for example, with the deportation of Islamists, a tougher line on criminals and the reintroduction of the death penalty.

FN Economic policy however is far more troublesome. ‘De-globalization’ and protectionism can be ruinous, and peaceable relations between the countries of Europe is something not to be gambled with.

As to the long-term prospects of Le Pen, we will have to wait for the municipal and EU Parliament elections next year, at which the party is hyped to make substantial gains.

Personally, I don’t think Le Pen will rise all the way to Elysee Palace, and this is probably for the best. Though she herself may be likable, we are more than entitled to be worried about those lower down the pecking order, for whom reality is a web of Zionist conspiracies, black helicopters and Yankee malevolence.

Still, that the FN’s success demonstrates a desire for change in France is to be welcomed. Let’s hope Le Pen is not the only one capable of seizing it.

D, LDN.