Does It Have to Get Worse to Get Better?

Tags

America, America 911, BBC, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, EDL, English Defence League, Eurabia, Europe, France beheading, ISIS, ISIS Beheading, Islamic State BBC, Islamic State Wikipedia, Islamification of Britain, Islamophobia, Kuwait Mosque, Muslim, No to Turkey in the EU, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Tunisia attacks

• First published on this blog in June, 2015

An argument beloved by the extremes of the right-left spectrum proposes that the short-term success of the opposing side is ultimately good for their own; in other words, that the dystopia they intend (ultimately) to make impossible has first to occur before it can be permanently forbidden.

In our case, this would be to say that the Islamisation of Europe has to quicken, the terror attacks multiply and the general abuse of our population intensify if we are to prevent a future in which such events cannot be opposed at all.

I suppose as arguments go, this one has a whispering, seductive quality to it. To a youthful and excitable temperament especially, easily thrilled by the idea of civil unrest and bad news, it will seem an obviously fine idea, since it guarantees (in fact requires) action and blood, broken glass and the rumble of boots.

But does it really hold water?

Well, today, following a Ramadan sermon by the shaggy beatnik “Caliph” Al-Baghdadi, terrorists have attacked civilians in three different countries. In Tunisia, Gunmen massacred at least 37 tourists relaxing at a beach resort. In France, some poor soul has been murdered, his head left – covered in Arabic script – on a spike. And in Kuwait, the perennially despised Shia have been blown up while praying in a Mosque.

All of the attacks are thought to be the actions of the Islamic State.

This triptych of evil certainly says something about the expansion of IS’s reach. And I think we can all agree that it qualifies as things ‘getting worse’. But have we been empowered by this day of carnage? Are we in a stronger position now than yesterday? I’m not so sure.

Most of the people intelligent enough to understand the reality of Islam already understand it. Faced with the daily progress of Jihad, you would have to be blind, deaf, mute and stupid to resist the conclusion that Islam is violent. And once that main point is understood, further outrages become progressively less shocking.

For this reason I doubt today’s events will have changed anybody’s mind. At least in the West…

In the nation of Tunisia, I think some progress will be made in the coming weeks. Although the point is often exaggerated by eager multi-culturalists, the Tunisians really are a more liberal, relaxed, ‘European’ people than their neighbours. Images of the city afflicted by today’s massacre (Sousse) remind me of destinations in Sicily and Greece. Only the captions below reveal their African location.

As one would expect, this reputation is jealously guarded by Tunisian liberals for whom an event like today’s must be infuriating. While they are in this mood, and should they stumble across this site, I would like say the following – The elimination of Islam from your country is the only failsafe cure for the misery that oppresses you. You have a beautiful Mediterranean homeland, one that many Westerners could be made jealous of. Be bold and change your allegiance while you still have a culture worthy of the name.

As for us in the West, the ‘things have to get worse before they get better’ argument is contradicted (repeatedly) by reality. Van Gogh’s stabbing didn’t bring us any closer to a solution. Lee Rigby didn’t. Rotherham didn’t. Charlie Hebdo didn’t. Today’s events won’t either. The attention span of the average Westerner is diminishing with every fresh atrocity, just as one would logically expect it to.

To rouse people into direct and decisive action will take initiative. It is no use waiting around for things to reach rock-bottom, and then like a phoenix, bounce back to a previous vitality. That is simply not realistic.

If you have the gift of organisation, organise a protest. If you have the gift of eloquence, write letters, start a blog or compose a petition. And when it is asked of you to state your grievance and preferred solution, be open and unafraid about it. Tell them you wish to preserve the Britain of comedy, poetry and freedom, and resist a Britain of Salat, Sawm and Jihad.

Keep the faith in victory too. When the future exerts its terrible pressures, our house shall stand. Theirs shall fall.  

D, LDN.

Advertisement

Why the Alt-Right is Too Alt for Me

Tags

2016, 4chan, alt-right, America, American Liberty, anime, anti-Semitism, BBC, Blog, blog blog blog, Christopher Caldwell, Civilisation, Coffee, dark enlightenment, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, DTMW, dtmw dtmw, Facebook, frog, Internet, internet internet, Japan, milo, modern world, Multiculturalism, Music, Muslim, Muslims, No to Turkey in the EU, pepe, pepe the frog, political, politics, race, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, subcultures, Twitter

Internet subcultures are so often exaggerated in scale and importance by the mainstream – offline – media that most reasonable folk tend instinctively to dismiss reports of their influence as hyperbole. Such was the case when Hillary Clinton devoted almost an entire speech to warning America of the insidious agenda of the ‘alt-right’, an internet coalition of racists, misogynists and Islamophobes allegedly in cahoots with the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump.

Strangely, and unlike so many cyber phenomena reported in the media, the tribe to which Ms Clinton referred is notable for being very real, or at least very widespread. Though there is no single agenda or set of principles agreed upon by the alt-right, there is certainly a general Weltanschauung strong and clear enough to gravitate like-minded people towards it. This worldview is well-described in the following YouTube comment taken from under a video of the Clinton speech: “We (the alt-right) are anti neo-libs. That is the only reason we are alternative. Neo-libs/cons have been the conservative mainstream since 9/11. We are a backlash against that. Neo-cons are not real right.”

By ‘neo-libs’ and ‘neo-cons’ (Neoliberals and Neoconservatives) the commenter is likely referring to a consensus known elsewhere as the ‘New World Order’, the 1%, or (vaguely) as ‘Zionism’.

Rumours of a ‘New World Order’ have gained currency on the right-wing fringe in recent years

These labels, although having little to do with each other in fact, are used as synonyms for the force that is actively shrinking the world into a liberal, multi-racial, multi-cultural free-trade zone, in yet another word – the force and ideology of globalisation.

The idea that conservatives should be pro-globalisation is actually a very recent one. Traditionally, as the alt-right notes, right-wing political thinkers have been strongly nativist and culturally protectionist. The shift in conservative thought, beginning during the Reagan-Thatcher era, to laissez faire globalism is attributed retrospectively to the influence of non-native forces, often (predictably) to that of the Jews (sometimes referred to in euphemism as ‘capitalists’/’big business’/’bankers’/’the banks’).

The alt-right wishes to return the conservative movement to where it was before that transition; before economics became more important as a right-wing principle than blood, soil and culture; that is, before paleo became neo.

The alt-right has no single birthplace, but there are nevertheless a few websites and forums indelibly associated with it. Prime among these sites is the Japanese-cultural forum 4chan and in particular the /pol/ (politically incorrect) messageboard. Here, a right-wing political consensus has become entrenched, often (but not always) expressed with dark humour, that has subsequently bled out into the wider internet universe, evidenced by the broad use of memes like Pepe the Frog as well as words and phrases like ‘degenerate’ and ‘dindu-nuffin’ (the latter invention being used to refer sarcastically to African-American criminality).

The English-language messageboard 4chan is commonly associated with the alt-right

The alt-right is connected to, but distinct from, the ‘Dark Enlightenment’ phenomenon I have written about previously. Unlike the latter, the alt-right is more realistic and less philosophical. While the Dark Enlightenment recommends absurd initiatives like the abolition of democracy and the return of divinely-appointed’ Kings, the alt-right prefers to concern itself with more achievable and substantial ideas, such as the abolition of third-world (non-white) immigration, building an opposition to political Islam and degrading the influence of certain varieties of feminism. This down-to-earth-ness is a large part of the reason the alt-right, unlike the Dark Enlightenment, has become a force to be reckoned with.

I have no idea whether this site would or should be considered part of the alt-right blogosphere. I only know that it has never been so described – and certainly not by me. I am, in my estimation, far too moderate, too much of a bleeding heart, to integrate smoothly into that crowd.

Though I recognise that races exist, I have never been a racist or a racial nationalist. Though I accept that certain varieties of feminism have inflicted great damage upon Western civilisation, I am not opposed to the idea of sexual equality, nor dismissive of the disadvantages women still face around the world on account of their being female. Though I recognise that he has joined the right side of the Syrian civil war and made constructive and wise comments about the bombing of Libya, I do not support or make excuses for the authoritarian, anti-democratic administration of Vladimir Putin. And so on…  The alt-right is simply too alt for me.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is beloved by many on the alt-right

Is the movement as dangerous as Hillary Clinton is making out? The answer depends almost entirely on who is asking the question. If you’re a white, Christian, heterosexual male resident in the Western World, then the risk this movement presents to you is minimal. If, however, you are Jewish, homosexual, black, south Asian or atheist, I would be very cautious about taking the movement to heart.

There are decidedly ugly currents within the alt-right that are not adequately represented by its spokespeople. Milo Yiannopoulos, a Jewish-Greek homosexual, may well be regarded as the crown prince of the movement at present, but it does not follow that the general masses huddled under its banner agree with his lifestyle or look kindly upon his ethnicity. On the contrary, more often than not, the alt-right foot-soldier is loudly hostile to both Jews and homosexuality. If you require evidence of that, just spend an hour or two browsing the /pol/ board on 4chan yourself.

Anti-Semitism in particular runs through the alt-right like colours run through a stick of seaside rock. It is both below and behind it, providing a vital support to the worldview espoused by its adherents. The West is being taken over by foreign elements, they agree, because a hostile elite is conspiring against the natives. One need not refer to the hostile elite explicitly. Innuendo will do. Innuendo did the job in the thirties, too (sorry, Godwin).

A variant of the anti-Semitic ‘happy merchant’ meme

I do admit that the alt-right is correct on some very important issues. On Islam, for example, the movement is reliably clear-headed and refreshingly consistent. On the virtues of a Trump administration, too, the movement is providing a much-needed counter-force to the almost universally anti-Trump mainstream media. The problem is the movement doesn’t seem to possess any kind of intellectual brake. It swerves habitually all over the place, sometimes finding itself on a main road and sometimes blindly ploughing through a field. This youthful unpredictability might make hopping on-board an attractive prospect for political thrill-seekers, but not for anyone else.

I suppose, if we must manufacture labels for ourselves, I am more of an alt-liberal than an alt-rightist. And I am not alone in that. There must be millions of people like me, scattered around the political spectrum, living unhappily in temporary ideological accommodation. It is high time we had a real home to go to.

D, LDN

Islam and Petroleum: An Old Alliance and its Future

Tags

America, American Liberty, balance of power, BBC, Britain First, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Defend the modern world, end of oil, EU, Facebook, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, ISIS, Islam, Malaysia, Middle East, Military, Muslim, Muslims, oil collapse, oil price, oil prices, oil saudi, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Saudi Arabia, United States, War, Weapons

The collapse of the price of oil over the past few months has sent shockwaves through an already vulnerable global economy, slowing the ascent of China, threatening the recovery of America, and causing stock markets from London to Shenzhen to wobble precariously on their foundations. But surely no part of the world is more affected by fluctuations in the oil market than the Muslim Middle East, specifically the nations of Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates of the Persian Gulf.

If the downward trajectory in oil prices continues for just a few more years, the economies of these countries will be plunged into crisis, their social order, military upkeep and political power undermined and potentially destroyed. And there is something else to consider in all this. Seeing as oil and Islam have been locked in a very profitable alliance for the past 50 years, what will this decline mean for the civilizational balance of power? Can Islam’s political and military ascendance survive the shock of a post-oil era?

Optimists imagine that without oil, states like Saudi and the UAE would be without influence in the world. Since their economies are based entirely on energy revenues, they reason, such countries would – in the case of an oil collapse – be reduced to the diplomatic grade of Burkina Faso or Zimbabwe. This is not entirely accurate. While it is certainly true that without oil the nations of the gulf will see a massive decline in standards of living, this will not necessarily mean the end of their mischief-making in world affairs. Saudi Arabia, to take a prominent case, has invested much of its gargantuan wealth in blue-chip Western companies – companies which will continue to reap the Saudi state considerable profit for as long as they are trading. The Saudis have also purchased an astonishing array and quantity of modern weaponry, including – according to some – nuclear missiles from Pakistan. This military power will in the short term (or with nuclear weapons, in the very long term) guarantee the country a louder voice than it deserves.

As for Iran, Saudi’s arch-enemy, the outlook is rosier in some respects, and murkier in others. Since the revolution of 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran has faced the boycott of its energy industry by much of the developed world. This has meant that Iran’s state finances have remained in poor shape, and also that they haven’t managed to buy up stocks in Western companies to the extent that Saudi has. On the other hand, this long period of boycott has forced Iranians to build an economy unreliant on the energy sector – a post-oil economy, if you will – and this will give the country a very important head start in the rush to regional economic diversification. The same is also true of Iraq, which has until very recently functioned without a petroleum economy.

Taken overall, the Islamic world will only face a sub-regional decline in diplomatic power from the collapse of oil. Outside of the oil-producing area itself, many Islamic countries have high economic growth rates even without energy reserves – these include the nations of Turkey, Egypt and Indonesia, all of which also possess considerable military strength to increase their bargaining power. Thus, the collapse of oil will sink Islamic power in the short-term, only for the power lost to be replenished later in different places. Given that these places will be less extreme than Saudi and Iran, the prospect for a general moderation of Islam is very real, if hardly as curative as liberal commentators would have us believe.

Here in the modern world, the end of oil politics is surely something to celebrate. A nasty and corrupt stench is about to be cleared from the air. The Islam-Oil alliance, even in so brief a period as it has existed, wrought real damage on the world at large. It is directly responsible for the 9/11 attacks in America, as well as for the crippling of Western economies in the 1970s. It has perverted American and British politics, enriched soulless monarchs and dictators, and radicalised much of the Islamic world against its will.

Good riddance.

D, LDN

Western Attention Deficit Disorder

Tags

add, adhd, adhd adhd, BBC, Britain First, cartoon, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, DTMW, europe africa australia, Facebook, facebook twitter, family guy Islam, glenn, ISIS, ISIS ISIL, Multiculturalism, Muslim, Muslims, Muslims in Europe, Paris, Paris Attacks, paris ISIS, politics, social media, south park Islam, Twitter, YouTube

Just over a year ago (last October) I wrote an article entitled ‘Is Jihadism Becoming Accepted?” (google to read it in full). After the Paris attacks of last week, and given the length and intensity of the reaction to them, I believe I am justified in recycling some quotes from it.

“During this process of Islamisation…” I began “…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…”

I then gave a brief history of terror outrages (against Western targets), noting that each reaction was briefer than the one before… “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.”

Now, a question: Do you believe the reaction to the Paris attacks of this month has been more proactive, severe or long-lasting than the reaction to the Charlie Hebdo shootings of last January? Personally, I don’t believe so.

Indeed, facebook gimmicks and a few cruise missiles aside, there has been very few political consequences. While, for 24 hours or so, the world was undoubtedly transfixed on the Bataclan carnage, a few days more reduced the event to fish and chip paper. Compare this to the years of outrage over 9/11, the months of outrage over 7/7, the weeks of outrage over Lee Rigby, and the 5 or 6 days of outrage over Charlie Hebdo. While more people dislike – even hate – Muslims than ever before, there is a diminishing vibrancy and intelligence in their emotions. Perhaps needless to say, this is gravely worrying.

Whatever else can be said about Muslims, one cannot say that they are forgetful. Indeed, we are still being attacked in retribution for the re-conquest of Andalusia, the Balfour declaration and the publishing of the Satanic Verses. Muslims remember. They hold grudges. The Western mind, by contrast, is easier to distract than the mind of toddler loaded up on Jelly beans. Whether to facebook, twitter, youtube, xbox or football, Western attention flees from unpleasant realities, having given them only the briefest glance in the first place.

This must change if we are to survive. If terrorism becomes an accepted part of our culture and everyday lives, we will lose the will to do anything decisive or conclusive about it. Religious violence is not acceptable in the modern world, and nor is it inevitable, natural or ‘the way things go’. It is exceptional, horrid and shocking and must remain so to our imagination.

D, LDN

Making Britain Safe for Apostasy.

Tags

Apostasy Hadith, BBC, Britain, Britain First, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, Ex-Muslims, Islamism, Islamophobia, Multiculturalism, Muslim, Muslim apostates, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Sweden

Imagine being a Muslim atheist in Britain. Though it sounds self-contradictory, there must be thousands of such people living alongside us in every corner of this country, typically in a condition of self-hatred and misery.

Try to empathise with them even a little and you can readily appreciate their plight. Imagine what it’s like to be trapped in a culture of stupidity that will kill you if you try to leave. Imagine being forced to suppress your own rationality and to oppose those you agree with. Imagine suffering the swelling hatred of the native majority and feeling the hot persecution of those who should rightly be your friends. Imagine the prospect of having to sever ties with your family, friends and ethnic origins just to embrace the modern way of life.

I feel immense sympathy for these people. They didn’t ask to be born into a degraded life. It was their own random misfortune.

What can we do to better facilitate their liberation? There is no riskless panacea or faultless manifesto to employ, but we must do something, or we risk abandoning our ideals completely and becoming simple xenophobes. 

As far as I can see, there are three core motivations that inspire Muslim atheists resident in the West to remain linked to their faith of birth. Other motivations (and there are many others) are usually children or siblings of these.

1. Distrust of the Islamophobic Community / racial pride.

2. Family ties.

3. Retribution.

Let’s deal with them in order.

If you were a Western Muslim atheist wishing to leave Islam, you might be deterred from doing so by the thought that Islamophobes are vulgar, racist and stupid. Despite your atheism, you might be averse to giving such idiots ‘what they want’. Islam, for good or ill, is watermarked in your ethnic identity and cannot be cleanly excised. In short, you would rather be a proud Turk or Arab, than a shy, quivering uncle tom.

I can fully appreciate this. Though far from the majority, there are obviously racists in the EDL, in SION and in other like-minded organisations; the kind of people who don’t have any religious opinions at all, but merely an active dislike of Turks, Arabs and Pakistanis. What proud Muslim atheist would want to shake those hands? – Would want to go from being a first-rate Pakistani or Turk to being a second-rate Westerner?

The solution to this is to place a heavy emphasis on the corrosive effects Islam has had on the ethnic cultures now dominated by it. Explain to the Pakistani that Pakistan was once peaceful and Buddhist; to the Arab that the Arab world was once an illustrious collection of ancient glories; to the Iranian that Iran was once the Persian Empire, and so on. Remind them that everyone on earth is too good for Islam. It degrades anyone who embraces it and depresses their natural talents.

Secondly, the Muslim atheist is understandably averse to severing ties with his family, who in most cases remain wedded to the Islamic faith.

The solution to this is naturally more difficult. How can we offer a replacement kinship for such people? As daunting as it seems, we can but try. It is often remarked upon that Counter-Jihad has become something of a sub-culture in recent years. Our enemies make much beef of this, claiming it as evidence for our collective delusion. But on the contrary, this pleasant fraternal atmosphere can help greatly to accommodate those who remain addicted to the communal warmth of religion and traditional culture. Try to make use of that.

The last deterrent factor is by far the most important. According to the Hadith (a religious authority in Islam second only to the Qur’an), the penalty for leaving Islam is death. The apostate is to be killed without mercy or regard for secular law.

This can be dealt with via politics. We must lobby and petition the government to ensure apostates are supplied with police protection and given special consideration in  housing and work. No apostate, having abandoned Islam, should be left to the mercy (or lack of it) of their community. They should be helped to move elsewhere with restraining orders placed on those relatives who seem likely and willing to fulfil the religious sentence. While this sounds over-the-top and beyond the rightful expectations of national charity, it is in fact the same protection we supply to beaten wives, witnesses to murder and any other citizen proven to be vulnerable to extrajudicial homicide. Why should apostates be treated any differently?

People of my viewpoint are often accused of being racist. Though it is a tedious and unwarranted slur, it is worth combating. The best way to do this is to look past the imposed surface of a Muslim and offer a hand of friendship to the person beneath it.

D, LDN.

American Zimbabwe: The War in Chicago.

Tags

American Africa, American thinker, American third world, Barack Obama, BBC, Chief Keef, Chiraq, Civilisation, Crime in Chicago, Dearborn, Dearborn Thinker, Defend the modern world, Kanye West, Lil Reese, Muslim, New English Review, slavery, VDare

The everydayness of gun-crime in America has long been a cause of great confusion (and in some cases, schadenfruende) in Europe, with the rates reported in cities like New York and Los Angeles seeming more appropriate to a Lesotho shanty-town than a bustling superpower, studded with skyscrapers.

But in reality, gun-crime is not really an American issue at all, but a peculiarly African-American one. ‘White’ states like Oregon and Washington have very low rates of crime and violence, while Black-heavy states like Georgia and Louisiana have rates well above the national average.

And of all African-American population centres, it is the city of Chicago, Illinois that makes for the most alarming case. This brilliant city, steeped in wealth and literary renown, is witness to an dizzying number of violent felonies, with the year 2012 clocking up 507 murders (by far the highest number in the United States), most of them committed with a firearm.

Many of the perpetrators and victims of these crimes are children; almost all of them having been trapped beforehand in a force-field of invented difference and meaningless rivalry. You’re from that neighbourhood, so why are you here? Boom! You’re meant to ride with us, so why do you wear that colour around your neck? Boom! And so on… This shocking rate of crime, coupled with the number of completed murders has led to the city acquiring the nickname ‘Chiraq’ – a portmanteau of Chicago and Iraq.

Most of these killings occur in a district of the city known as the ‘South Side’, made up of predominantly Black and poor neighbourhoods. Here, crack-cocaine manufacturing gangs are known to control the streets, and on occasion ‘provide security’ to whole tower blocks. Snitching on these makeshift police will only invite a swift demise. Failing to sign up to your local ‘clique’ (or ‘click’ – by the traditions of gang illiteracy) typically invites bullying, manipulation, shunning and possibly worse.

The culture of the South-Side is dominated by music; specifically a dark and violent sub-genre of Hip-Hop known as ‘Drill’ music. This trend was popularised by local artist Chief Keef, whose YouTube videos typically display the singer (and his friends) waving firearms at a cheap camera.

Keef (real name Keith Cozart) is known to have committed uncountable offenses in the city and has been directly accused of murder by the mother of one of the South Side’s child victims. His lyrics include barely-concealed references to homicide.

Among those who associate with Keef are an ignoble crew of villains and murderers. The video below depicts Keef’s collaborator and relative ‘Lil Reese’ beating up a young woman (for example):

Such practical misogyny is far from exceptional. Within Drill lyricism, a terrible emphasis is placed on ‘team sex’; a practice in which one’s entire ‘clique’ has sex with a single woman one after the other. For example, the lyrics of ‘Lil Mouse’ (who was 12 at the time of composition) include ‘If you wanna fuck me, then fuck the team”, while Chief Keef raps “You’re bitch won’t do the team? (I) bet she won’t fight!” – note that in the latter case, the boundary between consent and assault is terrifyingly blurred.

The life-expectancy of Chicagoan rappers has collapsed in recent years, with many aspiring musicians being snuffed out before their time. The rapper LA Capone, whose best-known songs include ‘Murder’ (the chorus – ‘Murder me? It’s unheard of’) was gunned down in 2012. His collaborator ‘Rondonumbanine’ was later arrested for murdering a taxi driver said to have been involved in Capone’s death. Chief Keef’s cousin ‘Blood Money’ was assassinated in 2013 by rival gang members.

So strong is the whirlwind of nihilism affecting Chicago, many of its rappers perish barely having had the chance to establish themselves. A small, baby-faced child calling himself ‘Lil JoJo’ made a nightmarish video (below) trolling the rival ‘Black Disciples’ gang (of which Keef, Capone, Reese and Blood money are or were members). He was killed within a month.

Drill’s popularity radiates far beyond its homeland. Outside of Illinois, young African-Americans compete with each other to imitate the criminals of Chicago. The black thug responsible for the bestial murder of Christopher Lane (a race-hate killing even if the media pretends otherwise) quoted Chief Keef on Twitter (“I’m with my niggas when it’s time to start taking lives”) the day before he and his friends committed the homicide.

In the established worldview of racist thinking, Black Africans represent the lowest tier of humanity and a biological fusion of human and pre-human. In doing the research for this post, I have myself felt the twitch of racist emotion; a heavy, slightly burning anger supported with a sentimental fear for the future. Should the numbers of these people be contained? Should segregation be considered?

I now see the world back in focus. Black people are as varied as any other race. There are Black professionals, Black thugs and innumerable varieties in-between. Nevertheless, the West must be firm about the issue of tribal violence. It simply doesn’t belong in this part of the world. Chicago’s children, women and law-abiding citizenry deserve better.

D, LDN.

Copenhagen.

Tags

Blasphemy meeting, Charlie Hebdo, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Copenhagen attack, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Denmark, Denmark cartoons, Islam in Denmark, Multiculturalism, Muslim, Muslims, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Shootings, Stand up for

There has been another Muslim attack in Europe today (predictable as rain, isn’t it?). This time the venue was Copenhagen, the very innocent, slightly boring capital of the very innocent, slightly boring nation of Denmark.

The ‘provocation’ of this aggression was a meeting on the subject of blasphemy; a gathering that attracted numerous figures connected with the original Mohammad cartoon controversy from 2006.

As it turns out, the attack was a bungled affair. Only two casualties have been reported so far (one at the event and a Jewish security guard from a nearby Synagogue). Knowing the death-hungry psychosis of Islamism, this will be counted as a failure.

Nevertheless, the increasing frequency of these attacks will just serve to feed the cycle and maintain the momentum of total Jihad in Europe. That only leaves us to wonder which city is next…
D, LDN.

Rotherham: The Full Picture.

Tags

Civilisation, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Mass rape, Multiculturalism, Muslim, Muslims, Rochdale, Rochdale Pakistanis, Rochdale war crimes, Rotherham Pakistanis, Rotherham political Correctness, Sheffield

Even if the horrors of Rotherham – the mass rape of 1400 White girls by Muslim savages – was a one-off phenomenon not replicated outside of the town’s borders, it would still stand as one of the greatest crimes in British history. Standing alone, it would easily outrank the crimes of Jack the Ripper, the Kray Twins, and even the medieval Witch burners in its number of victims and callousness of execution.

Of course, the crimes of Rotherham are in no way limited to that small town. Evidence is quickly mounting that similar waves of rape have afflicted towns, villages and cities the length and breadth of the country. Sprees are rumoured in Greater Manchester, Leicestershire and Birmingham. They are known to have occurred (on an as yet undetermined scale) in Rochdale, Oxfordshire and Burnley.

What will the final figure be? 10,000? 20,000? 100,000? Nobody knows, but one thing becomes clearer with every crime discovered: we are dealing with something altogether unprecedented – something more destructive and harmful to our civic life than Ebola could ever be.

I wrote in a prior post that these rapes amount to war crimes, and I stand by that. The scale demands it. Let’s speculate that the final figure is something like 10,000. That is, 10,000 girls raped for ideological motives by a foreign population. Is that really a matter for the national courts or is it one for the Hague?

I would suggest the latter, given that this figure is not greatly inferior to those from Serbian or Sudanese warzones, both of which are considered provocations of international disrepute. It would also (incidentally) serve our cause greatly to have these crimes designated crimes of war, since that would place the issue in its proper historic context.

Though terror attacks seem to fade from the public brain with ever-increasing speed, Rotherham will take much longer to be forgotten, let alone forgiven. The number of lives ruined chills the blood. Children who should have been skipping along in a haze of innocence were forced to confront the adult world at its absolute worst. Experiences that would scar the imagination of a battle-hardened US Marine were etched by razorblade onto the soft, undeveloped material of infant brains.

I truly hope that some of this countless number grow up to understand why they were so mistreated. I hope that the liberal carwash of education doesn’t convince them that the biggest issue was a ‘failure in social services’ or some comparable nonsense.

If they come to know the truth, they are given the option of pride. There is nothing shameful or weak about falling prey to these creatures. We all have in one way or another. These children are martyrs. Their suffering may yet deliver us.

D, LDN.

Why Aren’t They Screaming?

Tags

Christianity and Islam, Christopher Caldwell, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Europe, Feminism, Feminism and Racism, Multiculturalism, Muslim, Muslims, No to Turkey in the EU, Why Don't Women rebel?, Women's rights

Residents of London and other major European cities will be increasingly accustomed to the sight of a fully-veiled Muslim woman strolling awkwardly down a modern high street. Perhaps the only more depressing sight is that of a fully-veiled Muslim woman with a hijab-wearing daughter, in whose unsmiling eyes one sees a recognition that she too will one day be hidden from view.

And witnessing this sight, a European man in particular may suffer a predictable series of emotional reactions. At first, a potent, uncomfortable disgust and a stupid urge to condemn his own sex; and then after this, a foggy confusion which evolves into a question – As Philip Larkin asked of the old and dying:

“Why aren’t they screaming?”

Do Muslim women realise their condition? Do they care? Do they think the smiles of unbelieving women are painted on, or that the laughter and light-footed calm they exude is merely the symptom of a toxic soul? How do they rationalise themselves?

It is very easy for Leftist commentators to presume such women dress this way because of a personal, independently arrived-at religiosity. This at least allows for a quieting of their conscience. In reality of course, it cannot simply be a coincidence that those veiled women we see are usually the product of hyper-devout families structured according to a patriarchal social tradition; that they are the daughters of long-bearded fathers and house-bound mothers; that they often know no more about alternative ways of existing than someone raised in a cult. Whatever this may be called, one cannot call it a choice. It is a mould into which they were forced to grow, and for which their desires have been forced to deform themselves into enthusiasm.

Every day, a news story from the Muslim world demonstrates the lowly position afforded to the females of that region. Recent weeks have been especially hard-hitting. In Pakistan a woman was stoned to death by her own family for marrying without parental consent. In Sudan, a formerly Muslim woman, having converted to Christianity, was due to be stoned to death whilst carrying inside her body an unborn child. There was also a ‘corrective’ gang-rape in Pakistan, the sentencing of an Iranian actress to 100 lashes, and a brutal sexual assault in rural Malaysia.

Do Muslim women really believe (and with a sincere, non-fearful mind) that they are better off on that side of the cultural divide? And if they don’t, then why don’t they rebel? I could ask these questions all day long, but that would be pointless. Let’s try to consider an answer.

As you’ll be aware, the penalty for apostasy from Islam is death. Despite international efforts aimed at halting the practice, this ruling is still enthusiastically enforced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya and Yemen, and occasionally even in ‘moderate’ states like Turkey, Tunisia and Morocco.

The fear of this – that is, of death is obviously an effective deterrent for any human being and requires no further analysis by itself. It might not be however the most effective.

Another deterrent, this time particular to women, is the judicial theft of children. Even in the most moderate and Europeanised Muslim countries, a female apostate will almost certainly lose access to her progeny. Her appeals – if she survives long enough to make any – will be denied. In such situations, her offspring will be placed in the care of the father or a conformist grandparent.

These deterrents, the threatened destruction of both life and motherhood, are easily sufficient to explain female conformity in the Muslim world. They are not sufficient however to explain the behaviour of their sisters resident in the West.

Imagine if a North Korean defector moved to the West with a devout guard of the regime in tow, having been unable to shake him off at the airport. After a day or so on Western soil, the defector would flee into the protective arms of the majority, letting the regime guard be damned. What is different in the case of Muslim women?

Perhaps it’s actually our fault. Whilst we’d surely welcome a North Korean defector to our ways of liberty with a warm smile, we’d be more suspicious of a Muslim woman rejecting her own culture. Why?

The answer is Cultural relativism. Our official policy on minority cultures is that they are like Pandas and Whales – precious species vulnerable to the brutal heat of modernity and therefore in need of protection from it.

Language alone is incapable of portraying the damage this belief has done to individual liberty and individual happiness.

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.