Trouble in the South

Tags

African migrants, Europe, Greece, migrants, Turkey

How much would it cost to stop the boats arriving? How many ships, specially tailored to the task, would need to be constructed? I do not believe it would cost the world; but even if it did, the world is what Europe is worth to some of us.

For all its value, our continent is pitifully unprepared for the realities of modern migration. Boatloads of third world cargo are washing up on our envied shores almost daily, in direct contravention of both public sentiment and common sense. 

What price can Rome justify? And Seville? Athens? I would say any one of them can pay us back handsomely, whether in tourism, grandeur or sunny days, for whatever expenditure is necessary.

We are not quite ready for the conversation that needs to be had about all this. We are still too squeamish, frightened of the implications. Christopher Caldwell, author of Reflections on the Revolution in Europe, broke some very hard ground with the subtitle of his widely admired, absurdly controversial book -“Can Europe be the same with different people in it?”

The answer is no, of course. If current flows of migration continue, Europe will be changed dramatically, and quite obviously for the worse. There are great qualitative differences between the cultures of the world. And for this reason Europe is best left with a solid European majority.

So we must stop the boats. Turn all of them back. Put in place a strong naval task force in the Mediterranean and Aegean seas, equipped with whatever is necessary to encourage foreign adventurers to reverse course, and to help get them safely home. 

We have a beautiful continent, a splendid variety of cultures all our own. To squander this would be unforgivable. 

David

Advertisement

Could a Country De-Islamise Itself?

Tags

America, America 911, American Liberty, Ann, Ann Coulter, ann coulter trump, ann coulter twitter, BBC, big bang theory, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, convert, coulter quotes, Counter-Jihad, declaration, Defend the modern world, deislamise country, Egypt, Facebook, Iran, Islam, Islamic world, Islamism, Lebanon, policy, policy policy, Turkey, Twitter, we should invade their countries, wordpress, world

Iconoclastic commentator Ann Coulter once made headlines by suggesting that “(America) should invade (Islamic) countries, kill their leaders and convert the people to Christianity.”

Her idea – if it was really an idea – was promptly laughed out of court, as well as being branded an example of a corresponding American ‘fundamentalism’ by the apologist Left. I can’t really argue with that response. If an operation such as Coulter proposed were in any way feasible (or affordable) it would surely be the most worthwhile and benevolent action by a nation in human history. Sadly, it isn’t feasible, nor is it affordable.

Despite that, the idea that a Muslim country can be de-Islamised is not political science-fiction. There are isolated examples which may allow for it, owing to unique historic factors and local ethnic aspirations. I am frequently presented with the idea that Iran (Persia), Egypt, and Syria all have ancient identities which precede the Islamisation of their territories by Abu Bakr and his marauding armies, and for which they might be willing (if presented with the right amount of Western encouragement) to trade their rotten Islamic present. How might this be achieved?

The most notable case of a country attempting to rid itself of the strictures of Islamic doctrine is that of Turkey in the time of Ataturk. Although rarely explicit, Ataturk had little affection for the Islamic religion (or at least its social application) and his bold, sweeping reforms severely curtailed the faith in Turkish society. Ataturk (and his supporters) wanted a secular, Westernised Turkey; one that would bare little to no resemblance to the Ottoman Empire – with all its fanaticism and slovenly Eastern habits. The reforms so implemented were successful and would go on to secularise and partially Europeanise the Republic for over 60 years, before being rapidly reversed by the AKP party of Tacip Erdogan, a self-confessed Islamist and dedicated Sunni.

Turkey’s experiment with modernity was destined to fail all along. Despite their genuine desire to Westernise, the Turks remained overwhelmingly Muslim in allegiance, having Islamic funerals for the dead, Islamic rituals for the young and a large Crescent despoiling the national flag. Turkey did not de-Islamise because there was never an intention of de-Islamising.

A comparable experiment in Westernisation took place in Iran before the revolution. Backed by American and British leaders and inspired by the example of Ataturk, the authoritarian ‘Shah’ Reza Pahlavi enacted massive social reforms aimed at liberalising and modernising Persian society. In the urban elites this was a roaring success. Young middle and upper class urbanites fully adopted the freedoms of the modern world, celebrating the diminishment of Islamic authority. The descendants of these people are now largely living in the West, having fled the country after the Islamic uprising of 1979.

Why did that uprising occur? For many reasons, but one of the most essential is that a nation is not its elite. Working and lower-middle class Iranians (especially those from impoverished backgrounds) were not ready for such rapid change. When the rabble-rousing populists of revolution appeared, they thus found a sizable number of henchmen willing to topple the ‘arrogant’ pro-Western elite. The rest is history.

These days, the Iranian diaspora (descendants of the Iranian upper classes) assures the West that the next attempt at Westernisation will succeed. They may be right, they may be wrong. It will be a while before we can know one way or the other.

In Egypt, Lebanon, Tunisia, Syria and Algeria, the middle and upper classes are also secular. They too dream of civilising their respective countries; that is, bring the general population up to their own level of personal development. Yet as with Iran, the majority of Egyptians (excepting Christians), Lebanese (excepting Christians), Tunisians and Syrians are uneducated, jobless, illiterate, and supremely devout in their attachment to Islamic consolations. The elite can wish away the days and months, but nothing will change without a long, difficult and expensive process of public education and social reform.

De-Islamisation (of countries, societies, races) is not an impossible prospect. It may happen at some point in the future. But at the moment it is simply utopian, and as likely as the elimination of tradition from any nation, Islamic or otherwise.

D, LDN

Why Greece Matters

Tags

America, American Liberty, Ancient Greece, BBC, Christianity, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Defend the modern world, Facebook, Greece, Greece EU, Greece Europe, Greece European Union, Greece IMF, Greece matters, Greece vs Turkey, Greek army, Greeks European, Hellas, Hellenic Republic, Multiculturalism, No to Turkey in the EU, Sparta, Turkey, Turkish occupation of Cyprus, Turks cyprus, Twitter

The question of whether Greece remains in or tumbles out of the European currency may well have been decided by the time this article is published. Whichever way the referendum has now gone, my argument here is substantially broader than the current dispute, involving the extent to which Greece forms an essential part of the European geo-cultural community; a question more of an eternal nature than a merely temporal one.

As Greece’s economic health began to flatline in 2007/8, many chauvinist types in Northern Europe (specifically, British, German, Finnish and French conservatives) were quick to ask questions like – “How important is Greece to us anyway?” – “Who cares about Greece?” – “Is Greece/are the Greeks even European?” – “Why does Greece matter to us?” etc….

The attitude underpinning such enquiries would eventually lurch to the wild extreme in the German weekly newspaper Die Welt in which a columnist revived the canard that modern day ‘Greeks’ are not actually the famous ‘Greeks’ of old.

“The idea” he wrote “that the Greeks of modern times are descendants of Pericles or Socrates and not a Turkish-moulded mixture of Slavs, Byzantines and Albanians, used to be a belief among most educated Europeans. The architects of the EU themselves could not escape this belief. In this context, they brought clammy Greece into the European boat in 1980. The consequences can be seen every day.”

I’m not a geneticist and so cannot comment on the ‘Greeks are not real Greeks’ theory, but in regard to the first set of questions, the answers (in order) are as follows – “It is hugely important” – “We all should.” – “Yes.” – “Because of Islam.”

As alert observers (or at least anyone with a map and a brain) will have known for some time, the fate of Greece may foretell the fate of Europe… For over a thousand years, Greece has been the fighting border-guard of the West against the world of Islam, and should it fall now, or – just as bad – shift allegiance, our civilisation becomes at once a thousand times more precarious.

The Turkish army, for hundreds of years the nemesis of Greek aspiration, is the strongest in the Muslim world and considerably larger and better maintained than any in continental Europe. Indeed, Turkey’s military is the only non-European army currently occupying European land in contravention of international law.

According to most international rulings on the subject, the island of Cyprus is part of Greece. Turkey’s hold on the northern half of the territory is put up with only out of fear of Turkish arms.

Throughout history, various other Greek islands have been claimed by Turkish nationalists, and the Greek mainland was for centuries subsumed entirely by the Ottoman Empire, the modern Hellenic Republic only emerging from the dreamless sleep of Islamic rule in 1830.

At present, Turkey is also the only thing separating Greece (and thus Europe) from the territory of the Islamic State with which it has a rather dubious relationship. Routes through the country are almost always chosen by Western-born terrorists travelling to join ISIS, and local authorities have been notably slack in preventing this. Of course, if there are ISIS cells coming into Europe via Turkey, their footprints will first depress Hellenic soil.

The Greek military, for its part, is large by southern-European standards but still considerably weaker than the armed forces of Turkey, Egypt or Saudi Arabia. Westward from Greece, the first war-capable nation-state is Germany. Europe at its weakest thus shares a border with Islam at its strongest.

History is known to have a gift for poetic irony. As Greece, Rome and Jerusalem are the fountains of our civilisation, it would appear both apocalyptic and appropriate that anti-Western Muslims are freely landing in Italy, crossing into Greece, and plotting the downfall of the Jewish State.

D, LDN.

Who Knew?

Tags

Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, decadence, Defend the modern world, Detroit, Facebook, Imam, Iran, Islamisation, Islamism, masturbation, Multiculturalism, Muslims, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, sex, sex and, sexuality, Turkey

According to a Turkish Imam, when men masturbate they risk impregnating their hands.

Once again… According to a Turkish Imam, when men masturbate they risk impregnating their hands.

Now, before you jump to any rash conclusions about the scientific basis on which this claim is made, I must inform you that the hands are only impregnated in the afterlife, and this explains the lack of earthly evidence with which the Imam might back up this theory in the present, terrestrial domain.

Though he has not been pressed much further on the matter, the idea he imparted has great implications for those who hope to survive death, and such people are understandably desperate for certain clarifications. For example, if the hands are pregnant, from what part of the body does the child emerge? Is morning sickness in the wrists?

It’s very easy to laugh at Islamic madness. Despite that, I thoroughly recommend it.

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.

Bad Rubbish: If ‘Brits’ Go to Syria, Let Them Stay There.

Tags

BBC, Britain First, Brits deported, Brits going to ISIS, Defend the modern world, EDL, EU, ISIS, Islamisation, Jihad, Jihad in Syria, Jihadi John, Jihadis going to Syira, london, Paul Golding, Syria Yazidi, The Beatles Terror Cell, Traitors, Turkey, Turkish border

Yet again, Muslims with British passports have sought to cross the Turkish border into 6th century Syria with the intention of joining the international jihad.

According to the newspapers, these three ‘youngsters’ have now been apprehended by the Turkish authorities and are now awaiting deportation ‘back’ to the United Kingdom, where they will be treated (bizarrely) as ‘traitors’ and be tried in a court of European law.

This is obviously ridiculous, and all the comments beneath the articles in question are willing to say so.

“We don’t want the cretins back!” – said one.

“Keep them there. They’ve made their decision. If you make your bed, you lie in it!” – said another.

And this is altogether the right way to think about these matters. If you, a passport-holding British citizen, are willing to join a society filled with headless dissenters, thumbless thieves, invisible women, raped Yazidis and crucified Christians, you are not welcome, you were never welcome, and you will never become welcome in this United Kingdom.

D, LDN.

The Islamic World War.

Tags

Algeria, American Liberty, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Defend the modern world, Egypt, France holidays, Iran, Islamism, Multiculturalism, No to Turkey in the EU, Pakistan, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Saudi, Sunni vs Shia, Turkey, Turkey holidays

With news of Saudi F-15 warplanes carrying out airstrikes on Shia positions in Yemen, the formation by Egypt of a United Arab military force, Sunni militants seeking the violent overthrow of a pro-Iran regime in Syria, and bubbling tensions in Bahrain and Iraq, you would be forgiven for thinking an Islamic World War is on the near horizon. You may well be right.

Having simmered and spat for over a decade now, Sunni-Shia hostilities seem to be rushing to the surface in every country in the Dar es Salaam. Despite the likely cost of such a civil war, no Western policy seems capable of arresting it, and the process has an energy detached from all economic or political consideration.

Before looking at where we, in the West, should stand on all this, let us first look at the military, or civilizational balance between the two sides.

The Shia Coalition.

1. Iran.

According to outside analysis, the Islamic Republic of Iran has a military capacity roughly on a par with Saudi Arabia, with the latter’s technical edge sanded down by the former’s weight of numbers. Unlike Saudi’s quarter-million standing force, Iran’s army can marshal up to 900,000 soldiers (excluding state militias) and there is a wealth of dated yet still operational equipment from the Soviet Union for them to employ.

2. Iraq.

Despite the fact the two countries were once bitterly at war, it is increasingly naïve to consider modern Iraq as a separate political entity to Iran. Politically and diplomatically, the countries are in lockstep with one another, and the true source of Iraqi policy is now Tehran. All this means in practice is that Iran’s military-age population has increased by about 20 million and its oil reserves by 100%. If this integration continues, Iran will be a regional superpower, possessing or having influence over the greatest store of extractable oil in the world.

Iraq is yet to develop regular armed forces capable of acting independently

3. Southern Lebanon.

The Southern part of Lebanon (and to a limited extent, the national capital, Beirut) is currently occupied by Hezbollah, a Shia terrorist group loyal to Iran. At war, Hezbollah has proven to be surprisingly capable and it remains armed to the teeth due to historic weapons transfers from Russia, via Iran and Syria.

Hezbollah has between 4,000 and 65,000 fighters.

The Sunni Quintet.

1. Turkey.

By far the most militarily powerful country in the Islamic World, the Republic of Turkey is also increasingly aware of its position as a bulwark of the Sunni coalition. Having wrecked its alliance with Israel, elected an Islamist government, abandoned attempts to break into Europe, and made no attempt to resolve the conflict with the Kurds, Ankara appears readier than ever to play a part in a regional conflagration.

Turkey has already offered Saudi Arabia logistical aid in combating the Shia rebels in Yemen, and has vocally condemned Iranian activity in the region as a whole. The nation has pre-existing links with a variety of Sunni countries, including Egypt and Syria.

Of course, Turkey’s anti-Iranian sentiments may be due to more than religious conviction. Ankara is famously terrified by the aspirations of the Kurds, an Iranic people who possess strong links to Pan-Iranic Nationalists in Iran. Further complicating this is the fact that at least a quarter of Iran’s population are Turkic Azeris who routinely complain about Persian supremacism in the Iranian state.

Turkey can marshal roughly 1 million soldiers.

2. Pakistan.

The only Islamic country to possess an independent nuclear force, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan must be taken into account in any analysis or projection. Virulently anti-Shia, riddled with extremism and perennially unstable, Pakistan has been warmly embraced by Sunni supremacists like Osama Bin Laden, and the country remains an invaluable ally for the Saudis, who are said to be close to securing a nuclear weapon from the Pakistani stockpile.

Pakistan can marshal over a million soldiers.

3. Egypt.

The state of Egypt and its future direction is hard to judge. Despite being over 85% Sunni and the historic birthplace of radical Islam, the government in Cairo claims (for now) to be intent on a pro-Western path of secular reform. Only time can tell us whether this is possible or sincere, but if it isn’t, then the Sunni side of the conflict would benefit immeasurably, Egypt having the second most powerful military in the Islamic world (1.3 million soldiers).

4. Saudi Arabia.

The spiritual, financial and historic executive of the Sunni world, Saud Arabia has the world’s fourth largest military budget and the largest known oil reserves on Earth. Saudi investment companies own a considerable slice of Western meta-economy, granting Riyadh considerable diplomatic influence over the modern world. Saudi’s standing army numbers around 250,000 soldiers, but there are plans to increase this.

5. The Gulf.

The states of the Gulf, namely, Kuwait, the UAE and Qatar are among the richest nations on Earth, and possess small but very high-tech militaries. Gulf foreign policy is usually harmonious with that of the Saudis.

Combined, the number of active soldiers in the Gulf States is 105,000.

The Balance.

Sunni Quintet Military Forces – 3,655,000 – the larger Sunni world having 80% of the world’s Muslim civilian population.

Shia Coalition Military Forces – 930,000 – the larger Shia world having 15% of the world’s Muslim civilian population.

As should be obvious from this analysis, the Sunnis resoundingly outgun and outnumber the Shia. Indeed, if Iran was to fall apart or be drawn into a self-destructive war with Israel, the Shia would be left almost defenceless and vulnerable to outright genocide.

With that being said, a war as large as this can cause a lot of destruction before an inevitable outcome is reached.

Where Should We Stand?

Who should we side with in this developing conflict? In my own view, we should pick no side at all. A mad, religious conflict of this type has no relevance to the Western world, and neither the Sunni or the Shia have behaved in a such a way as to merit our allegiance.

Who will we side with? Well, given oil politics and the economic structure of the world, the West seems predestined to back up the Sunni-dominated order of the Middle East. The Saudis, Qataris, Kuwaitis, Egyptians and Turks are currently allied with the EU and America, while all the Shia states (save Iraq) are considered enemies. This will mean a short but destabilising war, ending in a Sunni victory.

Along the way, America may use the aggression of Iran towards Sunni states as a green light for action against the Ayatollahs. Israel may feel compelled to act against Hezbollah. A direct confrontation between ISIS and the Iranians may occur in Syria and central Iraq. Nevertheless, the end result can be foreseen in photographic detail, a Muslim world unchanged in its fundamental poverty.

I’ll close with an obvious but vital reflection: As all this blood is pointlessly shed in faraway lands, we should remind ourselves how luxurious it is to live in a 21st century civilisation; a condition far from perfect, but one that is infinitely preferable to the alternative.

D, LDN.

Stop Travelling to the Muslim World.

Tags

Are Muslim countries safe?, Are Muslims bad?, Civilisation, Civilisation vs Barbarianism, Defend the modern world, Is Islam evil?, Is Islam true?, Is it safe?, ISIS, ISIS videos, John Cantlie, Morocco holiday, No to Turkey in the EU, Syria, Terrorism, Travelling to a Muslim country, Tunisia holiday, Turkey

Each week, the world is treated to another episode of ‘Lend me your ears’, the oddly compelling news series fronted by an abducted war-photographer turned puppet of ISIS called John Cantlie.

In each instalment, no doubt to stall for time before his decapitation, Mr Cantlie, in a Guantanamo-Orange t-shirt and seated behind a black desk, puts admirable effort into the role he is cruelly being forced to play; a Westerner who has come to know and accept the arguments of the Islamic State (ISIS).

The beginning of each episode is the same. Mr Cantlie (with a strange, dull-eyed sincerity) states “I’m John Cantlie, the Westerner abandoned by my government”.  This line, almost certainly written by his jailers, is an effort to extract money for Mr Cantlie’s freedom, just as worked with the French government for the release of one Mr Cantlie’s former cellmates. It almost certainly won’t work with Britain.

The story of how Mr Cantlie fell into this morbid predicament is tragi-comic. The journalist was originally kidnapped two years ago by Islamist fighters in Northern Syria and was held hostage until moderates from the Free Syrian Army managed to secure his release. After heading back to Britain where he stayed for a couple of months, Mr Cantlie decided to revisit the increasingly lawless patch of Syria that provided him with his previous misfortune. He was soon re-captured, this time by ISIS, and now he seems to possess no hope of seeing the civilised world again.

I do sympathise with Mr Cantlie’s situation. I really do. But the question must be asked all the same: why the hell would any rational person – no matter what their objective and however noble it is – travel from the world of parliamentary democracy to a domain run along 6th century Islamic lines? What was the prize of such adventurism? A glossy shot of a corpse or a used tank shell? Surely the statistics reported by the Assad government and FSA sources illustrate the tragedy unfolding there in perfectly stark terms. What is the obsession with seeing everything?

The issue is broader than this one case of course. It isn’t just terrorism that potentially waits for you in the world of Islam, but uncountable instances of rape, abduction, sexual harassment (especially in Egypt) and ludicrous judicial punishments (in Abu Dhabi and Dubai).

The solution? Don’t go to the Islamic world. Stop travelling there. Whatever ancient (pre-Islamic) marvels, or professional thrills attract you, they are not worth your death or the tears of your family and friends.

If you want the ancient world, travel to Israel instead. Walk the hallowed streets of Jerusalem and Safed. Enjoy the thrill of seeing everyday people with assault rifles slung around their backs, charged with the maintenance of the civilised world’s frontline. See what happens to your political views when you try to imagine what it’s like living so close to the previous millennium that you feel its vile breathing.

Muslims are a generally dangerous people. It isn’t just a few bad apples. The whole barrel is rotten. And for the same reasons you wouldn’t travel to a Papuan jungle filled with cannibals, stop travelling to the Islamic world.

D, LDN.

Jobbik: An Enemy Within.

Tags

Civilisation, Coffee, Counter-Jihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, Jobbik, No to Turkey in the EU, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Turan, Turanians, Turanism, Turkey

Those who monitor the fortunes of the far-right in Europe will be increasingly familiar with a bizarre Hungarian outfit known as ‘Jobbik’.

On the face of it, the organisation is a generic nationalist movement, aimed at closing Hungary’s borders, re-emphasising its national identity and cracking down hard on domestic criminals.

Beneath that veneer however lies a perverse, little-known ideology that should completely disqualify the party from any greater European solidarity. That ideology is called ‘Turanism’.

A Turanist website describes the scope of this concept as follows:

“The Turanians are a family of ethno-linguistically related peoples which include the Hungarians, the Uralic group (Finnic and West Siberian peoples), and the Altaic group (Turkic, Mongolian, Tungus-Manchu, Korean and Japanese peoples). The Turanians are the indigenous inhabitants of vast territories in Eurasia, from Central Europe to the Pacific Ocean, and have a rich and ancient cultural heritage… Throughout history, the Turanian lands have been invaded by foreigners: Semites, Persians, Chinese, Greeks, Romans, Slavs, and Germanic peoples. In many cases, the indigenous Turanian peoples have been and are still subjected to genocide, colonization, deportation, or assimilation. Foreign rule has not only caused great losses in demographic and cultural terms, but also economically and environmentally as severe damages have been inflicted by the exploitation and pollution of the Turanian lands.”

Hungarians, or ‘Maygars’ are therefore (in Turanist theory) not European in origin, but rather descend from a mixture of Central Asian peoples, closely related to the Mongolian, Turkic and (in some extreme variants of the idea) Japanese ethnic groups.

And Jobbik, far from the ‘White Nationalist’ movement the media has intimated hitherto, seems determined to de-emphasise if not abolish Hungary’s identification with European history.

Of all the follies of Turanism, it is naturally the identification with Turks that should most bother Counter-Jihad activists.

Unsurprisingly, given the local bitterness about being refused entry into the EU, Turanism is enjoying a particular renaissance in the Ottoman fatherland, where its nationalistic adherents hungrily recognise a knife with which to prise apart the bloc that so cruelly denied them.

A Turanic axis, inclusive of Turkey, Hungary, Azerbaijan and the Azeri region of Iran would be disastrous, not just for Western Europe, but also for Russia, whose vast Asian territory is claimed by the same movement.

For now, Jobbik is rightly sidelined by mainstream Nationalist movements for its Anti-Semitic, anti-Ziganist, and anti-Democratic energies. Only the BNP and like-minded siblings embrace the group and even with these, desperation (rather than approval) supplies the motivation.

Still, the party provides welcome evidence, if any were required, of how unmalleable theories of biology cannot allow for a realistic solution to the predominantly cultural battles of our era. A great deal of cultural history separates Hungarians from Turks, even if blood does not. It will be a measure of Europe’s strength as to which way Hungary turns.

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.