There Are No Noble Savages

Tags

America, American Liberty, BBC, Blog, Civilisation, civilisation West, Coffee, concepts, cultural evolution, cultural issues, Culture, Defend the modern world, DTMW, dtmw dtmw, Egalitarianism, Facebook, facebook facebook, first world, first world third world, ideas, Internet, Memes, Multiculturalism, noble savages, Philosophy, politics, primitivism, savage, theory, third world, Twitter, United States, web, West, Western world

If the reader is a user of facebook or any comparable website, he or she may be familiar with the following viral post:

“An anthropologist proposed a game to the kids in an African tribe. He put a basket of fruit near a tree and told the kids that who ever got there first won the sweet fruits. When he told them to run, they all took each others hands and ran together, then sat together enjoying their treats. When he asked them why they had run like that as one could have had all the treats for himself, they said: “Ubunto. How can one of us be happy if all the other ones are sad?”. ‘Ubunto’ in Xhosa culture means ‘I am because we are'”

Though the authenticity of the Ubunto story is uncertain, the word appears to be real and to have roughly the same meaning attributed to it. If this is the case, the concept is surely pleasant, even admirable. But is it really so original or sophisticated?

If the adoring Westerners cooing over this story could stop crying with happiness for one moment, they might recall the similar Western phrase ‘all for one, one for all’ – or indeed many hundreds of other equivalents around the world.

Human solidarity, yet another way of describing ‘Ubunto’, is an innate quality invested in the human condition by the legacy of biological evolution. It is not something one needs to give a name to. It just exists – ineradicably, albeit in differing endowments from person to person.

As many cynics have noted, the only reason Western audiences are so enamoured of the Ubunto story in particular is because it appears to align with a very old and sentimental fallacy; that of the ‘Noble savage’.

The Noble Savage has been part of Western art – particularly literature – for centuries. Put simply, the idea is that undeveloped cultures (especially African, Amerindian, Asian and Middle Eastern cultures), though on the surface less sophisticated and morally developed than those of Europe, nevertheless retain valuable ancient wisdom the West may profit by relearning.

You can see the cultural effects of this notion everywhere you look; from fridge magnets emblazoned with Confucian and Native American spiritual maxims, to the kind of the meme mentioned above. The West cannot seem to get enough of ancient non-European ‘wisdom’. It is substantially more popular even than Western philosophy, including the immortal works of Nietzsche, Kant and the ancient Greeks – (when was the last time you saw a Plato fridge magnet?).

Of course, being the cultural bigot that I am, I do not believe that Crazy Horse is the equal of Nietzsche. In fact, to be perfectly honest, I don’t think they even belong in the same category. Nietzsche was the greatest philosopher of the last 500 years. Crazy Horse, though undoubtedly noble in the military sense, made only commonsensical remarks about his own life and about a political struggle he ended up losing (to Europeans).

Historic Third World philosophers, like historic Third World mathematicians, physicists and inventors, are extremely thin on the ground. The vast majority of celebrated non-European thinkers are products of the past 100 years, a century marked by non-European adaptation to European domination and cultural hegemony.

This is not a coincidence. When European civilisation – now de-racialised as  ‘The West’ – made the first breakthrough from localism to worldliness, the broader world was still filled with savage darkness. And long after the enlightenment began, Asians (including those dwelling in the now impressive Japanese and Korean cultures), Africans and Amerindians continued to exist in a twilight condition of subsistence agriculture and mind-numbing ritual.

In India, now home to internet entrepreneurs and industrialist billionaires, widowed women hurled themselves onto burning funeral pyres to satisfy perverse notions of marital duty. In Japan, now the epicentre of global technological innovation, Samurai (normal people in strange clothes) cut their stomachs open to amend for ‘dishonourable’ failures in martial etiquette. There is evidence of cannibalism in Southern Africa as late as the Victorian era. And so on…

The European explosion – the multinational enlightenment – was the beginning of true civilisation. Though periods of greatness in North Africa, the Middle East, Mexico and China had been observed centuries before this point, it is only after this seismic event that civilisation in its contemporarily recognisable form began.

So why do Westerners, those to whom the most credit belongs,  now look back at pre-civilisation with such a powerful nostalgia? Why do Brits and Americans, looking at memes on Apple Mackintosh computers, interpret the word ‘umbunto’ as a proof of Third World superiority? And why are non-Europeans, Asians especially, increasingly more cognizant of Western superiority than Westerners?

Since these questions are interconnected, a single answer may suffice for all of them. The West, unlike the rest of the planet, is infected with a virus of civilizational exhaustion; a crisis of civilizational confidence. We Westerners have grown so used to the blessings of modernity that we have come to take them for granted. It takes real mental exertion for us to imagine (honestly and accurately) a world without the internet, refrigerators and Starbucks restaurants. And with a thick fog of relativism further obscuring our vision we are inevitably tempted by the idea that such a condition is more ‘wholesome’, ‘substantial’ or culturally complex than that in which we now live.

Westerners have become bored of affluence and modernity

But it isn’t more wholesome, of course, nor more substantial, complex, romantic… It is inferior by almost every measure. And if anyone needs evidence of this contention, one can experience pre-civilisation for a very paltry sum these days. One can fly over to Ghana, Chad, North Korea or Afghanistan and live cheaply for whole years at a time. The reason we don’t want to dwell in such places, would not even dream of doing so, is because anti-Western sentiment is based on lies, illusions and errors of logic.

The West (including the Western-inspired cultures of Japan and Korea) is the only true civilisation on Earth. The further you go away from it, the further you go away from all that is valuable, good and worth living for.

The Noble Savage myth is the first step down a very slippery slope. It is best not to take it, even if that means not sharing a heart-warming post on social media.

D, LDN.

Advertisement

Characteristics of a Real Refugee

Tags

afghans, American Liberty, apostasy, Christianity, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Defend the modern world, dogma, Europe, Facebook, facebook twitter, Germany, hadith, Iraqis, island, Liberalism, liberalism vs leftism, migrant crisis, Multiculturalism, No to Turkey in the EU, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, refugee crisis, refugees, refugees welcome, syrians, Twitter, West, west east

The vast majority of Muslims seeking ‘asylum’ in Europe, whether from Syria, Afghanistan, Iran or Iraq, are not real refugees. If they were, as has been said countless times before, they would have settled in the first peaceful country they arrived at after fleeing their own.

It is now clear to all but the most doctrinaire Leftist that these people are actually migrants, most of them seeking solely material benefit and financial reward. They are economic refugees, then, not political ones (as the media would have us believe). Not that we should allow political refugees in either, of course, since the first-safe-country principle is also valid in that case.

The only possible exception to this principle – and thus the only conceivable justification for allowing, say, a Syrian or Afghan asylum seeker to settle in Europe – is if the person in question were proven to qualify as a cultural refugee; that is, someone who is fleeing not merely the violent excess of Islam, but Islam itself. While this remains vanishingly rare, it will cost us nothing to briefly define what such a case would be like.

Imagine if in the future a man in his twenties washes up on the southerly coast of Spain. After being taken into custody he is revealed to be a Moroccan citizen who has swam the distance from North Africa to Europe alone and without any possessions. To the surprise of his interrogators the man speaks very good English and announces – convincingly – that he has had enough of living in the age of religious barbarism and wishes to join the Dar al-Harb permanently. He emphatically identifies himself as an atheist, or a Christian (or whatever other non-Islamic identity you care to imagine), and he can eloquently back up his self-identification with detailed arguments and sincere passion.

What to do with him? The response would almost certainly depend on and reflect the deepest ideological poise of those who are asked the question. A nativist, or ethno-nationalist, for example, would politely decline the stranger or perhaps unceremoniously throw him back into the Mediterranean. A Leftist meanwhile would also rather the stranger return to his land of origin, since there is enough ‘Islamophobia’ in Europe already.

Me? I’d demand a probationary period of police vigilance on the fellow, and after that a path to citizenship. In my 3 years as a blogger, I’ve found that ex-Muslims are a very potent resource of resistance to Islam, far more indeed than the average Native. And surely this hypothetical case is exactly what an asylum law is designed for. Just as in the time of Communism we generously admitted those Russians and Eastern-Europeans who wished for freedom, but did not admit Communist sympathisers or state bureaucrats (for reasons of security). So in the age of political Islam must we admit those opposed to barbarism and keep out those dedicated to it.

Whenever a native of the Muslim world shows up at the Free World’s borders, one question should be asked before all others: Why are you leaving? If the answer is not in English, the answer should be treated with suspicion. If the answer is in English but is nevertheless punctuated with inshallahs, al-hamdu lilahs and salaams, the response should be a swift refusal. But if in reasonable English the native says something like the following: “I am looking for freedom. I want to live in the modern world and leave behind the darkness of Islam and its primitive, undeveloped society”, a more generous and warm response is surely merited.

One cannot reasonably ask that the native returns to the first safe country he or she came across, because the first safe country might no longer be safe for an infidel. A more reasonable action would be to inter the individual while background checks are carried out, and then if the individual is clean of connections with Jihad relocate that person to an appropriate part of the Dar al-Harb. It might not be somewhere as illustrious as London or Berlin, but there are many options available.

Over time, a policy like this would lead to the only logical resolution we can hope for in our clash with the Islamic world; geo-cultural segregation. The Free and the Unfree kept apart, and never to merge again.

D, LDN

This Week in Savagery

Tags

America, America 911, American Liberty, California, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Facebook, ISIS, Islam, islam war on the west, Islamism, malik, Multiculturalism, Muslims, pakstanis in america, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, san bernardino, saudis in america, shooting, tafsheen, terror in america, Terrorism, United States, West

This past week has been an eventful one for the demonic coalition variously known as Islamic State/ISIS/ISIL or (if you feel like being politically correct) ‘Daesh’.

First, in San Bernardino country, California, ISIS members cruelly abbreviated the lives of a random crowd of unfortunate civilians, shooting them all in cold blood. A few days after this, ISIS functionaries in Syria decapitated a Russian citizen before uploading footage of the crime onto the internet. And most recently, yesterday, a degenerate Muslim in London sought to slash members of the public to death on the London Underground with a machete (in this case fortunately he failed to accomplish any fatalities).

The reaction to these crimes has been different in each case, with the distinctions generally reflecting the differences in political climate in the victims’ homelands.

America reacted with that familiar blend of indignation and fury we have come to expect from our great, patriotic ally. After the identities (and religious affiliation) of the perpetrators was finally confirmed (after much prior confusion) Fox News and other right-leaning media outlets referred to the action as ‘savage’, ‘evil’ and ‘a national wake-up call’.

In Russia, as in America, the tone was one of purple-faced rage. President Vladimir Putin vowed to spill the blood of the terrorists in a tit-for-tat calculation hugely popular with the citizenry of nations which still believe in themselves (Russia, Israel, America, Australia etc…)

And Britain, dreary, silly old Britain, we responded with a hashtag campaign aimed at dampening down the threat of an anti-Muslim backlash… What a ridiculous crèche this country has become! I’m reminded of the words of Christopher Hitchens when he said  (half-jokingly) that if a Leftist found a venomous snake in their child’s bed, their first instincts would be to phone the RSPCA.

We’ve learnt nothing new over the last 7 days. ISIS have committed evil acts, but then we knew they would (somewhere). David Cameron’s decision to use our wonderful Tornado jets against Raqqa have very quickly returned an unpleasant consequence, but then we knew that would happen. The best the commentariat can do for now is to wish RAF bombs the greatest possible accuracy and the fires they generate the greatest possible heat.

Death to ISIS.

D, LDN

The West or Nothing.

Tags

America, America 911, American Liberty, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Coffee, Defend the modern world, Democracy, developed countries, European, Europeanisation, Facebook, Industrialised countries list, Islam, Liberalisation, Niall Ferguson, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, The West, The West versus the Rest, United States, West, West best, West is best, West versus the rest, Western culture, Western world, Western World developed countries, Westernisation

The Western World (Europe, Oceania, Japan, Israel and North America) is so often compared against the dusty wastelands of the Islamic world that a casual observer might think this disparity was an isolated one. It isn’t.

It is a vital truth that the Western world is not only a preferable environment to Planet Sharia, but to all other environments on Planet Earth.

I am writing this post as a self-conscious chauvinist. To me, there is simply no comparison between the relaxed, liberal manners of European culture and the chaotic, antiquated or eccentric alternatives offered by the third and second worlds.

Even those civilisations we can count upon as friends, like China, Africa, Indochina, India and Latin America are dizzyingly inferior to our own. We enjoy very special advantages confined to our range of habitation – advantages hewn violently over centuries, the glistening produce of bravery, rebellion and innovation.

Outside of this luxurious reserve, primitivism and bigotry can be found almost everywhere. In non-Muslim African countries, for example, girls from certain tribes have their breasts ironed flat to delay puberty and sexual development. The process is said to be mind-scarringly painful and is usually performed by the girls mother or grandmother. In democratic India, one particular ‘caste’, the Dalit, are considered ‘untouchable’ due to a perceived (wholly imagined) ancestral wretchedness. Members of this caste are condemned to the most menial professions and forbidden from inter-marrying with members of ‘superior’ categories. Likewise in Brazil – the land of toted post-racialism – the darker you are, the less likely you are to get on in life. With race an impossible concept (due to centuries of mixing) simple colorism – every bit as nasty as race prejudice – wears its clothes.

A majority of non-Western countries, including non-Muslim countries, approve of arranged (forced) marriages. This hideous idea means that young people never get to enjoy the romance of dating, seduction and sexual discovery, but are simply tacked on to a family friendly to their own. Those who rebel against the tradition and date outside their tribe or caste are subject to acid attacks and honour killings.

Speaking of violence, in Mexico (sunny, happy, vacation-friendly Mexico), neighbour of the great United States of America, there are more beheadings per year than in the entire Middle East. I’ll repeat that – in Mexico, there are more beheadings per year than in the entire Middle East. This unbelievable slaughter occurs only a slim river away from the peace and affluence of suburban Texas. By itself, this speaks volumes about the sharpness of contrast under discussion.

Despite the position of the far-right, the West isn’t actually a biological mass. Multiracial, Japanese and Jewish experiments have achieved (or even surpassed) the European standard. In the same spirit, Immigrants to the West can become naturally Western if they so desire, including people from the most Neanderthal backgrounds. Ayaan Hirsi Ali can no longer sensibly be compared to the inhabitants of pre-wheel Somalia, for example. She has become a Westerner, understands this and displays joy and gratitude for it. We all should, however native we consider ourselves.

As to the secret ingredient of the West (the cause of its distinction), I would nominate the legacy of Anti-Traditionalism; the breaking by axe of the formaldehyde jars preserving ancient mistakes. Westerners realise that the solemnities of royalty are a pantomime. We also can’t be impressed by ten-limbed, Elephant-headed deities, Chinese tea-making ceremonies that last 10 hours, competitively obedient wives, Buddhists staring at walls, insect-worshipping Jains or anything else that is completely out-of-place in a century of awesome material potential. The secret of Western success is a devotion to the real.

And only the real is of any worth; only it can be truly inspiring- the shimmer of the sun on skyscraper glass; the colourful stacks of wares at supermarkets the size of football fields. How luxurious and sane our countries have become. We should be prepared to kill millions to protect this.

For me at least, as far as modernity is concerned, the choice is ultimately not the West or Pakistan, but the West or nothing at all.

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.