Online Workshop Part 2: Can Eurabia Still be Averted?
Historian Bat Ye'or, who first coined the term "Eurabia", thinks that Europe's ties with the Arab-Islamic world are now so firmly entrenched and established that Eurabia is an irreversible fact. Europe will cease to be a Western, democratic continent, and will become an appendix to the Arab world, a civilization of dhimmitude employed to spread Jihad and further the cause of Islam on a global basis, while the original, non-Muslim population are held hostage in their own countries out of fear of Muslim violence. Do you think this is true, or can Eurabia still be reversed and Europe salvaged?I must admit there are certain parts of Europe that do seem to be beyond hope, or very close to it. ALL of the largest Dutch cities are projected to have a Muslim majority within a generation, as will several English, French, Belgian, Scandinavian and Spanish cities. I forsee several possible scenarios:
1. Eurabia.
The EU continues its transformation into a continent-wide organization with clear totalitarian leanings, and a very pro-Islamic stance. Europe's fate is sealed when Turkey is allowed into the Union, and becomes its largest member. Freedom of speech will be shut down, and any criticism of Islam banned. Eurabia will become a global center for Jihad activities, as the dhimmi taxpayers and infidel Western technology give a boost to the Ummah. For this reason, the Americans, the Israelis, the Indians, the Russians and maybe even the Chinese will have to crush Eurabia by brute force, as it will represent a grave security threat for them.
Muslims will be heavily concentrated in the major cities, and the dhimmi native population will retreat into the countryside. I believe something similar took place in the Balkans during Ottoman Turkish rule. The old nation states will thus slowly die, as their major cities, which constitute the brain and "head" of its culture, are cut off from the rest of the body. Europe's decline into Eurabia will be speeded up by the fact that millions of educated natives with the means to it will move to the USA or other nations. This trickle of Eurabian refugees wil eventually be slowed down by the authorities in the now totalitarian Europe, as it will erode the tax base. Native Europeans will simply be banned from leaving. There will be no war in Western Europe, as its civilization is already dead and very few will bother fighting for it. The only violence will be sporadic Islamic terror attacks to induce fear, and occasional Muslim mob assaults in European streets to remind the dhimmis who is boss. It is conceivable that the center of European civilization will move from Western Europe to Eastern Europe, but even Eastern Europe will be put under severe pressure from Muslims, both in the Middle East and in the West.
2. War.
Personally, I think this alternative is at least as likely as the above. It also contains several sub-scenarios, partly depending upon when the eventual war starts, and partly on whether there is still some Western pride and resistance left in Europe underneath the self-loathing and Multiculturalism:
The Pakistanization of Europe.
Muslims aren't numerous enough to control the entire continent. In the event of war, there will be mutual ethnic cleansing and Muslims will seize parts of Western Europe. For instance, a belt stretching from parts of Germany via Belgium and Holland to France, but maybe even regions within certain nation states. All of Europe will not be lost, but some parts will, and many others will de deeply damaged by the fighting. Much of our cultural treasures will burn. How things will go from there is difficult to predict. Perhaps this new "Pakistan" in the heart of Europe will be the source of constant instability and the staging ground for Jihad incursions into infidel areas, just as Pakistan is to India now. Perhaps we will see a slow reconquest of this area, possibly taking generations or even centuries.
Reconquista - The Second Expulsion of the Moors
Muslims strike too early, before they are ready to seize control over major chunks of Europe. It is possible to view the Jihad riots in France in this light. They overestimate their own power, and underestimate the strength that, despite everything, is still left in Europe. Once a full-blown civil war starts in one country, it can, and probably will, spread to other countries. We are now witnessing an example of this, as smaller "sympathy riots" have been staged by Muslims in Belgium, Holland, Germany and Denmark. Given the European Union's borderless nature, it is unlikely that war will be limited to one nation only. This will create a domino effect, and Muslims will be expelled from Europe yet again, after major bloodshed and millions of dead across the continent.
Global Civil War
Europe has been the primary staging ground for one cold and two hot world wars. It could become a major battlefield in an Islamic world war, too. A world war is already simmering, with Muslims clashes against Russia, Europe, Israel, China, India, the USA and Southeast Asia. Once the fighting starts in Europe, it could spread outside the continent and ignite a world war. This is the scenario that DP111 calls a "global civil war". It would become the worst and most destructive war in human history, involving nuclear weapons on both sides. It could completely destroy the Middle East and North Africa, deeply damage Europe, the Indian continent, and parts of Southeast Asia, and inflict serious casualties on the USA, Australia and Africa. Its secondary and economic ripples will be felt on all corners of the planet, uncluding the ones least involved in the actual fighting, such as Latin America and East Asia.
3. A Second Renaissance - Western Rebirth in Europe
Although I must admit that I find this scenario to be the least likely at this point, we should discuss the possibility of whether the Islamic threat will force the West to rethink its values and regain its strength. Can this be done, and how would this take place? Is it possible to avoid both major war and Eurabia or is this wishful thinking by now? The growth of Eurabia is closely tied to the growth of the EU. Perhaps we could derail Eurabia by dismantling the EU?
“Eurabia” Defined, by Andrew G. Bostom
This political agenda has been reinforced by (and now mirrors) the deliberate cultural transformation of Europe. Euro-Arab Dialogue Symposia conducted 20 to 25 years ago, i.e., in Venice (1977) and Hamburg (1983), included recommendations, below, that have been successfully implemented, accompanied by a deliberate, privileged influx of Arab and other Muslim immigrants, in enormous numbers:
• Coordination of the efforts made by the Arab countries to spread the Arabic language and culture in Europe and to find the appropriate form of cooperation among the Arab institutions that operate in this field. • Creation of joint Euro-Arab Cultural Centers in European capitals which will undertake the diffusion of the Arabic language and culture. • Encouragement of European institutions either at University level or other levels that are concerned with the teaching of the Arabic language and the diffusion of Arabic and Islamic culture. • Support of joint projects for cooperation between European and Arab institutions in the field of linguistic research and the teaching of the Arabic language to Europeans. • Necessity of supplying European institutions and universities with Arab teachers specialized in teaching Arabic to Europeans. • Necessity, when teaching Arabic, of emphasizing Arab-Islamic culture and contemporary Arab issues. • Necessity of cooperation between European and Arab specialists in order to present an objective picture of Arab-Islamic civilization and contemporary Arab issues to students and to the educated public in Europe which could attract Europeans to Arabic studies.
In the wake of the continuing French intifada, Bat Ye’or’s analyses have profound implications for Western Europe - which may be incapable of altering its Eurabian trajectory; her research may be even more important for the United States if it wishes to avoid Europe’s fate:
Th[e] Eurabian ethos operates at all levels of European society. Its countless functionaries, like the Christian [devshirme]-janissary slave soldiers of past Islamic regimes, advance a jihadist world strategy. Eurabia cannot change direction; it can only use deception to mask its emergence, its bias and its inevitable trajectory. Eurabia’s destiny was sealed when it decided, willingly, to become a covert partner with the Arab global jihad against America and Israel. Americans must discuss the tragic development of Eurabia, and its profound implications for the United States, particularly in terms of its resultant foreign policy realities. Americans should consider the despair and confusion of many Europeans, prisoners of a Eurabian totalitarianism that foments a culture of deadly lies about Western civilization. Americans should know that this self-destructive calamity did not just happen, rather it was the result of deliberate policies, executed and monitored by ostensibly responsible people. Finally, Americans should understand that Eurabia’s contemporary anti-Zionism and anti-Americanism are the spiritual heirs of 1930s Nazism and anti-Semitism, triumphally resurgent.
posted by Unknown @ 4:51 PM
17 Comments:
"The EU continues its transformation into a continent-wide organization with clear totalitarian leanings, and a very pro-Islamic stance"
Sweden has a diffrent approach, and take the lead, as usual:
http://simulev.blogspot.com/2005/11/foreign-politics.html
@ Fjordman:
Just thought you should check out the editorial in Sweden's largest daily newspaper (Dagens Nyheter) on the subject of immigrants, integration and islam:
http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=573&a=487074&previousRenderType=2
Fjordman,
If I had to vote on the most likely scenario, I would vote for number two, while much preferring number three.
It would be great to dismantle the EU as it exists today, since it doesn't seem to function very well. However, it seems unlikely at this stage of the game. A case in point is the existence of the UN. It began with good intentions, but has disintegrated into a corrupt body of evildoers--yet who (besides the US) is in favor of getting rid of it?
Great site, Fjordman - I have linked to you.
The Moai
Bjørn: You can never predict the future withy 100% certainty, no, but you can outline some very plausible alternatives. Wherever Islam has moved in elsewhere, it has either destroyed the original culture, or been forcibly expelled, such as Spain and by the Sikhs in Punjab. I see noe reason to expect any diiferent outcome in Europe, which leads me to believe that one of the two first scenarios will happen within the coming generation.
For all the talk about the muslim 'invasion' of Europe, the state which has done the most to promote muslim states in Europe is actually the US:
Exhibit 1: Bosnia
The US supported the Bosnian muslims throughout the war, allowing Iran to supply them with arms and jihad fighters, the same way it had allowed Pakistan to support fundamentalists in Afghanistan a decade earlier.
Exhibit 2: Kosovo
The US supported the muslim albanian KLA guerillas in Kosovo and, after three months of terror bombing of Serbian cities (bridges, power installations, roads, etc., the military was actually quite unscathed as the US planes didn't dare fly low enough to allow for precision bombing), they occupy Kosovo. Since then they've stood idly by as the remining christian population of the province is driven out and churches burned. Now the US is the strongest supporter for Kosovo to become Europe's second independent muslim state.
Exhibit 3: Turkey
The US is a strong supporter of Turkish membership of the EU, putting quite a lot of pressure on the EU members states to allow its ally into the fold.
Oskar: You're right, US policy towards Islamic nations has many flaws. Too many.
The future of Eurabia as I see it is close to what you call "the Pakistanization of Europe." I see it as more of a Continent-wide Yugoslavia scenario with several cities becoming larger and more horrible Sarajevos. Muslims will find themselves, as in Serbia, victims of nationalims and revived fascisms far more terrible and ruthless than Islamism can imagine.
Perhaps some areas will be completely cleansed of Europeans and run along Taliban-like codes but these will not survive long amid a Continent gripped by the fury of war and national/religious passions. They will lack the economic base to wage an effective war. Their lines of supply from Islamic countries will be tenuous at best.
This will result in the collapse of the EU and perhaps the UN as well. Turkey may wage war against several European nations and/or Russia.
In any case there will be unspeakable atrocities. This comflict will make the past few years seem like a Golden Age.
I don't understand Bjoern's point. I understand that he is saying we can't predict the future based upon history or demographic trends, or ideology, but if we can't use these, then how do we find policies to deal with anything?
Are we just blind men feeling an elephant in the dark, Bjoern? And, if that's how you see the world, then, what is truth at all? Are you a Postmodernist who believes that there is no truth?
I don't get it.
The Bad Monkey gives an example of someone who predicted the Iraq was. Now, here's someone who predicted the riots in France: Daniel Pipes.
And, I have been predicting that Europe will likely resort to Fascism in order to beat back the Muslims. My prediction is more longterm, and is not likely to happen for 10-20 years, but we do see that it people in Europe are beginning to turn to Fascist idealogues for answers.
Questions for you, Bjoern: How is it that Winston Churchill and G.K. Chesterson were able to look at the ideology of Communism (which is kind of a nice idea in theory) and predict that it would lead to murderous totalitarian states?
And how do we deal with any problem that comes up anywhere? We always look at the history, the ideas, and the demographics.
Seriously, Bjoern, could you help me out here? I really don't understand.
What is your proposed solution? Or, do you not even see a problem?
It will start, as these things always do, before anyone is ready. Everyone, the Islamists, the proto-dhimmis, the neo-nationalists, the sleepwalking middle class, thinks they have more time than they do. It may start more or less by accident, like WWI, through the act of a fringe player unaware of the forces involved or the stakes of the game.
As WWI began with the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, this war (which will be just as important and culturally destructive) may begin with the murder of a symbolic but politically unimportant figure.
There are many possible targets, from the Queen of England, a beloved figure in the English speaking world, to the Patriarchs of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Patriarchate is based in Istanbul. These figures have deep symbolic meaning for millions of Orthodox Christians, especially in Russia and Greece, but of which border Turkey. Last year Islamist threw a grenade over the wall into the Patriarchate without causing any damage. Of course the assassination of the Pope by Muslim terrorists would be the ultimate spark that lights the fire.
But it need not be a religious figure. Look at the response to the murder of Van Gogh, a minor and polarizing figure known only in Holland. Now imagine the reaction to the murder of a famous footballer or actor known throughout Europe.
Or a reverse scenario is possible. A nationalist or rightist murders a prominent Islamic figure, sparking a wave of Islamic terror across Europe. This leads to a crackdown by authorities or if not, a backlash that brings rightists to power.
Another possibility is a mega-attack, a chemical weapon or simply a massive suicide bomb or wave of bombs that succeed beyond the bombers plans and kills thousands and/or destroys symbolically important targets, a cathedral, a museum, the Chunnel. The fearful public then demands harsh goverment action. Some governments act; others are paralyzed and are incapable of taking action causing citizens to defend themselves.
The Islamist are not centralized. They cannot control the actions of their diverse cells or lone fanatics. Sooner or later someone will go too far and ignite nationalist responses that will sweep away the existing systems.
Hang on kids. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
Mark Steyn wrote about the recent Muslim riots, “As France this past fortnight reminds us, the changes in Europe are happening far faster than most people thought.” In a contradiction I’m sure he’ll appreciate, I think Steyn is at once too pessimistic and not pessimistic enough concerning Europe’s future in the Eurabian Civil War. He’s too pessimistic in that I do not believe that Europeans will submit to Islamization or flee the Continent in the face of ongoing conflict. Europe may have endured 2 or 3 generations frozen in an arctic multicultural wasteland but this is too weak a force to fully deface two dozen centuries of Western civilization. The European spirit sleeps inside the glacier. The heat from ten thousand fires will one day awaken it.
And this is why he is not pessimistic enough. The Eurabian Civil War is currently one sided. The Islamofascists are fighting against a vapor with the illusion of substance, a mist enveloping a somnambulant society. Sooner, far sooner than many believe, Europe will awaken and show itself for what it has always been: an aggressive, xenophobic, ethnarchy, jealous of its traditions, proud of its homogeneity, subject to enthusiastic waves of mass violence and enthralled by its angry gods (whether it’s Christ the Crusader King, Siegfried, Santiago Matamoros or some mutant deity as yet unborn). Elsewhere I have described this as neo-nationalism. The blinkered and stunned media will describe it as a backlash but it will only be the assertion of Europe’s true nature. The strengths that allow Islamofascism to succeed in its struggle with brittle, liberal democracies will prove of little use against a resurgent European nationalism. (Just imagine how a modern day Richelieu or Bismarck or Franco would have responded to the Madrid bombing. Reconquista indeed.) This is, of course, bad news for those of us who grew up in and care for liberal democracy and enjoy the freedom and prosperity it provides. European neo-nationalism will most likely be hostile to US interests and downright anti-Semitic. But European civilization existed long before the dawn of liberal democracy and will exist after its sunset. We currently languish in the twilight. The Islamists delude themselves that it is the dawn of the Muslim Age of the Restored Caliphate rather than the darkness into which they will be cast.
None of this will be pretty. The violence will be up-close and quite personal. Europe’s neo-nationalist future will be one filled with paranoia and fanaticism and blind, desperate struggle. Much of value will be lost. You may say that I am naïve; that Europeans have already submitted in the minds; that they are proto-dhimmis waiting, however reluctantly, to convert. But I say that thousands of years of ethnic fervor, cultural pride, fierce localism and passionate Faith are not erased in two or three generations. Civilization is more durable than that. However the civilization that endures is not the faithless, hedonistic, pre-packaged multicultural slop that we have known for 60 years. It is something else entirely.
Cross-posted here.
Pastorius' mention of G.K. Chesterton reminded me of a little-known fantasy novel by Chesterton
called 'The Flying Inn'. In this novel - written almost 100 years ago - Chesterton postulates a
(then) future Britain where an attempt is made to impose Islam on the English by a mixture of
da'wa, stealth invasion and collusion by a treacherous political and business elite.
One of the first things the pro-Islamist government does is to close all pubs and ban alcohol.
The soldier hero keeps the spirit of resistance alive by going around the country with a
clandestine 'pub' and supplying the workers with their beer etc. Eventually there is a popular
uprising and the workers defeat the Turkish/islamic army that has been secretly landed in Britain.
The book is written in a whimsical, humorous style, not very realistic to the modern reader, but
the treacherous politician (George Galloway anyone?) and the whining victimhood and taqiyya of the
muslim preacher character have a familiarity and resonance today which GKC could hardly have
imagined in his worst nightmare.
Worth tracking down for an amusing read - and compelling evidence that imaginative people can have
an impressive insight into possible futures.
BTW Fjordman, I have really enjoyed your blog - always informative and often inspiring - and I
shall miss it when you move to other things. I especially like discussions like the present
workshop about our less than wonderful future prospects in Europe. Such discussions may clarify
what we can do on a personal and collective level to minimise the catastrophes ahead (a pity that
the more popular blogs like LGF don't often take such a constructive stance.) I'm sure there will
be many like myself who will miss this site and also the masses of obscure news items that daily you
launch into the blogosphere. Can you recommend any other European sites that may help fill the large
gap left when you 'retire' (I already read - and recommend - the Brussels Journal and Non Passaran)?
An observation, if I may, then I'll move along.
I make no predictions as such about the future, it appears that you guys have that under control.
I will just state a fact.
Islam is it's own worse enemy.
Thats all I need to know.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
Listen Bjoern,
Last time I wrote to you, I was condescending and sarcastic. I then apologized when I realized you weren't simply a moonbat. But now, you are being condescending with me. Actually, I must admit, I'm not sure if, by Complexity Theory, you mean Chaos Theory, or complexity as it relates to computations, in which case I don't think the field of study you are referencing backs up the point you are trying to make.
I can assure you, though, I understand that there are many forces at work in any given situation. However, we are talking about macro-trends in society. In order to do so, we must generalize. It's like how in mathematics, Einsteinian physics is needed to analyze the world of atoms, while Newtonian physics will suffice for apples falling out of trees.
If you insist that we account for every sparrow falling, before we make any assertions about macro-trends in civilizations and cultures, then we will never be able to get anywhere.
(By the way, I am a former lefty. When I first began to change to whatever it is that I presently am, one of the first things I noticed is that my liberal friends would often attempt to shut down an argument by telling me things are more complex than that. That we need to understand the subtelties. That we need to be nuanced. Those are liberal dodges, unless they are resolved with a specific list of nuanced details, which you are not doing, my friend.)
Your answer to me ("we guess") is a pretty meaningless answer. At best, it is simply saying that when Fjordman makes predictions they would better be termed guesses. But, then, that is hardly an argument against what Fjordman is doing then, is it?
These riots, in short, are early battles in a continent-wide turf war.
It's a war authorities can't afford to lose. By accepting separatism, Europe is becoming a house divided against itself.
As all Americans know, a house divided against itself cannot stand.
So, until we build a model, then we really can't do a whole lot. Is that it?
You say you asked the commenters on this blog what they propose, and the answers were disturbing. Two questions:
1) Are Fjordmans proposals disturbing to you?
2) What do you propose?
The reason I questioned whether you were a postmodernist is because if one can't understand trends in society, unless he accounts for all variables, and ponders how they may interact with each other, than one can not ever reach any conclusions.
And, once again you are being condescending to me, with your comment about my "brilliant political insight." I am not against being nuanced, or recognizing subtelties. I was merely observing that people often use those words to shut down the conversation, which seems to be what you are trying to do.
Nuance is simply recognizing specifics; the component parts that go to make up a process, or situation. The truth is, all things, whether they be situations, processes, or objects are made up of an infinite amount of component parts. That's why we can't account for every sparrow falling. At what point would you be satisfied that someone has listed enough specifics to have "created a model."
bjoern - you claim that I 'just imagine scary scenarios.' The question is not whether my imaginings are scary. The question is are they plausible. Islamists threatened the Queen of England just this week. They have repeatedly threatened the Pope who they regard as the chief of blasphemers. Islamists in Turkey have threatened the Orthodox Patriachate in Istanbul and lobbed grenades into their compound. There is a very good chance that Islamists will attempt to assassinate one or all of these figures. They may not success but I believe an attempt is likely.
I do not consider this far-fetched or implausible. Do you? If so why? Are these idle threats? What prevents extremists in the UK from such an attack?
More importantly, how do you imagine people will respond to such attempts? Will every single one of the billion Catholics around the world shrug off an attack on the Pope, hold peaceful rallies and ask for more understanding and tolerance? Or will some become enraged and seek vengence?
Islamists have made their plans clear for anyone who wants to read them. Are they serious? Do they have a history of following through with their plans? Are they sincere in their fanatical beliefs?
I believe the answers to all these questions is YES. I believe the statements of our enemies should be the starting point for predicting the future. If they go through with their plans (which they have a history of doing) what will be the likely response by the targeted groups?
This is not science-fiction. The threats are real. The responses, from passive resignation to mass vengence, will also be real.
Post a Comment
<< Home