Monday, November 21, 2005

The Second Fall of Rome

I read from time to time that the European Union is compared to the Roman Empire. Most of these comparisons are not very apt, but here is one that I find intriguing. Julius Caesar was assassinated because he wanted to crown himself king, and openly threatened and challenged the established order in the Roman Republic. Not a popular move among the powerful elite in the Senate, who reminded Caesar that Rome had become a Republic precisely because they had rebelled against the "tyrant" kings of old.

His successor Octavian
, better known today as Caesar Augustus, had seen what happened to Julius Caesar. Although no less ambitious, he was smarter than Caesar. He understood that openly overthrowing the old order would trigger a lot of resistance from the established power elites. He is considered the first and one of the most important Roman Emperors (27 BC to AD 14), but he downplayed his own position by preferring the traditionally oligarchic title of princeps, usually translated as "first citizen". He also preserved the outward form of the Roman Republic. He thus paid lip service to the old elite of the Republic, and veiled the changes to make them seem less threatening and upsetting to the public. He was king, but did not call himself king.

Some might see a parallel to present-day EU. Up to 80 per cent of national laws come from Brussels, and many of them are made in secret, as in dictatorships such as North Korea and Cuba. What is then the point of holding national elections, and is Western Europe still truly democratic? Just as in Octavian's Rome, the real power has been moved elsewhere, but the old order is retained as a democratic fig leaf in order not to upset the public too much.

Of course, this is where the similarities end. Octavian's rule marked the beginning of the most powerful and dynamic period in Roman history. That is hardly the case with the EU today. The Jihad-riots in France look more like the fall of the Roman Empire several centuries later, when the barbarians immigrated in huge numbers and caused the now weakened civilization to collapse in large parts of Western Europe. The population movements we are witnessing now are the largest and fastest in human history. In Europe, they can only be compared to the period often referred to as the Great Migrations, following the disintegration of the Roman Empire. However, during the 4th and 5th centuries, the total human population of the world was in the order of 200 million. Today, it is 30 times larger than that, and still growing fast. We also have communications that can transport people anywhere on earth within hours, and media that show ordinary people how much better life is in other countries. On top of that, the Romans didn't have human rights lawyers advocating that millions of barbarians be let into their lands. Is it a coincidence that the last time we had migrations like this was when large parts of the European continent suffered a complete civilizational breakdown? Is that what we are witnessing now? The second fall of Rome?

The situation becomes even worse when we enter another factor: Islam. The Islamic world is at war with pretty much everybody, everywhere. Both Thailand and the Philippines, countries where the Muslim population is not much larger than it is in some Western European countries, are facing war. Countries such as France, Holland and Sweden could soon reach a point where the Muslim population will create something akin to civil war, as it already has in the above mentioned nations. Even though this conflict may start out as civil wars in a handful of countries, it could spiral out of control and spread to much of the continent, dragging in foreign fighters from the Arab world. The Islamic world is now at war with most of the major powers on the planet at the same time, from the USA to India and from Russia to Western Europe. It is a real possibility that we will get a full-blown world war because of these events. If so, I don’t think this will happen 50 years from now, but within the coming generation.

As Mark Steyn points out, the Jihad in the streets of France looks increasingly like the early skirmishes of an impending Eurabian civil war, brought on by massive Muslim immigration and multicultural stupidity. And it is by no means limited to France. Law and order is slowly breaking down in major and even minor cities across the European continent, and the streets are ruled by aggressive gangs of Muslim youngsters. At the same time, Europeans pay some of the highest tax rates in the world. We should remind our authorities that the most important task of the state - some would even claim it should be the only task of the state - is to uphold the rule of law. Since it is becoming pretty obvious that this is no longer the case in Eurabia, we have to question whether these taxes are legitimate anymore, or whether they are simply disguised Jizya paid in the form of welfare to Muslims and our new Eurocrat aristocracy. Although not exactly the Boston Tea Party, perhaps the time now has come for a pan-European tax rebellion: We will no longer pay taxes until our authorities restore law and order and close the borders for Muslim immigration.

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.

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 foresee 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 to 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 will 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. Islam isn't destroying Europe, Europe has destroyed itself. Just as a patient with AIDS may formally die from flu or even a common cold, the real cause is the long, slow decay of his immune system. It resembles euthanasia on an entire civilization: Europe is tired of living. Islam just puts it out of its misery.

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. Islam is nonsense and a failure at producing a stable and civilized society, but it is a highly successful warrior creed, specialized at plundering others. The basic rule is that the areas Muslims have taken into possession remain in Islamic hands, while the native population and culture is slowly eradicated. If this holds true for us today, then parts of Western Europe are already lost, and will indeed become Eurabia as Bat Ye'or predicts. There are not too many instances I know of where areas once under the sway of Islam have been reclaimed by infidels. The most obvious is of course Spain and the Iberian Peninsula, where the Reconquista took quite a few centuries. I know the Sikhs have kicked Muslims out of Punjab, India. Parts of present-day Israel could be counted, although Arabs and Muslims are trying very hard to wipe Israel off the map. And maybe some of China's Western provinces could be included. Islam has not been eradicated there, but it is visibly retreating as Chinese authorities are suppressing any signs of rebellion and sending in large numbers of Han Chinese immigrants into the area.

What these examples have in common is that both the Christians in Spain, the Sikhs in India and the Jews in Israel were fighting Islam with powerful religious convictions of their own. The Chinese are not usually very religious, but they have an equally strong, even ruthless nationalism and belief in their own civilization. If history is any guide, today's decadent, bored, post-religious and post-nationalist Europe will be no match for Islam, unless it rediscovers a belief in its own culture and a will to defend it. This will have to happen soon, or the Islamic demographic conquest of much of the continent will be an irreversible fact, anyway. The result of this will then either be Eurabia or a Pakistanization of Europe, the way we have already seen for generations in the Balkans. This is not paranoia, just a basic understanding of what Islam is and a careful reading of history.

2. War.

Personally, I think this alternative is at least as likely as the above "Eurabia" scenario. 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 be deeply damaged by the fighting. Many 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.

Of course, it could be more than one Muslim region. Kosovo and in part Bosnia are functioning as Islamic bridgeheads in Europe at this moment. From British India there were 2 Pakistans created West Pakistan (present Pakistan) and East Pakistan (present Bangladesh). There was also an attempt to create a South Pakistan (present Andhra Pradesh state - then called Hyderabad state) but it was put down militarily. There could be several mini-Pakistans created all over the place. In fact present day Kosovo walks, talks and looks like a mini-Pakistan. The "zones" in France sound suspiciously like Muslim "mohallas" in India although the situation is not as bad as in France. Half a million Kashmiri Hindus live in refugee camps in New Delhi near the centers of the government and everybody ignores them. The votes of 150 million Muslims are more important than half a million Kashmiri Hindu refugees who have no political power. You might see similar situations in Europe - for example the French living in refugee camps in Paris near the city centre and the French leader go around spouting Arabic/Urdu poetry - and the regular people in France ignore them because it is too unpleasant to face reality.


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. 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. Or a reverse scenario is possible. A nationalist or rightist murders a prominent Islamic figure, sparking a wave of Islamic terror across Europe. 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 Channel. The fearful public then demands harsh government action. Some governments act; others are paralyzed and are incapable of taking action causing citizens to defend themselves. The Islamists are not centralized. They cannot always control the actions of their diverse cells or lone fanatics. Sooner or later someone will go too far.

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 following the unrest in France. 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. It will start out as a Yugoslavia scenario with several cities becoming large Sarajevos. Muslims will find themselves, as in Serbia, victims of nationalism and revived Fascism. 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. The Arab world will support the Muslims and will prolong the war, but they won't win it. Turkey may wage war against several European nations and/or Russia, but they will lose, too.

This situation could trigger the rise of neo-Fascism and neo-nationalism, and maybe the downfall of European democracy. The strengths that allow Islamofascism to succeed in its struggle with brittle, liberal democracies will prove of little use against a resurgent European nationalism. 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. 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.

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. Or perhaps we could call it the Multicultural world war, just as WW2 was a Fascist war and the Cold War was a Communist war. 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 of "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, including the ones least involved in the actual fighting, such as Latin America and East Asia.

What we are seeing in the West are the opening salvoes of the continuation of the Jihad against Christendom that was brought to a close at Vienna in 1683. The new onset has come about as a direct consequence of allowing Muslim immigration to the West. Muslims are mandated to the Jihad and it is foolish of us to expect that they will refrain from doing so. It is our foolishness that gave them the opportunity to do so from within. Muslims and their religion are not yet ready to accept pluralism, democracy and free thinking. Democracy is in fact incompatible with Islam, as many Muslim imams have openly stated. That is their interpretation of the Koran. It should therefore come as no surprise to us, that Muslims in the West are waging Jihad against us. In their eyes, if we didn't realise that this would happen, the fault lies with us and not them. And they're right.

I do not think our societies, geared as they are to free and open thought, can continue with this continuous assault on freedom. If this assault is not brought to a halt soon, then free society will start to perish, and with that the economy. It may not be evident immediately, but perish it will in the fullness of time. If the current trend of increasing conflict continues, then we are irrevocably headed in the direction of a major armed conflict with the Islamic world. This is also going to lead to a civil war within Europe of unimaginable proportions. Europe's civil wars (WW 1 and 2) have not exactly been powder-puff affairs. Each day brings news of events that seem to bring us to that inevitable reckoning. We do not wish to fight for religion but we are being engaged in a religious conflict, quite against our will. Our politicians find it difficult to imagine that we are in a religious conflict. So passé - that sort of thing went out of fashion in the Middle Ages. It is all so pointless and avoidable. Time is short, and we need to act now to avert a human tragedy.

As poster DP111 says, we will easily win a full scale war with the Islam. What worries me is that in the event of a nuclear event in the West, we will rapidly go for the THIRD CONJECTURE option. Over the last two years I have stated on LittleGreenFootballs and Jihad/Dhimmi Watch that our inevitable large scale nuclear response, will also shatter the foundations of our own civilisation. Our Judeo-Christian civilisation has a built-in guilt complex, and we will not be able to sustain the shock of our victory bought at such expense. That is why the war option is not really a good one unless, unless we can re-define what this war is about. However, if we do NOT carry the war to the enemy with a correctly defined moral and political purpose, we will not be able to have public backing for the war. The Jihad in the meantime will continue, for in the eyes of the Jihadis and the Muslim world, they have a clear moral and religious purpose, and divinely sanctioned to boot.

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? Is there something we can do to avoid the breakdown of European democracy, either to an increasingly totalitarian Eurabia or to a resurgence of neo-Fascism?

The Jihadis have a clear moral purpose, and thus we, too, have to define an even more powerful moral argument as to why our cause is more just, more moral and better - not just to our public, whose unwavering support we need, but to many Muslims around the world. Hugh Fitzgerald from Jihad Watch recommends the containment option: Islam cannot be reconciled with Western ways, which means that we need physical separation as much as possible. Separation recognises, that at this moment in time, Islam and democracy are irreconcilable. Thus a separation leaves hope for the future for everybody. A war, which is where we are headed, will stop their progress, as well as cause a split within humanity that will be hard to patch up. The basic impulse of Islam is to expand into Infidel territory. Unable to do so, it will collapse quite quickly in historic terms, and thus release the 1.2 billion souls in its enslavement and bring about true freedom for them. What more can one ask for. To regain our moral purpose, we can thus cast our struggle against Islam as the emancipation of a billion slaves from a Fascist ideology. Which is indeed what it is.




“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.

11 Comments:

At November 21, 2005 2:46 PM, Blogger John Sobieski said...

I believe the civil war scenario is the most likely. While Europe does suffer from ennui, I do not believe the final transformation to Eurabia will be done with a whimper.

Europe must not fall.

John Sobieski

 
At November 21, 2005 8:24 PM, Blogger CJB said...

The civil war scenario is the most likely because, as you note, it will begin before anybody really notices, and because it includes variations of all the other possible scenarios.

The process toward dhimmification of Europe begins with the introduction of Sharia law, first in "limited cases" & then in limited regions. These "sharia communities" will be established within national regions such as the Parisian Muslim suburbs, or the industrial regions of Malmo or Rotterdam.

Some Europeans will adapt to their dhimmi status, too cynical of their own culture to fight back. Some Europeans however, will reject this development and advocate expulsion. The Europeans who fight back will include right-wing extremist groups, such as Le Pen's National Front, and those who would not normally think of themselves as racist or fascist: Christians. Violence & ethnic cleansing will involve both Muslims & non-Muslims population transfers between "sharia communities" & ethnic European communities. Cross border terrorist raids will be mounted from the Sharia communities. Counter attacks will be launched, and before the editors of Le Monde look up from their morning coffee and notices, civil war will be burning across Europe.

 
At November 22, 2005 1:46 AM, Blogger Imperial Knights of Bacchus said...

Howdy Fjordman!

I might be just a bit more optimistic than you. I do not believe that our continent is doomed. If we believe that, and give up even before we have tried to fight then we have given the Evil ones the victory at no cost. That must not happen.

I feel that the times we live in now in many ways have much in common with the pre-WWII years. Those who see the danger of Islam are labelled as racists, and ridiculed. With few exceptions, the Danish PM Fogh Rasmussen being one of them, the political leaders around Europe to day are all Chamberlains in our time. “Peace in our time”.

Like our own government in the pre war years, seeking pacifism and avoiding spending money on the military so they should not provoke the Nazi dictator… Our politicians today are vague when addressing problems everybody knows about, and gives in to demands just to avoid confrontations.

This is not just a problem with our politicians, but also our state church, with people like Einar Gelius are giving into demands. Gelius have even suggested to turn churches in to mosques (read Aftenposten, or my blogg), and our bishops have called for a more liberal and open immigration policy, as it is not open enough already.

60 years of living in the shadow of a communist dictatorship, socialism, and two world wars have institutionalized us in sleep pacifism and no aggression, even in self defence. However I do feel that tensions are high. We might not have reached a “critical level” of tension yet, but when that happens, I believe a tiny spark will cause an outbreak of violence, a war.

I do not believe that war… which might now be unavoidable (and I favour a war) will be the cause to the collapse of Europe. A Eurabia will not be in the interest of the remaining free world, and not at least for the USA. We will need to be liberated, either by ourselves alone or with help. We must not forget that our new allies in Eastern Europe so far have close to zero Muslim population, and that the conquest of Europe not is the final goals for the Muslims. They want world domination. If Europe would fall, that would take them much closer to their goal.

What I find most interesting thou, is how the western European nations will handle the crisis when a warlike situation will surface. Will they be able to have a loyal military that will fight, or will the armies disintegrate and militias surface to do their job… The governments might be too perplexed to fire against what they see as their own “citizens”. A temporary fall of democracy might happen…

But like Europe managed to rise from the ashes after the last war, we should again as before manage to survive like the bird phoenix.

High Mage
Imperial Knights of Bacchus

 
At November 22, 2005 9:15 AM, Blogger Cosmophant said...

Fjordman: The Jihadis have a clear moral purpose, and thus we, too, have to define an even more powerful moral argument as to why our cause is more just, more moral and better - not just to our public, whose unwavering support we need, but to many Muslims around the world. Once we have such a clear moral purpose, then indeed we can go to full scale war...

Samuel Huntington says: "The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."

So I say, we only need moral good enough to make us do the best in applying organized violence.

Lawrence Auster thinks: "Any hope that we can save ourselves rests on the assumption and hope that the world will be abandoning its liberalism"

The only hope for the West?
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/004542.html

All hopes for the future assume the end of liberalism
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/004549.html


So Fjordman, when you talk about "powerful moral arguments" it sounds to me that you are searching for another universal and sophisticated idea along the line of liberalism. I say, it's best to take away all such ideas and stay with the naked simple survival. Consider that regardless of the powerfulness of the moral argument, any group of white people strongly defending themselves will be called Nazis by their enemies, since this is completely demoralizing (and sohpisticated powerful moral arguments do not bite back).

So this is the deal that would work, I figure. Our moral argument is to save our lives and the lives of our sons and daughters, and fathers and mothers. Also, we do not like people who call us Nazis, so we'll kill everybody who call us Nazis until there are no more left of them (as I see it, it's the only way to oppose this effectively, any kind of "powerful" idea will be too weak).

Above I assume the situation of separatism, with broken-down national states (no better way to get rid of liberalism than to get rid of its institutions), Muslims controlling the cities, Westerners on the country-side as armed citizenry.

For Europeans the solution is to stop thinking globally, and start acting locally.

 
At November 23, 2005 1:44 PM, Blogger oskar said...

Some comments regarding the civil war scenario:

I think developments in Bosnia/the Balkans can be quite useful in in understanding this. B

asically, the problems there began when muslims all of a suddenly began seeing themselves as a "people" with a right to their own nation, or at least a nation where they would be the controlling majority.

Even though the Serbs had the sense to fight this they were stabbed in the back by the US and the West Europeans, who, blinded by the ideals of multiculturalism, didn't see why the Serbs didn't want to live in a state dominated by muslims (and founded and ruled by a hard-core muslim like Itzebegovic).

Next time a civil war/unrest erupts in Europe (or the US for that matter) because muslims demand their own state/jurisdiction I hope we have the sense to fight back!

 
At November 27, 2005 1:52 AM, Blogger M said...

Great essay. The danger of Eurabia may well be the catalyst for a true European Union of the future. AN EU that recognizes the distinct cultural diversity of its various peoples within the matrix of Pan-Europa. Europe has experienced two world wars in one century. She understandably wishes for the ideal of peaceful multiculturalism to triumph. It's too bad that this idealistic intention does not account for the monomaniacal jihad mentality within Islam.
Civil War will come to Europe within five years or less.

 
At November 27, 2005 3:08 AM, Blogger lindsey said...

"AN EU that recognizes the distinct cultural diversity of its various peoples within the matrix of Pan-Europa. "

So, you're saying you want to live in the Matrix? Wow. When it comes to the EU, the only way to safeguard freedom there is for the EU to become just a free trade pact. Preferably, there would be a free trade zone including Japan, Aus, US, Europe, etc.

 
At November 29, 2005 6:42 AM, Blogger Martell Isabella said...

Fjordman; you are the King! "The second fall of Rome" was a brilliant essay. Let it be said that many here in America love Europe, European cultures, and of course, Europeans-we are,largely,of European descent ourselves by blood and culture. Western civilization must not slip into a medieval tyranny of Islamo-fascism. Stand up to them, we'll be there.

 
At December 13, 2005 4:17 AM, Blogger Milan Oskoryp Sr. said...

It is hard to express terror of picture so realistically you painted in your essay.I live in Canada,however,Internet gives to me possibility to be at home in Europe.Now at ends of my days I want to cry,where is Europe of mine youth,ideas.Country without communism,people in worse shape than when there was common enemy.I try to wake up few people I know and to make them to see danger,you so artfully describe in "Second fall....
Coldness of no interest of people who do not see and do not want to see danger around the corner waiting .........
I hope there is going to be generation of Europeans or army across the Atlantic Ocean to save and to wake up Europe.
"Fjordman" is going to be on top of mine browser.
Thank you.

 
At December 15, 2005 6:00 PM, Blogger Odin said...

Excellent essay. Good to find you on the net. I'm an American living in Oslo. Based on the national news here and my conversations with people here, I have to say war is inevitable. It is incredibly sad to see this culture destroyed from the inside out. I came here because of the beauty and intelligence of this culture. A short 10 years ago there was so much less violence and crime. I think Europe is in denial, America is fighting the war right now, and Europe will not join till it is almost too late.
It is incredible to talk to Norwegians that view America as the enemy in this conflict, while Islamic saboteurs are plotting against them using Norway's free society and using the countries own money. Sadly, the only hope I see is the islamic fanatics attacking enough cities, so that Europe cannot deny what is happening. Simialr to Pearl Harbour, there will be no more dodging the facts that the enemy will not be subdued by talk. They can't be thrown out, they are citizens, the only cure I see is cutltural survival based on a common idea of maintaining your own values and agressively defending these values at every turn. The only way this will occur is after some big attacks. In Madrid they were cowards, in France, denial, in Århus, too nice probably. I welcome this war, I love America and I love Norway, they are both worth preserving!! So the sooner the better, bring it on.

 
At December 29, 2005 12:09 AM, Blogger yaman said...

Biggotry presented in paragraph form is oh so much more intelligent sounding.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home