On June 18, 2018, I published the essay, "Racism--and Europe's five-step plan for suicide" (here). In that essay, I wrote something that might offend:
Here’s a statement that’s a paraphrase of what is most likely a racist, fake news story. I’ve edited the original so as to delete what’s objectionable (here). It could summarize Europe’s fate:
“In Auschwitz, Europe burned a culture. Europe destroyed ‘chosen people’--truly chosen because what they produced changed the world for the better. The contributions of this people are felt in all areas of life: science, art, medicine...
These are the people we burned. And now, because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism (that killed the chosen), we have opened our gates to millions of people who reject everything we stand for".
...These millions seem ...more racist than Europeans. Th[eir] new racism has little regard for Western beliefs. It prefers Sharia law, not freedoms, rights or equality. For some, it prefers to conquer Europe (here)
These were harsh words for Europe. But recently, we saw someone else---from Europe itself, no less--suggesting a similar sentiment.
On July 5, 2018, an essay appeared presenting a conversation with a French writer named, Renaud Camus (here). Camus is supposedly known as a writer who may have been first to coin the phrase, 'Great replacement', a phrase which refers to "the reported colonization of Western Europe by immigrants from North Africa and the Middle East" (ibid).
...These millions seem ...more racist than Europeans. Th[eir] new racism has little regard for Western beliefs. It prefers Sharia law, not freedoms, rights or equality. For some, it prefers to conquer Europe (here)
These were harsh words for Europe. But recently, we saw someone else---from Europe itself, no less--suggesting a similar sentiment.
On July 5, 2018, an essay appeared presenting a conversation with a French writer named, Renaud Camus (here). Camus is supposedly known as a writer who may have been first to coin the phrase, 'Great replacement', a phrase which refers to "the reported colonization of Western Europe by immigrants from North Africa and the Middle East" (ibid).
In this July essay, Camus says:
"Europe persists in expiating, or believing they are expiating, the horrors inflicted on Jews during the last war by importing onto its territory millions of people who, as soon as they are here, have nothing more urgent than to inflict horrors on Jews. Racism turned Europe into a field of ruins; anti-racism is making it a hate-filled slum. In both instances, the first victims are the Jews" (ibid).
Camus' July's comments echo what I wrote--and quoted--in June. But there's a difference.
Camus' July's comments echo what I wrote--and quoted--in June. But there's a difference.
First, we do agree on certain points. For example, Camus states that Europe has become like Israel. Both Israel and Europe, he says, are threatened from all sides.
I agree with this specific comparison. Both Israel and Europe face an existential threat from Islam.
Then, too, Camus sees a difference between the two places. Unlike Israelis, he suggests, Europeans don't have the same attachment to their land, "the same fidelity to their membership, the same spirit of resistance" (ibid).
I agree with that, too. Officials in Europe don't believe Islam threatens them. Europeans don't yet agree they must actively resist Islamic 'pressure' if they wish to retain their traditional, Western European culture.
I agree with this specific comparison. Both Israel and Europe face an existential threat from Islam.
Then, too, Camus sees a difference between the two places. Unlike Israelis, he suggests, Europeans don't have the same attachment to their land, "the same fidelity to their membership, the same spirit of resistance" (ibid).
I agree with that, too. Officials in Europe don't believe Islam threatens them. Europeans don't yet agree they must actively resist Islamic 'pressure' if they wish to retain their traditional, Western European culture.
But while I agree with Camus on these two points, I do not agree with his suggested solution. Yes, he understands the problem: both Europe and Israel face an uncompromising anti-Western Muslim-inspired culture-and-religious challenge. For a solution to these challenges, Camus believes Europe should form an alliance with Israel so that, together, they can defend their cultures from the 'colonization' threat each faces. He believes Europe has a lot to learn from Israelis. He believes Israel can teach Europe how to survive the culture assault it faces.
Clearly, he believes such an alliance would benefit both places. He may even be suggesting that Europe's survival depends, to a certain extent, on Israeli help.
Clearly, he believes such an alliance would benefit both places. He may even be suggesting that Europe's survival depends, to a certain extent, on Israeli help.
His comments are intriguing. But I think he's got it wrong. I don't believe Europe's elites (its decision-makers) see Israel as an ally in a coming clash with Islam. Quite the reverse appears to be true: the EU works too aggressively to support Muslim animus towards Israel (here) to create any kind of alliance to defend against that animus.
Europe's elites are also not ready to declare they face an existential threat. They're not prepared to stand against Islam's aggressiveness. They are certainly not ready to believe Israel is qualified to help them with anything.
Europe's elites show no sign they consider Israel a helpmate. They see Israel more as an enemy than a partner. Indeed, Europe has become so anti-Israel that some now believe Europe has decided that destroying Israel is in its national interest (here).
Europe's elites are also not ready to declare they face an existential threat. They're not prepared to stand against Islam's aggressiveness. They are certainly not ready to believe Israel is qualified to help them with anything.
Europe's elites show no sign they consider Israel a helpmate. They see Israel more as an enemy than a partner. Indeed, Europe has become so anti-Israel that some now believe Europe has decided that destroying Israel is in its national interest (here).
There's an ugly European truth hidden beneath this ugly anti-Israelism. That ugly truth is, it may be too late for Europe to defend itself against Islam.
Europe believes too much in the redemptive power of open borders. Its elites still believe too zealously in a multiculturalism which posits that all cultures are so equal no one culture (even its own) could ever be more important to Europe than another.
Europe believes too much in the redemptive power of open borders. Its elites still believe too zealously in a multiculturalism which posits that all cultures are so equal no one culture (even its own) could ever be more important to Europe than another.
This self-denying sense of equality could be Europe's fatal flaw. Because of this commitment to cultural 'equality', Europe is unwilling to stand up for its Western ideals.
It slowly caves to the demands of Islam. It yields before the insistence of Islam.
It slowly caves to the demands of Islam. It yields before the insistence of Islam.
Europe's multicultural delusions eat away at its survivability. Its elites are too enamored of its migrants to reach out to Jews for survival. If, as Camus suggests, Israel can teach Europe how to survive a coming clash with Islam, Europe will surely fail. Its bias against Jews is simply too strong and, because of the growing power of an anti-Jew Islam in Europe, that bias will only grow stronger, not weaker.
Camus is wrong. Europe will never turn to Israel for help. It will yield to Islam.
Europe will fall. Its anti-Jew bias seals its fate.
No comments:
Post a Comment