Part of my occasional Seeing Things series.
I’ve been thinking about Paul Weston’s essays (parts 1 and 2) on civil war in Europe, and had a few thoughts on reading something recent. I begin to ask myself questions. What if Paul Weston is wrong? What if civil war is not inevitable? What if we die out, not with a bang, but a whimper?
What if civil war in Europe were a preferable alternative?
I was reading this piece at the excellent Brussels Journal and had a little thought when I read the following passage:
"Fjordman once wrote that the European elites have traded international warfare for civil war at home. The European peoples will not subject themselves to socialist Eurabia indefinitely. The people, betrayed by the actions of their own leadership caste, now find themselves culturally impaired, disarmed, overtaxed, gradually losing their civil liberties, tied-up-and-muzzled in the face of an unending stream of vile abuse, violence, petty crime, ingratitude, insensitivity, and exploitation by tens of millions of Third-World foreigners who should never have been allowed to settle in Europe in the first place. They will not be satisfied with sullen submission for much longer. Looking in vain for leaders, for political parties that have the courage to state that the Emperor’s new clothes are just tattered figments of utopian insanity, simple-minded people may fall for fringe neo-fascist leaders who, almost alone, seem to see what the townsmen on the street see. It is the great luck of Europe’s priestly caste that parties like the Vlaams Belang, SVP and BNP exist, for they too see and speak the truth, and provide an alternative that the common folks can join instead of supporting fringe movements that may expound the truth in some ways but spout lunacy ( e.g. "the Jews did it") in others. If civil wars and Hitler redux are to be avoided in Europe, it will only be because parties like Vlaams Belang have ascended to power and have given a voice and a vent to the suppressed aspirations and anger of many millions. So if Nazi skinheads applaud VB, therein lies the hope that violent sociopaths be transformed into content, enfranchised citizens. It’s no different from MoveOn crazy fringe lefties showing at the Democratic Party’s convention."
The thought that occured to me on reading this was, has Paul Weston considered writing on not if Civil War in Europe is inevitable, but if it might be desirable? Mr Weston writes of a possibly inevitable bloodbath on the soil of Europe which, in his words, would make WW2 ‘look like a bun fight’. But, looking at the situation, I begin to wonder if a European civil war would be that bloody, or if having a European civil war would really be so bad.
Let me explain my reasoning. Takuan Seiyo makes an excellent point that "if Nazi skinheads applaud VB, therein lies the hope that violent sociopaths be transformed into content, enfranchised citizens". Well, I don’t know if Nazi skinheads are violent sociopaths or not, but I do know that JFK was on to something when he said that ‘those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable’. Certainly, there may be those who would say that the islamification of Europe is a peaceful revolution, but such people would do better bouncing off padded walls than attempting to discuss such matters. Islam is and always has been a baleful, malignant foreign influence in relation to Europe, and a takeover by such a force would not be a revolution, but would be an invasion. In point of fact, it is an invasion.
The problem is that the waters are muddied, and badly so. In a paragraph discussing the "the Western white elite’s endless preoccupation with racism and perceived xenophobia", Takuan Seiyo makes reference to Charles Johnson (of LGF) making a ‘kneejerk overreaction’, presumably this is a reference to Johnson’s lambasting of the BNP in a recent post on LGF. LGF is not, of course, the only counter-jihad blog which runs against the BNP, and that’s the problem. Despite the plentiful evidence that multiculturalism is a failed abomination of a social science experiment, despite the massive evidence that the legacy and activity of the Frankfurt School’s Gramscian marxism is destroying all Western nations from within, despite the fact that no mainstream political party will touch these issues with a bargepole, otherwise sensible people rant and rail against the BNP and similar parties. And why? Because of some perceived, alleged ‘racism’ or latent ‘fascism’.
There are many issues which could be discussed here, not least of which the complete lack of definition of the terms ‘racist’ and ‘fascist’ in their contemporary usage, but that would detract too much from the main point here, so that will have to be ‘another story, for another time’. The key thing is that, for a transient (and utterly useless) false sense of moral superiority, even the people with their eyes open to the Islamic threat will jump up and down shouting ‘racist!’, ‘fascist!’ etc, etc, ad nauseam. As tiresome and puerile as this is, it also creates a deeper problem. It ensures that the only political parties with their nation’s best interests in mind will not be elected. For if even those awake to the islamic threat won’t go to the booths for these parties, what chance that the populace at large will? No, the BNP, the Front National, Vlaams Belang, et al, are highly unlikely to be voted into power in the near future.
This is a massive problem. If the BNP, Front Nationale, etc don’t ascend to power in the way Takuan Seiyo hopes for, then EUrabia is the inevitable consequence, and soon. Recent EU directives have called for millions more immigrants into Europe to make up for the declining native population (for some reason, providing incentives for the indigenous people to reproduce didn’t occur to anyone), and the increased drive for legislation to ‘promote tolerance’ is observable everywhere, from legislation against incitement to ‘homophobia’, to legislation against ‘incitement to religious hatred’, to proposed legislation to force bloggers to pay taxes and need licenses for blogging . Not to mention existing abuses of legislation to arrest and convict a ma
n of ‘racially motivated disorderly behaviour’ on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, with the only ‘witness’ of an offence alleged to have occurred in public telling the court " I could not swear to the words I did hear". Whether one subscribes to the Eurabia hypothesis, as I do, or sees the unfurling events as merely the catastrophic and ‘unfortunate’ results of decades of governmental incompetence, there can be no doubt that massive changes are afoot in Europe and the UK. Should these changes succeed in their aims, Europe will be unrecognisable very, very soon.
I find Paul Weston’s view optimistic, myself. Recent events suggest, and suggest strongly, that the fighting spirit of the native European populace in Europe and the UK seems to have waned considerably since the War. How else can one explain the success of the immigrant rape wave of which Fjordman has written, or of the grooming of young girls in the north of England (by immigrant moslems), or of the takeover of Mälmo? More importantly, how else to explain the fact that the natives have not grown restless to the extent that the locals have rioted? Klein Verzet reported on one such incident, but we all know that a single swallow does not a summer make.
If current trends continue, the completion of the EUrabia project could occur as soon as 2017, and then all is lost. Faced with such a prospect, we can see that if the BNP and co do not ascend to power very soon, they will not ascend at all. Who can say with honesty that they believe the EUSSR/EUrabian superstate which is being fashioned today would allow the existence of such parties in its politics when it is already, in its nascency, instituting and implementing Thought Crime legislation at every opportunity?
A Eurabian EUSSR superstate would bring ‘peace’, no doubt. There are those who justify the EUSSR programme as being a unison of nations against a Nazi resurgence. But the old question appears here: peace at what price? At the price of our nations, our ethnic identities, our cultures, our very souls? No. That is too high a price for too false a prize. I refuse it, and encourage any and all readers to do likewise. Against that evil ‘peace’, I would rather see a good war. Or at least a civil war that isn’t the institutional, condoned, and state-approved abominations of the EUSSR’s Eurabia Project.
One of two things must happen, and that soon, either there must be a victory by a BNP-like party, or there must be civil war. One of those two must occur before 2025, or Europe is lost forever, and the UK with it. (Any British readers who think that the islamification of the continent will not affect the UK have not been paying attention and are consequently living in a fantasy) This would leave America alone, and if even half of them follow the line that they’d rather take the moslems over the Europeans, then America won’t last very long either.
But fear and poverty of personality are powerful factors, and are likely to ensure that a BNP-like party will not achieve power in the short time they have left to do so. People would rather be liked than be right, after all, as Stanley Milgram accidentally demonstrated in his Obedience to Authority experiment. Lest we forget, today’s authority (for most) is whatever ersatz morality the mass media manages to persuade the masses to internalise, and chief among the topics for internalisation is a ‘kneejerk overreaction’ to anything with even the faintest hint of ‘racism’ or ‘fascism’, as described but never defined by the mass media and the politicos who control them.
Under such circumstances, I begin to think that civil war in Europe and the UK is something to hope for, rather than fear.
Takuan Seiyo writes that "for the Western white elite’s endless preoccupation with racism and perceived xenophobia, and its worship of tolerance as the supreme virtue is a deep psychosis …the psychosis leads to a denial of reality; even reality as solidly established through 80 years of statistical research as racial differences of mean IQs, body types, comparative advantages etc. And reality is a jealous mistress. Spurned, she will return to take her revenge " and is right in this, but in my opinion is only beginning to scratch the surface in the expression of this truth.
The deeper reality is what these 80 years of statistical research reflect, that we are dealing here with races and ideologies separated by hundreds of years of different breeding, learning, and culture. The result is that the differing groups hail from backgrounds as different as if one group had come from Mars, another from Venus, and so on. But an illustrative example is in order. Readers will know from history (or perhaps personal memory) that for a while Germany (and her capital city, Berlin) was split into half, East and West, forming almost a microcosm of the Cold War being played out in the wider world. This split lasted about 40 years, if we take the division of Germany in 1949 as the start date and the formal reunification in 1990 as the end date, which is the blink of an eye in historical terms, yet even as recently as the early 2000s there were still distinct differences in attitudes between the ‘Ossies’ and ‘Wessies’. This is after only 40 years of division, and that within a nation which had been together, with itself, for several hundreds of years. Reunification has not been easy for Germany, and may well not yet be complete.
Contrast that with the EUSSR project to melt all identities down by forcing them into the same pot and you see the greatest attempt in history to wipe out as many races and cultures as possible, which will result in either abortion by way of democratic action (a BNP, Vlaams Belang etc victory) or, worse, catastrophic failure or, which is much much worse, EUSSR success.
As discussed, a democratic resolution is unlikely, leaving us again with the two options of the EUSSR victory, or all-out civil war in Europe. Of the two, I prefer the latter. We must have, as Kipling said,
‘Freedom for ourselves, and for our sons
And failing freedom, war’
Takuan Seiyo writes that "reality is a jealous mistress. Spurned, she will return to take her revenge", but I think Kipling said it best:
"As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will bum,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with t
error and slaughter return."