Two continents pregnant with Islam 1

David Solway is the author of  a well informed and well reasoned article at Front Page Magazine. We who see ourselves as belonging to the RATIONAL RIGHT  agree with him.

We quote a part of the article. We recommend the whole thing. 

 If the rational Right fails to consolidate its base in the European political landscape, then the European Left will have brought its own eventual demise upon itself in the form of militant, illiberal and xenophobic parties of the extreme Right. It will, in fact, find itself squeezed between the jaws of an ideological vise of its own making, as two competing fascisms, one Islamic and the other indigenous, engage in a battle to the finish. Absenting the rebirth of a hardy and vigorous conservative movement, which does not shrink from instituting stringent immigration policies and enacting rules for the deportation of those who undermine the common peace, the long-term prospect for Europe doesn’t look encouraging. Even a best-case scenario is problematic: it may be too late for a conservative “revolution” to forestall either an Islamic or an ultra-reactionary denouement.

Europeans, says Walter Laqueur in The Last Days of Europe, idling away their future while Islamic political organizations patiently wait, “once the time is ripe, to launch mass violence” and the demographic time bomb is also ticking, are “quietly acquiescing in their own decline.” But, as I have argued, a growing number of Europeans are not, and the means they will adopt to counter the menace, whether successfully or not, will be harsh, coercive and turbulent. For as violence begins to move in from the Muslim enclaves in the banlieu toward the city center, as it were, and the authorities prove themselves increasingly helpless and vacillating before its progress, the reactionary Right will earn more and more legitimacy among the masses. We should make no mistake about this. The Jain-like attitude of the stimming [?]  political classes toward their avowed enemies, resulting in an anemic lack of fortitude that has become chronic, can only energize the factions of the extreme Right. The same applies to the Islamophilic and ever-compliant media, operating in tandem with a complaisant political establishment, whose motto might well be: Have pen, will grovel.

 The problem, however, is not confined to the Continent. It would be sheer folly to assume that we in North America are privileged spectators who are somehow exempt from the savage dialectic that Europe is now experiencing. It is starting to happen here as well. We may have a little more time at our disposal to try and come to terms with the predicament, but we are equally at risk. The gravest peril to America today is not an external enemy but its own developing fault lines. The tectonic plates that undergird the sense of national unity are moving apart. Strictly speaking, our situation is not identical to Europe’s, but close enough to warrant concern. If we are not vigilant and prepared to reconsider our generic assumptions about the culture of indiscriminate inclusion and the politics of spineless appeasement, Europe is our inevitable future.

Speaking at the National Press Club on June 10, 2009, Morris Dees of the Southern Poverty Law Center warned that a “perfect storm is brewing for the buildups of these hate groups,” of which the Center lists over 900. Many of the members of these cadres enlist in the army “to learn skills they will later take back to their groups while, in other instances, [they] work to recruit frustrated veterans.” Dees isolates the phenomenon of rampant Latino immigration as “the biggest engine generating increase in hate groups,” though Jew-hatred also figures prominently. But there can be no doubt that galloping Muslim immigration and high fertility rates, as well as the burgeoning influence of radical Islamic organizations, will fuel the rage felt and violence perpetrated by these virulent cells and networks.

There is only one way to defeat the extreme Right as it rises to its own depraved version of the defence of the West, and that is to disarm the common enemy and, by so doing, deprive a nascent fascism of its populist fuel. Which is another way of saying that immigration policies currently in place will need to be rethought and rendered more appropriate to the nation’s requirements, as is the case, for example, inSwitzerland, the sole western European country that attaches a high value to citizenship. And unpleasant as this may sound, we will also have to become less tolerant of the intolerant Other which refuses to recognize our values if we are to avoid the pendulum swing toward a vicious intolerance of all perceived outsiders.

We will, in short, have to embrace the conservative tradition of the moderate Right, based on the liberty of the individual, the duties of responsible citizenship, a coherent pluralism that respects the customs of the majority culture rather than a fractious multiculturalism that corrodes them, and the robust defence of the homeland against the threats, both domestic and external, that mobilize against it.

 Given that we can manage to avoid the Islamic future prophesied by Ottoman thinker Said Nursi who, in his famous Damascus Sermon, predicted that “Europe and America are pregnant with Islam. One day they will give birth to an Islamic state,” there is only one conceivable way out of the corner we are backing ourselves into. By electing moderate Right administrations, we may—just may—slip between the Clashing Rocks of the defeatist Left and the triumphalist Right.

To put it succinctly: assuming that Nursi’s prophecy does not come to pass—and that is a very big if—survival dicates that, as a society, we will have to “go conservative” and abandon the doctrinaire Left if we are not to succumb to the doctrinaire Right.

  • pencil

    Your posts do seem to have an interesting swing to the right that makes me hopeful.

    I simply must suggest something. I am in agreement that there must be a stable pluralism that
    abides by the common law which is of course the constitution. But I have some news, comming
    as I do from the more religious right, of which you should be aware. There are many people on the
    religious right who woln’t accept anything less than an extreamly pro life president. If our vote is
    to unite this is challenge 1. The second is . … people on the religious and particularly the christian right
    are not going to like “gay marriage” much. And finnaly, many are tired of being told they can’t
    pray in public schools if they are a teacher or they can’t pray if they are some high official ect. There’s been
    many an attempt to remove religious expression from public schools. I really don’t think
    speach should be . . . . harrased in this way any more. What we as an American people must agree
    on is the bill of rights . .. . and not because every peaceful assembly or every spoken word or every news
    print is morraly good . .. but rather because the government cannot and should not attempt to control
    any more than what the constitution permits it to control. This is just the way it ought to be. No
    one should be forcing their veiws down each others throtes either with bans on prayer or required
    prayer or that sharia law. I really don’t want to see any catholic crusades come back to life either.
    I really hope that someday people really learn and remember this balance where there is a sense it which government is neutral on such things as prayer and religious expresion and by neutral I do not mean neutral expression but rather neutral in its stance concerning creating laws about expression. Even christians
    agree you cannot force a person to believe or pray. Atheists must agree that you cannot force a person NOT to believe or pray. Certianly if there is a right that ought to be protected, it should be the politicak right to either pray or not pray according to ones own choice. This can apply to teachers, to officials, to the president himself.
    This political right should apply to everyone in the country!! Why?? because we are only human . . . we can’t mind meld. And besides in a sense forcefull coercion comming from a human being simply feels wrong regarding such things. If only more people knew that christians of the old america fully realized that mans heart was in the hands of God . . . . AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF MAN. That . . . that was once the religious reason for dispizing human tyrany. I hope some of the religious still see it that way. So you see we can, for different reasons,
    agree that human tyrany of Obama’s and Hitlers and . . . the Popes kind . . . must be stoped. Non of them
    has the right to play god. No human should be putting another human in chains for not CONVERTING to atheism,
    or christianity, or Islam. No human should be firing another human from their job for not converting to atheism, christianity, or Islam. What do we agree on?? We agree, I hope, that we have had just simply enough of
    man trying to play god and it is really getting on our nerves and creating far more havoc than there ever needed
    to be. Enough with the god impersonators, all of them!!! Lets vote them out while we can!!! Im sorry but the
    ACLU has to change its ways a bit as well. In fact they encourage it. They are the ones creating the fault line
    that has helped fuel Obama’s popularity. Lets have a truce. Lets stop going on crusades. Lets each live our own
    life IN PEACE without degenerating to tribal warfare and murdering our own children through abortion on top of it!! :)