Civilization’s fulcrum moment 13

This is a fulcrum moment in the history of civilized man. (Yes, MAN – the correct generic term for the human race.) What is happening to the Western world now is equivalent to the fall of the Roman Empire.

If most of Europe becomes Islamized, as it is fast becoming by the will and action of the Left – and all the governments of Western Europe are on the Left even those that call themselves Conservative – then where and how, if at all, will our civilization survive?

If most of Europe becomes Islamized, what will remain of European civilization in its homelands?

Imagine a map of Europe showing the thousands of square miles of vineyards. Think of the grapes, and the harvests, and the process of wine-making – the generations of practice and discovery that have perfected it. Do you enjoy drinking wine? Well, there will be no more for you to enjoy. Not from Europe. It will go. All those vineyards will be laid to waste. Islam forbids the drinking of alcohol.

So also beer, ale, whisky … the industries and the pleasure will all be gone. Your cosy village pub? Gone. Your  cocktail hour? Gone. Allah does not permit them to exist.

Now think of the art galleries of Europe. The pictures, the sculpture. Islam forbids the making of images of human beings and animals. Nudes in particular are haram. What will be done with Leonardo, Michelangelo, Velazquez, Rembrandt, Bernini? Their works will be destroyed. The pictures will be burnt. The sculptures will be hammered into dust.

Bernini’s Apollo and Daphne

What will be done with the libraries? They contain millions of books that are blasphemous in the judgment of Islam. They will all be destroyed.

What will be done with the schools and universities? What will they be allowed to teach? What will scientists be allowed to do? We know the answers to those questions.

Do you love music? You will not hear the great works of the European composers performed any more. Not in Europe. The concert halls will probably be turned into mosques.

What will be the position of women in Islamic Europe? We all know the answer to that. If Western women were “liberated” in the twentieth century, come the late twenty-first century their brief age of liberty will be over.

What will happen to homosexuals under Islamic rule? Islamic law decrees that they must be put to death.

If you are a Christian or a Jew, and insist on remaining a Christian or a Jew rather than joining Islam, you may be allowed to live if you pay protection money to your Islamic overlords. But don’t count on it. Muslim powers have not shown themselves to be in a merciful mood lately. Christians are being slaughtered even in comparatively tolerant Islamic countries such as Egypt; and in what used to be Iraq and Syria they are being mass-murdered, tortured and enslaved by the caliphate of the Islamic State. And Jews? How likely are they to be allowed to exist under any circumstances? As for atheists – they will have to pretend to believe in Allah-and-his-Prophet, or die.

There will be no more fair trials. In Britain, the adversarial system with its safeguards for the innocent of guaranteed defense, cross-examination of witnesses, rules of evidence, juries, will be abolished. On the continent the inquisitorial system – examination by magistrates “to find the truth” – will also be abolished. Sharia law will replace the old systems and codes. An example of sharia justice? If a woman claims she has been raped and cannot prove it by producing four male witnesses who will swear to having seen penetration, she is held to be guilty of adultery; her punishment for adultery is death. The method of her execution? She is buried tightly up to her shoulders in a hole in a public place, and rocks are hurled at her head until she dies.

None of this is fantasy. Europe has in fact invited mass Muslim immigration. The Muslim fertility rate far exceeds that of the indigenous Europeans. Islam will predominate and rule.

It is probably too late to stop this happening. Just possibly a strong British government that grasps the horror of the impending doom, might – with Brexit accomplished and the nation being once again in a position to make its own policies – stop the Muslim influx, reduce the Muslim population, and preserve British culture, law, and freedom. Some Eastern European countries are refusing to let the Muslim “refugees” in, so there European traditions and culture might be preserved for a while.

There was some hope for the Netherlands had the voters, in their recent elections, empowered the party and the leader who would have saved them from Islamization. But they did not.

The last chance for Europe comes in a few days from now, on May 7, 2017, when two candidates for the presidency compete in a run-off election in France. If the voters choose Marine Le Pen, who does grasp the horror of the impending doom, France may be saved; and since she would probably take the country out of the European Union  and so break up that corrupt undemocratic pro-Islamic entity, Europe may be saved. Europe’s viticulture may continue. Citizens of Western countries may be able to drink French, German, Italian and Spanish wines. The art galleries may remain filled with pictures and sculpture. Music may be played in the concert halls. Scientists may be allowed to pursue science. Freedom, tolerance, justice, reason, may prevail at least to the extent that they have prevailed since the Enlightenment. The nation states of Europe may continue to exist and govern themselves.

But if a majority of the French vote for the only other candidate, Emmanuel Macron, who wants more Muslim immigration and the continuing existence of the European Union, the doom will be ensured.

 

Jillian Becker    April 24, 2017

  • liz

    I can understand the stupidity of the general public who’ve been brainwashed into voting for their own demise; but how can these globalist ‘elites’, who are orchestrating the whole disaster, be so idiotic not to realize that if their plan succeeds, they are signing their own death sentence as well?
    How can they possibly think that by allowing inbred barbarians, who’ve already made oppressive, totalitarian sewers out of their own countries, to overrun the West, there will be anything left of civilization to profit from?
    They’ll rule their glorious global utopia – from atop a stinking pile of excrement of global proportions.

  • Mike

    Everyone seems to assume that this Islamist transformation will happen without any serious continental war. Don’t forget Europe’s bloody history. This will not happen without war. That’s a whole different thing.

  • I read your comment on Delingpole’s article at Breitbart. I too agree. After reading this post, I’m mostly in agreement as well.

    IMO, if Western Europe falls to Muslim hijrah jihad, Eastern Europe will, at some point, be forced to join the Russian Federation. I’m doubtful of England’s ability to survive but agree that it is within the realm of possibilities.

    Question: admittedly slightly off topic but nevertheless relevant given your advocacy of Western Civilization and your claim to being a conservative.

    As a conservative, presumably you claim to have “unalienable rights”, that is rights which cannot justly be taken away. Upon what basis, other than the consensus of personal opinion… do you claim to have unalienable rights? If no God exists, then we are reduced to personal opinion and, what one consensus of men may grant, a later consensus of men may rescind… Logic, upon which reason is based, cannot examine its originating premise. Logic, to be valid, must extend from its premise in an internally consistent manner and its conclusion must be coherent with that process. Your thoughts please.

    • Thank you for your interesting comment. I’m glad that your agreement on what is happening in Europe endorses my view. Though it’s a tragic view we have.

      To answer your question. These are our conservative principles: individual freedom, small government, low taxes, free market economy, strong defense. There is nothing about conservatism that requires a belief in the supernatural.

      I always prefer to say “We are free to … “, or “We should be free to …”, rather than “We have a right to …”, unless the right has been granted by law. If lawmakers wish to believe that the rights they grant are endowed to man by a deity, it makes no difference to the meaning or application of the laws.

      Whether I have a right to life or not, I live; and no one who wishes to murder me (and there probably are quite a few) would be deterred by being told that my staying alive is an “unalienable right”. The same goes for my liberty. As for the pursuit of happiness, I’ve worked at it as most of us do, with the usual mixed results.

      We do not believe that any god ever spoke to any man. All laws, all moral precepts, all scriptures held sacred, were composed by human beings.

      I fully respect your choice to believe otherwise.

      • [Zerothruster’s comment keeps disappearing. We can’t disover why. So we are trying re-posting it here.]

        Zerothruster replies to Geoffrey Britain:

        re Geoffrey’s last paragraph…)

        Geoffrey Britain’s claim is heard so often. It always has the same rhetorical ring, the argument of which is…
        (1) Only God can grant political rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of untold others.
        Therefore –
        (2) since we want to enjoy all those rights,
        – He exists.
        Good. Now we can rest assured that we have those rights.
        But if we don’t believe in Him, those rights we claim just disappear, and we may as well not even try to defend them.

        Good luck with that argument, because there are other theologies that make no claim at all about God-given rights. And what are theologies, but unverifiable assertions derived from tortured reasoning and rhetoric? That’s why we just need Faith, right?

        It’s a kind of God of the Gaps catechism:
        Why does the world exist? We don’t know. Therefore, God made it.
        Where do our rights come from? We don’t know. Therefore, God grants them.
        Why are abortion, homosexuality, torture and tyranny immoral? Because God doesn’t like them.
        So you say.

        That argument above, “(1)… (2)… – He exists”, could be called the Jeffersonian proof of God’s existence, as it seems to import the Declaration of Independence into Sacred Scripture. But don’t forget that in 1775, before the Declaration, the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights existed, there was also something in the air called the Divine Right of Kings, God’s Mandate, which Luther certainly would have endorsed. It could well be that Jefferson’s claim “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are…” was a rhetorical flourish meant as a counterweight to the mandate of divine right.

        And if the kinds of rights we in The Occident claim are divinely endowed, why is it they are so rarely manifest across human history and geography? (This is a question that relates not only to the nature of those rights themselves, but relates also to the theological problem of evil.) The human rights we support in the modern western world – Europe and its progeny – are cherished but contingent attributes of that contingent culture. Which is why we need to cherish and support that culture and its heritage.

        So when we’re pondering or arguing about rights and their foundations: Defend The West. Forget the rest.

        More generally, we could also have this argument about the so-called Judeo-Christian foundations of Western Civilization, which is also an often heard but highly dubious claim (unless you’re preaching to the choir.)

        Geoffrey, you raise a good point about Eastern Europe’s chances of escaping the caliphate. I think it’s interesting that the former Soviet block is a lot less hospitable to Islamic mass migration than the west is. I suspect that’s because these mass migrations are themselves part of a larger and long-term strategy involving the ‘former’ Soviet Union and its communist party (and also our former president). It may also be interesting that Angela Merkel grew up in East Germany. Just saying…

        I also wanted to call attention to George Will’s most recent offering, as it relates to this discussion and Europe’s choices (Will is an atheist, albeit an amiable, low-voltage one)….

        http://www.jewishworldrevie

        2 • Reply•Share ›

    • liz

      I’d like to also point out here that you’re falling for the false premise that there is no other alternative for believing in God except “personal opinion” – in other words, personal subjectivism. Following the dictates of a religion is also a form of subjectivism, along with ‘social subjectivism’ – following the dictates of the collective consensus.
      The alternative to all of that is of course, Objectivism – basing opinions on an objective grasp of reality.

    • Zerothruster

      (re Geoffrey’s last paragraph…)

      Geoffrey Britain’s claim is heard so often. It always has the same rhetorical ring, the argument of which is…
      (1) Only God can grant political rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of untold others.
      Therefore –
      (2) since we want to enjoy all those rights,
      – He exists.
      Good. Now we can rest assured that we have those rights.
      But if we don’t believe in Him, those rights we claim just disappear, and we may as well not even try to defend them.

      Good luck with that argument, because there are other theologies that make no claim at all about God-given rights. And what are theologies, but unverifiable assertions derived from tortured reasoning and rhetoric? That’s why we just need Faith, right?

      It’s a kind of God of the Gaps hypothesis:
      Why does the world exist? We don’t know. Therefore, God made it.
      Where do our rights come from? We don’t know. Therefore, God grants them.
      Why are abortion, homosexuality, torture and tyranny immoral? Because God doesn’t like them.
      So you say.

      That argument above, “(1)… (2)… – He exists”, could be called the Jeffersonian proof of God’s existence, as it seems to import the Declaration of Independence into Sacred Scripture. But don’t forget that in 1775, before the Declaration, the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights existed, there was also something in the air called the Divine Right of Kings, God’s Mandate, which Luther certainly would have endorsed. It could well be that Jefferson’s claim “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are…” was a rhetorical flourish meant as a counterweight to the mandate of divine right.

      And if the kinds of rights we in The Occident claim are divinely endowed, why is it they are so rarely manifest across human history and geography? (This is a question that relates not only to the nature of those rights themselves, but relates also to the theological problem of evil.) The human rights we support in the modern western world – Europe and its progeny – are cherished but contingent attributes of that contingent culture. Which is why we need to cherish and support that culture and its heritage.

      So when we’re pondering or arguing about rights and their foundations: Defend The West. Forget the rest.

      More generally, we could also have this argument about the so-called Judeo-Christian foundations of Western Civilization, which is also an often heard but highly dubious claim (unless you’re preaching to the choir.)

      Geoffrey, you raise a good point about Eastern Europe’s chances of escaping the caliphate. I think it’s interesting that the former Soviet block is a lot less hospitable to Islamic mass migration than the west is. I suspect that’s because these mass migrations are themselves part of a larger and long-term strategy involving the ‘former’ Soviet Union and its communist party (and also our former president). It may also be interesting that Angela Merkel grew up in East Germany. Just saying…

      I also wanted to call attention to George Will’s most recent offering, as it relates to this discussion and Europe’s choices (Will is an atheist, albeit an amiable, low-voltage one)….

      http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will042717.php3

      • Thanks for your interesting comment, Zerothruster. I especially agree about the “dubious claim” of a “Judeo-Christian foundation” for Western civilization.

        Also thanks for the link.

        So George Will – always brilliant, well-informed, erudite, articulate – doesn’t like Macron or Le Pen.

        He also doesn’t like Donald Trump.

        But the choice is binary. Either nationalism (the nation-state and the will of the people), or globalism (the EU, Muslim immigration, world socialism, the Leftist elite forever in power).

        And as there is no third choice on offer, it should be obvious to a conservative like George Will that Trump and even Le Pen must be chosen. Whatever differences of opinion on lesser matters he may have with Donald Trump, and however much he may dislike many of the proposed policies of Marine Le Pen, what the world needs rescuing from right now is Leftism, globalization, and the Left’s terrible foster-child, militant Islam. Preserving one’s purity of principle may satisfy one’s own conscience, but it won’t fend off the hordes of Islam.

        • Zerothruster

          Thanks, Jillian. That’s very well said.
          Will and most of the the other never-Trumpers are basically snobs, in my opinion.
          Sam Harris recently interviewed Charles Murray (two never-Trumper snobs), and Murray reiterated what one of Trump’s sons said by way of describing his father: he’s basically a blue-collar billionaire, who liked to spend time with the construction workers when he as a kid. (That would help explain his accent and occasional manner of speech.)

  • Cogito

    I agree with Athrin. France will not go with Le Pen. Germany will follow Merkel into oblivion.

    The small countries of Eastern Europe, having known the miseries of Nazi and Communist tyrannies, seem to be determined to resist islamic tyranny.

    We’ll soon see.

  • Athrin

    even if by miracle, Le Pen wins, europe will fall, conservatives are too stupid and cowardly to do what is a absolute necessity to save western civilization. Only growing a spine can save western civilization and i do not see that happening, western civilization is, 100% guaranteed to fall this century.