NOTE: the sections below are drafts, and have been seriously revised and edited for the final version of the book. They remain available, pending a complete update of this website, as a “teaser” and to provide inspiration for further reading. If you have any comments, please refer only to the final version (as available in the paperback or e-book): some of your questions may have been already answered.
Islamisation in Europe: some thoughts
These are some reflections on the current mass immigration and Islamisation in Europe (anno 2017), based on my work as a freelance journalist and my long-time interest in these topics. Feel free to ignore them as the rants of a conservative alarmist. I sincerely hope most of the predictions you will find below will turn out to be incorrect.
- Why is this Jihad such a new phenomenon?
- But what about the international refugee crisis? Shouldn’t we help everybody regardless of religion?
- The chance of becoming a victim of terrorism is small, isn’t it?
- Aren’t muslims just angry about the Crusades?
- Who supports mass immigration and why?
- Why do Europeans keep voting for pro-mass immigration parties?
- What will happen if immigration goes on like this in Europe?
- What’s the solution to Islamisation?
Why is this Jihad such a new phenomenon?
Jihad – in the meaning of aggressive Islamic expansion – is a very old phenomenon. It started during Muhammad’s life and went on until the 17th century (the siege of Vienna), at which point the Islamic world went into slow decline and could no longer continue the struggle. The reasons for this decline were the enormous scientific advances in the west and the fact that the Silk Roads, the ancient “money machine” of Islam, lost all relevance: Western nations colonised the countries of origin of most valuable oriental products and imported them through sea-lanes that were also dominated by Westerners, bypassing the ancient overland trade – routes that sustained many Muslim nations.
When oil became more important in global economy during the 20th century, the interest in the old ‘“Silk Road” countries (eg. Iran and Iraq) and their reserves of black gold grew exponentially. Some part of the enormous resources from oil exports is now used to promote radical islamic preachers and schooling throughout the world (by, among others, Quatar and Saudi Arabia), and in some cases terrorism. (This means that every time you fill up your tank with oil from these countries, you contribute to Jihad.)
In the early 20th century, discontent was brewing in the Middle-East. Tired of being pushed around by Western colonisation and disgusted by the growing secularism, many movements sprung up that wanted to restore the glory of the old Islamic Caliphate and its strict moral values. The most successful of these movements was the muslim brotherhood (founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna). This large international Islamist organisation (motto: “Islam is the solution”) has since then worked to further the global Islamist agenda, and is accused by many countries of supporting terrorism – related organisations. Their efforts (and those of their allies) bear fruit: more and more governments in the Middle – East and beyond sympathise with Islamism (Turkey, Indonesia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, North Sudan, Iran …).
Because of advances in medicine the birth rate in most North African and Middle – Eastern countries has increased enormously. In the West, modern education and women’s rights help to keep the birth rate in check, but modern education and women’s rights are amongst those things rarely found in the Islamic world. Unable to feed their children from overgrazed and arid farmland, tens of millions of Muslims have been obliged to emigrate – often to Europe or to the USA.
This combination of increased income, increased population and increased religious fervour has stoked the fires of Jihad once more. In conclusion: the period between 1700 and 1950 was an era of Western dominance and therefore the islamic expansion got temporarely suspended out of necessity. Temporarely suspended. For the reasons mentioned above, the hunger for religious expansion is growing in the minds of many devout Muslim leaders throughout the world. The global Jihad is picking up speed once more.
But what about the international refugee crisis? Shouldn’t we help everybody regardless of religion?
1. There is no such thing as a refugee crisis. There is “refugee normalcy”.
Many dysfunctional African and Middle-Eastern nations are experiencing a population explosion and can no longer feed their populations. The mass migration has been going on for some time now, it just got a bit worse in Europe in 2015 because one of the “Gatekeepers” of the mediterranean (Gadaffi) was ousted in the “Arab Spring” in 2011 and because of the Syrian civil war (and the EU’s abysmal response to it). What is the reason of the population explosion?
Rigid, traditional Islamic society => no education for women, no personal liberty, no intellectual growth or innovation => enormous birthrate, poverty => tribal warfare for grazing land and water => failed states => emigration.
Taking in a few million refugees will only postpone the next refugee “crisis”. Hundreds of millions of them will want to emigrate to the welfare states of Europe in the coming decades, according to an analysis by the Austrian army (one of the countries on the migration routes).
2. Why do some present the population explosion in the world (and the resulting migration) as a “new” crisis?
Because they benefit from it. Crises often lead to exceptional laws and funding. They also help to centralise power in the hands of authoritarian figures (Click here for a brilliant analysis of this phenomenon by Oleg Atbashian). Also, a lot of people make good money in the international “development aid – immigration – industrial complex” (Think of the influx of all those cheap labourers for Big Industry! The project money and new SUV’s for NGO’s! The new voter base for left – wing parties!). The fact that some of these people benefit from mass immigration but sell their lust for money and power as “charity” makes it even more disgusting.
3. Should we help everybody regardless of religion?
Sending tents, medical aid and food to refugee camps? Sure. But some think we must show compassion to refugees by abolishing all borders. But by abolishing borders, the negative effects will be felt mostly by the working-class Europeans and Americans (loss of jobs, lower wages, cultural alienation). Shouldn’t we have compassion with them too? When the Chinese replace part of the population of Lhasa in Tibet by Han Chinese, international organisations call it a cultural genocide. But when socialist politicians in Europe replace the population of large European cities by Muslim immigrants, nobody cares.
Also, as said before: the religion and traditions of these immigrants are among the big causes of the population explosion in the first place. By abolishing all borders, the problems of overpopulation and civil strife will just be relocated to the European continent or the USA. Not to mention the permanent loss of certain minor cultural traditions: Santa Claus, Easter eggs, winemaking, beer brewing, New Year’s Eve celebratons… These may seem like small things, but added together they constitute the “skeleton” of our societies. Is it not sad that all of this might disappear during our lifetimes?
The chance of becoming a victim of terrorism is small, isn’t it?
Even in extremist, muslim – majority communities, the chance of dying because of an act of religious violence is small. However, in such societies, the chance of losing your most important liberties (freedom of speech, freedom of religion, gender equality …) is 100%. To put it frankly: the “1%” terrorists are not the real issue. They are but the vanguard. The silent majority of “fake moderates” is far more frightening: once their numbers are high enough, they can create blasphemy laws, indoctrinate children and discriminate against all other religions and minorities without firing a single shot. This is sometimes called “silent” or “civilizational” Jihad.
Aren’t muslims just angry about the Crusades?
This is a classical example of double moral standards.
From 650 to 750 AD the muslim armies conquered half of the Christian world (North Africa, Spain, Syria, …) . In 1453 sultan Mehmed conquered one of the greatest cities of Christianity: Constantinople, and promptly transformed one of Christendom’s greatest churches – the Hagia Sophia – into a mosque. From 1450 until 1688 the Ottoman caliphate waged a relentless series of conquests into the Balkans and central Europe. Europeans do not use these terrible, aggressive events to justify anger towards Turks or Arabs.
The crusades, on the other hand, started – at least partly – as a defensive war. The byzantine emperor was heavily pressed by the armies of the Seljuq Turks, and asked for assistance from the Pope. Urban II complied and rallied Christian kings and warlords to invade the Middle East. After two centuries of warfare, even the tiny strips of land known as the “Crusader Kingdoms” were crushed and returned to Muslim hands.
End result of all religious warfare between Christians and Muslims from 650 AD until 2017 AD : vast areas that were once flourishing centres of Christianity (Egypt, Syria, Anatolia, North- Africa …) were conquered by the Islamic world forever. Many of these countries have seen a serious dwindling of their Christian populations through religious intolerance. Who should be angry with whom?
Europe is the destination of large waves of immigrants – most of them Muslims. For some in power this is pure opportunism: unintegrated refugees will vote for leftists governments, and will need help from “government agencies” and NGO’s caring for all these newcomers. Some people’s livelihoods depend on immigration.
Others – often young, naive lefties – are more delusional. They see mass immigration as a way to rid themselves of the sins of the “Evil Western Civilisation”: a feeling of guilt has been ingrained in them by schools, universities and newspapers over the years. They believe that by setting foot on European soil, a sort of magical transformation takes place in the mind of a refugee. Suddenly, 1400 years of Islamic teachings will evaporate and our poor immigrant will see the light of Western Secularism. This gullible belief in a makeable world is a typical socialist fantasy. In fact, the population replacement taking place in Europe is an unprecedented social experiment on a grand scale – maybe comparable to the great “migraton” period of the late Roman empire. Let us take this moment to remember the previous socialist “experiments” and their millions of victims: Communist Russia (holodomor, oppression), National Socialism in Germany (holocaust, second world war), the Red Khmer in Cambodia (killing fields), China (thought police, oppression), North Korea (no comments necessary), …
Some businessmen are glad with this influx of unskilled cheap labour. Immigrants are willing to work for less than some locals. Who cares about the long term effects on a society when you can increase your profits in the short term?
The main reason is the relentless indoctrination of the past decades. Schools have been teaching about the “evils of the West” (Crusades, colonisation) while ignoring the “evils” of the rest of the World out of political correctness. Since 2015, some governments are actively persecuting “hate speech” and “Islamophobia”.190 Jobs and reputations have been lost because of some harmless comment on social media or on a blog.
What will happen if immigration goes on like this in Europe?
Let me start with a quote:
We have 50 million Muslims in Europe. There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe—without swords, without guns, without conquest—will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades. Muammar Gadaffi (1942 – 2011, dictator of Lybia 1969 – 2011): (Speech (10 April 2006), quoted in New York Sun (6 September 2009) “Terrorists Promise More Attacks Like 9/11” by Steven Stalinsky)
The political establishment in most of Europe is heavily pro-immigration. Millions of immigrants – most of them Muslims – are pouring in; more and more each year. Since the refugee “crisis” of 2015 the pace of population replacement has even increased.
Some large European cities have a muslim population that went from about 0% in 1950 to 25% or more in 2017 (Brussels,191 Marseille,192 Birmingham193, …). Muhammad has been the most popular name for boys in many European cities for some years now. Because of immigration and a higher birthrate, many large population centers in Western Europe will be Muslim- majority by 2050. 194 Meanwhile, the children of these immigrants are getting increasingly radicalised.195 Connecting the dots, the future looks rather bleak for those who regard Islamisation as a threat. If these Muslims vote like their religious brothers in the Middle East (and there is no reason to think they will not), Europe – the birthplace of “the Enlightenment” and Humanism – is at risk of losing freedom of speech, women’s rights and all its other traditions within the coming decades.
Some nationalist countermovements have sprung up, fighting an uphill battle against the mainstream media, school indoctrination and the political establishment. A notable success was the pro – Brexit vote in 2016 in Great Britain. But in many nations, the road to power for these new nationalist political formations is still long. By the time they can weigh in on important issues, it might be far too late… .
If immigration is not seriously reduced, the population replacement will continue. Already some areas in larger European cities have become “no-go” zones where the rule of law can no longer penetrate. This trend will likely continue. If larger territories lose their cultural attachment to the old nation states, a “balkanisation” may occur with secession and creation of new countries. Already we see an influence of foreign potentates in local European politics: millions of Turks in Europe can be influenced by leaders like Erdogan, feeling more connected to their ancestral homeland than to their new country. As integration policies continue to fail, some cities might become virtual satellite states of these foreign powers. In some countries, new “migrant parties” 196 are allying themselves with left-wing political formations (sometimes called “Islamo-Marxism”), a move that will probably undermine any populist-nationalist revival. Some Eastern European countries (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia) are strongly opposed to mass immigration and will probably drift away from the faltering European Union, retaining their own culture and traditions.
And then? In the best case scenario, a sudden massive reform of Islam and integration of immigrants will take place: all problems will be magically solved. I sincerely hope this will come true, but there is no indication that we are evolving in this direction. In the more realistic scenario, Western Europe will lose much of its cultural identity and become an ethnically and culturally fragmented region. In some cities and countries, certain liberties and traditions will become almost impossible to maintain. In the worst case scenario this will lead to a prolonged civil war and continuous presence of paramilitary and terrorist organisations, competing with each other in cruelty.
Let us hope it will never come to that, and that I will be proven wrong.
What’s the solution to the problem of Islamisation?
With the “problem of Islamisation” I mean the abolishing of institutions and traditions by followers of traditional Islam, not the presence of some well-integrated people of foreign origin in Western countries.
The first step towards every solution is to acknowledge that there is a problem. Once western governments start doing this on the subject of religious intolerance in muslim communities, clever minds can start working on solutions. So let us start by getting the heads of politicians and media pundits out of the sand and make them stop whitewashing the bad parts of an ideology in the name of “multiculturalism”.
Secondly, as Andrew Breitbart used to say: “Politics is downstream from culture.” Schools in Europe have been indoctrinating children in the “multicultural church” for decades now. Newspapers and state broadcasters have been shifting more and more to the left side of the political spectrum, and are often willing to go to extreme lengths to cover up all negative news relating immigration and Islam. Members of the entertainment industry use their celebrity status to preach about the virtues of “breaking down the walls”, whilst living in walled mansions themselves (surrounded by security guards). As long as Europeans keep allowing children to be taught by left-wing zealots, keep buying newspapers that have lost all sense of reality and keep accepting that television clowns weigh in on important issues, there will be no foundation for political change whatsoever. There is urgent need for a restoration of the pride in Western institutions and traditions: children who leave school filled with “guilt” about the “evil Western world” will vote against their own interests.
Thirdly, once the problems with traditional Islam are acknowledged and the grasp of leftists on Western cultural institutions is diminished, political movements might start working on legislation and executive orders to defend Western cultural values in earnest. This does not mean crying and sympathising after a terrorist attack, but a serious crackdown on all radical preachers and enemies of Western values and a realistic approach to immigration policies and integration.
Lastly, a thorough reform of Islam would provide a basis for a more peaceful world. Whether this is possible is matter of debate – there are no signs at this time that this “reform” is going to happen in the near future – but I firmly believe that refraining from critique of Islam out of political correctness does not help muslim reformists at all.
Let us hope for the best.