Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Muslim Expulsion?

The sometimes erratic Ralph Peters muses aloud about a prospect that has crossed my mind—that Europe might some day simply expel its Muslim population. Despite the ferocious history Peters lays out, I doubt today’s Europeans have the stomach for it: nihilist multiculturalism—what Malcom Muggeridge called liberalism’s death wish—is simply too deeply ingrained in Europe today. But still. . .

Peters does make the important point that Muslims in America have the prospect of assimilation, of participating in the American Dream:

American Muslims have a higher income level than our national average. We hear about the handful of rabble-rousers, but more of our fellow Americans who happen to be Muslims are doctors, professors and entrepreneurs. And the American dream is still alive and well, thanks: Even the newest taxi driver stumbling over his English grammar knows he can truly become an American. But European Muslims can’t become French or Dutch or Italian or German. Even if they qualify for a passport, they remain second-class citizens. On a good day.

Then there is this deliciously ironic prospect: "I have no difficulty imagining a scenario in which U.S. Navy ships are at anchor and U.S. Marines have gone ashore at Brest, Bremerhaven or Bari to guarantee the safe evacuation of Europe’s Muslims. After all, we were the only ones to do anything about the slaughter of Muslims in the Balkans."

Discussions - 38 Comments

The link seems to be wrong.

I’m with you, Steve. These folks don’t have the right mindset (i.e., backbone) to defend their own. Ultimately they will wake up, but probably after it is way too late to do anything very effective.

I wonder how Notre Dame will look with minarets?

This is off to an unsettling start. Let me see if I understand.

European nihilism, a death wish (by suicide?), makes Europeans incapable of doing what the Spanish did in 1492, or what the Nazis did by means of the Holocaust. We can only hope they rouse themselves before it’s too late.

Is that the point so far?

Unsettling to say the least. As much as they seem to be on the same wavelength, let’s not forget that dain has endorsed "a few trains and some breathing space" (a la "lebensraum" by a certain infamous European nihilist of sorts, maybe annihilist?), and one-upped Peters’ sarcastic comparison of the Klan to Human Rights Watch by seriously describing the KKK as "a self-help organization."

Yea, Steve, that’s right...when being invaded by an alien culture that is demonstable hostile to your way of life, criticize anyone who thinks about lifting a finger to do anything about it.


So, let’s hear it from the Trollpatrol! What’s your solution for the coming of Eurabia. Solutions ONLY...critique is the priviledge of constructive people. I want to hear if you are in favor of or indifferent to the Islamisation of Europe and, if not, what you’d do about it.

Steve, do you have a beef with what the Spaniards did in the Reconquista, way back in 1492? Do you really think the Spaniards should have allowed themselves to be culturally and literally raped, as the Eastern Orthodox Church did, throughout the Levant and Anatolia?

Furthermore, by what right do you equate the Spanish Reconquista, which benefited all of Europe, the West and Christendom, with Hitler’s insanity, which very well may have spelled the doom of Western cultural confidence, {along with spelling the doom of the many millions killed in a war he started}.

anon - I was not equating them. By putting them in the same sentence, I thought I was summarizing Peters. And, if I am wrong, I claim no "right" to be wrong.

A more general question, prompted by Steve Hayward’s post. Sometimes cultural encounters produce extraordinarily rich and strong amalgams. Sometimes they produce "invasions" and "rapes." I do not doubt that there is a hugely important difference, but how exactly do we make it out? Historic Europe, Europe at its best, showed signs of and had experience with both. You could even say that that Europe was a product of both. In saying that, I don’t deny that our culture has a serious problem. I just trying to define it more carefully and exactly than Peters did.

What "rich and strong" amalgams? The Romans and everyone else? Done at swordpoint. The Normans and English...done a swordpoint. The Spanish and the Moors...bloody, nasty, etc. Europeans and Native Americans? How about the Mongolians and the Arabs? Bantu and (what’s left) of original races in southern Africa? There have been a limited number of peaceful "amalgams" along trade routes and such, but the overwhelming history of such "amalgams" is bloody in the extreme. Sorry to bust your bubble, Steve.

dain - I said nothing about peaceful. I was talking about outcomes and how we assess them. My bubble survives your onslaught, I think, and no need to apologize.

So, how exactly is your "amalgam" through slaughter superior to mass deportation/civil war? Your way ends up in forced cultural extinction, whereas more proactive measures retains significant chunks of Western culture.

dain - This is not a fruitful line. Or at any rate, I cannot enter the uberrational mind that would think of choosing between deportation and annihilation.

I’m hoping somebody gets us back to Hayward’s post.

Uh, Steve, Hayward’s post is about "expelling" Muslims. Perhaps you are simply unwilling to reflect on the consequences of your own value system?

Please do not link to Ralph Peters ever again...vile cavalier crap, lumping together all Europeans as proto-Nazis. The NY Post should be ashamed. I read this via Powerline, where Mark Steyn has a tough response. I say all this as someone who has argued here that while Steyn’s demography facts are facts, his basic argument seems to ignore the political dynamics of the inevitable European reaction to the prospect of Eurabia. (Apparently in his new book he makes amends and begins to address this.) That is, I have some sympathy with Ralph Peters’ basic reaction to the demography produces Eurabia hypothesis...but my sympathies stop there...not a person I will ever bother to read again.

Yes, dain, that must be it.

In fact, the post was complicated. More important than Peters’ fantasy about a nihilistic Europe rising in fury was a comparison between "Europe" and the United States, with the lessons that Western Europe’s elites are starting to pay attention to. One hopes there is, in the longer run, a softer landing than Peters imagines. It will take careful preparations against Islamist extremists, and more than that.

Yea, careful preparations. Check. Good luck with that.

I’m still waiting for the trolls to come up with some solutions. They excel at sniping (e.g., calling people Nazis and/or racists), but solid solutions seem to elude them. Essentially, the only thing they accomplish are 1) establishing their own moral superior (at least in their own minds), and 2) eviscerating any collective response to problems that may well engulf us. The fact that Europe is chock-full of such people explains their current immobility in dealing with their problems.

Personally, if I were running things I’d annex the Sudetenland.

Hmm...been a while since some lame-ass "copied" me. Very childish...and of course trollish. That you, Scanlon (or whatever your name of the day happens to be)?

Peters’ column is extraordinarily foolish. It manages to demonize present-day Europeans and overestimate their vigor without the slightest shred of factual support for either contention. He offers nothing but the cheapest and most undigested historical analogies, some going back hundreds of years. Their relevance to the present day is not even argued for, but simply assumed. Peters also implies that the only real solution to the problem is fascistic and violent, which is nonsense. In fairness, Steyn appears to say the same thing, but I don’t think he means to.

Solution: Reject nihlism, communism, tree-worship, crotch-worship, intellect-worship and eugenics. Expel the Anglicans instead and embrace Christ. And start having children.

Failing that, we need a plan to seize their nukes.

I don’t think I buy into all the doomsday thinking about Europe. I think that assimilation takes time... and in Europe it takes longer, because of welfare statism...and the fact that it takes generations to become European...vs. a shorter time span to become american. How big is the problem? A few riots here and there...some class warfare and Identity as ontology politics... Still more or less peacefull... because Fukuyama is more or less right.

Then I’d pay some Dutchmen to set fire to Jacques Chirac.

After a busy weekend with my visiting kids, I interspersed the happy laughter by depressing myself through reading that Steyn book on Islamic demographics every chance I got. Our Internet connection was down and I missed all news, which is not missing much these days. Today, lo! our cable likes us, again, and I have time to catch up on the news and what do I find upon opening? Yahoo tells me Iraq is talking to Iran, Olmert is offering concessions to Palestinians, Britain will begin to pull out of Iraq, Turkey thinks someone is going to kill the Pope while he’s there visiting a mosque, and now this. I just want to crawl in bed and pull the covers over my head, but I’m afraid that when I emerge, I will be living under sharia, which makes feminism really appealing, for a change.

John Lewis, It is the change in the law and politics in Europe as the demography changes that is worrying, not the few riots here and there. "assimilation takes time", but isn’t the question going to be who will assimilate whom in the time?


David Frisk and Carl Scott, Steyn seems to me to leave the question open. The only solution that seems clear is also impossible, not just because of the nature of democracy, but also because of cultural decline. A retreat to America, where the decline and fall of Western Civilization will take longer, seems to be his only real answer. You are quite right about Peters, though. That is an ugly article.

Ugly AND fantasist at the same time.

Do you all (Carl, David, Kate, Ed) mean that Steve Hayward was wrong to post the Peters piece? Or that he "framed" it inadequately? Or something else? I for one became more fully aware of a current of thought I had not paid attention to.

Well, I won’t take Peters seriously again, but I’m not mad at Hayward for linking...although...I am asking others to consider how foolish, and again, I would say hateful, Peter’s article is. As for Steyn, as far as I know he never says the Euros will go fascist. Indeed, I do expect that in some places serious returns, either in above-ground or in "black-market" politics, to white nationalism will occur. I just have enough faith in Europeans that they have at the end of the day the moral and intellectual resources to fight such returns.

As for "solutions" besides expulsion and the cocomitant returns to fascism, IMO the Europeans need to do the following, although I must stress that I do not know the current state of the various law codes over there: 1) strenghten any laws that encourage assimilation 2)toughen up laws protecting police action against riots, death-threats, etc, 3)enact indefinite moratoriums on Muslim immigration, 4) enact Draconian, heart-wrenching limitations on any "family-reunification" clauses in their laws, 5) deport non-citizens, or citizenship-pending persons guilty of a) rioting, b) terrorist-related crime c) advocacy of terrorism, d)advocacy of harming Jews, police, or others (NO equivalents of "clear and present danger" escape-clauses) e) perhaps even advocacy of sharia law/Caliphate. 6) ANYONE who aids or committs terrorism should be deported or imprisoned for long, long time...and they might want to think about re-instituting the death penalty. 7) Tight, tight controls on Islamic education--loyalty oaths for teachers, spies, etc. Of course, if you apply 4) to CITIZENS, that is a very Draconian step, as is the really effective forms of 7). Getting 3) will be the decisive hurdle. And if you get to the point of enacting these laws, particularly the latter ones, you just have forthrightly say, "we couldn’t make multicuturalism work, too many Muslims are the threat, but we intend to vigorously protect the rights of the law-abiding Muslims who are here, and we welcome their assimilation to our culture."

And as long as we’re getting radical, so as to see how it is that tough Europeans can avoid empowering white nationalists in the absence of their acting, I might point out that many of these nations have a weak tradition of consitutional rights, such as our right to privacy. So it might not be preposterous to say that the French or Russian government might say, "for the next two years, we will prohibit the sale of all contraceptives, and the administration of all abortions. If you want have sex this year, make preparations to take care of the kiddos."

I concede that almost everything on this list is undesirable, ugly, depolorable, etc....but at some point, if other solutions are not found, "good" Europeans will be up against either 1) doing all this in the most non-graducal and drastic fashion, or 2) with stepping aside and letting the Islamists and white nationalists fight it out. Oh, and then there’s 3) Peters’ turn to full-board fascism.

Show me how I’m wrong, folks...I want to be wrong about this.

No, I would have posted the Peters piece as well, and I don’t blame anyone for framing it differently than I would. Peters dealt with an important topic that is rarely discussed (whether the situation in Europe can really be solved), so it was worth reading. Unfortunately, Peters dealt with the issue in a manner that was both apocalyptic and incoherent.

They are simply horrified that eurofascism could be viewed in any positive light, Steve. Pretty typical on this website...refusal to face reality squarely and consider things from alternative points of view. Given how dire things will be getting in Europe in the very near future, and given European history (i.e., the track record), if the dam breaks it’s liable to get ugly. But, as I said in my first post, I think Steyn is correct...they will simply fade away, and we’ll pick up the refugees. A sad end for the world’s most accomplished culture.

But let me pose this to my fellow NLT’ers: Which is better, a eurofascism that preserves something of Western culture, or demographic death and the Etruscanization of the West?

Sorry, Carl, you are correct...indeed, these are the palatable solutions (that is, if you want to maintain some kind of Western civilization in western Europe). On the other hand, millions in Europe and America seem to prefer politically-correct purity (i.e., suicide) to any corrective action.

I’m not sure the world has ever produced such a dysfunctional culture...perhaps Western Civ is not viable in the long-term, for all its other accomplishments.

Steve Thomas, I was grateful to Steve Hayward for bringing the Peter’s article to our attention. Just because I did not like what I read does not mean it isn’t a good thing to know. I might as well have been angry at Yahoo for bringing me rough news in the morning.


I should go back and look, but am in ahurry, yet what I remember from the article that felt ugly was that Peters seemed to be saying "Oh, yeah? You think Islamo-fascism is nasty, just wait till the fascist haters of Europe get involved. There, now there, you have some really great haters! They’ll rescue the continent for us."


And dain (perhaps) who wants to have to choose between favorite flavors of fascism? I have none. Steyn’s demographic analysis would indicate that the Eurofascists haven’t got a chance based on the numbers. Carl is probably correct that those (neatly put) legal reforms in Europe might stem the tide, but can you see the EU doing any, much less all, of those things?

Thanks, Carl, for laying out what seems to me to be a set of reasonable suggestions for how Europe might protect itself without abandoning its core values. The obvious problem with mass deportations is that they would treat Muslims as members of an undifferentiated mass, implying the notions of collective guilt that lay at the heart of fascism. Yes, absolutely, get rid of those who break the law, but law-abiding Muslims deserve protection, not deportation.

How about this suggestion...the Islamification of Europe will be a good thing. Also note that I don’t think that this Islamification can transcend the liberal elements of modernity...that is to say that I think that liberal democracy will be maintained...The overarching ideas do not change...It won’t be an ontological coup d’etat. Fukuyama is right about Human Nature and the End of history...demographics only mean that the color of the skin will change and Europe will become a little more socially conservative. In other words, Dain is wrong. The "Etruscanization" of the west is a false alarm as a negative...and potentially a huge windfall as a positive. Kate needs to quit worrying and spend more time with her kids.

Sigh...Professor Lewis, I don’t know how to respond to your last post...you amaze me.

I don’t think it is the AU professor.

I hope...HOPE...you are right.

Of course it isn’t Dr. Lewis, as far as I know no one has ever posted under my name other than me. Dr. Lewis would probably disagree with me...good for him. My point is that if you are to be logically consistent...and if you hold that Europe is milktoast liberal...even say Nihilistically Multiculturalist...then what avenue of hope do you hold out for? It doesn’t seem unlikely to me that Muslims in Europe will have a socially conservative effect...basically I think muslims in Europe will tend towards being socially conservative Lockeans; i.e. hard working with a clear sense of right and wrong. Personally I see very little difference between the moral teachings of Islam and those of Christianity, especially when it comes to integrating itself in to the modern context of Europe. If Moderate Muslims exist they will thrive best in Europe and the United States. There is also a huge difference in the role played by the "same" religion in different cultures. Where there is less economic opportunity, less opportunity to thrive and prosper in this world...religion gains more force as a voice of discontent... The Muslims of Dubai in the UAE and Kuwait City in Kuwait are different from the Muslims in Fallujah. In the context of a prosperous Europe Islam itself takes on a different light, just as it takes a different role and place in the life of the believer. At worst the "Etruscanization" of Europe will make it resemble Dubai. The future belongs to the hard working capitalist, regardless of religious identification. In point of fact I would prefer to see the Muslims triumph than to see the Episcopalians triumph. The european muslim deserves more success than the european episcopalian. In the long run those who deserve success will attain it, and those who don’t will go extinct.

So, if Professor Lewis wanted to post, would he have to post as "Dr. Lewis" or perhaps "Lewis the Wiser?"

Anyway, the opinions expressed by "John Lewis" are plain stupid. Are current societies in the Arab world "hard working" and "socially conservative" (i.e.,Burkean paradises)? No, they are crappy dictatorships that enslave women, destroy dissent, retard science, and perpetuate a brand of intolerance that is completely incompatible with democracy, free markets, and religious pluralism. Given my choice, I’ll take the limp-wristed Euros...they are much less likely to park jumbo jets in various inappropriate places.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/9462