October 15, 2007
Patrick Foy is certainly entitled to dissent from my views about the current European scene, but it might help to point out the obvious, which his rejoinder partly obfuscates. It is naÃ¯ve to distinguish the growing Muslim presence in Europe as a religious community from the same presence as a non-Western and, moreover, anti-Western culture. The majority of Muslim immigrants in Germany have no interest in learning German, and they passionately identify with the Muslim Fundamentalist movement back in Turkey. Throughout Western and Central Europe Muslim immigrants and asylum-seekers form parallel societies, a subject on which I could recommend to Mr. Foy a slew of books, and they wreck violence on the European host countries as the hated Other. Most Europeans, who seem brain-dead or in the German case pathologically guilt-driven, allow this takeover to take place, because they have lost their desire to survive as a cultural and social community. Obviously Christianity once belonged to this lost European identity, but it was not the sole component, and the reasons that Muslim immigrants hate Europeans cannot be conveniently reduced to theological disputes. Contrary to Mr. Foy’s assertion, only a very tiny part of the European population has ever been Muslim. Moreover, the Bosnians who form the exception, converted during the Turkish occupation, to hold on their land. Although there were Muslims who became part of the Bulgarian state in the late nineteenth century, they were Turks, whom the Bulgarians graciously allowed to stay on after the Ottomans had withdrawn.
The Muslims do come as “invaders” whether or not the current generation of Europeans and their loathsome political representatives acquiesce in their own destruction. In 1938 Hitler “invaded” Austria, although many Austrians, who had sought unity with Germany since the First World War, actively cheered the invasion. How my views on what is happening to Europe coincide with standard neocon opinion is something that Mr. Foy never fully clarifies. Edmund Burke III has just touched the tip of the iceberg, when he cites the neocon journalist Ralph Peters to show that neocons often side with the Muslim invaders rather than the Europeans in times of confrontation. When the Muslim banlieusards went on the rampage in and around Paris in 2005, the neocons were full of Schadenfreude. Whether one looked at the Wall Street Journal Weekly Standard, or New York Post, it was the same point of view put forth. The Europeans are crawling with neo-Nazi enemies of Israel and are getting what they deserve. We were also told that the French and other Europeans could have absorbed the well-meaning Muslim immigrants, if only they had adopted the neocon formula of propositional nationhood, instead of being such damned fascist nationalists. Lawrence Auster should be commended for documenting at the time the pro-Muslim position that the neocons were taking on European politics. It is truly astonishing that Mr. Foy and several of his respondents attribute to the neocons the opposite view. One of these respondents even recklessly asserts that the Vlaams Belang is a neocon-like organization. The latest column by Jonah Goldberg should put to rest that glaring misconception.