Thursday, June 16, 2011

Angry Islam Incompatible with European Liberalism

Europeans are increasingly unwilling to tolerate Muslim intolerance

The liberal media in this country are wringing their hands over increasing European intolerance. They worry that anti-Muslim sentiment is on the rise even in Sweden...

"...home of the Nobel Prize and known as the "conscience of the world" for aiding refugees and pioneering laws for women's equality and gay rights. Yet even here, the Swedish Democrats made it into the Rikstag by tapping into a surge of anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim sentiment sweeping across many nations in Western Europe, propelling right-wing and nationalist parties to their biggest gains in years." (WaPo)
Are our ink-stained scribblers and enlightened cognoscenti really too dumb to realize that Islam is the greatest threat to Europe's famed and admirable liberalism? Muslims are not known for championing women's equality and gay rights.

A Swede put it simply:

"The Swedish are tired of walking around in their own neighborhoods and feeling like they're in Saudi Arabia," said Ekeroth, an intense 30-year-old and founder of the new Anti-Islamic Fund, which promotes criticism of radical Islam. "It is time for the Swedish to be comfortable again in their own country."
Angry Muslim replaces Ugly American as #1 Threat to Europe

There is disorder in the European house. Europeans were living comfortably and peaceably in the home they had built, settling upon a live-and-let-live liberalism that has kept the peace for 65 years.  Ugly Americans demanding everybody speak English used to be the main disturber of Europe's peaceful repose.

Now, denizens of the Olde Continent are shocked and horrified to see that many Muslims they generously invited in have become a pack of wild animals let loose in the house. The beasts have found high perches upon couch backs and china cabinets and bare their fangs at the customs of their hosts.  

Because of these newcomers, Europeans must change their behavior?

How is that right? A people have a right to their culture, and nobody has the right to forcibly change it from the outside. This is especially so when the culture is beneficial to mankind, not a threat to others, and has been decided upon by the people. Europe's culture meets all three criteria.

"It isn't racist to want to preserve your culture," said Leif Johansson, a 64-year-old carpenter. "I'm open to immigration, but these people come without a thought to integration, no interest in learning Swedish or being part of Swedish society."
Precisely. No nation should be compelled to commit national suicide. But what else could the agenda be of a people who move in and angrily demand conformance to their strange and violent politico-religious freak show?

Europe may finally be fed up. I pray they are, and I pray we learn a lesson here before it's too late.

* - This is a repost.  It expands upon my thoughts from yesterday's post


Always On Watch said...

Angry Muslim replaces Ugly American as #1 Threat to Europe

And one of the biggest differences between the Ugly American and the Angry Muslim is that the latter is a colonizer, an invader.

Once fundamentalist Moslems get a foothold in a country, it's nearly impossible to dislodge them. Just look at how long the Reconquest of Spain took! Some 700 years! And it also bore the fruit of the Inquisition. When the pendulum swings, it swings hard.

Anonymous said...

A couple of things:

1. The one thing we cannot afford to tolerate is intolerance.

2. Common sense should tell you that putting garlic in chocolate fudge, or hot chili peppers in cocoanut layer cake, or a tablespoonful of steel filings into beef stew will either totally destroy or forever alter the flavor and character of the dish in question.

As a New Yorker born and bred, I love cosmopolitanism -- the atmosphere where many different kinds of people and exotic foreign cultures live peaceably in their own neighborhoods but share food, music, art, interior design ideas freely without trying to dominate or annihilate each other. New York has always had its problems, but no one I ever knew there advocated foreign colonization of the USA. The disparate immigrant groups may have been distrustful of one another and highly competitive, but every one of them wanted to be part of the unique social fabric that is -- or was -- the United States of America.

The opposite of cosmopolitanism is multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is all about division. It inveighs against and works to undermine unity. Its goal is to weaken and ultimately destroy the ethos described in our motto e pluribus unum -- the motto that Al Gore did not know meant "one [shall be made] out of many." If I remember correctly, he thought it meant the exact opposite -- if he thought at all.

It's desirable to encourage all different sorts of people to respect one another as fellow human beings, and to develop a healthy curiosity about each other's folkways and ideals. What we ought to aim for is the elimination of any tendency towards aggression and subjugation based on an assumption of cultural or religious superiority. If we allowed for free competition in a marketplace of ideas and ideals, we might learn something of value from one another, but any attempt to dominate and subjugate by main force, treachery and deceit is doomed to perpetuate feelings of resentment, resistance, rebellion and the desire for violent reprisal -- the usual chain reaction that has made most of human history a tragedy.

All of which is to say:

If you like garlic, that's fine, but DON'T sprinkle it over my chocolate ice cream and expect me to LIKE it.

~ FreeThinke

TonyFernandez said...

I just hope that we do not change our laws. We should demand tolerance and nothing more. Equal treatment under the law made this country what it is today. We cannot change that because of some critics who want things their way. That is not what this country is about. Aggression and intolerance should not be allowed!

Lisa said...

great points here. I agree that a host country should not be expected to bend any traditions but embrace others,and in turn the host country's traditions should be embraced as well.
I mean after all, women especially who visit certain Arab countries are expected to adhere to their customs.

Anonymous said...

I've always found the liberal Muslim alliance a strange one. I have a friend who is a big supporter of the gay agenda. He is also outspoken about anti Islamic views I keep trying to explain that those two views are not compatible.

Anonymous said...

Finntann said it best. But it is not just the Muslims that want to establish their culture in America; don't forget about La Raza.

Trekkie4Ever said...

That's what you see..Muslims move in and then demand for people to change for them. They have no intention of learning the culture of the nation, but insist that we embrace theirs.

I am done with it.

Anonymous said...

People will do whatever they are allowed to get away with. Because The Christian West as been such an enormous success, elements that have not shared that triumph have long sought to make those of us who have benefited from the abundance Western Civilization has brought feel guilty and ashamed that we have so much while the rest of the world lives in abject poverty and utter wretchedness.

Out of envy, spite, malice and the desire to seek vengeance for being cast by fate, tradition and personal inclination in the role of perpetual outsiders, certain elements devised the demonically-clever, seductive and pernicious mode of thinking known as Marxism. Marxism very cleverly purports to be a wholly benevolent philosophy dedicated to the promotion of " social and economic justice," "fairness," "tolerance," "equality," when in fact it is based on the desire to destroy the established norms that have done more good than any other way of thinking and believing ever before devised.

Contrive to make people feel guilty and ashamed of who they are. Get them them to believe they do not deserve what they have. Seduce them into devoting themselves to vice, blatant vulgarity, and mindlessly self-destructive pursuits, and you will soon be able to bend them to your will, and thus destroy them.

Right now leftists love, support and defend radical Muslims, because the desire of the Islamaniacs and the leftists is the same. Both want to destroy Christianity and the magnificent civilization Christian cultural values produced in the past two-thousand years.

Leftists, apparently, do not see that once Islamania has established itself as the dominant force in the West -- coming soon, because:

1. the West, weakened by Marxism, is effete, emasculated, almost moribund

2. Islamaniacs outbreed us 10 to 1

3. Islamaniacs are great masters of deceit, which they regard as a positive virtue

4. Islamaniacs have no scruples whatsoever in trying to achieve their ends --

So, once Islam rules, these treacherous, traitorous "liberals," will soon find themselves targeted for brutal extermination, since the purpose of any Marxist/Islamist alliance will have been served.

By deserting reverence for Almighty God in favor of spurious, self-serving manmade philosophies, The West has signed its own death warrant.

Mankind will be plunged into a reincarnation of The dark Ages for hundreds of years to come -- if mankind can survive nuclear holocaust.

~ FreeThinke

MathewK said...

"Are our ink-stained scribblers and enlightened cognoscenti really too dumb to realize that Islam is the greatest threat to Europe's famed and admirable liberalism?"

Yes, just like the liberal idiots of Europe, they'll only come to their senses about islam when farook al-asswipe kicks down their door and punches them in the face shouting 'allah akbar infidel dog!'

"Europe may finally be fed up. I pray they are, and I pray we learn a lesson here before it's too late."

Don't count on liberals learning though, the liberal retards in America refuse to learn the lessons of socialism from Europe, they won't on this issue either.

Anonymous said...

Well, okay, MK, but I'm an American who happens to know several "European Socialists" -- one of whom was a classmate of mine in college who has been an American ex-patriate living happily in France since 1967 -- and all of these people are quite contented with their lives. They live well -- by their own lights -- and seem remarkably free of the anger, derision, paranoia and xenophobia that has come to dominate political life here in the USA.

I happen to think they are too passive and blissfully unaware of what is happening, and I disagree with their view that they are superior to us and have developed a better way of life than ours, but for us to imagine that all Europe live in poverty, misery, and degradation is ludicrous. It's just not true.

HOWEVER, I have studied real estate at home and abroad for many years -- a hobby of mine -- and I can tell you that larger and better quality housing is readily available in the USA at a fraction of what it would cost you to purchase much smaller, meaner, less attractive and more dilapidated quarters in Europe. For instance, most of the people I know here live in single-family dwellings anywhere from 1400 to 3500 square feet surrounded by a generous amount of woodland and garden space. These pleasant-but-decidedly-middle-class homes now range in cost from $90,000.00 -- to $375,000.00.

In Paris you'd be fortunate to find a 450-square-foot flat with primitive kitchen and bathroom facilities on the top floor of a walk-up for half a million dollars. You can buy very small, cramped, unattractive row houses with little or no garden space in unpopular out-of-the-way suburbs and unknown country hamlets for less than $300,00.00, but they usually need extensive renovation.

I don't know about real estate in Australia. But if you enjoy creature comforts, spacious accommodations, dependable service and material well-being, the good Ol' USA is certainly one of the best places to be.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

OMG, do you see whats taking place in Syria? Regardless of a brutal government crackdown, the demonstrations continue

Silverfiddle said...

Come what may, I believe we should be clandestinely helping the Syrians.

The fall of the Assad Regime deprives Iran of their toehold in the Levant. It would be a big mess, but it would also isolate Iran and cut off the Hezbos in Lebanon, giving that poor country some breathing room.