Donald Trump’s recent call to ban all Muslim immigrants from coming into the U.S. has been undoubtedly the most controversial thing he’s said of this campaign. That’s saying a lot, but I can feel it in the air. This comment has been different. It’s different because it gives him no plausible deniability. While the media construed many of his comments in the typical hysterical fashion, there was always a deniability. His supposed comments about “Mexican immigrants” were really about the illegal aliens that Mexico supposedly “sent” to the United States a la the Mariel Boatlift of 1980, but given the way he phrased it, it could sound like he was talking about all Mexican immigrants.
I didn’t really want to do yet another Donald Trump post at this point. Regular readers of this blog will know that I’ve been supporting him, mainly because of his calls for sensible immigration reduction, his pledge to renegotiate our country’s trade deals that have not been kind to the American worker, his surprisingly dovish foreign policy (which consists of not engaging in a new Cold War with Russia, not removing secular dictators in the Middle East, and not supporting “moderate” rebels in Syria or anywhere else), and his complete manhandling of the “social justice,” pro-regressive, politically correct left that has increased racial and gender tensions, and which engages in a spree of corruption, bullying, and marginalization of those they disagree with. The fact that he’s routing the media is an added bonus.
Yet, despite my nationalistic bent and desire for immigration reduction, even I can’t deny that on a deep, visceral level, what Donald Trump just did is extraordinarily ugly. I’m far from politically correct (as you all know!), and am not afraid to go into discourse that the left would like to forbid to get at truths that they don’t want to see.
Still, I can’t shake the gut feeling that this is particularly nasty. Chalk it up to cultural programming, but outright discrimination like this is unsettling to my American ears.
And yet, what Donald Trump has just said also forces us to engage in some unwanted dialogue and get at unsavory truths. We as a society are so utterly brainwashed by political correctness and this nonsensical mantra that everyone is equal and all cultures are the same that we simply can’t handle this kind of dialogue. If I’m feeling a bit uneasy, many others, as I put my fingers to this keypad, are basically hyperventilating.
First let me get the easy part out of the way…
1. This is Our House:
Much of the hyperventilation currently occurring is predicated on this assumption – we, the American people, have an obligation to let everyone in the world come into our country. In essence, we do not own our house, the entire world does, and we have no say what that house can look like and what its order can be. Indeed, this has essentially been our immigration policy for the past 50 years.
I find this assumption far more outrageous and “undemocratic” than anything Trump has said, but since it fits the mantra of liberal “equality” and globalization, not a peep.
To be clear, we, the American people, are the only ones that should have a say over who can come into our country and who cannot. We do not “owe” our country to any outside group. If we only want to admit Christians, we get to only admit Christians. If we want to only admit Muslims, we get to do that also, and if we want to exclude people from certain areas, or to certain IQ ranges, or to certain skills that can be brought to our economy, we can do that too, and if we want to admit no one at all, that’s our prerogative.
To say otherwise is to say that we do not have a country, and that we get no say in who we admit or how we do it. Much of this outrage affirms the belief that we should, ideally, not have a country.
Now that that’s out of the way, let’s get into the more serious portion.
2. Islam is a Problem:
There, I said it.
If you’re unhappy with that, you can go off and hyperventilate. It’s time for some real talk.
First of all, I want to be very clear that I don’t have a problem with any individual Muslims. I know that in today’s hypersensitive world, that’s a necessary disclaimer. I’ve met a number of Muslims from the Roosh V Forum (including Roosh himself, who is of partial Muslim heritage). One of the best girls I know is Muslim (but not Middle Eastern, rather a Russian Circassian). These are all good people.
My problem is not with Muslims. My problem is with Islam itself.
The amount of white knighting that has gone on for this totalitarian death cult is simply mind-boggling and disgraceful. The unholy alliance of leftists/globalists and Islam is fast dragging our world into ruin. As I will explain in my year-end article, I am calling 2015 “The Year that Moderation Ended,” and this evil coalition is a leading cause.
When I say that Islam is a totalitarian death cult, I mean it. The literal meaning of its name gives it away – “Submission.” It is a religion that is at once legalistic and absolutist. One could indeed argue that Islam is just warlordism disguised as a religion. The punishment for leaving the religion can be construed as death (the Koran does not command it, but several passages in the Hadiths do), and an alarming number of Muslims – in the West and in supposed “moderate” Muslim countries, believe that it is justified to kill apostates. An even greater number of Muslims believe that Sharia law takes precedence over national law, or would like to see such a situation.
Being a “white supremacist” or a “Nazi” is seen as the ultimate evil in today’s society. Though the framing of this as a somehow unique evil is something I find retarded, there is a good reason for a visceral disgust of someone who holds that sentiment. The disgust arises from the fact that the Nazi holds beliefs that are deeply dehumanizing, and we know that, though he himself may not carry out violence on those he dehumanizes with his beliefs, he won’t exactly be upset if someone else does, and may in fact give fuel to it. He would also gladly take up arms if the opportunity arose.
The Nazi plays well as an example to illustrate this phenomenon, even though, despite what the left claims, there are very few legitimate Nazis left.
Islam holds the exact same dehumanizing assumptions. It only has different justifications and end-goals. It’s rightly been said by many that “a moderate Muslim is just someone that’s waiting for a radical to kill you.” That’s overstated, but it’s less overstated than we, and certainly the left, would like to believe.
In my upcoming book, Year Zero, I examine the logical chain and ideas behind movements throughout history that have been decidedly destructive. Examined are not only the Nazism and Communism of the 20th century, but movements stretching back into history. They span the left-right spectrum. They are religious and secular. What they all have in common is this – they are based on purification and deconstruction, a total erasure of the existing social order so that a new order can be built in its place.
Although I don’t give much emphasis to Islam in the book until the end for its relative lack of an impact on Western thought until recently, Islam is very much a Year Zero movement. Its mission is to spread the faith worldwide, and it has no qualms about dehumanizing those who do not believe:
So when you meet those who disbelieve, strike their necks until you have inflicted slaughter upon them. – Koran 47:4
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. – Koran 9:29
And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, strife) and religion should be only for Allah. – Koran 8:39
Indeed those who are opposing Allah and His Messenger are bound to be humiliated. The Almighty has ordained: I and My Messengers shall always prevail. Indeed Allah is Mighty and Powerful. – Koran 58:20
It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, although they who associate others with Allah dislike it. – Koran 9:33
The Koran is not the only text in Islam that espouses Year Zero violence:
If you [Muslims] are under their [infidels’] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them, with your tongue, while harbouring inner animosity for them… Allah has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels in place of believers – except when infidels are above them [in authority]. In such a scenario, let them act friendly towards them. – Al-Tabari’s Tafsir
These are but a scant few of the proclamations of “the religion of peace.” Is this an ideology that can really produce a “moderate?” It is indeed not entirely without merit to say that ISIS is living as the Koran commands Muslims to live.
A “moderate” Muslim (who takes his religion very seriously as opposed to people who were just born of Muslim heritage and maybe occasionally attend a mosque), it can be strongly argued, is not unlike a “moderate” Nazi – an oxymoron. Though I am loathe to invoke Godwin’s Law and normally dismiss anyone that does, there is simply no way around the fact that Islam is a violent belief system that dehumanizes those it sees as its enemies, lest they be obstacles to its Year Zero vision.
Ditch the religion for a moment. Pretend that those statements could be applied to Ideology X. Would you be comfortable around someone openly stating those beliefs, much less want to make that ideology more powerful in your country? I would gamble that you would not.
Yet because Islam calls itself a religion, the people of the West put their heads in the sand, because they absolutely, positively, must be NotRacist (even though Islam is not a race).
And many adherents of the religion do indeed at least passively support violence. As pointed out above, many support cutting off the hands of thieves and stoning women to death for adultery. Nor is this view merely shared by Muslims in Muslim countries, for Muslims in the West are also problematic. By some accounts, 80% of young Turks in the Netherlands see nothing wrong with waging jihad against nonbelievers. Fundamentalism amongst Muslims all across Europe is widespread, which includes putting religious law above national law. Support for ISIS stands, by some polls, at 16% in France, and as high as one-in-seven among young Britons.
Then we can look at some of the practical, everyday problems facing areas with high numbers of Muslim immigrants. Sweden is the most obvious example of course, as since allowing mass Islamic immigration into the country starting in the 70’s, its per capita rape rate rose to amongst the highest in the world. Germany has also been facing an uptick of rapes since “asylum seekers” poured into the country.
And while “no go zones” throughout Europe are a misnomer, there are certainly areas of Muslim dominance that are causing a large number of social problems. Places like Paris and Malmo are infamous for them, but the most infamous of all is probably Rotherham, England, where 1,400 underage girls were trafficked and raped.
Nor is this phenomenon limited to Europe. While the United States does much better than Europe in assimilating minorities, Some Muslim areas in the U.S. are also associated with social problems. The most infamous example is likely the Muslim Somali community in Minneapolis, where Jihad recruiters are a recurring problem and there is evidence that a gang culture has been grown, though I could not find direct evidence on the overall effect on crime.
We must also look at the outcomes of Islamic culture. I am not wrong when I say that countries with a predominantly Islamic culture have not contributed anything meaningful to the growth of human civilization for the past millennium. Even vaunted liberal, atheist hero Neil deGrasse Tyson has said this:
Saudi Arabia and other leading Muslim countries have no qualms about lashing and punishing women for being raped. In Pakistan, a woman was stoned to death for having a mobile phone. And, while Islamic civilization does not have a monopoly on this, homosexuality is illegal in most Muslim countries and punishable by death in many of them. And, as we saw earlier, a large number of Muslims have no problems with any of this.
In white knighting so staunchly for Islam and not recognizing these abuses, people who are ostensibly liberal betray the supposedly vulnerable groups they pride themselves on championing. See also: my open letter to feminists.
And we simply cannot deny the most obvious truth – Islam, despite what anything apologists might say or attempt to counteract with cherry-picked examples, is presently the only religion in the world that produces terrorist attacks with alarming regularity, and there appears to be no end in sight.
Indeed, as one astute observer on the Roosh V Forum so painfully, but eloquently put it:
I’m seeing more outrage from Muslims over Trump’s comments than I have seen for any of the mass killings done in Islam’s name. – worldwidetraveler
Memes have gone around since Trump’s announcement attempting to shame it by substituting prohibitions on Jews or Catholics from coming into the country, but these are poor arguments based on emotions. Jews and Catholics are not presently stoning women to death or blowing themselves up and trying to kill as many people as possible in the name of their religion.
And, while we pride ourselves on “being inclusive,” we neglect to mention that Muslim countries are often far from being the same:
The standard response after hearing all of this is to go into denial and try to cherry-pick other examples to fit the equalist, multicultural, globalist narrative. To be forced to admit that another culture or religion is at least partly complicit in producing bad social outcomes is, to the typical Western liberal, somehow a tacit admission of “racism,” and “racism,” of course, is a unique evil to be avoided at all costs. To be clear, I also blame idiotic American/NATO foreign policy in the Middle East for terrorism, so we cannot entirely absolve ourselves from the blame, but that is a different topic. With or without it, Islam, like Nazism, Communism, or other Year Zero movements covered in my book, has supremacist and violent beliefs deeply inherent in it, beliefs we know to have produced appalling social outcomes, and such beliefs have been shamefully whitewashed in the name of political correctness.
For so long, the Western world, bathed in the self-congratulatory ideology of postmodern liberalism and lacking any serious existential crisis forcing us to confront reality since the Second World War, has been in the denial stage about not only Islam, but many other problems. Political correctness can be seen as a defense mechanism to deny reality.
But there have been some signs that the anger and bargaining stages are starting to set in, and Donald Trump blew the door so wide open on this issue that the anger stage is now in full force. The outrage seen now is by far the largest of the campaign. The hyperventilation is so strong because Donald Trump is forcing us to confront this reality. What Donald Trump said is ugly, but the world is not all sunshine and rainbows, and we have been so out of touch with reality for so long that the shock to our system when it hits could very well be terminal if we don’t know what we’re doing.
There are very real and very frightening indications that civil unrest and even war are possible. Our geopolitical and social situation does not resemble the chummy, humorous, high-tech world of Back to the Future II, but the powder keg that eventually led to the outbreak of World War I.
If we wish to avoid even the possibility of that occurring, we need to engage in constructive dialogue. The intellectual disease that is political correctness needs to be purged. We cannot afford it any longer. We must talk openly and honestly with one another, and stop taking things off the table because of faux moral outrage and virtue signaling. Indeed, though what Donald Trump said is undeniably ugly, by saying it, he may ironically help in the process of saving our liberal democratic society from its own weaknesses which now threaten its survival – not just from Islam, but from an increasingly alienated population that is fast threatening to make the moderate – of either left or right – an endangered species.
My friend, who goes by the name of Immortal Watchdog (I won’t disclose his real name for his privacy), on the Bardic Circle has mentioned several times the phenomenon of the political pendulum. He is from a politically connected family, and was recently in Argentina for its November election, which swept the leftist Kirchnerite faction from power, putting Mauricio Macri in its stead. In discussion with numerous officials, including Macri himself, a sense of not only celebration, but astonishment was in the air. They knew that what they had done was big. The ruling leftist order, entrenched not only in Argentina but in all of South America, had fallen, and yet, what’s going on cannot be contained on just one continent. In the days and weeks since, Venezuela’s leftist order under Maduro has been defeated in an election, in Brazil, it looks like Dilma is about to be impeached, Marine Le Pen looks set to make history by gaining at least two regions in Sunday’s second round regional elections, Angela Merkel, despite being named Time’s “Person of the Year,” is fighting for her life, the “Brexit” movement in Britain is gaining steam, and even Sweden’s nationalist party is surging. Though they are “left wing” movements, Portugal just elected an anti-establishment governing coalition and the Podemos Party in Spain is charging ahead.
Donald Trump is far from a lone wolf. He must be put into his proper context.
Immortal Watchdog mentioned that the pendulum is so far to the left that he is worried that when it swings back right, it will blow everything before it away. That may be true, but I think an even better answer is that people are so fed up with the establishment governing, media, and academic elites that the reaction to them could quickly turn into an overreaction of rage with undesirable outcomes in the end. Revolutions often go on that course. In Year Zero, I document how the English Civil War started with a relatively simple attempt to bring what was seen by parliament as an arrogant and out of touch King Charles I to the negotiating table and to recognize some of their demands. It ended in a bloodbath, including sectarian violence and authoritarian rule, that tore the British Isles apart and attempted to erase much of their history, but the Charles problem was indeed solved – because he was beheaded.
Such is the price paid by social orders and elites that are out of touch with reality and with their people. Solutions that are undesirable get found. Islam has been mentioned by a few as being a solution to our present problems – but it is certainly not the solution we want.
Donald Trump has forced us to recognize reality, for all its ugliness, but at least he’s given us the opportunity to talk to each other, and we should take it. Without the politically correct denialism, we need to talk about these problems and find negotiable solutions, ones which recognize the concerns of all involved. Otherwise we will find solutions we do not want, and I see two parallels before us if these problems are not solved now – Camp of the Saints or Starship Troopers.
These two outcomes are indeed solutions to the present malaise, but they are certainly not ones we want. Those who are outraged and think Trump is the Antichrist would consider him tame compared to what may ultimately come to pass.
So please, let’s get talking. If we’re talking, we’re not fighting.