“Islamed Out”

     When Mark Steyn throws his hands up:

     I've spent the entirety of this no longer new century writing about this stuff. As I told Steve Paikin on a turbulent edition of his TV show all those years ago, the remorseless demographic transformation of the western world is the biggest story of our time, so why wouldn't a writer want to write about it? Apart from anything else, once you're aware of it, it haunts your dreams. But most of us still aren't aware of it. I've been fortunate enough to get a couple of bestselling books out of the subject, but that's no comfort if, by the time they're my age, my children are living in a post-western world. And, of course, you can have a "bestseller" and 99.999999999 per cent of the population need never know of it. Every day I get letters from people who come here via a link from someone or other beginning in effect: "What do you mean, 'the Islamization of Europe'? It's the first I've heard of it."

     Really? Why did the Charlie Hebdo guys get killed? Because they provoked Islam. Why is Europe's political class so willing to trade away free speech and women's rights? Because they're desperate to appease Islam. Why did the same young secular childless German women who supported Angela Merkel in her multiculti delusions spend the New Year getting groped and raped by the young men they so generously opened the doors of their country to? Because when you appease Islam you provoke Islam.

     I'm pretty Islamed out, because I don't have a lot to say I didn't say ten years ago.

     ... you know the situation is grave. If you’re a minor-league commentator who’s been screaming at the top of his figurative lungs for just as long, you have to ask yourself whether there’s any point in going on.

     However, the exploitation of Islam by Western governments still demands emphasis. Also, that which drives me is less under my conscious command than I’d like to believe. Accordingly, one more probably vain screed coming up.

---

     Given the attitudes displayed by the members of our political class, it no longer seems rationally disputable that they regard Islam and the fearsome aspect it presents to us of the civilized world as a useful tool with which to ensure our continued submission. Every State is founded on the fears of its subjects. It follows that anything that accentuates those fears, that makes the individual look about for a protector, will be of value to the State.

     Therefore, it is unwise to expect that our government will “do anything” about any of the various aspects of the Islamic threat:

• Politicians will not speak ill of Islam.
• They won’t causally associate Islam with terrorism or other brutality.
• They won’t act to punish any Islamic nation, no matter what it might do.
• They won’t hurry to note that the perpetrators of any given atrocity are Muslims.
• They certainly won’t unambiguously side with Israel against the Palestinian irredentists.
• They won’t hinder – indeed, they might encourage, as Angela Merkel has – the hijra: the migration of Muslims from dar al Islam – the lands where it’s currently dominant – to dar al Harb -- the West.

     Of course, there is a problem with the tactic: while fearful subjects are easily commanded and controlled, the generators of that fear – Muslims – aren’t fearful at all. Should they displace the native populations of Europe and America, our politicians might well wish they’d thought the matter through a wee bit further.

---

     As with Steyn, I’ve been jabbering on about this for quite a few years. At the old Palace of Reason in 2004, I wrote:

     All of Islam's theocosmogony to the side, its usefulness to the Left in wearing away our edifice of freedom is undeniable. For one thing, Islam's instantiations in other countries, both political and cultural, are fodder for the apostles of multiculturalism. For another, Islam propounds so complete a system of dominance that most men of good will are unwilling to compare it to any "lesser" agenda of regimentation; it makes our domestic Leftists look good. For a third, as matters stand, Western societies are unable to bar their doors to an influx of immigrants solely because of their "religion." For a fourth, our necessary response to Islam's violent attitude toward other creeds and social systems provides leftists with specious justifications for accusing the West's defenders of tyranny, even though it's the Left's own program of control that's the real thing. It's hardly necessary to go on from there.

However, it remains the case that the Left cherishes some sorts of latitude, at least for itself, to which Islam is as rigidly opposed as it is to all others. Sexual freedom is one example; artistic license is another. Thus, while the jihadis are a temporarily useful tool in destroying freedom "in the large," the Left could not tolerate them once the libertarian-conservative ethos that protects personal liberty, private property, and individual initiative has been overthrown.

Each of these monstrosities alone would present a formidable foe, simply for its ruthlessness. Together, they appear tactically to be much the worse...yet the tensions between them offer the defender of freedom an opportunity not to be missed.

     At that time, I believed that it was possible to kill two birds with one stone, as it were. Compelling the representatives of the Left to admit that their apparent sympathy for Islam is a tactical ploy would poison American left-liberalism / “progressivism.” It would simultaneously prompt increasing numbers of unengaged or marginally engaged private citizens to take a closer look at the Religion of War, Murder, Slavery, and Rape. The consequences could only be to the good.

     Why this hasn’t happened, I cannot say. Certainly enough writers have noted the way the Left coddles Islam for sins infinitely more grievous than the peccadilloes for which it castigates the traditional religions, cultures, and customs of normal, decent Americans. Yet somehow, the necessary connections haven’t occurred in enough minds.

     Perhaps we the politically engaged have been firing the wrong ammunition.

---

     I’m terribly tired just now – it’s been a “medical morning” – so I’ll close here. But expect me to return to this subject. Not only haven’t we made any progress on it; apart from the possibility of a declaration of martial law after the election results come in, there’s nothing on the national radar that looms any larger. Indeed, I question whether any subject short of imminent nuclear war really could.