A Continent in Existential Crisis

The Mark Steyn Show
June 23, 2017

https://www.steynonline.com/7939/a-continent-in-existential-crisis

We're proud to present a brand new edition of The Mark Steyn Show. These programs, along with SteynPosts, Tales for Our Time and much else at SteynOnline, are made possible through the support of members of The Mark Steyn Club, for which we are extremely grateful.

In this episode, Mark talks to Douglas Murray, with whom he last appeared on the tenth anniversary of the Mohammed cartoons in the Danish Parliament. Douglas was much in the news this last week. In the wake of the attack on the Finsbury Park mosque, he was denounced on the BBC as a "hate preacher" - an outrageous defamation which the broadcaster has now walked back. You can see Reeta Chakrabarti's apology on behalf of the Corporation here.

Steyn does not regard Murray as a "hate preacher" but as a humane and clear-eyed observer of the existential tragedy unfolding across the west. In this program, Douglas discusses his new book The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam, published in America this week and which Mark describes as "profound". Steyn and Murray survey a continent in unprecedented demographic transformation, and roam far and wide in their analysis from the East End of London to the Mediterranean refugee camps, from far northern Sweden to the tomb of Charles Martel. We think you'll find this show worth your time. Click below to watch:

You can find Douglas Murray's must-read book here, and at bookstores everywhere. Among the benefits of Mark Steyn Club membership is that you can enjoy The Mark Steyn Show in any medium you desire: video, audio or text. So, if you find Steyn and Murray more palatable in non-visual form, please log-in to our Audio and Transcript versions. To listen to the above show, simply click here.

As we said above, The Mark Steyn Show is made possible through the support of members of The Mark Steyn Club. We appreciate that membership is not for everyone, but it does help assure that shows like this remain out there for everyone, winging their way around the world and perhaps changing a few minds. Premium Membership in the Club is available now, and if you'd like to find out more about it, please see here.

Another advantage of membership is access to our comments section. So, if you take issue with anything Douglas or Mark said on the show, then feel free to comment away below. (Any hate preachers among the membership are welcome to weigh in, too.)

© 2017 Mark Steyn Enterprises (US) Inc. All rights reserved.
No part of this website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied, modified or adapted, without the prior written consent of Mark Steyn Enterprises.

Got a comment on a column? Drop a line to Mark's Mailbox.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to steynonline's free weekly mailing list

Comment on this item

Submission of reader comments is restricted to Mark Steyn Club members only. If you are not yet a member, please click here to join. If you are already a member, please log in here:

Member Login

69 Reader Comments

Mark • Jul 8, 2017 at 19:01

Just finished going through"The Strange Death of Europe" for the second time. This is not a polemic; which makes it even more disturbing. There are no cheeky "Steynisms". It's a 'just the facts' tome. IMO, this should be mandatory reading for all politicians. Interviews like the one above make the Mark Steyn Club invaluable.

PK33 • Jul 4, 2017 at 11:07

Having made a long journey by car over the last week I listened to several audio books, including Douglas Murray's "The Slow Death of Europe". He mentioned that there were black US Secretaries of State, from both parties. Did I miss a Secretary, as I only recall Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice, who were both Republican party members and appointees? Perhaps I'm color-blind...

Nancy Wenlock • Jun 29, 2017 at 00:49

Mark, this interview was unnerving but something everyone should hear. Mr. Murray's observations are absolutely spot on. Every culture is NOT the same. Allowing people who have other homelands to destroy ours is quite insane and yet western governments are hell-bent on doing this.

Thank you for this in depth interview. I look forward to reading Mr. Murray's book and learning about his ideas on curbing this suicidal spiral the West is engaged in!

As an aside: Islamaphobia is non existent IMHO. Talk about making up words! The Western Civilization however, is being crucified.

Barbara • Jun 27, 2017 at 10:48

Mr. Steyn,
If we're going to be accused of being Islamaphobes, we may as well lean in, to use the current buzzword.
Have you ever considered doing an interview with Hamed Abdel-Samad, the German speaker who has also spent years trying to educate the West that their diversity worshipping is misguided? Maybe the readers here are already familiar with his work, but I think you would give us a fresh and insightful look. Keep up the good work!

Laura Rosen Cohen • Jun 27, 2017 at 10:44

So I just looooooooove the both of these chaps. Nothing like hearing an hour plus discussion on the Death of Europe but with such pleasant accents. Douglas Murray's line about the millennials, I'm dying! "I"m great, you're Hitler, hear me roar...or mew". HAHAHAHAHA!!

Mike Harlow • Jun 27, 2017 at 00:23

I thoroughly enjoyed this interview. A high level of intellect in a bed of humor leaving a pleasant feeling on an uncomfortable subject. Uncomfortable due to the repression of thoughtful dialogue that needs to take place, if the most serious of the issues, i.e. murder of innocent citizens by terrorists, is to be resolved.

Barbara • Jun 27, 2017 at 00:16

Great interview, thanks so much for putting our Founding funds to good use!
After listening to his experiences, I don't think the West is full of self-loathing of its culture, but rather just spoiled brats squandering our inheritance. The same way that socialists never expect to ever run out of other people's money, the elites really don't think that their soft comfortable life will be touched. I agree that the window of opportunity for a soft correction has probably passed. I'm seeing a future where the lines will not be drawn at the national borders but rather between the city limits and surrounding countryside.

Richard • Jun 26, 2017 at 17:12

Excellent interview - really a pleasure to see Mr. Murray able to speak for more than a minute without immediately being shouted down or smeared.

I was interested with the point about why Sweden was so eager to take in refugees. I had always assumed they got caught up in a feel-good multicultural wave with Germany, France, etc, but hadn't considered war guilt. My mother-in-law's family are immigrants from Finland, and apparently her father never said a bad word about anyone except the Swedes. During WWII, Finland requested help to fight off the Russians but Sweden never answered the call. This may not have any correlation with their current situation but it got my gears turning.

Gerry Kirkham. • Jun 26, 2017 at 15:09

With regard to the religious aspects of these discussions, I would submit that if it is relevant to the subject matter, then it is worth discussing. Although I am a lifelong atheist, I'm not rabid about it, and respect any persons right to choose their own path. However, the argument that our western Christian lineage is a very valid point. We each have a moral compass, that stems from that lineage. If you are raised by moral people, then your compass will guide you. Those raised to hate others for any reason, do not have a healthy moral compass, or any empathy for anything outside of their realm of existence! We have to learn that they hate, and want to kill us simply for existing outside of their realm. Collectively, WE ARE NOT LEARNING! our downfall will be because of our political leaders inability to call this insidious disease by it's true name and reality, and their refusal to act upon that reality. We need to rise up and demand our governments push back, or as has often been said, we will certainly hang separately, but we could actually survive collectively.

John Trainor • Jun 26, 2017 at 14:42

Over the years i developed a theory and bored both friends and relatives with my doomsday scenario. I think it is now more realistic then ever. Civilized society will increasingly be hemmed into secure, self defendiing enclaves, not that different from the current state of Israel, surrounded as it is by barbarians bent on its destruction. The bottomless naivity of the average North American of European descent never ceases to amaze and the lengths our governments will go to hide the reality of immigration is criminal. Syrian kids beating up locals in neighbourhoods and schools is a reality but the lid is on tight by a complicit MSM which is brainwashing the public after itself being brainwashed at Journalism school.

Dr chas oyer • Jun 26, 2017 at 14:12

On June 22 the Globe and Mail printed an informative article stating that an unnamed member of JTF2 had
achieved the remarkable feat of achieving a confirmed sniper kill, in or around Mosul, at a distance of 3500
meters ( 2 miles ). I deduced from the article that the Canadian special forces sniper used a .50 calibre fire-
arm-- an anti-material weapon feather than the .338 Lapua anti-personal rifle.I did the unusual and turned to
CBC NEWS NETWORK.. The military reports were ' Alberta Corporal charged with child porn' and 'Montreal
upset by CF-18 overflight of Alouettes game'. Why am I still paying for this excrement?

Steve Payne • Jun 26, 2017 at 00:52

A most interesting interview. I found it very depressing, however, that Mr. Murray pins his hope on unspecified people who will "get us out of this". If that's our only hope, I'm afraid that a former colleague of Mr. Steyn's had it right in a book title -- we are doomed.

Michael Turcotte • Jun 25, 2017 at 17:52

Oops, hit the button prematurely.

... or in Canada, 'peace, order, and good government' all stems from these building blocks.
Now this post-modernist secular society rejects the heritage given to it. Replaced by corrupt government, naivety, abortion, identity politics(racism), and jihad.
We reap what we sow!

Gerry kirkham. • Jun 25, 2017 at 17:10

To jones, thanks, that was an interesting read. I do feel that Europe is already lost, and that we here have a limited time in Canada or North America as a whole, before it's too late here as well. The useless child running this country has already capitulated to the dark side. I'm just hoping enough sane people in this country wake up the next time we vote, or we'll all become minions of the dark empire. I for one will go down swinging and fighting. I guess we'll need to form up and join the resistance at some point. I am really enjoying posting on Mark's new club. A great deal of interesting and mind expanding ideas and posts! my thanks to all.

Brod • Jun 25, 2017 at 17:03

Well Joseph I totally understand your point of view, it is prevalent. But there are two things you don't include in your argument. 1. Render unto Caesar what's Caesar's and unto God what is God's, this is the foundation upon which societies have formulated the concept of separation of church and state, and once the concept was
Actualizad by Christendom no one has believed that religion can call any shots in the state. And 2. If you read the catechism of any church( I only know the Catholic version) you will see that the hope is held out that any man who seeks the truth and seeks to do good is not excluded from the hope of salvation, only the most fundamental of evangelicals say that there is only one very specific formula for salvation.
But ... we prob shouldn't make these discussions about religion... might we poison the club?

Joseph W.

Brod • Jun 25, 2017 at 23:12

Brod -- I think the way you argue won't poison anything. But I will try to avoid going too far because I agree with you that it can be overdone.

Mark and Douglas hit a very important point indeed, though from a different angle than I would have: most of the human race really does have a natural itch that religious practice can scratch. If they don't have a safe and healthy way to scratch it, Islam is waiting right there with an alternative that's very dangerous to our civilization.

1. Render unto Caesar what's Caesar's and unto God what is God's, this is the foundation upon which societies have formulated the concept of separation of church and state, and once the concept was
Actualizad by Christendom no one has believed that religion can call any shots in the state.

I agree with this wholly. I simply think the concept became "actualized" when religion lost the power to call shots in the state...

2. If you read the catechism of any church( I only know the Catholic version) you will see that the hope is held out that any man who seeks the truth and seeks to do good is not excluded from the hope of salvation, only the most fundamental of evangelicals say that there is only one very specific formula for salvation.

It's been a long time since I read through a Catholic catechism (I had a 1972 version, lots of Catholics in my family)...but an awful lot of believers do accept Jesus' words that "No man comes to the father, but by me," and you may be familiar with the medieval bull "Unam Sanctam," which concluded that " it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff." So at least at some time there wasn't hope for salvation for everyone.

I'm glad to hear from you that this isn't the current view. I do know unorthodox Christians who have written Hell out of their religion entirely (two have reconciled Christianity with reincarnation; others prefer not to think it out that far). I am always glad to hear about things like that, because once you stop believing that the Infidel is going to hell, you lose the incentive to try to control was he thinks.

(I've read that Zoroastrianism as practiced in the reign of Cyrus I was similar...everyone was judged, but by the good and evil he had done rather than by the creed he professed. The "Hell" was really a kind of purgatory, and everyone gets out of it eventually once the evil is purged from his soul. That, I believe, is one reason he was willing to release the Babylonian exiles to rebuild their temple in Jerusalem; and it's one reason I find the "Mazdan" alternative the most intriguing among the synthetic religions for nonbelievers.)

Brod

Joseph W. • Jun 27, 2017 at 13:55

Thank you for your kind words and smart discussion on this topic. I did start looking through the catechism to find a passage that represented what I was speaking of. Article 9, paragraph III, line 847 of the catholic catechism, in response to the question about 'who will be saved?' ( and I do see that it is probably subject to different interpretations)...
"Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless
seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience-those too may achieve eternal salvation."
I realize this leaves one to explain what does 'do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church mean'? But there are also passages about the acceptance of Jewish believers and Islamic believers who seek the good.
So that is a loop-hole (so to speak) that helps me see that we are all slogging it out together trying to find the right way to live.
Thanks for the discussion this is something that has always weighted on my mind and its good to articulate it.

Joseph W. • Jun 25, 2017 at 11:34

On the importance of religion -- I think the episode addresses a very important matter.

I disagree with Douglas' idea that human rights, as we understand them, arise from Christianity. The Edict of Thessalonica in 380 made the Western Empire thoroughly Christian. It was over 1100 years before anyone successfully challenged the reigning faith. The best things about the West...the Enlightenment, constitutional democracy, the Scientific Revolution, the freedom of speech, and other human rights, did not arise until someone did raise a challenge and make it stick. (The Catholic Church resolutely opposed Magna Carta for centuries.)

Most human beings have got a natural religious instinct and Islam and Christianity can scratch that itch. The problem (well, one problem) is that both religions come with moral and intellectual baggage that defies reason, and that doesn't survive free inquiry over time.

The old-style not-very-observant Anglicanism that Mark favors was a good solution for its time, maybe one of the best that Mankind has ever come up with. But this may require a core of actual believers...a hard thing to maintain in a free society.

If we can't turn back the clock on that one, the better solution may lie in synthetic religions...rituals that people practice with the understanding that they are not praying to real gods, but are simply satisfying a need within themselves. Wicca, Asatru, Odinism, and even LaVeyan Satanism all fall into that category. If I were picking one, I would go with some variant of Mazdan (a sort of neo-Zoroastrian) practice...stripped of any claims that gods exist, but encouraging the "good mind" while leaving no religious vacuum for one of the uglier faiths to fill.

This isn't the only challenge Islam presents, as Mark and Douglas well understand. Islam also satisfies the need to belong, which we could better satisfy by reviving old-style patriotic education, and female hypergamy, which is tied to the problem they discuss about birthrates.

Matt McWilliams

Joseph W. • Jun 25, 2017 at 13:14

I have to disagree with you vehemently on this one Joseph, particularly with respect to the importance of the Judeo-Christian heritage of Europe and its importance. In fact, without that as a platform I don't think you even get to a Renaissance or Enlightenment.

As for the Founders of the U.S., it appears that even Franklin, who along with Jefferson is most cited in attempts to show non-religiosity among the Founders, believed in the importance of Christian principles. http://www.phmc.state.pa.us/portal/communities/pa-heritage/religion-early-politics-benjamin-franklin.html

As for synthetic religions, the Western World is already awash in those; Climate Change, transgenderism, multiculturalism, etc. Each with its own set of beliefs on what constitutes "the good mind." They all seemed to have been failures.

Joseph W.

Matt McWilliams • Jun 25, 2017 at 14:41

A vehement but reasoned disagreement -- like yours with me -- is a most excellent thing. I cherish the civilization that allows it.

Thomas Paine is the one I see most often listed as an example, rather than Franklin, but that said -- notice that Franklin's notion of serving God is "doing good to your fellow man"...and does not carry the extra baggage of orthodox Christianity.

Praising Jesus' "system of morals" slyly avoids the central Christian tenets -- that Jesus was the son of God, and that everyone who doesn't believe this is going to be tortured eternally in Hell fire. A neat counterpart to the Islamic view, that everyone who does believe God had a son it is guilty of shirk and will be tortured eternally in Hell fire.

When an idea like that is not just popular but really in power, the natural conclusion is that free speech should be suppressed, and heresy should be punished severely...not so much because the heretics deserve to die, but to scare people away from those heretical ideas. That is why Christians behaved that way when they had the power, and Muslims still do when they do.

This is the problem with Green doctrine as a "substitute religion," which has succeeded all too well. Like orthodox Christianity and Islam, they "believe their own BS," and are ready to enforce their tenets (or at least a scared silence) on the Unbeliever. Hence Mann v. Steyn. The Green believes that a false teacher can doom the planet to thousands of years of roasting heat. The Christian and the Muslim agree that a false teacher can doom a single soul to a billion years of roasting heat...and that this will be only the beginning.

When they get the power, all agree that the False Teacher must be shut up; they disagree only on who the False Teachers are. The best parts of western civilization are built on the opposite idea. Teachers true and false should be allowed to talk all they want. That is why we should encourage other "synthetic religions" which do not teach the adherents that they are worshipping real gods, or that the Infidel must be silenced lest he doom souls or planets.

P. Gao

Matt McWilliams • Jun 25, 2017 at 15:28

Note that 'church officials' can be the biggest impediment to understanding than any random pagan. Christ's most enraged opposition was entrenched religious authorities, who he named with the word 'hypocrites.' He declared their arbitrary self-serving rules added burdens and confusions. So, the argument that the 'church' was blocking advancement in knowledge was first declared by Jesus, who also cited a number of previous egregious examples of prophets who had faced the same entrenched and hostile mentality, and who was then crucified by those same 'holy' authorities for that impertinence. As Jesus said, fortunately for everyone, they didn't know what they were doing.
By that lesson, no one should be surprised that it would be a sadly predictable and reoccurring problem over the centuries. Physical churches are only as good as the quality of the fallible persons running them at that moment, but the original Word is reliable, universal and accessible to anyone.
Now, shifting from unburdened by human-added rules and regulations ( faith by works projects) to being guided by faith and a truth that sometimes is very hard to spot in the earthly mire was the spark that started the enlightenment. The Church did provide centuries of desperately needed law, authority and stability in chaotic, warlord-squabbling Europe, before the nation-states were able to take over that role. That was a good thing, but no surprise that some clergy were too invested in it to want that role to change.
There's been a lot claimed about science and Christian belief that isn't correct. Science, as the structured study of the world to understand how it works, and thus how to 'subdue' it to better the human condition is a demonstrable fruit of the Judeo-Christian culture.
Here again is why it is necessary to step out of the narrow confines of the modern European bubble and go see what it's like to live in a real culture ruled by superstition, see what outcomes are produced by a culture that believes god is in everything, the lack of advancements produced by a culture that believes everyone is fixed in life as a command of divine punishment or privilege. These mind-sets do not allow scientific work as a rule, and there are solid reasons why.
Scientific advancement does not commonly come out of cultures that believe that easily-offended spirits are hidden in everyday objects (animism). One messes with those at one's peril, so people who live in animistic cultures carefully stay within only what is already known. Cultures that believe god is in everything believe it is a blasphemy to manipulate or change the physical world - god is to be respected by not meddling with anything that isn't already provided. Fatalistic cultures accept their lot in life, to try to improve it would also be blasphemy to their god who made the judgment to put them there and will punish them for their rebellion against their pre-determined fate.
The Judeo-Christian heritage is the only one that can point to God's command, "Go and subdue the earth.' Subdue of course is a nuanced and actually positive use - 'taming'. One cannot tame without knowing how it works and taming requires good maintaining. Second, it is taught that God is active with His creation, but apart from it. Since God is not 'in' the world, then it is not blasphemy to test it, and besides He gave full permission. This was and remains today completely radical concepts in the pagan world.

Reasoning is nothing more than a logical thought process that everyone is innately able to do. But the outcome of the reasoning is based on the quality of the information known to the reasoner. If one offends a spirit, then one must appease the spirit. Very logical. If a mother wants her sick child to recover, then she must supply a stack of new blankets, a sack of maize meal and a new lamp as per the shaman's instructions who will then professionally intervene with the furious spirit to lift its curse on the child. It's perfectly logical reasoning. She doesn't want to lose her child, she'll do it. The second everyone discovers that the clinic is making other children healthy with some pills, they'll all run there and the shaman is out of business. He won't like that and will try to get rid of the clinic before entertaining any thoughts of reforming himself. New information that was verified by a number of successful experiences. No one wants to lost their child, they'll hold back until they get verification, first. That's logical reasoning. Verify. There's a lot at risk. That's not a made-up example, we've witnessed it.

Science is simply a standardized process (scientific method) to determine whether a guess (hypothesis) about how things work can be tested to find out if the guess has truth in it. The reliably of the discovery is measured by attainment of three pre-set goal-posts: Hypothesis, Theory and Law. It's not a belief-system, it's an organized testing process. That's it.
Most hypothesis are quickly abandoned as false. Some, no one knows how to test. Some people are so egotistically invested in their hypothesis that they will ignore results that plainly refute it. As we all know, some people need a certain result to achieve a benefit - money, power and will fiddle dishonestly with the Method until they get their result, but it's a lie. So the scientific method is only as good as the honesty and integrity of the persons conducting it. Employed well (honestly), it produces wonderful results that enhance knowledge, but employed badly, it can be damaging. It's just a method, a process.
So, there is a traceable reason that technological and medical discovery has been overwhelmingly produced out of a certain culture, the "Western Culture.' From it, other cultures have adopted all sorts of discoveries, modified, etc. being somewhat freed from their usual constraints as these all become 'known' world for them and thus safe to incorporate into their everyday lives.
The other defining characteristic of the Judeo-Christian culture is personal accountability. Actions have consequences and the individual is held responsible for his or her actions. This was actually revolutionary, and in fact remains revolutionary today. Why? All other cultures - superstitious, pagan, fatalistic provide all sorts of random, uncontrollable, unpredictable cosmic reasons for why things went wrong, thus completely absolving the individual of the responsibility for his or her personal decisions. There is a profound chasm between one person who has a sense of personal responsibility versus a person who doesn't. Most of the ancient didn't and modern world doesn't accept that their personal actions have consequences. Most people reject it when they hear it - they don't like the idea, seeing only the 'caught' aspect of it, not the huge benefits.

Tom

Joseph W. • Jun 25, 2017 at 16:06

First off, for full disclosure, I am myself Jewish. Some Christians spend all their time bashing Judaism. Others don't. I have met both kinds including quite serious religious Christians in both camps. The first sort is about as sturdy as the building Harpo Marx was holding up in a Night in Casablanca. Usually when people refer to Franklin, Paine et al. and Judeo-Christianity in general, including many more traditionally religious people, they are referring to Christians of the second type. You can include Isaac Newton in that second group too, and many important scientists. The paganization of science has been of no help at all. Classical science is rooted in Judeo-Christian values of absolute observer independent truth, as in independent verifiability, and as opposed to taking some expert's word for it. There have been both religious and secular people who have been on both sides of these issues of enlightenment etc. But the real substance of Judeo-Christian values when they aren't being abused, those are absolutely essential to any sort of Western identity and survival.

Joseph W.

Tom • Jun 25, 2017 at 22:48

Some Christians spend all their time bashing Judaism. Others don't...Usually when people refer to Franklin, Paine et al. and Judeo-Christianity in general, including many more traditionally religious people, they are referring to Christians of the second type. You can include Isaac Newton in that second group too, and many important scientists.

Paine and Deists of his generation were more likely to attack Christians because that's who they saw doing the most harm in their own societies. Voltaire's Philosophic Dictionary--it's a short work and a great introduction to Deism--has very little about Judaism but a lot about Christianity. Isaac Newton (a devout if cranky Christian) was far more interested in bashing Catholics than anyone else...like many English protestants of his time, he thought the Pope was Antichrist.

Classical science is rooted in Judeo-Christian values of absolute observer independent truth, as in independent verifiability, and as opposed to taking some expert's word for it.

That is not correct, at least not in the sense that this is a "Judeo-Christian value." Firstly, that kind of free inquiry was taking place in the Pagan Classical world. Euclid, Eratosthenes, Hipparchus, and Archimedes were all practicing "classical science"...even Aristotle did some descriptive biology...yet all died before Jesus was born, and the odds are high they knew nothing of Judaism. (Euclid lived in Alexandria so he might have met the Jewish community there, but I have never read evidence that he knew anything of Judaism itself.) Socrates was the epitome of the man who took no one's word for anything, but he died four centuries before Jesus, and Palestine might as well have been on a different planet as far as he was concerned.

Secondly, if you look at the history of science in the "Age of Faith" you will see that...there wasn't any. When Christianity was really in charge, science pretty much came to a standstill. Catholicism is based entirely on "taking someone's word for it"...that "someone" being the Church itself...especially if the subject was religion, or if the priests thought it touched on religion. (That is why the Church first sponsored the work of Copernicus...then placed his book on the Index of Prohibited Books for a while.)

The Scientific Revolution came after the Reformation...when the Church had some very unwelcome competition, and lost its dominion over the mind of Man. It was the dethronement of religion, not religion itself, that allowed the West to gallop out ahead on science. Here is a good 19th-century history of the war between science and theology in Christendom that can give you many examples.

But the real substance of Judeo-Christian values when they aren't being abused, those are absolutely essential to any sort of Western identity and survival.

Western civilization, the way I studied it, includes Greco-Roman culture that predated Christianity, with strong cultural identities that survived for centuries. The West endured when Zeus and Jupiter disappeared; it can and should endure without Yahweh. But we can't ignore the religious instinct in the process...we just need to give it a healthier alternative, without threats of eternal Hell fire.

Tom

Joseph W. • Jun 26, 2017 at 00:43

When I say classical science I refer as much to Newton as the purely Greek variety. He drew on both biblical and pagan sources obviously. There are many others outside of the history of Judaism who independently discovered some of the same values. Judaism explicitly recognizes this. And does so in books common with Christianity. Therefore I am correct thank you very much. I am well aware of the Greek/Roman contribution. I am a professional mathematician and have heard of Euclid et al. obviously. The value of absolute observer independent truth is found in genuine Judeo-Christian values as well as being indepently found by others. If it weren't recognized as being independently found by others then it would hardly be observed independent then, would it. So it is a Judeo-Christian value as well as being found elsewhere.

I am well aware of the bitterness between various Christian groups. Humans are always good at that sort of thing. If you need a more general statement of the dichotomy to which I referred, then it is this. Some Christians are superficial sectarians and some are not. The same goes for everybody else too but you were speaking more of Christians so I also did. The point was being made through a paradigmatic example. Would you like me to point you to a dictionary to give you a basic lesson in the meaning of paradigm like you so condescendingly like to give references? Incidentally you seem to like bashing Catholics yourself. The Catholic Church has low points in its history, like everyone else, but it is slanderous to attach anti-science to them generally.

The reformation was a competition between religious groups so it hardly supports your position of anti-religion equaling pro-science.

There are religious people against science and there are religious people who support it. Seculars or Deists may think otherwise, but their groups have at least as much anti-science sentiment however dressed up in technical jargon and chest thumping. We have all witnessed such fake science support in recent times. There were historically and are now numerous prominent religious scientists and mathematicians. To say that religion generally or Christianity in particular was generally in a war against science is preposterous.

Yahweh which designation specifically calls Judaism to mind does not believe in eternal hell-fire. He does believe in meting out whatever is just. I don't ever want to live in a society that does not believe that God punishes the wicked. That would be a living nightmare.

You are quite right that there was a "West" before Christianity. Do you really think that I don't know that? However I was talking about the modern West. If you want to return to the pre-modern West then you can do it on your own.

satori

Joseph W. • Jun 27, 2017 at 12:29

Joseph, your view seems to me too deep in the weeds to see a bit bigger picture.
A few points to consider:
Any idea or ideology that gathers some significant following gets appropriated by the powers that be and/or opportunists for their own purposes. Different ideologies are differently suited for such (ab)use - but Christian teaching has to be outright perverted (or hidden) from the followers to justify things such as aggressive war or persecution of non-believers (btw - Islam has been for such use purposely designed).
Leaving aside scientific methodology and looking at ethical progress:
Judaism represented major step forward with the concept of eye for eye, tooth for tooth, in other words, the principle that penalty should be commensurate to the offence, as opposed to contemporary practice of punishments way out of proportion to the harm caused. In other words still, the concept of common sense fairness in everyday real world problems. (In addition, it introduced some personal hygiene and nutritional rules that may have make a lot of sense in the context of contemporary Middle Eastern climate and lifestyle.
Christianity then came up with the revolutionary, unheard of before concept that all people are equal (even if only before God), universal compassion extending beyond merely tribal solidarity, and introduced the idea of forgiveness and rehabilitation.
(Islam's contribution was resetting the clock about a thousand years back, to about or slightly before the ascent of Judaism.)
If we talk about ideas, let's not confuse them with acts of those who claimed to be guided by them. From the point of human progress achieved, there is certainly plenty of room for criticism of medieval rulers (secular or clerical). But both the Reformation and Enlightenment were based not on refutation of Christian philosophy, but rather on criticism of either hypocritical pretension, or outright perversion, thereof by the powers of their times.
Finally, the difference between a religion and an ideology or philosophy is that the former is one of possible forms while the latter is the actual content. Historically, religion was basically the only form of ideology until quite recently (last about 200 years).
So, if two thousand years ago, you came up with the idea of equality, and human rights stemming from the concept, how would you package it to sell it? As a series of educational public lectures, or as a religion?
As for Greco-Roman culture, we owe it a great deal of gratitude for a lot of things, but the concept of equality and inalienable human rights are not among those.

Mark • Jun 25, 2017 at 11:32

One of your best ever! Book ordered...I like the idea of having important books like this available at the Mark Steyn store. Keep up the great work.

Fern • Jun 25, 2017 at 10:38

I think Sweden did have a colonial past, albeit small, New Sweden, in what would now be Delaware.

Karen H

Fern • Jun 25, 2017 at 23:21

Yes, Fern, and I also wonder about their possible guilt in regard to not helping Finland defend itself during the first year of WWII, the transit of German weapons (for a time), and finally their decision to remain neutral.

Gerry kirkham. • Jun 24, 2017 at 20:40

The truth for me, is that I saw this....or 'something wrong' in England as a young adult. I had spent a few years in the Merchant Marine, and have been to many countries, including a few in the middle east. I could almost feel some kind of cloud coming over things. No I didn't expect what is now the reality over there, but I got out and left for western Canada 35 years ago. I've have never been back! Now the cloud is catching up! there are not many more places to get out to. At age 68, I thankfully won't see the worst of it, but I truly fear for our western way of life. Trudopia is falling through the same looking glass that Europe has, and I am deeply saddened by it! Honestly, unless there is a violent civil war in Europe, I don't think it can be stopped!

Jones

Gerry kirkham. • Jun 25, 2017 at 05:03

Almost there I'm afraid.

https://www.10news.one/sweden-on-the-brink-of-civil-war-national-police-chief-help-us-help-us/

Matt McWilliams • Jun 24, 2017 at 17:56

Another excellent interview. I'm very much looking forward to reading Mr. Murray's book. On that subject, will it be available from Steyn Online? The reason I ask is that I'd be willing to pop a few extra bucks to get a copy signed by Mr. Murray and don't think that would be available via Amazon. Also, if there is a way I can avoid helping to fund Jeff Bezos' takeover of the civilized World I'd like to take it.

Karen H

Matt McWilliams • Jun 25, 2017 at 14:28

Agreed. I want this book sans Amazon.

Wm. Tomlinson • Jun 24, 2017 at 17:46

I find it curious that so few understand that this is beginning of the end time. (Oh my goodness gracious! A prophet of doom.)... Possibly

Everyone is so fond of seeking for solution of the problems and yet instead of making close examination of the problems for ourselves we, (often even those for Bible thumpers like me) take as rote what has been said so many years.

Take for instance the "four horses of the Apocalypse;" everyone's been taught that the rider on the white horse is the "antichrist." Why? Well, because he is not named, and sooo .... The other riders, the red, the black man, the pale horse are labeled as "War" and "Famine and Pestilence" and "Death."

What I find fascinating about this is, that the rider on the last three horses are concepts, of which if you speak any language, they will be understood. But for some reason, though the wording identifying all 4 riders is exactly the same, theologians chose to make the rider on the white horse an individual.

I submit to you that the rider on the white horse that is going forth to hold conquering and to conquer and whose authority is given to it and we would have known weaponry except that it was given to by the West is an ideology. It is Islam.

The red horses is close behind.

Bart Nielsen

Wm. Tomlinson • Jun 26, 2017 at 09:16

William, excellent and sobering thought. I will study your idea more, as on the face of it, it seems to have a great deal of merit. Thanks.

Robert Sullivan • Jun 24, 2017 at 17:36

Wonderful wonderful interview ... You are both a joy and I so appreciate the opportunity to sit in and learn whilst you babble on ... We talk about the immigrants but not much about who they are fundamentally. I suspect that were we welcoming millions of Presbyterians rather than Muslims the conversation would be far different. Islam is a powerful powerful force ( I lived among them for 25 years ) with precisely zero positive contributions to offer bent on the destruction of other 'civilizations' , and we secular loopies have nothing to oppose them . Millions of sincere Presbyterians , or Congregationalists for example, rafting to our shores might result in a different outcome altogether. .

Wm. Tomlinson • Jun 24, 2017 at 17:17

Excellent dialogue Mark ... except for one point neither of you brought up. If you will allow me to stand in the place of Elihu?

You both, laid out the problem: 1. We are being invaded. 2. We invited the invaders. 3. We don't have any idea what the invaders believe. 4. We don't have the heart of will to ask them to leave. 5. We don't know how to get them to believe what we believe .... Wait ...

Isn't that the problem? We no longer believe ... in anything, at least anything outside of our selves.

The West begin rejecting the one true God, upon whom all Western civilization has been built, over 50 years ago.

We actually began appropriating to ourselves, with gay abandon at that time, the first sin; "You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Foolishly people have believed that "knowing" means understanding. It does not. It simply means experiencing, and quite frankly experiencing it in such a manner that it leaves us altogether confused. That is why we need Jesus, to enlighten us, that we might differentiate and shun evil and choose good.

In short, the West has ceased to believe. We have forgotten what it is to believe. Our enemy (by their choosing, not ours) KNOWS what it is to believe. That is why they look upon us with such disdain and say in their hearts, "Allah has blinded their eyes!"

It would be wise of us to consider the teachings of Sun Tzu, "to know our enemies," but at this time that is impossible because we do not even "know ourselves."

There will be national repentance or there will be national.

Joseph W.

Wm. Tomlinson • Jun 25, 2017 at 10:53

Mark and his guest did bring that up some ways into the interview. They both seem to accept--as I do not--that Western civilization is "built on Christianity" and that even our notions of human rights really derive from Christianity.

That to me is nonsense. Firstly, Western Civilization is built partly on ideas that predate Christianity and will survive it (such as Euclid's insistence on mathematical rigor, or Socrates' on inquiring rationally into things when the pious wanted him to shut up). Secondly, when Christianity really was in power...in the Dark Ages and the Age of Faith...human rights as we understand were basically unheard of. Even Magna Carta was vigorously opposed by the established Church, which was serious about St. Paul's admonition that "all authority is from God."

Our modern notions of freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, and freedom of inquiry did not arise during the Age of Faith. They arose after the institutional Church had been dethroned. The U.S. Constitution wasn't written by a bunch of atheists--though there were some deists, or likely deists, in key positions--but the Christians in the new country included Congregationalists from Massachusetts, Episcopalians in Virginia, Catholics in Maryland, Quakers in Pennsylvania, and the people of Rhode Island, whose state was the place you ran away to to escape persecution in Massachusetts.

What did all these people have in common, both with each other and the Deists? Only this: That they did not trust each other to legislate on religion. Thus, the only compromise they could agree on was to get the federal government out of the religion business completely. It's the dethronement of institutional religion, not religion itself, that gets you to these freedoms.

Bart Nielsen

Wm. Tomlinson • Jun 26, 2017 at 09:25

I agree with you William, but would put the beginning of the decline back in late C18 and C19 for the intellectual class; and the WWI generation as the point where the culture at large began wholesale unmooring from its Judeo-Chrisyian roots. The 60's younvsters were acting on leadership from old guys from WWI who wanted to throw off every vestige of Victorian morality they could smash.

I thought it odd as a child how emotional people got railing against Victorian morality...it was so long ago after all. Now that that generation is gone you never hear of Victorian morality anymore.

Bart Nielsen

Joseph W. • Jun 26, 2017 at 09:26

William, excellent and sobering thought. I will study your idea more, as on the face of it, it seems to have a great deal of merit. Thanks.

fran lavery

Joseph W. • Jun 26, 2017 at 11:07

I tend towards agreeing with this analysis you make, Joseph. Thanks for this. I really don't care for a one-size-fits-all reason to blame ourselves, as in: "we don't know what we believe," therefore we're vulnerable. In the USA, some of us believe in Christ, some of us are atheists, agnostics, Muslim, Buddhists, Hindus. The open societies are full of a variety of ideas about what to believe. I have friends and family even, as none of our children, and few of our nieces and nephews married same-race or same-religion spouses, within the entire gamut of those belief systems, I just mentioned. I see the problem as the open-societies just allowing themselves to become so open and tolerant that the unlimited tolerance has blinded our eyes. It's as if the radar system for detecting what the enemy looks like broke down. It's exactly the small but growing part of one of these groups that has our open society in their crosshairs that needs elimination. I think we all know what the enemy thinks, we know the problem after seeing teenage daughters and tourists used as their frontline fodder, and, unfortunately, to solve it requires actions that nothing short of a totalitarian regime would feel comfortable using.

Bart Nielsen

Wm. Tomlinson • Jun 26, 2017 at 21:48

Joseph W, if you actually read the Magna Carta your argument falls apart. Although the Roman hierarchy opposed Magna Carta, it was written by a Christian bishop and draws heavily on Scripture and the Chtistian worldview generally. One of the exceptional things about the British Isles has been the repeated instances of its people turning to a more authentic experience of Christianity, often over the opposition of institutional structures like the Catholic Church.

You cannot separate our freedoms from our Christian roots.

P. Gao • Jun 24, 2017 at 17:12

Great interview, another author and commentator to be introduced to.
A tangent comment, because was struck by a sense of 'loneliness.'
The worry about 'white' versus 'brown' or 'black' is misleading everyone. What does a person believe is what's important, it informs every decision and action they make.
To culture and what people believe.
There is no difference or benefit to civilization and Western values by having a pack of sacrificing 'white' Celtic or Germanic tribal witches living at the end of the street always on the lookout for a fresh victim in the neighborhood versus a pack of sacrificing 'black' Nigerian Calabar tribal witches living at the end of the street always on the lookout for a fresh victim. It's the same culture, producing the same damaging societal outcomes and it still exists in the world. If it wasn't for Christian conversions centuries ago, the majority Celts or Germans would still be doing it. Low trust, high fear, no advancement.
Islam for 1400 years across North Africa through India to the frontier of China has looked white,brown, black, with conquered peoples conformed to it, yet stunned as hard as Europe was in the day when the horizon filled with the massive army of Ghengis Khan who in his day would hold fascinating court debates to hear Christian priests and Muslim imams present the defenses of their faiths.
This hang-up on using a skin color to define the issue is blocking the opportunities to discover important allies in Africa, where the people have copious experience (1000 years) with all this while not being constrained by the guilt trips of European leftism.
Can't link here, but watch the speech given by Peter Bashir Bandi of South Sudan, just prior to the 2011 Referendum vote for independence. Stick with it - he stood up in rebuttal to the argument of unity - he starts in Arabic and switches back and forth to English. South Sudan suffered over 2 million deaths in the north's brutal attempt to impose Islamic colonialism on the non-Muslim southerners.
Proving that there really is a different agenda in the Left, in total contrast to their lofty rhetoric condemning colonialism and racism, European journalism and much of its diplomacy was practically unanimous in denial at the time, trying to dissuade everyone they could as the usually warring, disparate tribal peoples of the South solidly united for their chance to be free of Muslim Khartoum, a government that stills calls them all cockroaches, kept them poor and disorganized for centuries to take their natural resources (see Samuel Baker's accounts in the 1880s), slaughtering their men, enslaving their women and children and forcing them to speak Arabic, all up to the modern age of 2005, and that only stopped not by conscience, but by force of arms. It exposed a lot in unexpected ways - even seemingly inexplicably South Africa didn't support independence for South Sudan and they never ever suffered the way under the Afrikaners the South Sudanese peoples had under the Arabs.

South Sudanese point to Isaiah 18 - that this is their prophecy - they of the land of Cush:
"At that time gifts will be brought to the Lord Almighty
from a people tall and smooth-skinned,
to a people far and wide,
an aggressive nation of strange speech,
whose land is divided by rivers..."

Just apply what every European knows - it's silly to think a Frenchman is the same as a Hungarian or a Swede. Apply the exact same understanding to Africans and suddenly Africa all starts to make sense. Even the concepts of 'white' and 'black' in Africa are not the same as in Europe. Mauritanians self-sort by 'white' and 'black' - as in white is Maur/Arab versus black harratin, who are their slaves or other 'black' tribes such as the Pulaar, who themselves own slaves. Even a man of the exact same skin color who would call himself 'black' would agree the other fellow is 'white' an Arab/Berber - because they are judging by family and blood lines, not the color. The Senegalese and Malians have the social custom of 'cousinage' where the one tribe constantly reminds the other tribe to stay jovial and not get cocky as they were once their slaves, a situation that can be reversed any time. This isn't over primitive campfires, but over restaurant dinners and cell phones.

A meandering way to point out that there's a whole world of people out there who have a lot they can bring to all this, in solidarity, but aren't even being thought of.

Matt McWilliams

P. Gao • Jun 24, 2017 at 17:52

Interesting post, as usual from you Gao. However, I think you've missed the point slightly. Europe's basic problem is a lack of civilizational self-confidence. This has left "a hole at the heart of Europe." I'm paraphrasing, but you get the point. As Mr. Murray said, that is the basic problem. Islam is simply the aggressive opportunist that is filling the void at this time. It looks likely to remain so, but not necessarily. Even if the issue of aggressive Islam is solved, the underlying problem among Europeans will need to be solved to avoid the emergence of another, perhaps worse, aggressive opportunist.

While I agree that Africans in particular have much to contribute in terms of addressing aggressive Islam, they really cannot help Europe solve its underlying problem. Only a re-awaking of European consciousness can do that.

Cheers.

P. Gao

Matt McWilliams • Jun 25, 2017 at 03:48

Thank you. Oh, yes the main point is paramount, just describing a contributing issue to the main problem of lack of confidence and will -lack of understanding and knowledge. Sometimes it helps to be in the company of those who are more confident, maybe help restore the faith, light the old moxy.
Regards!

Katie vS • Jun 24, 2017 at 16:39

Thanks very much for this, Mark. I'm glad he's out there making his case.
There's a key point on which I think he's wide of the mark, however.
It's illusory to hope that we can maintain the goods of Christianity without the actual faith and practice of Christianity. People don't turn from sin and selfishness or hopelessness or ennui (never mind muster the courage to risk their lives or make personal sacrifices) because, well, shouldn't we all agree that, on the whole, the world would work better if everyone behaved decently, and if the relics of Christian culture were preserved?
In truth, we need the actual God—His grace, His help, and His promise of eternal life. That's where hope lies.

fran lavery • Jun 24, 2017 at 15:12

After hearing this new Mark Steyn interview and reading all of the comments, i can't help but feel that we're embarking on a dangerous societal journey on a brand spanking new ship, The Titanic II, with the only difference being that we're aware the collision with the iceberg is going to happen and we have a little window of time to prepare. I might ask Mark to make the musical and film selections for the trip.

Roger B. • Jun 24, 2017 at 14:08

Would the low birthrate of Europeans matter if the demographic makeup of Europe was the same as in 1950? As Paul G says automation is a looming factor which may make perhaps 70% of current human employment unnecessary. We do not need a constantly expanding population, which is not sustainable anyway.
Similarly would the turn away from belief in Christian dogma matter if European demographics were as in 1950?
What is happening is that Europe is being invaded by a malignant and hostile force; Islam. There are other demographic issues of lesser importance, particularly the importation of very large numbers of low IQ, ineducable and largely unemployable Africans, but it is Islam that desires the extinction of European civilization and they have shown that thousands of them are prepared to die to achieve exactly that.
We Europeans ( I am in USA) are facing a stark choice, which has been in front of us for many years; that choice is to fight or die, the longer we leave this unanswered the more likely it is that we die.

Brod • Jun 24, 2017 at 13:15

I've read Mr. Murray's book and enjoyed this interview. And I think we all have come to the conclusion of unearthing and redefining our cultural heritage as a Christian society. But I do wonder ( and I know this will be a downer for many) can Christian culture be revivified without belief? Belief is the difference between a lukewarm response and a profound spiritual awakening that calls men to action. It may be that the power of Islam can only be countered by an equal and opposite zealousness. And this I think this will be the stumbling block.

Bernie Hill

Brod • Jun 25, 2017 at 06:09

..exactly. But what zeal looks likely? Feminism-LGBTQwertyism has already capitulated, Geenism is a myopic feeble foe, and Leftism at large is Islam's gimp.

Carl • Jun 24, 2017 at 12:17

I could really use that Steyn babysitting service so that I can watch these videos more easily. Finally got one kid off with mom, one napping, and one watching Spongebob, allowing me to enjoy. I think the gentlemen nailed it when they recognized we are going to need some sort of Christian reawakening in the culture where non-believers don't become believers but at least cede the fact that no one has come up with a better option than a universal moral code built on Christian ethics. Otherwise, this relativism will be the end of us

Paul G. • Jun 24, 2017 at 11:57

A long discussion, very informative and future oriented but misses the great, looming reality of robots and AI. i'd hope you couldn't think that hard and not at least have it travel from the back of you mind to Broca's area of expression.

Elizabeth Lorenz • Jun 24, 2017 at 11:36

it's fascinating to me that the reason given for low reproduction numbers among native Europeans in countries like Germany and England is the expense. How is it then that the muslims entering Europe can have five and six offspring to a couple and they aren't worried about the expense? Is the dole to blame?
It seems to me perverse that European countries are subsidizing their own destruction. Every time there's a terrorist attack the muslims position themselves as the victims. It appears to me that the real victims in western Europe are the next generations of native Europeans whose ancestors worked and suffered to build the functioning civilizations of Europe, that worked and fought to defend their countries and those county's interests, those next generations of European children are the real victims of all of this. In order to reverse this trend the native Europeans will have to love their children enough to want them to have a better future than the one they're currently offering them.
It wouldn't hurt to elect representatives that actually have children. Men like Nigel Farage have a reason to invest in the future of Europe. Women like Ms. Merkel have none.

Bob M.

Elizabeth Lorenz • Jun 24, 2017 at 13:02

It is as though Muslims sense they are building a society while the West's offspring feel, "meh, all I got was this lousy t-shirt."

Ian Cory

Elizabeth Lorenz • Jun 24, 2017 at 13:28

" In order to reverse this trend the native Europeans will have to love their children enough to want them to have a better future than the one they're currently offering them."

In the recent UK election, Jeremy Corbyn offered the "children" pennies from heaven, which of course they lapped up like grateful cats at a spilled milk convention! Inter alia, at a stroke, abolishing student university tuition fees, including those incurred since, ooh let's see, 2000? Or whatever. After all where would we be without all those "Gender Studies" degrees?

Elizabeth Lorenz

Bob M. • Jun 24, 2017 at 14:23

But Ian, therein lies the rub. Those pennies are a short term salve that will only act as a distraction. Lap tops and i-phones give us distractions as entertainment. Politicians capitalize on this weakness in human nature. A short term fix to distract people and make them think they're getting somewhere will do nothing to protect them from the change in culture that will result from the dramatic change in demographics already underway.
Thanks for your interesting comment.

Elizabeth Lorenz

Bob M. • Jun 24, 2017 at 14:27

Bob, this is true. So what does it take to reawaken knowledge and pride in the Christian civilizational heritage of western Europe and western society in general. I love reading old grammar school text books from around and before the early 1900s. Those text books are unashamed of western civilization and the Christian heritage that created it. If you look at modern text books the pc pablum they proffer is depressing.

BallBounces in Toronto

Bob M. • Jun 24, 2017 at 16:48

Ian Cory

Elizabeth Lorenz • Jun 25, 2017 at 03:33

Elizabeth, I completely agree with your point about distractions, i.e. civilisational denial. My comment was ironic in that Corbyn's Labour Party promises, notwithstanding May's Conservatives inability to call them out, perfectly illustrated the poverty of current political discourse. All the while a remorseless population replacement by a culturally antipathic diaspora continues apace. A potpourri of cartoon economics and "multi-culti" evasions is almost all that is on offer from the political establishment as we are encouraged to look the other way and stop raising awkward issues. Douglas Murray a "hate-preacher"? You couldn't make it up! In so far as it will still be possible to study objective history several generations hence (doubtful) when Islam is the predominant dispensation, Douglas's point about a prevailing sense of a hole at the heart of European civilisation is an interesting one to say the least. It will no doubt be debated as one of the great mysteries of this age along with the prevalence of one of its suicidal symptoms; open border "virtue signaling". Fascinating really. A whole civilisation disappears because of ennui and a pathological narcissism!

Laura Rosen Cohen

Elizabeth Lorenz • Jun 27, 2017 at 11:07

The "it's too expensive to have kids" is a complete load of dogsqueeze. It's never been less expensive. People in the Western world, for the most part have state-funded health care, public education till grade 12. People are too selfish to have children, they are all about "me" and pleasure-seeking (toys, distractions, trips, YOLO, etc.). There is no focus on the continuity of Western values, and our personal stake in eternal life through our children. It's all about the here and now. There is, as you wisely note, lots of money for subsidizing the offspring of non-natives. So it is absolutely not about the money. Making children is the most G-dly thing that human beings can do. Those without any interest, knowledge or care about G-d, and no wonder at the miracle of creation cannot be counted upon to have and raise children. Raising a family requires commitment, an erasure of a certain part of the self, till one's dying day. Barren leaders absolutely do not have any skin (literally and figuratively) in the game. None. The flesh of their flesh does not exist, so they can leave a world simmering in destruction without a care in the world.

Denyse O'Leary • Jun 24, 2017 at 10:53

Please forgive me if I have mentioned this before. I have friends in medicine. All they ever say, listening to streams of nonsense from a hospitalized addict's life, is: Do you want to live? If so, we can help. If not, we can't.

England is there now. Do they think English Common Law matters? Or is their fat welfare cheque from Germany more important?

BallBounces in Toronto

Denyse O'Leary • Jun 24, 2017 at 16:54

Maybe this analogy: We want to live, but know-better medical authorities have us on a poisonous IV drip.

den

BallBounces in Toronto • Jun 24, 2017 at 17:11

Pull it out and live. You have the right to "refuse treatment."

Richard Harrison • Jun 24, 2017 at 10:12

Thank you for this profoundly important - and profoundly sad - discussion of the most important phenomenon of our age.

At the risk of adding to the sadness, I need to point out that Charles Martel (and almost every other French king once buried there) no longer lies in the Basilica of St Denis, in Paris. Their tombs are there, but they are empty. In 1793 the French revolutionaries engaged in the very "warring with the past" you warn against. The remains of the kings were exhumed and dumped into a common grave and covered with quicklime.

The current age's Jacobins, comprising most members of the ruling elites of the West, are proving much more thorough. They are in the process of dumping our heritage, our values, our entire civilisation into a common grave.

Carl • Jun 24, 2017 at 09:49

How do you like new publicly available episodes of The Mark Steyn Show? More more more! Please make sure Mr. Murray does not hit the minibar too hard because we need there to be funding available for lots more. Now I need to watch this.....was just so excited to wake up next to an empty bottle of bourbon and a new Mark Steyn Show loaded on my phone that I had to comment

Debra Milligan • Jun 24, 2017 at 08:54

Mr. Murray states the truth — not a truth, or his truth or one of the truths — but the truth compellingly, with grace and quiet confidence. I find it interesting to watch 2 men attempt to grapple with a problem that can be blamed, in part, not on the propagandist politicians but on the women of this, the Western civilization.

As a woman, I'll be the first to say that women are the civilizing influence and too many of them during the past 40 years or so have failed their duty in so many ways that no one can, or should, write a book about the sorry state of the "modern" female. The Nanny State would have a few less teeth that are now dropping out if the women of the previous decades had stayed long enough in marriages to cast shadows, long enough to have children who could carry on Western virtues. But one cannot teach virtues that one does not know, and in that truth your fears are valid about the future. Watching the Nanny State age into the Hag State is not pleasant!

Being on the forefront of societal evolution means being so far ahead of things that you really can't get caught up in current crazes and you tend to remain anonymous. The women who are making the difference now are being ignored; they are not seen or heard from or even acknowledged as existing. The women of the 1920 and 1930s, the Flappers, who got all the raves, all the attention, all the magazine covers (those new forms of influence in American society and elsewhere) were not the minority of women who held the fabric of that society together when the hell of Pearl Harbor happened. That minority of women quietly went about keeping the home front, and then they were reviled by their daughters, the loud, brassy Boomer brats who went on to destroy so much of what their self-sacrificing mothers had done. The re-construction of that society continues . . .

I champion the minority when it stands for the hard, thankless task of doing what the majority fails to even admit has to be done. Mr. Murray cares profoundly about the world that Charles Martel would not recognize today, but I have faith, and it may be a fool's faith but I hold it deeply nonetheless, that the hammer of triumph will prevail in a Europe that has not fully recovered from what it did to itself during the entire 20th century.

Tom

Debra Milligan • Jun 24, 2017 at 10:45

My grandmother and her friends always saw through all the crazes. People have to stop panicking about the latest fads and macro-doomsayers. Maybe she was a fool but it is more foolish to read all these anticipated obituaries and assume that this is the only possible outcome. That may be what the jaded elite wants everyone to believe but really it's just the dead end nature of their own ideas getting projected.

Debra Milligan

Tom • Jun 24, 2017 at 15:25

The projection of the death wish of the Left (and too many on the Right) is a problem, but I do agree with Messrs. Murray and Steyn that this sort of invasion of the hordes of non-assimiliated Arabs (Muslims) is creating a foment of true fear and societies that are on the brink of not collapse but withdrawal -- where do I run to?

There is biology at work here (more than robots) and that is the simple fact that people from the desert cannot survive regions like Lapland. The Chinese millionaires overtaking French farms like cockroaches to produce cheese and wine are not genetically programmed to eat stinky cheese and guzzle red or even white wines. They will die off.

When I first moved to the welfare state of California in 1979 I was told with more than enough glee based in resentment that by the year 2000 I would be the minority. This veiled threat was handed to me by whites as well as people of various skin tones. An extra-ordinary thing happened. Inter-marriage led to less brown-tones. Now the bean-counters can still count 1/8 or 1/18 (the one drop brown rule) but the dwindling of that sick hope dwindles apace. My children are 1/32 Canadian Indian and they check off the box that states Caucasian.

So the craze gets crazier and we must keep our heads above it!

Debra Milligan

Tom • Jun 24, 2017 at 15:33

One other point is the Golden Rule: The one with the gold makes all the rules.

The idea that the Western democracies will allow the lower classes to milk the upper classes (as Obama tried here in the USA) without some kind of an "adjustment" is a fallacy. The screaming bloody murder that the Left has literally acted out aligns with the bloody murder of the terrorists to destroy the hand that feeds it. The Left and anarchists have always made death together.

Bob M. • Jun 24, 2017 at 07:45

Spot on, but to me this is an arc of history that began post WWII with the decay of our religious and educational institutions. Religion became a pro forma exercise with no intellectual heft. We lost the ability to challenge ourselves with the demise of our educational system. Now its 45000 dollars a year, everyone has a 4.0 GPA, and no one can fail. There is no self awareness, as credentialed experts blow endless smoke but no not the least of ethics and incapable of recognizing their limitations.
The elite have condensed themselves into a an oily paste of incompetent, moneyed boobs who apparently feel a need to replace the citizenry but no nothing of their own heritage.
Meanwhile, people trying to find meaning have been turning to new age religions, drugs, and movements trying to find some there, there.
(thanks for letting me vent, that's been my toot for a long time)