A quarter-century ago this summer, Samuel Huntington published the first version of what would become his book The Clash of Civilizations. I've quoted it many times over the years, not least its passages on what Huntington called "Islam's bloody borders". The man himself has been dead a decade now, and so on the twenty-fifth anniversary of his famous thesis it falls to Francis Fukuyama, Huntington's former pupil and author of The End of History, to do the honors:
Since Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations has been contrasted with my own End of History in countless introductory International Relations classes over the past two decades, I might as well begin by tackling at the outset the issue of how we're doing vis-Ã -vis one another. At the moment, it looks like Huntington is winning.
That's big of him, all things considered. Fukuyama has attempted to modify his thesis over the years but it doesn't get any sounder: He argued a book or two back that democratic societies were all trying to "get to Denmark", but, if you've actually set foot in Denmark recently, you might be inclined to think that the challenge for Danes is to figure out a way to get back to Denmark. Elsewhere in Scandinavia, it's easier to imagine Sweden getting to Sudan than Sudan getting to Sweden. Huntington discerned a lot of this, as Fukuyama concedes:
Huntington was very prescient in his depiction of "Davos Man," the cosmopolitan creature unmoored from strong attachments to any particular place, loyal primarily to his own self-interest. Davos Man has now become the target of populist rage, as the elites who constructed our globalized world are pilloried for being out of touch with the concerns of the working class. Huntington also foresaw the rise of immigration as one of the chief issues driving populism and the fears that mass migration has stoked about cultural change. Indeed, Carlos Lozada of the Washington Post has labeled Huntington as a prophet of the Trump era.
"The fears that mass migration has stoked about cultural change" is a coy way of sidling up to the way I put it in America Alone - that culture trumps economics. Pakistanis came to Yorkshire because the mills needed workers. The mills closed anyway, but the workers stayed, and built their mosques and madrassahs. Today, as I mentioned on Tucker's show a few weeks back, automation (and predictions that it will eliminate 30 per cent of all jobs) ends any economic rationale for mass immigration. That leaves little else to justify it except virtue-signaling. Which is more than enough, judging by the hysteria that greets anybody who seriously questions demographically transformative immigration policies. Fukuyama isn't quite ready to concede the cultural point to Huntington, and attempts instead to sidestep it:
Identity is a much broader and more flexible concept with which to understand contemporary politics rather than religiously based culture or civilizations. Identity is the modern concept that arises out of the belief that one has a hidden inner self whose dignity is at best being ignored or at worst being disparaged by the surrounding society. Identity politics revolves around demands not for materials goods or resources, but for recognition of the dignity of one's ethnicity, religion, nation, or even one's unique characteristics as an individual...
Many of the young European Muslims who left the countries of their birth to fight for the Islamic State in Syria were trapped between two cultures, the traditional one defined by the piety of their parents, and the secular Western one in which they were brought up... Seeing the same phenomena through an identity lens rather than through the lens of religiously based culture better conforms to today's realities... [In America] there was the constant emergence of new identities: not just gays and lesbians, but transgender and intersex people.
He has half a point here. Yes, many young western Muslims, the children and grandchildren of comparatively assimilated immigrants, choose a global Islamic "identity" for themselves. Likewise, many secular westerners choose one of the exciting and ever multiplying array of sexual "identities". But it seems to me that both these phenomena are at least partly responses to the assault we have waged on our own culture and civilization this past half-century. Who wants to identify with a culture that reviles its own past, that blames itself for everything, that demolishes its statuary and denounces its greatest figures and insists that, while multiculturalism posits the equal value of all cultures, if you have to pick a villain pick the culture that built the modern world? In the void of modern western identity, people look elsewhere: Some find the new one-size-fits-all Islam, others find "intersexuality".
In the end, however, one of these is real, and the other isn't. And in those societies where the one buts up against the other (Denmark, say) the one that is real will one day steamroller the other. Samuel Huntington grasped the obvious; Francis Fukuyama is still trying to tap-dance around it.
~Programming note: On Thursday I'll be swinging by "Tucker Carlson Tonight", live across America at 8pm Eastern/5pm Pacific. Hope you'll tune in if you're in the presence of the receiving apparatus.
We have some special events planned as the second year of The Mark Steyn Club cranks into full gear, including the inaugural Mark Steyn Club Cruise, sailing with me and my special guests from Montreal to Boston at the height of the fall foliage season. (Those Steyn cruise cabins are selling fast, and pricing is better the earlier you book.) Club members also enjoy special member pricing on over forty products at the Steyn store, such as our My Sharia Amour gift pack. So, if you've been thinking about signing up, you can find more details about the Club here - and, if you've a chum who'd enjoy our audio fiction, video poetry and much more, don't forget our special Gift Membership.
Comment on this item (members only)
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
83 Member Comments
A few days late, but excellent write-up. Huntington and Fukuyama - brings me back to college!
Amsterdam stabbing on Friday 31st. Both American victims. Attacker an Afghan. I just read latest update - Police have no motive at this stage.
The people in the photo... With allowed four wives, it is common that an Arab man can have an Arab wife through which his chief inheritance goes, plus an African wife through which her children get to serve their 'pure' half-siblings. So, two even three or four families to present, slyly promoting the one that pushes all the 'virtue-signalling' buttons, while the other families waits out of sight to be brought in later.
Vapid modern Western Civ is completely unprepared to deal with this as it is ignorant of the real-life dynamics, focusing not on real culture, but fake university-manufactured 'multiculturalism.'
Re the other topic... never liked Fukuyama, seems like another university-steeped person, all theory no real life. The case of Liberia can be invoked again this week... a once prosperous state was quickly reduced to nearly primitive conditions due to the destructive civil war. They had the dollar as currency, their accents were U.S. Southern drawl, from modern university to commerce to agriculture, yet the people were reduced to making their own hand soap, by candle-light in the cities and towns. Civilization has to be maintained by conscious effort and it has to be consciously protected from attack. Liberia's situation strongly evoked the historical events of the fall of the Roman Empire and how it played out in Romanized Britain - the Romanized Celts vs the native un-Romanized Celts and invaders.
A lesson from Liberia - the arguably worse action taken, the hardest from which to recover, was the burning of the City Hall - the Vital Records. Henceforth, who was the rightful owner of what? Who was a citizen? What were their legal ages for voting, for retirement, for pensions? Marriage records, birth records,citizenship, property, debts, settlements... every legal transaction afterwards has been a legal nightmare. With five documents presented claiming ownership of one piece of land, which one was true, which ones false? Who could prove to a court's satisfaction they were the child of said parents? Whether they were citizens or not? Never thought Fukuyama had any real life experience with how fragile civilization is. Had a new and deeper appreciation for the role of "Vital Records" for the basis for making everything function after what happened in Liberia.
This speaks to the reality that an ever increasing percentage of western humanity has lost its mooring and is drifting aimlessly because they have lost sight of life's meaning and purpose. Our ever-increasing denial of the Source of life is the cause and societal collapse is always the result. This scenario repeats itself like a broken record in the Old Testament. Orthodox Islam fills the vacuum giving some of the unmoored a seemingly strong anchor. Unfortunately it's an anchor that eventually drags everything and everyone straight to the bottom.
Deep elemental truths here from Mark. "America Alone" should be paired with either of Bruce Bawer's books if one is interested in what is taking place in Europe. Mark's providing an overview and Bawer whom lives in Norway giving us a ground level view of the consequences of Islamic immigration. One incident Bawer - a liberal gay man - relates that has stuck with me took place in Oslo. While strolling down the street he and his partner were confronted by a hostile group of young Muslim males who's 'gaydar' alerted them to an easy target. The confrontation was ugly and frightening especially occurring in broad daylight on a busy street. Bruce went to the nearest precinct to report it and the world weary desk officer told him that the Muslims beat him to it, filing a claim as victims of a religious slur. Told it wasn't true the cop said of course not but they do this all the time so we can't do anything. Just an everyday occurrence in Norway - no big deal. It's a cultural thing you know, different values and we'll have to live with it. This isn't a classical liberal viewpoint at all of course - it's something else entirely as we see playing out every day from the 'new left' in America.
I read things like this, Roy, and wonder how people can take it anymore. How much longer do the citizens hang in there before losing control of their sanity?
These 'minor' incidents occur every day in certain areas of European cities that are under defacto Islamic control. Natives are simply advised to avoid these places called no-go zones. Woman are advised to 'cover up' if venturing anywhere near these areas. Cops stay away as well for their own safety and also so as not to upset residents of these enclaves. Forced sex on an infidel woman is not considered as rape by some Muslims and justification for this view can be found in the qua'an. This argument was actually raised during the Birmingham mass rape horror story of a few years back. Those New Mexico Muslims were planning the mass murder of our own school children and three are now free with no restrictions. I see a direct correlation with the tepid reaction to this outrage here in America and what Europeans are willing to put up with on a daily basis. Islamists play the long game and I like their chances, especially in Europe.
Today the FBI arrested five of the seven. Two were sent to Atlanta. Five were let go the other day because the prosecutors messed up not holding a hearing within ten days, that you heard. I knew the FBI had to get involved. A couple hours ago, Foxnews.com reported the FBI arrested them on weapons and conspiracy charges.
Roy, this is the first good news I think I had since this hideous story broke. It had me a wreck thinking this could happen here. I heard the area north of Taos was beautiful, more of a family environment up around the Red River area although I've never been there. To think that these slugs could be crawling around up there with the local schoolchildren in their crosshairs was beyond hair raising and bone chilling. It unsettles one to the core. Btw, thanks for your two recommendations on those James Coburn films. I had seen "Affliction" but not the other two. Oh, and the Bruce Bawer author! Enjoy your holiday weekend. We can be very thankful about this recent development.
What a lot of people on the left do not seem to grasp is that a culture does not consist only of food-preferences and maybe styles of dress, but that actions are judged fundamentally differently in different cultures, especially if they are as vastly different as the Muslim culture and the Western culture.
Two examples to illustrate this:
-A few days after the mass-sexual assaults of Cologne, an iman generated a lot of outrage, because he said, that the women who were sexually assaulted or raped, were at fault because of their provocative dress. I once saw the results of a survey of people in different majority Muslim lands, where a vast majority of men and even a majority of women agreed to this statement. (The definition of "provocative dress probably is a lot different as well between different cultures)
-a few days ago, I read the following article (it is in German)
https://www.bild.de/regional/hannover/hannover-aktuell/prozess-in-hannover-messer-opfer-geschockt-von-taeter-gestaendnis-56792886.bild.html
To sum it up: A Syrian on trial for attempted manslaughter (he stabbed a young woman, who now has a 40cm long knife-wound and parts of some of her organs missing) proclaims himself a "model-refugee" and says, the does not know, why he is on trial. In his culture, one is allowed to attack someone with a knife, if one gets insulted and for big insults even kill the person doing the insulting.
Multiculturalism will NEVER work, because it means, that different groups attach completely different judgments to the same action.
Liberals are not known for their ability to learn from experience. See Obama's foreign policy re Muamar Qadafi and Hosni Mubarak.
Fukuyama: "When Donald Trump spoke of "the West" in a speech in Poland in 2017, his West was a different one from the West of President Obama."
Which is somewhat of an understatement. The foreign policy to which you refer is very much about Muslim brotherhood, in its broadest sense; an incontrovertible fact about the previous POTUS, as several people recently noted in the comments.
I was in England some years ago for my son's wedding and staying in rural areas (as is my nature) I never saw the problems that now plague urban centers, though a few folks talked to me about it. What I did see often was a real admiration for Obama, right about the time his incompetence was about to help set the Middle East on fire. Most of my in-laws and the people I met were wonderful, lovely people who kept telling me how great it was that Obama was president. I figured I was a guest so I held my tongue, but the three conservative young men I brought with me weren't quite so gentle. I think many of the folks I met (but not all), and Fukuyama as well (who seems a poor student) look at people like our current president as not just a threat to polite society, but a threat to free societies and the checks and balances that used to mark American politics. I believe Fukuyama says as much in some of his writings. I wish tribalism didn't make humans such dangerous creatures. I wish populism and nationalism didn't have a tendency to evolve into nasty beasts. I wish when two disparate cultures meet one isn't invariably assimilated, subjugated, or destroyed. History can teach us valuable lessons, and provide signs for the way we should go. When our leaders ignore these lessons, however, their people get the real lesson, and pay it in blood and treasure.
Good points. "When our leaders ignore these lessons, however, their people get the real lesson, and pay it in blood and treasure." As Mark has noted, the past 70 years have been a highly atypical period of stability and prosperity in the broader sweep of history. That being the "lived experience" of most people, they assume that the global order could never retrogradely unravel. Balkanisation awaits.
Forgive the last bit...summer cold hyperbole I guess. As one wit put it, "if wishes were horses, we all could ride" (or some such thing). Also, I'm now reading "The Strange Death of Europe" by Douglas Murray. Mostly, having children, and soon, grandchildren living in Europe has made me a bit apprehensive. I plan on visiting the UK fairly soon and would like to spend some time at the British Museum of Natural History in London. I hope some of the more radical residents can hold off with acid and knife attacks for a bit. Hyperbole or not, the bit about tribalism is true and Balkanization is never more than a few generations or a single misstep away. California is starting to really get a good taste of what a thoughtless immigration policy is all about. I grew up on a little ranch near two modest cities that are now the car theft capitals of the world. I have personally lost friends to the (mostly Hispanic) gangs, and homelessness is rampant, and the knuckleheads who run the place apparently lack the skill, will or funds to combat these problems. And this is just one fairly tame example of what happens when two fairly similar cultures come together. Ask the Serbs what it was like having Muslim neighbors when the heavy hand of Tito was removed and Yugoslavia blew apart. Or ask the Armenians, Greeks or Kurds what it was like, what it is still like, dealing with Ottoman Empire and its remnants. Or ask the Russians who invaded Afghanistan with a more Roman-like approach to these problems than Americans what it was like dealing with an implacable foe.
Still, as the EU and the US are now both run by bureaucrats and indecipherable policies, you might just ask one for an honest answer as to what the logical endgame is for inviting into our countries a people that come armed with a religious handbook that provides a political and civil code that is anathema to Western civilization. I think this is the thing that frustrate me most. I don't believe those bureaucrats have an answer or, if they do, I don't think I will like it very much
More on virtue-signaling: the first discussion of this that I ever heard was from Rush Limbaugh who did not use this term when analyzing the example of a grade school teacher who encouraged her students to empty their piggy banks and send the money to the US Treasury to pay down the national debt. He characterized it as an activity that was known by the actors to be completely futile and that was solely intended to make the actors feel better about themselves. If Merriam-Webster had the definition, it should read "Futile activity intended to alleviate guilt." Agreed?
Agreed. It is like Warren Buffet complaining that his secretary pays more in taxes than he does. If he so desires, Buffet can cut a cheque and send it in, the IRS would take it. But that doesn't allow for virtue-signalling in the public sphere.
Dittoes.
Leftists are virtually all innumerate: they have no understanding of actual Numbers AT ALL. Their public pronouncements and hysterical actions have No Effect AT ALL upon the "problems" that they have manufactured. (For example, "Global warming / Cooling / Climate change", anyone?) (Or oil field "fracking", most of which occurs at depths of about 2 miles, which is 1.9 miles below the depth of ANY fresh water.)
They are also ignorant of both history and science. By "history", I mean ACTUAL history, not the imbecilic anti-American, anti-Western culture twaddle that is force-fed to children in our "public schools." And by "science", I mean "Real" science, not the algore pseudo-"science". Their public statements are simply Virtue-Signaling to similarly ignorant leftards.
Yes it would, as he could choose to publicise the fact.
So the significance is that he chooses not to do it, which is what VS [ not to be confused with BS], is all about; a free ride to a halo.
The part that I find mind-boggling is the utter arrogance and vapidity of it. No matter how it turns out, it doesn't seem like history or current events will treat leaders who betray the trust of their citizens in such a callous fashion. I know the arguments (cheap voters, cheap labor) but did any of these geniuses think of the endgame for a cultural and political event of such magnitude? Opening your borders and your civilization to barbarians hasn't ever really worked well in the past. In our country the Chamber of Commerce and the crony capitalist are just as big an enemy to the average American as virtue-signaling open-borders leftists. While some of our leaders seem hellbent to follow the Merkel plan, the majority of our immigrants so far are poor Chinese and Catholics who just want to work, and I can't blame them for wanting to escape the corruption and violence in Mexico. Just getting rid of Obama slowed the mess down a little bit. But unless Macron and Merkel are either enormous twits or big fans of rape gangs and mass graves, not to mention the execution of apostates and politicians, what could possibly be the endgame they envision?
While I unabashedly prefer my inherited culture of liberalized Western civilization, columns like this one always remind me of the terrible choice I would likely have to make were I to somehow manage to live for 200 years (maybe only 100?). Without radical course correction, Western civilization is doomed, and individuals will be choosing between minor variations of Islam or the protean "intersexuality" culture now growing within the West like some malignant parasite.
When combined with the impending catastrophe awaiting the Catholic Church and the confounding return of true socialism to the forefront of economics, this intersexuality culture as Mark puts it makes Islam look good by comparison, especially for an older man.
And there lies the great irony to this. The attack on the West is largely focused on the patriarchal society that favors older men (mostly white since this is the West). It seems to me that the easiest path back to "global domination" would be for all of us to just convert to Islam in an organized fashion. After all, nothing is more patriarchal than Islam. I've pondered this for a year or two now, and I still cannot decide whether or not I'm deadly serious or just making a sarcastic joke.
As America Alone puts it, sooner or later alleged "white supremacists" are gonna realize they care more about the 'supremacy' part than the 'white' part. He gave the example of some Klan guy somewhere converting to Islam.
However, "Clapped out" (as Steyn would put it) old white guys converting to Islam ain't gonna make the radical Islamists win. They have one generation, maybe two, before they get blown away by their own hypocrisy and ignorance. Might nuke a few cities in the meantime.
Wayne,
The problem with your argument is that Islam is not patriarchal. Patriarchy implies emphasis on fatherhood, but Allah is nobody's father. Without God the Father (referring to Allah as Father is a serious offence), there is no Son, no basis for patriarchy, no basis for brotherhood, no basis for sisterhood, and no basis for the family. That is why Muslims make war on other Muslims with equal or greater ferocity than on non-Muslims. That is also why very few feminists, criminals, or intersexuals have any issue with Islam.
To survive, the Catholic Church needs to become more patriarchal; not less: stop treating its followers as resources to be exploited for political ends (the way the Muslim clergy treat their followers), and instead treat the Faithful as its sons and daughters to be blessed, favoured, and protected from danger, even if it means placing itself at risk. That is not happening. Until that changes, if ever, the catastrophe will deepen.
Wayne, What you described has already occurred in Europe at least once in the not so distant past. When the Ottomans displaced the Venetians in the Balkans, many if not most of the Christian families in the conquered territory quickly converted to Islam. They did this not because the Turks threatened to put them to the sword, but for the economic advantage of being Muslim. The descendants of these European Muslim converts live in Bosnia, Croatia, Albania, etc today. Further, I believe that Mr. Steyn has noted that Muslim conversion in Europe today is at a near record rate. What you suggest is surely not a joke.
"... the economic advantage of being Muslim" doesn't quite convey the corollary (ie. the status of dhimma), in the sense that persecuted religious minorities are (paradoxically) seen to be essential as the productive/ tax-paying sector of the "community" under Sharia.
Very interesting, Andrew, and frankly never thought the way you explained Islam here. Had similar thoughts as yours in the second paragraph earlier this week.
Just came from visiting my daughter in Seattle. Checked in at the center city St. James Cathedral for their 10 am service. It was very beautiful, with some of the prayers sung in what I call a high mass style with some Latin and a full choir. The church was fairly well packed. The priest gave a pretty good sermon, I thought. Other than the main theme which was the Ascension (never an easy one to grapple with, he admitted, and I concur), it was the first time I heard straight from a priest at the pulpit some sort of apology when he said he did not blame the Catholics who walked away from their churches and faith one bit. Does that mean I could fit there after being away on and off over the years? "We have a lot of work to do," he said. By attendance numbers, although only going by a hunch as a drop in, I would say that the congregation has not abandoned the church but the church has abandoned its fundamental principles.
I often wondered if some Jews converted to Christianity during WWII to avoid being killed. My sister-in-law did convert to Judaism from Catholicism during her adult life. She studied Theology in college and graduate school all the way to her PhD. My son was curious about that and did a little digging and he seemed to find some evidence that people in Italy during WWII may have indeed converted to avoid being sent to death camps.
I have complained constantly to my elder son about the islamisation of the West, and the effect it will have on my six grandchildren . Finally, he'd had enough, and silenced me with the rejoinder " Relax Dad, there all boys, they'll be fine!"
Also, that's what happened throughout most of the Middle East, though it took centuries and there were a lot of complicating factors.
Point taken insofar as Muslim cultures make war with each other when it's not convenient to make war with others. I would just say that at lease you're still in the game when you're Muslim though since you can just "convert" to the winning Muslim side at any given time.
A Danish friend of mine, active in the People's Party - this took place at least ten years ago - made a poster with photos of pretty Danish women contrasting with photos of women in Muslim attire, shaking their fists and their faces contorted in rage. The caption read something to the effect of "what kind of women do we want in Denmark?". He was tried and convicted of hate speech, appealed and was convicted again. Since, as Mark has observed, the process is the punishment, he received a suspended sentence of six months or so, with various restrictions on his freedom of movement during that time.
Denmark is now requiring that children two years of age and up spend their days at kinder care learning Danish culture and language. Those who refuse to do this are removed from welfare rolls. IIRC, families are walking across the bridge into Sweden.
Meanwhile, the latter is fast becoming a failed Western state, hoist by the petard of its own p.c. mythology. Police have given up, as have fire and emergency squads. Sweden is the Rape Capital of the world. See our recent report by essayist, Svenne Tvaerskaegg:
https://gatesofvienna.net/2018/08/uppsala-has-fallen
If what you say is true about Denmark, then they may still have a chance. That, combined with a moratorium on any more immigration could prove to be a prudent policy in the years ahead.
Unfortunately something like that would never fly in the US. The left would claim racism, nationalism, bigotry against those who dared introduce the plan that new immigrants learn the English language and about American heritage and culture.
Problem number one would be, what IS American culture? How can we even have a common culture and inheritance if we are a "diverse tapestry of different cultures?" That's the whole problem with this diversity rubbish.
So even though the Danish plan would make immigrant children more successful pupils and more successful adults, the USA, Britain, and the Continent for the most part will not follow suit.
"Who wants to identify with a culture that reviles its own past, that blames itself for everything, that demolishes its statuary and denounces its greatest figures and insists that, while multiculturalism posits the equal value of all cultures, if you have to pick a villain pick the culture that built the modern world? In the void of modern western identity, people look elsewhere: Some find the new one-size-fits-all Islam, others find "intersexuality"."
I think that's where I can't quite agree, because I've never seen the social justice war as blaming "itself" or demolishing "its" statuary or denouncing "its" greatest figures. Rather, the social justice war is about saying "it was all YOU GUYS fault - you Christians, you Jews, you right-wingers, you conservatives, you racist fascist sexist homophobe imperialists - and we, the brave, noble, bold, daring band of Social Justice Warriors are going to tear down YOUR statuary, YOUR greatest figures, and the culture that tried to stop the building of OUR modern world. "
Therefore, I believe that plenty of people - and that includes people whose parents didn't go to mosques, as well as people whose grandparents didn't go to synagogues and people whose great-grandparents didn't go to churches - are going to find that "identity" attractive. "Intersexuality" is just a thin veneer over the real identity of SJW.
It's complicated by the fact that part of the SJW creed is that "Muslims" still get to hate Jews, just as "Irish" "Catholics" still get to hate the English. But I doubt very much that Linda Sarsour believes that her husband has the right to multiple "spouses" or to "divorce" her by text message. And she's what, second generation? How about two generations down the road?
Honestly, my first doubt of the long term strength of the SJW came with some of the #MeToo business. The real attraction of SJW-ism, besides power and virtue-signalling, for productive white men, was unlimited sex. They wanted the deal that Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and Harvey Weinstein got. (Women get it too, as do minority men, but they ALSO get the right to engage in race-based or sex-based chest thumping, so there's a smidgen more in it for them.
The unproductive ALSO get endless welfare, so same deal). If it turns out that Harvey-ism is no longer on the table, then suddenly the Social Justice War will look a whole lot less attractive to a lot of people. Hence the frantic attempts to pretend it is all about 'consent' - but I'll bet there are very few people who have hundreds of sex partners where you can't identify one of them who will feel that they didn't give full consent. If 60's conservatives wanted to send Elvis, the Beatles, and the Rolling Stones to #MeToo hell I'll bet they could. So that's a medium term danger for the SJW.
But as compared with Islam? Why be so convinced that Islam is a "real" identity? It seems like one when you're surrounded by other Muslims in a country where Islam is written into the law, but get here, where nobody cares if you wear a veil, nobody cares if you go to a mosque, nobody cares if you pray five times a day, nobody cares if you read the Koran? Any stats on the percentage of great-grandchildren of Muslim immigrants who still do those things? Not dramatic stories about some of them becoming jihadists but numbers.
I do care if someone is wearing a niqab or burka. It freaks me out every time I'm in my home city, and I have travelled quite a bit. It is especially disconcerting when you see what looks like male footwear peeking out from under the skirt and they are carrying a giant tote bag. Whenever I see that I make a fast exit, and I have seen it often enough to now check every time. I'm probably just totally wrong and being a bigot, but I don't need to have my blood shed to know for sure. People should have to show their faces in public and not hide under a niqab, burka or ANTIFA kerchief.
"Not dramatic stories about some of them becoming jihadists but numbers."
Roy,
That is the ironic point, though. In Islam you're either a Jihadist with a dramatic story, or you're just a number; another bag at the mosque. Among the SJWs, you're either a top virtue-signaller with a hot sex life, or you're a nobody. You are correct, neither qualify as real identities. A real identity must permit individuality; in other words, the base must be allowed to retain its statue.
And I suppose that you are in favor of those post-War-of-Northern-Aggression "Anti-Klan" statues against public masking be applied against Muslim women and the Pantifa terrorists? I know that I am.
Point taken.. but you know what I mean. I am sure that in Afghanistan, if you don't wear a veil you get in big trouble. How many great-grandchildren of Afghan immigrants bother with it?
Remember the Democrat politician (don't remember his name) who said "I can't be a sexist; I'm a progressive?" Yeah... if that no longer works, there's a lot less allure to 'progressivism'.
"Today, as I mentioned on Tucker's show a few weeks back, automation (and predictions that it will eliminate 30 per cent of all jobs) ends any economic rationale for mass immigration. That leaves little else to justify it except virtue-signaling."
Have to disagree here. Don't you think that our elitist ruling class, living high on the hog on their cut of wealth redistribution policies which depend upon extracting future generations money in exchange for paying for their/our hamburgers believe that it is vital to import fecund third worlders to do the job American's won't or can't afford to do? That is, create the next generation of Ponzi scheme suckers...oops, children...working to keep the game afoot? Plus they get the benefit of the parent's votes now.
Of course, if those jobs don't exist because of automation as you posit, then these new State supplicants won't be paying taxes, but will be taking more taxes.
How to reconcile this? Maybe they believe Generation Next will have careers mining BitCoin currency with a smartphone app, in-between downloads of cat pictures, burning fossil fuels to create digital vapormoney as the new tax base.
Why would our political class care if they are saddling the future generations...well...actually today's Generation Pampers, with all this debt now? After all, they'll be likely dead and buried. All I can think is they have some guilt for screwing their own children. Even if it is a pipe dream fantasy, it doesn't take much for people to justify whatever they are doing for the most vapid reasons.
My niece decided to pursue a career in education, she started university last year. In the first semester a mandatory course on Social Justice was required. While their family is left-leaning to begin with, as families with only daughters often are (they have two), the SJW talking points she spouted as facts after that first semester were appalling. My mother, the niece's grandmother, was saying she couldn't believe how such a smart girl could be so duped. Well, she is duped indeed and given her career choice she will also be one doing the duping of future students.
People present feelings as facts and no longer seem to know the difference, or don't care to distinguish the difference. Such a shame, considering we have access to almost all the information in the world on a device that fits in one's hand but some can't be bothered to look up the actual facts.
The Kinder-Surprises of Mark's columns are the links to his other columns, which then have second and third order links etc. The 2015 "Last Laughs in Europe" is an excellent piece, including the papal references: with "global warming" prioritised over the plight of Christians in the Middle East "... he fiddled with the thermostat while Rome burned." (With Jorge Bergoglio now fending off allegations of serious wrong doing, as well as calls for his resignation, it's interesting to hear this point reinforced (unwittingly) by the Archbishop of Chicago— (30/8/18) "He also said the Pope had "got to get on with other things, of talking about the environment and protecting migrants and carrying on the work of the church".")
The commentary about "Davos Man" caused me to recall the following Adam Smith quote from "Wealth of Nations," which seemed to sum it up rather well all the way back in 1776.
"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."
What is Davos other than a meeting "for merriment and diversion" among bankers, global business interests and their political allies?
Fukuyama says, "The Third Wave of democratization that Huntington himself observed progressed in the period from the mid-1970s to the mid-2000s from about 35 electoral states to perhaps 115 by 2008. But since then the wave has gone into reverse, what Larry Diamond has labeled a democratic recession."
When freedom disappears, what replaces it is always the same: imposition of rule by force. The "progressive", or anti-freedom movement, is a home-grown reticulum - a coalition of interests - with lots of glittering temptations and goodies to ensnare the biggest catch of westerners. The reticulum acts as a smothering blanket over the nation, but one that simultaneously extinguishes and promotes freedom as people find out what yearning to breathe free feels like for the first time. So as the flame of freedom goes out, it sputters.
Thanks Sol. You put me in mind of another quote, which Mark has used in the past. It is from Alexis de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" where is opines on what form tyranny might take in a country like the United States. I've loaned out my copy so don't have access to the full text, but your description seems to fit with Tocqueville's overbearing paternal State.
As for Fukuyama, I read his article and it reads more like a complaint than an analysis. The annoying bit about writers like Fukuyama is that they define the good for themselves and then assume that in a properly functioning World everyone should progress towards that point that they themselves have defined for us. It seems that in Fukuyama's world globalization and breaking down of National identity equals good and anything that doesn't move in that direction is cultural recidivism. In layman's terms, Fukuyama's democratic recession simply means "you're not doing it right." As for his description of the Trumpist right, he could have saved himself some time and space and just called us "deplorables."
Indeed. Douglas Murray in the link above: "Most people prefer their security and comforts to freedom, and although history shows that everyone benefits from being free, it has always been a small minority who actually pursue and protect the cause."
A Tocqueville quote (possibly the one you're thinking of) which Sol's comment touches on:
"Certain peoples pursue liberty obstinately in the face of all sorts of perils and misfortunes..... Other peoples tire of it in the midst of their prosperity; they allow it to be snatched from their hands without resistance: for fear of jeopardizing by such an effort the very well-being they owe to it. What do they lack with regard to remaining free? What, indeed? The taste itself for being free."
This appears at the conclusion of "Soft Despotism, Democracy's Drift" by Paul Rahe (of Hillsdale College); an excellent book, despite not being the easiest read on account of its very scholarly approach. It looks as though Mark's review— "The State Despotic"— in The New Criterion (June 2009) requires a subscription.
"The fears that mass migration has stoked about cultural change"
Maybe I'm stereotyping my friends in Tarneit and Hoppers Crossing as being incorrigibly petit bourgeousie, but I get the impression that they're less concerned about cultural change than they are about car jackings and home invasions.
But perhaps Fukuyama, like most of Australia's mainstream media, regards such things as unworthy of the attention of the enlightened and progressive.
Fukuyama seems like he has gotten so academic that what he has written about is related to reality as a fifth cousin, three times removed.
According to the Victorian judge sentencing the refugees involved in the fake childcare centre scam, it's the gangs (perpetrating home invasions and carjackings) who are being (unfairly) stereotyped.
From The Australian 29/8/18: Justice McInerney referred to the recent media coverage of South Sudanese youth, which he called "unjustified", in his decision to sentence the family trio. "To have so many people from that country (South Sudan) engaged in an attack of the revenue of this country is most disappointing," he said, "given the thousands, if not millions, of dollars spent to help their plight. Your community has undergone unjustified vilification in recent times ... given the large media attention this sentencing will get, you have added to that trauma that your community must endure."
To run childcare centres for non-existent children and accrue seven figure profits whilst evading detection is quite an enterprising rort! As for "trauma", the judge failed to mention the trauma endured by the many victims of violent home invasions. It's all about the backlash.
Found it online.
"I am trying to imagine under what novel features despotism may appear in the world. In the first place, I see an innumerable multitude of men, alike and equal, constantly circling around in pursuit of the petty and banal pleasures with which they glut their souls. Each one of them, withdrawn into himself, is almost unaware of the fate of the rest....
Over this kind of men stands an immense, protective power which is alone responsible for securing their enjoyment and watching over their fate. That power is absolute, thoughtful of detail, orderly, provident, and gentle. It would resemble parental authority if, fatherlike, it tried to prepare charges for a man's life, but on the contrary, it only tries to keep them in perpetual childhood. It likes to see the citizens enjoy themselves, provided that they think of nothing but enjoyment. It gladly works for their happiness but wants to be sole agent and judge of it. It provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasure, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, makes rules for their testaments, and divides their inheritances. Why should it not entirely relieve them from the trouble of thinking and all the cares of living?
Thus it daily makes the exercise of free choice less useful and rarer, restricts the activity of free will within a narrower compass, and little by little robs each citizen of the proper use of his own faculties. Equality has prepared men for all this, predisposing them to endure it and often even regard it as beneficial.
Having thus taken each citizen in turn in its powerful grasp and shaped him to its will, government then extends its embrace to include the whole of society. It covers the whole of social life with a network of petty complicated rules that are both minute and uniform, through which even men of the greatest originality and the most vigorous temperament cannot force their heads above the crowd. It does not break men's will, but softens, bends, and guides it; it seldom enjoins, but often inhibits, action; it does not destroy anything, but prevents much being born; it is not at all tyrannical, but it hinders, restrains, enervates, stifles, and stultifies so much that in the end each nation is no more than a flock of timid and hardworking animals with the government as its shepherd."
Sound familiar?
It seems uncanny that someone can envision the future so accurately, but that's the way truth is. It cuts across time; it cuts across everything.
It's all there! As Sol says, it's quite extraordinary .... an immutable template for soft despotism.
I understand one does not mention Enoch Powell in polite company (much less his so-called "rivers of blood" speech), but the poor victims of the "Asian" (read Pakistani) "grooming gangs" (read pimps and child rapists) certainly found themselves up to their necks in a river of some effluvium or another. One effect of importing a "global Islamic identity" into your previously European-identity country is the hybridization of their antisemitism with your local variety. It's still unclear to me, hopeless optimist that I am, whether Europeans consider that a bug or a feature.
Wouldn't it be "butts"?
"He has half a point here." I think the half that he has claimed is portion that is empty. The problem we have today is that we have emasculated our education system and the expectations that we hold for individuals. Our public schools turn out children who have no idea of what they are capable of. Reading of our history, you can't help but be astounded at the accomplishments of individuals in days past. When the Wright brothers needed a gasoline engine they turned to a mechanic in their employ who worked on bicycles and had created a wind tunnel for testing the Wright brothers' airplane models. In a matter of six weeks Charles Taylor had an aluminum crankcase cast, machined the cylinders from fine grain cast iron, and created the remaining parts himself from sheets of steel. There were few examples of other engines at the time, the job wasn't like modifying a lawn mower engine. But the thing generated 11 hp at 1000 RPM, and this was sufficient for the first powered aircraft. Or consider Benjamin Franklin. In addition to all his well known inventions, in 1750 he made the first electrically ignited detonator for use in black powder explosions. Or Thomas Edison who saw the potential of the Sierra Nevada's for generating electricity, and was one of the early supporters for the power that is now making life possible in Los Angeles. These fellows did not worry about their "hidden inner selves", nor were they concerned about their identities. They followed their interests and revolutionized our world. Now we are surrounded by fragile little snowflakes who need a village in order to keep themselves clothed and fed. And in the back alleys, we have nasty little masked anarchists who express their frustration over being so inconsequential by assaulting those who still dare to accomplish something.
Worse, we have a university system that is dedicated to preserving this state of affairs.
As Mark noted of the extraordinary achievements of that bygone era: "Man's conquest of distance", and "Man's conquest of night". Astounding indeed.
Dead solid perfect — Bravo.
These were great accomplishments, indeed, considering what these men had at hand, but add to that their brilliant imaginations and things were invented. What's so absurd and offensive about the Antifa among many other things like the violence they worship is they don't correct their name which should accurately be "Fa" short for Fascists.
I always say their name is half right. The half that is wrong is "Anti".
Look here now. I understand that Russia and China are led by bad people with nukes who have ill intentions towards our elections, currencies and spheres of influence. And, yes, I realize Islam approaches 2 billion strong and seems able to outbreed hapless westerners but they aren't very organized and seem just as likely to turn on one another. I just don't have time for all this trivia when I only hav ed about 2 decades left to memorize all the gender pronouns or the Identity Police will havd me picked up and euthanized. I'm not near as dapper as Mark, and I often smell like livestock, so one failed pronoun and I'm history.
President Putin is probably the best thing to happen to Russia since the breakup of the Soviet Union. He's not a Boy Scout (I guess that's a dated phrase these days) but he's well aware that the world isn't just one big happy jamboree and he acts accordingly. He's a strong civic nationalist and has been more strongly against militant Islam than any Western leader until President Trump. In short, I'd say he's not a 'bad guy', though he is a rival or as President Trump said 'he's a competitor'.
And Islam is highly organized. That's why we're having the problems we are having with it.
Be careful! Your livestock may turn you in. Especially if you have resentful steers or capons.
Mark replies:
In my experience, capons are invariably resentful.
Uh huh.
If Putin was genuinely against "militant Islam" he'd be teaming up with the US against BOTH Shiite nutcases (Iran) and Sunni nutcases (ISIS). Instead, he has unreservedly backed the Shiite nutcases because that works for him. He's a major reason the US has had such a hard time coordinating international action against the Iranian nuke program.
While I was untypically snarky above, and I don't have as much of a problem as the National Review crowd with populism and nationalism in the West, you are correct when you say a former KGB officer who rose to power in Russia is not a Boy Scout. Given that losing half your male population in WWII is bound to make folks a bit wonky, the corruption of Putin makes him an enemy of my people and an enemy of his own people, if they ever wish to be free of the corrupt legacy of communism.
As for Islam, if a leader the level of Saladin ever appears to unite the children of Mohammed, he will have to contend with committed terrorist groups, obstreperous fundamentalist mullahs and the many schisms within Islam. The process of building and stabilizing an empire under conditions like that is likely to be bloody and difficult. That said, any multicultural snowflake who would label me an Islamophobe should read a history of Islam in Eurasia and Africa. The Crusaders were amateurs, especially when compared to an enemy that doesn't mind using their women and children as weapons.
Mark, do you blame them? I have to admit though. I have been doctoring farm animals since I was a young boy, delivered calves, kids, lambs, foals, puppies, kittens, even raised baby owls and crows successfully, but I could not begin to tell you how to caponize something. And I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to learn.
Dymphna, I use Border Collies and Great Pyrenees as my own Canine Secret Police. The goats are the clever ones, but any wether (a goat capon) caught talking to the press or a government agent winds up in the freezer. In that respect, I suppose, I am kind of like the Putin of the Northern Rockies. Lucky for me, too, if any Gender Equity Police wander into my country, they are liable to run into a hungry bear, wolf, or mountain lion.
Which is why our Chiweenie (Chi Wawa-Weiner Dog mix) still has all his gear.
I'm being sincere with this response.
"Given that losing half your male population in WWII is bound to make folks a bit wonky, the corruption of Putin makes him an enemy of my people and an enemy of his own people, if they ever wish to be free of the corrupt legacy of communism."
There appears to be three different ideas / statements in this sentence (separated by commas), but I can't understand how you mean to connect them either to each other or as a rebuttal to my remarks. Please clarify if you don't mind.
There will always be groups warring within Islam, just as there have been groups warring within Christianity. That doesn't mean some of these groups aren't organized in their assault on Western Civilization. As with the alliance between Islam and the Left, their common enemy is sufficiently engaging for now. When that enemy is defeated they'll move to the next one on the list.
A tactic that's been common in international relations throughout history is to support proxies that further your own ends, regardless of whether or not they would be allies otherwise.
As I said, it's not a big happy jamboree out there and if you can set your opponents against each other instead of against you then it conserves your resources and strengthens your position overall. Better to have them fighting each other than bringing their conflicts to you.
Crimea and Syria were both positive moves from Putin in my view. In Russia, and probably in Crimea too, Crimea was likely looked upon in a similar manner to how West Germany viewed East Germany, though Crimea's transfer to Ukraine happened more recently than the division of Germany did. Consequently, Putin and the Russian people view it as a repatriation and Western media talk of it as an annexation. There's certainly further political pragmatism / justification if you want to talk about NATO expansion, buffer zones, the Obamanation and EU globalists fomenting revolution, etc., etc.. I'm neither Crimean nor Russian so I can't speak with authority on their viewpoints, but those are my viewpoints.
Russia's support for Syria was a given; it's their only Mediterranean base and as such a key strategic asset for them. One could also accurately say that Russia was the only foreign power that was present in Syria with the approval of the Syrian government. If you don't like that justification then you'd better not complain when some other country's military goes on tour without a tourist visa for their destination. Assad is certainly no saint, but Syria was one of the few places in the region where Christians weren't persecuted and religious minorities were protected by the state. Similar to pre-Arab Spring Libya, the way order was maintained was certainly different from the way things are done in the West, but order was maintained and it wasn't the West.
I could be more verbose and give more examples, but this seems to be enough for a single comment.
Presbyterians and Methodists rarely shoot at each other, Tom. When you speak of "warring Christians", you are mean arguing Christians. When you speak of groups warring within Islam, you are speaking of guns and tanks.
Even in the middle ages, Christians were lousy at making war on each other; they couldn't fight before breakfast, had to break at noon for the Angelus, and couldn't fight on Sunday or other Holy Days (holidays). It took conflict with Islam (and the Golden Horde in the east..) to teach Christians how to fight ruthlessly. With the rise of the secular state post-reformation, that, miserably, got applied to each other, but even those internecine wars paled in comparison with the later secular French Revolution, WWI, the purge of the Kulacks, WWII, the Great Leap Forward, Pol Pot, etc, etc. Probably the very worst Christian war was the American Civil War, and even that was tangled up with political (southern Democrats vs northern Republicans) and regional, basically tribal, alliances.
It makes a difference, living in a Christian or a Muslim society; or an atheist society.
I'm not judging mind you, but the losses in the WWII and the subsequent adventures of the Soviets, plus the years of rule by Stalin and his successors made the Russians a bit different, more tolerant of authoritarianism and corruption. Putin is a child of that system, he murders his opponents and shows an unhealthy interest in foreign expansion and interfering in our business. If we can come to an accommodation with Putin that serves both our interests well, that is certainly better than warfare. It would be a grievous error to believe Putin is trustworthy, however. Sorry for my lack of clarity.
As for the thorny problem with Islam...I do not mean to downplay the two biggest threats I see, but if we hadn't had a remarkably feckless president who allowed the rise of ISIS, the destabilization of Syria, threw barrels of cash at a theocratic state who supports terror, and supported the bizarre notion of an Arab spring, the middle East would probably be a more stable place right now. Maybe not. Even a simple shepherd like myself knows how much damage a determined predator can do to the flock, so I obviously see this as a huge problem with Islam, because a few determined individuals with the right support could do a great deal of damage...look at 9/11. Terrorism is a problem for everyone, including moderate Muslims, yet it feels like there are an awful lot of people in the Islamic world that are indifferent to the survival of the West, or indifferent to reform of some of the more egregious practices of fundamental Islam. These factors, and their ability to outbreed their non-Muslim neighbors makes them a problem for folks who take them in. The inability or unwillingness of the host peoples in the West to recognize the fundamental conflicts between Islam and the liberal West does not bode well for a happy ending to this tale.
Although Islam doesn't operate as an homogenous, global bloc, its supremacist ideology finds expressesion in all sorts of different ways (jihadist terrorism being the most identifiable). Advancing influence in the West by "soft jihad" (from a position of minority rights— "Islamophobia") is a perfect adaptation, and bides time until sheer numbers are sufficient, as in parts of Europe.
"The process of building and stabilizing an empire under conditions like that is likely to be bloody and difficult." And Islam is more than up to the task, as history proves. It excels in that respect!
Well you won't get any rebuttals out of me when talking about Islam being a problem in the West. I do agree that the Obamanation that was America was exceedingly masochistic and the so called leader of that time continues to show his contempt for the West and for whites in particular with his current support for the South African regime. At least he's now made it clear what he was hoping for with 'more diversity', because he praised South Africa's 'diversity' so the code word has been formally deciphered. If you're getting rid of white people then you're becoming more diverse, even if the replacement is homogeneous in nature.
I still disagree with you about Putin. Today's Russia isn't yesterday's Soviet Union, regardless of what McCain thought or how many times he said it. I don't know what specifics you're referring to when you say 'foreign expansion' but whatever it might be is nothing compared to how NATO expanded even when they indicated that they wouldn't. As for interfering in our business, I'm going to assume that you're talking about US domestic affairs. They may have done something with the election, but from what I understand it amounted to taking out ads on Fakebook, to the tune of $100k or something like that, which probably cost less and had less effect on the election than a county fair rally in Tootsville for the Jeb! campaign. Frankly, if I were running a foreign country and I thought Clinton might become President I'd be wanting to do my bit to save the world from impending doom too. Kind of a Paul Revere scenario in a way...
The Pantsuit is coming! The Pantsuit is coming! Lock up your money!
The Pantsuit is bringing The Pants! Lock up your daughters!
When I wrote "warring groups within Christianity" I actually had Northern Ireland in mind. It seems to me, though I'm not well versed in it, that The Thirty Years' War piled up a few bodies here and there though.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a Christian myself and very much want to see Christendom maintained and preferably expanded. I just meant to point out that power struggles manifest themselves in all manner of organizations and while that can weaken them to the point where they're not a threat it doesn't mean it will.
LOL. I would very much like to send Bill and Hillary to Putin, but I fear they would thrive in that system.
I've lived in my home for 42 years and over that time I've seen a huge change in demographics just on my block alone. I live in Southern California, by the way. Ever so gradually, however, American flags have emerged on house after house, mine included, that are being flown year round. The houses where no flag flies are mostly inhabited by foreigners. I have had the thought recently to do a survey of the houses with flags to see what political affiliation they have: Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian. I've seen a couple houses in neighboring tracts that fly the American flag plus the flag that is supposed to signal the country is in distress. Is anyone else seeing flags appearing everywhere?
Not here in New Mexico, though maybe a white flag up north around Taos!
Who wants to identify with a culture that reviles its own past, that blames itself for everything, that demolishes its statuary and denounces its greatest figures and insists that, while multiculturalism posits the equal value of all cultures, if you have to pick a villain pick the culture that built the modern world?
If there are any folks in government, or who hope to take part in it, who can articulately address the public in such terms, they do not often show up in public discourse. This is a serious lack for humanity. It isn't necessary to frame the discussion as starkly as multiculti vs liberal democracy, but who's making the effort to illuminate the benefits of Western civ in terms or choices which will appeal to the guy in the street? It can't be that hard.
I'm with God on this one. I don't think He's suspended the Tower of Babel edict.
Take heart Mark. Andy Ngo of the WSJ wrote a straightforward description of life in London and small town England today... he even bashed multiculturalism. The news is beginning to spread.
Trudeau is planning to confiscate 300,000 arms from his subjects, because when they realize that they are frogs being brought to boiling point by his jihad on them, they will be angry. Ditto everywhere else.
It will be interesting to see how joyfully those Canadian arms-holders will go along with Juthtine on this one.
Isn't this what tthe plan is in SA? That was part one of the plan; the second part, I believe, is going to involve blood being shed, that of people with white pigmentation.
So... some people post lookouts in case of icebergs while others wait until the ship slips below the waves to acknowledge the danger. Even if Fukuyama comes to a realization of shattered cultures, he is useless as his reasoning is proven flawed. This is Russian Roulette played with a single shot pistol.... hoping the round misfires.