Tuesday, August 07, 2007

The West in the 21st Century — Developed or Developing Nations?

The Fjordman Report

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.



In the debate regarding how the relationship between the Old West, Europe, and the New West, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, will be in the 21st century, many observers seem to take for granted that much of Europe will fall to Islam, and that native Europeans will flee and resettle in the New West. There is, however, another scenario that is theoretically possible, but little discussed. What if the opposite happens? There are Europeans emigrating/fleeing to these nations already now, but I think they will discover once there that the problems they are fleeing from are already present in their new homelands. Some of them are even worse there, especially since many of those fleeing will be white, and they will discover that whites are rapidly diminishing as a factor in these countries and that hostility towards whites is rising.

I gave serious thought to emigrating to the USA or some other English-speaking country a couple of years ago. I don’t blame Europeans who do so, but for me personally, this seems like a less attractive proposition now than it was then. First of all because I believe there is still work to be done in Europe, and second of all because so far I can’t see that the countries of the New West are standing up to Muslims in a forceful way, either, with the possible exception of Australia. And finally, because I’m white, and the more I read about the situation in the USA, Canada and New Zealand the less I feel like moving there. Frankly, I’m not sure whether I see any future in being white in the USA. Maybe there is no point in moving from the Old West to the New West because most of our problems are shared for all Western nations. Indeed one could claim that the West is now recognized not so much by a shared civilizational legacy as by shared problems.
- - - - - - - - - -
We are definitely witnessing the end of the Western world order, as I’ve said before. That doesn’t necessarily mean the end of the West itself, although some pessimists do believe this, too. According to the blogger Conservative Swede, people of European origins will become the global Jews of the 21st century, moving around to whatever country will take them in, while Germany, Italy and Britain will be populated by Nigerians and Kurds:

So what’s the future for people like me? Because even if I belong nowhere politically, I belong somewhere socially and ethnically. Well, the world is being homogenized. Tomorrow the whole world will be like the Third World. People like me, of European ethnicity, will have no home, no nation. We will live like the Jews as elites in other people’s nations (preferably a non-Muslim nation). This doesn’t scare me. The Jews have lived thusly for two thousand years. It’s a pity, but this is our destiny. This is what the Western Christians and liberals are working eagerly towards. This is what they are programmed to do. This is what they will achieve. I’ll let them have it. As an individual I cannot change this. The only thing I can do is to prepare myself for it. A good plan is to live as a ‘Jew’ in Catholic/Mestizo Latin America rather than a Muslim Europe, or the sinking Titanic of America. Even China looks like an option, in comparison.

There is some basis for claiming this, unfortunately. Our left-wing intellectuals love developing countries so much that they want us to become developing countries, too, a new form of rehashed global Communism. I recently read a column in Al-Guardian by Timothy Garton Ash, who also loves the European Union, hailing Brazil as the model for the future, where we are all merged into just one race, the human race. Multinational corporations want to erase borders to create one big world of capital, goods and consumers, and I’m pretty sure some members of our political elites are envious of the corrupt plutocrats ruling many Third Word nations.

Still, I think it’s a tad too pessimistic to resign to the inevitability of this scenario. Some countries will resist, perhaps successfully, and I’m not necessarily sure the English-speaking countries will come out on top. It has become custom in segments of the English-speaking blogosphere to bash the countries of continental Europe. Some of this is justified. France has led the creation of the EU, Eurabia and the European appeasement of Arabs, and they deserved to be bashed for it. However, if you look closely at the ideology of Multiculturalism, as I have done for some time now, you will notice that it wasn’t spread by France, where the ideal was never Multiculturalism but the assimilation of all groups equally into the secular French Republic. Not that that alternative worked out too well, either.

On the contrary, some writers such as Paul Gottfried have convincingly argued that Multiculturalism and identity politics, which are now eating away at the body of what once was Western civilization, were spread from the English-speaking countries, especially from the United States. This makes sense once you notice that the much-vaunted Anglosphere in fact leads the West in self-destruction. Canada is a Multicultural basket case, as is New Zealand. Britain, in particular England, the cradle of the Anglosphere, is one of the worst — some say the worst — countries in Western Europe, which leaves Australia and segments within the USA resisting their demise. Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Canada and New Zealand cease being recognizably Western within this century, and the USA being divided into several countries, including perhaps one predominantly white nation incorporating parts of Canada. Australia could stand a better chance of pulling through, but we should remember that it is a demographically vulnerable nation that is geographically merely an extension of Asia.

I’m not sure whether most of Europe, even all of Western Europe, will fall to Islam in the end. Worst case scenario: Muslims will create several smaller Pakistans or Kosovos, for instance one stretching from parts of France via Belgium to the Netherlands, one in regions of England and another one in southern Sweden. The situation in France and England is difficult to predict. France does seem set to become a Muslim country by now, but it is also a nation with an unpredictable revolutionary legacy. England sometimes appears lost, but my gut feeling tells me that there is still some residue left of the old warrior spirit there, which means that they will put up a fight at some point. France and Britain now both face the choice between becoming Islamic or engage in devastating civil wars. This could, ironically, lead to the rise of Germany as the pre-eminent European power. The Germans have significant problems with immigration, too, as do pretty much all Western countries these days, but they are nowhere near as bad as those of the French and the British.

If the Anglosphere implodes in this century due to the Multicultural ideology that it has been promoting and championing, this leaves the possibility that some people of European origins in the New West will flee back to the newly liberated nations of Free Europe. On the global scale, the Sino-American rivalry predicted by many now could fail to materialize. Not necessarily because China won’t be strong enough to rival the US, but because the US — or whatever remains of the US at that point — won’t be strong enough to rival China.

Finally, one comment from a blog reader Mikhail Paul:

I have a mix of extreme pessimism and cautious optimism about the West. North America and England are already gone, as is New Zealand and pockets of Scandinavia— well in the process of demographic race replacement that’s irreversible at this point. But part of Europe is holding its own, especially the German lands, Finland, Denmark and Iceland, and (to my surprise) France, Spain, Portugal and Italy also coming through this. Belgium and the Netherlands could go either way, but seem now to be inclining more toward the self-preservationist tendencies of Finland and Germany rather than the PC self-destruction plan of North America and England. An independent Scotland and Wales may also join in, as will Ireland— Celtic languages like Irish Gaelic, Welsh and Scottish Gaelic, all but moribund today, will likely rebound, as these will be all that’s left of Britain as a Western nation. We do live in interesting times to say the very least.

We certainly do. Whatever the end result will be of this process, with Iraqis moving to Sweden and Swedes to Latin America, Chinese moving to Britain and Britons to Australia, Turks moving to Germany and Germans to the Unites States it is bound to be unsettling for a long time to come. Maybe I should move somewhere quiet to watch the whole mess from a distance, somewhere the masses won’t follow. What about Antarctica?

36 comments:

AWOL Civilization said...

Overall a very interesting article. I can testify to the situation in France. I recently returned to the US after spending six years in Paris. I felt like I was one of the last people to get into the lifeboat. Every day, the PC propaganda was thicker, the “youth” riots were closer to home, the people more anesthetized. The great classic French culture is on its deathbed. Of course, the French can always fall back on their ethnicity, something we can’t do in the US. But, as you point out, they are so far gone that only a civil war could extract them out of the mess.

Also we need to consider what would happen if Europe falls, and there is mass emigration of the native population. A good portion of this would most likely go to the US. What would be the impact of a renewed, early-twentieth-century-style immigration from the heartland of Europe? Would all these people, fresh from the catastrophe, act as an obstacle to the same event occurring in America?

Finally, you mention a couple of times that such and such could happen before the end of this century. I think you are being very generous. I shudder to think what could happen in the space of 93 years. In my opinion, we’re looking at a couple of decades at most before all of these issues reach boiling point.

ZionistYoungster said...

OT (only slightly, again): more depressing news from the cultural front, via Jihad Watch:

Outcry as British Council quits Europe to woo Muslim world

Summary: 8,000 books, comprising all the literature of the British Council in Greece (e.g. Byron), are being shipped to Athens because of lack of funding for the Athenian Library, because the money is being used for efforts of "widening gap of trust between the UK and Muslim states".

That's like throwing money down the toilet, only stupider. At least the toilet doesn't throw the money, together with the brown stuff, back at you--the Muslims, in contrast, use the money to buy weapons that they eventually use against the non-Muslims who were foolish enough to give it to them.

David M said...

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 08/07/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

Lemon said...

If you wish to be a "Jew" in among other nations, be prepared for the pogroms!

Also of consideration: Immigration to the US is not easy for white ethnic people.
The US has a somewhat large illegal immigrant Irish population since Ted Kennedy did his magic on changing immigration rules.
It is far easier to immigrate to the US if you are Hispanic or Asian than if you are European.

Antarctica is too cold but....
Aren't there any unclaimed islands still floating in the Pacific somewhere?

carpenter said...

If you could imagine deep-frozen Antarctica; then why not Svalbard? The tentacles of radical Islam will never reach it. And you can even speak Norweighan there!
A disadvantage is the coldness; winter all year long...

James said...

Fjordman, America is a biggish country with (dare I say it) a diverse distribution of populations. I have the feeling the rural South or New England, or Appalachia, might not be your jar of lingonberry jam, but if what you're after is a community populated almost exclusively by those of European descent, you won't do much better than, say, the hills of North Georgia or the coasts of Maine. And you know what? They all have guns.

It's a mistake, I think, to extrapolate the opinions of the elite chattering classes to Americans at large. Popular resistance to the Mexican amnesty bill sent that one down the toilet; there's a strong tradition of resistance to such Federal fiats still very alive and active here.

Gordon Pasha said...

Frankly, immigration from Europe would never help Anglosphere nations to resist. The continental Europeans would only bring their multi-culti madness, white guilt, socialist dogma, and viral anti-Americanism with them, thus making matters worse for us. In North America, all that is sort of thing is concentrated in academia (irrelevant to everyone but themselves) and government bureaucracy (which can be overthrown easily enough). There is lots of remaining resolve in the Anglosphere. With all due respect, lighten up a bit on the gloom.

gun-totin-wacko said...

How Europe goes will, in the end, be largely a function of how Germany goes. Germany is the center of the Continent, in every sense of the word. Biggest, strongest, etc. What they do will affect their neighbors. And when push comes to shove, Germany doesn't always play nice with those they perceive to be threats.

As for the US, I agree with the comment above regarding the Euros coming over here. It isn't easy, because the US government apparently only wants minorities.

But if Euros start coming over in greater numbers, what will happen? Most likely the ones that can move over here are the younger, more educated and more motivated folks. But will they bring socialist ideals with them, or will they come here to work and "get ahead" on their own?

Zerosumgame said...

May I ask Fjordman why he thinks Australia will survive the Islamicization of the Western World and the USA will not?

Almost all polls predict a Labor victory this year in Australia, and their Labor Party is as anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, and pro-Islamist/appeasement as any European leftist party.

Let's see what Fjordman has to say after 6 months of Prime Minister Rudd.

Plus, does he really think Australia (population 20 million), can hold out against an Islamist Indonesia (population 220 million), if the United States (population 303 million) is defeated?

Zerosumgame said...

By the way Fjordman,

You really should travel in America. And not in NY or California. Nowhere is the gap in worldview between the media elites and the general population greater than in America, which is why the media is more hated in America than in any other democratic nation in the world, with Australia perhaps the only nation with a similar level of distrust.

Zerosumgame said...

gordon pasha said:

Frankly, immigration from Europe would never help Anglosphere nations to resist. The continental Europeans would only bring their multi-culti madness, white guilt, socialist dogma, and viral anti-Americanism with them, thus making matters worse for us. In North America, all that is sort of thing is concentrated in academia (irrelevant to everyone but themselves) and government bureaucracy (which can be overthrown easily enough).

Yes, I agree. I don't care for illegal immigration, but I would actually prefer that America's legal immigrants come from outside Europe. I do not need immigrants tainted by a belief in Socialism and virulent anti-Semitism.

I live in NJ, and in fact, this is what is happening. Where I live, there is a very large presence of both East Asians and South Asians (Hindus, fortunately), who bring the discipline, work ethic and (in the case of Christian Koreans and Hindu Indians) generally conservative religious and moral values.

turn said...

From my little corner of the US portion of the Anglosphere I'd just like to point out that 'anglo' in this sense is more about shared language and culture than race.

Some seemingly huge chasms of difference are not so big, after all.

I've read fjordman's posts here for quite a while and I appreciate his perspective. But the above strikes me as being a bit myopic--perhaps he needs to come down from the tower and spend some quality time in the US.

The real chasm here has no racial divide--it is the 'reality-based' left vs everybody else.

Monday's Dr Sanity post "IT'S OFFICIAL" illustrates perfectly.

kepiblanc said...

Just like the invading Muslims Fjordman forgets a crucial point: the economy. Muslims live off welfare, only they call it 'jizzya' - and correctly so. And by 'Muslims', I really mean all Muslims : the GDP of the entire Islamic world is lower than Finland's if one doesn't count oil into the equation. Oil they didn't discover, can't drill, pump, refine or use without Western technology and assistance.

Even with gazillions of petro-dollars they can't sustain their own exploding populations. Muslims don't come here solely to destroy us, but to collect the 'jizzya' while doing so. But they forget something essential : they need us to provide for them. So, what happens when the Muslim part of a population reaches say 20-25%? - The welfare system, the 'jizzya',dries out. That's what. In this part of the world most jobs are high-tech or physically demanding - neither of which Muslims can handle. Confined to their ghettos they can 'work' as hair-dressers, taxi-jockeys, falafel-bakers or imams, but that's hardly enough to sustain an economy. Accordingly, if they kill us or chase us out of the country, they'll starve. Which leads to the question: how long before we say no more taxes. At that moment they will leave the ghettos and go into full intifada-mode, killing, raping, plundering and looting.

And that will be the end. For them.

Vol Abroad said...

"And you know what? They all have guns."

This is the important point about America that Europeans miss. America is still fundamentally an armed society, and thus at root a free society. Any attempt to disarm the heartlands would result in civil war. And the Constitution is on the side of the people, so most of the US military could not be relied on to disarm them.

What this means is that European civilisation will almost certainly survive across great swathes of heartland USA for the foreseeable future.

Vol-in-Law

Conservative Swede said...

Fjordman,

Thanks for quoting me. My description of a future living as a "Jew" is what I see as the worst case scenario. And as long as one stays away from Muslim countries it's not such a bad scenario. It makes me see the future in positive terms, and it puts my mind at ease. Latin America is a good option. Life will be more like the current higher classes in a country like Mexico. Eastern Europe could even be majority white also in the future (maybe as part of a Russian empire). As well as bits and pieces of what was once the United States. I also like the idea of Australia. And of course Japan and China should be considered. But we should of course no longer have high expectations of belonging to a nation in the way we do today. In most places we will be the minority, but still having a sense of ethnic identity together with other Europeans/Swedes in diaspora.

Once the Christians/post-Christians are few and insignificant, the problems generated by them will also start fading away--such as the acceleration of the population explosion among the Other--and things will start balancing themselves out. But the result will be a homogenized world, the multicultural dream. Not surprisingly since so much force and effort is put behind achieving exactly this.

As an ironic touch to all the migration streams you describe we have the Americans who dream of moving back to Europe. Such as this Californian:

Mexican rule, white exodus
I know several Californians who are taking a good look at re-migrating to Europe—to Scandinavia, in particular—as the annexation of the American Southwest by Mexico accelerates. Those who have gone over to take a look-see are of the same opinion as me: Though threatening, the Muslim immigrant presence in most of those countries is nowhere near as overwhelming in raw numbers, nor as inescapably toxic to the white culture and quality of life, as is the Mestizo Mexican engulfment of this part of the U.S.

Personally, I’ve felt more at home in smaller towns in Sweden than in the increasingly alien, third-world landscapes of once-familiar suburban California, U.S.A.


The process started earlier in California than anywhere else, the non-Hispanic whites, i.e. the original nationals of America, are already in minority there.

So the white migrants go back and forth irrationally. There is no plan to it, only futile hopes and dreams. Better to accept the things as I say. Prepare to live as "Jews". It's when you see this that you will stop worrying.

rohan said...

turn, I read that Dr. Sanity post and was extremely impressed. I agree that writing from Europe one may not realize the vast divide between D.C/Hollywood/MSM and the "non-elites". He might have more optimism about the USA if he did. Plus, as you said, I think race is not the real issue. It is the mindset of the individual and their belief in freedom AND responsibility that counts. Just as there are millions of Americans who hate our culture, there are millions of foreigners of all colors who are Americans at heart, just born in the wrong place. Makes me want to see if there is some way we could make a trade. Our liberals/leftists for your entrepeneurs/freedom-lovers.

turn said...

conservative swede said:

"But we should of course no longer have high expectations of belonging to a nation in the way we do today. In most places we will be the minority, but still having a sense of ethnic identity together with other Europeans/Swedes in diaspora."

It seems you're saying that were you to emigrate to the US or Oz, you would choose to not assimilate.

Also:

"Once the Christians/post-Christians are few and insignificant, the problems generated by them will also start fading away--such as the acceleration of the population explosion among the Other--and things will start balancing themselves out."

?!?

Hey, this will ruin your entire day.

Last, I want to take you to task for seemingly attributing this:

"Mexican rule, white exodus

I know several Californians who are taking a good look at re-migrating to Europe—to Scandinavia, in particular—as the annexation of the American Southwest by Mexico accelerates.
"

to a Californian or fellow blogger of mine at RR. The above was posted by Paul Belien of the Brussels Journal and you know it as Belien crossposts you from your blog.

Even the Baron doesn't escape your acid pen:

"At Gates of Vienna Baron Boddisey acts as the perfect PC Inquisitor when ostracizing Swedish blogger Jan Milld, as anti-Semite, for questioning the exactness of the symbolic figure of 6 million Jews, along with pointing out that the case, about gas chambers, was built on witnesses rather than technical evidence. This made Baron react with his reptile brain, quite as we have seen Lawrence Auster do with regards to me a month ago (on a completely unrelated issue).

These people are just not prepared for a proper fight. They are too much driven by superstitious fear and emotions. And there is not exactly anyone else around."

If that sounds familiar, it should--you posted it yesterday.

As to 'not being prepared for a proper fight" I'll not take the time to tell you why you're so wrong.

MrSmith said...

Vol, I'd have to disagree. Europeans either simply don't know the liberating power of the use of force or have been brainwashed against it. Those Euros and Brits who do know, are simply powerless to do anything about it. Democracy is essentially useless in a situation where the game is rigged so that an entire country can be frozen out when it makes the wrong free choice (Haider's Austria) and a legal political democratic party is hounded, demonised, and its leader put on trial for 'hate speech' for criticising Islam (BNP and Nick Griffin).

As the excellent Paul Weston seems to foresee, it's likely to take a civil war to get us out of this mess.

Re the point in question, this is a phenomenon I've seen mentioned repeatedly, often under the title 'White Flight'. But this puzzles me. Why run?

If we run, they will follow.
If we hide, they will seek.
If we capitulate, they will ravish and destroy.
But... what if we fight?

Are we really so afraid of disapproval, of being tarred and feathered as 'racists' or 'islamophobes' that we prefer our own destruction? Are we really so admiring of this half-baked fashionista marxism that we'll just hand over our self-hood, our freedom, our very souls for a liar's promise of peace?

Or do we still retain some vestige of self-belief and self-love? Some spark that can be fanned into a flame to carry us through?

I hope we do, but where's the evidence?

Yorkshireminer said...

History is very difficult to predicted and it is never linear. Mark Twain said that “HISTORY MIGHT NOT REPEAT ITSELF BUT IT DOES TEND TO RHYME” especially if it goes into a chaotic phase such as war, then surprisingly it tend to be more predictable. The apposing populations tend to polarize usually along ethnic cultural political and religious lines , the ditherers and appeasers have to take sides. If it is a civil war, without any external interference then they are fought with an increasing ferocity until one side or the other wins a resounding victory. If the two sides receive support from out side a civil war usually ends in a peace of exhaustion. Prior to the last century most wars were fought for economic reasons but in the last century ideology became more important. The last two major wars the Second World War and the Cold War were certainly more ideological than economic and the next one will certainly be ideological. They usually start with a build up tension between the two sides usually the side that starts the war being extremely bellicose shouting out its demands and its superiority until a certain cusp is reached then guns are used to back up the rhetoric. They usually start when the bellicose power reaches an apogee of there ability to win, and to delay a war any longer would mean certainly losing it. The American Civil war certainly followed these general lines. If the south had bombarded fort Sumner ten years later they would have been crushed within a year and not four. The Northern States were industrializing at such a phenomenal rate they would have easily dominated any conflict between the states. For the South it was either then or never. Demographics were one of the reasons that the Kaiser went to war when he did in 1913 Germany had reached the high point in the no. of young men of military age. After 1914 it was down hill all the way, the no. of men of military age would have contracted rapidly. Hitler had to go to war in 1939 and not in 1942 as planed. The Allies, Britain and France were rapidly overalling Germany in war production. Once again it was then or never.

The problem for me is not IF but when and where. Will the next ideological war start when the Muslim oil revenues start to decline? That is one cusp. Will it start in the Middle East when Iran has the Atomic Bomb and its economy goes finally into terminal decline? That is another cusp, tension is certainly building up more rapidly there than in Europe. Will it start in America when some gentleman of middle eastern appearance explodes a dirty bomb in New York? Will it start in Europe? Your guess is as good as mine, but start it will. The consequences are going to be catastrophic for the world. Especially for Islam, no muslim economy has a real industrial base and those that do run it on oil. This will collapse immediately because western technicians, run the oil industry these will leave immediately the shooting starts. All oil tankers full or otherwise will dock in the west. The west has other sources of oil the Islamic countries don't.

I am certainly not so pessimistic as Fjordman. Europe is certainly in a bad state, but not so bad as to write it off. Muslims live in Ghettos in the large towns. Let us say for example Israel was Nuked, may it never happen, and serious rioting took place in say Antwerp or Rotterdam or Brussels. This is most likely to happen. The muslims would certainly not be able to hold there jubilation in check. Let us say they killed several thousand Dutch or Belgium people celebrating the the destruction of the little Satan. Do you think that a Dutch or Belgian Government would stand for such action and back down, and compromise. That certainly wouldn't be in power at the next election, martial law and shoot to kill would be the order of the day, they could certainly be starved out in a few days. Muslims have power bases but they don't have defense in depth. The E.U. would certainly lose its power. I can't imagine a German Army coming to save the Muslims from the wrath of the Dutch if commanded too by the E.U. self interest would take over. Rotterdam is Germany's largest port. They wouldn't want or allow a independent muslim city state sitting across there main export artery. When the dominoes start to fall and Europe tips into civil war chaos, retribution will be violent and extremely bloody, unenlightened self interest will be the order of the day and unenlightened self interest does not favor the muslims. No reinforcements will get across the Mediterranean, the French navy will see to that. Russia will certainly support Europe. They will certainly not take kindly to an Islamic Europe, especially an Islamic Scandinavia controlling the entrance to the Baltic. Neither will the Danes if the Swedes lose control of malmo. Once the new oil pipeline from Russia under the Baltic to northern Germany comes into operation, Germany Europe's industrial power house will be much safer. Europe can certainly feed itself and so can America, muslims seem to forget that they import most of there food. Europe can certainly survive longer without oil than the muslims can survive with out food. Don't think that any politician will get elected on a platform of lets be nice to muslims after such a civil war. If war tells us anything it tells us that attitudes can change in the blink of an eye and appeasement dies at the sound of the first bullet.

MrSmith said...

"appeasement dies at the sound of the first bullet"

But not, oddly, the first gang-rape?

turn said...

yorkshireminer-

I, like you, have been giving this some thought. Here's my 'take' from 8/04:

We've already lived through the 1st few stages of the Jihad War. More than half of Americans do not yet see the threat and, of those that do, many believe there's roughly 10 to 20 years before demographic change forces large-scale conflict.

There are many possibilities that could reduce such a timetable from years to months. A real attack on Israel by Syria or Iran or an attack on the Green Zone with a WMD traced to Iran or Waziristan could trigger a badass response in a matter of weeks.

Barring such triggering events, I think the next stage will probably start in Europe as reprisals escalate to gang violence and the impotence of the EU authorities becomes apparent to both the natives and the immigrants.

Imagine riots like the '05 carbeques around Paris being met with a response in kind from natives--"burn my car and I'll burn your tenement". Initially, police will apprehend anybody from either side of such a 'battle' but eventually, inevitably, they will tend to back off and then a more military response will ensue.

As the escalation progresses, the general level of violence increases and the political weakness of the EU, unsupported by an electorate, may start to unravel as nations revert to borders and national governments are overturned by that parliamentary procedure of a 'vote of no confidence'. We might well witness a European and urban version of Cavalry and Injuns.

It would be about this point where the armed OPEC states would start to put the squeeze on oil shipments and make some coordinated noise regarding the Zionist Occupiers. That's about as far as I can see without the Great Carnac's headgear.

And hey... I could be FOS. It's 4August and I expected Hizbollah to attack Israel by the end of May given reports of rearming.

whiskey_199 said...

Fjordman --

I think you are in grievous error in many areas.

1. The US is far different than the media would have you believe. The proof: even though Dems nutroots shout and scream their professional politicians are reluctant to go too far in surrendering in Iraq or giving civil rights to terrorists. Much less being blamed for lax measures allowing another attack. Bush has a 29% approval rating on Iraq, but Congress only 3%. Overall Bush's rating is 35% and Congress's 14%.

Look for Rudy to win over Shrillary (who won't get any male votes).

2. Multi-culti stuff is merely a symptom of the US providing "free" defense and the lack of any obvious external threat. It's a triviality brought on by too much prosperity. Something likely to change.

3. Italy, Spain, Greece, and France are gone: fertility rates of 1.08 from which no nation has ever recovered. They will be Muslim (France's real white rate is around 1.08, it's bumped up by Muslim births).

Moreover, each nation is EXTREMELY vulnerable to invasion and annexation from poor Muslim nations across the Med. Spain and Portugal could not fight their way out of a paper bag and if the Moroccans decided to take them they could do so without much trouble. Absent the US Navy they will. Italy could not fight either and could be easily invaded by Libya. First Sicily then the rest. France has more ocean but they can't fight either. What, they'll be rude to the Algerians? All of these nations are dirt poor, have lots of unemployed, angry young men who are a danger, and have a long cultural tradition of raiding.

The Netherlands and Belgium are gone, Iran's nukes allow them to act as protector of the new Muslim states in them. As well as France, I doubt France has any stomach for any fight, particularly nuclear. They're probably already planning the surrender ceremony.

Britain has surrendered already, but the power vacuum and distance from the Med and Iran might give them "enough" breathing space to overthrow their weak government and fight. Already my guess is the ordinary people hate/loathe their anti-populist elites and the Muslims they coddle as their Cossacks.

Germany as I've noted has many young men without women and nothing to do but join the NPD. I'm sure they would be quite happy to send them on their way to "great adventures" in Sweden or elsewhere, if for no other reason that they're someone else's problem. Germany will be well in reach of Iranian nukes so that's about all they'll do.

The US ... on the other hand has that great big ocean. Which gives us time and distance to do something.

Anyone thinking of "living as a Jew" has not seen the horrible anti-semitism and also anti-White racism in Latin America. Much of it class-based, Latin America's tragedy is that the rebel overthrows the General, becomes Maximum Leader, His Excellency, marries a very white woman, his descendants rule the nation and get whiter and whiter, until another rebel repeats the pattern. Simply replacing the General with the Leader. See: Fidel. For most poor mestizos "white" equals the oppressive rule of the elites. I understand that. But I have no desire to live in their hell-holes.

The elites think that uncontrolled Mexican immigration can continue to replace troublesome white workers with compliant, obedient Mexican ones. This is unlikely and it will very likely provoke another Jacksonian revolt IMHO.

I will defer to your opinions in Scandinavia. But I think the missing factor in prognostication is Iranian nukes and patronage of Muslim republics in the West, invasion and annexation of a weak and demographically imploding Italy, Portugal, Spain and France, and the blessings of time and distance particularly for the US.

After all, that's what saved Stalin from Hitler: trading space for time.

Yggdrasil said...

A few comments:

1. A vital factor determining the outcome of the crisis will be the action of the state apparatus. So far it has all been in appeasement mode, but if we consider second world war, and the effects of the states "going to war" - this could change a lot.

Say for instance if Denmark declared war on muslims - it would be logical to enter southern Sweden to fight there. I do not hope it will happen, but as soon as the states will start moving the entire picture will change radically.

Consider the Holocaust.

2. White men are really fighters, we have always been fighters. We might have been suppressed by the media, UN, EU and so on - but never on a physical level. It is mindcontrol not really physical control. And basically i think the states are a lot more scared of white guys going into war than the muslims - because that will really be bad.

The fighting genom is in the culture, in the myths (as Holger Danske), in the physique, in the mastering of hig tech weapons, in the sense of community - and unleashed it will certainly change the face of the world.

It could lead to the extermination of the muslim creed.

turn said...

bigtree-

One hopes.

turn said...

whiskey_199-

We're 15 short months from election '08 and I don't share your confidence that the witch will be be defeated. She will wield the most formidable tools--human and financial--to become president. The clintonistas know no obstacles that they can't buy, coerce, silence or kill. Their ambition knows no bounds.
_________________

Should Denmark 'go to war' against muslims it would first have to withdraw from the EU and handle its own immigrants before marching on Sweden.

The Danes may be in the forefront of citizen recognition and early organization of 'the problem' but I expect it will take a major country like Germany or France to make things roll.

That said, a dissolution of 'the union' probably needs to come first.

Eisvogel said...

Thank you for this great essay, Fjordman. I love these well thought outlooks to the future even if the aren't pleasant at all. I'll start to translate it soon.

But part of Europe is holding its own, especially the German lands,...

I am so sorry, but that seems rather unrealistically optimistic to me. This may be true for Eastern Germany (former GDR) but only if they are going to rebuild that old wall. And soon!

There is some grassroot opposition, but we are harrassed and branded as racists, just as anywhere else. All our political parties - even the conservatives - praise Muslim immigration and support mosques to be built with the exception of some individuals. One of them, Rene Stadtkewitz, a local politician in Berlin, who opposes a mosque to be build in a quarter in former Eastern Berlin, where no Muslims live, had his house firebombed about a year ago. His 6 year old son and a girl of the same age could only be rescued from suffocation by fortunate coincidence.

I'm quite sure the government even lies about the actual number of Muslims in Germany - or maybe they don't know this number. Nevertheless they continue talking about 3.5 million Muslims which means 4.5% of the population and which is also reported in international statistics. They freely admit that they don't know the number, the 3.5 million only being estimated. It has never changed for years. The number is repeated like a religious dogma by all politicians and media. Hans-Peter Raddatz, a writer critical of Islam (i.e. Allah's women) estimates, that there are about 6 million Muslims in Germany, which means 7.5% - or if you consider Western Germany alone - nearly 10%. The usually higher Muslim birthrates and German convertites to Islam are not taken in account in these calculations. I have reconstructed his calculations and they seem to be much more comprehensible and logical to me than the official number. Please notice: This is not proved and cannot be proved! But the number the federal government ceaselessly spreads isn't proved either. I do not believe a single word our politicians talk about Muslim immigration. Perhaps it's true. Perhaps it's untrue with a grain of truth in it. Perhaps there isn't even this grain. I just do not know.

I published Mr. Raddatz' calculations on my website and was adviced by a commentator not to concern with totally irrelevant numbers but to think about what went wrong with "integration" (our fault) and rather invite a Muslim family to my home. Sometimes I feel like a sane person locked up in a gigantic mad-house.

There are still nice places, even in the Western part of Germany. A few weeks ago I travelled to my place of birth in the Black Forest. It was a wonderful sunny sunday and the small train climbing up the dark hills was full of cheerful people. I was sitting there, watching them and suddenly I was struck - I am not young, I'm in my 40s - I was indeed the youngest person in this train! All of them were over 60 or presumably 65. I really got obsessed with this and later in the Black Forest on a walk with my old auntie - elderly people everywhere. Muslims are young. Perhaps everyone is thinking "My country is worse than others" because we notice the problems in our own countries better than those in others.

I am not at all optimistic rather a real "naysayer". But until recently I was sure that at least the US will survive and carry on the light of Western civilization. I love America - and I am not yet willig to give up at least this hope.

MrSmith said...

Eisvogel,

Und die NPD? I did some research in Wikipedia after seeing the name mentioned here, and the article in Wiki says it's currently the fastest-growing party in Germany. How would you say this meshes with citizens' experience of Germany?

Your comment about the former DDR strikes me as fantastically ironic. That the last bastion of hope for Western values and civilisation in Germany, in the face of increasing cultural marxism and its effeects, might be a re-isolated East Germany, former last bastion of communism in Germany, is really quite something, don't you think?

Eisvogel said...

My comment was indeed somehow ironic or rather sarcastic, Mr. Smith. It's not realistic at all. And it's not about the people, only about demographics. Muslims didn't immigrate to communist countries in the 70s and 80s, and when the wall broke down they already had cities-in-the-cities in Western Germany, and newcomers today still prefer to settle where they find a perfectly established Muslim and Turkish community. Thus - concerning Muslim immigration - Eastern Germany still resembles much more Poland or Czechia than any Western country. Perhaps these countries will be Europe's last free bastion against Islamisation and downfall of reason and Western civilazation? Eastern Germany is likely to be "assimilated" by the multicultural "Borg".

Und die NPD? They are not only branded as neo-nazis, they really are. They are inelectable for a sane person - extremely anti-Semitic and anti-American, economically leftist, their brains filled with mad conspiration theories about WWII and Ahmadinejad being "their best friend". Morons.

Most of them do oppose immigration - but they are as bad as Muslims, the main difference is: they don't dismiss alcohol. Not at all ;-)

They are marginal and considered as disgusting outlaws by about 99% of Western Germans and even a large majority of Eastern Germans. I don't foresee that they are going to grow really in the near future. But one never knows.At least I don't don't hope so! Their growth is a result of the reunion, a few Easternes vote for them. A growth from 0.5% to 1% is still a growth by 100%.

Don Miguel said...

"A good plan is to live as a ‘Jew’ in Catholic/Mestizo Latin America rather than a Muslim Europe, or the sinking Titanic of America."

This is a rather ridiculous statement given that most countries in "Catholic/Mestizo Latin America" are oligarchies in which the oligarchs are ... white.

Profitsbeard said...

Jeez, and here I am wondering if I should return to The Netherlands from the U.S. to be on the forefront of the fight for Civilization, and honor the sacrifice of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, and everybody else is for running away.

Predators always folllow the running prey.

Stand your ground.

It is YOUR ground after all.

MrSmith said...

Eisvogel, Thanks for the explanation on the NPD, Whiskey_199's mention of them was the first I'd heard of them, so thanks for the explanation. That's a pity that they are such unelectable individuals. Is there no hope for Germany, then?

Profitsbeard, maybe if everyone returned from the US to a single place in the fight for civilisation, it'd work out better? People run because they've been robbed of a sense of their country, their selfhood, their right to their homeland, and they think they're alone in being afraid of the newcomers. Maybe there's something to be said for strength through unity, certainly the demonisation of resistance to the Islamization of Europe and inability of those who resist to band together is doing great work for the social engineers responsible, by the looks of it.

Eisvogel said...

Is there no hope for Germany, then?

I don't think so. But of course I don't know.

And perhaps everyone tends to overestimate the problems in ones own country compared to those in others. Some commentators think it's worse than anywhere else. But that's paranoiac, that's not true. But I am not sure, whether it is much better.

You are British, are you? When I read news from Britain I think it's worse there. They sadden me, Britain was such a great and proud nation. What's happened to you? It surely is more obvious in Britain. I comiserated so much when I heard from those evil terrorist attacks.

It's a kind of "softer" Islamization in Germany since most Muslims here are Turks and not as aggressive, but they are still Muslims and they are radicalizing. In the big cities more than 60% of the children under 5 years have "migration background" - 30% in the total country. (That's from an official survey of the state statistical authority)

Doesn't look good, does it?

How many of them are Muslims? Of course nobody knows. They don't ask such "xenophobic" questions in surveys.

PRCalDude said...

I'm a native Californian and I've been considering moving back to Germany, my ancestral homeland. Yes, Muslims are 4% of the population there, but they don't have citizenship rights unless they're German by blood. Birthright citizenship, in the end, is what undid the United States. The fact that any Mexican can just cross into the United States and give birth to a citizen is simply ludicrous, and makes citizenship almost worthless. The European nations that are still able should immediately eliminate jus soli.

Mexicans are pretty hostile to whites. They envy our greater success, the color of our skin, and our women. Mexican women commonly dye their hair blonde and try to stay out of the sun as much as possible to look white. Mexican television looks like it was cast by Hitler.

I've often wondered what will happen when they become the majority. Well, in the past, they've been quite hostile to Whites. They've never gotten over the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848. In 1919, they enacted "The Plan of San Diego" which involved incursions of the Mexican military into the U.S. to instigate a full scale race war. Don't take my word for it, look it up yourself.

I can't see that having them here will be anything other than a giant millstone around our neck. Their system of thinking and logic and the arguments they use against Europeans sound like they were lifted from a jihadist website: the historical grievances, the failure to introspect, the constant blame-shifting. In the end, because of Vatican II, I think most will just go right along with the Islamists. Most of the "Brown Power" websites I've read (and most Mexicans are Brown Power) overwhelmingly side with Muslims in current events. They also overwhelmingly support the Democrats (3:1) and favor higher taxes because it involves taking money from whites and Asians and giving it to them. With the Democrats a permanent demographic majority, we'll go the way of Europe culturally. The Republicans will have no one to blame but themselves for this, of course, because they did the bidding of their corporate masters. Maybe some civil war and partition are in the U.S.'s future. I have no idea. It's too early to tell. Hopefully some country will take us in. I feel that whites will be the Jews of this century as well. It's pretty obvious to me. We're beset in the U.S. by international Latino gangs and drug cartels, jihadists, and their convergence. I just hope something happens to coalesce the conservatives into physical warfare before demographics run their course. That's the only option I see possible.

I've even considered moving to Russia. Though the outlook there is pretty bleak, they have at least not thrown any Christians under the bus like the Serbs and Chaldeans.

Sorry to rant. I just wanted to share my thoughts. It's very depressing to read all this because I'm strongly anglophile. All my favorite authors are British.

MrSmith said...

No, Eisvogel, not British, but English. What happened to the British notion seems to be that it lost its composite identity. Devolution hasn't helped at all, especially the way the English have just been left to the side and denied even the right to self-identify as English in most areas. Except, it would appear, to deny white English teen girls work.

I saw a German newspaper cartoon a while back which stuck with me since. Two guys at a bar, one asks the other if he's an ausländer and the second chap says 'no, a Turk'.

'Oh', says the first, 'sorry. Didn't mean to... you just look a bit... Sorry about that.'

Gastarbeitern, wie? Great idea in theory. What was it they used to say about fish and guests?

Eisvogel said...

Yes, Muslims are 4% of the population there, but they don't have citizenship rights unless they're German by blood.

That's not quite correct, PRCalDude, I even strongly doubt the 4%. It's only estimated not recorded and the estimations do not seem to be logical.

Many Muslims from Turkey, Albania, Bosnia and the Arab lands have citizenship. There is no such thing like citizenship only for persons with "German blood". The "blood" thing was only a special regulation for Russians with German ancestry, who were entitled to citizenship the day of their arrival without any conditions.

Anybody can apply for German citizenship. Those who have lived in Germany for at least 8 years, are law-abiding and not dependant on welfare are even entitled to get citizenship, it can't be denied by authorities. Muslim organizations encourage their members to do so. If husbands are not law-abiding, wives can apply for it, so the whole family can stay.

They have also passed a new law that comes near to birthright citizenship recently. Children (born to the above people) are both German citizens by birth and citizens of their parents' country. At the age of 18 to 23 they have to opt for one of the two.

It's a strange and sad thing. Young well educated Europeans are eager to leave for the US, and you are considering to do the opposite. I guess it's going to worsen. People are fleeing from all over the West.

PRCalDude said...

Eisvogel,

Well I guess most Europeans will end up moving to South America where the taxes aren't so high and the government will leave you alone. Chile looks pretty good. At least it's not a crime to be white there.