Below is the third part of a four-part translation of an article by Hans-Peter Raddatz, a well-known German author and scholar who specializes in Islamic issues. The original was published in issue Nr. 5/2012 October of Die Neue Ordnung (pdf; table of contents here). In it Dr. Raddatz discusses the most recent book by Bat Ye’or, whose writings are alleged to have “provoked” the violence of Muslims and others, including Anders Behring Breivik.
Europe and the Coming Caliphate
The Systemic Background of an Important Book
3. Dhimmitude versus Islamophobia
This context is discussed to no effect in ever-decreasing circles in scholarly, ideologically independent discourse, because opinion dictated by the Mufti-istic dialogue is forcibly continuing the development of Islam’s vision of salvation, and aggressively defends it against criticism and analysis as the pinnacle of civilization. There is great informational value in Bar Ye’or’s detailed documentation and commentaries, which describe the corrupt collaboration between Islam and the West as well as the Nazi-like radicalism of the Euro elite, masked as Leftist Liberalism. They stem predominantly from the anti-bourgeois forces of the Left and Right. They further them, continue established Nazi-Middle East networking, create rapidly growing Muslim communities and networks of mosques in Europe by means of Islamically dominated multicultural immigration, and simultaneously de-construct the Christian-secular nucleus of the European tradition of freedom. Under the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood, meanwhile, Islam’s tradition of violence was strengthened, making it — with its Koranic hostility to Jews and Christians — a natural partner to the EU oligarchy. According to Simon Wiesenthal, the Europeans’ respectful dealings with the Terror Duo, Husayni-Arafat, revealed their attitude of forgiveness for mass murderers, in that “a powerful empire… is subjected to hostile forces which abrogate its laws.” (The Grand Mufti, 2) This proved to be prescient when post-war Islamocentric obedience united with the modern propensity for mass murder. This did not stop the Holocaust but rather encouraged the toll of victims to climb further in the second half of the 20th century (Daniel Goldhagen, Worse than War, Munich, 2009). In this connection. we must bear in mind that this is a long-term trend — useful for power-mongering to be sure, but overriding and with only limited guidance — which indissolubly unites mechanization, population growth and violence (Karl Metz, Origins of the Future, Munich, 2001) and also includes the culture dialogue.
The public — less informed or, perhaps, subject to government disinformation — can perceive only that its living conditions are coming under Islamic pressure, and ask at the same time why its own elected representatives are creating such problematic conditions against its own interests. And beyond that question is the question of not only why they are doing it, but why they are doing it systematically without regard to the civil rights of the citizenry. The attempt to answer these two questions encounters massive resistance in the mainstream. Bat Ye’or fleshes out this context, thus becoming dangerous for the interests of Islam, its European enforcers and its countless “agents.” She attracts the standard reflexes of the “dialogue” — Right Radicalism, Islamophobia, Racism, etc — but above all, the crown of totalitarian thinking, the excusing of mass murder. In this case, it is not the doctrines of Islam but her writings which are supposed to have “provoked” the violence of Muslims and others, e.g., mass murderer Breivik. The obligatory “eyes right” distracts from their own racism — an age-old trick of the illusionist.
The book’s central conceptualization strikes an Islamic nerve and thereby also strikes into the heart of intercultural propaganda. From dhimmi — the Arabic word for the Jewish or Christian infidel who is eking out a tenuous existence under Islam and must pay tribute for a survival vouchsafed by his suppression — the author derives her programmatic term, dhimmitude. This signifies a servile obedience which also characterizes the present leaders of the dialogue, and it continues the historic elimination of Jews and Christians under Islamic rule into the present time as a slow-motion version of the same. From this comes the realized utopia of the “Palestinian folk,” the inversion into a mass fetish by means of which Islamic aggression can be turned into universal peace, and hatred of Jews and the crusades of Christian clergy can be turned magically into the current jihad against Israel and the Christians.
Indeed, Jesus in Islamic doctrine has long been Mohammed’s prophetic predecessor, who will destroy all Christians, pigs and crosses on Judgment Day; but he is also supposed to be active in the Here and Now. Together with UNESCO, its Islamic counterpart ISESCO (Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) is pursuing plans which call for Jesus — as part of the Palestine Cult — to be named Palestinian Messiah (short form = “Pali-Prince”). The Nazi model is clear. Hitler spoke of the “Aryan Jesus” and his theologians expunged the Bible of “Jewish influence” — a deviation which is repeated with striking exactness in Bat Ye’or’s documentation of Jewish-Christian Islamization. Since the media are the propaganda arm of the pro-Islamic system, they do not speak of the psycho-physical dual strategy of bombs and boycotts, used by the UN/EU/OIC alliance to grind Israel down politically and mentally, nor of the incessant attacks on the Bible to do the same intellectually and spiritually. Just as effective is the EU-financed hate propaganda in the Arabic schoolbooks that are educating/indoctrinating another jihad generation in hostility towards Jews and Christians. The author repeatedly highlights the collaboration that has grown for decades, and describes in detail the compulsive unfolding of Islamization in Europe, accompanied by a systematic deception of the population. Beginning with submission to Yassir Arafat’s terrorist blackmail of the 1970s, the enlightened veneration of an esoteric “Palest-Islam” à la Lessing/Goethe* was amplified to a political-religious factor, rising in the course of events to become the encompassing creative power. As the right/left extremist cadres of the block wardens and apparatchiks once forced themselves on their states, so the town criers of the dialogue have overwhelmed the remaining democratic institutions. Since the elite of the “House of Europe” are acting under the roof of the dictated peace and on the foundation of the likewise dictated euro, they are pursuing an Islamocentric globalization as the foreign policy of the EU. Along with euro-skepticism, this combats doubt about Islam. Since the beleaguered exchanges and state budgets are supported to a great extent by Islamic investors, Islamophobia is revealed to have a deleterious effect, not only psycho-politically but also economically, turning critical analysis into a crime and every pro-Islamic player into a judge and jury over non-Muslims. At any rate, the supreme [constitutional] court has already stated in its explanation of the 2005 “head scarf verdict” that Muslims in Germany are living in accordance with their beliefs, therefore sharia will appropriately replace the legal system.
The adaptation of Euro elites to Islamic normality with its obsessive terrorist mind-set — which was already disadvantaging the basic rights of the people in the European Community of the Nine — was eased in through the initial institutions with the establishment of the Euro-Arab Dialogue (EAD — 1973) and the Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation (PAEAC — 1974). In numerous conferences, resolutions and other decisions documented by the author, these organizations are infiltrating the UN as well as the European Community/EU. In the following decades, it was the key conferences of Venice (1980), Barcelona (1995) and Naples (2003) — with impetus from the EU constitution and the Maastricht and Barcelona treaties — in which the unification of Euro-Islamic neighboring states was established under the rubric of a Mediterranean Union. This alliance is seen as the renaissance of the Cordovan Culture — lost a thousand years ago — and which shall now with the catalyst of the Palestinian religion bring forth the new Caliphate as the realized utopian empire of peace with its capitol in Al-Quds (Jerusalem). An element in this is the unity in insolvency of the Euro South (Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain) as a monetary troublemaker, whose PIGS logo corresponds ironically with the Islamic “swine concept” of rejecting Western civilization on political-hygienic grounds. The continuing dialogic enmeshment between the EU and its states, with increasing participation and control by the OIC and ISESCO as major Islamic players, was brought about in the self-strengthening chain of effects of oil, gold, immigration and the Pali Cult. Thus, the rules of Islamic faith are engraving in stone a racist worldview, making Muslims the best of all peoples (3/111) if they will spread this doctrine and subjugate the inferior peoples, primarily the Judaeo-Christian civilization. This is in tune with the racism of the red-brown EU policy, which is delivering the hated individualism of Old European culture into dhimmitude. The Hitler-Stalin model continues to work, undermining the opponents of the system in the shape of the Judaeo-Christian values system and democratic citizens’ rights, by use of the split effect of religious freedom for Islam alone (cf. A. Schachtschneider, Limits of Religious Freedom in the Example of Islam, Berlin, 2011).
Thus a new radical trend is rejuvenated, which in multicultural guise affords the elites the opportunity to lead Europe into a third — now Islam-based — totalitarianism. Anyone who still holds to the Judaeo-Christian life with individual thought, freedom of scientific inquiry and democratic politics is not thinking as a totalitarian and therefore Islamically incorrectly and as an Islamophobic deviant, already provided for in the envisioned criminal legal system of the EU-OIC autocracy. In accordance with the dogma that Islamic peace consists of putting aside everything that is not Islam, dialogic self-training sees its Holy Grail along the way to another, namely “radical” democracy, which is connected to the sociological dogma of self-reflection (see above). While deception — among other techniques — is a power function in using ambivalent concepts, the Islamophobe question remains temporarily an open question: Who, in the context of intercultural “enrichment,” has passed on what to whom, and how have the space and time for the dismantling of the old culture and the construction of dhimmitude in Europe arisen?
Next: The Profit for Islam from the Reduction of Thought
|*||Emblematic of the German — and general European — intellectuals’ idealization of the mysterious culture and knowledge of the “Orient” in the 18th century and beyond.|
Previous posts by Hans-Peter Raddatz:
|2011||Mar||6||Is Secularization Possible in Islamic Countries?|
|2012||Dec||30||Europe and the Coming Caliphate: The Political-Cultural Scenario|
|31||Europe and the Coming Caliphate: European Mufti-ism|