Monday, April 17, 2006

The Retreat of the Western World Order

The Fjordman Report
The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.

Samuel P. Huntington’s “The Clash of Civilizations” thesis has generated a lot of debate, and some justified criticism. He has been accused of simplification, but also for underestimating the case of Islam. Huntington does talk about “the bloody borders” of the Islamic world. However, he has also stated that there is nothing implicit in Islamic teachings that has created the current turmoil among Muslims, but rather the huge number of young men, the primary instigators of violence in any culture. This is obviously not the case. If Huntington had read books such as “The Legacy of Jihad” by Andrew Bostom or “Onward Muslim Soldiers” by Robert Spencer, he would have understood that Jihad and aggressive violence have been intimately related to Islam on three continents for 1300 years. Yes, an abundance of young men as “cannon fodder” for war or demographic Jihad certainly helps, but this situation was created by the contents of Islamic core texts.

Huntington fails to grasp to what extent Islam is a special case, uniquely aggressive among all established cultures and religions on earth today. Hugh Fitzgerald, Vice President of Robert Spencer’s website Jihad Watch, has explored some of the limitations of the “clash of civilizations” paradigm. As Fitzgerald points out, it gives the impression that America or “the West” or Western Christian or Western post-Christian civilization are the enemy, while in reality the global Islamic Jihad is as much directed at Hindus and Buddhists, and the Eastern Orthodox Christians in the Balkans, and the non-Muslim black Africans, as it is against the much more powerful, and therefore more dangerous, United States of America:

Fitzgerald: Clash of civilizations? Yes and no

The phrase “clash of civilizations,” made famous by Samuel Huntington, is misleading. In Huntington’s formulation, there are the Sinic, the Orthodox, the Hindu, the Islamic, the Western, and so on. And these are all potentially clashing. But this is nonsense. There is only one clash that counts: that of Islam with all of non-Islam. If, in the future, China and America were to go to war, it would not be because the former is “Sinic” and the latter “Christian” or “Western” or some such, but because of perceived Great-Power rivalries — for China and America are now part of the same civilization, the shared, modern, universal civilization, with disagreements at the edges, but nothing like the clash between Islam and all Infidels. In fact, a war between China and America would be about power, and thus no different from, for example, the rivalry, ending in war, between Germany and England in the pre-1914 period. It is interesting to note, meanwhile, that Arab and Muslim analysts around the world tend to prefer the phrase “clash of civilizations” — because it avoids the truthful description of the conflict as one motivated by a belief-system, the belief-system of Islam.

However, Samuel P. Huntington should be credited with some of the honor of placing the significance of culture on the radar of global politics. He is also right in pointing out that the beginning of the 21st century is characterized by a West that has superior, yet declining global power. Rival cultures such as the Chinese and the Islamic ones are asserting themselves. The tectonic plates of global power are shifting in ways they haven’t done for centuries. Maybe future historians will label this age “the retreat of the Western world order.” I say “retreat of” because it is not yet certain that this is the end of the Western world order, although that is a possibility. These massive changes and the real or perceived weakness of the Western civilization that has been dominant globally for centuries could very well create a new world war. Multiculturalism and the inability or unwillingness of Western nations to uphold their borders from massive immigration is viewed by Muslims as an invitation for attack and a signal that their ancient Western rival is weak and ripe for conquest. This is no doubt the background for the ongoing aggressive posture by the Iranian president, among others. We should take this dead seriously, because it is meant that way.

Muslims really do believe that the time has now come for overthrowing the West and putting Islam into the global, dominant position it should have according to their scriptures. They will spare no efforts, including nuclear war, in achieving this goal. The Iranian president has quite openly stated that “Islam will soon rule the world,” which implies that they will have to destroy or subdue the West. Al-Qaeda strategists have earlier outlined a schedule for awakening the Islamic world and crushing the West, with a timeline stretching over the coming fifteen to twenty years. They still stick to this plan, which means that tensions are bound to escalate even further in the near future. Westerners need to understand that a world war of sorts with the Islamic world is already inevitable by now, no matter what we do. The only question is whether this will be a cold or a hot world war. We will rapidly approach the latter, if countries such as Iran are allowed to gain nuclear weapons and continued Muslim immigration pushes Western European nations to the brink of civil war. Iranian nukes need to be prevented at absolutely all costs, if we are to have any chance of avoiding further escalation of the most dangerous kind.

There are many possible scenarios for the first half of the 21st century. Let us have a look at some of them:

1. Another Atlantic/Western century

The intra-Western, Atlantic ties between Europe and North America will still be the most important and defining global axis. This would require that Europe regains her old, cultural and religious dynamic and repels Islam. Just as Islam isn’t the cause of Europe’s current weakness, but rather a secondary infection, it could have the unforeseen and ironic effect of saving Europe from herself. By quite literally putting a dagger at Europe’s throat, the Islamic world will force Europeans to renew themselves or die. Europe will go through a turbulent period of painful, but necessary revival, and will arrive chastened on the other side. Although not impossible, this is probably not the most likely scenario at this point, given the economic and cultural weakness of Europe in particular. The West as a whole also makes up a declining proportion of the world’s population, and globalization makes it more difficult for the West to retain its technological superiority.

2. Another American century

The USA, more than Europe and Asia, will remain the world’s unchallenged superpower. The 21st century will be a continuation of the American Age that started in the 20th century. Europe may foster the strength to repel Islam, but not enough to renew herself, and will fade off the world stage. Alternatively, Islamic-controlled Eurabia emerges triumphant, or the entire continent becomes a nightmare of civil wars where neither side gains a decisive victory. In both cases, Europe will be a source of constant instability. The rise of the Asian economies will be derailed by internal political and cultural problems, or could trigger nationalistic rivalries and devastating intra-Asian wars similar to WW1 in Europe.

3. The Asian/Chinese century

The world will return to the Asia-centric system we had before the rise of Europe and the West. Multiculturalism and uncontrolled mass-immigration destroy the internal cohesion of the decadent West, which will slowly fall apart as it has lost the will to defend itself and the belief in its own culture. The wars in the Balkans in the 1990s will in hindsight be seen as a prelude to the Multicultural World War. Just as Imperialism caused WW1, Fascism WW2 and Communism the Cold War, Multiculturalism and Muslim immigration will drag the West into a war with the Islamic world. Instead of a Westernization of the Balkans, we get a Balkanization of the West. Will this be a world dominated by China, or by Asia as a whole, including India? Perhaps India and Southeast Asia will be bogged down by instability caused by Muslims. The Chinese will watch from the sidelines, quietly playing both sides against the middle as the West and the Islamic world destroy each other. In the end, China will reign supreme as the last man standing.

4. The Pacific century

The USA may remain the world’s leading power, but Europe fades off the global scene and leaves her spot open for Asia. Global affairs will be shaped by the twin pillars of the USA and Asia, mainly China, who will cooperate to contain Islamic extremism, a kind of Global Infidel Alliance. Europe will be the world’s largest open-air museum. The Louvre, the Eiffel Tower, Big Ben and Parliament in England as well as many other landmarks will have been lost during the Eurabian civil wars to expel Islam from Europe. They now exist only as plastic souvenirs that Europeans sell to American and Asian tourists to scrape out a living. These “authentic European souvenirs” will all be made in China, of course.

5. The Anglosphere - Indian century

I believe this is what has been predicted by writer Mark Steyn, among others. The USA and the UK, the major powers of the previous 3 centuries, will be at the centre of this one, too. But they will share the spot with India and some other countries such as Japan, “honorary members” of the Anglosphere. US President Bush has already adopted a policy designed to draw India closer to the United States in a strategic alliance. Perhaps this will be in the shape of a Democratic Union or Democratic Infidel Alliance, which may include parts of Free Europe depending upon the Islamic situation there. This alliance will be suspicious of authoritarian China, and will have hostile relations with the Islamic world.

6. The Global Civil War - Neo-Barbarism and Chaos

The darkest scenario of all. Islam manages to derail the West, both Europe and later North America. This disrupts global trade, and the ripples create unrest even in other parts of the world not directly involved in the fighting, including East Asia and Latin America. India will be drawn directly into the conflict with Islam, as will Russia and Israel. The chaos forces created by Islam and by global mass migration by hundreds of millions of people will erode state power virtually everywhere. Perhaps this trend will be reinforced by the appearance of a new, lethal virus, which will quickly spread to all regions of the world thanks to technological globalization. All of this will create a Global Civil War, the first of its kind in human history. It will disrupt civilization, be that Eastern or Western, for generations to come.


Frank said...

Excellent post, and it begins to touch upon the real root of the problem. The immediate problem may be Islam, and it may preoccupy us for a time above all other problems, but Islam is as it was a millenium ago: a troublesome but fractured force beating at the gates of a decaying Bysantine Empire.

The real problem is two-fold: the balkanization of the west, and the cultural decay engendered by the twin Godheads of relativism and "tolerance". In fact, the latter has become nothing more than nihilism...a sort of general acceptance of guilt for historical western success, and a consequent yearning for our own cultural demise.

Will we resurge before we become latter day Bysantines? Maybe, but if so it will be I suspect in the form of a totalitarian reaction. Anglo-Saxon culture tends not to do things by halves. Either way the result could have been avoided by a little less Platoism and a little more foresight with the nonsense of multiculturalism.

al fin said...

So the game is afoot, and more complex than some people thought. So? A good game of chess is more stimulating than checkers, and go is more stimulating yet.

It is time to teach our children "games" that will help them get through this present historical bottleneck. Schools and their damned multiculturalism will be the death of western civilisation unless wiser heads prevail.

al fin said...

Anyone who has not read science fiction author Dan Simmons' latest web message should go there right now and read it. It will haunt you if you do, but some hauntings are worth having.

Charles Martel said...

al fin,

Thanks for the link. Great story. And, unfortunately, all too likely.

What do you suppose the three words were?

Frank said...

Thanks al fin.

My bet on the 3 words is...never mind...its a secret.

William Zeranski said...

Since hate is not a survival instinct how can Western Europe survive? Anti-Americanism, anti-Semitism, anti-Christianity and Anti-Capitalism are not part of a survival formula.

Europe may be dominated by violent and radical Muslims, but again, hate is not a survival instinct nor is it creative. Hate is can be a form of dissipation. A hate-filled Islam, after some time, years--decades, will fade. Radical Islam will dissipate.

But who will be around to pick up the pieces?

Charles Martel said...

Ah, now William! Hate can actually work quite well as a survival tool. The multiculturalists (or relativists if you will) have debased even hatred. Now, you might ask, how can so elemental an emotion as hatred be debased? And I would say to you that the capacity for corruption and destruction on the left is utterly limitless. It knows no bounds save its penchant for all that is good and sacred.

Hate has become an underrated commodity. All the effete pantywaists with their limp wrists, sallow chests and pasty complexions have attempted to strip away so fundamental an instict as hatred. A good full bodied hatred once in a while is good for the soul. And I'm not talking about a hatred that takes root and destroys the host, but rather the kind that clarifies and cleanses the soul. THAT kind of hatred is precisely what those timid souls on the left rail against.

I hate bullies of nearly any stripe. I hate nearly all "intellectuals" with their preening pretensions. I loathe the traitorous fifth column made up of radical leftists. I hate those that would deny us our liberties.

The left is consumed by their petty hatreds of nearly everything better than them and that would include nearly all that is good. This type of hatred would more accurately be described as envy and, I would agree, that envy is nearly always bad.

I believe that the statement that hatred dissipates and that Islam, left to its own devices is a dangerous cliche. EVENTUALLY Islam will dissipate. But that dissipation will ONLY occur after Islam has destroyed its host organism - Western Civilization.

William Zeranski said...

Charles Martel--

I was inadvertently being obtuse. An instinct is inborn. Hate is learned. There is no hate instinct.

But, yes, on an individual level hate can be very creative and useful, as long as the individual ultimately controls the hate, BUT hate on a mass scale tends toward the mob mentality, and that is never constructive and can only destroy; not create something that is positive and enduring. Nazi Germany is the best historic example as is as is totalitarianism in general.

Yes, multiculturalists/relativists are destroyers and they use hate to manipulate people--it’s easier to incite a crowd than the individual.

Now, the Islamic radical ‘way’ was again unleashed, when the USSR went under. This Islamic rampage will, somewhere along the way, eat its young. It will exhaust itself. Hate does that, because hate is either exhausted and/or self-destructive. This hate will pass--I didn’t say go quietly into that goodnight--there will be no quiet, but there will be an end somewhere along the way. And I do not mean an apocalyptic--end of times--malarkey.

Again, who’s going to pick up the pieces.

rickl said...

charles martel:

The left is consumed by their petty hatreds of nearly everything better than them and that would include nearly all that is good. This type of hatred would more accurately be described as envy and, I would agree, that envy is nearly always bad.

Actually, what you describe is different from envy. In one of Ayn Rand's essays (I'm too lazy to look it up right now) she describes "hatred of the good for being the good" and says it is different from, and worse than, ordinary envy.

Allow me to illustrate: Two boys are playing. Boy #1 has a new toy. Boy #2 resents him for having the toy and snatches it away from him. That is envy.

Same scenario, but this time Boy #2 snatches the toy and smashes it. That is "hatred of the good for being the good."

This is the real disease that infects the left. They would seize the reins of power if they could, but if they can't do that, then they would be more than happy to just "bring it all down, man."

geoffgo said...

Ayn Rand said: "Hate is the natural emotional reaction to evil."

Charles Martel said...


BINGO!! And as such should not be squelched or discouraged. Not all hate is equal. Sometimes it is good and cathartic clarifying the moral atmosphere. Sometimes it is actually closely related to envy - this variety tends to typify those on the left. Those on the left would deprive us of hate while they themselves wallow in it. Any authentic emotion is assiduously avoided by the left prefering instead counterfeit substitutes. The left's primary objective is to deny reality both to its adherents and to all others who fall under its sway. What is PC other than an elaborate ruse to deny reality?

Vol-in-Law said...

Islamism as such will not have the population mass in the USA to destroy the USA in the foreseeable future, despite some conversions; nor will China likely allow much Muslim immigration, and Islamism is unlikely to militarily threaten the USA or China from the outside, even if it gains control of the EU, so number 6 is probably unlikely within the next century. Most likely, the USA's global preponderance will decline slowly while China rises (India much much less so), so that towards the end of the century these will be the two major global powers. Japan may enjoy something of a renaissance as robotic technology advances. Eurasia will decline and become increasingly unstable; with likely intermittent civil wars in which the USA and possibly China will intervene. Political Islamism will become an increasingly dominant force within the EU, which may break up if its internal contradictions become unsustainable, but Islamism will continue to be militarily weak, incapable of force projection against USA or China. If it gains control of an ICBM arsenal (Russiia, France or China most notably) it may seek an apocalypse through nuclear attack on USA though; which threat may provoke renewed US intervention in European civil wars; a US-prompted nuclear disarmament of Europe and Russia prior to any Islamist takeover occurring (analogy to South Africa) is also possible.

Captain USpace said...

Real sad stuff, WAKE UP EUROPE!!!

absurd thought -
God of the Universe knows
Iran never nuke Europe

if they swear to Allah
or embrace full dhimmi life

No PC said...

I think some people are slightly exaggerating the rise of Islam in Europe. The latest figures show that apart from France, with its 12-15% Muslim population, the rest of the major European countries have Muslim populations of between 2 and 5%. The growth of these is increasingly being restricted by tighter immigration controls.

I am not arguing that the risks are not there, and indeed I have blogged on the subject myself, but there are factors that non Europeans forget when predicting the demise of European or western culture.

1) It seems inconceivable that the Belgian’s for example, are going to PC themselves into extinction. There would be a civil war followed by mass expulsions of the Muslims. This would trigger the same expulsions in other European countries, or the break up of the EU (which would then result in the same expulsions).

2) The ballot box is a form of limited dictatorship, and in the confines of that booth, people will vote in a way they would not publicly acknowledge. If threatened they vote against that threat. Anti Islam parties will get votes. I cite the fact that the British National Party has suddenly started winning council seats in England. Their poll results before the elections are 1-2%, so people are voting against what they publicly admit to.

3) The European propensity for war has been buried but not suppressed by PC politics. I cite the Balkans as an example. Its only 45 yrs since the Germans were at everyone’s throats.

4) There is some evidence that we may see a wave of right wing governments, voted in as a 'defenders' of "traditional European values", sweep across Europe as public fear is expressed in the ballot box? I mention this because the recent new entrants to the EU have a number of states where "traditional" values are being espoused e.g. Poland.

5) The Dutch now require all aspiring (legal) immigrants to undertake and pass a number of tests, including proficiency in the Dutch language and acceptance of aspects of Dutch society (homosexuality, for example) that are antithetical to Islam. The French are reported to be in the process of instituting new immigration laws. The Austrian Minister for the Interior recently said that 45 per cent of Austria’s Muslim immigrants “cannot be integrated”, and urged them to “choose another country” to reside.

Interestingly, the US is pushing for the admission of Turkey with its 60 million Muslims into the EU. Hardly likely to do anything more than either, push the EU into collapse or, according to many US bloggers into becoming an Islamic continent.

Not so surprising, is the fact that the French have said that this new inclusion will be subject to French people’s approval. Take it from me Turkey is wasting its time waiting for a pro vote from the French public.

Finally this is an Australians view on events.

1389 said...

Looking back on this article from over a year later, I can see that it is shaping up to be #6 for sure. The US and the EU governments, and that of Israel, are falling all over themselves to give away the store. On the plus side, China is slowly, and covertly, becoming a Christian nation. Russia is distancing itself from Iran and is holding the line on Kosovo. Again, I predict #6 with a probability of .9 or greater. The likeliest survivors will be Russia. China, and Japan - and perhaps the Southern Appalachian states of the US as an independent entity. The rest of the US? No. And I am old enough to know that the propensity to hate is not a learned response but an innate part of the human condition.

World War Stories said...

This is a very interesting article..
World War 2