Is Islam Destroying the European Union?

Is Islam Already Deconstructing Europe? Yes: consider Brexit.

I would not have thought this, that Fundamentalist Islam was already devouring Europe, a year ago, or any time before: I would have laughed derisively. Now I am not laughing anymore. Meanwhile there was Brexit.

Brexit was a first blatant revolt against the established order. The next blatant revolt was the colossal sweep of Donald Trump’s electoral victory: Trump controls the presidency, the Senate, the Congress, and most states (and the army, by putting the key generals in his government, and soon Trump will control the Supreme Court). Trump does not like the European Union (at least not as an alter ego of the USA; an independent Scotland may well suit his golf courses…)  Trump is a rebellious Pluto threatening the plutocracy, the ultimate horror, haunting plutocracy, ever there is plutocracy, and it plots.

Meanwhile the so-called judges, all over Europe, full, without knowing it, of hatred for the civilization that they are supposed to defend, have pursued their program of provocation of the survival instinct of the European population they terrorize with their obvious bias against any national instinct (I am going to explain those grave accusations). 

So what is the precise reason for my sudden pessimism? NEXIT! NEXIT originated from cancers affecting the soul of the elite: Postmodernism and Multiculturalism. 

841 CE, Fonetnoy, Next to Auxerre, France. 40,000 Killed. Catastrophe Happens: the War of Brothers, the Bruederkrieg, Brought 11 Centuries of European Strife, And Ten Centuries of Rampaging Islamists

841 CE, Fontenoy, Next to Auxerre, France. 40,000 Killed. Catastrophe Happens: the War of Brothers, the Bruederkrieg, Brought 11 Centuries of European Strife, And Ten Centuries of Rampaging Islamists. Now the same divisive spirit is back, and so are the Islamists

***

“Postmodernist” and “Multiculturalist” thinking has been the greedy ideological pretext of the venal European elite.

That vicious elite was well rewarded for it. “Postmodernism” and “Multiculturalism” basically say that the Enlightenment is not any more worthy than the primitive desert, pre-literate cult, Islam. The Enlightenment and Islam are both cultures, all cultures are the same, thus they are equivalent, say the “Postmodernists”, “Multiculturalists” and “anti-colonialists”.  Hence Islamists islamizing are fully right to kneel by the hundreds in the middle of French streets.

It does stop there: by hating “colonialism”, which tragically, put an end to cannibalism and slavery in Africa, European “intellectuals” and those they formed (the so-called judges, the so-called politicians and the so-called teachers, etc.) ended hating the very foundation of European, civilization.

The motivation of the higher spheres of this European elite was sheer corruption by the global plutocracy. Plutocracy hates civilization, always has, always will: ruling by evil ways is its exact definition. By destroying the foundations of European culture, European civilization got undermined, hence the resistance to plutocratization. Thus “Postmodernism” and “Multiculturalism” have been used as Trojan horses to demolish civilization.

In practice, some Europeans noticed the preceding, and started to vote for politicians who protested against it. This is why Brexit passed: the British were exasperated by massive immigration. The Brits were exasperated by the million Muslims lunatic Frau Merkel let in, knowing full well that, once in the EU, they could end in Britain, where “Multiculturalism”, not to say “Islamization” has long been not just desired theory, but a long-standing practice.

Brexit was, fundamentally, an anti-immigration vote.

Europeans, bless them, are finally understanding the venom, the poison of so-called “POSTMODERNISM” and “MULTICULTURALISM”.

Let me hasten to point out that I know of nobody as “Postmodernist” and “Multiculturalist” as myself: I speak several languages (and I have studied even more, including Japanese and Mandarin), I have lived on several continents, and spent 90% of my infanthood and childhood in Africa, half of my family was from, among (very nice, very advanced) Muslims.

So what gives?

My “Postmodernism” and “Multiculturalism” is counterbalanced by a hierarchy of all values, anchored in human ethology in full, and an appreciation of superior culture, not just from the inside, but also from the outside.

However, so-called judges, politicians and teachers of Europe are lower dimensional creatures who know very little, and, in particular ignore entire dimensions. And they revel in it. “Postmodernism” and the “Multiculturalism” enabled them to crow about their cultural and moral superiority. The more simple, the more superior, those European elites have this in common with the Islamists.

(In France it surface recently that some individuals so close to ex-justice minister Taubira

(Posatmodernism and Multiculturalism were actually Faustian bargains: the elite sold their souls to ingratiate themselves with the same US plutocrats who had helped to bring them Nazism and Fascism earlier, from the Kaiser to Mussolini, to the Greek Colonels, passing through Lenin and Stalin, as Lenin himself recognized jokingly… This theory of history is very much mine will not be mentioned in the rest of this essay, but has been detailed in many of my works before…).

***

NEXIT is the Netherlands EXIT from the European Union:

If someone had told me, two years ago, that the Netherlands could vote to leave Europe, I would have laughed derisively. But, as with Brexit, facts on the ground changed spectacularly. How could that happen?

Geert Wilders is the leader of the anti-Islam Party for Freedom (PVV). For years, he was hounded by so-called judges in the Netherlands. The last case was on December 6, 2016.  Wilders led a party rally during a local election campaign in The Hague in March 2014, asking whether there should be “more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands”.

The crowd’s response of “fewer, fewer”, was clearly organised, said a judge at the secure court at Schiphol Judicial Complex, near Amsterdam, ruling that Wilders had breached the boundaries of even a politician’s freedom of speech.

We wonder how the so-called judge knew this. What do judges know? Did they study hiastory, real history? 

“It doesn’t matter that Wilders gave another message afterwards [saying he was referring only to criminal Moroccans and benefits claimants],” said the so-called judge. “The message that evening from the podium, via the media, was loud and proud and did its work… The group was collectively dismissed as inferior to other Dutch people.”

Wilders said, in a statement in English posted on his YouTube channel, “I still cannot believe it, but I have been convicted because I asked a question about Moroccans. The Netherlands has become a sick country. The judge who convicted me [has] restricted the freedom of speech for millions of Dutch. I will never be silent. I am not a racist and neither are my voters.”

Wilders, the increasing popular politician, who did not attend the judgment or most of the process, apart from to give his “last word” at the end of hearings, also called it a “kangaroo court” in tweets about the judges and hearings earlier this year.

In France, facing elections in seven weeks, so-called judges have multiplied “judicial” attacks against right-wing and nationalistic politicians. The two leading candidates for the Presidency are the object of judicial harassment. So-called judges would prefer the 30 something Emmanuel Macron, a golden boy who made many millions from working for the Rothschild bank, an early start in life reminiscent of Krugman and Summers (pillars of the US Democratic Party who got launched as employee of the plutophile Ronald Reagan).

Macron just declared that France was culprit of crime against humanity for its “colonialism”.

Well, there is hope. Just before his ill-informed anti-European civilization blast, Macron, the candidate of ultra-”liberalism” was likely to become French president. His anti-French blast made him dip in the polls. 

The recently condemned Wilders, gloriously “anti-Islam” leader of the Dutch far-right Party for Freedom (PVV) is on course to win the most seats at the general election in March. His election would be the latest, potentially lethal, blow for Europe’s so-called “liberal” order in the tumultuous wake of Donald Trump’s victory and the Brexit vote.

Mr Wilders has pledged to close the Netherlands’ borders, shut down mosques, leave the euro and EU if he gets into power. To implement this, he will propose a NEXIT referendum.

The European Union as it is, will not survive NEXIT. The Netherlands is where the Franks came from: it would be tearing the heart.

A reminder perhaps?

Let’s talk about Lotharxit, when Lothar decided to go his own way, and impose it.

***

No Legitimate Imperial Power: The Old Roman-European Problem.

In 800 CE, Charlemagne was proclaimed one and only Roman emperor. Even the Regency in Constantinople agreed. The Renovated Roman Empire was united and strong. The (English-born) philosopher Alcuin, Prime Minister of Charlemagne, pushed education throughout the empire, which covered most of Europe.

However, the Franks had not improved much on the non-existent Roman imperial succession system. The results were catastrophic.

Notice in passing that this means centralized imperial power was not legitimate. The European Union has basically the same problem now: its power is viewed as neither legitimate, nor imperial.

The power struggle among the Franks resulted in the Battle of Fontenoy in 841 CE (there was another battle at Fontenoy, more famous but much less important, 900 years later…).

The three-year Carolingian Civil War culminated in the decisive Battle of Fontenoy-en-Puisaye, fought at Fontenoy, near Auxerre, on the 25 June 841. The war was over the territorial inheritances —the division of the Charlemagne’s Carolingian Empire between his grandsons, the three surviving sons of “Roman” Frankish emperor Louis the Pious (Louis Le Debonnaire in French, meaning Louis the Do-gooder and easy-Going: he kept on forgiving his wayward sons, instead of punishing them severely, even after they deposed him!).

Emperor Louis was obligated by the Salic Law to divide “his” empire equally among his sons (at the same time, the leaders of the Franks were supposedly elected; thus basically the richest was elected…)

***

The Catastrophe Of Fontenoy, 841 CE:

The battle was between the emperor Lothar, grandson of Charlemagne, allied to his cousin, leader of Aquitaine, against the coalition of Lothar’ brother Louis the German and his half-brother Charles the Bald (Charles was 17 years younger than Louis). The war was precipitated by Lothar’s proclamation, in July 840, that he was global effective emperor  of the whole Renovatio Imperium Romanorum (Lothar was already long king of Italy, thus Rome). Lothar said it was not just about the imperial title.  

Around noon a cavalry charge from Charles-Louis side broke Lothar’s lines, and the latter was put to flight. That day of butchery brought 40,000 DEAD (and much more wounded; in the worst day of World War One, the French army suffered 27,000 dead, around 21 August 1914…).

Angibert fought on the side of Lothar at the battle. He wrote a poem, which is as follows, in English:

Fontenoy they call its fountain, manor to the peasant known,

“There the slaughter, there the ruin, of the blood of Frankish race;

Plains and forest shiver, shudder; horror wakes the silent marsh.

Neither dew nor shower nor rainfall yields its freshness to that field,

Where they fell, the strong men fighting, shrewdest in the battle’s skill,

Father, mother, sister, brother, friends, the dead with tears have wept.

 And this deed of crime accomplished, which I here in verse have told,

Angibert myself I witnessed, fighting with the other men,

I alone of all remaining, in the battle’s foremost line.

 On the side alike of Louis, on the side of Charles alike,

Lies the field in white enshrouded, in the vestments of the dead,

As it lies when birds in autumn settle white off the shore.

 Woe unto that day of mourning! Never in the round of years

Be it numbered in men’s annals! Be it banished from all mind,

Never gleam of sun shine on it, never dawn its dusk awake.

Night it was, a night most bitter, harder than we could endure,

When they fell, the brave men fighting, shrewdest in the battle’s skill,

Father, mother, sister, brother, friends, the dead with tears have wept.

 Now the wailing, the lamenting, now no longer will I tell;

Each, so far as in him lieth, let him stay his weeping now;

On their souls may He have mercy, let us pray the Lord of all

Lothar later resorted to methods akin to terrorism, with a new army he had raised: the stronger Charles and Louis pushed him into the woods, out of his capital Aachen.

***

Following this huge civil war among the Franks, the Magyars, Vikings and Saracens (Islamists) swooped in, shredding Europe:

And the Islamists and their friends did this in an industrial fashion (the first Islamist attacks had been against Spain in 711 CE, Francia in 715 CE). In the Ninth Century (and again in the Tenth Century), Islamists camped by Swiss passes, capturing even a cleric grandson of Charlemagne at the Saint Bernard pass (the grandson was ransomed for a colossal amount). Vikings roamed nearly all over France. Magyars did pretty much the same in the East (until they were defeated much later by Frankish “Roman” emperor Otto 1 next to Ausburg, Austria. The Magyars came from the Urals…

The general problem is that the Franks did not have a common, admitted system for succession of the ultimate authority (same problem as Rome). The last common emperor was Charles the Fat (expired in January 888, after a coup; he had been very sick for years, and was even trepanned: surgical hole in the skull…). Charles had been elected by the “Magnates” (a hefty dosage of plutocrats therein).

***

Catastrophes happen.

Brexit is a catastrophe.

One catastrophe can lead to another.

The underlying catastrophe here is the proclaimed equality of all cultures, and the accompanying implicit detestation of European culture. This will to destroy and insult civilization, by so-called judges, corrupt politicians and the like, is actually an implementation of the submission to global plutocracy.

The election of Trump is a reaction against the detestation of all what made Europe (and thus its American colonies!) superior. Similarly, Brexit is a reaction against that detestation. Yet, Brexit is clearly self-defeating (the jury of history is out for Trump, somewhere in the future). Brexit is an alienation, and we saw what the alienation of the grandsons of Charlemagne led to (Fontenoy, see above).

The Frankish empire, mangled in many parts survived because it was, and as, a global Latin speaking entity (at the elite level of intellectuals, monks, leaders, war mongers, etc; common people talked Germanoid in the East, and degenerated Latin elsewhere). Ultimately rather centralized western Francia, an empire and a kingdom and the more decentralized  rest of the “Roman Empire” found a mission fighting off the invading Islamists for centuries, as the latter roamed over half of Europe. This led to the counterattack of the Crusades, which bred some sense in the Islamists (Saladin and Al. made treaties with Richard the Lionheart, representing Europe; while re-opening the trade routes to the Orient; the Crusades were not all mayhem, no gain, at least, some of them…)

The history of the Franks shows catastrophe can occur, and that its dreadful consequences can last 1,105 years (840 Ce to 1945 CE; the time it took for the French and German to settle their differences). Ultimately, creating a European imperial government which can carry war where the refugees come from, and extinguish their cause is a necessity.

***

Another pitfall of history is devolution of understanding. Consider Tasmania. Or, more exactly, the Tasmanian Devolution:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2010/08/19/tasmanian-effect/

Tasmanians, for whichever reasons hard to understand, lost the technology they had. Practically it means that the English farmers could exterminate them to the last (whereas the Technology advanced, war like Maoris fought back efficiently and survived in New Zealand).i

Fanatical “Postmodernism”, fanatical “Multiculturalism”, under the pretense of universalization serve the globalist plutocracy and hate civilization. They have no better symbol and reward than Islamization.

Down the drain we go.

At some point, one loses control of events: a snowflake is cute, innocuous, light. Too many snowflakes, and one gets a lethal avalanche. There are worse fates than war. Even global war.

Time to progress in understanding. It is a question of survival.

For Europe, understanding means to move to a Federal Union as fast as possible. The leaders of the french, german and Italian assemblies just signed an open letter demanding just this:

Now is the moment to move towards closer political integration — the Federal Union of States with broad powers. We know that the prospect stirs up strong resistance, but the inaction of some cannot be the paralysis of all. Those who believe in European ideals, should be able to give them a new life instead of helplessly observing its slow sunset.”

Right. Time to fight. For the right ideas.

Patrice Ayme’

Advertisements

Tags: , , , ,

13 Responses to “Is Islam Destroying the European Union?”

  1. Benign Says:

    Right, why don’t whichever nations elect to join the federalized Europe take the American Constitution and try to actually live by it–throwing out the unelected Brussellscrats–with immediate amendments imposing term limits and complete prohibition of political donations. Only in this manner can a republic survive.

    My odds on the EU breaking up are about 50-50 at this point.

    cheers,
    benign

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      The Brusselscrats, as you call them, are not the ultimate authority in Europe. In theory they are a bit like the presidential cabinet in the USA. The national government meet and decuide, Brussels implement.
      However Brussels is in charge of making the free market work (by removing non tax trade barriers). As a result, Europeans saw Brussels intervening everywhere, and got durably furious.

      In truth the national governments are taking all the big decisions. This is what Britain has decided to cut itself from. It’s self-defeating.

      On the other hand, in case of NEXIT, France, Germany (and Italy) have a huge problem. What they should then do is to unify further: that would force the Dutch to back-off. Fortunately at this point the most popular politician in Germany is the excellent Socialist Martin Schultz (completely French in mentality, and his French is perfect). Unfortunately Frau Merkel is wily…

      “EU” breaking is not the end of story: as long as France and Germany agree, the ass will follow, as the saying has it…

      Trump put a 5 year ban on politicians going private (and life long if they lobby for foreign countries).

  2. EugenR Says:

    Thanks for this essay or rather should I call it a Manifest? There are two unequal cultures in opposing themselves. The post world war liberal, multicultural European culture, trying to act out of social principle of mutual guarancy, and it doesn’t matter if it is represented by social party or conservative,

    • EugenR Says:

      Sorry it sliped away, i will come back to it.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      The post world war world was a US plotted world. A FDR plotted world. FDR was an authentic US plutocrat, not just an enlighted socialist, and a crafty warrior and French-hating world imperialist.
      Postmodernism and multiculturalist, well done, are a great progress (and I am fully about it). Yet done the way they were, they demolished Europe’s highest value.

      Nowhere is it better incarnated by the devotion to Islam, which would have made Voltaire scream. Voltaire was anti-Islamist in writing. If one is pro-Islamist (as many of my pseudo-intellectual enemies are, off this site), one is also pro-Christian, in the sense of the Christianism of the First Crusade (complete with massacreing European Jews). Actually some of these pseudo-intellectuals who started a campaign against me violated US law (because defamation can be excused only if it is opinion; if it is made to injure, it’s against the law).

  3. EugenR Says:

    What exactly are these children taught?

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Preaching or teaching literal Abrahamism as if it were truth or reality should be made a criminal offense, heavily punished. That, of course would not affect contemporary Christians and Jews, or truly enlightened Muslims…

  4. picard578 Says:

    Reblogged this on Defense Issues and commented:
    Multiculturalism is a plutocratic ploy. People without identity are easily manipulated, and multiculturalism (plus moral relativism) destroys identity and any semblance of a coherent social structure. By doing this it prevents any possibility of an actual democracy existing. By purpoting that all cultures are equally valuable, it endorses islamic intellectual fascism and places it level with Enlightment. But in practice, multiculturalists do not really believe that all cultures are equally valuable: they believe that all cultures are more valuable than Western one, and they believe that because they do not know history. Western educational system teaches people of Western slavery, but remains silent about far worse slavery that has existed – and still does – in Islamic countries. It teaches people of Western colonialism, but does not say that it was islamic imperialism which forced the West to embark on its colonial endeavour. Half a truth is the worst lie there is. By destroying civilization in this way, it enables plutocracy. For this reason, modern Left is the greatest ally that plutocracy has – and most don’t even realize it.

    Nazism is used as a disparaging label against those who oppose multiculturalism, despite the fact that both Nazism and multiculturalism have the same root. They are two sides of the same coin, but brainwashed ideologues are too stupid to see it. But multiculturalism leads, invariably, to monoculturalism: by its very nature it is merely a transitional state. Only monocultural societies are stable enough for extended existence, and multicultural societies will bath in conflict and blood until monocultural equilibrium is achieved. And unless something is done about it – and quickly – this end state will, in Western Europe, mean islamofascist totalitarianism.

    And this is precisely what plutocrats want. Conflict is conductive for plutocracy, because people are too busy fighting and surviving to care about what elites do (those more interested in how plutocrats utilize conflict for their own needs should read Naomi Klein’s “Shock Doctrine”). Multiculturalism is lethal to democracy because it causes conflict, and thus advances plutocracy. But since plutocracy controls the government – legislature, executive and judiciary alike – anyone who does not toe the multicultural line is declared a “Nazi” and faces persecution (formal or not). This despite the fact that Nazis were gloriously multicultural, as explained in my “Nazi roots of multiculturalism” article, published some months back.

    Brexit itself is not an alienation. It is a consequence of alienation, of alienation of EUs bureocracy from the people it is supposed to represent. Brusselcrats do not represent the people, they do not care about the people and are in fact doing anything they can to cause continent-wide armed conflict (through importation of islamofascism). Brexit is a rebellion against illegitimate plutocracy ruling the European Union (of course, Britain itself has proud plutocratic history, so it may be merely an exchange – one evil for another).

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Thanks for the reblogging, Picard!

      Multiculturalism and “postmodernism” are indeed plutocratic ploys. They were launched as early as 1945, with enthusiastic support from well-known European intellectuals (they became “well-known” in great part because of that support they gave to US based plutocracy).

      It’s entirely correct that Nazism and Multiculturalism are the same: they greatly originated from the same inspirators (Rousseau, Herder, US plutocrats), they are both forms of nihilism (something Nietzsche had warned against). The SS ended very multiculturalist and Hitler with Muslim volunteers sent by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (Hitler admired Islam loudly as a “war religion”)

      Brexit could still turn one way, or another. Many of the aspects suggested, by some, are utter madness.
      Brusselcrats are have been on the run, right. But mostly on irritating rather than grave subjects. Grave subjects are determined by the elected governments. Brussels executes. However, that made it possible to have all the unpopular decisions go through the EC (European Commission, a ludicrous term for European executing government).

      As I tried to explain in the present essay, division can go too far: consider Fontenoy. Total Brexit, as proposed by many, is sheer madness, from brutal division… From little more than sheer rage (plutocratically driven as the media is plutocratically owned, or influence, in the UK… As anywhere else, but particularly blatantly there…)

      • EugenR Says:

        The problem is the confusion between multiculturalism and cultural diversity tolerance. Culture without multicultural tolerance is anticultural criminal offense and so should it be treated.

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Multiculturalism should be, as you say, “cultural diversity tolerance”.
          However the conventional Multiculturalists have cooperated with the haters of civilization, the plutocrats, who finance them.

          A perfect illustration was Pluto Soros financing the Sharia woman who organized the “Women March” on Washigton. Public figure who advocate Sharia should be prosecuted, like anyone who advocates violating the law: people doing that with taxes end in the slammer regularly in the USA. Sarsour advocates caging women, killing homosexuals, etc: that’s much worse than advocating not paying taxes!!!!!!!!!!!

          • EugenR Says:

            Islam causes to Muslims to become criminally offensive towards other cultures. It is not about financial support of this or that bilioner, may be the intention behind his support whatever, but about understanding, that cultur with despotic tendency orientation toward other cultures are endangering our civilization and with it the humanity itself, with all it’s cultural and intellectual achievements.

            • Patrice Ayme Says:

              Indeed. Best illustration now are Sissi (Egypt) and Sultan Erdogan, let alone Algeria’s Bouteflike, an original main opponent to France in the 1950s, still “president” (!!!).
              If you submit to abuse by “god”, you are ready to be abused by any dictator. And to find him “great”.

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: