By Richard Deacon:
Christopher Caldwell’s Reflections on the Revolution in Europe was first published in 2009. It looks specifically at Muslim mass immigration into Europe, its impact and its future trajectory. It is an accessible and well argued book; it avoids the esoteric, unlike some writing from the Right. Caldwell is neither a nationalist nor a racialist. He is an American journalist writing primarily for conservative publications such as The Weekly Standard and the Financial Times.
Caldwell puts the “criminalization of opinion” in Europe, such as the anti-Holocaust denial Gayssot Law in France, and other similar legislation, down to the growth of various ethnic lobbies and grievance groups combined with an overreaction after 1945 to a “collection of aging ‘fascist’ buffoons”!
The charge of Islamophobia is now used similarly to stifle free speech, although not codified in law to the same extent.
On Enoch Powell, Caldwell asserts that Powell was morally wrong but factually right in his opinions on race and immigration. On the contrary, Enoch was right, and was morally duty bound to speak out. As Caldwell does admit, Europe’s experience of immigration post 1945 has shown the “fundamental difference between colonization and labour migration” is not an obvious one. This is exacerbated by “Europe’s population problem”; Europeans are, quite simply, “not having enough children”. To Caldwell’s credit he does not shy away from stating truths that fly in the face of the diversity agenda:
“Immigration is not enhancing or validating European culture; it is supplanting it. Europe is not welcoming its newest residents but making way for them”.
There are, of course, elite sections of European societies that have welcomed mass immigration in the name of multiculturalism and diversity, relying on leftist fellow travellers to implement their ideologies on the ground. Caldwell detects no hidden hand behind the colonization of Europe, although he doesn’t appear to put much effort into investigating the same, either.
One big question Caldwell does ask, albeit rhetorically is, “Can you have the same Europe with different people?” Although to most people reading this, the answer is likely to be a resounding and self evident “No!” the danger is that too many Europeans, whether guilt-ridden and self loathing, or merely ignorant, would reply “Who cares?” However, to those not yet lost to our cause, particularly European youth, this question must be posed, with the aim of igniting a desperately needed spark of defiance.
The establishment of ethnic colonies in Europe has advanced to the extent that “Muslims now either dominate or vie for domination of certain important European cities.” In addition to inward migration Muslims, more than other, non-European immigrants are far less likely to adopt the “ambient secularity (and low birth rates)” of Europe. The Muslim population of Europe is expected to double by 2025. This demographic seismic shift is apparently inevitable. Christopher Caldwell describes the secularization of Europe as leaving a spiritual void. As Christianity is a declining religion in Europe and Islam a growing one, it seems certain that it will be Islam that fills the spiritual void. The question has been posed, does the future promise an Islamised Europe or an Europeanised Islam? Neither answer provides succour for native Europeans.
Christopher Caldwell’s book will do little but reaffirm what anti-liberal sceptics already know. His willingness to ascribe the unfolding catastrophe to carelessness and a “fit of absence of mind” may well irritate. However, his is a soundly argued case and his book is a valuable introduction, especially for young people and those older, perhaps not so widely read, who’re not yet fully cognizant of the dire situation European civilization finds itself in.
‘Reflections on the Revolution in Europe’ by Christopher Caldwell – ISBN 978-0-141-02777-7
By Richard Deacon © 2013
# # # #
Roman Bernard
- Edit
“On Enoch Powell, Caldwell asserts that Powell was morally wrong but factually right in his opinions on race and immigration.”
Fortunately, this is impossible. If something is factually right, it is morally right. If something is morally wrong, it is factually wrong.
Tony Davis
- Edit
Our grandchildren will grow up consumed with propaganda and see no problem with a mosque on every street corner, and their sisters being raped and butchered!!!
Kyle McDermott
- Edit
No, they will NOT. They will grow-up and travel to the stars.
frederickdixon
- Edit
But remember “it is not given to us to know the future”. You paint a grim and all too likely scenario, but there is still – just – time to avert it and that is what Western Spring is for.
ConnalOakesHolt
- Edit
Caldwell, may see no hidden hand, though to refer back to the article presented here at Western Spring on one Richard Coudenhue Kalergi and the Pan European Movements idea to blend the European people with the African, to create a dumbed down negroid people, without ethnic loyalty or national pride, easy to control and manipulate, is , proof thereof that the changeing face of Europe is no accident.
The Frankfurt School Marxists identified Christianity along with other organs of cultural and societal cohesion and health, as targets to be attacked, deconstructed and degenerated as a preparing of the ground, through the anhilation of hope, replaced by despair, prior to the implementing of Communism. Another hidden hand.
The introduction of Islam into Europe, through mass immigration of Middle Eastern Muslims many via Eastern Europe following the betrayal of Serbia who for centuries, through force of arms had kept the Muslim at bay and thus Europe Christian, may well serve to fill a spiritual void, that may well be the intention. A state religion can be a powerful weapon in the hands if those who seek to dominate.
Breaking down the ethnic and religious homogeniety of our European nations through the introduction of Islam creates another fault line that can be manipulated and another percieved ‘victim’ group that despite having volutarily entered our homelands for a better way of life, finding much to be disagreeable with once here ,sets about locating the various organisations that have been so ‘helpfully’ set up to aid these oroffesional complainers to impose their will upon us.
An organism that cannot fight off a parasite is in a sick state of health and will be drained of vital strength in the onset of death.
Since all our state bodies and their officers ,that should be looking out for the interests of our people alone and be acting as an immune system in the organism of society and our nations are of the liberal mentality and thus not looking out for European interests, it can only be concluded that these institutions and the people in them are indeed sick and not fit to govern.
Caldwell may not see the hidden hand, he may spark a few minds towards further enquiry though and its a change from those bloody ‘benefits of diversity’ type of drivel.
Anonymous
- Edit
This is not a ‘revolution’; it is an invasion.
‘The question has been posed, does the future promise an Islamised Europe or an Europeanised Islam?’
One might wish to draw a parallel with Christianity, and point out that alongside a Christian Europe, there also emerged an Europeanised Christianity. However, the parallel is misleading for historical and ideological reasons:
1) Historically, as Christianity was spreading through Northern Europe, it was being invaded and displaced in the land of its birth by Islam. As a result, Christianity increasingly became confined to Europe – and thus, Europeanization became possible because there was nowhere else for Christians to turn to, (except maybe Ethiopia – but that was too distant). Europe was the faith; the faith was Europe. Hence the synthesis that we call Western Christianity – a synthesis possible because Christianity’s roots in the Near East were being torn up.
In contrast, even as Islam spreads in Europe, it remains entrenched in West Asia and North Africa. Thus, any attempt to Europeanize Islam is likely to fail since those attempting to localize it will be criticized by the rest for seeking to divide the umma on geographical lines. Certainly, the spread of Islam to Africa, India and South East Asia has not seen the creed become ‘Africanized’, ‘Indianized’ or ‘Asianized’ to any meaningful extent. (The closest one comes is with the Ahmaddiyyas – a small Indianized sect of Muslims who are considered and treated like non-Muslims by the rest.)
2) Ideologically, Christianity is based primarily on an individual – Jesus Christ; the New Testament is secondary. With Islam, it is the opposite: the Koran is primary, Mohammed is secondary. [This is why, for example, orthodox Muslims in Saudi Arabia do not celebrate Mohammed’s birthday. One can hardly imagine a Christian not celebrating Christmas.]
A personage – like Jesus Christ or Buddha, can easily be modified in order to suit a new environment (hence European Christianity portrayed Jesus as an Aryan; Chinese Buddhism portrays Buddha as an Oriental), etc.. Not so with a text.
The Koran is not going to change to suit Europe. Quite the contrary: Muslims intend to change Europe to suit the Koran.
An Islamised Europe is a possibility (undesirable no doubt). An Europeanized Islam is a fantasy for the reasons given above.