Filed under Politics
With friends like the American right, the European right doesn’t need enemies
Thanks a lot Glenn, you addle-brained asshole. Bad enough that you’re a frothing-at-the-mouth maniac, but now you’re sinking a blade in the back of one of the few successful and principled conservative politicians in the West? Richard Hoste takes the words out of my mouth:
My biggest nightmare: Europe awakens and then the US attacks in order to “save freedom” again. The idiots wave their flags, pat themselves on the back and ensure the Islamization of Europe. They smear anybody who dissents as an anti-American liberal.
And a commenter writes at View from the Right:
Do not Beck and others like him understand that the longer it takes a white Christian revival of Europe to occur, the MORE likely it is that a Hitler will be the only remaining alternative? Beck and the others need to read some history and think this through. Hitlers come along when people get really desperate.
Way to go, genius. It’s like a self-fulfilling prophecy – Beck and others who try to clip the wings of rising conservative figures in Europe by smearing them as Nazis make it MORE likely that Nazism will actually return. Hermes was exactly right when he said that “there’s very little that’s defensible about the mainstream right.” With the loudest conservative voices hell bent on taking down the few worthwhile stars of the movement, it’s no wonder we’re Doomed.
Diversity – the new religion and time bomb. I think Roissy summed up the whole thing nicely when he said Diversity+Proximity = war. I think it will lead to war eventually and it will be an ideological/religious war that may tear civilisations apart. Hopefully though the issue will be pushed far enough in some European country that tensions erupt into a full scale war which forces the rest of the civilised world to wake up and notice the 800lb gorilla in the room.
This actually doesn’t surprise me because most people in this country, especially populists like Beck, don’t know much of anything about Europe. I put this right up there with Sarah Palin saying that she could see Russia from her front door step.
Geert Wilders is allied to feminists like Fleur Agema.
What exactly is to like about Geert as a conservative? I understand some people really hate Islam blah blah, but there’s nothing substantial or principled about Geert Wilders politics. It’s populist right wing crap (that will unite all those that hate Islam from the left as well), and not focused at all on substantial right wing issues. And yes, for once Beck is right – Geert is a fascist.
Europe could do a lot more about its Islamic population by not giving Muslims allowances, rather than distracting themselves with silly things like headscarves and banning religious books.
In defense of the Fascists, Fascists and Nazis are not the same thing. Indeed, the Italian Fascists treated the Jews better than the allies did until Nazi Germany forced them to change their policies basically at gun point, and even then, they largely paid lip service. More Jews probably died at the hands of the Royal Navy’s blockade of Palestine for Jewish refugees than died at the hands of the Italian government.
**Not that I like Fascists, but Fascism in its true sense is not the genocidal ideology that the other big left wing ideologies were.
Most Americans don’t know a shit about Europe but they are haughty enough to try to give us lessons.
Europe needs one thousand Geert Wilders to survive
Islam is the real totalitarism. Hitler was only an apprentice
I can assure you guys that whatever your loonies on FOX come up with, we in Urop couldn´t care less.
BTW, that´s Villepin whom Beck paints as a quasi-nazi. Hilarious, as he´s just a typical corrupt career politician. The real fascist in France is “Jean-Marie LE PEN”.
Notice the similarities of the last names, the LE PEN part? Something tells me that FOX´ stellar journalistic credentials are shining through here again.
Is there even an agreed-upon definition of “fascism”, or is it pretty much just a political slur these days against anything nationalistic?
@finsalscollons
Geert Wilders talks of the threat of Islam in the face of Holland’s Judeo-Christian heritage. How keen were the Europeans on their “Judeo-Christian” heritage when they tried to kill off all their jews? How Judeo-friendly was Holland when it killed off 80% of its Jews just some decades ago? And you have the gall to talk about “Islam” being the real totalitarianism and Hitler as an apprentice. Enjoy the coming holocaust guys. You eurotrash just never learn.
Indeed, as a french it made me laugh to hear De Villepin described as being from the far right. De Villepin is what we call a Gaulliste (followers of the General De Gaulle) in France, that is to say a traditional right politician, but in no way far right.
YouTube has pulled the video. Can someone give me a quick summary of it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Fascism, is basically a Big Goverment trying to get its tentacles in every aspect of the lives of its citizens. Is the absurd believe that a political pary should do the thinking for the people that they represent.
Of course, when actual talent, skills and Justcice are substitued by loyalty to the Party in who gets the jobs, who is punished for crimes, etc. shit hits the fan and it reveals itself fairly quickly as a totalitarian regime. Dictatorship. Both the left and the right can and have descended in this madness several times in history, so it isn’t exclusive for one side.
“The political is the personal” is Fascism resumed in it’s pure form. And only an inmoral megalomaniac would want so much control over the lives of those under him. Unfortunately, there’s a lot of them. Warlords. Tyrants. There’s several names for those who are good at it.
Dylan. You are so clueless that there is no point to argue with you.
Read the Koran, study the hadiths and learn about Islamic jurisprudence. Then, you can live in a Muslim neighborhood and work with Muslims, like I have done for years. Then we will talk about it
If you are able to have a rational discussion without insulting the people who think different than you, which I doubt.
You does not seem European. Too bad, because when our future Islamic masters seize the power, people like you will be the first ones they will come for.
I don’t think I will be alive but, if I am, I will laugh my ass off.
Come on. Europe has a long history of war and destruction, and you guys are whining about third world immigrants from previous colonies. Grow up.
And yeah, i’ve done everything in your first paragraph and I’m convinced anyone who makes such arguments with a straight face has never read any history or theology. Some people will scare themselves into a lather over petty distractions.
Glenn Beck is entertaining but as a Great White Hope he fails just like the rest of ‘em. They always sell out because white conservatism is still plagued with White Guilt Disorder and they’re still petrified that anyone thinks they’re a racist.
Once prominent Whites stop giving a fuck about being called racist then progress will be made. Andrew Breitbart is making strides in this area and it’s not surprising he’s Jewish. Jewish people don’t give a fuck and get shit done while gentiles grovel and capitulate like a bunch of pussies.
Butt Implant Scandal: Caulk Injected Into Six Women’s Butts In Plastic Surgery Horror
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/09/butt-implant-scandal-caul_n_491550.html
NEWARK, N.J. (Associated Press) — Six women in New Jersey are recovering after they received buttocks-enhancement injections containing silicone used to caulk bathtubs.
State health officials say the women, from Essex County, apparently underwent cosmetic procedures from unlicensed providers, The Star-Ledger of Newark reported.
He’s nowhere nearly as offensive as Nick Griffin and the BNP, but I do have some concerns. He proposes banning the Koran, which I believe would be counter-productive and would only further radicalize Muslims in Europe. He also supports administrative detentions, which have the great potential for abuse.
However, I will refrain from calling him a “fascist” because he has a greater respect for individual rights than the Islamists he is fighting against.
The U.S mainstream right is a joke, it honours its beliefs in the breach. By calling Wilders extreme, it just serves to show how far the Left even the mainstream U.S Right is.
Still most of the serious right wing intellectual heavy lifting is done in the U.S. For its size, Britain contributes little, Australia, New Zealand and Canada are, with certain very limited exceptions, intellectual basket cases.
Beck is right about one thing, the times are a’changing and world is becoming polarized. There is a great unease in our societies at the moment, and many people are unhappy with the way things are working out. Stupid people are turning to the extreme left. What I worry about is when stupid people turn to the right.
Unlike the U.S., Europe is essentially atheistic, and an right wing party unmoderated by Christianity (I mean the old fashioned robust kind, not the wishy washy stuff that parades as the faith) has a strong possibility of going off the rails. I’m not saying that Wilders is a Fascist (He seems pretty reasonable to me) all I’m saying is that the European right is a different beast to the U.S (Anglo) one and the benevolent assumptions that come with the U.S model don’t necessarily apply to the European. The Mangan’esque right(Which the New European right resembles), taken to its extreme, is pretty ugly. I suppose what I’m saying is that I wouldn’t be attacking the European right at the moment, but I wouldn’t be uncritical of it either.
Sarah Palin never said she could see Russia from her house. That was Tina Fey, imitating her. She said from certain islands in the Arctic Ocean you can see Russia, which is true, Russia is only 20 miles away. Not many people go there, but it is part of the state of Alaska.
As for Wilders, he is hardly a fascist. Fascism has government control of the total economy (every company and business takes total direction from the government) AND private society (Boy Scouts, United Way, etc.) Wilders is basically in US terms an LBJ Democrat, that’s how far to the Left European society has moved.
Wilders wants to ban the Koran as Mein Kampf is banned under Dutch (and German and Austrian) law. No special privileges for Muslims. To remove Dutch citizenship from immigrants who commit serious crimes, and deport them. To stop immigration. To stop subsidizing Muslim immigration and Islamization. Basically, to spend the very limited amount of money available for Welfare spending in the economic recession on the Dutch Majority population and NOT the Muslim immigrants who wish to subject the Dutch people to Muslim rule and Sharia.
Wilders argues (rightly) that there can be no compromise between Muslims and the Dutch because Muslims do not become Dutch. Wilders argues for gay rights because he notes toleration of European eccentricities and various splinter groups from Europe is part of Europe’s heritage. He argues further that Muslims cannot be tolerated because they actively use violence to create RULE by a cruel, vicious, violent minority.
He actively compares them to the minority Nazi invaders who used great cruelty to subject the Dutch to foreign rule. Considering the Dutch themselves were formed in open revolt against the Hapsburg Spanish rulers, and continued to fight for centuries against first French, then English, and finally German attempts to dominate them as a colony, his program finds many takers in the ordinary Dutch people who are in effect a second class colonized citizenry by alien Muslim rulers.
Muslims are not French Huegonots, or Jewish immigrants, or exiles from Poland, Russia, France, Germany, and England who formed fairly assimilated or very brief communities (the Pilgrims departed from the NETHERLANDS not England) that did not threaten Dutch social cohesion. They seek to rule via Sharia implemented by violence.
The European Right is not going to be making Concentration Camps. All they want is to send as many illegal immigrants home as quickly as possible (mostly by paying them along with police crackdowns) and ending special privileged PC treatment for Muslims. So social welfare goes to ordinary Dutch people not alien invaders.
Most Americans don’t know a shit about Europe but they are haughty enough to try to give us lessons.
To be fair, the reverse is also true. Most Europeans don’t know anything about the US either.
Both Geert Wilders and Glenn Beck have their own sets of plusses and minuses.
Neither has a clue about the biggest lefty Trojan horse of all – Misandry.
BTW, there seems to be a bit of a perception that Hitler was right-wing.
Nazi Germany was left-wing, for the most part. Almost all genocidal regimes are.
Lefty regimes *will* fight each other too (Hitler vs. Stalin, Mao vs. the USSR in 1969, China’s invasion of Vietnam in 1979, etc.). After the war, they then re-brand the losing side as ‘right wing’.
Wilders argues for gay rights because he notes toleration of European eccentricities and various splinter groups from Europe is part of Europe’s heritage.
The open flaunting of homosexuality was never really part of Europe’s heritage. Homo’s have been around forever, but even in ancient Greece, it wasn’t the done thing in polite society.
The real failure here is not immigration or race per se, but ‘diversity’. It is the change from assimilation to integration.
This is also the reason that Australia is starting to suddenly flare up with ethnic tensions despite previous generations of peaceful immigration by vastly different people.
Islamic immigration is only the focal point of the rising tensions in Europe because of its inherently violent nature, which no amount of PC sophistry can hide, even if no one has the guts to say it out loud for fear of being outcast by loud mouthed fools with their collective heads in the sand.
It’s worth noting that Glenn’s & friends are in the pocket of a Saudi prince who also pays of the families of suicide bombers:
http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/1261/Should-Fox-News-Register-as-a-Saudi-Agent.aspx
It’s also worth noting that Glenn is a histrionic little bitch who would be the passaround girl in prison if there were any justice in the world.
Wilders wants to ban the Koran as Mein Kampf is banned under Dutch (and German and Austrian) law. No special privileges for Muslims.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. The fact that Nazis have their free speech right violated doesn’t mean that Muslims should have their free speech right violated as well. Freedom of speech is not a “special privilege,” it is a basic right. And there are passages in the Old Testament that are just as offensive as the Koran, but few on the Right are willing to address that.
The difference is that those passages in the OT have been internalized in the West and do not rule us. There is a NT after all, and numerous other reasons why that kind of literalism has not had the upper hand in the West other than in isolated pockets in a long long time.
In the Islamic world that just is not the case. There is no Islamic reformation. Their own religion, scripture and so on, is a serious threat to Western civilization precisely because it knows no moderation. The mullahs in Paris and London and so on are NOT moderates. There ARE no moderates among the believers — there are people who believe, and people who are to one degree or other apostate. Again, drawing parallels between Islam and contemporary Christianity is both naive and asinine.
You’re a fool.
Their own religion, scripture and so on, is a serious threat to Western civilization precisely because it knows no moderation.
The same is true for feminism. Perhaps more so.
Not too long ago, I was quite afraid of Islamic encroachment into the West.
Now, all I ask of them is to tone down the violence. If they can do that, then I would gladly side with them as an alternative to Western misandry.
British men facing divorce court ruin are going to Islamic courts in Britain to get a better deal. I don’t blame them.
I challenge anyone to show me that the average MAN (again, MAN) has it better in the US or UK, than an upper-middle-class MAN in a moderate country like Turkey, Malaysia, Morocco, etc.
If Western Civ is now characterized by institutionalized Misandry, then consider me to have switched sides as long as Muslims keep violence to a minimum.
And if Western Civ has lost ME, consider Western Civ to have lost a lot….
In summary :
Traditional Patriarchal Protestant society > Moderate Islam > Feminazi Hell
If option 1) is irrevocably lost, then I choose option 2).
TFH, if you like Islam so much, why don’t you convert and move to one of the several dozen countries that already have an Islamic majority? If it’s so great, you should be happy to live there.
If not, you should think twice about wanting to allow the Muzzies to spread their dysfunctionality to the rest of the world. Especially the parts WE live in.
“If option 1) is irrevocably lost, then I choose option 2).”
I second that. I would rather live in an Islamic society where paternity is certain than a feminist society characterized by serial monogamy and hostility to heterosexual cooperation.
TFH, if you like Islam so much, why don’t you convert and move to one of the several dozen countries that already have an Islamic majority?
I don’t have to. They are taking over the West anyway.
Plus, you totally dodged the main point about feminism being a bigger negative for Western MEN than Islam.
you should think twice about wanting to allow the Muzzies to spread their dysfunctionality to the rest of the world.
Feminism spreads more dysfunctionality than Islam. Except that feminism originated in the Anglosphere.
I suspect you are a whiteknight. I further suspect that you would take that as a compliment.
Jacko, on the other hand, gets it.
The Fifth Horseman gets it.
Firstly, as much as i hate feminism, the islamic view on women still disgusts me. Marriage in Islam is essentially a pact between a slave (woman) and a master (man). Now, while i agree with MRAs who say that men should assert their dominance more, i still won’t advocate slavery for women.
Secondly, ISLAM IS A POLYGAMOUS RELIGION!!! In Islam, a man can have four wives and several concubines. So in other words , as in a feminist dystopia, ALPHA MEN WIN! Expansion of Islam byt the sword has always relied on a mass of sexually frustrated young men, who can not get a wife, since the alphas have most of the women. So Islam has sought to channel that frustration by promising these men access to the women of the lands they conquer or in the next world (72 virgins and all).
Dylan,
Thanks.
I have declared radical Islam the threat of the LAST decade (which is mostly moderated out), while Misandry is the premier threat of the NEXT decade.
The people who are still stuck in the last conflict get caught off guard as the next one sneaks up on them.
Marriage in Islam is essentially a pact between a slave (woman) and a master (man).
Not so. You are taking extremes as the median. Ask Bhetti about he reality.
Secondly, ISLAM IS A POLYGAMOUS RELIGION!!!
Most Islamic countries do not have polygamy. Even though I would be on the winning side in such a system.
Plus, there is an assumption that Al-Qaeda and Saudi Wahabbism = all of Islam. That is like saying Mormonism = All of US Christianity.
A lot of conservatives are totally blind to how feminism demolishes all conservative principles. They would rather appease feminism rather than stick to conservative principles.
Plus, British men are already converting to Islam in order to seek refuge from feminist divorce laws. This is already happening, and I don’t blame them. You would do it too, if you were in their shoes.
TFH:
That might be problematic since she’s been scarce lately. In fact, if you go to CORRUPT’s homepage, you’ll see that she’s been removed from the masthead. Her page is fortunately still up:
http://www.corrupt.org/blogs/bhetti_ameen
“Most Islamic countries do not have polygamy. Even though I would be on the winning side in such a system. ”
They don’t have polygamy because , once the expansion stops, it will lead to massive internal instability, even though The Koran allows it. Most of the Islamic countries have been Muslim for a long time. However when Islam is in an expansionist mode, there definitely has always been polygamy and concubinage. And Islam is in an expansionist mode in Europe.
“And that is why i don’t see how Islamisation would improve the plight of the betas and omegas. It MIGHT after decades or centuries but not in the near future. well except:Plus, British men are already converting to Islam in order to seek refuge from feminist divorce laws. This is already happening, and I don’t blame them. You would do it too, if you were in their shoes.”
I would, yes.
I would, yes.
Well, there you go. The actions taken when the rubber hits the road, is what matters.
Rather than worry about Islam encroaching into the West, the question to ask is :
“What have Western women done for Western men lately, to inspire Western men to protect these women from Sharia? It would be easier to step aside, and wait until they earn our protective services again by repealing Misandrist laws. Let these ‘empowered’ women give me a REASON to protect them from Sharia.”
That is my position.
Novaseeker:The difference is that those passages in the OT have been internalized in the West and do not rule us. There is a NT after all, and numerous other reasons why that kind of literalism has not had the upper hand in the West other than in isolated pockets in a long long time.
In the Islamic world that just is not the case. There is no Islamic reformation. Their own religion, scripture and so on, is a serious threat to Western civilization precisely because it knows no moderation. The mullahs in Paris and London and so on are NOT moderates. There ARE no moderates among the believers — there are people who believe, and people who are to one degree or other apostate. Again, drawing parallels between Islam and contemporary Christianity is both naive and asinine.
I agree with much of this, but you’re not going to contain ideologies merely by banning their holy texts. There are still neo-Nazis in Europe even though Mein Kampf. Also, there is a process of moderation going on within the people of the Middle East that can be seen in the Iranian protests. Europe has done a piss poor job of integrating Muslims (mainly because of the welfare state) but banning the Koran won’t solve it. In 50 years, Muslims in the Middle East could be more liberal than Muslims in Europe.
TFH: I challenge anyone to show me that the average MAN (again, MAN) has it better in the US or UK, than an upper-middle-class MAN in a moderate country like Turkey, Malaysia, Morocco, etc.
Surveys of happiness show that people in western countries are happier than those in most Islamic countries. And of course, men in the west has higher standards of living, are more educated and live longer.
Now you do use tricky adjectives such as comparing the average western man to an upper-middle class to make your point. But I would say there is a strong coloration between how liberal (in the classical sense) a country is and what the standard of living is for the country’s average citizen.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_PZ4DNuop6PQ/S5Xge9rNCyI/AAAAAAAAApQ/4c95ymfU2OA/s1600-h/world_map_of_happiness.jpg
TFH: “Well, there you go. The actions taken when the rubber hits the road, is what matters. ”
Yes, but i’ve never been married. What i meant was, that if my life was about to be destroyed by the combination of female viciousness and state power, i would say “fuck it” and grab onto any sort of ideology that would offer relief and wouldn’t give a fuck about whether that ideology is good for society or not.
sparks123: “Surveys of happiness show that people in western countries are happier than those in most Islamic countries. And of course, men in the west has higher standards of living, are more educated and live longer.
Now you do use tricky adjectives such as comparing the average western man to an upper-middle class to make your point. But I would say there is a strong coloration between how liberal (in the classical sense) a country is and what the standard of living is for the country’s average citizen. ”
Yep. I’m not at all convinced that an islamic society could maintain western standards of living and technological progress.
I’m not at all convinced that an islamic society could maintain western standards of living and technological progress.
I can tell you for a fact that feminism also makes the living standards that Americans are accustomed to impossible. There is no shortage of men here that would agree with that. Go read Ferdinand’s “The Contract Between the Sexes’.
And of course, men in the west has higher standards of living, are more educated and live longer.
These are the same surveys that show that women earn 77% of what men do, and that women ‘suffer’ under divorce more than men. Come on, you know better than that.
A man cannot be ruined in a dozen different ways via feminism outside of the West.
Some of you still want to risk your lives and spend your energy defending Western women from the prospect of Sharia.
I don’t think I’ll bother until they give me a reason. I choose to step aside and see what happens, joining up with Islam if it is a better deal for me.
I am Indian, so I have much more direct exposure to Islam than most of you do.
you do use tricky adjectives such as comparing the average western man to an upper-middle class to make your point.
Any American man in a middle-class profession like engineering or accounting can go to any number of emerging nations (Islamic or otherwise) and be considered solidly upper-middle-class.
For an apples-to-apples, compare a US educated engineer working in the US vs. working in an emerging market.
You people are giving feminists a huge free pass. Are you willing to die to protect THEM?
Turns out that in Iran, or all places, there is a revolution going on against the Islamic rule.
“I can tell you for a fact that feminism also makes the living standards that Americans are accustomed to impossible. There is no shortage of men here that would agree with that. Go read Ferdinand’s “The Contract Between the Sexes’.”
I’ve read it. And i agree that feminism is unsustainable. However the transfer from feminism to Islam is simply a change from one shitty ideology to another. Yes, in Islam men are in a much better position in regard to women. But that’s not the Only change Islam would bring.
I can tell you for a fact that feminism also makes the living standards that Americans are accustomed to impossible.
Then why is it that developed countries have been the most sympathetic to feminism going back to the 19th Century and the countries least sympathetic to feminism have remained stagnant?
These are the same surveys that show that women earn 77% of what men do, and that women ’suffer’ under divorce more than men. Come on, you know better than that.
So you honestly believe that all statistics are irrelevant and not to be trusted? I suppose that would include your statistic that 90% of divorces are initiated by women. (Which I believe, BTW)
I am Indian, so I have much more direct exposure to Islam than most of you do.
Speaking of which, I’m curious as to your opinion to the proposal in India that a third of the legislative seats be set aside for women. And it’s the free market party who’s proposing it no less. That’s something that neither party in this country would dare propose.
Any American man in a middle-class profession like engineering or accounting can go to any number of emerging nations (Islamic or otherwise) and be considered solidly upper-middle-class.
It’s easy to import well-education westerners. That doesn’t change the fact the emerging nations have structural issues in their economies that prevent people who were actually born there from improving their lot in life. That’s the standard by which to judge an economy.
Are you willing to die to protect THEM?
Not them specifically, but for the principle of individual liberty, yes.
“Then why is it that developed countries have been the most sympathetic to feminism going back to the 19th Century and the countries least sympathetic to feminism have remained stagnant?”
Good question. If the west had been islamic then, we wouldn’t be having this debate since we wouldn’t have the technology to do so.
And sustainability of a society, or a way of life, is not an automatic indication of how “good” it is. Up until little over 10000 years ago all humans lived nasty, brutish and short lives as hunter-gatherers. Yet clearly , since throughout most of its history Homo Sapiens has lived that way, it was a sustainable way of life.
Certainly all societies must worry about how to sustain themselves. But if conditions remain the same, it can also be a sign of stagnation, as it is in the islamic world.
Yes, in Islam men are in a much better position in regard to women. But that’s not the Only change Islam would bring.
That still means that Western women have squandered the privilege of having Western men protect them Islam.
I’ll run Game on ‘em, but I won’t defend ‘em.
I’m curious as to your opinion to the proposal in India that a third of the legislative seats be set aside for women.
A terrible idea. But as divorce laws in India are not woman-oriented, this will not have the disastrous effect that the same would have in the West. Women have already occupied nearly a third of the seats already, so it won’t change much.
Easy, profitable divorce is what wrecks women, more than anything else.
Not them specifically, but for the principle of individual liberty, yes.
Oh, really? Then why are you doing nothing to fight a whole slew of feminist laws, from divorce to alimony to VAWA to the Bradley Amendment that totally violate the 13th and 14th Amendments of the Constitution, and treat men scarcely better than blacks under Jim Crow. If you think the US constitution is valuable, than fighting US misandry should be a much higher priority than fighting Islam.
A man with an eye on self-preservation is unlikely to see Western feminized civ as any better than Islam, all things considered.
You need to go over to The Spearhead and learn how the illusion of ‘liberty’ in the US has been greatly subverted, totally bypassing both voters and the Constitution. Furthermore, US conservatives are so afraid of shaming language from feminists that they would rather sacrifice the Constitution than incur the wrath of a feminist who might call them names.
In summary, people who think Islam is still a bigger threat than Misandry are still stuck in 2006. Times have changed, and so should your priorities.
Sparks123,
If you are willing to die for the ‘principle of individual liberty’, then can I expect to see you do the following? :
1) Stand in front of a county courthouse with a sign and flyers explaining why US divorce laws are unconstitiional (i.e. men going to jail as ‘deadbeat dads’ just for losing their job, even if HE didn’t want to divorce, etc.).
2) Organize protests to fight against false rape accusations, that send innocent men to jail for 15 years without a fair trial.
3) Drop of stacks of flyers at your local Med and Business Schools, where men are about to reach marriage age, and also embark on lucrative careers, about the what they may not know about divorce laws, and why they should get a pre-nup.
4) Organize a protest against VAWA, that extends protections to women, but not men, even though half of domestic violence victims are men.
I mean, if you are willing to DIE for the principle of individual liberty, then fighting oppression and tyranny through these safe and easy tasks are not asking for much….
It should trouble you that men in America are in jail for no crime other than failing to make their wives sufficiently happy, or losing their job, or failing to pay for a child that their wives adulterously conceived with another man.
It should trouble you, given that you are willing to DIE for the principle of liberty….
“That still means that Western women have squandered the privilege of having Western men protect them Islam.
I’ll run Game on ‘em, but I won’t defend ‘em. ”
I’m only arguing that an islamic Europe would be no less shitty, than the alternative of a misandrist hell.
I MIGHT defend SOME women but if at all, i’ll be very picky.
@Mikko, Sparks
I think you may have missed the point here. No one wants to live under an Islamic theocracy. What I would tolerate, however, is converting to Islam in a western nation that has a history of tolerance, pluralism and mutual respect.
I’m not convinced that Islam must also be equated with backwardness and stagnation. What it does do well, it seems to me, is support men. In the event a woman wishes a divorce from her husband, she must first get permission from the Imam. He must be convinced she has a case. In other words, there must be a fault. Additionally, the husband is given custody of his children. If she truly wants a divorce, she loses her kids, too.
Now would you rather be an upper middle class or just plain middle class man in America, divorced with child support payments and limited to visitations of twice per month with your children, or would you rather be a Muslim with a slightly lower standard of living and complete control of your woman and family?
To clarify, for me both alternatives:
1. collapse from misandry
or
2. submission to islamization are undesirable alternatives.
or 3. a mix of 1. and 2.
Though , unfortunately, i don’t see really viable alternatives for Europe. Either way, Europe will become (more of) a shithole.
Another huge flaw is the assumption that more Islam in the EU immediately makes them a Saudi Arabia or the Taliban.
It is safe to say that something like Turkey and Morocco (the two Muslim nations closest to Europe) are the more likely outcome.
The typical educated man in Turkey or Morocco does not go through the divorce wringer/Bradley Amendment that millions of US men go through.
I am not convinced that US MEN of COMPARABLE EDUCATION LEVELS have it better in the US than in Turkey, Morocco, Malaysia, Indonesia, Oman, UAE, etc.
Lastly, only about 5% of the EU is Muslim, and most of those are Turks, Albanians, Tatars, etc. (i.e. far more moderate and ‘white’ in appearance). Major Islamification is NOT imminent in Europe.
When was the last real terrorist attack in Europe? 2006?
It is silly to be more worried about Europe becoming Islamic than the West becoming Misandric.
Mikko :
2. submission to islamization
So 5% of the EU population being Muslim, that too mostly Turks, Tatars, Albanians, Kosovars, etc. means ‘submission to islamization’ is looming?
That is even loonier than those who think the US Southwest will soon rejoin Mexico.
Even among genuine Arabs in Europe, how many are ‘radical’ and how many are wise, intelligent, fair-minded people like Bhetti?
You have been sold an incredible bill of goods, that has distracted you from something far worse – Misandry.
I have a bridge in Istanbul to sell you….
Then why are you doing nothing to fight a whole slew of feminist laws, from divorce to alimony to VAWA to the Bradley Amendment that totally violate the 13th and 14th Amendments of the Constitution, and treat men scarcely better than blacks under Jim Crow.
When the last time you saw any man in this country lynched? Or turned away at the polls? Hell, Obama won a plurality of men! The divorce laws in this country are fucked up, but marriage is an act of volition and every man knows the terms of it going in. And the Supreme Court knocked down the worst parts of the VAWA in US vs. Morrison.
If you think the US constitution is valuable, than fighting US misandry should be a much higher priority than fighting Islam.
Sharia law would explicitly be a violation of the First Amendment, nothing under current law even approaches it.
A man with an eye on self-preservation is unlikely to see Western feminized civ as any better than Islam, all things considered.
Only if he see the battle of the sexes as a zero-sum game.
You need to go over to The Spearhead and learn how the illusion of ‘liberty’ in the US has been greatly subverted, totally bypassing both voters and the Constitution.
I read The Spearhead on a regular basis and I enjoy many of the articles. I don’t believe that the majority of the writers there would take the position that Sharia law is superior to the current American system. And the subversion of liberty hasn’t been bypassed by the voters. They’ve endorsed it! They elected Obama (including a plurality of men as I mentioned earlier). And the fact that the Supreme Court knocked down the worst parts of the VAWA shows that there still is at least some respect for the Constitution in our judicial system.
Furthermore, US conservatives are so afraid of shaming language from feminists that they would rather sacrifice the Constitution than incur the wrath of a feminist who might call them names.
Hasn’t Rush Limbaugh made a career out of the term “feminazis”?
In summary, people who think Islam is still a bigger threat than Misandry are still stuck in 2006. Times have changed, and so should your priorities.
Please explain to me what has happened in the last four years that would change my assessment of the one threat as compared to the other. There hasn’t been any major changes in the divorce laws.
Let me further add that gunslingergregi and xsplat are white guys who now live in Islamic countries, and most certainly don’t want to come back to the US.
They are happy in Malaysia/Indonesia (I think that is where they are).
Go ask them.
but marriage is an act of volition and every man knows the terms of it going in.
What? They KNOW the terms going in??? LOLOLOL!!!!
Sharia law would explicitly be a violation of the First Amendment, nothing under current law even approaches it.
You actually think Sharia is imminent in the US? Misandry exists today..
And the Supreme Court knocked down the worst parts of the VAWA
False rape accusations are growing.
Please explain to me what has happened in the last four years
Misandry has grown. None of these blogs existing 4 or even 2 years ago.
You seem to think Sharia is imminent even in the US (let alone Europe). Misandry is a reality today.
I see no reason to fight Islam ahead of fighting misandry.
Plus, it appears you don’t want to undertake those simple tasks I outlined to preserve the principle of liberty.
“When was the last real terrorist attack in Europe? 2006? ”
So no terror attempts were thwarted in the meantime? There’s no ongoing massive effort by european intelligence agencies to prevent islamic terror attacks?
“So 5% of the EU population being Muslim, that too mostly Turks, Tatars, Albanians, Kosovars, etc. means ’submission to islamization’ is looming?”
Fanatical Nazis were a minority in 1930′s Germany. Yet i seem to recall that they had quite an influence on politics. And in the 7th and 8th centuries, when the first and biggest wave of islamic conquest took place, Muslims were a minority in the lands they conquered . And large scale conversions did not take place among the conquered populations until much later.
“You have been sold an incredible bill of goods, that has distracted you from something far worse – Misandry. ”
Nope. Rather, i see the current problems of misandry and increasing islamic fanaticism as being connected. Misandrists/feminists will not be able to enforce all the totalitarian measures they have planned, or already put in place, since doing that requires large scale cooperation from MEN. As everyone here well knows, men are switching off. And that doesn’t include just the men who’ve woken up to the truth about feminism. Even guys who still support feminism are increasingly likely not to bother. This leaves the field wide open for islamic radicals.
What? They KNOW the terms going in??? LOLOLOL!!!!
Sure, we all know men who have gone through divorce. We’ve all seen Eddie Murphy’s routine from more than 20 years ago about a woman getting half a guys shit. We’ve all read article about male celebrities getting taking to the cleaners. You yourself wrote about men dropping out of marriage because of the unfavorable terms in “The Misandry Bubble.”
None of these blogs existing 4 or even 2 years ago.
Nomarriage.com has been around since 2003.
You seem to think Sharia is imminent even in the US (let alone Europe). Misandry is a reality today.
Certainly not in the US, there’s aren’t enough Muslims and there’s too strong of individualist current. But you discussed how British men were choosing Sharia law, so I’m just taking it from you.
@Mikko
What makes you think that ‘switching off’ isn’t a form of large scale cooperation from men? I’m in Canada, and the feminist lobby in Ontario is pressuring the Ministry of Health to include fertility treatments as a covered medical procedure. This means taxpayers will be paying for women in their late thirties or early forties to become pregnant. How fucked up is that? Women grow bolder and bolder. I heard in Sweden that they were considering a domestic violence tax on all men. This situation is ridiculous and I would have to concur that it must be a ‘bubble’.
The best one can do is abscond. Be a ‘man going his own way’.
“What makes you think that ’switching off’ isn’t a form of large scale cooperation from men?”
Because, while men’s silence has been a signal to feminists to make increasingly extreme demands, without the fruits of men’s labor, they will not have the resources to put them all into action. With increasing male unemployment and apathy, the money for it simply won’t be there.
On top of that, all totalitarian regimes needed men to be their enforces. While feminism’s rise to power has certainly been supported by hordes of manginas there is a difference. Gestapo/NKVD/KGB/etc. could not have commited their atrocities, if the ideologies they supported had been actively anti-male.
But you discussed how British men were choosing Sharia law, so I’m just taking it from you.
They are choosing it BECAUSE OF MISANDRY. And I am glad they did. I want more of them to do that in order to nullify misandry.
Also, you fail to see that misandry is what has made the West weak in the first place. The Islam you are so terrified of would have no ability to make inroads in the West if the West stayed patriarchal in the first place.
Fighting misandry is the priority, even if you are afraid is Islam, and even if you are not.
So no terror attempts were thwarted in the meantime?
No major attempts since 2006. In the US, the very best they could muster was the Nigerian underwear novice. Also, one can credibly argue that male disenfranchisement, due to misandry, was a bigger root cause than Islamic radicalism.
You have provided extremely weak examples, and certainly are not willing to walk the talk regarding your claim to want to ‘die to uphold liberty’. I guess passing out flyers and organizing protests of divorced men is too much to ask.
Worrying that 5% of the EU’s population is Muslim, of which just 1% are subgroups known to be radical, and concluding that the US is under threat from the long-term ramifications of the actions of this 1% in Europe, strikes me more as an attempt to avoid having to face up to misandry than anything else.
You are still living in 2006. Times have changed.
TFH: your latest post seems more a response to sparks than to me. However, since you quote both of us, i want to be sure you didn’t get some of my responses and sparks’ responses a bit mixed up: i didn’t claim to be automatically willing to die to protect western women, or for some abstract “ideal”.
Secondly, i agree that if the west had not engaged in misandrist bullshit Islam wouldn’t have gained a foothold. Infact i wrote that misandry and the spread of Islam in Europe are connected.
However i still don’t see Islam as a cure. First of all, if you went to any Islamic country and removed all those technologies and other things dependent on western scientific and technological innovation of the past 400 years, what would you have left? Has the islamic world made ANY significant contributions to science in that timeframe? That is why i believe an islamic Europe would be a stagnant one.
Secondly, in Europe, the political wing pushing for greater immigration from islamic countries (though not only from them) has been the left with its multiculturalist agenda. The very same left that is fanatically feminist and thinks of western men as the root of all evil. So there’s a connection.
Thirdly, yes i know the islamic world is not a monolith and some countries within it work quite well. However the countries where most of the islamic immigrants have come from in the past few decades are not among them (well maybe a few).
Also few islamic countries can be held up as examples of internal peace, nonviolence and stability.
I hope TFH doesn’t represent the men’s movement. It’s really jumped the shark if its advocates hate Western Civilization so much that they want to see it replaced with Islamic civilization. On the other side, even Andrea Dworkin wasn’t that bad.
If Islamic countries are so great for men, why do so many Islamic men want to move to the West, and why do so few Western men want emigrate to an Islamic country? ANY Islamic country, including the supposedly civilized ones like Turkey or Malaysia? If misandry is as bad in the West as you claim, surely men would prefer to live in countries without it. But the fact is that they don’t (with rare exceptions).
None of the Middle Eastern guys I’ve known have wanted to go back to their countries – including one that was cuckolded by his American wife. He says that in his country, her own family would have killed her, and that the way we handle stuff like that here is bullshit. But his country sucks so much that he would rather put up with that shit. That tells you something, doesn’t it?
The reason Islamic countries suck is that they’re full of Muslims. Demographics is destiny. If you put a bunch of Muslims anywhere you’ll get the same thing.
Yes, but it is also true that:
Strolling along on a summer’s day > having acid thrown on your face > being drawn and quartered and set alight
I only have a passing acquaintance with Islam from the Bosnians I’ve known (who were not religious) and from some ESL work I’ve done. Not all the women hate it. I’ve heard them defend the veil as liberating, and I can see their points.
But other than male authority being supreme, is there anything else about Islam its resulting culture/achievements that men find particularly compelling?
Hysteria over Islam seems to be growing, and I have to wonder if it’s a symptom of other fears which we have but are actively repressing. It’s not as if Islamic societies are the only ones that have produced terrorists.
In other words, it seems very passive for men to say, “Well, they’ll give us what we want, so we’ll let them take over.” Ask yourselves if what they will give you is what you really want or if it would actually be better to actively fight for what you want within the society you already have.
Feminism nazi hell (as TFH) aptly described it is fleeting. It is unstable and we all know it. Islam is stable because it is stagnant, violent and incapable of moving forward.
Feminism won’t last forever and then we’ll prosper again, a lot wiser than before. Islam offers us nothing but what it has given the world in the 13 Centuries since its inception.
Even if the west is unfavourable toward men there are ways to prosper for a man of dedication and vision. Technology is still moving forward. Islam offers you nothing but perhaps a subservient wife if you become Allah’s bitch. It is still possible to get yourself a wife you want in the West if you take the path of manhood and grow a pair.
Anyway, the West will not be destroyed, not even by Islam. Western nations may fall but the spirit will continue. It will be found in other countries where smarter, richer, forward thinking Westerners have fled from matriachial laws or been compelled to take their businesses, or else have just looked upon brighter horizons. Whose to say where the new banner of Western ideas will raise up from? Could it be SE Asia, Russia or Eastern Europe?
The West is not a country its an achievement of the ideas of men and when you think of it in this way you’ll realise that the West will be whereever those men of ideas are even if they are no longer found in contemporary Western nations.
Also, I am hoping feminism will be the death blow for Islam. It is clear that both cannot survive long side by side. Hopefully feminism will gut islam and render it like modern Christianity, where most practioners pay only lip service on Sunday. Feminism, as I’ve said above, is not sustainable so it will be destroyed eventually anyway.
It’s worth noting that Glenn’s & friends are in the pocket of a Saudi prince who also pays of the families of suicide bombers:
http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/1261/Should-Fox-News-Register-as-a-Saudi-Agent.aspx
Is there some kind of de facto alliance between Israel/neocons and the Saudis?
Due to some kind of combination of having too much oil to fuck with and any successor regime would almost certainly be worse? Plus being militarily weak and
no desire for nukes.
[...] In Mala Fide – With friends like the American right, the European right doesn’t need enemies [...]
“Both Geert Wilders and Glenn Beck have their own sets of plusses and minuses.”
Horseman,
That’s a complete load. Wilders is in favor of cutting off all immigration into Europe from Muslim Countries, which would be a profound boon and protection to MILLIONS of innocent people.
Glenn Beck isn’t in favor of anything that would do one billionth as much good as that.
All he wants to do is stop Obama from making things slightly worse than they already are.
Big deal, Glenn, you aren’t worthy of being mentioned in the same breath as Geert Wilders.
Also, stop saying the Nazis were Left Wing.
The only people who say that are the biggest idiots alive.
Everyone in the 1930′s knew the Nazis were Right Wing, and they called them Right Wing because of it.
But I guess you know better than the people who were actually alive at the time.
icr,
Israel and the Saudis have a common rival in Iran, and this is pushing them closer to each other than they were in previous times.
The Elites of both Countries want America to invade Iran, for example, even if in Saudi Arabia the masses are dead set against it.
Iran becomes our objective ally against Saudi-Arabia. As well, the Saudi masses against the Saudi Elite.
http://www.sauduction.com