the case for Christian Wahhabism

You might think that for an atheist I’m a bit obsessed with Christianity. And you’re probably right. The thing is I really do believe that secularism is a dead end. I believe that the greatest enemy that the West has ever faced is liberalism and I don’t see any way to fight liberalism by purely secular means.

The only secular alternatives to liberalism that ever seemed viable were communism and fascism. They weren’t terribly pleasant and they certainly don’t look viable any longer.

The only way to combat liberalism is, I believe, some kind of religion. There are several alternatives but most seem very unpromising, or unpalatable, or both. The least unpalatable alternative would be a revival of Christianity. The question is, is such a revival possible?

It’s instructive to take a look at the history of Islam over the past hundred years. A hundred years ago nobody took Islam seriously. The Ottoman Empire seemed to be tottering towards destruction and the universal view in Europe was that quite naturally the European great powers would carve up the corpse of that empire between them. The idea of Muslims putting up any kind of resistance seemed too fantastic even to consider. And in fact when the Ottoman Empire did collapse most of it was carved up by the great powers. The European powers pursued a policy towards the Middle East that was cynical, hypocritical, vicious, short-sighted and foolish. After the Second World War the Americans naturally assumed that the Middle East would be within their sphere of influence, and they proceeded to pursue policies that were even more cynical, hypocritical, vicious, short-sighted and foolish.

Much to the surprise of the great powers there was a reaction within the Islamic world. In fact there were two responses. One was the growth of Arab nationalism, but the Americans were determined to put a stop to that. The other response was the explosive growth of a new kind of Islam – the kind of militant radical Islam with which we are now familiar. This didn’t really exist to any great extent a hundred years ago. Wahhabism existed but was confined almost entirely to what is now Saudi Arabia. The spectacular growth of movements like the Muslim Brotherhood and Wahhabism was a response to what many Muslims saw as an existential threat.

There’s no question that the West in the 21st century faces an existential threat at least as serious as that facing Islam in the 20th century. Christianity as it currently exists is not going to be any help. In fact mainstream organised Christianity is part of the problem, not part of the solution. It is merely secular liberalism with a feelgood gloss. It’s a more emotional, more effeminate, secular liberalism.

Of course I am aware that Not All Christians Are Like That. Of course there is still a very small minority who still follow the teachings of actual Christianity, and a small number of Christians who are still prepared to fight for their faith. However the sad truth is that most of the people who currently identify as Christians are secular liberals, and globalist SJWs.

If Christianity is to play a part in defending the West it will have to reinvent itself the way Islam did. It is significant that Wahhabism started as a movement to purge Islam of what were considered to be un-Islamic innovations. A viable Christian revivalism requires a similarly ruthless purging of non-Christian innovations, and that means it must be purged of liberalism. Purged thoroughly and completely. No compromise is possible with liberalism. No compromise at all. A pre-Enlightenment Christianity is what is needed. I do not believe that any existing mainstream Christian church can be reformed sufficiently to be able to play a useful role. A new Christianity will have to be built, from scratch. The existing churches need to be consigned to the scrap heap. They are too thoroughly infested with liberal ideas to be saved.

The new Christianity will need to be a radical militant Christianity, somewhat on the lines of radical militant Islam. Many Christians (and many on the right) are not going to like the idea of learning from Islam. They are also going to be reluctant to abandon many of their cherished liberal ideals, ideals that they often do not recognise as the liberal poison that they are (I enumerated many of these ideals in a previous post on conservatives and Christians defending liberal ideals).

The struggle against liberalism is a war, and it’s a war to the death. It’s about time we accepted that reality. A Christian wahhabism may be our one slim chance of survival.

Advertisements

in praise of patriarchy

A commenter at The Knight and Drummer recently accused me of wanting to restore patriarchy. I have to say that I plead guilty as charged. I do indeed want to restore patriarchy.

Until western society decided to commit suicide all human societies had been patriarchal. I know that feminist scholars (and I always chuckle at the concept of feminist scholarship) make claims for certain societies in the dim dark past having being matriarchies, and for a handful of remote tribes being matriarchal until modern times. In virtually every case this is nothing but wishful thinking on the part of woolly-minded academics. Successful societies have always been patriarchies.

I define a patriarchy as a society which accept two things – that men and women are profoundly different and have different social roles to play, and that final authority must rest with men. It’s important to remember that you can’t have one without the other. If men surrender their authority traditional sex roles will be overturned. If traditional sex roles are not respected men’s authority will vanish. If either of those things happen then that society is doomed.

Very few people today are prepared to nail their colours to the mast and embrace patriarchy. Most self-defined conservatives (including most so-called social conservatives and traditionalists) have surrendered completely to feminism. All mainstream conservative parties have made the same surrender, as have all mainstream Christian churches (with the possible exception of the Orthodox churches). Some of these “conservatives” will bleat about feminism having gone too far but in fact they are happy to accept 90% of the feminist agenda. If you’re a conservative and you believe in “equality” or “fairness” or “justice” then you’re a feminist and you’re part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

The fact is that we have all been so thoroughly indoctrinated by feminism that we think that admitting to being a supporter of patriarchy is a bit like admitting to being a member of the Ku Klux Klan. This is of course arrant nonsense. Patriarchy is not only the only workable way to run a society, it is also the only system that is capable of making both men and women happy.

But what exactly are the ramifications of accepting patriarchy?

Obviously we need to ask what place, if any, women should have in political life. Female leaders have always been disastrous. Of course we also need to reconsider the whole question of representative democracy, a system that guarantees corrupt, vicious and inefficient government. It’s not a question of whether women should be allowed to vote. It’s a question of whether voting is a good idea, for anyone. Every time the franchise has been extended the system has become more unworkable and more corrupt.

Secondly, women should accept the authority of their fathers, and after marriage they should accept the authority of their husbands. This is what women actually want. Women despise men who allow themselves to be dominated by women. The thought of having sex with such men nauseates them. Women have always sought men who can protect them and that implies authority. It’s a matter of biological reality. Fairness doesn’t come into it. Biological reality isn’t interested in fairness. Reality isn’t interested in fairness. Reality just is.

Thirdly, we need to carefully consider whether higher education for women is really a good idea. Of course we also need to think about higher education in general – we need to slash the number of university students overall by at least 80%. We need doctors and engineers. We don’t need gender studies majors or film studies majors or any similar nonsense. We also don’t need the absurd number of lawyers being churned out by our universities.

And unfortunately it’s the nonsensical courses to which women are attracted, and all these courses do is to make women angry and confused. If you have any doubts about this, try having a conversation with a female student doing one of these courses – they are incapable of doing anything other than getting angry and mouthing slogans that they don’t even understand. Their ignorance is exceeded only by their arrogance.

Of course by now all true conservatives are wringing their hands in horror that anyone would dare to express such wicked forbidden sentiments. But as I tried to point out to the commenter mentioned earlier, patriarchy is coming whether we like it or not. Within a few decades western Europe will be Islamic and it will be patriarchal. There aren’t going to be any gender studies courses taught. There isn’t going to be any feminism.

The irony of course is that women, and feminists in particular, have created the situation that is going to lead inevitably to the resurgence of patriarchy, of one form or another. Feminists have weakened our civilisation  to the point where invaders can simply walk in and take over. Which is exactly what they are going to do. Feminists can celebrate their triumph over Christian patriarchy but their celebrations are likely to be short-lived. Patriarchy will reassert itself one way or another because there is no viable alternative.

the war between the sexes: the aftermath

Ever since the evil ideology known as feminism emerged men and women have been at war. In my view there is no way the conflict between the sexes can be resolved. So what does the future hold?
This is purely a personal view, but I suspect we will see an almost complete separation of the sexes. Our society will in fact be two societies, one male and one female, with very little real contact between the two. Men and women will lead totally separate lives.
When they’re in their 20s women will use men for sex. When they hit their mid-30s they’ll hear that biological clock ticking and they’ll panic and they’ll have one child and the state will raise the child. Marriage will be out of the question. They will have left it too late, and no man is going to want to marry a bitter angry 35-year-old feminist who has spent the previous twenty years treating men like dirt.
Men will increasingly opt out. There’s no upside whatsoever to marriage from a male point of view. You’d have to be insane even to contemplate such foolishness. Men in their 20s might hook up with women for casual sex but even that will increasingly be seen as not worth the misery and the aggravation. Within twenty years or so men will get most of their sex from sex robots. That’s an idea that has been around in science fiction for decades but the technology is catching up with the science fiction.
There are animal species in which the males and females have little or nothing to do with each other. They come together briefly once a year to mate and that’s it. That’s going to be the future for humans as well, except that we probably won’t even bother with the mating part.
Eventually men will figure out that they’re paying all the bills. Women mostly don’t have productive jobs. They work in the bureaucracy or in the “service” sector, in nice comfortable air-conditioned offices where they don’t get their hands dirty and they can spend their time drinking coffee and having meetings. They don’t actually produce wealth for the country. Men do that. When men realise that they’re producing the nation’s wealth whilst women are simply consuming that wealth things could get interesting. Men will discover that if they can’t find the kinds of jobs that allow them to keep their income (in other words jobs where they are paid under the counter) then there’s not much point in working at all. Women, who increasingly control the bureaucracy, will make frantic efforts to prevent men from keeping their income.
Both men and women will face the prospect of long long years of loneliness in the second half of life. Women will have their cats. Men will have porn and beer and gaming. All will be lonely but the relations between the sexes have been so irretrievably poisoned by feminism that will all live out their lonely lives in solitude.
I don’t see any chance of fixing any of this. The damage done by feminism has been so severe that any kind of truce seems unlikely. In all probability relations between the sexes will continue to deteriorate. We’ll end up with a kind of sexual apartheid. Two mutually hostile societies existing side by side in steadily increasing incomprehension and suspicion.
Of course in western Europe things are likely to go in a different direction. Islam will sweep feminism aside as if it had never existed.

the future of Europe: liberal or Islamic?

Assuming that Muslims go on increasing as a proportion of the population in western Europe it’s obvious that eventually there will have to be a showdown. Islam and liberalism are mutually incompatible belief systems. The question is, which system will win?
The European elites are sure that liberalism will win out, and that within a generation or two Muslims will become atheist liberals. The elites are composed of people who simply cannot comprehend religious belief. It is inconceivable to them that anyone, faced with the choice between actual religion and the prevailing secular religion of hedonism and consumerism, could possibly choose religion. The elites are sure that Islam will gradually fade away the way Christianity did. If the elites are wrong about this they are in big big trouble.
The other possibility is that Islam triumphs. In a recent comment at Oz Conservative Mark suggested that if Islam wins elite women will convert to Islam because they have zero commitment to Christianity. That is certainly possible. I can imagine quite a few liberals, especially the ones who dominate the media, bureaucracy and academia, converting because basically they’re people who are willing to adopt any set of beliefs that will help their careers and allow them to curry favour with the people who really run things. Because liberals in the media, bureaucracy and academia might think of themselves as being members of the elite they aren’t really – they’re just members of the Outer Party. And the Inner Party members are not going to give up their devotion to their chosen religion – the pursuit of power and money.
The problem with this scenario is that it’s not going to be very attractive to the Inner Party. The super-rich globalists of the Inner Party want a population that is docile and easily controlled and that will fulfill its allotted functions – which means a population dedicated to hedonism and consumerism. An Islamic population is unlikely to be docile and easily controlled and is unlikely to dedicate itself to hedonism and consumerism. And that would be a threat to the profits and to the power of the global capitalists. That would mean that the elites would have to take active steps to undermine and ultimately to destroy Islam. They would use the same methods that were so successful in destroying Christianity.
Liberalism is essential to global capitalism because it is the one belief system perfectly suited to producing a population of compliant mindless consumers.
Islam is not likely to submit as meekly as Christianity did. The stage would be set for another culture war but this time it’s not going to be a cold war – it’s going to be a very hot war.
Islam and liberalism cannot co-exist in the long term. One must destroy the other. I don’t believe that Islam and capitalism (at least capitalism of the sort that currently dominates the planet) are compatible either.
Christians and social conservatives will therefore face a choice. We can watch from the sidelines, or we can enlist as allies on one side or the other. We’re in the same situation that small nations are in when Great Powers start assembling alliances in preparation for war, having to choose which alliance to join and desperately hoping to choose the winning side. Islam and liberalism are the ideological superpowers. We’re one of the minor powers but our very survival depends on making the right choice. If we stay on the sidelines we’re not going to be very popular with either side.
My own view is that liberalism is by nature totalitarian. Liberals will not stop until every Christian and every social conservative has been hunted down and sent to a re-education camp (and a re-education camp is the best we can hope for). In the long term liberalism intends to stamp out every single ember of dissent. Under triumphal liberalism we have no future at all.
As for Islam, it’s a crap shoot. We might get lucky and find ourselves living under a reasonably tolerant Islamic regime. Or we might get something like Saudi Arabia.
Sometimes in life you have a number of choices but the trouble is they’re all bad.

choose your enemies carefully – Islam vs liberalism

It is clear that western civilisation faces two great threats. On the one hand there is Islam, on the other there is the liberal-feminist-homosexual-green death cult. The question is, which is the more dangerous enemy?
Many conservatives seem to view Islam as the more immediate threat. They may well be quite wrong. The fact is that there would be no Islamic threat in the first place had the liberal-feminist-homosexual-green death cult not destroyed the west’s will to live. The root cause of all the west’s problems is the triumph of cultural marxism. It is the despair, the self-loathing, the nihilism, the atheism and the degeneracy promoted by cultural marxism that has brought us to the brink of civilisational collapse. If western civilisation is to survive we need to get our priorities right. The destruction of cultural marxism must be the first objective.
In achieving this objective our most powerful ally may well be Islam. The only force in the modern world that seems at all likely to oppose the cultural marxist agenda is Islam.
Perhaps we should be hoping to see Islamic republics established as quickly as possible in countries like Sweden, the Netherlands, Britain and France. That might serve to concentrate the minds of Americans, Canadians, Australians and eastern Europeans. Eastern Europe is still predominantly Christian. The establishment of a caliphate in western Europe might persuade the eastern Europeans that perhaps it’s not a good idea to abandon Christianity, patriotism and self-respect.
It is not at all clear to me why social conservatives and conservative Christians should shed any tears over the imposition of sharia law in liberal cesspits like Sweden or the Netherlands. If it’s a choice between living under sharia law or living under the heel of the feminists I’m inclined to think that sharia law might well be preferable. Of course it might mean that women would lose their most precious right, the right to murder their unborn babies. Homosexuals might lose their most precious right, the right to spread their poison in the school system. 
The imposition of Islamic republics in western Europe might also hasten the demise of the European Union. That can only be a good thing.
The western Europeans have after all chosen their fate. Enoch Powell warned the British nearly half a century ago of the consequences of unrestricted immigration. They ignored him. The British, the French, the Swedes and the Dutch do still have a choice. They can vote against the political establishments. They do have alternative parties for which they can vote. If the French choose to reject the FN in the next presidential election then they have chosen their fate. If the Swedes choose to reject the Sweden Democrats they too will have chosen their fate. If the British choose a clown like Ed Milliband or David Cameron in their next general election they too will have voluntarily chosen self-destruction. In those circumstances they richly deserve the fate in store for them. The good news is that Islamification might be the prelude to the destruction of the liberal-feminist-homosexual-green death cult. If that is the only means by which that death cult can be destroyed then it might not be such a bad thing.
There is certainly no reason for genuine conservatives to lift a finger to save liberal atheism from Islam, or to save feminism from sharia law. 
I am no apologist for Islam. I would prefer western civilisation to survive, but it cannot survive so long as it nourishes within it the cancers of feminism, the radical homosexual agenda, atheism, nihilism, despair and degeneracy.

the liberal-feminist death cult

There’s been a lot of talk in the past few years about Islam as a death cult. While Islam certainly has quite a bit of innocent blood on its hands, consider this. There are 3,000 abortions a day performed in the US. Islamic terrorists recently murdered a dozen people in Paris. In 2012 more than 220,000 abortions were carried out in France. If we’re looking for a death cult perhaps we’re looking in the wrong place?
Apart from this horrifying slaughter of the innocents the liberal-feminist death cult in the western world has all but destroyed marriage, causing untold misery for those children lucky enough not to be aborted. The same liberal-feminist death cult encourages thousands of people to undergo surgical mutilation in the pathetically deluded belief that they can somehow change their biological sex. The same death cult encourages the spreading of homosexual propaganda in schools.
This same death cult has undermined belief in all of the worthwhile traditions that made western civilisation great. Perhaps this is not quite genocide, but it’s pretty close to it. It’s certainly cultural genocide. 
I am not arguing in favour of Islam. I am merely pointing out that the self-hating self-destructive west is hardly in a position to claim the moral high ground.
Thousands of people in western countries convert to Islam every year. Given the west’s rush to cultural suicide this is hardly surprising. 
Any talk of resisting the Islamisation of Europe is just so much hot air as long as the liberal-feminist death cult remains firmly in control. Unless that death cult can be overcome there can be no hope. Even without the threat of Islam European civilisation will still be doomed to destruction. The enemy within is far more dangerous than any external threat.

Rotherham, Islam and the decay of western civilisation

Peter Frost in his recent post at UNZ Review has some interesting things to say about the Rotherham scandal. I disagree with much of what he says but he does make some valid and pertinent points. 
It’s obviously crystal clear that the main problems are the catastrophic policies of multi-culturalism and mass Third World immigration but I think Frost is right in believing that there are other things going on here as well. It does seem as if many immigrants (especially Muslim immigrants)  are assimilating, but in dangerously wrong ways – that they are adopting the very worst aspects of our own rapidly collapsing civilisation while at the same time maintaining the very worst features of their own cultures. They are embracing the mindless hedonism, the obsession with sex, the nihilism, the victimology and the identity politics. From their own cultures they are maintaining the contempt for outsiders.
They are also taking advantage of the disintegration of the family unit in western culture, which has led to so many teenage girls becoming virtually victims waiting to be happen. 
These immigrants are also taking advantage of their knowledge that the police (especially in the UK but also to a large extent across the western world) are always going to take the side of non-whites against whites. The few fathers of victimised white girls who tried to get something done about the problem found themselves being arrested. 
The net result of all this is that for the mainly Pakistani grooming gangs their horrendous activities were made ridiculously easy, and almost risk-free.
Frost also makes the point that other non-white groups apart from Muslims are over-represented in these kinds of crimes. 
Islam and immigration are certainly major parts of the problem but unless we can address the serious failures of our own civilisation we can expect many more Rotherhams.