The religious war of the 21st century

On December 9, 2015, in Commentary, by natalt

Many remark that the violent clash between the West and Islam is a clash of civilisations, or perhaps a clash of religions.  Their thesis is that Islam is trying to impose itself on us and that we are trying to defend our way of life against this imposition.  This seems to the the position of many mainstream conservatives and of the anti-Islam patriot groups which have been spawned from mainstream conservatism.  Although there is an element of conflict between these cultures, the bigger conflict may be between the faithful and the apostates.

One one hand we have Islamic fundamentalists who wish for a return to the Caliphate and stricter adherence to Islamic doctrine (which is in line with the Koran, despite what Liberals would have you to believe).  These groups, exemplified by ISIS, are pushing for a strong adherence to their religion and a more complete rejection of Western decadence. Boko Haram seeks to drive out Western influence and education.  The clue is in the name which translates to “Western influence is a sin”.  ISIS seek to impose an Islamic State, a world wide caliphate.  Once again, the clue is in the name. The Taliban are students of Islamic Law who seek a more accurate fulfilment of Sharia law.  Their war against us is a war against unbelievers.  Jihad is prescribed in the Koran, despite what Liberals wish you to believe.  Their fight is to protect and expand their religion against those who may undermine it.

On the other hand we have Western Liberal Democracy, which also adheres to a religion.  That religion is Political Correctness.  When the Paris attacks occurred, indeed, when any Islamist attack happens in the West, the first response was not to target the attackers and remove the threat, but to allay fears about Islam, to denounce the “racists” for perhaps “marginalising” Muslims, to worry about an “Muslim backlash” and to keep pushing solidarity and multiculturalism.  The attacks in Paris were notable for the lack of any retribution or sense of hatred or desire for defence.  What did the French first go to defend? Themselves? Their people? The first thing that they went to defend, as is the case for any Western nation, was their faith. The bullets and explosions of Islamic terrorism shatter the illusion of the religion of Political Correctness, particularly when the terrorists are home grown, those who supposedly form part of the integrated, vibrant, multicultural tapestry of peoples. The religion of Political Correctness asserts that multiculturalism will not only work in creating an enlightened, peaceful society free from hatred, violence and tribalism, but that it is necessary for this development to occur and succeed.

In both cases, a particular religious belief is being pushed, and there is a perception that there is a struggle against those who reject it. The apostates and infidels on the side of Islam, and the “bigots” and “nationalists” on the side of Political Correctness. In this respect, we can see Political Correctness and Islam in parallel, pushing to maintain their orthodoxy in a world which is drawing people away from it. Western Liberalism drawing Muslims away from the lifestyle the Koran advocates, and a growing realisation of the failures of multiculturalism and the lie of diversity pushing Westerners away from the beliefs and morality of Political Correctness.

So when any event occurs which contradicts the orthodoxy of Political Correctness and vindicates our criticism of their faith, they must go into a defensive posture. They must show that it isn’t the faith that is flawed, but that it is instead the unbelievers who have brought this calamity. It is a lack of integration. It is Western Supremacy. It is marginalisation. It is the Muslims who don’t accept Political Correctness and Western Decadence and are “radicalised”. This is where they claim the fault lies, and the solution is to push the religion of Political Correctness even harder. Even more denunciation and persecution of the heretics, and a push to make Political Correctness even more encompassing, to further arm and empower its priests. All these attempts, the endless social media posts asserting that this has nothing to with Islam, all the vitriol against those who point out the problems of open borders, are attempts at defending their own belief system – because without these efforts their belief system would fall apart in the face of contradictory evidence and their moral monopoly and power would be undermined. One may look at these reactions and think they are a matter of a weak people showing their weakness and lack of resolve, and to a degree this is correct. However, we aren’t just seeing abject weakness and cowardice, we are seeing a system of power exert itself, and this system of power in modern Western Liberal Democracies is a theocratic power ruling as per the religion of Political Correctness. This religion is under threat from the growing far right, from neo-reactionaries and nationalists (but not the zio-patriots), and also from the activities of Muslims who have a competing religion. Some have argued that ISIS targeted the hipster district of Paris to try and create division, to create a divide between Islam and the infidels. Maybe this is just an argument to try and dissuade people from putting the blame for this attack where it belongs, at Islamists pushing Islam. However, maybe there is truth in this, maybe ISIS are trying to push people away from the competing religion of Political Correctness and undermine it by showing its ugly truths. Perhaps through these attacks they are pushing forward Liberalism’s underlying flaws and making them plain and clear for all to see.

For nationalists, having the Islamists try and destroy multiculturalism and fight against assimilation through acts of violence against us is undesirable. Our tolerance of this violence to prove solidarity is the result of a religion which persists to maintain itself, even if it has to martyr its adherents through terror attacks, rapes and other forms of exclusion. Those who don’t wish to be martyred, such as those who might support Le Pen, are beyond the pale as they are apostates who have rejected not only Political Correctness but its basic underlying tenets. It is here, at least in Western lands, that the real war lies.

How long this religion can stand against all observations to the contrary is anyone’s guess, but one of the first steps to solving this problem is admitting that there is a problem, and the West can’t begin to shake off this false religion, this false cult of diversity, until it realises that it is a cult in the first place.

Tagged with:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please enter CAPTCHA *