After Brussels:
The Trap of Counter-Jihad

1,266 words

The religion of peace strikes again. At the risk of being immodest, I can predict what happens next. After all, these terror attacks seem to follow a basic formula:

Step 1: Attack happens. World leaders are “shocked” that such a thing could happen. Who would have thought bringing in people who follow a religion founded by a warlord and pedophile would lash out in such a way against us? We’ve been so tolerant! To them! And it’s not as if these things happen on a regular basis . . . 

Step 2: The media assures us that these attacks have nothing to do with Islam and denounces the terrorists, but not as militantly as they denounce us and every other person who makes the connection that Islamic terrorism might indeed have something to do with Islam. After all, suicide bombings are bad, but a common-sense immigration policy would lead to another holocaust! They go on to claim that the terrorists are attacking our “values” (as opposed to us) and that the biggest victim of Islamic terrorism are Muslims themselves (because some people on the street might give them weird looks) and that what we need to do is let in more refugees, who just happen to be Muslim. After all, if we implement a common-sense immigration policy, then Muslims will feel alienated and the terrorists will win.

Step 3: The media insistently show model Muslim citizens, well dressed and assimilated, denouncing what happened. They also make positive role models of dhimmis making politically correct yet ultimately worthless gestures towards our Muslim “fellow citizens.” These people are given a metaphorical pat on the head as they cash in on the anti-European Zeitgeist.

Step 4: While the far-Right might make some gains, things ultimately go back to normal as a jittery public goes back to what is really important, e.g. paying attention to which celebrity came out as gay/got a sex change, football, working eight hours in a cubicle, etc. A few bright individuals, however, become aware of the fact that Europe is in an existential civilizational struggle, one in which we aren’t exactly winning.

This basically sums up every attack since 9/11. And of course, while the uncritical mind accepts the MSM’s bogus explanation of events, we on the Alt-Right aren’t fooled and easily see through their lies. Anyone can read the Koran for themselves and see what it really says in regards to waging war against the unbelievers. Furthermore, we know that closing our borders to Muslims will not magically result in a “victory” for the Islamic State. In fact, this claim that “the terrorists win if we turn on our Muslim brothers!” might just be the most annoying and idiotic argument that leftists make. After all, if that were true then France, which has suffered multiple serious terrorist attacks and also contains within its borders no-go zones that even police won’t enter, is winning against ISIS, while Slovakia (which has vowed to refuse entry to any Muslim migrants and has not had any Islamic terrorist attacks on its soil) has already lost.

However, when leftists say that we lose by restricting or even banning third-world immigration into our countries, they are being ideologically consistent. After all, if all featherless bipeds are equal and if anyone can become, for example, a Swede, then all of the world’s seven billion inhabitants are potential Swedes. As such, to ban anyone would be a transgression against a fellow human being and a potential Swede. The women, children, and (mostly) men we see swarming across the border may as well be our brothers, our cousins, our neighbors, or our friends. In this context, borders exist merely as a safety precaution to ensure that the process of enrichment doesn’t get too chaotic. They are necessary only to ensure that we become minorities in our own countries in an orderly and (relatively) civilized manner. You don’t want to boil that frog too quickly. Sure, multiculturalism will lead to otherwise unnecessary terrorist attacks, assaults, rapes, and murders, but it’s a small price to pay to help our fellow human beings and a necessary sacrifice to the god of Equality!

Unfortunately, as Professor Kevin MacDonald has pointed out, this is likely a part of our nature. Europeans, especially our intellectuals, tend to see morality in universalist terms, and humanity as an abstract and fluid concept. For them, our in-group is not bound by DNA, religion, culture, language, or anything solid, but rather by a series of abstract values based on individualism and equality. Thus it is difficult to speak to our fellow Europeans about the nature of racial and cultural inequality, or that we must prioritize our own survival over that of these third-world immigrants with whom we have little in common, genetically or otherwise.

Nonetheless, in these coming times it is undeniable that faced with a powerful enemy that has its own culture and civilization, our people (excluding those who are actively betraying us to our declared enemies) will look for something to stop it. As more and more people become red-pilled by reality, it will be increasingly difficult to hide behind the system of abstract values (personal freedom, free markets, tolerance, yada, yada . . .) that libertarians, counter-Jihadists, and others promote as being the pillars of our civilization. The fact of the matter is that without Europeans, there is no Europe. And the more non-Europeans enter European countries, the more obvious that will become.

It is inevitable that in the wake of Islamic terrorist attacks many will flock to the counter-Jihad movement. However, this is a false friend. As the name implies, the counter-Jihad movement is a movement of negative identity. Instead of focusing on who we are as Europeans, the counter-Jihadists (à la Robert Spencer, Tommy Robinson, etc.) will only assert who we are not, that is, radical Islamists. And if they do just so happen to mention who we are, they will use essentially the same kind of language that our elites used to get us into this mess: That the West is nothing but a conglomeration of values and principles. Such reasoning will lead to the same problem that we see ourselves in today, as it does nothing to stop the hordes of non-Muslim Blacks, Arabs, Mexicans, or even moderate Muslims from entering our countries and turning them into something unrecognizable.

So what do we do? We must assert our own identity as Europeans. Instead of focusing on who we are not, we must focus on who we are and take pride in that. Instead of merely opposing immigration of the other, we need to assert our own identity. Identitarians and Nationalists can do this in many ways. We can organize music festivals that exhibit our nations’ traditional songs and dance. We can promote the glorious history of our nations by organizing lectures that counter leftists’ anti-national propaganda. We can arrange fitness and martial arts classes that promote strength and discipline. We can organize volunteer programs to help members specifically of our tribe as opposed to fresh-off-the-boat foreigners. Or, in countries where culinary imperialism has been particularly severe, we can arrange food festivals displaying the tastes of our land.

The possibilities are endless. As far as I am aware, most (if not all) of the things I mentioned are already done by various nationalist groups all over Europe and the world. These types of actions help turn our movement into a real community, a counter-community if you will. Don’t limit yourself: Protest against the invasion, but not without providing your folk with a strong positive alternative. Use your imagination, stand up for your people and help your fellow Europeans.