I tried to write a post on Brussles


This is the third time I tried to write a few posts on Brussels, but the other two times I never got past the first few sentences. What is there left to say? The cheap symbolic vigils, Obama’s bored blathering, the Pope urging Europe to accept still more rapists migrants… it is like everyone is sinking into self parody.

It is self parody because rather than look at the problem – bloodthirsty maniacs blowing people up in the name of Islam – they are falling back – yet again – onto to their pre-prepared scripts. Instead of adopting a new vision of the problem they retreat into comfortable categories which absolve them of the responsibility of protecting their citizens.

Bill Maher recently wondered if recent experience of Islamic terrorism would get Europe to stop hating Israel so much, since they now have to deal with the same problem Israel does, crazy Arabs going on murder sprees. I doubt it very much. The ideological blindness is too strong.

Europe admitting that it has an Islam problem would be admitting that technocratic and unaccountable bureaucracies ruling by their idea of the universal dictates of reason is not a basis of government. It would be admitting that the EU dream is false, and that culture, religion, and ethnicity matter much more than international courts, central banks and the trappings of rationality.

The Eurocrats prefer carnage to admitting their project is a lie, so the carnage will continue.

But don’t worry, you always have Imagine.



  1. Europe doesn’t have an Islam problem, the world of humans has a religion problem. It’s disgraceful to shut out millions of homeless people based on religion, because of the actions of a very few who loosely share the label. And it’s counter productive, which seems to be an argument lost on you.

    1. Yes, “a religious problem”, those goddamned Amish blowing stuff up all the time. And that time those Quakers shot up Times Square, horrible, just horrible. Why if one more Seventh Day Adventist goes on a killing spree in the name of Ellen White, I don’t think I could even.
      It seems like the migrants are homeless because they chose to leave home, and not for any other reason. That is, most don’t seem to be true refugees but able bodied young men looking for work or at least booze and a good rape. Those that are true refugees deserve pity and help form those in a position to give it, but that does not give them the right to squat in your backyard or resettle in a nation that already has a large unassimilated minority.
      As for it being counterproductive, the migratory wave has worked out so wonderfully, hasn’t it. Sure there have been rapes and mass murders and people are waking up to find themselves strangers in their own hometowns, but just look at the brightside! You are compassionate! And you don’t even pay the consequences! Best of both worlds!

      1. Great observation re. the Amish. Well done.

      2. Yes, while you would happily lock everyone out and not even look at the consequences for the majority of the Syrian population. If they kill each other, so what? Children starving to death, so what? I can’t get my head round “protect me and my kind”, it’s so provincial, valuing one human life over another because of proximity, and fearfully shutting out those you believe are different. Islam is currently a problem, like Christianity has been for most of its history. I vote we solve this problem by treating its adherents with the respect that all people deserve, not by suggesting they are all killers and rapists because of the actions of a few in the refugee numbers.

        A serious question: what do you think Jesus would do?

      3. 1) Lemme get this straight: because people in one Arab country are dying, European governments MUST therefore allow tens of thousands of young Arab men to simply walk into their countries without knowing who they are, why they are coming, and knowing full well that they for the most part will bring retrograde Arab mentalities with them? Oh, and a handful are suicide bombers too. And all this when you already have a large unassilimated Muslim population that you don’t really want?
        And when they behave in an entirely predictable manner – rapes and grope mobs and theft and a few mass murders thrown in, this is what? Breaking a few eggs to make the multicultural omelette? Oh, and if you complain you are a racist. Lay back, girls of Cologne, and think of Europe!

        My serious question: Why is this the only possible solution?

        2) Well, I’ll tell you why I suspect is the only possible solution. Because European leaders know they face unsustainable demographic trends, and they know that a bigger work force will keep labor costs down, and they know it will not be their neighborhoods overrun or shot up, their synagogues burnt, or their daughters harassed. Omelettes, somebody else’s eggs, and self-congratulation. Best of all worlds.

        3) As for what Jesus would do, he was not a statesman and did not generally comment on politics. While, judging from the record, he played fast and loose with his own life, he did not sit back and send Mary Magdalene to get raped while congratulating himself on his own goodness. It is quite Christian to risk your own life and goods for the well-being of another, but no Christian is obligated to do that. It is quite diabolical to risk the well being of others while you suffer nothing.

  2. To be fair, the Amish don’t live in Syria 😛
    The problem with the Arab world isn’t just religious. Poverty, corruption, injustice- they’re about 500 years behind Western civilization. That has no bearing on the EU. We do, of course, have many problems. You can’t however blame Islamic terrorism on us… that’s just ridiculous.
    The EU project is, in a number of senses, pure brilliance. The execution of it hasn’t been ideal; but it’s no less ideal than the American project. In Europe “states” have retained some independence. In America they have much less. Which is worse?

    1. Of course there are problems in the Arab world that are not essentially religious, and of course the EU is not the cause of terror, crazy Arabs are.
      The point is that current EU mentality does not let them call a spade a spade.
      A comparison with the US attempt to make a nation out of British colonies is interesting: it resulted in civil war within a century. The North-South cultural differences were too great.

    2. To be honest instead of “fair,” the poverty, corruption, injustice, and now being 500 years behind Western civilization is the sole fault of one religion, Islam.

      And that is the global crux of it. The only religious problem of real and rational note is Islam. All other faiths manage to, by and large, behave in an, albeit often self-serving, civilized manner among themselves and between each other.

      1. Not of their own accord. Whenever and wherever possible religious groups have imposed themselves in the same way Islam still does. Just look at National Catholicism.

      2. Yes, on their accord. Even those of Nacionalcatolicismo were in general both civilized – taking into account that they were part of a coup and civil war of course – and non-repressive when it came to furthering their country’s power, influence, and wealth.

        Hell! The reason they survived in power until the 1970s was just that. They didn’t cause trouble and didn’t treat their people so badly that their were either constant uprisings or have the state disintegrate into various petty quasi-states ruled by individual warlords, e.g., Yemen and Pakistan.

        And yes! In modern history the Nacionalcatolicismo were about as close as Christendom or any other faith of consequence came to acting like those of Islam did. Hence, a good and rarely considered example, sir, but one still lacking in scope and order of magnitude.

    3. Lucretius · · Reply

      “Poverty, corruption, injustice- they’re about 500 years behind Western civilization.”

      Why should we judge them by Western culture’s standards? What about tolerance and multiculturalism?

      *giggle* It can’t be that multiculturalism is more unicultural than its proponents tell us…

      Christi pax,


      1. Multiculturalism is about finding a way for different cultures to coexist. The values of the enlightenment are what made that possible in the modern Western world. Meanwhile in Pakistan people are being killed on the basis of religion.

      2. Lucretius · ·

        What if I don’t accept the values of the Enlightment? Am I to be tolerated? Should we tolerate people who reject tolerance? I wonder how many in the Middle East would accept these Enlightment values, especially feminism? Should they be forced to? Should we reeducate them?

        Furthermore, are you so sure that the advancement of the West (whatever that is…) is due to the Enlightment? I wonder if you would contribute Fascism, all the bad stuff in the French Revolution, Communism, and the American Civil War to Enlightment values too?

        Christi pax,


      3. Lucretius · ·

        Excuse me, “Enlightenment.”

        Christi pax,


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: