Sign In
0 Items (
Search
Comments (37)
We live only in a thin slice of evolving history. It is impossible in our short adult lives to know in what ‘age’ our lifetimes will be placed by future historians. Those living in the so-called Dark Ages in Europe in 600; those living in the Renaissance in 1450, or in the Enlightenment in 1750, didn’t know they were living in such defining times.
What I would like to do is to take a trip to the future and speculate on how the mullahs will describe our current age, say, from the beginning of this century to its end. The mullahs, you say? Well, yes, I’m simply going where time and tide appear to be taking us.
How about the Age of ‘…Renaissance Reversed?’ or ‘…Mohammed’s Mastery’, ‘…Sharia Supremacy’ or …Christendom Crushed? The Age of Papal Delinquency has the ring of verisimilitude to it. ‘Ottoman Mark II (bigger and better than ever before)’? These are all possibilities which might pass mullah muster.
Or maybe those in charge of such things will have a sense of humour. The Age of Useful Idiots might prompt a chuckle? The Age of Refugees are Welcome Here strikes a sense of delicious irony and might occasion a wry smile. The Age of the Great Hoax is a bit too cryptic and might be confused with global warming — which long since will have been consigned to the box of infidel tricks designed to damage Arabia.
My pick is none of the above. I suggest that the Age of the Religion of Peace has everything going for it. It carries authenticity for believers while leaving incorrigible infidels clueless and, in point of fact, headless. It marries Allah’s forgiveness with his righteous wrath. It can’t be bettered, and to think George W. Bush more or less invented the term after 9/11! The moral of that story is that killing thousands of people is no barrier to being anointed as peaceful by those desperately desperate not to offend.
The game is being lost and we don’t know it because we occupy only a thin slice of passing events. We can’t comprehend the big picture. But we are not akin to beings in a two-dimensional world for which up and down is unseeable. We can surely spot the portents of the evolving future. Here, very broadly, is what we know.
Muslim populations of Christian (Western) countries have grown sharply in recent decades and are continuing to grow disproportionately; both because of immigration and relatively high fertility rates. Christian populations of Muslim countries have declined sharply in recent decades and are continuing to decline sharply because of oppression. (There is a clue in there somewhere.) Islamism is growing in Turkey and in Muslim nations in Southeast Asia; and, in fact, wherever you look.
Muslim scripture is supremacist in its nature and demands that Muslims rid the world of other faiths and establish Dar al-Islam. Tens upon tens of thousands of resolute and devout preachers carry this message to 1.7 billion (and growing) Muslims; including to so-called ‘moderate’ ones. The spiritual counterweight is flimsy and getting flimsier.
With perhaps the possible exception of the United States, Christianity in the West is a pale imitation of its former state. Its feckless and faith-emaciated leaders proffer inter-faith dialogue to “ravenous wolves” (Matt. 7:15); they shouldn’t wonder at the grisly fate likely awaiting their successors. Assertive atheists show more conviction than do Christian leaders. And good luck if you expect anyone to die in a ditch for atheism.
It is one thing to spot the trend towards Islamic dominance; it is quite another to arrest it. In particular, tolerant societies in these politically correct times have no feasible way of countering intolerance when it is practised and preached by a minority religion ready to claim victimhood at the drop of a hat. I entertained the thought that it could, but it can’t be done. And it certainly can’t be done when Muslim populations become large enough to have political clout; and that isn’t too large.
Muslim immigration can’t be stopped. Financial support to Islamic institutions can’t be withdrawn. The superiority of Western cultural and social conventions can’t be actively promoted. A safe, supportive and encouraging environment can’t be offered to Muslims who wish to leave behind their intolerant and violence-provoking creed. We are stuck, I’m afraid, with just a hope and a prayer.
We have to do our best for the cultural and spiritual wellbeing of our descendants, as transitory as we are in the grand sweep of history. But it seems to me that the portents speak to a relentless trend. If so, our age might indeed be defined and written up by Muslim scholars and historians in circa 2150. If there is faint hope it probably resides in America alone, as Mark Steyn titled his best-seller.
Of course wars, civil wars and insurgencies can alter the course of history. But it is a sad reflection on human progress if extreme and widespread violence is the only obstacle to the advent of a new (and real) Dark Age. Coming up with a more benign solution is the greatest existential challenge of our troubled times. What that solution is, I have no idea. But we need leaders. There’s Trump perhaps. Who else?
Whilst this excellent article reflects the reality, there is almost nothing outside of Quadrant, The Australian and a few other select conservative outlets that trumpet the dangers of the Muslim ‘long game’. If we act now and decisively, there may just be a chance to preserve our way of life – but who will be our champion?
I despair for my children’s future, but particularly for my Daughter and grand daughters.
How can anyone who considers themselves a feminist not be heart and soul behind opposing further Muslim immigration?
Christalmighty Peter that’s a bit of a wrist-slasher innit? Yes there’s Trump and then there’s… Trump. That’s it for the West.
There are a few European politicians of which Geert Wilders is one of the more successful but as of the recent Dutch election still treading water politically. Of all the others Le Penn included only Hungary’s Victor Orban jumps out. Not that being the outspoken head of a small-medium sized member of the sclerotic EU will get you anywhere. And there’s precious few in the post Brexit UK and as far as May (or her likely successor the buffoonish Boris) are concerned – forget it – if her statements in the wake of a series of bloody Islamist attacks are anything to go by. She spews the same pathetic apologist pap that Turnbull does.
Which brings us to us.
Here amongst the elected there is Cory Bernardi and Hanson. That’s it. The agonisingly inarticulate Hanson? Nah. Cory gets it but unfortunately, for the time being anyway, not many get him – enough to project him into a leadership role as a potential PM anyway. I know, I know there’s still Tony… but really? Tony? He gets it too but that horse has long since bolted. So not looking good BUT in the overall context of the Islamically-propelled decline of the West I can still see us and the USA as the final bastions of resistance. Provided Trump survives that is.
Doc S, I ended it even more bleakly in my first draft but decided to lighten up.
> ” … decided to lighten up …
Why ?
As you see from the following comments: physical revolution, street demos, Russia/China, Pauline Hanson, or just circular arm-waving …
In short, bugger-all.
Would that be the same Tony as the one who signed us up to Roz Ward’s “Safe Schools”?
I forgot to add good ol’ George Christianson. Great guy who also gets it but won’t be party or PM leader material anytime soon. Dammit.
We also forget that the west are slow to anger but once stirred to action have proven ruthless in the pursuit of our goals.
Do you imagine those undertaking the attacks have the nuance to do anything else but stir the western beast?
It will arrive at a point where one murder, will be one too many, a Ferdinand moment if you will and it will be on, they will lose, they have to and my kids will have to face that challenge. We have let them down.
> “a Ferdinand moment if you will and it will be on …
I do keep asking the question, I’m aware, but exactly what is *it*, to be on please ?
I agree that our children and grandchildren have been betrayed, but I cannot for the life of me see what should have been done about it. Voting is pointless without any real choice and the two major parties simply squabbled over what numbers cap should be applied to immigration – never once was the populace asked through either electoral choice or plebiscite where immigration numbers should *not* come from.
The real lesson the self-described elites learnt from the Brexit vote was never to offer the population any real choice. The Aus version of this is for political operatives to agree tacitly on “bipartisan” policy and expect the MSM to support that by maintaining silence on the issues. Works too.
For me, the most fitting description is The Disenlightment.
I believe this has more than sufficient potential to turn into a physical war, one where the survival of our society will hang in the balance.
That is what “it” is.
The irony is staggering and yet another example of history repeating. Doubtless there were elders on the banks of Sydney Harbour in 1788 when the First Fleet set down who told their tribes people that they had nothing to fear!! “Let them come; they mean no harm”.
Something like that.
“Age of the Religion of Peace” is fitting. It’s got parallels with the war against Israel called “The Peace Process”. Remember Peres’ repeated line – “don’t let the enemies of peace derail the peace process”. That’s the enemies of peace that exploded in Israeli pizza joints and on kids school buses. “Don’t let the enemies of diversity derail diversity”. Boom.
We may need to call on help from the inheritors of Byzantium, the states of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Our only way out will come via China and Russia.
Defeatism is a train I will never board.
What if it’s the only train and you are the last one in town?
I don’t see the Hindus lying down peacefully either. But i think democracy is done. We re just witnessed for the coup de grace. Mind you one good thing that does spring to mind is that by the time there are sufficient Muslims to do us over,about 30 years from now. there will be no money left for them to live off. They have not realised that it is democracy that gave us a the Great Leap Forward in terms of living conditions that paid for all their handouts.
The irony is that they will have created a country the same as the ones they left behind. Third world holes all of them with a few exceptions rolling in petro dollars thanks to western economies and even those are looking at a bleak future of declining incomes due to America’s fracking revolution. At best the future looks like a world full of Egypts.
This article sure paints a gloomy scenario which is also frightfully realistic. What Peter didn’t mention is the underlying reason for this seemingly hopeless situation: the woeful ignorance and cowardice which permeates our society. The Muslims do what “comes naturally” to them or at least what their scriptures command them to do, which is to subdue the world under the Islamic rule of Sharia. We, on the other hand, do not merely sit back and let them do it, but assist them in their endeavour with our ever-so-noble tolerance and all the rights and privileges designed for the benefit of people of civilised and benign attitude towards all. Peter laments the lack of leadership to lead the resistance, which is a crucially valid point, but what about us, those who are doomed to be subdued? Where are the tens of thousands marching in every western city and town to protest against Islamisation? Do we ever dare speaking out openly against it, prepared to be charged with hate speech? When the odd brave soul does and run foul of political correctness, do we make our voices heard loud and clear in their defence? How many people donated to the fighting fund of the Q Society defending the writ brought on by exposing the scam of halal certification? All in all, we pretty well deserve whatever is to come.
Bill: I agree with what you say. These are strange times, a champion tennis player says she does not agree with same-sex marriage, and cyberspace erupts with calls to rename a tennis arena. Gays organise protest marches, which (no surprise) are featured on Their ABC. I note, however, that the gays don’t seem to get worked up about the adherents of the Religion of Peace (that most feminist of religions), who kill gays, make sex slaves of kaffir women, subjugate their own women etc.
I think that most of us (me included) are wary about going public with our concerns, if you do, like Andrew Bolt, you have to endure the hatred and intimidation of the Left.
I am not optimistic about our future.
I’m putting my faith in Pauline. She is often painted disparagingly for her naiive artlessness and halting speech but has achieved more in her lifetime from a very humble base than most of we “commenters” could forsee or her powerful media detractors allow. She constantly takes the fight up in the face of these snarling scalphunters and is currently winning.
Pauline taps directly into an unspoken unless whispered, seething tide of resentment bubbling away in the pubs, clubs and sporting grounds across this country, not merely on forums for chatterboxes and the more politically aware. Her recent polling ahead of the Greens is irrefutable evidence of her current political success.
The very fact that she isnt a skilled political dissembler is her greatest and most attractive asset. Her calls for limited Muslim immigration and defunding of the ABC are being shouted to a populace that are increasingly listening. Cory is far more eloquent and has equal passion but not the cut-through brand recognition for the majority
If Pauline can accomplish just these two of her stated goals she will have done all of us a very great, real and lasting service. I realise she may not have the longevity of other parties and her time is now. She is a boots’n’all fighter with a ferocious passion that shames many of her male political heavyweights in trumpeting the need for the screamingly obvious.
What needs to be remembered is that it’s a slippery slope from expelling/locking-up/attacking Muslims to doing the same to other minorities, in particular Jews again. Jews have been accused of all the things Muslims are being accused of now: disloyalty/subversion, a nation within a nation, claiming victimhood, supremacist religious ideology etc.
After the Holocaust, this is why hate-speech laws and punishment for hate speech have been introduced.
Never ever again as they say.
This is a thoroughly abhorrent comment. Shame on you!
It appears to have some semblance of truth about it Bill. The word Zealot didn’t come from the back of a cornflakes box. Although it strikes me as a long bow to draw to suggest that interning people is a short step away from firing up the oven.
We managed to do it here with people of German decent and in USA for the Japanese, it wasn’t fun for them but nobody tried to wipe them out, we leave that behaviour for those who have marked themselves as enemies.
If you’re going to virtue signal, at least state your reasons why.
The difference is that the Jews didn’t actually do what they were accused of, unlike muslims. They virtually ran and run Wall Street, so knock out subversion/disloyalty. They represented some of the most cultured people in the western world, so knock out ‘nation within a nation’; they stood on their own feet and built prosperous businesses/corporations, so knock out “victimhood’. And they kept their religious ideology to themselves, not expecting the rest of the world to adhere to it – so knock out “supremacist religious ideology’.
Oh dear how so like silly children.
To some degree you are right acarroll. It CAN become a slippery slope if we allow it to become one.
Banning the religion, burning the books, rounding up enemies. Within are quite pacifist appropriate ways of defending ourselves from ideologies abhorrent to our ways. And are probably the best ways to protect our society and we have a right to do that.
Arguing about what happened in the past with other threats is pointless if we don’t mention how we defeated the things they practised which were abhorrent to us and that they intended to impose on us. The second war wasn’t s war to defend Judaism it was a war to protect Westerism. Rescuing many Jews and destroying the perpretrators occurred as a conquence.
The here can be arguments about the Jews keeping their ideology to themselves currently, too Jody, with their influence on trying to equal Judaism and Christianity.
We have been bought to our weakness today by The Managerial class. It is they who lack conviction and equivocate about our heritage.
Trump is changing that. Make no mistake he is leading the war against the enemy which is among us in two forms, the Elites and the Muslims.
Wall Street is not run by the Jews Jody. It is run by the New York Federal Reserve( Which runs the US Federal Reserve and the US economy and by now probably large swathes of the Chinese economy. This in turn is owned by the major banks which are in turn are owned by the major corporations. These corporations and the banks are owned and controlled by the major New York ‘old money’ families (7 or 9 of them) including the likes of the Cabots, the Astors, the Du Ponts etc as well as newer money including the likes of the Rothchilds, the Rockerfellars, etc and lately the Buffets.
The Jewish money wouldn’t be a patch on these people. And they were all in league with Nazi Germany, when it suited them.
Oh and they are the biggest beneficiaries of ‘ Obama’s quantitive easing’, the Climate change scam, and globalisation.
You should read more Jody instead of acting like the media forgers in a previous article.
A surprisingly defeatist piece here, based on a very questionable assumption stated in that first (tongue in cheek ?) paragraph.
The conquering religion of Islam actually has a fundamental weakness, which its supporters admit when they seek bans on its critics. An admission of Islam’s vulnerability can be seen in its clerics’ stringencies against anything they regard as heresy and apostasy.
But there is a curious contradiction in this article. Peter O’Brien is openly basing himself on Christianity. But all religions are equally weak in that they build their edifices of dogma on the sand of untestable propositions and assumptions. Yet O’Brien also launches into a side attack on science: he does not like work done on the heat-trapping properties of carbon dioxide, the inferences made from that or the conclusions reached.
So he wants it both ways. Rationalism is OK, but only when it dovetails with his religious position and the antiscientific stance that flows from that. In that he is little different from the imam in the mosque coming to a street near O’Brien’s own.
Immigration is not uncontrollable. It is controlled, but not as far as ideas are concerned. Nor should it be.
(Japanese immigration to Australia was rather effectively controlled in 1939-45.)
O’Brien I ain’t, though I have nothing against him. But all religions aren’t equal in any respect. One is true, the others are false. QED.
Ah. One assumption too far. If apologies are required, you have them.
BTW, please enlighten me. How does one establish the truth of a religion?
No religion is built on shakier “sand of untestable propositions and assumptions” than CAGW.
Bill:
About 100 years ago, the chemist Svante Arrhenius and his students performed the basic experiments that established the heat-trapping properties of CO2. These are endlessly repeatable, and are consistent with the modern evidence of slowly thawing polar ice and a steadily warming world, as CO2 and other industrial emissions are poured into the air. Thus we are using our home planet for one huge continuing scientific experiment.
The most powerful evidence against this is the apparent fact that AGW is bad for some established businesses, and for coal businesses in particular.
Ian
This afternoon I did some Maths.
CO2?Share of atmosphere = 4%
Man made CO 2 share of all CO2 emissions = 3%
Australian share of all CO2 emissions = 1.8%
Now that makes Aust contribution to CO2
in atmosphere 1.8 % of 3% = o.054%
4% of 0.054% = 0.00216%
Now tell me how much effect reducing emissions 0.00216%
By 20% (0.000432%) to 0.001728% is going to have on temperature?
I’m sure Arrhenius, being a real scientist, would have come to the conclusion of sweet Fanny Adams.
But he didn’t look at percentages of the earth’s atmosphere did he?
So tell us all how much you’d like us taxpayers to spend in $’s fir Australia to achieve absolutely no result?
Don’t say anything else except the $ figure.
Realise I’ve asked a precise question and want a precise answer.
Anything you say over and above that figure is just mere bs and you’ll label yourself by your response. A $ figure will show us all we need to know.
Here’s your precise answer:
According to the ABS, Australian GDP last year was 1339.54 billion (USD). Beside that, the tax they want me to pay each year is stuff all: as good as $zero. Zilch. Nada. Nothing.
So I reckon that by rights, that’s what I should pay.
First chance I get, I’m going to hit the tax mob with that information. And I will back my case up with your brilliant mathematics.
Also, stand by for a gold medal award from the Taxpayers’ Association.
“Extreme and widespread violence” is a commonplace of history. It is a sad reflection on progressive delusions that encourages us to forget that.
There is one great lie that I think has led to the West’s imminent downfall – that Christianity has been a force for superstition and repression that only the brave Enlightenment brainiacs managed to free us from. I’m an atheist (who despises the Dawkins/Hitchens variety) who has developed a deep belief in and respect for the frankly transcendental achievements of the world’s greatest religion. Awe and humility is the proper response to anyone honestly contemplating what Christianity has done for mankind. While a revival of High Middle Age Faith might not be possible, surely to God there is enough spiritual manna in the West’s story so far, with its titanic struggles against brute Nature and resulting achievements in art and science, to inspire a useful level of passionate commitment?
Yes. Yes there is. And you’ll be a major part of it. Remember that strong thread in Christian history is a distrust of the powers that be, as it was religious leaders who arranged Jesus’ murder and secular leaders who carried it out, so we don’t want anything that smacks of authoritarianism, and least of all of theocracy. Now, as an *insider* of Western Civilization but an *outsider* of the church, your opinion on the right balance to strike on religious matters could be very helpful: how much influence do *you* want the church to have?
And we can win.
The thing is, we’ve been here before. The acceptance of the ‘inevitably’ of a Marxist victory, until the rise of Reagan, Thatcher and JPII; the belief that we could negotiate with the Axis; and so on back to weregild to the Vikings. We always leave it until it is ‘too late’…and then win anyway.
And *this* time, we have the advantage that the enemies hate each other. The different sects of Islam desire each other’s destruction with a fury far greater than that directed against us; just as the Nazi invasion of Russia changed the course of WWII, wars between these factions can change the course of WWIII.
Very perceptive reading of history Whitey especially of the 20th century.
And the same will be true iof the defeat of the factions in the Managerial class by Trump.
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the great article. We need to keep shouting – though it may feel like it’s into a deafening wind at times, for sure. I would however take you up on your assertion “And good luck if you expect anyone to die in a ditch for atheism”. I am what I think you’d call a Christian atheist – see Mr Murray or Mr Hitchens. I doubt atheists would have any trouble fighting to the death for liberty and freedom, and I doubt these days the populace would indeed fight for Christianity as such anyway – but I believe most would fight for the freedoms we all enjoy. In fact, it’s likely that most conscientious objectors in the past have been practicing ‘religious’ types. I am a passionate new comer when it comes to seeing the Left for what it ‘stands for’ these days and thoroughly enjoy most articles I read in publications like Quadrant and The Spectator, and texts such as Mr Murrays, Hitchens, Bawer and Ms Hirsi Ali’s amongst many others. I am a new member of the Liberal party – but unless the party metamorphizes into something remotely resembling a liberal conservative party I won’t be renewing. I’ve considered Cory’s direction but his constant chatter regarding Christianity doesn’t fill me with optimism. I think rather than assuming an atheist would not do the ‘hard yards’ (atheism doesn’t equal passivism) we’d be better off for mustering all the allies we can in respect to this current threat to democracy (as we know it) and the way of life we cherish. Keep up the good work. Paul