Europe Organizes, Rationalizes, and Industrializes Hate (Again)

Feb 15, 2016

Photo credit: Kacper Pempel/Reuters

By Maajid Nawaz

Recent days have witnessed the rise of a continent-wide anti-immigration mass movement.

Beginning in Germany, the “Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West” are known by their German acronym, Pegida.

Last week, Pegida held coordinated rallies in the UK, Ireland, France, The Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, southern Austria, and even reached as far afield as Australia. The protests have been multi-ethnic and multi-faith, but markedly anti-Islam.

Being Muslim is the new bogeyman. Xenophobia and bigotry are disguised as patriotism. Populism is on its ugly march once more across Europe. And people are petrified.

The Pegida protests were met by often violent anti-fascist counter-protesters. True to form, the one arrest at the UK protest was of an anti-fascist. These are in fact Regressive Left fellow-travellers of Islamism, and they have only inflamed community tensions further.

In the name of their own ideological experiment driven by identity politics, the anti-fascists not only ignore, but wholeheartedly defend the stranglehold Islamists have over Europe’s Muslim communities. Theocracy and illiberalism are disguised as diversity. Multiculturalism is institutionalized across Europe. And people are petrified.

Free speech has suffered the terribly. Populists will abuse it to incite hatred of Muslims. Islamists will simultaneously argue for it, and against it, depending on whether the topic is the right to advocate theocracy or ban cartoons. The Regressive Left’s answer is typically authoritarian, preferring to silence debate rather than think uncomfortable thoughts.


Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.

34 comments on “Europe Organizes, Rationalizes, and Industrializes Hate (Again)

  • The Populist Right, Islamists, and the Regressive Left share a bigotry: they insist that Muslims, Islam and Islamism are one and the same.

    A quite excellent piece. I hope all his material sees the light of day here. Namazie speaks with this kind of balance and even Ayaan Hirsi Ali, her righteous (and rightful) anger cooled a little, in her new book speaks increasingly in this balanced way.



    Report abuse

  • The fact is that it would not have been so easy for a right-wing movements to gain such a momentum if islam wasn’t so often incompatible with values, which are predominant in Europe. Take Imams attitude towards free speech, democracy, woman rights, science.



    Report abuse

  • We are headed for a human population crash from 7.5 Billion to 70 thousand or zero people some time between 2022 and 2040. We don’t have time for research or fooling around with renewables. Causes of a population crash:

    Global Warming [GW] will cause civilization to collapse within 13 years give or take 6 years because GW will cause the rain to move and the rain move will force agriculture to collapse. Famine has been the cause of many dozens of previous population crashes.
    Reference “Overshoot” by William Catton, 1980 and “Bottleneck: Humanity’s Impending Impasse” by William Catton, 2009. Catton says that we humans are about to experience a population crash. Population biologist William Catton says that the US is the most overcrowded country. Collapse from overpopulation could happen any time now.
    The Earth has 4.5 Billion too many people. An overshoot in population requires an equal undershoot. We overshot by 4.5 billion, and the consequence is an undershoot by 4.5 billion. The carrying capacity is 3 billion. 3 billion minus 4.5 billion is zero because there can’t be minus 1.5 billion people. This can happen even if there is enough food.

    Catton tells the story of an island with deer but no wolves. The deer population increased to ~3500. There was still plenty of food, but the population crashed to 35. The reason was overcrowding.
    Sharing kills everybody because you can’t survive on half of the required calories. 7 billion people is 4 billion too many no matter how you slice it. “We” didn’t make “Them” have too many children.

    Aquifers running dry No irrigation, no wheat. No wheat, no bread. The “Green Revolution” was a bad idea. It caused India to double her population rather than get out of poverty. Now Indian farmers have “discovered” that water is a limiting resource. Water is a limiting resource in the US as well. When, not if, the aquifer under the high plains runs dry, there will be no bread and no pasta in the US.
    We didn’t “cause” third world poverty. They were never “unpoor” in the first place. They were stone age, not poor. We invented science. They didn’t. Their failure to invent science is not our fault.
    Resource depletion
    4A oil
    4B minerals
    etcetera.

    War will kill a lot of people. Famine will kill 8 billion out of 7.5 billion. 7.5-8=-0.5, but with population, the crash ends at zero.

    Will there be survivors? Nobody knows. Nor does anybody have any idea who or where the survivors might be, if any.

    NATURE has lots of other ways to kill humans. Don’t provoke her.



    Report abuse

  • 4
    Stardusty Psyche says:

    Brother Maajid, you say

    “Being Muslim is the new bogeyman.”

    I think that trivializes the very real rape culture, calls for sharia, acts of deadly jihad and all the fascistic ambitions large numbers of Muslim immigrants are bringing with them.

    “Reasonable conversation around Islam, race, and immigration has become impossible. “

    You have published this article, so you seem to be speaking against yourself. I suspect your admirable passion on this subject has led you to a hasty use of an absolute. You probably mean to comment on the extreme difficulty of having a meaningful conversation when so many of the parties have barricaded themselves behind walls of dogma.

    “the anti-fascists not only ignore, but wholeheartedly defend the stranglehold Islamists have over Europe’s Muslim communities. Theocracy and illiberalism are disguised as diversity. Multiculturalism is institutionalized across Europe.”

    Indeed, this fairly well summarizes the typical liberal crying Islamophobia at anyone who tells the truth about fundamentalist Islam.

    However, you speak as though Islamists have some kind of grip over Muslims, somehow diverting them from truth or manipulating them toward a false Islam. Islamists are, unfortunately, correct in their fundamentalist interpretations of Islam. That is why Europe is heading toward cultural suicide by numbers and the only way to prevent this cultural demise is to halt mass immigration of Muslims, and very quickly.

    “the fact that Europe’s labor market—and Germany is a case in point—has a dire need for major influxes of manual labor”

    This is the seldom-discussed root of the problem, besides the inherently fascistic, misogynistic, extortionist, expansionist suicidal homicidal nature of the fundamentals of Islam.

    Merkle wants labor to appease the industrialists. Unfortunately the well of labor she is tapping is poisoned with a pernicious ideology, Islam. Let’s hope the great nations of Europe come to their senses before Muslim populations reach a tipping point toward theocratic fascism.



    Report abuse

  • If I were God (and there is no God) I would permanently abolish all religions. Anyone inclined to defend religion should watch this. Here is the marvelous Krauss “debating” someone whose name I seem to have forgotten. It’s not a “violent” debate, but it is enough to make any sensible person’s skin crawl. But Krauss does a superb job. We need more people like him. He is not afraid to speak his mind, to ridicule even.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuTucfWTSgw



    Report abuse

  • we need more people like him

    @ video – “…imagine a room full of Krauss’…

    I’ve been stating this for ever so long – is it too late for 2016?



    Report abuse

  • 7
    Stardusty Psyche says:

    bonnie – Krauss for President

    Sure, why not? I mean, having no experience in government didn’t stop Trump from running! At least we would have an outspoken person who will engage in forthright rational discussion, as opposed to a bellowing blowhard.

    Actually, though, I might have a bit of difficulty on how he might deal with zero funding allocations because Krauss doesn’t know the difference between nothing and something and might be easily confused as to thinking the zeroed out item actually has funding by poof.

    He has done decades of great work fighting the good fight against religious nonsense, but unfortunately, the creation by poof mentality seems to have rubbed off on him.

    I think Krauss should be a little more explicit in step two
    ![http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b42/Throbert/cartoons/then_a_miracle_occurs.jpg][1]



    Report abuse

  • Well done to Maajid Nawaz for putting his point of view so plainly and accessibly.

    But Nawaz goes seriously wrong in one way. He’s blaming the wrong people for the rise of the likes of Pegida.

    After reading his piece for the Daily Beast I’m reminded of that expression, “It’s not paranoia when they really are out to get you.” Muslims seem to be alienating themselves, maybe because they’ve been caught in that stranglehold that Nawaz mentions.

    Here in Britain at least, people are worried about the likes of Lutfur Rahman, a politician banned from re-election in the UK, who seemed to favour Muslims over others when he was in charge of a local authority in London.

    People have legitimate concerns when they read of the intolerance of homosexuality among British Muslims, zero per cent of whom think it morally acceptable, according to a Gallup poll of 2009.

    In another survey we learn that 40 per cent of Muslims want Sharia in the UK. That’s a big minority, and that’s a figure we [italics]should be worried by.

    Why should Muslims have separate Sharia courts in England, even if they only preside overfamily matters and even if it’s only when all parties involved agree to appear before them? Any sensible person wonders why they get these special privileges at all.

    Some Jewish people are understandably fearful about being seen in public wearing a kippah. Their wariness is noticeable in their body language and facial expressions when they find themselves near anyone who looks like they might be a follower of Islam. Aren’t their feelings justified?

    It isn’t just a question of creating bogeymen. We ought to be worried, perhaps about the number of Muslims who have left these shores to join ISIS, some as young as 15.

    I haven’t even mentioned France and Charlie Hebdo or the Bataclan massacre.

    Nawaz is right to warn us about doing Bin Laden’s work and alienating Muslims, every one of which is a potential atheist, in my mind anyway – but where he misses the point in this article is understanding where the blame lies when it comes to the Europe-wide rise of right-wing nuts. At least he presents his arguments in well written and engaging English.

    [Slightly edited by moderator to bring within Terms of Use – see link to Terms, Conditions and Privacy document at foot of any page.]



    Report abuse

  • Who the hell are the “anti fascists?” This article (which I only now just read in its entirety) isn’t so hot. It’s muddled and distorted, concrete, simplistic, condemnatory, unbalanced, vague, manipulative, ambiguous – with a kernel of truth deliberately thrown in.
    He’s looking for scapegoats and leveling everything in the process.



    Report abuse

  • Probably a little unfair Dan,

    You might try listening to his discussions with Sam Harris here see what you think then perhaps.

    He was a Islamic fundamentalist in his youth partially due to the violent racism he experienced in his youth, as a young adult he was an Islamic activist and was eventually arrested, tortured and imprisoned in Egypt for about 4 or 5 years. On getting out he gradually changed his views and set up a foundation to fight against Islamism. In doing so he has been accused of being an Uncle Tom and a Racist by left wing nutbags. Anyway worth a look, you still might think he hasn’t done a good job here but give him half a go, we need more like him.



    Report abuse

  • While the fascists are into the politics of the extreme right, the Anti-Fascists are the communist equivalent on the extreme left.

    Alan, you see anti fascism, those who resisted Mussolini, as the equivalent of fascists on the left? Were those who resisted Nazism their anti fascist equivalents? You use wikipedia as your source. My father wrote about anti fascism in Italy, was an expert.
    What are you talking about? And now Anti-Fascist means what? They are left wing extremists? That’s nuts.



    Report abuse

  • Phil

    Intention? I don’t know. What the hell doI care? I don’t like the term anti fascist being used inaccurately and as a derogatory term.
    That’s unhistorical and twisted.
    I didn’t like the article. He sounds like a fascist himself with his labels.



    Report abuse

  • Reckless Monkey

    Well calling all extreme leftwing nutbags “anti-fascists” is tantamount to calling all anti fascists throughout history extremists. That is ignorant and pernicious so fuck him and let him educate himself. I don’t give a shit about him. He’s probably a permanently damaged bigot.



    Report abuse

  • While the fascists are into the politics of the extreme right, the
    Anti-Fascists are the communist equivalent on the extreme left.

    Sorry, Alan, but you need to inform yourself.



    Report abuse

  • Dan #15
    Feb 17, 2016 at 4:55 pm

    While the fascists are into the politics of the extreme right, the Anti-Fascists are the communist equivalent on the extreme left.

    Alan, you are very seriously deranged.

    While some campaigns against fascism were commendable and justifiable, I was talking about specific far-left organisations, and gave you a link identifying these.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fascism#1970s_and_later

    In the 1970s, fascist and far-right parties such as the National Front (NF) and British Movement (BM) were making significant gains electorally, and were increasingly bold in their public appearances. This was challenged in 1977 with the Battle of Lewisham, when thousands of people disrupted an NF march in South London.[32][33] Soon after, the Anti-Nazi League (ANL) was launched by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP). The ANL had a large-scale propaganda campaign and squads that attacked NF meetings and paper sales. The success of the ANL’s campaigns contributed to the end of the NF’s period of growth.

    The SWP disbanded the ANL in 1981, but many squad members refused to stop their activities. They were expelled from the SWP in 1981, many going on to found Red Action. The SWP used the term squadism to dismiss these militant anti-fascists as thugs. In 1985, some members of Red Action and the anarcho-syndicalist Direct Action Movement launched Anti-Fascist Action (AFA).

    Extreme communist groups split off from legitimate anti-fascist campaigns in various countries, naming themselves “anti-fascists” . – As shown on the Wiki link I provided.



    Report abuse

  • How’d the word “deranged” get up there? I deleted that! Sorry.
    I don’t care what certain groups called themselves. Btw, Mussolini first coined the phrase “anti-fascist.”
    Now it’s being used indiscriminately and as a term of abuse? That’s very annoying.
    What specific far-left organizations? You need to specify. That’s what got me incensed. Militant left or Far-left and anti-fascist are not exchangeable terms, whether we’re talking about the past or the present. That is historically and educationally pernicious.
    Are radical feminists anti fascists? Of course not.
    You don’t go throwing words out like that.



    Report abuse

  • Alan4discussion #19 Feb 17, 2016 at 5:19 pm

    Again, I am terribly sorry for calling you deranged. You must have somehow seen that before the final posting. (It’s not up there now, as you can see.) You outclassed me; you showed no rancor, did not stoop to respond to that remark.

    I need to watch those moods.

    Talk to you soon.

    Dan



    Report abuse

  • @ everyone

    Explanation

    I overreacted to this article. I was taken aback by the use of the term “anti fascist” as a label to describe in negative terms some group in Cologne. Anti-fascism has a complex history, is varied, and is for the most part a very good thing. Now the term has been appropriated by certain groups and is being used against other groups. That is insidious. That aside, I don’t think the author is very enlightened. The term must be used with discrimination, and not as a term of abuse. That is historically pernicious.
    This new label, this new way of characterizing anti fascism, is pernicious and has already led to atrocious comments like this one:

    While the fascists are into the politics of the extreme right, the Anti-Fascists are the communist equivalent on the extreme left.



    Report abuse

  • The term must be used with discrimination, and not as a term of abuse.

    No. It is a rhetorical device for Nawaz. He knows that all of us at one point would clearly identify as anti-fascist. (Fascism is bad, right?) This is exactly the smack in the face to have you examine your acceptance of the term as a scott-free identifier.

    All ideologies can fail to adapt to the ever changing realities of the world. We’re all multiculturalists, right? In Canada I might be but in the UK, where it came to be a policy of multiple, parallel cultures, with the state abandonning community individuals to the undue influence and isolation of self elected community “leaders” was the very opposite of my multiculturalism of increasingly porous communities.

    All ideologies suffer mission creep.

    Those most likely to settle for the identifier of anti-fascist these days are those who may betray the three right wing tribal loyalties themselves, with maximal, exclusive grouping and minimum porosity. Nawaz’s argument is entirely that we are in danger of ideological simplifications when careful and clear sorting of the issues will better help. The problem is entirely that banner waving takes the place of careful argument. Our daily due dilligence is lacking.



    Report abuse

  • Dan #23
    Feb 18, 2016 at 3:32 am

    Anti-fascism has a complex history, is varied, and is for the most part a very good thing. Now the term has been appropriated by certain groups and is being used against other groups. That is insidious.

    I’m glad to see you have picked up on that point.

    This new label, this new way of characterizing anti fascism, is pernicious and has already led to atrocious comments like this one:

    While the fascists are into the politics of the extreme right, the Anti-Fascists are the communist equivalent on the extreme left.

    On a picky point, perhaps you initially over-looked my use of capitalisation when writing “Anti-Fascists”, indicating its use as a proper name of activist groups like the ones linked.
    There have of course, been many worthy anti-fascist campaigns by non-extreme political parties.



    Report abuse

  • At Dan #23

    @ Reckless Monkey # 11

    Sorry if I sounded a little vituperous.

    Quite all right, I often get heated in discussions myself on this forum (you wouldn’t have to look at too many of my old posts to see me saying things I regretted – or rather regretted the tone anyway).

    Is worth having a listen to the link I sent

    Regards



    Report abuse

  • @ Pinball #28

    I don’t know what got into me. This fellow isn’t that bad. I did have a strong reaction to what was to me a confusing use of the word anti-fascist. I may have misconstrued, but I had the impression that that was now being used as a new label, a catch-phrase, to describe all militant protesters on the left. And that just wouldn’t be fair.



    Report abuse

  • Unfortunately I saw it coming. He went on a spree this morning having a go at the mods as well as a few members. Seemed like a death wish really.



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.