oyvindstrommen.be traktningar

A wreath left by the British National Party at a war memorial has anger churchgoers and war veterans, reports icCroydon. On Sunday, British National Party members laid poppies after a Remembrance service at St Mary’s Church in Addington Village Road. The message on the wreath read: “To those who fell for our race and nation to keep Britain British we will never forget them. Croydon BNP.”

Michael Lyons, 73, chairman of the New Addington branch of the Royal British Legion and veteran of the Suez conflict in 1956, described the message as inflammatory and disgusting. Councillor Brenda Kirby (Labour) said: “Anybody who wants to commemorate those who died has the right, but you can’t pick out a section of them. Thinking our fathers and grandfathers died only to keep Britain white is the most insulting and obscene thing”.

“My dad did not get captured in Calais and force-marched to Poland to keep Britain white. He was fighting for his country and freedom for the world. It was a world war.”

Vincent Reynouard has been arrested in France, charged of denying the Holocaust. While it is doubtful that this is an effective way to fight holocaust denial, the arrest might shed some light on the activities of the group Vision historique objective (Vision of Objective History). The group, which principally aims to deny the Holocaust, is the French-speaking branch of the Flemish group Vrij Historisch Onderzoek. A leader of the Flemish VHO, Siegfried Verbeke, was also arrested on the 14 November in Kortrijk (Courtrai). He was released one day later.

Verbeke was a founding member of Vlaams Blok (now: Vlaams Belang). Together with Roeland Raes, a former senator for the party, he edited the magazine Haro, a magazine “for the concervative revolution”, notorious for its denial of Holocaust, which it described as “fiction and manipulation of the historical realities” kept in place by “the censorship of the democrats”.

Onkel Henning læser avis (Uncle Henning reads the newspaper) is one of the more interesting Danish blogs around. In a recent post Henning Holm comments on an article in Information. Henning makes some points that deserve a much wider audience than the Danish or Scandinavia blog readers, and I warned him that I would steal some of his points for use on this English-language blog.

The article in Information was a critical response from Frederik Stjernfeldt on Swedish journalist Stefan Jonsson’s analysis of the Danish debate on immigration. Jonsson’s main point was that the Danes have become obsessed with Islam. Stjernfeldt writes:

“The false understanding of constant cultural essences has become one of the premisses of the debate”. This is one of the critical comments on the Danish debate from Stefan Jonsson. Here, I think he is completely correct. Of course, it concerns Islam, and the idea of Islam as a constant cultural essence it thriving both on the right-wing – where Islam is routinely seen as a culture with no hope for improvement, quickly associated with terrorism – and on the left-wing – where Islam is, just as routinely, seen as made up by poor, innocent victims alone, people whose picturesque culture must be protected.

Many on the left would not like to admit it, but this description is more than a caricature. Some left-wingers are drawn from their (often justified) criticism against Western powers (i.e. the United States) to support of anyone who fights against these same powers. Those who struggle against the perceived “imperialist hegemony” are then automatically understood as having noble intentions, simply because they are the enemy of the enemy. In this way, the West is made into an essence and understood as necessarily ‘evil’.

When right-wingers ask ‘do you want Saddam back, then?’ they are mostly discussing against strawmen built by themselves. But amongst that army of strawmen, some real people on the left have also found refugee. Henning Holm mentions Carsten Kofoed. I could think of others, too.

Another aspect, which I see as more important, is the fact that many of Europe’s progressive left-wing parties have shun away from discussing problems surrounding immigration and immigrant communities. Some feminist groups are quick to protest against the opening of a new sex store, connecting sex stores with the porn industry, but are slow to fight against brutal suppression of immigrant women. Some left-wingers, and people on the liberal right, are quick to criticise Christian homophobia, but slow to criticise Muslim homophobia. Seen in that light, the growth of various populist right and even neo-fascist parties is not difficult to explain. They are seen as the only one standing up for Western values; when in fact, they oppose central tenets of a Western democracy.

But then, how should the left wing and the liberal right address these problems? I have stolen Henning Holm’s list and slightly adopted it:

1. Fight against stupid anti-Americanism based on monolithic thinking, just as you would fight against stupid Islamophobia based on the same.

2. Do not set lower standards for immigrants or minorities than for anyone else. This is racism reverted. If someone is spouting Jew-hatred or homophobia, they should be confronted, regardless of their ethnic, cultural or religious background. Also, do not excuse someone’s despicable actions or attitudes because they are in agreement with you on other areas.

3. Do not let the socalled far right define the debate. Opposition to stricter rules on family reunions is not the same as support of forced marriages. Confronting the views of the far right is good, but critique coupled with alternative suggestions to solve actual problems is better.

4. The “big debate” on Islam should be modularised. It is pointless to discuss the Taliban in the same context as youth crime in European ghettos, and stupid to discuss female genital mutilation in the same setting as the Iraq war. The main challenges of integration have little to do with 1960s Egyptian radicalism and even less to do with Ottoman policy in Southern Bulgaria.

5. The debate should be deislamified. The problem with forced marriages is not that they take place in Islamic cultures, but that people are married against their will. The problem with female genital mutilation is not that the tradition is practiced in some Muslim countries, but that the tradition is practiced at all. The problem with al Qa’ida is not that they pray to Allah, but that they are involved in terrorism. These problems should be seen in the most relevant context(s), which often does not include the religious one.

A reader has responded to my post Fisking Mark Steyn and since the response both has little to do with Mark Steyn and is very interesting as a point for further discussion, I have decided to reply in a separate post. I will respond to his post part by part, but let me begin with one of his main points, namely that parties promoting xenophobia are on the rise across Europe because the left has somehow failed.

I am not sure I agree with Iblis, as my reader calls himself, in how the left has failed. I am, however, in full agreement with him in the notion that the left – and for that matter the liberal right – has failed. European integration policies are not extremely successful, and this is the case for a number of reasons. Also, feminist groups, left-wing and right-wing alike have failed to raise to raise the role of women in immigrant communities. I have written quite extensively on this at earlier occassions, in between what Iblis describes as my “whining on the internet”. One example is my article, “Our own madness” where the reluctance of the left to address some central issues is one of my central points.

The (still short) FAQ-section of this page also should serve to give a better understanding of my point-of-view.

Then for my response to Iblis, who writes:

You seem dedicated to “expose the renaissance of hatred”. Exposing racism is a noble cause indeed, if there really is any racism to be exposed. If rising fascism in Europe is a problem, the first step in contering the problem should be to find the causes of the problem, not whine on the internet as you do.

One might say the same thing about another problem, namely the perceived rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Europe. If this is indeed a problem, the first step in countering the problem should be to find the causes of the problem, not whine on the Internet as quite a number of people, including Iblis himself with his blog “Right Wing Revolution”, does. Sadly, the far right seems totally incapable of understanding the root causes of for instance the rebelling youth of mostly immigrant background in France. It does not with a lack of understanding. People who do point out central root causes, and the obvious similarities to for instance the Watts riots, are consistently being ridiculed.

In other words: Iblis should apply the same standards towards what many refer to as Islamic fascism (and perhaps rightly so) as he wants me to apply towards what I refer to as fascists. To quote Starship Troopers: “If you want to kill the bug, you have to understand the bug”.

Personally, I believe the best understanding of the problems France do face and will face comes from people like Fadela Amara who speaks out against both what she refers to as “green fascism”, and against the blatant racism of the far right. If people like Iblis were really concerned about for instance Islamic radicalism or criminal immigrant youth; they would ally with Amara. Of course, that’s difficult for them; she is of immigrant background and she is a Muslim. As Iblis clearly demonstrates in the rest of his comment, that makes her part of the problem, not part of the solution.

That kind of thinking is not fascist in itself. But when it comes from political parties with provable historical ties to fascist politicians, movements and parties, such as the British National Party, the French Front National or the Flemish Vlaams Belang, you should consider the possibility.

What is the cause of rising fascism in Europe in 2006 (I dont necessary agree with you that critics of muslim immigration can b[l]e labeled fascist, but I will use the word “fascist” for now, because that is your rhetoric)?

I do not agree with “me” that critics of Muslim immigration can be labeled fascist either. I am not saying that all Islam critics or all who oppose or are critical to immigration are fascists. I have never said so. It would be wrong. What I am saying is that there are genuine fascists who are playing political roles on the socalled far right and that there are people who have genuinely fascist ideas. I am also saying that a certain tendency towards fascism is penetrating well into a number of European far right parties, but I have described this as “a touch of madness“, not as “utter madness through-and-through”.

Why is right-wing political parties getting support?

I’m not sure a party like Vlaams Belang is right-wing at all, and I think a number of market liberalists I know have every right to be offended when the party is referred to as far right. But why does for instance Front National get support? There are a number of factors that play a role, including the left’s reluctance to raise some central issues concerning immigration and integration, but also including for instance media coverage and the creation of myths done by the far right itself. Who would have thought, after hearing the propaganda of the far right, that the crime rate in Belgium is considerably lower in 2005 than it was in 2000? Who would have though, listening to bloggers like Iblis, that the murder rate in Norway is lower now than it was in the 1970s? In Oslo, described by Iblis as a “multicultural hellhole”, there had been 10 – ten – murders this year when the last statistics were reported in early October. I would not be surprised if a casual reader of newspapers would guess a number ten or even twenty times higher.

Remember, no one asked the millions of european workingclass people if they really wanted third world immigration in the first place. Now they strike back. How can you ask of them to adapt to the “new Europe” if they dont want it? Working against social phenomenons you dont like is basic politics, and it makes very much sense.

Most Western European countries, with the exception of Spain and Portugal, which was ruled by fascist regimes well after WWII, are and have been democratic countries where people can vote. That, my friend, is basic politics, and it means that the European worker class people you seemingly worry about, have had every chance at voting out the parties supporting immigration. Truly, a number of neo-fascist party try to sell the idea that Europeans have never had a say, blaming the “marxists” (including liberal socialists), or “the left-wing” (including right-wing liberals) or even, in the case of several European far right politicians, the Jews (!) for it. In other words, your pretense is false.

Still, you are of course perfectly entitled to work against “social phenomenons” you do not like. Just do not expect me to agree with you.

To label it “fascism” without trying to understand is just counterproductive, because you push the people even more away from the political establishment.

Agreed. See above.

The demographic factor you seem to downplay also plays a major concern in this. Today almost 40% of Oslos firstgraders are non-european. In twenty years they will make out 40% of Oslos 26 years old. There is not many non-violent ways to change that fact.

I am not at all downplaying the demographic factor (although I am not upscaling it either, as you are when you cleverly add “almost” to a higher number than the actual, and then leave the “almost” out in the following sentence). I am pointing out that the most central demographic development in the world at this time in history is not immigration to Europe, it is the demographic revolution going on in large parts of the socalled developing world, including most Muslim countries. Immigration to Europe is a side-effect.

Mark Steyn’s description is heavily flawed, as he bases his understanding on the Gaza Strip and Yemen, rather than basing it on the majority of Muslim countries. The process going on is, in many ways, very similar to the demographic revolution Europe went through in the 1800s. In the 1860s as many as ten to fifteen per cent left Norway. They were welcomed in the United States, although some of them were also met with xenophobia and prejudices.

One member of the Wisconsin legislative council said, in a time were black people were not exactly treated fairly, that “the negroes here were more intelligent, more civilized, better acquainted with our institutions…” than the Norwegians, whom he “[had seen] living without what any other people would have considered the most absolute necessaries of life, burrowed so to say in holes in the ground, in huts dug in the banks of the earth”. This time around, the new colossus is lifting her lamp besides the Golden Door of Europe – and, of course, Europe will change. The numbers you refer in your article seem accurate enough (of course, good numbers does not make for good conclusions, but that’s another story). Your comment above is more worrying:

There is not many non-violent ways to change that fact.

Can you explain to me what that actually means? Which non-violent ways are there, and what do you suggest to do if these non-violent means do not work?

You continue:

From my perspective the immigration policy of the socialdemocratic parties in Norway are the very cause of the negative social development in Oslo and Norway. [...] No, I rather cast my vote for those who promise to end insecurity and stop muslim immigration. They may not succed in delivering those promises, but at least they try. The lefts only solution is to make things even worse.

There is one big problem with that logic. The problem is not your notion that the immigration policy of the social-democratic parties is unsuccessful, resulting in negative social developments (which I hope is not simply a codeword for “bloody foreigners”, although I have my suspicions). The problem is your notion that it helps voting for “those who promise to end insecurity and stop Muslim immigration”. In Norway, you will have to look long and hard for any political party giving those promises, of course, but in a number of European countries the people who make those promises come from the same political movement as the guy who wrote this some decades ago:

But, on the other hand, nothing gives better proof of the vital forces of a people [...] than that one day, through a happy decree of Destiny, a man arises who is capable of liberating his people from some great oppression, or of wiping out some bitter distress, or of calming the national soul which had been tormented through its sense of insecurity, and thus fulfilling what had long been the universal yearning of the people.

I think I will leave it up to my readers to guess who that man was. Your final claim, Iblis, is the following:

The political climate in Norway and Europe is really depressive, but it is one thing that is positive. The positive thing is that my view (which you may label “fascist”) is much more common among the young people. My generation seem alot more concerned with muslims and immigration than those who rule today.

In fact, the younger generation is – in general – more positive towards immigration and immigrants than older people. I guess we are not all living in the same bubble. And… I am quite happy I am not sharing a bubble with you.

I have a feeling that Mark Steyn – “the one-man global content provider” – is a smart man. Of course, I’m not a mind reader, but it seems to me that Steyn sure knows what people want, and that he takes care to give it to them. Steyn is loyal to his fans, always quick to say “Europe is doomed!”, “Multiculturalism is evil!” and “The Liberal Party is bad!” in the form on long and seemingly thoughtful articles.

I admire Steyn. He is an excellent propagandist. But I can’t say I admire his fans. I mean: Why is it that these independent thinkers, the politically uncorrect, never actually care to check out Steyn’s stories? Just a tiny little bit? My theory is that they are willing to accept anything as long as it contains the idea of Europe becoming Eurabia. Anything.

But let’s get started with fisking Steyn, shall we? We will take a closer look at one of his recent prophetic articles – “The future belongs to Islam”:

#1 Stupid demography

This is about the seven-eighths below the surface — the larger forces at play in the developed world that have left Europe too enfeebled to resist its remorseless transformation into Eurabia and that call into question the future of much of the rest of the world.

The larger forces. Sounds scary, doesn’ it? It’s the demography, stupid, as Steyn would say. What he is really talking about is sperm. The larger forces threathening Europe, and the rest of the world, is sperm. It’s not just any kind of sperm, of course, it’s Muslim sperm. Here’s the kind of image you should have of Muslim sperm when you read Steyn:

Little dudes with tails. And long beards. And suicide belts. And the collected writings of Sayyid Qutb. Looking for an egg to… well, maybe not blow up, but… you get the idea.

As many of the people telling us that Europe is doomed, Steyn is a hobby demographer. And, as other hobby demographers he has discovered that Europeans have few children, and that Muslims have many. In this specific piece, he gives two – 2 – examples from the Muslim world. The Gaza Strip. And Yemen.

Anyone wonder why he does not take for instance Tunisia and Turkey? Or for that matter the most important current member of the Axis of Evil(TM), Iran?

I’ll tell you why. It’s because they make horrible examples. Turkish women have 1.92 children in average, Tunisian women 1.74. Iranian women? 1.8 children. If you put that together with Steyn’s comment on American women having 2.1 children in average, the whole point of Steyn’s article suddenly seems… well, lacking? Steyn is concerned about the demographic development in Europe, but he has failed to realise one thing. The biggest demographic revolution at this moment of history has little to do with Europe. It is happening in the socalled developing countries. In 1970, a typical woman in one of these countries bore six children. Today, the rate has tumbled to 2.7. This is true in Brazil. It is true in India. It is also true in most Muslim countries (this makes Ahmadinejad sweat – later note: If something makes Ahmadinejad sweat, it´s most likely good news. Except for global warming, that is. Global warming is bad news).

Notable exceptions? Well, there’s the Gaza Strip. And Yemen. And a couple of other countries in the Arabic peninsula.

That being said: Yes, Europe is changing. In some ways, it is becoming the new America. You remember the poem, don’t you?

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

This is what Europe has to live up to, and I’m not sure it is up to the challenge. Even if it is, it is hardly going to be painfree. Still, closing the borders is not really an alternative, as one look at North Korea should tell you. So, here’s the deal: An increasing number of Europeans will be Muslim. Deal with it.

#2 Muslim + Muslim + Muslim = Eurabia?

Mark Steyn has figured out that Muslims will take over the world soon. Or at least, that is what I think he is saying. Maybe what he is really saying is that we should not let Muslims take over the world. If that’s what he is trying to say, it is not really clear what he wants us to do, though, a striking feature of many of the “Doomed!”-lot.

Anyway, Muslims make up a handy group. You can put everyone in this sack. Take one colonel Gadaffi, with his weird ideological mixture of God-knows-what, and shake him together with one mulla Krekar, the infamous Kurdish islamist living in Norway. Add some “youths” as toppings, even though they probably know more about hash than about hajj.

Steyn’s example – quelle surprise, as he says – is the youths who “stumped” and “kicked” the Belgian train conductor Guido Demoor “to death”:

Three “youths” were arrested, and proved to be — quelle surprise! — of Moroccan origin. The ringleader escaped and, despite police assurances of complete confidentiality, of those 40 passengers only four came forward to speak to investigators.

I would have understood Steyn’s description if it was written months ago. But it isn’t, which makes me wonder… did Steyn even bother to look into the case after reading about it for the first time? Or did he just add it to the notebook called “Good examples for propaganda” and forget about it until retrieving the notebook from under a mountain of books on how alone America is?

No verdict has been passed and many things are not clear about what happened from press reports, but there is a number of things Steyn fail to mention.

First of all, six youths were involved, and all six of them were eventually arrested, though the term “ringleader” does not seem to fit on any of them. Several of these youths have later been released, under various conditions.

Secondly, and more importantly, Belgian media have later reported the incident differently than the initial description Steyn repeats. Here is my translation from an article in De Standaard, a leading Flemish newspaper, from the 29th of September:

[Guido Demoor] asked the youths to act calmer. When they did not listen, he [allegedly] grabbed one of them by the neck, whereupon two of the six suspects hit and kicked the victim. The four others looked upon. The youths then ran away. Demoor did not survice the incident. From the autopsy it was concluded that the victim died of a stroke, caused by agitation in combination with high blood pressure. An experts’ report that was recently added to the case it is said that a connection between the facts [of the incident] and the death can not be ruled out”.

In short, the story is not quite as the story told by Steyn. According to the above variant, mr. Demoor was not simply the victim of aggression, and he was in no way willingly beaten to death. What happened did not last long, giving few people chance to react, and according to some news reports Demoor was still alive and seemingly well when the youths left the bus. Why does Steyn leave all this out? Because it does not fit as well into the myth of the criminal immigrant kid? And allow me to digress, because sometimes I get a feeling that many think, or want to think, that 50% of Europe’s youth of Muslim origin is criminal. That’s all the boys, I assume, since the girls are too busy being suppressed. I sometimes get the feeling that the Europe described at some websites is a Europe where large crowds of Muslim kids shoot bazookas at elderly white ladies. And that it is getting worse. Every year.

I live in a city the local xenophobic party describes as on the way of becoming an Islamic state, and I can’t really relate to their fairytale. Sure, I have experienced noisy sixteen year olds (with an unhealthy interest in literature) on the bus. They were of Moroccan origin, but acted pretty much the same way as I’ve seen noisy sixteen year old Norwegians do in Norway. In fact, the city I live in, while high on Flemish crime statistics, has a relatively small crime problem, and crime is on the decrease. According to statistics the Belgian Federal Police, there are fewer rapes, fewer car thefts, fewer breaking-and-enterings and generally less crime in Belgium now than in 2002.

Don’t expect Steyn to write about that, though. It’s not what people want to hear. People want to hear that Europe is doomed.

The death of a Flemish magazine read only in limited circles is hardly the kind of material that will hit the frontpages of large newspapers around Europe. And in itself, it is also not such an interesting story. A radical nationalist magazine will not be published anymore, after its secretary passed away 78 years old.

There are some things that make the death of Dietsland-Europa worth noticing, though, because the magazine is one of the most obvious links between old-time fascism and the neo-fascism which is now spreading in several European countries. Described as the think-tank of radical Flemish nationalism, by Filip Dewinter of Vlaams Belang no less, the magazine is the not-so-missing-link.

Originally founded by the Jong Nederlandse Gemeenschap, a radical group fighting for a Greater Netherlands, it was edited by Karel Dillen until 1975. By then, it had become the publication of Were Di, a radical nationalist, anti-capitalist, anti-communist and anti-Belgian group. Upon leaving the group, Dillen was to go on to cofound Protea, a Flemish-South African pro-apartheid friendship association. That same year, 1977, he also founded Vlaams Nationale Partij (The Flemish National Party). This party eventually was to grow into Vlaams Blok and later Vlaams Belang.

That very same mixture of nationalism and support of the apartheid regime was also to be found in the columns of Dietsland-Europa. But it does not stop there, you will also find holocaust revisionism, as well as demands for amnesty and attempts at restoring the honour of Flemish Nazi collaborators (some of which, it should be noted, were hardly Nazis).

The magazine has also served as a forum for the ideas of various non-Flemish thinkers: Jean Mabire, Alain de Benoist, Maurice Bardèche, Julius Evola, Robert Faurisson…

Two examples
In 2002, Oswald Kielemoes, who represented Vlaams Blok in the city council of Gent from 1994 to 2002, wrote an article called “The Jews dominate British media”. He wrote:

The Jews have almost complete control over the media in Great Britain [...] trough these media they uniformly, intentionally, systematically, continuously and intensely promote the recreation and the permanent destruction of Great Britain into a multiracial and multicultural state, forcing the needs of Israel upon the Brits, against the will and the interest of the native British. [...] Next to the massive coloured immigration, they also encourage interracial marriages and race mingling, with the extinction of a native race as result. This is a pure genocide”

Kielemoes was thrown out of the VB. Dietsland-Europa also distanced itself from his text, but kept him as a part of their editorial team. He had, after all, been one of their most eager writers for ten years.

An earlier, but equally chocking, example from the columns of Dietsland-Europa is a piece written by Roeland Raes in 1979:

We do not see our most important task in remembering history, but sometimes you have to look back. Especially since cunning businessmen stir up classical themes with the Holocaust fraud: Germany’s sole guilt for the war, the 6.000.000 lost Jews, the atrocities of the Nazis etc. We will not deny that the Germans did not commit serious crimes, that many innocent people were killed, that many died in the concentration camps, but… everything needs to taken back to its original proportions

Raes goes on to praise the book “The hoax of the twentieth century”, written by Arthur Bulz. The book is a holocaust revitionist classic. Raes was a senator for Vlaams Blok from 1995 to 2002. According to an article in the Flemish weekly from 23. May 2006, he remains active in the party. He also remains a holocaust revisionist.

The pictures are taken from blokwatch.be.

When reading and writing on the neo-fascist and xenophobic parties of Europe it is difficult to avoid the term “extreme right”. I have used it before. I will probably use it again. But to be frank, it is quite a meaningless term.

There are parties on the right wing that are truly extreme in their right wing policies, support of an unrestrained market economy, support of privatisation, hardline opposition to the welfare state models of Western social democracies and social liberal countries. However, these people rarely promote xenophobia, often support very liberal immigration policies and believe in the equal value of all people, regardless of skin colour, creed, sexuality or ethnic background. In short, they are what neo-Nazis would describe as race traitors or what the modern-day fascists of suit and ties would instead call “politically correct” and “representative for the traditional parties”.

Some European liberal-concervative parties are of course willing to cooperate with anyone if it puts them in power, but the same is true for left-leaning parties, as seen in for instance Slovakia. But the problem with the term “extreme right” goes further. It gives the left immunity. And the left is absolutely not immune to xenophobic hatred, anti-Semitism or Islamphobia. Neither are its voters. All over Europe, the neo-fascists are winning in what used to be red bastions; Copenhagen, Vienna, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Marseille, Lille, Antwerp, Charleroi.

They are collecting votes from across the political spectre.

Volen Siderov, the extreme nationalist candidate in the Bulgarian presidential elections, lost. That might sound like good news. It is and it isn’t. When twenty per cent of those who vote choose to cast their vote for an anti-Semite, for someone who spreads hatred towards Turks and Roma, that is very worrying. Equally worrying is the election results in Flanders. Six years ago, the fact that 32,95% of the voters in Antwerp chose for the nationalist Vlaams Blok brought large parts of the political establishment into panic. In the elections a few weeks ago, the party grew another half per cent, and even got between 41% and 43.5% per cent of the votes in parts of the city. Yet, this time the reaction in media and other parties was almost euphoric.

Why? Because the social democrats won more votes, and once again became the largest party in town. In all its tragedy, it is almost comical. But it isn’t funny, not really, not when you consider what it actually means. Because what it means is that close to one out of two voters of autochtoon (non-immigrant) background in Antwerp voted for a party that has provable historical ties to fascism, a party which houses holocaust revisionists and racists.

I do not think all the voters of Vlaams Belang or similar parties are fascists. I do not think all their members are fascists, either. Some are genuine conservatives, some are misguided liberals. Some are socialists who have given up faith in the Labour party. And yet, it is of importance to point out that these voters are identifying with parties that hold neo-fascist opinions, and that they are voting for people who have marched with militant anti-parliamentarian nationalists. Still, it is necessary to point out the links to radical white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups.

The ties are there for anyone who is willing to look, and this illustrates two things: the very real danger of the neo-fascists, and the fact that the neo-fascists are right about one thing, namely that the so-called “traditional parties” have failed.

Rinke van den Brink, a journalist and author who has been following the European extreme right (sic) scene for years has written a brick of a book called “In de greep van de angst” (In the hold of fear). The book discusses how social-democratic parties should challenge parties like Vlaams Belang, and contains dozens of interviews. Regrettably, the book is not available in English, because the discussion deserves a wider audience. One of the possible conclusions from reading the book is that Vlaams Belang and similar parties are winning because they are asking the right questions. Where no one but the neo-fascists question failed integration, the neo-fascists will win. Where no one but the neo-fascists confront ghettofication, crime, etc., the neo-fascists will win.

In some countries, other parties have woke up to the realisation that the fascists ask a few of the right questions. As a result, they have started to copy the answers, regardless of how wrong these are. They have started implementing the policies of the xenophobes for them, letting them set the order of the day. In this way the whole mainstream discourse on Islam, for instance, has been poisoned by elements that view Islam as a monolithic construction of Evil.

When Christians start spouting distortions of history that would make Christianity look like a rabid death cult if the same kind of methodology was used, you have reason to be worried. When social democrats throw solidarity over board and liberals sacrifice liberalism, both of them to compete with the xenophobic parties for parliamentiary seats, you should realise that something is wrong. When the media, in spite of the frequent complaints that they are Marxist-dominated propaganda organs of “the cult of multiculturalism”, obsesses with a minority group making up a few per cent of the population to such a degree that you can hardly open a newspaper without some example of a nutty cleric in another country jumping at you… then you should take a deep, deep breath… and think.

Will you reach the conclusion I have? I do not know. But my conclusion is that this problem goes much deeper than to the question of left or right.

Lately I have been thinking about how to become a popular blogger. You know. How can I get tens of thousands of people to visit my website every day, how can I get TIME magazine to quote me, how can I sell my upcoming books “How Blogging will Change Everything” and “Why Bush is a Sissy Liberal”. In this context, I realize that the below text, in all its political correctness is a bit of a tactical bummer. But well, I was quite happy about it, and I do think I make a couple of points, and fools rush in, they say, so I thought I’d just publish it.

Still, I have do something to pull visitors. Hello, Google. Hi, Technorati. Catch this: “Islam is evil”, “Bad Islam”, “Why Robert Spencer is the wisest man on Earth”, “Jihadwatch tells the truth”, “Political correctness sends Europe to hell!”, “New Research: Mythical Norwegian Trolls were in fact Muslims”. That should do the trick – now for my article.

-

Ain’t no Vietcong ever called me a nigger, Muhammad Ali.

I am a European, but – you might call me a sucker for punishment – I sometimes read American books. Lately I have read a whole bunch of books and articles and blog posts all telling me pretty much the same thing. Europe is doomed!

While I try to think off where I have heard this talk before, I have to point out that these books are sometimes almost amusing in the way they twist the tales. In the middle of some examples illustrating the doubtlessly more mainstream (and endlessly more worrying) anti-gay sentiments found amongst Muslims, Bruce Bawer mentions another example he has dug up. And this time he has found a genuine scary bearded fellow, who declared a fatwa against Terence McNally, a death sentence no less (1). The fellow is called Omar Bakri Muhammed, and he was a representative of the Shariah Court of Britain. Wow! That sounds impressive! The Shariah Court of Britain.

I now understand why Booklist said Bawer’s book was full of “almost unbelievable revelations for Americans”. I mean it: The Shariah Court of Britain. Important people!

But here’s one revelation Bawer’s book, unbelievably, did not contain. McNally wasn’t only threathened by the Shariah Court of Britain, he was also threathened by another organisation which I will have to say sounds even more important: the National Security Movement of America. I mean it! The security movement! And while Omar Bakri Muhammed actually warned local Muslims against chopping the head of McNally – he wanted an Islamic state to do that if McNally happened to drop by one – the security movement in a phone threat against the «Jew guilty homosexual Terrence McNally» made it clear that they would «exterminate every member of the theatre and burn the place to the ground».

And this is the security movement of America. By now, you might wonder why they were so much in agreement with the Shariah Court of Britain. Simple reason: McNally’s play Corpus Christi was interpreted as showing Jesus as a gay man.

-

By now, I hope that you’ve realised that the National Security Movement of America is not the NSA, but a bunch of Christian loonies. If you actually thought it was the NSA I suggest you take a good long hard look at your friends and ask yourself: Are these people really sane? Am I?

Here’s another revelation: The Shariah Court of Britain isn’t quite as important as it sounds. And, on the top of that, Bawer pulled exactly the same trick as Norway’s number one newspaper, part of the establishment that he either loves to hate or loves to pretend he hates just so that he can sell more books. In an article so full of factual errors it could make even a journalist blush (2), the newspaper VG told us that «Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad wants to turn Norway into an Islamic state, governed after the sharia laws», before informing us that his organisation is standing very close to bin Laden and his al-Qaeda, ideologically speaking, and that it has already been established in the land of the fiords.

The article went on explaining what the sharia laws would mean, as well as quoting Omar Bakri Muhammed extensively.

- Within one year we will be strong enough to step forward, in public places, in the streets, in the universities […].

That never happened. If you haven’t guessed already, here’s why: Omar Bakri Muhammed is not only a scary bearded fellow, he is also a complete nut! And just like the National Security Movement he’s not a very represantive nut. While the VG article from 2002 describes Muhammeds organisation al-Mujahiroun as the political leadership of Hisb-ut-Tahrir (HT) and HT itself as «a more secret, militant recruitment group» Muhammed in reality left the latter (rather public and quite vocal) group in 1996.

What does that mean?

Imagine someone leaving the Ku Klux Klan because the Klan has gone soft on the importance of white superiority… that’s Omar Bakri Muhammed. Imagine a split inside the National Security Movement of America because someone thought that the threats against McNally weren’t juicy enough. That someone would be Omar Bakri Muhammed! But would VG quote him extensively and put his face on the front page then? Somehow, I just don’t think so.

Scary Muslims sell better! That’s why I have created this scary ASCII muslim:

(__)
(oo)

Oops, wrong drawing. That was just an ASCII cow.

Let’s get back to Bawer. The conclusion of his book «While Europe slept» is almost poetic:

As we walked aorund Amsterdam that March weekend, I thought about those Dutchmen emigrating to Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Unlike Muslims in Europe, they’d integrate quickly – they’d find work, contribute to society, fit in. They already spoke English. Yet what, years from now, would their children think? Their grandchildren? What, for that matter, would they themselves think when they lay in bed at night, far from home, their minds flooding with images when they lay in bed at night, far from home, their minds flooding with images of the small, lovingly tended land of their birth, with its meticiously laid-out roads and walks and bicycle lanes, its painstakingly preserved old houses, its elaborate, brilliantly designed systems of dikes and canals?

[…] They seemed to have brought Western civilization to its utmost pinnacle in terms of freedom and the pursuit of happiness, and the road ahead, very much like the actual roads in the Netherlands, seemed to stretch to the horizon, straight, flat, smooth, and with nary a bump.

Notice the order. Dutch are neat people. And not only that – they speak English. Who would have imagined? Those darn Muslims, on the other hand, represent chaos – they are «the very peril that [will] destroy [the Dutch]».

And they are not productive to society, at all, no sir, and they don’t come to the Netherlands already knowing Dutch, regardless of the doubtless position that language has as lingua franca number one these days (3). Do they learn it after some time? Most do. And if they are crap at it, their children usually aren’t.

In that way they are not much different from any other immigrant. King George I of England, for instance, an immigrant from Hannover, spoke little English and instead used his native tongue. His heir, George II, also preferred German. Even Queen Victoria learnt German before she was taught English. In the BBC series «Blackadder Goes Forth», Rowan Atkinsons role character Captain Edmund Blackadder interrogates Captain Kevin Darling, whom he suspects to be a German spy. Captain Darling says that he is just as British as Queen Victoria. Captain Blackadder retorts: «So your father’s German, you’re half German and you married a German!».

American books aren’t the only source telling me how terrible Muslims are. The order-chaos picture of Bruce Bawer reminds me much off a cartoon made by some funny guy in the cozy Flemish party Vlaams Blok (4).

The top part of the cartoon said «This is the way it is», and was showing a city scene with a mosque in the background, smashed windows, an immigrant mugging an elderly woman, another immigrant apparently shooting up on heroine. The bottom part says «It must become like this», and shows a church, windows full of flowers and only white and happy people. Oriana Fallaci took it another step further and tells me that Muslims are «breeding like rats» (5), that there is only one Islam, a pool of rotten water, and that those who disagree with her are traitors, a fifth column of the West.

Yeah!

-

When Tariq Ali visited Brussels in February 2006, to talk about his Islam Quintet-books, a woman approached him after his talk. – I’m not a racist, she said, – but… Tariq Ali answered: – That makes me very worried, you know. When people say they are not racists, that usually means they are.

All of these people who are not racists love anecdotal evidence. I am not a racist, they say, and then point out that they once experienced a Moroccan stopping in the road in front of them, and buhu – all Moroccans are terrible and bad and they block traffic! I am not a racist, they say, and then go on to talk about the Moroccans they saw throwing the empty wrappings from their frietjes into the river and buhu – all Moroccans are terrible and bad! And if a Norwegian reads in the newspaper that someone «of foreign background» did something criminal, well, he feels sure that he is not a racist, and that the criminal was Pakistani, and it does not really matter if the criminal wasn’t an immigrant at all, but rather a Polish ’tourist’ or a British drunkard.

I like anecdotal evidence too! So, after hearing all these stories I sat down to think long and hard, to come up with stories about how I have been suppressed by mean Muslims. But… eventually… I had to conclude in pretty much the same way as Muhammad Ali. No Muslim has ever done me any harm.

When I was the one no one wanted on the team in the football match in the lunch breaks in my early schooldays, the little Ronaldos that didn’t pick me weren’t Muslim. Not a single one of them.

In fifth grade, my class was to build a neighbourhood out of cardboard and I got into trouble because of a little capitalist enterprise, ironically enough considering my later leftist leanings. Daringly, and revolutionary, enough, I turned my cardboard house into a cardboard shop. The teacher found this to be completely outrageous, since «everyone» had agreed that the neighboorhood was only to have one, presumably state-run, shop; in my opinion little but a laughable kiosk. My shop sold Thai figuralia and antennas for satelite TV, I was a globalist already back then! And the teacher who gave me hell and wanted to turn class into a court session? He wasn’t a Muslim. He wasn’t even a Socialist. He was a Christian.

I could continue like this. The guys who attacked me when I was pushing my bike home one evening in eight grade… they weren’t Muslim either. Actually, I rather suspect that a couple of them have grown into voters for the anti-immigration Progress Party.

The worst experience I have ever had with Muslims, and I am not so sure of their religious conviction, was when a bunch of Pakistani boys came into my motel room during a school trip at 15, stating – in an exaggerated accent – «Hi, we are the new robbers». It was a practical joke. I feel convinced that the one who had the idea wasn’t any of the Pakistani boys, but a certain little blond girl from a Western Norwegian fiord.

Therefore, I’m not anti-Norwegian, but…

What kind of experiences have I had with Muslims?

I won’t let my prejudices rule, some of the people I have met and who came from Muslim countries might have been something else. The guy who prepared a most delicious dinner for the guy living next door on the student home, just to be friendly, could have been Zoroastrian. I only know he sure could cook! The guy who taught me to play «It’s now or never» on the accordion might have been an Atheist, or a Christian, or whatever, but he sure had a lot of patience.

But even with these uncertain examples, the list of Muslims who I’ve met is long – and I never had a problem with any single one of them:

1. Not one of them chopped my head off because I am an infidel.

2. Not one of them sent me letter bombs because I like to drink beer. In fact, a couple of them probably drink harder than I do, haram or no haram.

3. Several of them are almost as good cooks as the guy who might have been Zoroastrian.

4. None of them raped me, nor did they rape any women, sheep, ducks or cartoonists.

5. As far as I know, not a single one of them celebrated the attacks on WTC and Pentagon by eating cake.

6. None of them swindled me. On the other hand, several of them sold me both good and cheap food.

7. None of them were breeding like rats at the time I saw them.

Conclusion: I just wonder about one thing. What the hell is wrong with my Muslims? Why aren’t they evil?

-

Footnotes:

1. Bruce Bawer: While Europe slept (2006), p. 25

2.Vil ha Norge som islamsk stat, VG, 24.04.02.

3. Actually, the Netherlands is home to quite a few Muslims hailing from Suriname, a small Latin American country where Dutch is the official language.

4. Now Vlaams Belang

5. Oriana Fallaci: Fornuftens styrke (Force of Reason), 2004.

Yesterday I posted a link to an article by the German-based freelance journalist Eric Singh in my worth reading section (over in the right column). Singh asks how serious the rise of fascism in Germany is today. He makes a number of points, not all of which I immediately agree with, but the most interesting part of his article is definitely the comments made by Kurt Goldstein (92), one of those who survived Hitler’s concentration camps:

What helped the fascists to such an enormous power was a terrible sense of nationalistic chauvinism, with which we Germans are imbued, and haughtiness towards other nations. Xenophobia was very prevalent in Germany. Unfortunately this did not die with the end of the Second World War. This is precisely the basis being used by the present generation of the rightwing in Germany. It is showing its ugly face once again which represents a great danger for the coming years and decades. Whoever underestimates this, is doomed to a rude awakening when these reactionaries grab power in Germany again.

In spite of anti-Nazi laws, Germany has no better vaccine against neo-fascism than other European countries. In fact, the legislation used against them has helped extreme right movements to win the status of the martyr, the only guy who dares to stand up against “the politically correct”, even though he is punished for it. Both Goldstein and I might sound alarmist, of course, but there are genuine reasons to worry. Two recent news stories from Germany are genuinely horrible.

In the small town Parey a 16-year old was forced to wear an anti-Semitic placard earlier this month. The placard read: “Ich bin am Ort das gro?te Schwein und lass mich nur mit Juden ein!” – “I’m the biggest pig in town, only with Jews do I hang around”. Parents in Parey tell stories of a “hard core” of Neo-Nazis who have been intimidating other youths for some time. The easy way out would be to simply disregard this episode as schoolyard bullying and little else, maybe even as schoolyard bullying blown totally out of proportion by leftist media and authorities obsessed with political correctness. But that’s the easy way out. The hard facts is that police counted 1,100 racist or anti-Semitic crimes last year in the German state of Saxony Anhalt alone. Central German politicians are worried.

Another event earlier this month, largely unreported in media outside Germany, involved something as innocent as a football (soccer) match. The Jewish football club TuS Makkabi, playing in the sixth regional amateur league, were the subject of numerous anti-Semitic chants and, indirectly as a result of this, left the pitch in the 78th minute of their match against VSG Altglienicke from eastern Berlin.

The players complained to the German soccer administration and claimed that the referee refused to intervene when fans shouted at them slurs such as, “gas the Jews,” “Auschwitz is coming back,” “Führer, Führer” and “The NPD [an extreme right party] rules here, not the DFB [the German Football Association]“.

The most worrying of all is, however, that the NPD – another of Europe’s socalled national democratic parties with obvious historical and modern-day ties to Nazism, anti-Semitism and Holocaust revisionism – is winning seats in elections.

Volen Siderov (wikipedia), the Bulgarian ultranationalist who also appeared (and disappeared) in this article, won 22 per cent of the votes in the first round of the presidential elections in his country October 22. Running on a platform of banning Turkish parties and cracking down on the Roma people, Siderov will contest a runoff vote with incumbent president Georgi Parvanov of the Socialist Party.

Read more here:

The Bulgarian April 21st (Focus)

Volen Siderov: I am Voting for Power that Will Oust Corrupted Politicians and Bulgarophobes (Focus)

Russians Salute Siderov’s Result in Bulgaria and Note ‘Globalization and Holocaust’ Conference (Focus)

Prof Kalin Ynakiev: The Attack party is an element of the morass between the left and right (Focus)

FROM ALL SIDES: On the campaign trail with…Volen Siderov (Sofia Echo)

Bulgarian incumbent wins 1st round president vote (Washington Post)

Bulgaria’s run-off vote (euro|topics)

Volen Siderov (Maya’s Corner, Bulgarian blogger)

Dimitar Stoyanov, the child prodigy of Ataka (Maya’s Corner, Bulgarian Blogger)

Europe’s Second-class citizens (Ciaran Parker, Irish blogger)

Bulgarian’s vote for a president (Erik Laakso, Swedish blogger)

Also, it is worth checking out the blog Counter Ataka, although it has not been updated in a long while.