American Iconoclasm

For the past month, Americans have been treated to the spectacle of rampant iconoclasm occurring nationwide, the result of a concerted effort by progressives to undermine and erase America’s “racist” past.  It began with the assaults on the South’s Confederate heritage.  Statues of southern generals were targeted for removal, toppling, or complete demolition.  Some more ambitious souls have even floated the idea of dynamiting the monument at Stone Mountain, in Georgia, an altogether more difficult proposition than merely pulling down a statue of Robert E. Lee.

As predicted, the iconoclasm did not remain confined to the destruction of Confederate history.  The process has since moved on to encompass practically every visible and tangible aspect of American history.  We have seen the vandalism of monuments to as widely diverse a group as the Founding Fathers, Union generals, former Philadelphia mayor Frank Rizzo, Christopher Columbus, St. Junipero Serra, and even (in an ironic twist) the Great Emancipator himself.  Additionally, movements are afoot all across the country to rename schools and other public buildings which are named after anyone who was, essentially, a white male.  This follows the recent academic trend of replacing Shakespeare and other historical giants in university curricula (as well as in literal monuments) with pygmyish “people of colour” who were much less capable, but much more ideologically acceptable to the radical Left.

Many observers have compared the recent iconoclasm to those of various Islamic terrorist groups such as ISIS and the Taliban, who have made a habit out of destroying millennia-old cultural artifacts in the areas they control.  Despite the obvious ideological incompatibilities between the two, this comparison does have merit on a deeper level.  The existence of the “Red-Green” alliance between radical Muslims and radical progressives should not be as surprising as many might initially think.  It is an alliance of convenience between two groups who are equally committed to the destruction of traditional Christian, white, Western civilisation and its replacement with something else.

Continue reading


Why Westernisation through Modernity is Failing

One of the biggest mysteries that plagues the world of neoconservatism is the question of why the end of history – that final triumph of liberal democracy and consumer capitalism –  hasn’t occurred yet. All around the world in many different cultures and nations there is a strenuous reaction against these very things.  Indeed, even in the western core – Western Europe and the Anglosphere – there is increasing skepticism about these tenets of the Enlightenment.

The question which the neoconservatives ask is, “Why do they hate us?”  This question increasingly applies to pretty much everybody all over the world, but most especially to the Muslim world. Instead of seeing Fukuyama’s end of history, we’re seeing Samuel Huntington’s clash of civilisations. It seems to many of the neocons that the Muslim world is simply being obstinately ungrateful in refusing to recognize the blessings of democracy, secularism, and hedonism being imposed upon them by the force of Western military might.

Now, far be it from me to defend Islam itself or to defend the terroristic tactics which Muslims use. Certainly, I find Islam to be a false religion and Muslims to be primitive barbarians for the most part. However, my attitude toward them tends to be one of desiring to neither invade them nor invite them. I’m perfectly happy to let them do what they want in their own lands and to run their own countries as they see fit, so long as their barbarism is not imported into our Western countries.

Continue reading

Social Matter Confirms What I’ve Been Saying (with Some Additional Commentary)

It’s always nice when one of the heavy hitters confirms the things you’ve been saying all along.  In this case, it’s Social Matter and their confirmation is to my point that I made a few days ago about the fundamental incompatibility of gays and Muslims within the SJW hierarchy of victim groups.

Significant fault lines have long existed between the motley assortment of victim groups which form the progressive coalition. The recent butchery in Orlando is the most high profile example of this inherent tension playing itself out. There is an unavoidable element of humor involved in watching the media organs of the Cathedral, as they attempt to piece the Humpty Dumpty narrative of multicultural harmony back together again–especially after one of their key proxy groups has decided to unapologetically jihad the other into oblivion. The rationalization wheels of the liberal mind are coming apart at the seams as they spin wildly past their maximum recommended operating speeds.

Try as they might to stay on message, by attempting to pin the blame somehow on the NRA and/or ‘intolerant’ Christian America, the holes in the narrative are apparent enough that some on the left are taking notice of the dissonance. Granted, liberal propaganda has never had qualms about ignoring reality; the entire transgender movement is based entirely on just such a premise.”

I encourage the reader to read the whole thing, it is quite a cogent analysis of the failure of Western neoliberalism, with its secularist and increasingly hedonistic trajectory, to appeal to any of the other major civilisational groups on this planet, and especially the Islamic.  For years I have been noting that the “Red-Green” alliance – between the constellation of culturally and economically Marxist groups on one hand and radical Islam on the other – is a rather cynical attempt by the two great enemies of Western civilisation to undermine and destroy us.

Each of them thinks that they will successfully use the other to get what they want (the end of white, Western, Christian civilisation), followed by the assimilation or at least containment of the other.  The Marxists and others on the radically secular Left believe (incorrectly, as Carlo observes) that they will be able to convert Islam into latté liberalism, while the Muslims believe that they will convert or kill the secularist infidels once they no longer need them for political cover while pretending to be a victimised group (a much more likely scenario).  Each is driven by its own vision of “the end of history” stemming from their willingness to place ideology over realism.  Secular leftists think they’ll reach the Fukuyamian end point of liberal democracy coupled with secular humanism.  Muslims believe they’ll reach an end point in which all the world is submitted to Dar al-Islam.

Of course, only one of them could be right.

However, both of these partners combine traits of arrogance and impatience.  Looking at the American Left in particular, they simply do not have the patience to play out the long game.  The American Left is trying to “accomplish” in three decades what it took the European Left almost two centuries to do.  As a result, they are putting undue pressure on their alliance of interest groups, creating fracture points like the one I noted between the gays and the Muslims.  The Muslims are incapable, in turn, of exercising the self-restraint necessary to keep them from throwing gays off of buildings, or to prevent them from shooting up the occasional gay bar.

The problem for them both is that neither of them are ideologies rooted in reality.  Indeed, both are founded on rejection of reality.  The secular Left embraces obvious fantasies – marriage can be extended to homosexuals, people can change their gender at will simply on the basis of their “identification,” and so forth.  But really, Islam also rejects reality.  Islam is a civilisation far past its prime, despite what you may have heard.  Even though its most fervent adherents believe that Muslims will prove to be a supernaturally unstoppable force to bring the entire world into its tent, Islam really can present a threat to the West only so far as the West purposefully allows itself to be demoralised, emasculated, and enervated – and this remains true no matter how many children the Muslims breed.  However, if the secular Left’s fantasies fall apart, and therefore its hold on the power structures of the Western nations, then Islam’s fantasies will follow in quick succession.  A reinvigourated West that is no longer shackled by foolishness like political correctness, multiculturalism, feminism, homosexualism, anti-colonialism, and all the rest will simply not put up with the behaviour of Islam that we currently see.  Steps would be taken to end it decisively.  Islam’s break from reality would cease.

Should this happen, there’s likewise no reason to believe that the West itself would stay on the “end of history” trajectory so vital to the radical Left’s self-esteem.  A reinvigourated West will be a neo-Traditionalist West, one which rejects secularism, liberal democracy, atomistic individualism, and cultural latitudinarianism as much as have China and Russia.