Until the advent of materialism and 19th c. dogma, Western Civilisation was superior to anything Islam had developed. Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam. Proof of this resides in the 'modern' world and the unending political-economic and spiritual poverty of Muslim states and regions. Squatting on richer civilisations is not 'progress'. Islam is pagan, totalitarian, and irrational.
Emmet Scott dispenses with the ignorant post-modern myth of the Muslim ‘Golden Age’ in Spain. In reality it was a period of slavery, Christian persecution, endless raids north into the Christian enclaves of northern Spain and France (even into Switzerland), despotism, high taxes and the neutering of technology and innovation (the Blast Furnace was invented by Christians in Catalonia in the 12th century, a series of discoveries that Muslims never made, anywhere in the world, and this is one example out of hundreds). Islamic Spain was a squatter’s empire, squalid, splendid for the few, an evil nightmare for the many.
Muslims invaded Spain in 711 A.D. and within a few years had conquered the Arian-Catholic and very wealthy Visigothic empire, with only a few redoubtable Christian states holding out in the north, clustered along the Pyrennes. Don Pelayo and his small band of Christian fighters memorably saved Spain and probably most of France with their improbable and dramatic victory at Covadonga in 722 A.D. I am sure this miraculous defeat of Muhammad’s cult will soon be rewritten as a display of White Catholic racism and intolerance toward liberators and enrichers.
An example of an egregious lie is the myth that Cordoba was the richest, grandest city on earth during the Muhammadan occupation. A city of great vastness, teeming with all sorts of 'inventions', superseding the 'dark age' Visigothic city. In actual fact Cordoba was never a megapolis. Archaeology reveals that the Muhammadan city was no bigger than it was under the Visigoths. Perhaps a new wall, some new structures, or a new suburb may have been built, but in essence it remained a city of 50.000, not 500.000 as given by Arab chroniclers and anti-Christian post-Enlightenment commentators. Technology would have been neutered given the dogmatic totalitarian strictures of Sharia, still evident and on display in today’s Muhammadan world. The Jewish-Christian craftsmen and literate society would have been the basis of any Muhammadan construction or culture; non-citizens who paid the Jizya and whose men and women were open to rape, torture, enslavement or forced labour. A paradise it was not.
But a very different picture of the Spanish Caliphate has been painted by other writers. Consider for example the statement of Richard Fletcher, an author very well-disposed to Islam and its culture: “Moorish Spain was not a tolerant and enlightened society even in its most cultivated epoch.” Indeed! One would never suspect from the descriptions of Messrs Briffault, Lewis, and many others, that Islamic Spain was the center of a vast slave-trading empire whose rulers believed it was their religious duty to wage ruthless war against their Christian neighbors to the north on an annual or even twice-yearly basis.
Muhammadans endlessly persecuted the Christians from 711 to 1492 A.D. History’s longest war (the Reconquista), but also its longest foreign subjugation and destruction of a people and culture.
Harsh reprisals with mutilations and crucifixions would sanction the Mozarab (Christian dhimmis) calls for help from the Christian kings. Moreover, if one dhimmi harmed a Muslim, the whole community would lose its status of protection, leaving it open to pillage, enslavement and arbitrary killing.” ferocious persecution of both Jews and Christians which occurred in Spain in the thirteenth century during the rule of the fanatical Almohads. equally fanatical predecessors, the Almoravids, who caused havoc in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries.
Louis Bertrand, writing in 1945, before the epoch of political correctness: “From the outset of the Almoravid invasion the destruction of Christian churches had begun. Among them was destroyed a very old and very curious basilica in the neighbourhood of Granada, the church of Gudila. The faquis commenced to persecute the Christian Mozarabs [Christians under Muslim rule] so intolerably that they begged the King of Aragón, Alfonso the Warrior, to come and deliver them. The Aragonese did not succeed in taking Granada. When they retreated, the faquis avenged themselves on the Mozarabs in the most merciless fashion.
Christians were not tolerated. Under Sharia they paid heavy taxes, had to perform duties and obligations in time and labour for their Muslim masters, had their women raped and many sent to harems, had no legal rights, were not able to openly practice their religion, could not build new churches and indeed saw thousands of churches and Christian built edifices converted into Mosques or simply torn down. They were also expelled and forced out of Spain by their Muhammadan overlords on many occasions.
“Already ten thousand of them had been compelled to emigrate into the territory of Alfonso to escape their enemies’ repression. The remainder were deprived of their property, imprisoned, or put to death. Many of them were deported to Africa. They were established in the neighbourhood of Salé and Meknes, where oppression of all kinds compelled them to embrace Islam. Ten years later there was a fresh expulsion. The Christians were again deported to Morocco en masse.”
The impact on Catholic-Spanish culture, by the Muhammadan fascist savagery and intolerance must have been immense. The only way to eject the Muhammadan invaders was to be more ruthless, more intolerant, harder, tougher and more militaristic than they were.
“Finally, it was not without contagion that the Spaniards lived for centuries in contact with a race of men who crucified their enemies and gloried in piling up thousands of severed heads by way of trophies. The cruelty of the Arabs and the Berbers also founded a school in the Peninsula. … Whilst I do not necessarily endorse Bertrand’s opinion (I feel he has slightly overstated the case), it is nonetheless true to say that their long contact with Islam most certainly did not foster the development of humanitarianism in the Spanish character.
Far from a Golden Age, Muhammadan Spain was a disaster. It stopped progress, effaced technology and trade, enslaved and killed literally millions of people over 800 years and deformed Catholic culture in Spain. It also exhausted the resources, energies and foci of Catholics for 800 years, obstructing the creation of innovations and discoveries and retarding the growth of civilisation.
Emmet Scott rightly identifies the source books of Muhammad’s cult, to be the generators of 1400 years of war and Jihad. Jihad is the ‘6th pillar’ of Islam, and according to Muhammad, the 2nd most important. What pray tell would be the ‘1rst pillar’ of Muhammandanism and the most important one asks? Well, it is to ‘obey the Al-Lah and his only prophet, Muhammad’. Surprising.
The 2 most important fundamentals of Muhammad’s cult is to obey the Al-Lah or Lord of Mecca (who at the time of Muhammad was Baal the moon deity) and Muhammad himself. After that, to be truly pious, you needed to wage Jihad against the Kufar or unbelievers. Jihad is not about a spiritual struggle. That concept is confined to Sufism a small, insignificant Muslim sect of mystics, who have turned the verses of Jihad into metaphors for spiritual combat. For mainstream Muhammadans, Jihad means war.
Indeed, the waging of jihad or holy war is fundamental to Islamic custom and belief: Since the first flush of victories in the seventh century, conquered infidels have been presented with a simple choice; either convert or pay a poll tax, known as jizya. But the important thing has always been to establish political control. This being the case it is clear that Islam is not a religion at all in the ordinary sense of the word, but a totalitarian political ideology with religious pretensions, a fact noted by Rebecca Bynam in her recent work, Allah is Dead: Why Islam is not a Religion.
Muhammad led the Jihad, in person, averaging 2 conflicts per year during the establishment of his totalitarian regime. There has not been a single year in the past 1400 years, where Muslims, somewhere on the globe were not waging Jihad against non-Muslims.
Muhammad: He is said to have initiated sixty wars and raids and to have participated in at least twenty-seven of these. Many of these engagements involved massacres of unarmed men and boys. The Prophet of Islam is said to have ordered the killing of all the men and post-pubescent boys in the Jewish settlement of Banu Quraiza, and to have led a series of unprovoked attacks against other Jewish communities in Arabia. During his lifetime, almost all the Jews of Arabia were either killed or forced to convert to Islam. The Prophet is said furthermore to have ordered the assassination of political opponents and encouraged his followers to take up the sword in the propagation of the faith, declaring that a night spent in arms in the cause of Islam carried more merit than a lifetime of fasting, prayer and good works. Before he died, he is reported to have enjoined on his followers to “fight with the peoples” until the whole world should confess that there was no god but Allah.
it is doubtful if there has been a single year in which Muslims, in some part of the world, have not been fighting against infidels. In the history of relations between Europe and the House of Islam alone, there was continual and almost uninterrupted war between Muslims and Christians since the first attack on Sicily in 652 and on Constantinople in 674. In the great majority of these wars, the Muslims were the aggressors. And even the short periods of official peace were disturbed by the “unofficial” activities of corsairs and slave-traders. For centuries, Muslim pirates based in North Africa made large parts of the Mediterranean shore-line uninhabitable for Christians, and it is estimated that between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries alone they captured and enslaved something in excess of a million Europeans.
The only Muslim medieval ‘historian’ of note that Muslims and their many apologists can name is Khaldun. Even this mis-represented figure stated that Jihad was an obligation.
Spain. A native of that country, Ibn Khaldun, gave, several centuries later, a very similar account to the one quoted above of Islam's attitude to war: In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, caliphate and royal authority are united [in Islam], so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them [religion and politics] at the same time.
The Jihad and endless expansion fed the unlimited demand for Slaves. 25 million or more Whites (slave comes from Slav or Eastern European Whites) and 40-100 million Blacks were enslaved by Muslims over 1400 years. Curiously various anti-White terrorist groups such as BLM do not mention the two over-riding aspects of Black Slavery: 1-Blacks sold other Blacks into Slavery and 2-Muslims were the greatest of the Black slave traders and imported 4-10 x more Black Slaves than were trans-shipped over the Atlantic.
Historian Hugh Trevor-Roper explains how the enormous wealth accumulated by the caliphate in its expansion across Asia and Africa enabled it to purchase what it wanted from Europe. What the Muslims wanted, above all, was “eunuchs and slaves.” He continues: “It was one of the functions of the Vikings to supply these goods. Half traders, half pirates, they ranged over all northern Europe, and in their ranging, or through the method of piracy, they collected furs and kidnapped human beings. For preference they dealt in heathen Slavs, since Christian States had less compunction in handling a slave-trade in heathen bodies – they could always quote that useful text, Leviticus xxv, 44. So the Vikings fed both Byzantium and the rich new civilization of Islam with the goods which they demanded and for which they could pay.
In doing so they penetrated all the coasts and rivers of Europe.” In the above quotation Trevor-Roper repeats the erroneous notion, prevalent until the last decades of the twentieth century, that Byzantium somehow escaped the ravages of the Saracens and that in her territory there continued to flourish an intact and prosperous branch of ancient Rome. Constantinople, he imagines, like Damascus, was a wealthy recipient of Russian slaves. Yet by the end of the seventh century, as I have shown in great detail in Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited, the formerly great power of Eastern Rome was little more than an impoverished rump, cut off, just as surely as the West, from the wealth and learning of Asia.
Muslim conquests of lands around the Mediterranean, must have, as common sense and factual detail support, deranged, shrank, and neutered the Christian states in both the East and West. This would have resulted in social-economic decay as trade routes were cut off, various raw materials and goods were diminished in trade, economic exchange was impoverished, and technological advances regionalised. The impact would have been vast and from the 8th to the 10th centuries Christian and Christianising Europe, beset by Magyars, Muslims and Vikings would have been close to extinction.
The Muhammadan Jihad has many facets and features:
1-War, and the elimination of the Infidel and the eradication of non-Muslim civilisation.
2-War, and the subjugation and taxation of ‘Dhimmis’, non-Muslims including the ‘Peoples of the Book’, wherein Muslims live off the Dhimmis and their taxable largesse. This precludes the complete destruction of the Dhimmi-civilisation and is at odds with those within the cult who want to completely efface all non-Muslim cultural artifacts within the conquered states.
3-Cultural, where Muslims enshrine their cult as the apogee of societal development in conquered lands, usually using Dhimmis as slaves and providers of money and tax.
4-Sex slavery and the use of women as sex-chattel, and eunuchs as warriors, advisers, or slaves.
Jihad has nothing to do with a ‘spiritual struggle’. It is about conquering the globe for Muhammad. The exact nature of Muhammadan governance will vary on a scale from completely eradicating the non-Muslim culture, to using it for the purposes of tax-slavery, sex-slavery and abject Dhimmitude, thereby creating a façade of ‘tolerance’ which sends the Islamophiliacs into sighs of delight and delirium. Ignorance is not bliss. It is just ignorance.
Emmet Scott’s very good book, ‘The Impact of Islam’, will never be used as a teaching aid. You won’t hear the English historian quoted by academics, or on the BBC, defending Henri Pirenne’s thesis that Islam greatly contracted Mediterranean life, economy, civilisation and thanks to its barbarous obsession with Jihad (Spain, Italy, France), White slaves, destruction and rapine, helped disrupt European life to such an extent, that it gave a simple-minded pretext for anti-Catholics to declare a ‘Dark Age’ from 500-1500 A.D.
This calumny is oft repeated, and a lie spouted by the ignorant, including such atheist luminaries as Voltaire and Diderot. The simple-minded sloganeering could have at least, given their ‘intellectual’ pretensions, looked for ‘root causes’ as to why life may have been forcibly contracted in Europe post the advent of the Muslim Jihad. For most anti-Catholics proof is optional, and of course, those saintly, revered Muslims are immune to any form of critique.
The illiteracy of the ‘Dark Age’ myth, is anti-Catholicism. This in turn means an ‘ennobling’ of the ‘noble savages’ of Muhammad’s cult. As Scott writes (edits are mine):
The source of this “Islamophilic” viewpoint is a frankly anti-Christian mindset which first appeared during the Enlightenment and thereafter spread inexorably throughout Europe and the Americas. This anti-Christian bias has now become the default mode of thought in academic circles in the West: As Christianity was “talked down” so it became, as the twentieth century progressed, more and more the custom to “talk up” Islam.
Take for example the following quote from Bernard Lewis, the doyen of Middle Eastern studies at Princeton, whose 2001 book What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response, looked at the decline of the Islamic world vis à vis the Christian, from the Middle Ages onwards: “It is often said that Islam is an egalitarian religion. There is much truth in this assertion. If we compare Islam at the time of its advent with the societies that surrounded it – the stratified feudalism of Iran and the caste system of India to the east, the privileged aristocracies of both Byzantine and Latin Europe to the West – the Islamic dispensation does indeed bring a message of equality. Not only does Islam not endorse such systems of social differentiation; it explicitly and absolutely rejects them. The actions and utterances of the Prophet, the honored precedents of the early rulers of Islam as preserved by tradition, are overwhelmingly against privilege by descent, by birth, by status, by wealth, or even by race, and insist that rank and honor are determined only by piety and merit in Islam.” (p. 82) Furthermore, “… though this pristine egalitarianism was in many ways modified and diluted, it remained strong enough to prevent the emergence of either Brahmans or aristocrats and to preserve a society in which merit and ambition might still hope to find their reward.
Lewis and other academics are absurd in their claims of Muhammad ‘brotherhood’, equality and tolerance. The cult was spread by fire, sword and death. Non-Muslims lived as Dhimmis or non-citizens with no rights, an obligation to pay Jizya or a poll tax along with other onerous taxes and duties; and defined within Muhammadan society as inferior, akin to livestock, the women used in harems and for pleasure, the men in a form of bondage working for their Muslim masters or marched off within Muhammadan armies to war.
The reality is that the three groups identified by Lewis as not sharing in the general beneficence of Islamic egalitarianism and freedom – women, slaves, and non-Muslims – suffered, throughout the centuries, indescribable hardships at the hands of their Muslim masters; and two of these groups, women and non-Muslims, continue to suffer to this day. That there are no more slaves in Islam (or very few, officially, at least), is due entirely to the efforts of Westerners during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
The myth of Islamic tolerance is in fact one of the most pernicious to have gained currency in Western belief over the past century. In fact, Jews and Christians were anything but “protected” under the aegis of Islam. The dhimmi communities, as Bat Ye’or has shown in great detail in her excellent series of books on the subject, was subject to a whole raft of humiliating and degrading laws which rendered their lives almost intolerable: One of these was the compulsory wearing of distinctive clothing – an endearing feature copied by the Nazis in their persecution of the Jews during the twentieth century.
Academics are usually in thrall to Totalitarianism. They have defended mostly en-masse, Nazism, Communism, variant strains of Socialism, Covid Totalitarianism, GlobaloneyWarming, and other ideologies in which power, might and human debasement are essential elements of the program. It is not a coincidence that most academics, the ‘scientists’, the news-readers, the editors, the text-book writers and Wikipedia editors are Islamophiliacs. It is simply part of the pattern. As Scott notes, these lustrous ‘experts’ miss the entire point of the Koran-Muhammadan cult: enslavement of non-Muslims.
A fundamental precept of Islamic law – again, underlining its political nature – is that Muslims occupy a privileged position and have a right to live off the labor of infidels – whether they be dhimmis living under Islam or unconquered infidels living outside the House of Islam’s borders. As may be imagined, such a teaching could only breed a parasitical and lawless attitude which positively encouraged robbery and piracy.
The effects of enslavement of civilised non-Muslims leads to civilisation’s decline.
No Christian or Jewish communities could possibly prosper under such a pernicious system; and there are very good grounds for believing that it was this very system which turned vast areas of formerly fertile agricultural land in the Middle East and North Africa into semi-desert within a few decades during the late seventh century: Incoming Arab nomads grazed their goats and camels on the cultivated fields of the conquered Christians and Jews, and these dared not complain.
Muslim hordes spread across civilised Christian lands from Arabia to southern France. They squatted on rich Byzantine Eastern Christian lands (the Levant, Syria, North Africa) and rich Arian-Catholic lands in Spain (the Visigothic empire). These Christianised areas were some of the richest on the planet. All forms and manner of culture, technology and advances were being made. Algebra for example is a 2nd century Greek-Christian invention (Diophantes et al), and was simply renamed by ignorant Arabs. Advanced economies used complex irrigation systems, trade routes were extended, money fuelled exchange and refined products impressive in diversity and scale. The Arabs had none of this. They simply came, overwhelmed and squatted.
Indeed, the process of importing new technologies into the West had begun in the sixth century, before the appearance of Islam, with the appearance there of such Oriental technologies as the stirrup and silk-making. The spread of these eastern ideas seems to have been disrupted for three centuries by the arrival of the Arabs, and then resumed in the latter tenth century. And we should note than even those things which did originate in the Middle East, such as alcohol distillation, algebra, the windmill, etc., were rarely, if ever, the work of Arabs or even Muslims. Almost invariably they were ideas deriving from the work of Persians, Syrians, or Egyptians, who were permitted to continue their work for a short time after the Arab conquests. Once again, it is safe to say that these things would have arrived in the West irrespective of whether Islam existed or not.
What did Muhammadans actually bring? Destruction.
What Islam did bring to Europe was war and slavery, on a massive scale. The House of Islam in the tenth century had little use for any of the produce and natural resources of Europe, except one; the bodies of the Europeans themselves. Young women and boys were preferred, but during the tenth century Europeans of almost any age or class, and in almost any part of the continent, could find themselves in chains and on a ship bound for North Africa or the Middle East.
Scott rightly documents the culling of White slaves for the Muhammadan cult, with the predations of Vikings. The onslaught of the North-men is directly connected with obtaining and selling White slaves to Muslims. Dublin and many other cities were founded to provide a locus for the aggregation and sale of White slaves, many of them ending up in Muslim markets.
For the whole Viking phenomenon, which saw Scandinavian pirates wreak havoc throughout the north of Europe for several centuries, was a direct result of the Muslim demand for European slaves. The majority of slaves sold by the Scandinavians to the caliphate were Slavs from east of the Elbe, and indeed the word “slav” implies “slave” in most European languages to this day.
But since White Lives Don’t Matter, no one cares about this do they? More to come from Scott’s book.
Are the End Times for Western Civilisation close at hand? Consider:
1. CV-19, lies, exaggerations, and unbridled fascism to combat what can only be described as a bad flu with ‘cures’ which are now worse than the disease
2. Unfettered Muslim and non-White immigration into Western states, accompanied by an endless set of apologia for Muslim rapes, crimes, unemployment, Jihad, public attacks, FGM, child-bride marriages, Christophobia, Church attacks and anti-Semiticism
3. Mainstreaming of pornography, drugs, anti-culture and violence
4. Decimation of ethics, faith, conservative ideals, and the ethos and culture which built civilisation, in all state institutions and processes
5. An obviously stolen US Presidential election with a 30 million vote fraud performed openly with nary a dissent from the elites or media
6. Deep States in every nation controlling political-economies
7. BLM, Anti-fa and other anti-White racist groups portrayed by a Fake Media as peaceful protestors
8. Rewriting of history using the lens of Cultural Marxism in which Whites are now evil, non-Whites angels
9. Financial fraud with negative interest rates, massive cost escalations, stock market manipulation by Central Banks
10. A Global Elite intent on One World Governance
Edited and redacted from a very good article to read and ponder. Source is American Thinker, ‘Are the End Times Near?’ by David Solway, whose books are blacklisted by Amazon.
Spengler (a must read)
Oswald Spengler’s The Decline of The West, published 1918-1922, laid out the trajectory of the enfeeblement and decay that awaited us, developing a theme that went as far back as the Greek historian Polybius, but that, in the wake of a war that wiped out a generation, seemed less a “theme” than an historically imminent reality.
Yeats (a must read)
The greatest poet of the modern age, William Butler Yeats, felt it in his bones, working out a visionary schematism in his prose volume A Vision and reflecting on the inevitable in his timeless poem “The Second Coming,” written one year after the end of the Great War: “And what rough beast, its hour come round at last/Slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?”
Robert Bork (a must read)
…Slouching Towards Gomorrah hammers out Yeats’s vision in lurid contemporary detail, pointing toward a “syndrome” of collectivist attitudes dominating the culture, the debilitation of the family structure, and a “left-liberal moral consensus” diluting the text of the U.S. Constitution.
O’Brien and Michelet
In his master volume On the Eve of the Millennium: The Future of Democracy in an Age of Unreason, published in 1995, Irish historian Conor Cruise O’Brien was not sanguine about the prospects for Western civilization in the coming years. Civilizations have term dates and ours is fast approaching, O’Brien felt. He quotes French historian Jules Michelet’s History of France, who speaks there of “this vast concert of naïve and barbarous voices” with its “strange accents [and] fantastic and bizarre harmony,” signalling the end of a customary world. The dissolution is abetted by common lassitude, self-indulgence and studied ignorance, by those, O’Brien writes, “who are indifferent to politics, religion, virtually anything.” We watch “history on the screen with apathy and an occasional passing flicker of horror or indignation,” almost, we might say, as if we do not believe that history can happen here.
Toynbee (a must read)
Arnold Toynbee in his twelve-volume A Study of History, among my prize collections, articulated a theory of recurrence -- owing in part to The New Science of the 18th Century Italian political philosopher Giambattista Vico -- in which he saw patterns or cycles of growth and decay common to all civilizations, of which he isolated more than twenty-six exemplars. Though maintaining a guarded optimism that correlation is not infallibly causation and that Western Civilization might survive an otherwise inevitable debacle, he posited that once psychological devastation had gone too far, recovery would be impossible. Perhaps it was from reading Toynbee that O’Brien speculated about the onset of apathy and indifference leading to civilizational collapse. He believed we were already there.
Burnham
Burnham’s magisterial 1964 Suicide of the West, in which Burnham writes of a “morphological pattern,” an unmistakable trend or curve. “Over the past two generations Western civilization has been in a period of very rapid decline, recession or ebb within the world power structure.” What we call liberalism is “the ideology of Western suicide,” permitting Western Civilization “to be reconciled to its dissolution.” Although he holds out hope for a transition to a higher order above the parochial divisions of the past, which seems touchingly romantic, his analysis of the liberal virus has rarely been bettered.
On Feminism and Cultural Marxism
….culture-wrecking movement and socially destabilizing factor confronting the Western world: identity politics, neo-Marxism, political correctness, radical environmentalism, “climate change,” “social justice,” outcome egalitarianism, information censorship, trans-national authoritarianism, abortion on demand, anti-meritocracy, chain immigration, “white supremacy” -- the list goes on. … Feminism was no doubt a critical issue, a socially destructive and culturally malignant phenomenon, but only one of many indices of something of far greater import: the approaching disintegration of Western civilization.
Great Reset
As Kenneth Minogue writes, wish to “acquire power in the service of transforming the order of human life.” (Today we would call it the Great Reset.) Rather, I believed, and still believe, that every manifestation, every symptom of the sickness of our time, the self-destructive corruption, the lies and hypocrisies and weakness of spirit, the coordinated attack on the institutions and traditions that have sustained Judeo-Christian civilization, the digital surveillance project of billionaire Globaliers -- these must be resisted and fought, for there is no other choice but feckless and dishonorable surrender.
Conclusion based on Realism
The conclusion is foregone, but not yet. In Michael Walsh’s terms from his new book Last Stands, manly virtue fights to the foreordained end. The issue is this: We cannot deter, but we can defer.
What we are really doing, whether we know it or not, is buying time. Western civilization and its constituent nations are too far gone to be retrofitted; our internal enemies have seen to that. As Bork writes, a “soft and hedonistic culture…faces a continuing assault from within.” The prospect is grim.
Apathy, indifference, psychological devastation, envy and self-hatred are the norms of our present moment. America, the guarantor and bellwether of the West’s survival, has been hollowed out by its Olympian classes, the political, juridical, informational and fiscal elites -- this was Founding Father and second president John Adams’ deepest fear. In his important 2018 study John Adams and the Fear of American Oligarchy, Luke Mayville parses Adams’ conclusion that “republican governments had always been threatened by elite domination and that America would be no different.”
Western Feminists steeped in nescient anti-Western dogma, have always hypocritically, ignored the brutality of Muhammad’s cult towards women. Nary an outburst against Muhammad’s cult from the Feminists shrills and shills. Untutored in the ways of Muhammadan beliefs, the Western Feminist will usually ingest the crass stupidity of apologist Karen Armstrong and her ilk, and ‘admire’ the liberating effects of Muhammad’s cult on women. Some go on to claim that Muhammad himself was a feminist and freed women. A rather odd claim considering that Muhammad had a harem of 24 wives and sex slaves, married a 6-year-old and stated that a woman was half the value of a man.
Expressions of Muhammadan misogyny and savagery towards women include: Female Genital Mutilation, Child Bride Marriages, Polygamy, Wearing of bags in public as tokens of submission to men, the lack of legal equality, and the prolific Muslim justification for sex slavery.
None of these practices were allowed in Christian Medieval Europe, with the one exception being that of royal families who married off their young sons and daughters, for dynastic alliances and political largesse. Even that practice was challenged by the Medieval Church and was entirely a secular process which found no favour within the Church (and one largely ignored by those committed to rewriting history and debasing Medieval Christianity). It is the Western Catholic Church which freed women.
Medieval Christianity outlawed slavery including overturning the chattel status of women, which is still rife within Muslim societies today, and which still includes: polygamy, the female family member’s legal ownership by men and the formal sex-slavery of women including Infidel women (which the ‘right hand possesses’ within a harem) and Muslim concubinage (both inside and outside the harem). None of this is allowed in Western states, simply because Western states have a Christian heritage.
Sexual relief is a prime plank of the male dominated Muslim cult. It is rather incredible that any woman wilfully and consciously joins and submits herself to the Al-Lah cult of sexual deviancy. Islam is a cult and one aspect of the Muslim cult, which is prevalent in many other cult groups, is sanctifying for the leadership and the male faithful, the unbridled lust for, and use of, female bodies. The moon cult of Mecca is completely unfriendly and even hostile to women and we find this hostility expressed in Sharia Law and Koranic ritual.
One of the mainsprings of Muslim imperialism and the spread of the cult which attracted untutored and rough hooligans was the Koranic fact that women were inferior to men, that sex slavery was expected and protected; and that a woman was merely a beast whose fields were to be ploughed, to quote Mohammed. He also said that women were stupid and beast-like [Bukhari (6:301) - "[Muhammad] said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her intelligence.'"] The Muslim animus towards the female runs long deep and is a profound aspect of Islamic imperialism and cult behaviour.
We see this in the Koran. The sample of 12 verses and 1 entire Sura below, clearly depict women as inferiors and sex objects. These verses are supported by 14 Hadiths which confirm that women are to be subjugated by men, and to obey men [Muslim men that is].
Assessing women to be pure enough for the cult:
Sura 60 is an entire chapter devoted to women who apparently fled to Mohammed to take up the cause of Allah. These females had to be devout in their worship to the moon idol and were means tested for such. This Sura outlines how you 'investigate' the woman to make sure she is good enough for the cult. Only females dedicated to Mohammed and his cult of Allah could join Muslim society.
Men rule
Qur'an (2:228) - "and the men are a degree above them [women]"
Qur'an (24:31) - Women are to lower their gaze around men.
Only Men are Gods
Qur'an (53:27) - "Those who believe not in the Hereafter, name the angels with female names." Angels are identified in Sura 74 to be men including the 'Magnificent 19' or early companions of Mohammed. El-Lah or Al-Lah is of course the chief male deity or 'God'. Women are not a part of the angelic hordes.
Legal status:
Qur'an (2:282) - (Court testimony) "And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women." This clearly states that women possess half the legal status of a man.
This means that if a woman is raped, she will need 2 men to support her allegations, if not she will be guilty and can be stoned to death, depending on the jurisdiction.
Inheritance
Qur'an (4:11) - "The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females" (see also verse 4:176).
Women are unclean
Qur'an (5:6) - "And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it"
After a man has some contact with a female he must wash himself, to purify himself, and erase that contact. This is why you might see Muslim men refusing to shake hands with Kufar women for example. They don't want to sully their perfect selves.
Plough your wives
Qur'an (2:223) - "Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so, approach your tilth when or how ye will..." The wife is a sex tool to be used at will by the man. Some believe that this verse is also referencing the joys of anal intercourse. If this is what Muhammad meant, however, then it would appear to contradict what he said in Muslim (8:3365).
Polygamy
Qur'an (4:3) -"Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four"
Sex slaves are good
Qur'an (4:24) and Qur'an (33:50) - A man is permitted to take women as sex slaves outside of marriage.
This verse distinguishes wives from captives (those whom they right hand possesses). It is hard to know how many sex slaves Muhammad had in his harem, but 20 is the estimate (along with 4 official wives).
Hypocritically of course Mohammed ordered Arabian and Muslim women to cover themselves and hide their feminine qualities and allures, though there is disagreement about how much 'covering' is appropriate [the Koran says covering the breasts is mandatory 24:31]. As well there are Islamic laws related to temporary marriage and contractual sex which can be found here which reinforce the hegemonic status of men over women.
An immutable fact is this: there is not one single verse in the Koran, or the Hadiths which describe a woman as a human being, equal to a man; intelligent, caring, riven by doubt, afflictions and perhaps even evil intentions; but nonetheless a thinking, cognitive, loving, redolent human character.
A straight reading of Muslim texts reveals the theology to be misogynistic, sexually obsessed, and defamatory toward and with, the female gender.
There are about 420 pages in the Koran. The word 'slaves' appears on 226 of them. The word 'slave' singular, makes a guest appearance on 109 pages. Together 'slave' and 'slaves' are found in 335 pages or about 80% of the Koran.
At the verse level these terms comprise 5% of the verses out the Koranic total of 6236. It does appear that this Al-Lah thing, idol, Hub'al, or Muhammad, is rather preoccupied with supine submission and 'slavery'. Or, with non-Muslims being ‘slaves’ of Muslims. Or, with a Muslim being a ‘slave’ to the Koran and Muhammad.
Based on data we can conclude that the use of the nouns ‘slave’ or ‘slaves’, runs throughout the width and breadth of the Koran and is an important element in Muhammadan theology.
The problem with the mentality and energy devoted to the idea of ‘slaves’ and ‘slavery’ is fairly obvious. It is the issue of freedom and free-will. Thomastic theology in Christianity lays out the rationale based within faith, of human free-will. Thomism (13th c) confronts and upends using logic and reason, previously held Orthodoxy based on Augustinian theology, which negated free-will (echoed by Luther in the early 16th c). Ennobling human free-will is an essential component of freedom. It leads to responsibility, accountability and self-determination.
This cultural ethos will be reflected in society through the establishment of local and national forums which protect these inalienable, God-given rights. Legal processes are also dependent upon free-will, as are most social norms including the right to privacy, property and individuality, as long as the communal is not endangered or threatened. There is no equivalent philosophical concession to free-will within Islam. None. It is negated. Due to this, Muslim states never developed the political-social institutions that Christian Europe did, and which directly led to its global dominance.
We can see this issue in every longer Sura. Sura 3 reviewed here, is infamous for its violence against Infidels. In immoderate Sura 3, only 27% of the text is supremacist, racist and violent to Unbelievers. But also, importantly, Sura 3 demands prostration and unthinking deference to the Muhammad-Al Lah idol (often in the Koran, Muhammad and the Al Lah or Baal the moon deity, appear to be the same, reflected in the many variations of names such as Muhammad Ali). Sura 3 clearly says that Moslems must be good 'slaves' to Muhammad-Al Lah. If they are, the Al-Lah idol might take notice and reward them. However, (there is always a but in Muhammadanism), you might not be rewarded, since Al Lah will decide and even submission does not guarantee his grace.
|
Say: "Shall I inform you of things far better than those? For Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2) there are Gardens (Paradise) with their Lord, underneath which rivers flow. Therein (is their) eternal (home) and Azwajun Mutahharatun (purified mates or wives) [i.e. they will have no menses, urine, or stool, etc.], And Allah will be pleased with them. And Allah is All-Seer of the (His) slaves". |
|
|
So if they dispute with you (Muhammad SAW) say: "I have submitted myself to Allah (in Islam), and (so have) those who follow me." And say to those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and to those who are illiterates (Arab pagans): "Do you (also) submit yourselves (to Allah in Islam)?" If they do, they are rightly guided; but if they turn away, your duty is only to convey the Message; and Allah is All-Seer of (His) slaves. |
|
|
On the Day when every person will be confronted with all the good he has done, and all the evil he has done, he will wish that there were a great distance between him and his evil. And Allah warns you against Himself (His Punishment) and Allah is full of Kindness to the (His) slaves. |
|
|
This is because of that (evil) which your hands have sent before you. And certainly, Allah is never unjust to (His) slaves. |
The above Sura lines are rather odd. There is a strong link between piety and being a slave; avoiding punishment by submitting yourself to the Al-Lah or Baal idol as a slave; and receiving ‘justice’ from Al-Lah if you are a good slave. The messaging seems rather clear: to be a good Muslim you must be a slave. This means that Muhammadanism rewards the concepts which permeate a slave society in which the slave accepts: bondage, complete submission, being owned and managed by a Master (Muhammad), being a property of the Master, giving up free-will and displaying an unthinking devotion to the Master.
Sura 3 also makes the rather bizarre claim that Jesus Christ, whom Muslims reject as the Son of God, and who was an inferior prophet to Muhammad, was a slave of Baal or Al Lah. Considering that Christianity even in the early Church (or the ‘Way’) had nothing to do with pagan Baal worship, and was in fact, like Judaism, practicing in its rites and rituals, the opposite beliefs of the pagan Baal cult, this claim is fundamentally absurd.
|
Then whoever disputes with you concerning him ['Iesa (Jesus)] after (all this) knowledge that has come to you, [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus)] being a slave of Allah, and having no share in Divinity) say: (O Muhammad SAW) "Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves - then we pray and invoke (sincerely) the Curse of Allah upon those who lie." |
This verse plainly states this: Muhammad is the last and greatest 'prophet' superseding Christ, and the most important human ever since Al-Lah – Muhammad's family deity and the moon cult idol of Mecca – said so. How convenient.
Sura 3 is an important read for those who wish to understand the ‘root cause’ of the endless Muslim Jihad against non-Muslims.
Jews and Christians linked to evil and impiety.
Allah's 'slaves' to be rewarded in heaven with delights unimaginable; "I have submitted myself to Allah (in Islam), and (so have) those who follow me."
This is always the goal of a cult.
Establish a cadre of slaves who will submit and give up their free-will, rationality, and obtuse ethical ideals about the Golden Rule, gratitude, immanent tolerance and good will to all. Hate the non-cult member. Kill them. Humiliate them. Swagger in superiority amongst them.
So demandeth the idol Al-Lah and his alter-ego Muhammad.
1400 years of Jihad. 1400 years of proof of Muslim supremacism and racism (Black, Brown and White Slave trading, Sex Jihad in the UK elsewhere against White girls). 1400 years of Koranic hate-speech proffered by Muslim religious zealots and warlords. 1400 years of war against the Infidel.
Yet, for self-proclaimed geniuses, Western multi-cultists, the religious cult of ‘tolerance and diversity’, there is a fascistic intolerance to any who criticise the cult of Muhammad or who reveal the factual history of Muslim Jihad and the current Muslim warring against the Infidel in all its various guises. For these lights of delusion, such Muhammadan-critics are phobic, bigoted and should be put on a ‘racist register’ and monitored by the Police (one assumes Muslim or non-White policemen would do the surveillance), or perhaps just shot and dumped into a mass grave.
Does anyone still read? If you read Mein Koran, the ‘root cause’ of Muslim fascism and war becomes rather obvious. Take the first part of this execrable book. Suras 2 to 10 comprise 134 pages of the Koran, or fully 32% of the book. This first third of the Koran contains 1466 verses. No less than 348 of these verses, or 24% of the total preach violence against the Infidel. The rest of the book is no better. To be specific about ‘violence’ we can define violence in using the following dictionary terms:
1 a: exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare effecting illegal entry into a house) b :an instance of violent treatment or procedure
2: injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation: outrage
3a: intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or force <the violence of the storm b:vehement feeling or expression :fervor; also:an instance of such action or feeling c :a clashing or jarring quality : discordance
4: undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)
Mein Koran satisfies the above definition of violence. It is a book which promotes a raging violence and hate of the Infidel or non-Muslim. Almost every single page broadcasts inter-alia: use of physical force against Infidels; injury; profanation against non-Muslims; furious destructive action against the ‘enemies’ of Muhammad; violent, vehement feelings against Jews and Christians; a philosophical world-view of the discordant nature of non-Muslim society which must be either subjugated or destroyed. Violence is the core, underlying characteristic of the Muhammadan books, the Koran, Hadiths and Sira (biography of Muhammad).
Table: Violent verses in the first 10 Sura’s
|
Sura |
Total Verses |
Number of Verses of violence against the Infidel |
% of violent verses of the total |
|
2 |
286 |
42 |
15% |
|
3 |
200 |
54 |
27 |
|
4 |
176 |
49 |
30 |
|
5 |
120 |
42 |
35 |
|
6 |
165 |
24 |
15 |
|
7 |
206 |
37 |
18 |
|
8 |
75 |
33 |
42 |
|
9 |
129 |
52 |
40 |
|
10 |
109 |
15 |
14 |
|
Total |
1466 |
348 |
24% |
The first 10 books of Mein Koran are the most important. They are the ‘longer Suras’ which detail the organisation, ethos, and imperialistic organisation of Muhammad’s cult. They are lurid with hate, violence and adjudications to war against the Infidel. There is no compromise here. The world is split between the adherents of Muhammad and the rest. Those who are outside the cult of Muhammad have few choices. They must surrender to Muslims, be conquered and used as tax slaves for Muslims and ruled by Muslims within the ‘House of Islam’, or killed and erased. That is it.
Moslems cannot make the argument that the other 75% of Mein Koran is centred upon an ethical program of free-will, tolerance and inter-faith harmony. None of these attributes can be found anywhere in the Koran including the only 2 passages that the multi-cult can quote namely Sura 109 and 2:256, which do not advocate peace or tolerance but quite the opposite if one bothers to read the verses before and after the out-of-context-lines oft-quoted as evidence of Muslim-inter faith love and dialogue (See here, here and here for refutations of the claims that either Sura is about the Golden Rule or tolerance).
Beyond Sura 10, most of the text which is not dealing with 'punishing' the 'wrong doers and criminals', is busy with demands of submission and cult obedience to both Muhammad and Allah [are they the same, a good question rarely asked?].
It is clear that if 25% of the first 1466 verses preach violence, hate and jihad against the Infidel that we have a document of power and aggression, not one concerned with humanism, free-will, piety, and faith through reason and understanding including the use of a Golden Rule. None of these characteristics can be found anywhere in the Koran. Jihad or the call to war has many names in the Koran, it is simply untrue that the Koran does not advocate Jihad [see here for an example], or the destruction of Infidels. The whole objective of the Koran is to promote violence, hate and anger against non-Muslims. Maybe the pious members of the Multi-Kult might wish to actually read the foundational documents of Muhammad’s cult.