The Finish of the West
Just after my previous comment someone calling himself Whiskey_199 wrote at Gates of Vienna:
Bottom line, the exclusion of the Press means Sharia is coming in.To which I answered:
OF COURSE Sweden will cave. Or more precisely the government. Among the likely agreements: banning pork, dogs, "uncovered mean" i.e. unveiled women around Muslims, "blasphemy" (but only against Muslims/Islam), and of course outlawing booze.
The elites of course will not be affected by this but the ordinary person will be punished which is the whole point of multiculturalism, PC, and moral relativism. Punishment of the ordinary person.
Lars Viks is going to jail. The newspapers that published the Modoggies will of course be fined and some of the editors/publishers jailed. That is also the "deal."
Lars Viks is going to jail. The newspapers that published the Modoggies will of course be fined and some of the editors/publishers jailed.As Fjordman wrote after a discussion with me this spring:
Well, of course not.
This is the fundamental error by the right-wing. They truly believe that the left-wingers want to destroy our civilization, want to be dhimmified, etc. But this is not what the left-wing perceive themselves as doing. They see themselves as maximizing goodness. And we're talking Christian goodness here, 'cause the Left is all about Christian ethics.
This is maybe the most important conclusion of my writings at my blog--something I got distracted from by other people and by being unfocused myself--that what the left-wing is doing is not destroying Western civilization, but completing/fulfilling it. What I call "The Finish of the West".
According to a conservative Swedish friend of mine, many of the seemingly crazy excesses now on display are not so much a perversion of Western civilization as a fulfillment of it.I should get back onto this theme. I have let myself being distracted too much by less important sidetracks, especially by Lawrence Auster.
[End of post]
13 comments:
What I've noticed at Gates of Vienna is that the people who say "Sweden will cave" are all non-Swedes.
I think you can discount the American opinions -- we really don't know what we're talking about -- but the opinion of the Danes is worth considering. The Danes seem certain that Sweden will abase itself before the Muslims. Do they know something that you don't know? Or are they just being negative because of the historical Danish/Swedish conflict, i.e. they're pissed off about Skåne?
I don't know enough to have an opinion; that's why I keep reading & trying to find out more.
after all, all this shame and mess is caused by people having evolved from monkeys. New developments always bring new problems. Have we remained monkeys, no liberals, no West, no Crystianity and no socialism would ever appear. So the question is - should we better remain monkeys?
" They see themselves as maximizing goodness"
Having been a left-liberal myself, I would disagree. Left-wingers are maximizing "fairness", not goodness. Fairness is goodness for "oppressed" at the cost of good people. That's because deep inside left-liberals identify themselves with the "oppressed". So the real reason for liberal "fairness" is actually their care of themselves, not a principled search for goodness.
Ypp,
You have missed the point that the concept of Christian goodness is based on slave morality and inversion of values.
Baron Bodissey wrote:
What I've noticed at Gates of Vienna is that the people who say "Sweden will cave" are all non-Swedes.
Well, all the counterjihad Swedes said so too. At GoV. Or if you go to http://motvarnet.se/ the new portal to all the anti-PC blogs.
I was alone in saying differently among anti-PCs.
I think you can discount the American opinions -- we really don't know what we're talking about -- but the opinion of the Danes is worth considering. The Danes seem certain that Sweden will abase itself before the Muslims. Do they know something that you don't know? Or are they just being negative because of the historical Danish/Swedish conflict, i.e. they're pissed off about Skåne?
I'm with the Danes and not the Swedes (in general) about Islam, of course. But this is not the issue here.
No of course the Danes do not know anything I don't. Completely the other way around. By being here I can read the situation better than them.
Possibly the Danes are a bit extra negative, and I mention this only to stress why I do not discount an informed American opinion such as yours. But all in all, I'm just as negative as you and the Danes. But I'm here telling you that this particular theater won't be played in the way that you all are expecting. All thanks to the "invention" of Lars Vilks.
People act as Turning machines. Push the buttons in the right way, and they will act predictably. Lars Vilks tailored this thing in such a skillful way such that he managed to make even the Swedes act in an honourable way, as honourable as possible being Swedes (which include dialog with thugs etc.)
Read also my answer to Geza in the other thread about the overall situation.
Kepiblanc claimed at GoV that his prediction was correct. This is wrong. So far it's my prediction that is correct. Why were the Muslim ambassadors satisfied? As far as we know at this point, just because they were received, and there was a lot of hot air in that room. Coming from a "respect" and "honour" culture, this is bound to make them feel happy for a few days. Kind of like when you and your colleagues are sent to a weekend conference.
And today Lars Vilks put up a new Muhammad cartoon at his site...
But this might be the culmination of the whole affair. It is possible that it will ebb out from here on. Ending in my worst fear, that Swedes will consider it demonstrated that dialog is possible with Muslims. Making liberals around the world believing even more in the myth of moderate Muslims. By the end of it, being the bad side of Sweden getting to have the major influence in all this, after all, in spite of all the good things that happened up until now.
As I said, this might be the culmination of the whole affair. It is quite possible that Lars Vilks from now on will stop making Muhammad sketches and the newspapers will stop publishing them.
Then probably Sverigedemokraterna will try to keep the fire burning by publishing Vilks' sketches and similar things. The Swedish establishment finds a way to frame this as a hate crime (surely it must be, if it's done by "racists"). They will be punished, and everything will be back to normal.
Back to square one, but with the extra baggage of the belief in that it's been demonstrated that dialog is possible with Muslims.
However, under the surface the rage of the ordinary people is boiling.
CS --
You misascribe certain opinions to me which are not mine. I don't hold that Sweden has caved, or is finished, or any of those other endgame assessments. In this particular case, I assert only that the Muslim ambassadors evidently thought they got some kind of concession from Sweden. But where that leads, I don't know.
I know that Sweden's government has practiced dangerous and destructive policies for the last 50 years or so, that they are untenable, and that things are about to change. But I have no idea what they will change to.
Fjordman, of course, has a more informed opinion, being closer to the subject than I am. And you are closer still. I defer to your analysis, and Carpenter's (who agrees with you, or so it seems).
You misascribe certain opinions to me which are not mine. I don't hold that Sweden has caved, or is finished, or any of those other endgame assessments.
I'm honestly surprised by this comment. I'm sorry if I have given the impression to ascribe opinions to you that you do not have. But I do not think that I have done so. Where would that have been?
And when you use words as "finished" and "endgame assessments", I'm completely lost. Where did this come from? Nobody at all said these things in the current discussion.
In this particular case, I assert only that the Muslim ambassadors evidently thought they got some kind of concession from Sweden.
Sure. This has been very clear. I have not commented upon the obvious.
I also agree with you here.
I know that Sweden's government has practiced dangerous and destructive policies for the last 50 years or so, that they are untenable, and that things are about to change. But I have no idea what they will change to.
Unlike Anchorix is hinting, I do not think that this is the big change or anything like that. But it's a welcome change of the scenery of Swedish politics. But I'm not sure that it's more than that.
To conclude, my comments on this has been regarding something very specific--Sweden won't cave in regarding this specific thing. But all along I have not been positive about the big picture. In the bigger picture Sweden is continuing to become dhimmified.
Also I think your reporting and assessment about this issue has been excellent. And I'm once again sorry there has been a misunderstanding here.
What I was responding to was:
But all in all, I'm just as negative as you and the Danes.
I'm negative on some specifics, but only on specifics. You and Carpenter and other Swedes who write to me make me feel fairly optimistic about Swedes, in general terms.
Economically speaking, there will soon be a very big change in Sweden. That's what I meant. I agree with Fjordman on that one -- the welfare state in Sweden is unsustainable, and its contradictions will bring on a crisis fairly soon. Fjordman's estimate is 5 to 10 years, but I don't know if he's right. However, I do think it will be soon.
"concept of Christian goodness is based on slave morality and inversion of values"
If you make statements as general as this one, you should at least present some explanation and references to the articles where it is discussed. I also cannot but mention, that having rejected discussing general matters like goodness, you regress into useless arguments about what Swedes know about what Danes think about what Swedes know. By rejecting the one currently available source of goodness, you should at least offer another one, otherwise there is no point in this discussion.
...what the left-wing is doing is not destroying Western civilization, but completing/fulfilling it.
IMHO not quite. The left is not a monolith. While most of the left (the centrist wing commonly described as "liberal") adheres to the aformentioned description, there is a hard left wing (aka cultural marxists) that is most assuredly seeking to destroy western civilization in all its aspects, and is driving a large part of the liberal agenda.
"Politics make strange bed fellows".
In my book Leftwingers see islam as a partner in destroying western culture (=capitalism.) The tool is mostly multiculturalism. The collectivist elite is ,of course, exempt and childishly believes it can run the country together with the mussies.
"If we are nice to them...."
Sweden is continuing to become dhimmified. Dissecting Leftism says:" It's the shared hatred of the rest of us that unites Islamists and the Left"
Even though the discussion is over, I would like to add a comment in case future archeologists dig it up. Clearly, current dcline of the West is caused by the West itself, including all its attributes. You claim that you found a single principal reason - Crystianity. Other people also found other reasons, such as demographic decline, world wars, Jews, Socialism, European nazism, atheism etc. Interestingly, all of them present persuading arguments. I write in your blog because I haven't yet given up on you as a reasonable person. Having so many single reasons, all well argumented, isn't there a feeling that there must be something else?
So, here is my The Single and Only Correct Reason. The reason is the West's quest for power. Goodness is justification, tolerance is necessary not to repell the potential subjects of Western rule. Having given up on military rule, modern progressives prefer the "soft" rule - by economic and idealogical means. AThe words they say may be even taken from the Bible or any other source, but the passion that drives them is rather diabolical.
So why the West needs Chrystianity? Not because that can immediately solve the Islam problem. But because it is necessary for the sane mental life. Having obtained sanity, the West will solve other problems somehow.
Post a Comment