boat-refugees-water-escape

CZECH PRESIDENT: NO MORE REFUGEES…

January 14, 2017 By Joseph P. Farrell

In last Thursday's News and Views from the Nefarium I reported on an interesting story that appeared in three different (and very divergent) venues concerning the growing scrutiny of Darth Soros' foundations and NGOs operating in Hungary. Those stories appeared in Zero Hedge, RT, and on Alex Jones' Infowars website in a revealing article by Wayne Madsen. As you'll recall, I suggested several things in that News and Views:

1) that if Mr. Orban's remarks represented a growing and legitimate pan-European concern shared by various governments, and the emergent anti-EU anti-refugee opposition parties, then that legitimacy should manifest itself by a public focus on Mr. Soros' role in those policies. In short, Mr. Soros and his foundations will become a talking point of the representatives of those opposition parties.

2) that Mr. Orban's remarks might also be a part of my "emergent Mafia Wars" scenario of international relations in which, as Catherine Fitts has recently observed, assassinations play a much more prominent role in international politics. As such, I also suggested that we should expect the globaloney crowd once again to use "demonize Russia" tactics, and thus to tar the emerging opposition to Brussels' and Berlin's "multicultural" policies with Russian "influence", either in the form of more "Russian hacking" allegations or other memes. As I noted, the Russian hacking meme has already been floated in Germany as a kind of trial balloon.

It is in that context that the following article shared by Ms  S.H. might be read:

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2017/01/11/czech-president-we-do-not-want-muslims-because-they-refuse-to-integrate/

What is interesting here is the Czech Republic's President's comments about integration, a term which, notably, has been left apparently undefined. From the context of his remarks we may reasonably guess that his idea is probably somewhat different than that of the United Kingdom, where we have seen separate Sharia courts and patrols actually implemented, or that it is different from what has been seen in Germany. One wonders, in the light of other recent news, if his idea of "integration" includes acceptation of money from the (out)House of Saud for the establishment of sharia law centers in the University of Prague or other Czech universities.

But then the article makes another observation, and it's a crucial one, both for its commissions, and its omissions:

As we have been reporting, there has been a deliberating importation of populations whose beliefs, values, and actions are entirely incompatible with European society. Their actions, and especially the fact that they are allowed to commit and get away unpunished for horrible crimes, are a recipe for causing a massive war. As we have been talking about, there is the rise of a new, neo-pagan socialist, anti-Christian eugenics rising up in response.

The Czech President represents, in one sense, the frustration of most Europeans, whether they are from the East or West, and that is they do not want the Muslims or Islam in their lands. However, what makes this approach of Czech Republic- and much of Eastern Europe- different is that they don’t want them because, as he emphasized, these people choose to isolate themselves, taking from society instead of contributing to it. As such, instead of bringing these people in, it is better to just ask them not to come all together. It is far more honest of an approach than what is happening in Western Europe, in which Islam and Muslims are being used as political vehicles to usher in a new anti-Christian order, regardless of the human cost. (Emphasis added)

This is a key observation, and especially its notice of the rise of "a new, neo-pagan, socialist, anti-Christian eugenics rising up in response." At the most basic level, the issue driving the politics of Europe now is not even a political one, it's a cultural one. And Europeans reacting to the policies of Mr. Globaloney in my opinion rightly intuit that their culture is at stake, though here we meet with an important omission, for this intuition is as much about what I would call the Renaissance and humanist-Englightenment bases of Western European civilization as they are about its Judeo-Christian roots. As I've observed here and elsewhere, the roots of western culture and civilization are three-fold, and not simply religio-cultural, and it is that all-important third component, the "Renaissance-humanist-Englightment" complex for want of a better expression, standing on the foundation of the other two, that that makes the culture unique. Thus, the opposition in Europe is colored by two trends, the radical neo-pagan element, with its strong overtones of neo-fascism, and the more moderate opposition represented by what appears to be the overwhelming majority of those opposition movements and parties that are keenly aware of those three core elements and foundations.

All this brings me back to some high octane speculation that I first voiced some years ago on the late George Anne Hughes' The Byte Show and in other venues, a speculation that I voiced because even those years ago, the problems of the "refugee crisis" and of the "Islamicization" of Europe were beginning to loom: why would the "elite" of Europe sponsor such a nutty and inherently suicidal project when the culture itself was at stake? If one has difficulty thinking in "glittering abstractions", then imagine, for a moment, having to pay a jizzya (religious tax) for the public performance, say, of Mozart's various masses, because of the inherently Christian nature of their texts? Or of Leonard Bernstein's Chichester Psalms or Candide? Or having to get special permission to read the works of Kant, or Schopenhauer or Wittgenstein or Sartre? Put in such simplistic terms, that's what is at stake.

So why such an inherently suicidal course? What I proposed then, and reiterate now, as a speculative possibility, is one would do this if one were trying to create a genuinely "European cultural identity" wedded to the Brussels bureaucrats themselves, something those bureaucrats and technocrats currently lack, and the way to stress that commonality and identity is to bring in a culture wholly foreign and antithetical to it. In this respect, it is interesting to note that the various opposition parties speak as much about "European" cultural features as they do about "German" or "Dutch" or "French" ones. And if that scenario has any traction, then eventually one should expect to see the Eurocrats themselves taking deliberate aim at their own policies, and beefing up the Eurostate in opposition to "the threat." And notably, those neo-pagan, neo-Fascist elements are waiting in the wings to possibly, and I emphasize, possibly fill the cultural "void" with a neo-paganism that bypasses those other two core cultural components.

...And we all know a certain someone with lots of NGO money and a lust for power that has his own associations with that Fascist tendency in the past, and the direction that European cultural politics takes will be signaled in large degree on how those opposition movements address the problematic that he poses.

See you on the flip side...