Culture, politics, science, philosophy.
General manifesto ***** Immigration manifesto
The deep Crisis of the West
A discussion of the ideology behind the politics
28.01.2012. All of a sudden one discovers patterns that have previously been invisible, because the perceived problem and the words used are new and detached from previous ideologies. New words are used, and the underlying ideological currents behind them go unnoticed. One has a wish that everything will be new and that this time things will be different, writes Knut Skjærgård. Here are some additional excerpts from his article:
All of a sudden one discovers patterns that have previously been invisible, because the perceived problem and the words used are new and detached from previous ideologies. New words are used, and the underlying ideological currents behind them go unnoticed. One has a wish that everything will be new and that this time things will be different.
After World War Two the nations of the world decided that there would be no more war. The war had created international legal issues, large groups of people had been displaced from their homelands, and solving the refugee crisis was the most pressing task for the newly-founded United Nations. The brutal toll that the war had exacted on the civilian populations led to the creation of the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. The International Convention on Refugees first saw light in 1951, and its purpose was to ensure equal treatment for all refugees. It also placed legal obligations on the host nations to properly consider each asylum application. Additionally, it required that the host nations refrain from repatriating refugees in those cases where there was a real risk of persecution.
Ideas such as international cooperation and globalization arose as a direct result of the International Declaration of Human Rights. The idea of a United States of Europe attracted support from a new generation of politicians and visionaries. The influence of the UN kept increasing, and so did the support for globalization. A big international treaty of co-operation eventually saw the light of day.
But in the 1960s and ‘70s, long after the refugee problems of World War Two had been resolved, something happened in the West. The labor migration from the East began. This immigration came as a surprise to the Western nations, although it wasn’t necessarily unwelcome. Manpower was needed. The old colonial powers welcomed huge numbers of citizens from their former colonies. But the scale of this immigration was relatively modest, and assimilation went fairly smoothly.
Another typical trait that characterizes totalitarian ideologies is the denial of reality. The fact that we now have an ideological, authoritarian asylum regime with religious overtones is evident when the advocates completely close their eyes to the enormous economic and social costs of this policy. When the King and the Prime Minister in their 2012 New Year speeches failed to mention anything about the massive challenges that Norwegian society is facing as a result of the mass influx of asylum seekers, it is incomprehensible, considering that most outside the nomenklatura read, see and hear about these problems every day. The unpleasant reality is covered up and is not talked about; thus the problems do not really exist other than as delusions among the common people. So far the authorities have managed to sweep clear signs of ethnic and religious conflicts under the rug in Norway, problems which in Western Europe, however, are about to destabilize nations such as France, England and Germany. The problems are serious, and they have the ability to transform Norway into a new society divided by class, characterized by religious and group identity. In the future individual security will not be determined by being a citizen of the Norwegian state, but by belonging to a strong ethnic or religious group.
The only thing these two heads of state mentioned in their respective speeches was the Utøya atrocity committed by an ethnic Norwegian. Some people probably wondered if these two were in fact talking about Norway. Their speeches show a strong display of ideological normative force, a strong consensus culture which is sufficiently based in itself. The king and the queen had even visited a Muslim family and found that everything was normal!
This removal from reality can only be explained by the fact that all authoritarian and totalitarian ideologies distort reality. All such ideologies share a deceptive (seductive) character, and by agreeing to achieve a stated goal, they tolerate endless violations of ordinary citizens, none of which presents any ethical problems for them. Those who do not agree are excluded and lose their careers.
After the collapse of communism in Europe, after members of the ’68 Generation abandoned their utopias about armed revolution, we all believed that the notion of the ideal society, the classless society, was history. What we are seeing now is that the era of the great social experiments is back again, but in a modern form, justified by arguments based on human rights and tolerance.
The socialists and the Left will never relinquish their ideas about designing the ideal society, far removed from their original roots, their traditions and their culture, and a lineage that goes back several thousand years. No one knows the cost of this; no one even knows if these projects are feasible. Just as in other failed social experiments, the end could be tragic.
The notions of a multicultural society can in many ways today be recognized in surviving traditions of thought that have strangely resurfaced in the West. Fortunately, people are waking up to dangers. I’m not saying that everybody with a positive attitude towards the multicultural society necessarily has a totalitarian disposition, but it is important to shed some light on the underlying ideological currents and name them. When the authoritarian aspects are more clearly defined, most liberal and conservative politicians will reject the multicultural experiment. For the time being, we are talking about a form of false consciousness that must be exposed, and it is then essential to do this among the ruling class.
Read the entire article at GoV (originally published in Norwegian at Document.no).
A traditionalist’s guide to Norwegian politics — Norway’s AltRight
18.01.2012. In December of 2010, I wrote that “with the exception of a handful of half-mad recluses and obscure blogs, the Norwegian non-aligned Right does not exist”, a statement for which I was criticized by Ole Jørgen Anfindsen in an otherwise positive assessment. Although I think Ole Jørgen misinterpreted my comment somewhat (it was meant as a gently self-deprecating quip, not an indictment – in fact, I cribbed the phrase “limited to a few half-mad recluses” from Roger Scruton, who used it to describe the state of British conservatism around the time his book The Meaning of Conservatism was published), he probably had a point. As I’ve learned since, Norway has more erudite and committed authors, bloggers, and intellectuals who may be considered friends or members of the “alternative Right” – which I will here define as the segment of the Norwegian Right that is not aligned with any of the mainstream non-socialist parties – than I thought. Here are some of them. Continue reading at Dispatches from the North.
Attempts to silence criticism of Islam
14.01.2012. German authorities have officially confirmed that they are monitoring German-language Internet websites that are critical of Muslim immigration and the Islamization of Europe.
According to Manfred Murck, director of the Hamburg branch of the German domestic intelligence agency, the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV), his organization is studying whether German citizens who criticize Muslims and Islam on the Internet are fomenting hate and are thus criminally guilty of "breaching" the German constitution.
The BfV's move marks a significant setback for the exercise of free speech in Germany and comes amid a months-long smear campaign led by a triple alliance of leftwing German multicultural elites, sundry Muslim groups and members of the mainstream media, who have been relentless in their efforts to discredit the so-called counter-jihad movement (also known as the "Islamophobes") in Germany.
Continue reading this article by Soeren Kern at Stonegate Institute.
«His book The Dark Net fisked by fellow Norwegian»
04.01.2012. Øivind Østberg filed the following review of Øyvind Strømmen’s book, ‘The Dark Net’ at Document.no, published on 30.12.2011. Østberg’s review exposes the shallowness and overt bias of the author’s book, which entirely excludes the circumstances in which the anti-Islamization movement was born. It’s as if the opposing of Islam took place within a bubble, with no other outside influences of Islam itself. For further comments, and a complete English translation of Østberg's review of Strømmen's book, continue reading at the Vlad Tepes blog.
PS: For those of you who wonder about the spelling of certain Norwegian names, Mr. Strømmen's first name should properly be spelled Øyvind, not Oyvind, i.e., with Ø (O-slash) rather than a plain O. And Mr. Østberg's first name is indeed spelled Øivind, i.e., with i rather than y as the second letter. As a matter of fact, Øivind and Øyvind are both common male's names in Norway, and are pronounced identically.
Permalinks to older articles