The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information

 TeasersiSteve Blog
Charlie Hebdo

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
🔊 Listen RSS

With Muslim terrorists committing anti-Semitic massacres in France and Denmark earlier this year, and Middle Eastern and African youths routinely harassing Jews on the street in European cities, one might think that facilitating another massive influx of Muslims, along with all the chain migration to follow, would be considered not good for the Jews.

Some Eastern European countries have offered to accept persecuted Syrian Christian refugees, but not Muslims. You might think that would be considered a reasonable compromise good for the Jews, right?

But that is simply unthinkable to the current mind. The important thing is not to do practical things to help actual European Jews, the important thing is to stick to the Narrative and follow out its symbolic logic. Thus, from the New York Times:

Hungarian Leader Rebuked for Saying Muslim Migrants Must Be Blocked ‘to Keep Europe Christian’
SEPT. 3, 2015

Open Source

Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orban, was criticized online and in person on Thursday for writing in a German newspaper that it was important to secure his nation’s borders from mainly Muslim migrants “to keep Europe Christian.”

“Those arriving have been raised in another religion, and represent a radically different culture. Most of them are not Christians, but Muslims,” Mr. Orban wrote in a commentary for Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung, a German newspaper. “This is an important question, because Europe and European identity is rooted in Christianity.”

“Is it not worrying in itself that European Christianity is now barely able to keep Europe Christian?” Mr. Orban asked. “There is no alternative, and we have no option but to defend our borders.”

Before meeting with Mr. Orban on Thursday in Brussels, Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, which represents European Union leaders, thanked him for securing Europe’s borders, but took issue with the argument of Mr. Orban’s opinion article.

“I want to underline that for me, Christianity in public and social life means a duty to our brothers in need,” Mr. Tusk said as he stood alongside Mr. Orban.

“Referring to Christianity in a public debate on migration must mean in the first place the readiness to show solidarity and sacrifice. For a Christian it shouldn’t matter what race, religion and nationality the person in need represents.”

Mr. Tusk, a former prime minister of Poland, drew attention to his rebuke of the Hungarian leader on social networks, and his office posted video of his comments on YouTube.

Mr. Orban waited until the end of the day to respond to Mr. Tusk. At a separate news conference in which he faced reporters alone, he reiterated the theme of his article, that Europe was at risk of being “overrun” and had to shut its borders. The Hungarian prime minister argued that European countries had no obligation to accept most of the migrants, as “the overwhelming majority of people are not refugees because they are not coming from a war-stricken area.”

“Our Christian obligation is not to create illusions,” he said. …

Mr. Orban’s formulation echoed notorious remarks made by the poet T.S. Eliot in 1933, another moment in history when Europeans expressed fears of being overwhelmed by a “flood” of non-Christian immigrants.

The Real Enemy

The highest priority must always be to defeat the real enemy, T.S. Eliot.

Of course, you can’t stop T.S. Eliot in the past without getting a few more kosher supermarket shoppers and bat mitzvah security guards murdered by Muslim thugs in the future. But the deaths of these Jews will, apparently, be a small price to pay for not having to consider whether diminishing marginal returns have started to set in for our era’s dominant ideological obsessions.

Never forget: It’s always 1933.

Thus, from the New York Times once again:

Treatment of Migrants Evokes Memories of Europe’s Darkest Hour

BUDAPEST — In Hungary, hundreds of migrants surrounded by armed police officers were tricked into boarding a train with promises of freedom, only to be taken to a “reception” camp. In the Czech Republic, the police hustled more than 200 migrants off a train and wrote identification numbers on their hands with indelible markers, stopping only when someone pointed out that this was more than a little like the tattoos the Nazis put on concentration camp inmates.

Razor-wire fences rise along national borders in Greece, Bulgaria, Hungary and France. Many political leaders stoke rising nationalism by portraying the migrants as dangerous outsiders whose foreign cultures and Muslim religion could overwhelm cherished traditional ways.

“It was horrifying when I saw those images of police putting numbers on people’s arms,” said Robert Frolich, the chief rabbi of Hungary. “It reminded me of Auschwitz. And then putting people on a train with armed guards to take them to a camp where they are closed in? Of course there are echoes of the Holocaust.”

Europeans are facing one of the Continent’s worst humanitarian crises since World War II, yet many seem blind to images that recall that blackest time in their history.

This migrant crisis is no genocide. The issue throughout the Continent is how to register, house, resettle or repatriate hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees, a daunting logistical challenge. But perhaps not since the Jews were rounded up by Nazi Germany have there been as many images coming out of Europe of people locked into trains, babies handed over barbed wire, men in military gear herding large crowds of bedraggled men, women and children.

At the same time, the images may reveal a deeper truth about Europe and its seeming unpreparedness for a crisis so long in the making: While extolling the virtues of human rights and humanism, it remains, in many parts, a place resistant to immigration and diversity.

As a result, some here are reacting in ways that recall some of the Continent’s darkest impulses.

“They must be oblivious because who would do that if they had any historical memory whatsoever,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “It’s amazing, really. Certainly those images of the trains can’t help but conjure up nightmares of the Holocaust.”

Rabbi Frolich was especially struck by the lies used to manipulate the migrants.

“They tell them that the train was going to Austria and then take them to a camp instead,” the rabbi said. “I don’t think the police got instructions from the government to do it this way, but it is very similar to what happened to Jews in the 1940s.”

Jan Munk, chairman of the Jewish Community of Prague, was inclined to be generous in his interpretation of the episode.

“I understand the reasons why the police marked migrants with numbers,” he said. “They are under a lot of pressure and stress and simply did not realize the connotations it would have. It was indeed tasteless and reminded me of the numbers at Auschwitz, but I know it was not done on purpose.”

But for others, the fact that it was not done on purpose was even more frightening, showing a puzzling historical disconnect in many of the very places that the Holocaust caused the deepest devastation.

“It may be correct that they didn’t know, but the insensitivity and the ignorance of the imagery their actions evoked is stunning; it’s just sickening,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, in New York.

The T.S. Eliot Menace is the important thing, not the future of Europe.

George Orwell famously stated: “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

But those who control the present may not actually get a future they will like if they are so focused upon symbolically smiting their enemies of the past that they blind themselves to learning from the present.

🔊 Listen RSS

From the NYT:

In Cold Political Terms, Far Right and French President Both Gain

PARIS — … If Mr. Hollande has gotten a small boost from these terrible few days, however, so have Ms. Le Pen and the far-right National Front, which has made the challenge of radical Islam to France the center of their politics. Even before the attacks, her brand of nationalistic French populism had helped make her a credible contender to succeed Mr. Hollande in the 2017 election.

The homegrown terrorism here, with its apparent links to Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, will also be used by other far-right, nationalist and anti-immigration movements in Europe, from the United Kingdom Independence Party to the Sweden Democrats and Germany’s Pegida — Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West. That is another reason so many European leaders from the mainstream parties of the center right and center left, from Angela Merkel of Germany to David Cameron of Britain and Mariano Rajoy of Spain, came to show their own solidarity with France and Mr. Hollande.

Invitees also included the leaders of all the main French political parties, including former prime ministers and presidents, like Nicolas Sarkozy and his rivals on the center right in the Union for a Popular Movement, Alain Juppé and François Fillon, who themselves are divided but also battling for voters attracted to National Front.

Ms. Le Pen was excluded from the Paris rally, however, in what many consider a political mistake by Mr. Hollande’s Socialist Party, which organized the event.

Ms. Le Pen, whose support in various opinion polls for the 2017 presidential election comes close to 30 percent, loudly cried foul. Her exclusion made a mockery of the concept of national unity, she said, and was itself a violation of “freedom of expression,” which the rally was meant to uphold. She accused the political elite of “astounding cowardice” to isolate “the only political movement that has no responsibility in the current situation, nor do its millions of voters.”

“The masks fall,” she said. “National unity is a pitiful political maneuver.”

She said her supporters would see her exclusion as a “tribute” to their power, saying, “They will have the opportunity if they wish to express their opinion at the ballot box.”

Ms. Le Pen’s embrace of exclusion perfectly fits her politics. Using old tropes of the far right in France, she took pride in avoiding the capital, Paris, which she and her supporters view as the center of political corruption and cynicism, for “la France profonde,” the “real France” of genuine patriots tied to their land and their provinces. So she marched on Sunday instead in southern France, in Beaucaire, where her party won local elections.

“We’ll march there where the spirit of tolerance is the strongest,” she said, “where sectarianism is less violent.”

Alain Barluet, a journalist with the daily Le Figaro, said Mr. Hollande had handled the situation well except for his exclusion of Ms. Le Pen.

“The problem for us now is simple: Will she be the next president?” Mr. Barluet said. “Many people are unhappy with the exclusion of the National Front from the march, since she is always emphasizing this fracture — that she is a victim, that she is the real France.” …

The problem, Mr. Rousselin said, is that “the National Front is the only party that is saying out loud things that many people feel, and the current moment is playing into this discourse.” He added, “If you had national unity with the National Front present, you could say that we are united and the terrorists are isolated, but the problem is the infighting that starts the day after.”

Erlanger, the NYT’s Paris correspondent (which is a pretty good job as far as reporting beats go), is a smart guy, so his non-frothing at the mouth tone about Le Pen in this article is interesting. Three years ago, just as Trayvonmania was taking off in the U.S., he made an embarrassing mistake by assuming that an anti-Semitic terrorist crime in France was committed by some rightwinger excited by Le Pen’s presidential campaign. Instead, it turned out to be the usual suspects, same as last week’s kosher grocery store terrorism.

Perhaps he’s learned from his mistake?

Is anybody else learning?

• Tags: Charlie Hebdo 
🔊 Listen RSS

Commenter Wilkey points out:

… We keep hearing that Muslims must tolerate blasphemy because free speech. But Europe doesn’t have free speech. In most European countries, including France, there is a long list of blasphemous statements for which one can go to jail – from publicly denying facts, like the Holocaust, to denying opinions, like racial equality.

America has a lot of ways of enforcing blasphemy taboos as well, such as being forced out of your job (e.g., James D. Watson, Jason Richwine, Brandon Eich, etc.), public humiliations, leaking confidential conversations, and so forth.

The Left is an amorphous religion from which one cannot claim religious freedom, because the Religion of Political Correctness has never been formally declared. But it has its own dogma – racial and gender quality, etc. It has its own scriptures – poems like “The New Colossus,” and plays like The Crucible. It has its own hymns – “Imagine.” It has its own deities, including one – The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Junior – with his own holiday. “Public schools” are now effectively parochial schools owned and run by the Religion of Political Correctness.

A belief in magic is almost mandatory these days.

It must seem to Muslims very hypocritical to claim they must accept blasphemy while banning blasphemy against the Left.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Charlie Hebdo, France, Freedom of Speech 
🔊 Listen RSS

From the Washington Post:

A tweet from far-right icon Le Pen causes anger in France

By Adam Taylor January 9 at 10:42 AM

Jean-Marie le Pen, the father of France’s mainstream far right movement, provoked both outrage and support on Friday when he tweeted an image of his daughter Marine le Pen with the slogan “Keep Calm And Vote Le Pen.”

The elder Le Pen’s message came as police struggled with two separate hostage standoffs in Paris. At least one of the incidents is believed linked to a terrorist attack on the offices of satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo that left 12 people dead Wednesday. …

Online, there was clearly some support for the National Front: Jean-Marie le Pen’s message received more than 1,000 retweets in less than an hour. However, many users expressed shock at what they saw as a cynical appropriation of a tragedy. “Vous êtes odieux” (You are odious), one user tweeted at le Pen. “Manœuvre nauséabonde” (a nauseating political maneuver), wrote another.

Whenever Muslims Behave Badly, we are immediately warned by the establishment, in what I call the Frontlash, that the real danger is the imminent, looming Backlash.

In the U.S., of course, this is awfully silly since there are basically zero white Christian youth organizations outside of the control of responsible adults.

In soccer countries, with their more organic, working class sports culture, however, there are hooligan firms that could conceivably cause trouble. So old man Le Pen’s tweet is telling his rowdier supporters to keep calm and instead express their outrage in the voting booth.

So you might think that Le Pen’s call — “Keep calm” — for no Backlash in the streets would be praised. But Le Pen’s call for peace and democracy is outraging the Establishment: because the point of their Frontlash is not to avoid some broken glass, it is to hold on to power by demonizing and demoralizing anyone thinking of holding the ruling caste accountable for their policy mistakes via the democratic process.

• Tags: Charlie Hebdo, frontlash 
🔊 Listen RSS

I wrote in VDARE:

In other words, the Administration and its media shills remain committed to their Grand Strategy of Invade the World – Invite the World. Bomb them over there and indulge them over here.

Obviously, when you stop and think about it, that makes no sense whatsoever.

So, it’s time for a new Grand Strategy to unify domestic and foreign policies for how Westerners should deal with Muslims. Because strategizing routinely fails due to too much Rube Goldbergish complexity, I’ll boil it down to one word:


Perhaps the most quoted social philosopher of our time famously asked:

“Can we all get along?”

Well, when it comes to Muslims and Westerners, the answer is:

No, we can’t.

So, deal with it. When we get in each other’s faces, we get on each other’s nerves. It’s time to get out of each other’s faces.

Westerners and Muslims don’t agree on the basics of social order and don’t want to live under the same rules. That shouldn’t be a problem because that’s what separate countries are for. We should stop occupying their countries and stop letting them move to ours.

To paraphrase E.M. Forster:

“Only disconnect.”

If we start disconnecting now, maybe in a generation or two we’ll have forgotten what we’ve done to each other and can start afresh.

I wrote that back in 2006.

Granted, I’m some kind of weirdo nut who thinks the basic arrangement of the world into 200 separate countries is, on the whole, a pretty good idea. But everybody who is anybody knows instead that All We Have to Do is invite every Iron Age culture in the world into our countries and then come to a mutual agreement with them upon protocols of behavior governing every aspect of our mutual lives.

That’s All We Have to Do.

• Tags: Charlie Hebdo 
🔊 Listen RSS

The terrorist slaughter of the staff of a satirical magazine featuring on its cover this week novelist Michel Houellebecq occurred on the day of publication in France of Houllebecq new novel Submission.

Here’s a synopsis of the novel, which is scheduled for publication in English translation in the fall.

Back in 2002, Houellebecq had been dragged into court for saying snarky things about Islam, but had been ultimately acquitted. His new novel about a Muslim takeover of France in the 2022 Presidential election harkens back to another event of 2002, the two-round Presidential election. In the primary round, the incumbent center-rightist Jacques Chirac took first place with 19.9% of the voters. Lionel Jospin of the center-left Socialists got 16.2%. But the Socialist was squeezed out of the runoff round by veteran rightist National Front leader Jean-Marine Le Pen with 16.9%.

Unlike laborious American Presidential general elections that take place many months after the primaries (the elderly John McCain, for example, grew 3/4ths of a year older [but no wiser] between when he lucked into wrapping up the GOP nomination on February 5, 2008 and the general election against the fortysomething Barack Obama), French final rounds last only two weeks.

And the European establishment in 2002 turned this into an extraordinary pan-European Two Weeks Hate against Le Pen and against immigration restrictionists in general. (Not surprisingly, the leading Dutch immigration skeptic, Pim Fortuyn, was assassinated by an upscale white leftist the day after the French final, and the European establishment reaction tended to be that while it was all very tragic, the murder victim kind of had it coming.) With the entire left turning out to vote for the old Gaullist Chirac, Le Pen senior only increased his share of the vote in the final round to 17.8%.

So Houellebecq projects this scenario forward 20 years to 2022. Houellebecq has said he’s speeding up demographic destiny by placing in 2022 events more likely for, say, 2042.

The Socialists have somehow eked out a second term in 2017, but now Marine Le Pen is the frontrunner. The Socialists are so unpopular by 2022 that the new Muslim Fraternity party ekes into second place, earning a spot in the final round. From The Modern Novel website:

There seems to be some agreement afoot between the Socialists and the Muslims. However, while the Muslims are willing to concede finance and foreign affairs to the Socialists,

That’s a nice touch.

they are adamant that they should be in charge of education, on the basis that if you educate the children they will turn out as you wish them to turn out.

It seems that their policy will be to create Muslim schools which will follow strict Muslim teaching (same sex schools only, girls mainly taught domestic science and trained to be wives and mothers, very limited higher education for women, regular prayer and Koran-based instruction). Non-Muslim schools will exist but they will get much less funding, so that they will soon deteriorate and all middle-class parents will want to send their children to the Muslim schools. They will also allow polygamy.

I don’t see Muslims getting their hands on education policy right away. White people care a lot about their children’s educations. On the other hand, Muslim politicians in France getting their hands on immigration policy would be the more likely camel’s nose in the tent, as it were. After all, immigration policy is increasingly seen in the respectable world as a subject for moral grandstanding, while education is an area for nuance

Eventually a deal is made between the Muslim party and the main older French political parties so that the Muslim party wins the election.

The Houellebecqian antihero, a professor of French literature, flees Paris fearing a civil war:

Running out of petrol, he finally finds a garage but finds the cashier dead – shot – as well as two dead, armed Muslims. What happened? Eventually, he arrives at the village of Martel, apparently named after Charles Martel, who defeated the Arabs at Tours in 732. He bumps into Alain Tanneur [a Socialist deep stater], who has a house there. Both he and his wife have been made redundant. He goes to dinner with them, where Tanneur gives a lot more speculation on the possible future of the country and tells him how the attacks on the garage and similar attacks at election booths are being kept out of the media.

In other words, in Submission, 2022 wasn’t a free and fair election, but Le Monde et al aren’t going to tell you that that the majority actually favored Le Pen.

However, when the Muslims do win the elections, things seem to calm down. After that, things change very rapidly and, in my view, very unconvincingly. Women are sent back to the Middle Ages, wearing only modest clothing. They seem to be squeezed out of many jobs. François, for example, goes to a cocktail party at the university later on and is surprised that there is not a single woman there. Polygamy is adopted and accepted (by both sexes). Crime drops. The new president, Mohammed Ben Abbes, is very astute at not antagonising too many people.

The European Union, under French inspiration, admits Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Egypt. EU membership comes with Open Borders, sealing the demographic fate of much of the rest of Europe.

The protagonist is bereft of a job (and the steady supply of a coed per year that had come with it). The new head of the university, a collaborationist, offers him his professorship back if he converts to Islam. He does, and finds it not so bad.

There are some ideologically brilliant ju-jitsu moves in this, such as equating Islam with the Nazi occupation of France, and suggesting that Houellebecq himself, who has cultivated for himself over the years a George Costanza-like image as an opportunistic schlemiel, would, of course, collaborate.

To make this more historically plausible, however, I’d stretch this political process out into a two stage process taking place over five years across two presidential elections, and combine Submission with Jean Raspail’s 1973 novel The Camp of the Saints (and Bertolt Brecht’s 1953 poem The Solution).

In 2022, Marine Le Pen easily wins the first round with, say, 40% of the vote. The mediagenic Muslim party candidate, who finishes fourth with 9%, announces that he will advise his followers to not vote in the final election, unless the coalition of Establishment parties give him control of one area of policy — but not of education as in the author’s scenario, but of immigration and citizenship as a moral rebuke to the anti-immigrant hatefulness of the National Front.

The establishment / Islamist coalition ekes out a 51-49 win over the National Front, helped along by some mob violence and election tampering. A secular centrist Frenchman becomes president. Marine Le Pen retires as head of the National Front in favor of her even more popular and charismatic daughter, who instantly becomes the frontrunner for 2027. The Internet is full of observations that Likud lost eight straight general elections before becoming the dominant party in Israel.

In desperation to stop the next onslaught of the FN in 2027, the combined establishment parties accede to the suggestion of their most brilliant young politician, Mohammed Ben Abbes, that to prevent the people from electing a new government in 2027, the government must elect a new people.

A media campaign of white guilt over French colonialism and the Crusades is ginned up. A ship loaded with illegal immigrants founders spectacularly in the Mediterranean on television. A new law is rammed through offering, in effect, open borders for four years to all countries victimized by French imperialism and the Crusades (in the fine print, populous Egypt is included for having suffered the indignity of the French building the Suez Canal). A one year residency requirement for voting is introduced. A senile Pope Francis issues an encyclical denouncing immigration restriction as the great Satan of the 21st Century. A few false flag operations whip up a frenzy of hatred against the FN.

The Camp of the Saints of course proves a vast disaster for France, which only intensifies establishment anger at dissidents for pointing this out. Muslim and/or African car-be-ques appear to be headed out of control, but Ben Abbes demonstrates an impressive ability to turn them off at his command. In desperation, the Socialists and Sarkozyites turn to Ben Abbes as the one man who can permanently end the FN menace, while also calming the street violence spilling from the banlieues to the arrondissements. Of course, after Ben Abbes takes out the FN, the French insiders reason, he can easily be squeezed out himself.

And so on January 30, 2027, a few months before the scheduled election, the sitting president resigns in favor of the temporary expedient of Ben Abbes as President.

Several weeks later the Louvre burns down. A retarded white soccer hooligan is arrested nearby holding a can of gasoline.

FN leaders are rounded up. A North Korean computer hack reveals to the world the names, addresses, and license plate numbers of FN voters, some of whom suffer rough justice for their hereditary guilt stretching back to the Crusades.

NATO leaders invoke Article 5 as applying to NATO member (since 2009) France and applying to an attack from inside the country by nativists. President George P. Bush, at the suggestion of U.S. national security advisor Prince Bandar, deploys the 82nd Airborne to the NATO base at Avord in central France to back the Ben Abbes government in maintaining law and order. Secretary of State Chelsea Clinton announces, “Lafayette, we are here!” as the U.S. sets up drone patrols over rural France.

In a magnanimous gesture praised in world capitals, President Ben Abbes announces he is not delaying the scheduled election. Although in preventive detention, after the first hour of vote counting in the primary round in April 2027, Mademoiselle Le Pen appears to be headed toward a smashing majority, making her President without a runoff. But a computer outage takes vote counting off the air for the rest of the evening and when the count resumes in the wee hours, it’s found that she only won 48% and must face two weeks later Ben Abbes, who is then anointed the defender of all that is right and holy in the multicultural modern era.

And thus we can pick up again with the story line in Submission.

• Tags: Charlie Hebdo 
🔊 Listen RSS

From the New York Times news pages:

Dangerous Moment’ for Europe, as Fear and Resentment Grow

LONDON — The sophisticated, military-style strike Wednesday on a French newspaper known for satirizing Islam staggered a continent already seething with anti-immigrant sentiments in some quarters, feeding far-right nationalist parties like France’s National Front.

“This is a dangerous moment for European societies,” said Peter Neumann, director of the International Center for the Study of Radicalization at King’s College London. “With increasing radicalization among supporters of jihadist organizations and the white working class increasingly feeling disenfranchised and uncoupled from elites, things are coming to a head.”

Olivier Roy, a French scholar of Islam and radicalism, called the Paris assault — the most deadly terrorist attack on French soil since the Algerian war — “a quantitative and therefore qualitative turning point,” noting the target and the number of victims. “This was a maximum-impact attack,” he said. “They did this to shock the public, and in that sense they succeeded.”

Anti-immigrant attitudes have been on the rise in recent years in Europe, propelled in part by a moribund economy and high unemployment, as well as increasing immigration and more porous borders.

But not, of course, propelled by any bad behavior on the part of immigrant ethnicities.

The growing resentments have lifted the fortunes of established parties like the U.K. Independence Party in Britain and the National Front, as well as lesser-known groups, like Patriotic Europeans Against Islamization of the West, which assembled 18,000 marchers in Dresden, Germany, on Monday.

In Sweden, where there have been three recent attacks on mosques, the anti-immigrant, anti-Islamist Sweden Democrats party has been getting about 15 percent support in recent public opinion polls.

Paris was traumatized by the attack, with widespread fears of another. “We feel less and less safe,” said Didier Cantat, 34, standing outside the police barriers at the scene. “If it happened today, it will happen again, maybe even worse.”

Mr. Cantat spoke for many when he said the attacks could fuel greater anti-immigrant sentiment. “We are told Islam is for God, for peace,” he said. “But when you see this other Islam, with the jihadists, I don’t see peace, I see hatred. So people can’t tell which is the real Islam.”

… The mood among Parisians near the scene of the attack Wednesday on the newspaper Charlie Hebdo was apprehensive and angry. “There’s no respect for human life,” said Annette Gerhard.

“Politically, the official left in France has been in denial of the conflict between France and the Arab world,” Professor Hussey said. “But the French in general sense it.”

The attack left some Muslims fearing a backlash. “Some people when they think terrorism, think Muslims,” said Arnaud N’Goma, 26, as he took a cigarette break outside the bank where he works.

Samir Elatrassi, 27, concurred, saying that “Islamophobia is going to increase more and more.”

“When some people see these kinds of terrorists, they conflate them with other Muslims,” he said. “And it’s the extreme right that’s going to benefit from this.”

The German interior minister, Thomas de Mazière, told reporters on Wednesday: “The situation is serious. There is reason for worry, and for precautions, but not for panic.”

With each terrorist attack, however, the acceptability of anti-immigrant policies seems to reach deeper into the mainstream. In Britain, for example, which also has a large Muslim population, the U.K. Independence Party has called for a British exit from the European Union and sharp controls on immigration, emphasizing what it sees as dangers to British values and identity. The mainstream parties have competed in promising more controls on immigration, too.

“Large parts of the European public are latently anti-Muslim, and increasing mobilization of these forces is now reaching into the center of society,” Mr. Neumann said. “If we see more of these incidents, and I think we will, we will see a further polarization of these European societies in the years to come.”

Those who will suffer the most from such a backlash, he said, are the Muslim populations of Europe, “the ordinary normal Muslims who are trying to live their lives in Europe.” …

The mood of failure and paralysis is widespread in France. The Charlie Hebdo attack came on the publication day of a contentious new novel, “Submission,” by Michel Houellebecq, which describes the victory of Islam in France and the gradual collaboration of the society with its new rulers from within. Mr. Houellebecq, like the well-known caricaturists and editors who were killed at Charlie Hebdo, has been a symbol of French artistic liberty and license, and his publishers, Flammarion, were reported to be concerned that he and they could be another target.

But the atmosphere has been heightened by the rise of the National Front and its leader, Marine Le Pen, who runs ahead of the Socialist Party in the polls, campaigning on the threat Islam poses to French values and nationhood.

There was much recent attention to another best-selling book by a conservative social critic, Éric Zemmour, called “The French Suicide,” attacking the left and the state for being powerless to defend France against Americanization, globalization, immigration and, of course, Islam. Another new novel, by another well-known French writer, Jean Rolin, called “The Events,” envisions a broken France policed by a United Nations peacekeeping force after a civil war.

“This attack is double honey for the National Front,” said Camille Grand, director of the French Foundation for Strategic Research. “Le Pen says everywhere that Islam is a massive threat, and that France should not support attacks in Iraq and instead defend the homeland and not create threats by going abroad, so they can naturally take advantage of it.”

What kind of wacko extremist doubts the prudence of a grand strategy of invade-the-world / invite-the-world?

… When journalists are killed for expressing their views, it is one step away from burning books, said Annette Gerhard, 60.

Actually, it’s worse. But at least this allows the NYT to sum up with a closing sentence implying that the murderers are more like Nazis than are the people objecting to the murderers:

“It’s like Kristallnacht,” Ms. Gerhard said, noting that her family had died in Nazi deportations. “There’s no respect for human life.”

So I guess that’s a brave dogwhistle to put it last.

• Tags: Charlie Hebdo 
🔊 Listen RSS

Via Commenter Manton, from the New York Times:

An Aging Europe in Decline

“I’VE fallen and I can’t get up.”

These words, shouted by an elderly woman, were made famous in a medical alert device ad in the 1990s. In 2015, they might be Europe’s catchphrase.

As the United States economy slowly recovers, analysts across the political spectrum see little to cheer them from Europe. …

One bright spot might seem to be immigration. In 2012, the median age of the national population in the European Union was 41.9 years, while the median age of foreigners living in the union was 34.7. So, are Europeans pleased that there will be new arrivals to work and pay taxes when the locals retire?

Not exactly. Anti-immigrant sentiment is surging across the Continent. Nativist movements performed alarmingly well in European Parliament elections last year. Europe is less like a grandmother knitting placidly in the window and more like an angry grandfather, shaking his rake and yelling at outsiders to get off his lawn.

Arthur C. Brooks, a contributing opinion writer, is the president of the American Enterprise Institute.

A version of this op-ed appears in print on January 7, 2015, on page A23 of the New York edition with the headline: Europe’s Decline.

• Tags: Charlie Hebdo 
🔊 Listen RSS

At least 12 of the staff or guards of Charlie Hebdo, a French humor magazine featuring this week on its cover a caricature of the author of the new novel Submission, have been murdered by Islamist terrorists.

Commenter Reiner Tor provides us with Google Translate’s translation of the cover cartoon on Charlie Hebdo:

Les prédictions du mage Houellebecq:

En 2015, je perds mes dents.

En 2022, je fais ramadan!

Predictions [of] magi Houellebecq:

In 2015, I lose my teeth.

In 2022, I [keep] Ramadan!

• Tags: Charlie Hebdo 
Steve Sailer
About Steve Sailer

Steve Sailer is a journalist, movie critic for Taki's Magazine, columnist, and founder of the Human Biodiversity discussion group for top scientists and public intellectuals.

The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?