Passing thoughts on Islam and Europe

Tradition is superior to liberalism, in fact we can use “Tradition” as a normative principle id est “Truth,” thus, all else besides Tradition means untruth. Following this begs the question of returning to Tradition; how is it to be done? If our age is one of lies, vice and deceit, then how do we escape this hell?

It is often noticed that the institutions which in ages past maintained Tradition and its realisation within the Occidental context have largely — if not entirely in some countries — collapsed. The Catholic Church with its universalism and outright Marxian Pope; the Anglican Church with its acceptance — nay, encouragement — of sodomy and other sins, the irreligiousity of the Czech Republic and Norway, et cetera. Europe’s Western religious traditions have withered and died and the Church to this day encourages this further with its advocacy of sin, humanism, universalism, and so on.

So we have then two choices:

  1. We rebuild the Church in some fashion; we encourage the spread of Christianity and European spirituality to anyone we can to have it re-enter the zeitgeist in some manner, nomatter how small. Over time, provided the supports are there in the form of books, videos and other media, people can more easily readopt the European religious tradition unobscured by the clouds of modern nihilism/atheism. Those who are already within the Church can work from the inside to purge it of heterodox elements and individuals (most of whom are elderly) and reintroduce conservative and traditional attitudes and politics into the remit of the Church. Over the coming future, as the demographic thus political environment in Europe extremifies, individuals within and without the Church can work to make it an effective and positive force in the culture.
  2. Alternatively, Europe adopts another tradition: Islam. Europeans convert to Islam, destroy their Bibles, destroy or repurpose Europe’s Churches and Cathedrals, and enter the next Age following Mohammed, leaving liberalism behind them as they march to Allah.

If my loaded language is not indicative enough, I believe the former option is a thousand times more preferable to the latter if not moreso. A Traditional Europe is preferable to a liberal one absolutely, but a brown Europe is not preferable to a white one. The Occidental people — Occidental by both blood and spirit, mind you — have their traditions and those must be rediscovered, not replaced.

Nor do I believe Europeans can even accept Islam on a mass-scale. Islam is not the exotercism of the Western; its spirit stands in direct contrast to what has been represented from the Ancient Greeks to the Middle Ages. The notion of individual, or person, is one such — and I would say the largest — difference between the West and Middle East; insomuch as our place in the universe. The Islamic conception is of man as slave, the Western conception is of man as assistant; our differing myths and rituals confirm this.

Islam is fit for the Middle-Eastern mind and soul, it is not fit for the Western. Hence our battles historically, hence the very low rate of Western conversion to Islam (and even in cases of conversion, it is not the post-Christian layman who is drawn to it at all).

It was claimed by some Neo-Reactionary some weeks ago that we would all be well-off converting to Islam to escape liberalism. When I commented on the article telling him that he should be shot like the traitor he is, and that the Europeans must — and will, I believe — rekindle their own way to God, not turn to some foreign tradition which shares no commonalities with our our former or “sleeping” tradition, he deleted my comment.

Corneliu Zelea Codreanu quote

Lastnight I ended a series of podcasts held on my YouTube channel wherein myself and others discussed what is to be done regarding the loss of European’s religion. Technical difficulties and fewer participants than planned aside, we came to the conclusion that the Occidental tradition in all its various forms must regroup, essentially; and that elements old and new must enter an equilibrium to wrest differences East to West Church-wise, the pagan versus Christian elements and so forth (something Paul Andersen has been wrestling with with his writing here at West Coast Reactionaries to varying responses and degrees of depth).

The European must settle to rest his inner demons in order to gather his remaining strength with which to crush liberalism and survive Islam over the coming decades and centuries. If this question is not addressed by the mainstream Churches, public religious figures and others, Europe as we know it will cease to be after the next century; its traditions cut-short by the meddling and pussyfooting of powerful idiots.


13 thoughts on “Passing thoughts on Islam and Europe

  1. I as a Muslim, used to believe that Europeans would benefit from Islam. But as you’ve noted as well, that most Europeans don’t feel comfortable with Islam since it doesn’t align with their inherent natures. I had assumed perhaps the case was that Europeans just see it as a nonwhite religion but yet I didn’t understand how they have no issue with Christianity which like Islam, has its birthplace in the Middle East.
    The Quran makes the case for its revelations on the basis that man not commit oppressive transgression against others. That is the major reason for its revelation, and we see Muslims are doing lousy job at following that core principle of the Quran. Europeans have done a better job pertaining to such a principle without Islam. From the lectures and conclusions of Sheikh Farhan Bin Malik, I too feel that Europeans are better off with Christianity if they were to ever choose to return to traditionalism.

    1. Christianity has been thoroughly Europeanised, hence the conversion occurred peacefully in some areas (Iceland and Rome for example) and violent conversions had political undertones, such as the Northern Crusades.

      Different human groups are different not only in their biology but in their spiritual predispositions; how they interact with the Divine. Islam is fit for Middle-Easterners where the European tradition — itself a mix of native paganism and syncretic monotheism — is fit for Europeans. That obviously denies the universalism that both Christianity and Islam traditionally espouse, but nevertheless that is why I myself am not a Christian — but it is still, regardless, my tradition; my roots lie in that formulation.

      I would, at some point in the future, like to do a podcast covering this topic more thoroughly. Would you, Milania, be interested in participating?

      1. I think whatever spiritual faith whites choose to adopt by the masses, it would not change their inherent racial tendencies provided that their gene pool remain uncontaminated from mongrelisation. As much as I do agree that Christianity has become deeply embedded into European culture, but the face of Christianity outside of Europe takes on the varying cultures of other societies. It is not so much different for Islam. Had Islam appeared before Christianity and had reached Europe without nonwhites, I think it would have embedded into European customs in not a dogmatic version but more so a spiritual one such as Sufism. But since it’s not the case and Europeans are much more comfortable with Christianity than Islam, I vehemently hope that Europeans return to their traditional Christian roots for those traditional roots preserved so many of the things I find endearing of Western civilisation.
        I myself am more favourable of that than European paganism, but ultimately not that my opinion matters since it’s not upto me to dictate you guys lol.

        And yes, I’d be willing to participate in your podcast 🙂

        1. Yes, I agree — look to, for example, Rene Guenon and Frithjof Shuon’s engagement with Islam; they were initiated into Sufism, not Sunniism. I definitely agree with the idea that Sufism is closer to Christianity and Europe than Sunniism, largely due to its mysticism.

          And excellent. I will contact you soon about it.

  2. I find your normative principal of everything other than tradition being “untruth” quite confusing, as well as downright false. Unless you weren’t being completely literal.

    1. That is because I did not even define it, merely mentioned the point — it was not an argument. Tradition is what Evola, Guenon, et cetera spoke of — it isn’t “my” definition. I will do a post sometime in the future talking about Tradition = Truth at some point to explain.

      1. I realized you didn’t define it, it just seemed to me manifestly obvious that tradition and truth were not mutually inclusive things. Of course, I was merely mentioning it in passing out of curiosity.

  3. I think an authentically European Islam would liberalize and commit suicide just the way Christianity did. I think it something in the Superhajnal character.

    Islam is little different theologically and psychologically from Calvinism. Both anti-clerical, iconoclastic, egalitarian, and eager to believe in the utter depravity of man. Yet they evolved quite differently I think primarily because of the different genetic makeup of the sort of people who came to follow them.

    1. In defense of secular rightists like Spandrell, it’s hard not to look on late Muslim successes against cultural degeneracy without some degree of envy. But he’s got the causation backwards. Arabs and Afghanis would be good at fighting degeneracy under any religion. A Muslim Europe would be no more successful at doing so in the long run than a Christian Europe. Arguably, much less successful. For it is hard for me to see Islam as anything other than an early version of the Protestant Reformation, which has not only proven not to be an effective safeguard against cultural degeneracy, but verily a proximate cause of it.

  4. The greatest enemy of Western Civilisation is ourselves. Struggle past the internal post-modern fluff of the Modern West, then I think you’ll find that many of these problems will figure themselves out. Through chaos a new order will emerge. Let’s make sure we make it the right one.

  5. Very interesting stuff, and in the aggregrate, I think you are absolutely correct.

    With regard to Spandrell, this kind of thing is why I do not give predominance to the ‘sociopolitical’ account of religion. Sociopolitics are important, but truth is far more important. And I say the same to those who say I should be an Odinist. I don’t believe in Christianity because it flatters me or because it benefits me, I believe in it because I genuinely believe it to be true. Similarly Spandrell should only embrace Islam if he genuinely believes Mohamed was the last prophet and recieved a message from the Archangel Gabriel which he transcribed word for word into the Quran. And if you want to bring it down to sociopolitics, heads up, the sociopolitical benefits of religion are reaped by people who ACTUALLY BELIEVE THEM, not by those who just do the rituals as routine. But still, we all have our moments of madness.

    I should clarify something I had stated before regarding Islam. I had said that I thought Europeans would never be able to adopt Islam on a mass scale and thus our fate would likely be similar to that which was eventually ‘bestowed’ upon the Armenians (thankfully without ultimate success).

    I think this may have been overly simplistic on my part. I think at a fundamental level, Occidentals could embrace Islam as a religion (with great difficulty), but because of how intrinsically puritanical the vast majority of Muslims (Sunnis) are, the kind of Islam we would have to embrace would be the ARAB expression of it, anything else would be Haram. This is the problem Islam has on a sociopolitical level that Christianity doesn’t. Christianity is malleable to a people, and can be expressed in ways that reflect the diversity of its adherents. Islam cannot allow for such a thing, and thus those it conquers who are significantly different in their spiritual orientation from Arabs (or notably deep southeast asians), must eventually be eliminated when they do not mesh with the whole. Their lands are then colonized. That is what I fear with regards to Europe, but this is not near-term Nostradamus: Armenia was under tentative Islamic rule for generations before they decided to clean house. It would be very gradual, but once the process had begun, it would become icnreasingly hard to reverse it and prevent the eventual conclusion.

    There are two things I think we should look to:

    1) The efforts of the ‘aristocrats of the soul’, those who stand opposed to the Modern World, and those gravitating towards that belief. This intellectual milieu is undoubtedly the most vibrant political dialogue taking place anywhere today.

    2) Rely on events to favor the abovementioned group. Islam is positive in a way, because it is destabilizing the Liberal grip on power sooner than they otherwise might have lost it due to their own decay. Islam is making bold things that were once only vague abstractions or theoretical doomsays.

    I’m not sure if you read this story, Adam, but yesterday or today an Amahdi Muslim was stabbed in the face and killed in Scotland, by a mainstream Muslim who didn’t like that he had wished Christians a happy Easter. The Amahdi’s are a sect much like the Alawites, small, persecuted for centuries due to their quixotic beliefs, and not overtly violent. That speaks to what I have said, this is as rigid an ideology as you are likely to find, born to conquer. If the West cannot muster a defense from a cultural force so monolithic and driven, then its survival will be in question very quickly.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s