In Patrick Keiller’s beautiful film Robinson in Space, a pub sign is shown hanging outside a hostelry in Gravesend, England. The film, a haunting sentimental journey intruded on by the ogres of modernity, shows the creaking, old-fashioned swinging sign outside a pub called The World’s End. The painting shows a Crusader ship, flying the famous red cross epaté, falling off the edge of the world. A Muslim cleric once demanded the withdrawal of the Hollywood film Gravity due to its depiction of the world as round, contrary to the cosmology (such as it is) of the Koran. While this may have been a simple exercise in promoting brand awareness – something else the Islamic world has adapted from the West as part of its ongoing cultural appropriation – it still reminds us that we may well be, all of us, drinking in The World’s End. The finely bedecked Crusader ship carrying the West’s intellectual and social cargo is indeed tipping over the edge of an unexpectedly truncated flat planet.
The planet is called tolerance, and its length and breadth are running out as the ship teeters on the brink. We do not tolerate Islam, of course. Our masters have informed us that we will accept Islam or face the consequences of social ostracism, loss of employment and even jail. Forced acceptance is not tolerance. The elites, however, are not stupid, and they are well aware that Islam is not a particularly pleasant experience for those on whom it is foisted. So it is that we have London’s Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan, telling us that we would just have to get used to Islamic terrorism. He did this on a state-funded jolly to the USA to shill for Hillary Clinton, whose plan to import tens of thousands of Muslims has now been foiled.
And yet, at the same time, Muslims have been rather quiet of late, at least in terms of the terrorist spectaculars the Western elites’ increasingly authoritarian provisional wing - aka the police - constantly tell us to expect, despite their genius in averting these disasters. To be sure, Muslims are still sexually assaulting Europe’s women, just as American blacks are still handing out punishment beatings to ordinary white Americans, but there has been a distinct lack of bombings and mass shootings.
As I mentioned a few postcards ago, I find it hard to believe that Muslims could not strike when and where they want to strike. The police are far more interested in Tommy Robinson, Twitter and outreach than they are with shaking down potential killers.
As I mentioned, I am confident that I could organise an incident with a high kill rate, were I so minded. So for radical Muslims, embedded as they are within labyrinthine no-go areas – which the police deny exist – it should be a cake-walk. So why the distinct lack of Bataclans and Nices and even 9/11s? I have said before that I think the command structure for European Islamic terrorism goes right to the top of the elites. It is they who are using Islam to destabilise the West prior to the inevitable conflicts – long overdue – and resultant authoritarian clampdowns. There is no need to push things, and with a spate of recent elections and referenda, it might be expedient to keep it all quiet on the Western front.
It may be, of course, that Muslims themselves have accepted that they can play the long game of demographic replacement and creeping cultural Islamisation, in cahoots with political leaders as they are. They are metaphysically equipped not to require the Reconquista within their own lifetimes, as opposed to their godless hosts who must have everything now, for there is nothing hereafter. The treatment of dissident kufr compared with the treatment of Muslim criminality can leave no one in any doubt that Islamisation, at least sufficient to destabilise and allow for anarcho-tyranny – the constitution of Traumaville – is the game plan of the elites. It is increasingly rare to see refugees jailed for rape. Compare this with the Scottish couple jailed for 12 and 8 months for festooning a mosque with bacon. These sentences send out a very clear cultural semaphore.
The disparate voices of the political Right see many hidden reasons why the EU and America are treating Muslims as a protected species to be imported quicker than oranges. Primarily, they see a pre-fabricated voting bloc for the nominal Left. Islam seems to suit the Left. The ummah already marches in ideological lockstep, its Sunni-Shia sectarian differences notwithstanding. It is easily bribed with a range of social benefits and Americanised consumer baubles. It is easily bought off with revanchist illusions, as mosques replace churches on a politico-religious Monopoly board. There is only one problem with this argument; politically speaking, there is only the Left. If they are of the nominal Right, ‘opposition’ parties across the West are just as busy cosying up to the many-headed Islamic outreach groups as the incumbents. In terms of pragmatic politics, we are all Leftists now, and supposedly warring parties vie with one another over Muslims in the same way divorced parents try to spend more on the kids when it’s their weekend. Anyone who voted for Cameron in part-concern over the Islamisation of the UK must be busy looking up the dictionary definition of ‘Conservative’.
What of Muslims considered simply as a component of immigration? We are told ad nauseam by our governing class – who are, after all, the experts – that immigration is a Good Thing. But are Muslim immigrants considered separately a benefit? Benefit seems to be an apt word here, but not quite in its positive sense. A cursory glance over the internet suggests that Muslims cost the UK more than they produce – and that’s without policing and security costs – whereas Eastern Europeans produce or provide more value than they take from the state. Of course, some of that money may find its way back to Gdansk and Sofia, but there are indications that we should be focussing on importing Catholic workers far more than Islamic ones.
Unless Trump can single-handedly save the USA, and the ‘populism’ so hated by the elites and their catamites in the media, academia and the public sectors can steer Europe’s course astern, the ship of fools we are on is heading for the edge of the world. And our problem is just what it was for the ancients. We don’t know what’s out there.