@ KA

Talking about the need for self-criticism.  Mon Dieu!

I have clearly stated why your position is contradictory.  You cannot say IN THE SAME CONTEXT that (1) people are aware of the issues confronting them, but (2) that society has to "collapse" first before these people can act.  Like every naive-left relativistic multiculturalist you seem incapable of holding people accountable for their own actions (which includes INaction in the face of "issues").

In western democracies, people are NOT at the mercy of 'elites'.  Their (in)action is based on the fact that most of them buy into the illusions of certain 'elites' (be they academia, Hollywood, the media, or whatever).  

You should stop 'justifying' any coming societal collapse by scapegoating others (your 'favorites' in that respect are jews and nonwhites) for the actions and/or inaction of any people in western democracies.

marcfrans: The Kapitein seems incapable of considering full paragraphs rather than single sentences.

Perhaps I will change my response formatting. First, however, you will need to actually read the posts you are replying to, rather than merely using them as excuses to spam.

marcfrans: In 'democracies' people have remedies if they are "aware of the issues confronting them". If there is inaction it is either because there is insufficient awareness or because we are not talking about 'democracies'...

Firstly, these so-called democracies are representative as opposed to participatory, direct or deliberative; secondly they are liberal and/or socialist (or social-democratic). There are many shades of democracy, and democracy is not always compatible with liberalism and/or socialism.

marcfrans: I did not refer to any "mental difficulties" anywhere.  Thus, the Kapitein's quotation marks are inappropriate (if not dishonest, in the sense of a false strawman).  

This was in response to the Gates of Vienna commentator, who did mention "mental difficulties". You were critiquing a critique. Suffice it to say, this blog does not revolve around you or your correspondence with me; far from it, it focuses on the articles posted. Though I abhor all things Marxist-Leninist, perhaps you need to reflect and engage in some self-criticism...

The Kapitein seems incapable of considering full paragraphs rather than single sentences.  Hence he continues to miss the forest for the trees.  In the 2nd paragraph of his Part II, he clearly starts off by saying that "average Europeans of all stripes" are aware of the issues "confronting them", but continues that societies need "to collapse" in order "for Europeans to take action".  This is nonsense. In 'democracies' people have remedies if they are "aware of the issues confronting them".  If there is inaction it is either because there is insufficient awareness or because we are not talking about 'democracies' (where people control government and not vice versa).  

Let's take the easy case of Belgium.  The public is INsufficiently aware of "the issues confronting them".  If they were sufficiently aware of it they would replace the political personel and/or 'elite' that is saddling them with these "issues".  The alternatives are clearly available to them and the means (i.e. elections) to achieve them as well.  If they do not act (before societal "collapse") it is due to lack of awareness or lack of concern, for which the Belgian voting public is responsible and no one else!   The same applies to other countries in similar circumstances.  

P.S. I did not refer to any "mental difficulties" anywhere.  Thus, the Kapitein's quotation marks are inappropriate (if not dishonest, in the sense of a false strawman).  

marcfrans: The Kapitein, with his moral-relativistic outlook, is incapable of holding people accountable for their own actions or inactions, just like the 'leftist' elites that he decries so frequently.

Not true. I never claimed that the various European nations in question were not "responsible" for dealing with their crises. On the contrary, I denied that Europeans were "in denial" due to "mental difficulties".

marcfrans: If Europeans, or any other peoples for that matter, have to suffer the consequences of the ideological (multicul) illusions of their elites, it is because most of them buy into those illusions and thus help to sustain them.

These "illusions" are part and parcel of liberalism, socialism and any such fusion of these ideologies.

marcfrans: It is simply dishonest to imply that reasonable 'remedies' are not available to the public in 'democracies'.

Reasonable remedies are not available in liberal or social democracies. Such democracies are inherently opposed to authoritarian and/or apartheid-like remedies.

The Kapitein continues to keep his head in the sand to reality.  He maintains: (a) that "average Europeans" are well aware of the issues confronting them, but are incapable of responding to them, and thus (b) that societies need "to collapse" before Europeans can take action.  This is utter nonsense.  No sensible person wants society to callapse in order to take remedial action after "an inferno".   Either people are aware of what ails them and then responsible people will take action, or people are not aware or do not care and will suffer the consequences of their ignorance or their lack of courage.  

The Kapitein, with his moral-relativistic outlook, is incapable of holding people accountable for their own actions or inactions, just like the 'leftist' elites that he decries so frequently.   If Europeans, or any other peoples for that matter, have to suffer the consequences of the ideological (multicul) illusions of their elites, it is because most of them buy into those illusions and thus help to sustain them.  It is simply dishonest to imply that reasonable 'remedies' are not available to the public in 'democracies'.     

Ironically, it's a part of our human psychological make up to help us mentally survive, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it will help us to survive physically.

Wrong. It if truly exists as an individual complex (let alone a social one), it is a mental defense mechanism. Physical survival requires that all potential threats be treated as real and acted upon, which is why Hobbes' State of Nature, if it ever existed, was marked by a war of "all against all".

What is happening throughout Europe is a collective shutting of the eye, a self inflicted blindness, a form of self delusion and denial on such a grand scale, that it's is keeping us from clearly seeing the approaching danger.

On the contrary, average Europeans of all political stripes seem quite aware of the various issues confronting them, and are concerned about immigration, crime, terrorism, etc., and are opposed to multiculturalism and political correctness. Unfortunately, an elite is pursuing policies and programmes for the purposes of electoral expediency (as well as "oikophobia" etc.).

In order for Europeans to take action, their societies need to collapse or collapse further until the authorities are no longer capable of governance. Once the proverbial spear is thrown at the tower, the masses will follow. Statistical research on revolutions indicates that their is little build-up: a spark is lit and becomes an inferno rapidly.

What makes the fight against Islamism and the eventual Islamization of Europe a much more difficult phenomenon to tackle, is the guilt factor that Europe bears in regards to its genocide of Jews and other minorities during WWII.

Not really. Jews and Jewish organisations that used to incessantly invoke the Holocaust and accuse their opponents (in the main critics of Israel) of anti-Semitism are toning down their rhetoric as it becomes clear that far from hiding in a sea of ethnicities wherein they are unassailable, they are surrounded by teeming hordes of Muslims. In fact, such rhetoric is now being directed against Muslims.

Interesting that the commentator refers to the National Socialist genocide "of Jews and other minorities". How many Poles, Gypsies, Russians, Ukrainians, Yugoslavs, Byelorussians, etc., is a Jew worth? Clearly more than 1:1 according to many. Perhaps if more attention was paid in the mass media to Hitler's genocide against the Slavs, Russian youths would not be so quick to adopt the tenets of National Socialism.

European guilt over the Jewish Holocaust is a both a correct and direct manifestation of European acceptance of the atrocities that were done in the name of Europe.

I was under the impression that the Germans undertook the genocide of the Jews, not Europeans, unless the commentator wishes to debate the culpability of those nations that fielded collaborators (e.g. Hungary, Vichy France, etc.). Nor was this crime committed "in the name of Europe". At this point, I am questioning whether the commentator's ethnic or religious background is influencing their views expressed here.

But ironically, it is that same European guilt over the Jewish Holocaust, which is now being used by the Islamists, – regardless of whether they are of the violent version or not – for their own advantage and to the detriment of Europe. It is furthering the process of Europe's eventual entrance into the "Dar al-Islam", or the House of Islam.

The Islamists are not "using" any such guilt complex. They are merely exploiting cultural and socio-political institutions in order to further their interests; it is of no concern to them where these are derived from.

I am reminded me of a conversation I had with a Finnish academic a few years ago, who drew a similar comparison between how Europe is currently behaving now, and how Jews in Europe behaved to the coming Nazi danger in the 30's.

It is high time to invoke Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies.

The academic stated that a people who are publicly targeted for violence have extreme difficulty in believing that the words of violence being directed against them, could possibly reflect the true intentions of those who are working towards their inevitable destruction...It is mentally too difficult of a thought to process and to accept.

Ascribing such naïveté to entire peoples is ridiculous. Firstly, "a people" is comprised of individuals, and these belong to a variety of overlapping groups e.g. socio-economic, military, political, etc. Each individual and group has his, her or its own general and particular interests, which even if concerning the "people" as a whole, tend to clash. Secondly, it is difficult to prove that this concept is viable. Mental difficulties may not be the cause and effect of a people's dismissal of public threats issued by another group. Indeed, the people in question may not believe that the other group backs the threats and/or has the capacity to carry them out i.e. the threats may be issued by a 'minority' of 'extremists'. Moreover, not all episodes of ethnic cleansing and genocide are publicly announced. Indeed, even Die Endlösung der Judenfrage did not come into being until 1942, and there was a marked contrast between the National Socialists' and Hitler's public statements concerning Jews and their private ones. Furthermore, many Jews were worried about the future during the 1930s and those that could emigrated to the United States, Israel, etc. Were the world more welcoming, perhaps the Shoah's death toll would have been significantly lower.

When approaching doom appears inevitable, especially over a long period of time, the subject will more than likely choose to reject that reality, and replace it with something more acceptable. "It can't be real, so therefore it is not".

Though I am an admirer of Bruno Bettelheim and his ideas, his analysis related more to the Jewish people once the Final Solution commenced i.e. fight or flight. He was a supporter of both. Unfortunately, he claims that Jewish leaders did not encourage either, but rather they instructed their people to ride out the storm. Essentially it is groupthink 'in the moment' as opposed to groupthink pertaining to National Socialist rhetoric and association with policies and programmes.

It is the same guilt that seems to be used to demonize any parties on the right; even in the US, the right is regularly called fascist or Nazis (the left somehow forgetting the 'socialism' in National Socialism). THe Holocaust guilt serves a similar function as the civil rights guilt in the US; so, Islamists in the US tend to couch their 'struggle' in terms of the African-American civil rights movement. We're racist just like our ancestors if we don't give in to their demands.

"What makes the fight against Islamism and the eventual Islamization of Europe a much more difficult phenomenon to tackle, is the guilt factor that Europe bears in regards to its genocide of Jews and other minorities during WWII. European guilt over the Jewish Holocaust is a both a correct and direct manifestation of European acceptance of the atrocities that were done in the name of Europe."

This reflects the "Europe Died at Auschwitz" email I received a while back...

Forgiveness for one's sins is a Christian concept - and with Christianity thrown by the wayside by Europe goes any possibility for redemption on a spiritual and psychological level.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine