Article author: Greg Johnson, Counter-Currents/ Re-Published: 29th Night of Æfterra Yēola 2265.RE (in Anglo-Saxon/English ethnic culture) / 29th Night of January 2015

The Muslim, Islamic Problem or the Jewish, Semitic Problem?

In the United States, many white [racially European] Americans who fear being ethnically swamped by non-white immigrants are not willing to actually say so, for fear of being called racist. So instead they object to illegal immigration.

But fixing illegal immigration does not fix the real problem, for illegal immigrants can simply be legalized by the government, and even if all immigration were halted, whites would still be demographically displaced by the fast-breeding non-whites who are already among us.

The lesson here is: You can’t solve a problem if you won’t accurately name it.

But, on the other hand, if illegal immigration is the first thing to wake up white Americans to our demographic crisis, we should welcome that fact, then try to explain the full nature of the problem and what must actually be done to fix it.

In Europe too, many Europeans are worried about demographic displacement by non-white immigrants. But instead of objecting to non-whites as such, they prefer to complain about Islamization. But this contains traps as well:

⦁ Are non-whites OK if they are not Muslim? In that case, there are billions of other non-whites to choose from: Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc.

⦁ Isn’t the problem Islamic “extremism” or “fundamentalism,” rather than people who are merely nominally Muslim? If so, then the solution is to secularize the extremists who are here and be more selective about future immigrants, so we only get nominal, secular Muslims. In fact, there are plenty of secular-minded nominal Muslims, the Kemalist movement in Turkey and the Baathist movement in the Arab countries being the best examples.

⦁ Attacking Islam invites a host of distracting distinctions and quibbles. What about the Sunni vs. Shia? What about the Sufis? What about Bosnians and Albanians? Are they not European? Are Maronites and Armenians and Georgians European because they are Christian? None of these issues matter if we properly identify the problem as demographic displacement by non-Europeans.

⦁ Attacking Islam does not sit well with European secularists, who fought long and hard for religious tolerance. They think that Islam can be made tolerant as well. It took hundreds of years, of course, and many wars, but Europe managed to de-fang Christianity. Today, most whites are nominally Christian and de facto liberals, which is the true civic religion of the West. So it is completely conceivable that Islam can be de-fanged as well. Of course, it would be salutary to review the history of the Enlightenment in Europe, as some might blanch at the prospect of turning Europe into a battle-ground for three centuries or so just to “enrich” ourselves with nominal Muslims.

⦁ Attacking Islam allows Christians to frame European identity politics as a clash between two universalist religions, Christianity and Islam. But we are not fighting for Christendom, which is now more non-white than white. We are fighting for the white race, regardless of religion.

⦁ Attacking Islam plays into the hands of the principal enemy, the organized Jewish community, which is happy to reroute white anti-Muslim sentiment into fighting Israel’s enemies abroad, rather than fighting Islam in the streets of Europe. Indeed, Israel when destroys strong Muslim regimes in its neighborhood, this sends new waves of Muslim refugees to destroy white countries, killing two birds with one stone (a stone that we ourselves provide).

Again, we can’t effectively fight enemies and fix problems if we do not accurately name them.

On the other hand, if Islamic barbarism, intolerance, violence, and frank declarations that they intend to assimilate us actually wake up some of our people, we should be glad of that. But we should work to make sure that they see the whole problem and the necessary solution, not get sidetracked by half-truths and half-measures.

The problem is the destruction of the European race by non-whites, through demographic swamping, miscegenation, and outright genocide. The solution is European Nationalism: the [reclaiming] of ethnically homogeneous European homelands through moving borders (partition, secession) and/or moving populations.

In every political struggle, as in every war, we must decide who is “us” and who is “them,” the enemy. We are [racially European] — not Christians, not conservatives, not Westerners, etc., although those categories [have in the past] somewhat [artificially] overlapped with the [European] race — and our enemies are those promoting our racial destruction, namely non-whites and traitorous [Culturally-Marxist or Judaized] whites.

But the hard core of the coalition that opposes us is the organized Jewish community [Jewish Supremacists]. That makes Jews the principal enemy, because we cannot set our house in order without defeating them. The role of Jews in creating the present crisis is an interesting but largely academic question, because political change is ultimately about the future, not the past. And there is no question that organized Jewry today is opposed to every policy necessary to save our race, and they are the organizational and financial linchpin of the entire anti-white coalition. And since Jews have a record of subverting movements that oppose them, we cannot risk trusting even those Jews who express sympathy for our cause, because that is exactly what Jewish subversives would say.

That said, it is a mistake to dismiss the Muslim problem as simply an expression of the Jewish problem, or as a distraction from the race problem, because Islam is an independent variable. If we solved the Jewish problem, and if we solved the race problem, there would still be a Muslim problem. Islam has been at war with the rest of humanity since the days of the prophet. It has brought war, death, slavery, and racial and cultural annihilation to millions. This is not, moreover, a departure from “true” Islam but an expression of it. The establishment of Islamic rule would mean the death of white civilization and the white race.

Islam was a threat to Whites[/Europeans] before today’s Jewish hegemony, and it will be a threat when Jewish hegemony is ended.

Islam is not just a problem because it is practiced by non-whites. Islam makes non-whites far more militant and destructive of white civilization. As one commentator pointed out, this may be providential, because without Islam, it would be possible for many Europeans to believe that a multiracial, multicultural society might actually work.

Making an issue of Islam also reveals intellectual confusions and smokes out false friends in our ranks:

⦁ One-track anti-Semites bristle when Islam is attacked, because they fear it inevitably “plays into the Jews’ hands.” But it is not an either/or: both Jews and Muslims are problems, and they are problems on their own as well as in concert with one another.

⦁ Those who put anti-Semitism over race reject criticism of Islam because they hope for an alliance.

⦁ People who put “tradition” (large or small “t”) before race sympathize with Islam and bristle when it is attacked.

⦁ People who put patriarchy (and, let’s be frank, misogyny) before race sympathize with Islam.

⦁ People who put machismo, bellicosity, and barbarism before race sympathize with Islam.

What, then, should be the [Germanic &European folkish] solution to the Muslim problem?

 ⦁ If non-whites, including Jews, leave White/Germanic homelands for their own, Islam would become predominantly a question of foreign policy toward the Muslim world, the ummah, including its European outposts Bosnia and Albania.

⦁ Whites would be completely free to convert to Islam. But since Islam is a political religion, and thus a threat to White political orders [especially to Asatru and our Germanic traditions and culture], such converts would have to be sent to the ummah destination of their choice.

⦁ European countries would maintain cordial relations with the Muslim world, but our own security dictates that we prefer secular, [non-expansionist] Muslim regimes [that simultaneously block Israel's geopolitical expansion efforts].

Wherever our racial interests dictate, we would side with peoples who are resisting Muslim expansion [except in the instance of worse enemies].

⦁ The Jewish homeland of Israel would exist [isolated and blockaded] alongside a Palestinian homeland [which would have heavy AA defences to negate the potential of Israeli nuclear launches], [Israel would remain] in the sights of a thousand nuclear missiles, so the Jews [would be forced to] behave themselves [just like almost every other country does].

In summary, [Germanic & European] policy toward the Muslim world would no longer be dictated by Jews, but by our identity and [our racial] interests. This would eliminate the causes of virtually every current war and intervention in the Muslim world. And that’s it. It would be a world we can all live with.

Continue reading this excellent article by Greg Johnson via the excellent intellectual website: