Translate

Monday, January 19, 2015

Europeans are frightened


...of their own governments.

Fr. Anthony Chadwick, a British expatriate living in France, has deleted 12 days worth of debate on the presence of Islam in Europe.

"Muslim immigration" is, of course, a dog whistle for Middle Eastern and African immigration. European governments have decided the topic is simply not up for discussion (to say nothing of a huge and intractable Roma problem), and so a frightened Fr. Anthony has deleted four blog posts with numerous comments.

This is unfortunate, because the failure to debate and implement reasonable policy now will mean no debate, and lots of street fighting later. As I said at Fr. Anthony's, the first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging. Britain and Europe should impose a moratorium on Middle Eastern and African immigration for at least the next two generations, and it would also be helpful to stop subsidizing the ghettoized existence of violent, ignorant subgroups. The truly unassimilable need frankly to be repatriated, though there is probably nothing that can be done with the improvidently naturalized "citizens." Hopefully with a moratorium on Wahabbist funding and chain migration in place, Islam can eventually learn to live in peace in Britain and Europe. But apparently not even such mild measures can be debated, much less implemented.

By the way, when is the media going to stop using ballyhooed terms like "far right," "hard right," and "ultra right" to describe parties like France's National Front and the Sweden Democrats? These parties are polling at 30 and 13 percent respectively, high enough to overthrow parliamentary coalitions. How fringe can they be?

Nobody seems concerned that Israel can be a classical Jewish nation-state, or that Arab Palestinians are entitled to an Arab Palestine, or that multicultural Yugoslavia needed to be broken up into its Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, Montenegrin, Macedonian and Kosovar nations. Is the idea that a nation-state's extant members get to decide who else gets to be a member really a "fringe" or "far," "hard" or "ultra" topic?

P.S.: Fr. Anthony responds, here..

P.P.S.: I have corresponded with Fr. Anthony, and we understand each other better now. Please refrain from any personal attacks against him.

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idOHr3r1Qi4

I think the Muslims are indeed a problematic subset of a larger problematic group, ie. non-European immigrants. But I fear those running the war-on-terror charade/police-state more.

lannes said...

People like His Reverence are just SURE they know what motivates anyone who objects to wide-open immigration -- the "R"-word.

Fr Anthony said...

Nothing I say will ever change anything about what will happen in Europe. I don't want any of the solutions presently on offer. That being said, something will happen.

That being said, I do agree that immigration has to stop or even be reversed. We can't afford it!

The Anti-Gnostic said...

That being said, I do agree that immigration has to stop or even be reversed. We can't afford it!

That has been my point from the start, and you'd better do that now to avoid some awful social conflict later. It is also, by the way, the entirely reasonable position of parties like Le Pen's National Front.

What I believe you and many others are failing to think about is that the Tradition isn't really effective without traditionalism.

Bert said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kakistocracy said...

I don't want any of the solutions presently on offer.

What solution on offer do you reject?


We can't afford it!

And if money were no object then what? This isn't about cost. It's about the welfare of a people who are being globally submerged. And the only craven rhetorical tool they're willing to deploy in defense is concern for The Economy. Well don't worry about him. Big business assures he is perfectly sanguine about Western colonization.

Prior Martin said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Fr Anthony said...

I have read the comments of "Bert" and "Prior Martyn" and take note. Given what you say, you are no better than those against whom you want to wage war.

Prior Martin said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Prior Martin said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The Anti-Gnostic said...

Okay we are pretty far afield and, regrettably, I am going to delete some comments. My purpose in this post was to point out how Europeans are subject to two-pronged attack: physical assaults by immigrants, and imprisonment or fines by their governments for daring to discuss physical assaults by immigrants.

I have always been told that parliamentary systems were more subject to popular control and Europeans should take full advantage.

Fr Anthony said...

Thank you, Anti-Gnostic for this conciliatory gesture. I can say I am frightened by the times I live in, between "socialist" totalitarianism, an Islamic caliphate dealing with us like they do in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and many other places, or authoritarian parties that manifestly have no experience in statecraft or diplomacy.

I have no human solution other than my humble prayer for the conversion of Muslims to the love of Christ.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Not at all Father, and please accept my apologies for the unpleasantness. You are welcome here any time and the debate will be kept to its merits.

I submit that your majority parties do not actually have the interests of the democratic majority at heart and the citizens might want to give them a time-out. It is unfortunate that we are coming to this, because Hillaire Belloc, Rudyard Kipling, Enoch Powell and Robert Frost all gave us ample warning about trying to rebuild Babel. You are being a good priest, but we citizens have democratic options. God forbid those options fail us.

Ian F. Shield said...

In case you haven't noticed, quite a few people have a problem with Jews having a national state. Including many Jews in the West (who are quite noisy) and many of the most powerful groups of (mostly anti-religious) Jews in Israel. Perhaps you overlooked the storm over the recent proposal by Netanyahu to recognize by statute Israel's nature as a "Jewish" state (in the ethnic, not religious, sense of "Jewish"). His coalition fell apart over it, and almost all nonorthodox American Jewish organizations denounced it. Netanyahu has also been widely denounced (by Jews, in Israel and the West) for building a border fence to keep out migrating African vagrants who have recently caused many problems in working class Jewish neighborhoods in Tel Aviv.

Bert said...

Golly, I sure did miss the party, didn't I?

"I have no human solution other than my humble prayer for the conversion of Muslims to the love of Christ."

Congratulations, then you're as worthless as a one-legged horse. Moreso actually, because at least the horse could be eaten and provide nourishment.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

That's enough about Fr. Anthony, per my PPS above. I have corresponded with him and we understand each other better now. Let us move on to other things.

Bert said...

I sometimes let my passion get the better of me.

Anonymous said...

Fr. Anthony, if possible, your thoughts on Archbishop Williams' comments from a few years back on the acceptability of sharia law in Britain?

Fr Anthony said...

For me, sharia law is unacceptable anywhere, let alone a western country. France will not have it, one thing they get right. The law is the same for all. I find it entirely wrong for it to exist in any shape or form in England.

ed pacht said...

Let me just throw in a brief comment. One does have the right to speak out. Just because one can does not mean one must or even should do so. To speak out without weighing the consequences is an irresponsible act, like shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theater. The host of a discussion has not only the right, but the obligation to regulate what is said under his auspices, and is himself responsible to consider the consequences. This is not cowardice, but can be an evidence of wisdom. I had several comments on Fr. Anthony's deleted posts, and applaud his wisdom in deleting those posts. I surely would have done so myself, even at the cost of my own "brilliant" verbiage.

Bert said...

I bet Ed Pacht would be the first to submit to Islamists when his life was in danger. Something also tells me that Father Chadwick's prayers won't save him.

You guys are fucking pathetic.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Think about this: French Catholic youth destroyed the abominable Piss Christ. I don't have a problem with this. But I suspect for alot of Christians the secular canon trumps the Christian one.

Bert said...

I have no doubt that if Francis the faggot had been pope at the time he would have decried such a hateful, mean attack. Because he wants the church to be nice about everything and hates "meanness, aka actual doctrinal conservatism.

I apologize if I seem angry, but after the sight of the Pope coddling subhuman Muslim trash and condemning the people of Rome who are desperately trying to defend their women from rape I came to the conclusion that the church is a hindrance to the survival of European peoples and not an asset.

Fr Anthony said...

It seems that Bert is letting things slip a little. Sturmabteilung oder Gestapo?

Bert said...

Calling somebody a Nazi. It's brilliant in it's originality. I also love how Englishmen can never hide their resentment of Germans. Considering Germany today is ten times the economic powerhouse England is, that's understandable.

Understand this Father: you're the minority. The old white faggots who dominate the Catholic Church (and for that matter the Anglicans) represent nobody but themselves. if the Church wants a revival, it should come out on the side of the people who have been it's lifeblood for a millennium. Kissing the feet of a bunch of refugee filth sends the wrong message.

Prior Martin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Prior Martin said...

Bert,
I have deleted my original comment since our host has kindly asked us to play nice, or at least to make a valiant attempt. Bishop Anthony Chadwick is quick to condemn men who are willing to fight for their lives, culture and church. He ridicules them and often accuses them of being racists, Nazis and Ku Klux Klansmen, hackneyed accusations frequently used by leftists. He has a particular dislike for Southern Americans who are proud of their Confederate Heritage, of which I happen to be one.
He and his pansy-pacifist associates, such as Ed Pacht, will some day cry for us to help them when the Muslims slow separate their heads from their bodies. Their well being is not my concern. They can look elsewhere, not to me for help.
His blog has become toxic and will eventually bring discredit to the Anglican Catholic Church. Archbishop Haverland, a gentleman who eschews controversy, will no doubt find this negative publicity detrimental to the church's reputation and will take appropriate action.

Kakistocracy said...

AG, I wasn't going to comment further, given that your request to eschew insults left little to say.

But since I know you take the health of your church seriously, it seemed germane to mention the obvious: this is why you fail. This is why your pews lie fallow in the West. Chadwick almost seems to offer a caricature of the flaccid effete sniveling that has so successfully repulsed me from congregations for years.

And it is likely to no one's loss but my own. For if there is a God, then I detrimentally remain out of his orbit. And that is because those who serve as the stewards of his mortal embassies offer little more than mewling pap draped in vestments. All but the latter of which is available 24/7 via innumerable cultural outlets. If the church is merely offering dishwater liberalism, then it is being drastically out-competed. Bert can be called a nazi anywhere in the deracinated West; he needn't seek Christian counsel for the privilege.

If the church wants to enliven the spirit, and draw men accordingly, it will find its inner Pope Urban II. If it does not, its clerics will one day find their debates over Angels on a pin interrupted by the muslim call to prayer pealing from St. Peter's.

Prior Martin said...

Kak,
I couldn't have said it better. That which disguises itself as piety and prayer is nothing more than emasculated cowardice, the very sort of disguise worn as a badge of honor by "men" like Bishop Anthony Chadwick and his fellow mealy mouthed, pseudo-pious, castrated and hypocritical clergy.

Anonymous said...

The Islamic five-pointed star obscures its six-pointed enabler.

Anonymous said...

This is really good stuff.

Kakistocrazy said...

" badge of honor by "men" like Bishop Anthony Chadwick..."

"Chadwick almost seems to offer a caricature of the flaccid effete sniveling that has so successfully repulsed me from congregations for years."


Indeed, Mr. Chadwick is a MAN. Wash your mouth with the soap of God and pray that your Christian bashing will not result in His wrath.

Robert What? said...

I'm still unclear why the "elites" are so enamoured of unlimited Muslim immigration? Do they think that they will magically be able to "ride the tiger"? Is it the "maybe they'll kill me last" mentality? There must be some perceived benefit to them - even imaginary - but blast if I can see it.