In September, a member of board of the Bundesbank, the German equivalent of the Federal Reserve, published a book titled “Germany is Abolishing Itself.” The reaction to Thilo Sarrazin’s thesis, which is that Muslim immigration not only threatens the existence of Germany, but of every country in which it is permitted, was mixed. While the pushers of multiculturalism and diversity exploded in outrage and Sarrazin was encouraged to resign from the Bundesbank board, the book became an immediate best-seller.
Unlike past sinners against diversity dogma, Sarrazin has neither apologized nor backed down. Various opinion polls have demonstrated that the majority of Germans agree with him despite the fact that the political elite in both major parties are still frightened to death at the thought of being forced to address the very large elephant in the Bundesrepublik’s living room.
This same split between the multicultural pieties of the political and academic classes and the sound historical instincts of the populace is visible throughout Europe. In the Scandinavian countries, the police try to hide the statistics relating to the rape epidemic that is concurrent with the influx of non-Scandinavian immigrants; the incidence of rape in Sweden has doubled in the last 10 years and is now approaches the world-leading South African rate. In Italy, there have even been armed attacks on camps of immigrant squatters by Italians fed up with imported crime.
And the proud city of London has been rightly dubbed Londonistan as its universities and mosques are now producing more jihadists than most Muslim countries.
All of this no doubt factored into British Prime Minister David Cameron’s decision to utilize his speech at a Munich security conference to denounce “state multiculturalism.”
“What I am about to say is drawn from the British experience, but I believe there are general lessons for us all. In the UK, some young men find it hard to identify with the traditional Islam practiced at home by their parents, whose customs can seem staid when transplanted to modern Western countries. But these young men also find it hard to identify with Britain, too, because we have allowed the weakening of our collective identity. Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream. We’ve failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We’ve even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values.
So, when a white person holds objectionable views, racist views for instance, we rightly condemn them. But when equally unacceptable views or practices come from someone who isn’t white, we’ve been too cautious frankly – frankly, even fearful – to stand up to them. … This hands-off tolerance has only served to reinforce the sense that not enough is shared. And this all leaves some young Muslims feeling rootless. And the search for something to belong to and something to believe in can lead them to this extremist ideology. Now for sure, they don’t turn into terrorists overnight, but what we see – and what we see in so many European countries – is a process of radicalisation.”
It is good that a British head of state has finally found the courage to say what so many European heads of state are still afraid to admit. But Cameron is making the same mistake that George W. Bush made before him. Because liberal secularism that Cameron upholds is what produced state multiculturalism, it cannot be expected to successfully serve as an opposition to it.
Still, Cameron’s speech marks the first time that the Western political elite has admitted the failure of multiculturalism. Other steps will follow, and eventually the diversity dogma will be abandoned entirely. But it will take time, during which the extent of the challenge will continue to grow.
While Cameron is correct to assert that Europe and the West need to wake up on the subject of Islamic extremism, he is naively optimistic to imagine that the post-national, post-Christian values he espouses are a sufficiently strong horse to compete with the Islamic revival that has swept the Middle East and is now spreading throughout Africa, Europe and even North America. The secular humanist god of Science Reason is as helpless in defense of its own as were the wooden idols of Baal when mocked by the prophet Elijah. If the West is to survive this ongoing conflict of cultures, it will eventually learn that it must turn to the bold spirit of Charles Martel instead of the satirical one of Voltaire and the Enlightenment.