You’ve heard of “redistribution of wealth.” We are now watching in Europe something even more ghastly take shape.

It’s a phrase I’d never heard of before last week (although we suffer from the syndrome, too): the “redistribution of refugees.” It is even worse than the redistribution of wealth because it makes you a stranger in your own land.

I have seen this before on my travels in Europe. There is vast psychological and spiritual dislocation. There is permanent destruction of the cultural home. Such costs, such losses are gigantic, incalculable, but never considered – at least not by our leaders.

Meanwhile, the masses of foreigners, to use the old-fashioned word, coming to Europe (or the U.S.) from the Islamic world, from Africa (from South America), will always be able to “go home again.” Their homes, their cities, their countryside remain unchanged. Leave a 98 percent Islamic country? Return to a 98 percent Islamic country (maybe 99 percent). That Islam now dominates sectors of many of Europe’s once Christian towns and cities, from Rotherham to Amsterdam, is fact. After decades of Islamic immigration – the demographic jihad of the “hijrah” – so many neighborhoods and communities are already strange, and dangerously so, to their natives. And now?

I wonder about the wielders of power, the redistributors, seated in their elegant conference rooms, sipping sparkling water, pronouncing on the fate of millions of citizens across Europe. German Chancellor Merkel. Swedish Prime Minister Lofven. European Commission President Juncker and the rest. Either they have no understanding of the plight of their peoples, or they have full understanding of it. That is, either they are insulated to a point of numbness to what actually happens to Europe’s people – their churches and remaining synagogues, their schools and languages, their marketplaces and streets, their customs and their lore – when a town or neighborhood is engulfed by an alien and predatory culture such as Islam – or they sadistically relish the prospect in the name of something they like to call “European values.”

Indeed, “European values” are the stated basis of Angela Merkel’s accelerating demographic war on Europe. I don’t use the word “war” lightly. The destruction of sovereignty, border law and order we see in Hungary, Greece and elsewhere overwhelmed by masses of mainly Muslim, mainly male aliens, are hallmarks of invasion. We hear much talk about war – the war in Syria – as it supposedly relates to this crisis, but it is Germany’s role as honey pot – social welfare mecca – that is now driving and expanding a sustained demographic assault on Europe.

There is tension. Today’s news flash that Denmark has suspended rail travel with Germany – surely a headline out of some old war movie – to prevent “refugees” traveling from Germany to Denmark reveals more evidence of strained relations with Germany.

It is easy to understand why. Merkel has announced that the category of political refugee has no bounds. Her vice chancellor has announced that Germany alone will be able to take 500,000 per year for several years. Three years? Four years? Ten years? Forever? If the European Union was designed to encompass Europe, Germany has now effectively declared that its domain can also encompass some massive part of the rest of the world’s population – and it seems to be on the march to Europe, all eyes on the prize of Germany.

But not so fast, according to Merkel and her EU cronies. These mainly Islamic masses must be “redistributed” throughout Europe. Sweden’s socialist prime minister this week called for a “permanent, mandatory redistribution system.”

Signs of a big heart, of “European values”? Sounds more like madness and totalitarianism. What is more frightening still is at the pinnacle of power in Berlin and Brussels we see the contempt that so many of Europe’s leaders feel for what is indigenous to Europe. Such contempt excuses any act – including Angela Merkel’s global population resettlement project that can only lead to European destruction.

The plight of poor, swamped Hungary tells the story. According to the script, we are supposed to regard Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s efforts to reinstate borders, to register tens of thousands of “migrants,” to house and feed them in “camps,” with more than suspicion – with dread and revulsion. Borders. National sovereignty – hiss, boo.

In fact, Orban is attempting to comply with European Union law. It is Merkel and the EU leaders who are subverting it. According to the EU’s Schengen and Dublin treaties, states must maintain their external borders (with non-EU nations), permit entry through those borders at specific crossing points and only at certain times of day. Once inside, aliens are supposed to be registered before moving on.

If Germany supported the European Union, it would be supportive of Hungary’s efforts to maintain the integrity of the EU borders and do everything in its own power to reverse the flow of Islamic humanity into Europe. Denmark, for example, has embarked on an advertising campaign in the Middle East, making it clear that Denmark is no longer the honey pot it once was for asylum-seekers. Germany, however, continues to pledge a land of milk, honey and unlimited welfare to the likes of 500,000 new people per year. Germany is destabilizing the EU. It is inciting a population shift from the Third World to Europe that bodes a level of cultural destruction that is truly cosmic. Germany is instigating calamity.

The ironies pile up. For example, Merkel invokes “European values” as the rationale for “redistributing” Islamic population blocs around Europe. These Islamic blocs, however, bring with them their religious-political-legal system, Shariah, which will only hasten the destruction of those already imperiled European values. Merkel also hints at the subtext informing her actions – more expiation for Hitler’s crimes of destroying European Jewry. All the more gruesome, then, to see Germany – Germany! – doing so by welcoming into Europe massive new colonies of the worst Jew-haters in the world.

But there is resistance, in Denmark, Hungary and even some in England, where David Cameron announced he will not be participating in the mandatory quotas the EU mandarins seek to impose – a program to spread some 160,000 persons “across the bloc.”

For a reality check, add some zeroes.

Listening to Prime Minister Orban explain his country’s position at a recent press conference, it struck me that the poison of Marxism did not subvert the peoples of the former Soviet bloc as it did the rest of the “free” West.

Orban also made it very clear that he does not want “large communities of Muslims” imposed on his country. He harkened back, quite politely, to Hungary’s centuries of Islamic subjugation to explain why. Here are his relevant remarks.

There are different experiences. During my meeting today with [European Council] President Tusk, we also discussed history. We talked about our own experiences. I have to say that when it comes to living together with Muslim communities, we [Hungary] are the only ones [in the EU] who have experience because we had the [opportunity] to go through that for 150 years in history. Some parts of Slovakia also might be affected by it, not others. Polish people, for example, suffered from Christian people, not to name names.

So we all have different experiences and therefore different reflexes.

We don’t want to criticize France, Belgium or any other country. We think all countries have a right [to decide] whether they want to have large numbers of Muslims in their countries to live with … in their countries. If they want to live together with them, they can. We don’t want to, and I think we have the right to decide that we don’t want a large number of Muslim people in our country. We do not like the consequences of a having large number of Muslim communities that we see in other countries. And I do not see any reason for anyone else to force us to create ways of living together in Hungary that we don’t want to see. That is a historical experience for us which does not coincide with other countries’ experience, therefore there are differences.

“Different reflexes” is right. It is good to see that at least some nations in Europe still want to survive.

But will Merkel and the EU powers let them?

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.