Read a Book!: America Alone

March 4, 2009


America Alone: The End of the World as we Know it

by Mark Steyn

I finally went and bought the “Soon to be Banned in Canada” edition of Mark Steyn’s America Alone (and Goldwater’s Conscience of a Conservative, but that’s for another day…) I finished it last night.

The general premise of the book is that the Islamic jihad is stealthily advancing due to differences in demographics and the West’s self-destructive tendencies. With the exception of America, the entire Western world is not longer reproducing at the replacement rate so, their populations are declining; the Mohammadan population is reproducing at a much higher rate, so they are becoming “the children Europe could not bother to have”; the West (with the exception of “red state” America) does not wish to defend our culture. That combination allows for the more fecund and “culturally confident” Mohammadans to eventually crush the West, resulting in a new Dark Age. But this Dark Age will, in all likelihood, look more like the Greek Dark Age (where civilization stopped) than the Medieval one (where there were some limited cultural progress).

It’s a good book. Mr. Steyn has some good one-liners in there. So what if it is “alarmist”, as quite a few book reviewers called it; sounding an alarm when danger is afoot is a good thing.

As a side note, this book reinforced the one stupid bit in Mass Effect. In one of the Tali conversations, she brings up the fact that Quarian population control generally bars multiple births. If the goal is to have enough Quarians in the flotilla to keep the ships a’goin’ and the species viable, would it not make sense to require breeding exactly at the replacement rate? Demanding only 1 child means the population halves every generation. It’s stupid.

I did have a problem with the book, though: Steyn’s ultimate solution to the Mohammadan problem is, like most authors that write on the subject, to encourage the so-called “moderates” to effectively reform Islam. This is a bad solution on multiple counts. First off, Steyn even points out that any reform of Islam has undergone as of late has been a return to original concepts, not modernization. He points out that some female Mohammadan nurses refuse to “scrub up” before surgery because that requires baring ones arms; the Mohammadan concept of modesty has been made more important than sanitation.

Secondly, I think the “moderate Muslim” (a.k.a. a Muslim that rejects the “kill or virtually enslave all non-Mohammadans” additions Mohammad added to Islam after getting initially rejected) is either a myth or not worthy of our encouragement. The difference between the “moderate Muslim” and the Mohammadan is one of zeal, not theology; the “moderate” may not be plotting to blow up people or whatnot, but they are donating to Mohammadan charities like the Holy Land Foundation, supporting the political arms of the jihad like CAIR, making life miserable for those that want to leave the Islamic death cult, et cetera.

Thirdly, Even if this mythical “moderate Muslim” exists and is a strong enough influence to affect change, their attempts is ultimately a bad thing in my opinion. I’m sorry, but cheering for these “moderates” is like cheering for the Archbishop of Canterbury’s attempts to “modernize” Christianity or cheering against the “Skyclad” Jainists; you are cheering for those that are destroying vital parts of the religion. Violence is inherent in the Mohammadan system; the progressive revelatory principle guided Mohammad in the writing of the Koran. The older, more peaceful suras are trumped by the newer, more violent suras.

Forth, modernization will also be ultimately ineffective. The Skyclads and the Fundamentalist/Evangelical Christians are still out there in droves, despite the theological moderates efforts. In fact, the modernist Christians are shrinking in numbers. It’s a bad plan.

I really do think that Mohammadanism needs to be treated just like the anti-Western concepts of the previous century (you know, fascism and communism); it needs to be crushed in the marketplace of ideas. Mohammadanism needs to be made so repugnant that it is rejected by all decent folk. Sure, there still will be small groups of fanatics, just like there are still Neo-Nazis and Communist groups out there but they will no longer have the finances or numbers to be effective. These fanatics efforts will be focused primarily on increasing their numbers by trying to talk people into stuff they have already rejected. The Koran will become like Mein Kampf, tossed in the dustbin of history, only to be temporarily picked up to be sneered at. We need to use reason on those who can be reasoned with and force (military, economic, diplomatic) on those who cannot.

 Ultimately, the book was a good read. Pick it up. And, if you live in Canada, you might want to get it soon. The Mohammadan-Multiculture Complex is trying to get it banned.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “Read a Book!: America Alone”

  1. bk Says:

    I posted this comment on another site recently, but I think its appropriate here because (to my mind) it illustrates why radical Islam (which I now believe is a legitimate problem) has cowed so much of contemporary western society:

    “this is what the feminazification of canadian society has wrought us. Think about it: the very large majority of burea-rats in these commissions are female and moldering, old barbara hall, whose politics are mired in the marxist-feminist grievances of two generations’ ago, is the classic anti-male, “anti-patriarchy,” anti-free speech, anti-individual rights and anti-due process, aggrieved second-wave feminist who never received (or, more likely, just chose to ignore) the memo that gender equality and racial equality were both achieved in a formal sense decades ago and that, if anything, women are far more favoured in our canadian contemporary society than are men whilst immigrants and “minorities” (a term which still seemingly includes privileged white women) are generally better-treated and more politically popular with the ruling class than are whites (well, at least white men).

    I hate to say it, but caucasian women in our society – like barbara hall – are the major reason why so many of the rights Canadians took for granted (the right to a fair trial, the right to due process, the right to be innocent until proved guilty, equality before the law for all, and free speech) are now under threat. Look for the villainesses in feminist judges, feminazis in the nation’s english departments, and in all those women who embrace the multi-headed monstrosity that is the canadian “fairness” state.”

    these women will gladly flip the switch on their sons, brothers, and ex-spouses (to say nothing of the unborn) but are strangely silent with regards to radical islam. Of course, fighting yesterday’s battles is usually a hallmark of the cowardly.

  2. Kralizec Says:

    Regarding your extensive critique of the author’s reliance on moderate muslims, please consider page 152. On page 76, consider the mathematics’ dual application. If you’re an American, it may be easier to remember these pages as 76 and 2*76.

  3. liberexmachina Says:

    Care to pull some quotes? Different editions mean different page numbers. Telling me to consider page numbers without a reference to which edition

    My degrees are in Biology, not Mathematics. I have not had a math course in 6 years; care to give me a refresher on “mathematics’ dual application”? Am I right to assume it is something along the lines of multiples (as 2*76=152)?

    Awaiting your elaboration,

    Liber Ex Machina

  4. Kralizec Says:

    Consider the last page of the seventh chapter.

  5. liberexmachina Says:

    For those that have yet to pick up the book, the last page from chapter 7 discusses how Mohammadans are, by nature, brutally honest when they state their intentions to ultimately destroy us. There is brief mention that, if they ever get successful enough to accomplish something extreme enough, there would be non-governmental groups that would respond just as violently.

    Was your point that Mohammadans are honest to a fault? Koran 3:28 “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers. If any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah; except by way of precaution, that you may guard yourselves from them” Ibn Kathir, in his commentary, states “Allah said next, […] except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda’ said, ‘We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'” Mohammadans are allowed to lie to us if they are afraid of us for some reason, like if we would stop them from whatever nefarious deeds they are up to. Just because the more belligerent Mohammadans choose to be honest (perhaps because they have no fear of us?), does not necessarily mean the “moderate” ones will too; they have more to lose if their adherence to Mohammadanism was discovered. Cell groups, anyone?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: