First of all, there are many decent people who are Muslims and, for example, in London, Paris or Berlin, assiduously run a vegetable store around the corner, bring up their children, telling them to be honest and polite, to show respect to elder people and think highly of tradition and strict morals. These people emphasize the differences between the sexes and the necessity of hierarchy. They are against homosexuality, abortion, the destruction of the (patriarchal) family and the Enlightenment philosophies. They are even pious, but unfortunately they believe in the wrong religion, namely Islam. And although Islam is – in many respects – an evil religion, some people surprisingly and fortunately draw some good and wise conclusions out of their – maybe insufficient – common sense interpretation of Islamic faith.
So what we as Christians have to do is this: we have to try to evangelise and convert them. (Or should we – horribile dictum – say: proselytise them?) But how do we do that, if we say to them: You belong to a savage horde and an inferior culture?
A judgement like that is in itself an indication of an inferior cultural formation, because educated people know of the magnificent creations that the Oriental culture brought forth in the fields of architecture, poetry (for example think of Hafis, whose poems tops Goethe, whose “West-Östlicher Diwan” was influenced by them), fine arts and craftsmanship (for example goldsmithery or furniture-, fabric- and carpet production), the cuisine, and even music. The crusaders were so fascinated by the achievement of the refined Oriental culture, that the European aristocratic lifestyle was influenced by it, when the Christian knights returned to their unheatable castles in the foggy forests of Germany and northern France.
As beauty always is an indicator for value and – yes – even for truth (according to the scholastic precept “pulchritudo est splendor veritatis”, beauty is the radiance of truth), the Oriental culture, which has been a predominantly Islamic culture for centuries, because of its beauty, must be of some value and contain some truth; even if we agree that it has stolen that value and truth from the Byzantine Empire to a large extent. But nevertheless, we have to recognise the value of that culture and – above all – we have to love the people we want to convert in the first place. To love somebody is impossible while despising the whole cultural and social environment that determines his identity.
Secondly: Since the early 90s, the Empire of the New World Order utilizes a double strategy. On the one hand, its representatives tell us that mass immigration of people who don’t share our religion and culture is something magnificent, and that it is strictly prohibited to criticize anyone’s religion, creed, ideological conviction or worldview (unless he’s a real Catholic) for the sake of “tolerance”. This part of the strategy serves the purpose of destroying our cultural identity and its traditional foundations through “pluralism”, to thereby atomise all communities and societies and to transform each and every one of us by that means into slaves of the banksters in the long run. All the States that belong to the global capitalist system – not only those in the Third World – have already fallen into debt-slavery that they will never be able to overcome, because they will never be able to pay back the debt – not in a million years. It will, to the contrary, always increase.
On the other hand, the same ideologists seed hatred and contempt towards everything that does not go along with the “Western Civilisation” (and by the way: Protestantism), especially the Orient, incidentally including Orthodox Christianity – as far as, for example, Samuel Huntington is concerned. This part of the strategy serves the purpose of the creation of a new enemy (necessary after the end of the Cold War), and of legitimizing wars that are at the same time unjust (from the standpoint of natural law and the Theology of just war) and a violation of international law. Every country of geostrategic significance that does not submit itself to western interests and the goals of globalisation (which are a central part of the western project of the New World Order), now can be involved in a war because of its lack of “freedom” and (pseudo-)egalitarian “democracy”.
Our masters have created two camps in Western Society, that of the politically correct leftist gooders and that of the identitary “Western” “conservatives”. Both camps combat each other, not recognizing that both of them serve as mercenary troops of the New World Order, and which – entangled in their distractive battle – never get to perceive their real enemy in the real war. The real enemy is The Revolution and the real war is the war between Counterrevolution and Revolution which – in the end – is the war between Christ and the Antichrist.
The Revolution is trying to eradicate everything natural and naturally grown in culture and society, including economy, government and even family, and to replace it by artificial constructions mainly based on the devilish ideology of the so called “Enlightenment”. But maybe it would be better to talk about the “Endarkenment” in that regard, because the Church has identified this movement from its very beginning as the plaything of her very worst enemies. And many papal encyclicals have confirmed this assessment over and over again.
The Revolution hates the Orient, because – due to its real backwardness – it has remained in “The Middle Ages” and therefore in a status of natural organisation of family, economics, society etc., even though often in a deficient and insufficient manner, which gives the Revolutionaries the opportunity to discredit everything natural. And for the same reason the Revolution hates Catholicism. If you look at the enlightened arguments against the Orient and replace Islam with Catholicism, these arguments work equally, because from the standpoint of the Revolution, real (that means traditional) Catholics, like Muslims, are Middle Ages-minded fundamentalists, i.e. people who believe that concepts, thoughts, convictions, explanatory (scientific) models and strategies for action have to have a fundamentum in re and not only a fundamentum in voluntas humana.
Also, the “western” “Conservatives” reject traditional Catholicism as they reject Islam, because Islam has never “gone through Enlightenment”, as they put it. Because of that, the only sort of Christianity “Conservatives” are willing to condone is a Christianity moulded, “developed” and transformed by having “gone through the Enlightenment”. And this is what Protestantism and protestantised Catholicism is all about. That sort of “Christianity” is a central part of the Revolution, because the Reformation was the first phase of the Revolution in western modernity.
This article appeared in The Remnant's print/E-edition back in April. To see what else you missed, subscribe right now!
And so it is hardly surprising that the same sort of people who want to overcome the Middle Ages in the Orient by implementing enlightened “freedom and democracy”, are also donating to heretical protestant sects that try to de-catholicise former Catholic countries, especially in Latin America. So it doesn’t matter, whether one finds himself in the camp of the leftist gooders or the identitary “western” “Conservatives” – he is always fighting for the Revolution. [Editor’s Note: Fox News Channel’s sellout to the gay lobby is a good example of this. One or two FNC personalities may still quibble over the idea of ‘gay marriage’ (mostly for financial reasons having to do with tax breaks for families raising children) but not one of them still has a problem with the actual sin that cries to heaven for vengeance. As Fox goes, so goes American conservatism. But none dare call it conspiracy. MJM]
But what about the real savage hordes that threaten the Christians in the Orient and meanwhile also in Europe right now? First of all: They threaten the Muslim population in the same way (but this is not the place to go deeper into the whole problem of the Sunni and Shiite conflict and the related problems of all sorts).
Secondly: Islam has indeed a high capacity for violence. We have some experience in Europe with meeting our fellow Muslims at the gates of Vienna. But after the fall of the Osman Empire, Islam did not play any significant role in world history any more. Since that time, the Orient was sluggishly behind the times.
What revived Islam as a political force was Islamism, which – from a theoretical point of view – emerged from merging Koran teaching with Leninism and other western revolutionary ideologies. And the real savage hordes, be they Taliban, Al-Qaida, ISIS or who else, could never have gained the military (and terrorist) power they have without western funding, instruction, arming (this is where Turkey comes into the picture) and logistic support, etc.
Look at the territory ISIS has conquered in only a very short time. Savage hordes without support from western General Staffs, Special Forces and aerial reconnaissance could never have managed that. Not to speak about their modern weapons and vehicles paid by gas stations with national anthems like Qatar and Saudi Arabia, whose corrupt leaders don’t even dare to tinkle without permission of the US State Department or the Pentagon.
The contemporary “West” is the force of the enlightened Revolution. And the people who run the whole show know their Hegel; and as good Hegelians they know what dialectics is all about and how to build a political and geostrategic approach on dialectics. They know that – from a strategical point of view – it is not the best modus operandi to go straight for your goals. It is much better to treat your objectives as syntheses, which are brought forth by the struggle between a thesis and an antithesis that you have to construct in the first place, so that you can lean back and watch how your objectives emerge out of this struggle “all by themselves”. Oops! Look at that: The unstoppable historical progress has actually spawned what is useful for us.
The movers and shakers behind the scenes use “Middle Age” (although in reality Leninist) Islamism, the contempt of the Oriental Culture and the politically correct condemnation of any independent, critical point of view as “hate speech” for one and the same purpose: the destruction of traditional Christianity, which must give way to the inexorable “historical progress”. In this regard the whole conflict between Conservatives and Leftist is only an artificial staging in order to divert our attention.
The West in not interested in converting the Muslims to the truth of Christ, but to stage a conflict between East and West in order to convert all of us to the big plan of human self-redemption, which paves the way to the reign of the Antichrist, which was the very objective of the Revolution from its very beginning, regardless of whether you identify that beginning as the “Glorious Revolution” of 1689, the American Revolution of 1776 or the French Revolution of 1789, the same year – by the way – in which the Freemason George Washington became the first President of the United Sates.
Since those times, “Revolution” is another name for Regime Change. No really successful revolution has ever emerged from an insurgency of “The People”, as they told us in school. All revolutions have been highly expensive and well organised operations in order to manipulate the people for the sake of “freedom and democracy” and in order to replace a naturally-grown traditional elite by a new, “enlightened” one.
Therefore, the natural and traditional aspects of Oriental life and mentality have to be defamed in order to destroy human nature and tradition as a whole in the long run. There must be no order that we did not invent ourselves. Objectively speaking, the Muslims are – in a certain respect – our enemies indeed, because they are the enemies of our religion, and sometimes they behave like that, although they do not always. But they are not our worst enemies. Our worst enemy is the Revolution, which (sometimes) is also the enemy of the Muslims, while simultaneously it (sometimes) uses them as a revolutionary tool.
It is not the purpose of Christians in the West to export “freedom and democracy” (whatever that slogan means) as we did in the cases of Iran (1953), Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Syria and many other countries, or to spread the ideas of the enlightenment (read: endarkenment). It rather is the duty of Christianity to do what the Church did since the days of Constantine the Great in the late Roman Empire and afterwards in the Holy Roman Empire: To gather the world under the Kingship of Christ, which evidently includes the social kingship of Christ, as it was emphasised by Pope Pius XI, not in the Middle Ages but in the midst of the 20th century.
The whole history centers on Christ, and it evolves as a constant battle between Christ and the Antichrist, between light and darkness. This has always been the teaching of the Church. And the interlinked globalist elites of big money, big state and big media, who are the revolutionary forces dominating “The West”, have obviously opted for the darkness.
As the online edition of the New York Times reported on March 19th, referring to UPI from December 28th 2015, a 50-foot-tall full size model of the entrance portal of the Baal temple in Palmyra, that has been destroyed by the ISIS Terrorists, will be erected at Times Square in New York and at the same time at Trafalgar Square London for at least one week. [Editor’s Note: After considerable protest this event was postponed, but Mr. Stark’s point remains the same. MJM] This event is officially explained as a protest against the destruction of the cultural heritage of humanity by the ISIS troops. And indeed: the destruction of the relics of ancient architecture has to be considered as an act of barbarism which is worth protesting against.
But the question is, why is this legitimate protest being expressed by just putting a symbol of the Baal cult in the very centre of most representative western cities? Baal is the male Canaanite Deity of youthfulness, fertility, abundance and richness. The Baal cult is most severely condemned by the Old Testament. All the prophets of Israel fought against it, as the religion that is most hostile to God.
The Baal cult is associated with sexual magic, heterosexual and homosexual temple prostitution and ritual orgies (1 Kings 15, 12; 2 Kings 23, 7), and with sacrificing children to the Deity by burning them. The Old Testament identifies the worship of Baal as the reason for the destruction of the kingdom of Israel and the exile (2 Kings 17).
So again: Why do western metropoles use a symbol of a religion, and thereby identify with a religion that – according to the Holy Scripture – is the one which is most offensive to God? Maybe because this religion sacralises success and wealth and above all sexuality in all its natural und unnatural forms, and thereby represents some of the “Western Values” we desperately don’t want to give up; those with which – to the contrary – we want to delight the rest of the whole world, including the Orient, such as: adultery, promiscuity, homosexuality, free access to pornography, and as a result of all that: contraception and abortion as a modern type of sacrificing children to an evil idol?
However: Every Christian has to decide where he should search for the real enemies of God, of the Church, and therefore of humanity as a whole. Therein lies the beginning of actual enlightenment.