Gay Patriot Header Image

Why Europeans Are Willing Accomplices to Their Own Cultural Suicide

Posted by V the K at 11:26 am - May 8, 2017.
Filed under: Politics abroad

Ex-Patriate Gay Dude Bruce Bawer explains why Europe is so willing to subjugate itself to Islamic Supremacy.

In America we’re taught (or, at least, used to be taught) that our leaders work for us; we learn (or used to) that it’s not only our right but our duty as individuals to stand up to those leaders when we think they’re wrong – especially when we think they’re exceeding their powers and infringing on our rights. But Europeans aren’t brought up that way. Not really. Yes, there’s lip service to the idea of freedom. But when it comes right down to it, they’re raised to bow down to the state – to prioritize not themselves, not the individual, but the society, the commonweal, that abstract ideal known as “solidarity.”

So it is that even in a secret ballot, it takes European voters a remarkable amount of nerve to resist the thunderous chorus of voices from above urging them to vote against their own interests; it feels like nothing less than an act of treason to heed the meek little voices in their own heads begging them to do the opposite – to do what’s actually best for themselves and their loved ones. They’ve been psychologically manipulated to the point where they truly believe, on some level, at least in some Orwellian doublethink kind of way, that acting in clear defense of their own existence, their own culture, their own values, and their own posterity, is an act of ugly prejudice.

There’s a distressingly strong strain of “subjugate yourself to the state as long as its being run by the Democrats” in the United States as well. Heck, you even have groups like Antifa violently demanding *more* subjugation to the state.

And let’s be blunt. The emigrants who left Europe for America in the 19th and early 20th Century were the ones with courage and balls. Leaving behind one’s country to take a chance in a foreign land is an act of ballsiness. (Sadly, immigrants in the 21st Century just want to cash in on America’s generous welfare benefits.)

Naturally, the Europeans who stayed behind were more likely to be wimps, cowards, and (things Trump would grab).  And two world wars probably killed off the European genes for bravery. Let’s face it, a lot of Frenchmen are only around today because their grandmothers learned the German words for “Good evening, handsome soldier.”

Plus ca change…

 

Share

10 Comments

  1. Pres. Trump didn’t meet with Le Pen after his election even though she was spotted lurking in the lobby. Also, he didn’t endorse her for several reasons. Two of which were her usual typical anti (any) immigrant history & because she just didn’t have the numbers & national popularity to win. Hillary didn’t have a chance to win either. McCain could have won against her. Obviously. Now. Unfortunately, for US Libs, this French thing wasn’t about them. It was always a faerie tale to think Europe would snap out of it without an actual substantial violent attack & I’m not talking about periodic shootings in clubs or vehicular attacks leading to overreaction & the sense that there’s been an actual attack instead of all being just an example of their unintegrated population with diverse allegiances.

    Bawer is only reiterating common knowledge that most people seem to forget. Anyway, since when have the Europeans not shot themselves in the foot, whenever possible? There was never a chance that the obvious problems would be fixed. An unintegrated immigrant or non-ethnic French citizenry. A rabid sense of entitlement & dependency on the state for everything leading, on occasion, to authoritarianism &/or socialist leaders.

    The French are the French, as the saying goes & the Spanish are more or less exempt because they still love their after naps. Merkel & her anti-ethnic European crusade is still responsible. They all think mass immigration is a good idea & they all love their successors to monarchy.

    Comment by Hanover — May 8, 2017 @ 11:58 am - May 8, 2017

  2. I think the reason Europeans are sold on the need to colonize their own countries is because the socialists have run out of money. countries like Greece, spain, Portugal, Italy and Ireland are all close to being bankrupt. the Europeans are all sold on the idea of their lifetime benefits. of course they let the communists talk them into not having children so now they don’t have anyone to work to pay for all those benefits. the socialists told them no problem, we’ll just bring people here from other countries so they can work to pay for your benefits. well the people they imported said screw you we’re not working for you we’re going on the dole, you can work for us. so now they are faced with that and all the other problems these colonists have brought to their country while the communists are rejoicing that they are only a decade or so away from instituting their long sought after dictator of the proletariat.

    Comment by salg — May 8, 2017 @ 1:35 pm - May 8, 2017

  3. Every nation has lies they tell themselves to sleep at night; we have them, the Brits have them and so do the French. One French national-lie is WW2’s “The Resistance”. One gets the impression that one-in three-or-four resisted; yet anecdotally only 20,000 were actively involved out of the French millions, plus another 20,000 trade-unionists and Communists working in-parallel.

    The half in Vichy-France kept their heads-down, and hoped that no-one knocked on their door. The half in Occupied-France were silent, or cooperated with Vichy, or colluded with the Germans, or openly collaborated. Paris was Paris and the lights stayed-on and the champagne flowed.

    After the Liberation in 1944, the national conscience was salved by the existence of the Resistance, …and few questions were asked. A few heads were shaved, a few of the obvious hung-from lamp-posts, and quiet resentments and outrages were settled in dark byways and alleys. Suddenly everyone “resisted” and National Pride was saved, “vive le’France!”. Or, at-least papered-over in the smoke of burning confidential and incriminating files. …France Resisted!!” A seat on the Security Council, the Force de frappe and de Gaulle. Then there was Algeria, and the flood-gates opened wide.

    Meanwhile, in Madame Merkel’s East Germany, one-in-three were STASSI informants…

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — May 8, 2017 @ 1:52 pm - May 8, 2017

  4. The cheese eating surrender monkey is the bastard child of French liberalism.

    Stephen Ambrose wrote about the Frawnch pissing and moaning about who would clean up after D-Day contrasted with how the German civilians immediately sorted through the rubble after a bombing to pile up useful bricks for reconstruction and getting back to civilized living.

    For my lifetime, the Frawnch have always snickered at the up-tight, silly Americans.

    Modern “liberalism” is decidedly il-liberal. A quote attributed to William F. Buckley is classic: “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”

    Half a century ago, leftist Herbert Marcuse wrote a Marxist essay entitled “Repressive Tolerance.” Marcuse “discovered” the “fact” that society is so radically unequal that we must be intolerant and repressive in the name of tolerance and liberty in order achieve “equality.” [He rejected what he termed “indiscriminate tolerance” — a tolerance that accepts all viewpoints — in favor of “liberating tolerance” or “discriminating tolerance.”

    Marcuse was quite clear about “Repressive Tolerance”: “Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left.”

    Avante-garde is libéral, progressive, radical, innovative, new wave; all of that is embedded in “Repressive Tolerance.” To illustrate from the essay:

    They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion, or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc. Moreover, the restoration of freedom of thought may necessitate new and rigid restrictions on teachings and practices in the educational institutions which, by their very methods and concepts, serve to enclose the mind within the established universe of discourse and behavior — thereby precluding a priori a rational evaluation of the alternatives. And to the degree to which freedom of thought involves the struggle against inhumanity, restoration of such freedom would also imply intolerance toward scientific research in the interest of deadly “deterrents,” of abnormal human endurance under inhuman conditions, etc.

    What Marcuse says is strictly anti-intellectual. The “Repressive Tolerance” of Marcuse is what we now call “political correctness.” And what is the first tool of “political correctness?” Re-education of “intellectuals” by the Marcuse fueled bureaucrats and apparatchiks with illiberal roots and totalitarian tendencies. Those addicted to “political correctness” slip into posturing by promoting polarizing views, and evidence steadily diminishing analytic foundations for their opinionated, utopianism. “Political correctness” is intellectually flaccid.

    The urban Frawnch are so illiberal that they can not possibly endorse anything which resembles conservative common sense.

    Macron has limped into office and in a most underwhelming landslide of votes cast mostly by the rabid urban status quo. He took Paris by 90%. Whether Macron is more like the center-right Valéry Giscard d’Estaing of the 1970’s or the center-left of François Hollande is almost a distinction without a difference. France will still have Islamic terrorism, socialism and a globalist philosophy.

    Comment by Heliotrope — May 8, 2017 @ 2:25 pm - May 8, 2017

  5. @3 people should know how they trade-unionist communists aided the Nazis in conquering france in the first place. their original resistance was against the French forces fighting the Nazis. if anybody is old enough to remember the viet nam war the actions of the French “resistence” in 1940 will sound vey familiar.

    Comment by salg — May 8, 2017 @ 2:46 pm - May 8, 2017

  6. I remember having a conversation with a French couple (good friends) about 10 years ago re. French politicians. We admired de Gaulle and laughed at Edith Cresson but when I mentioned Jean-Marie Le Pen, they became visibly angry, furious that I even mentioned him. Several weeks later when friends and relatives from Brittany arrived on vacation, they introduced me as the guy who had reminded them of the bitter specter of Le Pen and we talked politics, each of them saying terrible things about him. (I didn’t know much about him other than that he was supposedly a terrible racist.)

    Comment by Ignatius — May 8, 2017 @ 4:52 pm - May 8, 2017

  7. Jean-Marie Le Pen was the French electorate’s Id Monster; what they thought and actually-said in the privacy of their own homes and social circles…including the vicious antisemitism. Gaullism and Socialism is merely their “public face” when asked by strangers or co-workers.

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — May 8, 2017 @ 5:51 pm - May 8, 2017

  8. I figure that Le Pen would have been more popular if she had not wanted to get France out of the EU. France considers itself part of Europe, and given its history, has an high resistance to that move. If Le Pen could tone down that rhetoric and ditch the demand to leave, she would be much more appealing to the French electorate. She could keep the anti-immigrant stance whilst not giving up the EU…

    Comment by Cas — May 8, 2017 @ 6:53 pm - May 8, 2017

  9. @8 ever thing the colonization thing is related to being in the eu. it is the eu that insists European countries have to take in the colonists.

    Comment by salg — May 8, 2017 @ 7:55 pm - May 8, 2017

  10. I think it is pretty sad that France couldn’t seem to pull it’s head out of it’s socialist, pc, rear end, but they have been pretending that wine and l’amour is still their legacy instead of the socialist/islamist hellhole they are quickly becoming. After all if it weren’t for the French there might well not have been a United States of America, and if it weren’t for the U.S. there certainly would not be a France. But the march of history proceeds and it remains to be seen if we can save our own republic.

    Comment by Rex — May 9, 2017 @ 10:18 am - May 9, 2017

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.