Summary: Europe is burning their culture, deliberately and fecklessly, by allowing in so many migrants from very foreign cultures (worse because Europe has difficult assimilating immigrants). This is the third post about one of the best books describing this tragedy.
The Strange Death of Europe:
Immigration, Identity, Islam.
By Douglas Murray.
Excerpt from Chapter 13 – “Tiredness.’
The facts of the loss of belief and faith across a continent are frequently commented upon and indeed taken for granted. But the effects of this are less often considered. Rarely if ever is it recognised that the process described above meant one thing above all: Europe had lost its foundational story.
And the loss of religion to Europe did not just leave a hole in the moral or ethical outlooks of a continent, it even left a hole in its geography. Unlike, say, the United States, the geography of Europe is of a collection of towns and villages. Leave a village and you will eventually stumble upon another. And in any low-built area the first thing you will see is the church, placed at the heart of the community. Today, where these hearts of the communities are not wholly dead and converted into housing they are dying, and the people who still congregate in them sense that they are in a dying movement. …
Where once there was an overriding explanation (however many troubles that brought), now there is only an overriding uncertainty and question. And we cannot unlearn our knowledge. Even someone who regrets their inability to connect with the faith that used to propel them cannot believe again simply in order to regain the propulsion. And as Europe learnt from philosophers such as John Locke, it is not possible to ‘force’ faith. Nevertheless, our societies go on, largely avoiding addressing these and other gaping questions or pretending that they do not matter. …
What else did these conflicts and the clash of ideologies destroy? If not the last vestiges of religion then certainly the last refuge of the idea of a merciful God. If this had not been achieved in the mud of Flanders then it was completed in the trial of God as described by Elie Wiesel at Auschwitz {in Night
The Jews could continue their traditions as a people and could believe in the people even if they had lost faith in their God. But Christian Europe had lost faith not only in its God but in its people as well. Any remaining faith that man had in man was destroyed in Europe. From the period of the European Enlightenments onwards, as belief and trust in God had waned, so belief and trust in man had partially replaced this. The belief in autonomous man had accelerated after the Enlightenments that had stressed the potential wisdom of mankind alone.
Yet those who let reason be their guide now looked as ridiculous as everyone else. ‘Reason’ and ‘rationalism’ had led men to do the most unreasonable and irrational things. …
So it was that by the end of the twentieth century Europeans could be forgiven for possessing or inheriting a certain weariness. They had tried religion and anti-religion, belief and non-belief, the rationalism of man and a faith of reason. They had originated nearly every one of the great political and philosophical projects. And Europe had not just tried them all and suffered them all, but – perhaps most devastatingly – seen through them all. Between them these ideas had left hundreds of millions of people dead, not just in Europe but around the world wherever versions of these ideas were tried.
What could anyone do with such regrets, or such knowledge? An individual responsible for such mistakes would have either to deny them or to die of shame. But what does a society do? …
What is the effect of people coming into Europe in very large numbers who have not inherited the doubts and intuitions of Europeans? Nobody knows now, and nobody ever did. All we can be certain of is that it will have an effect. Putting tens of millions of people with their own sets of ideas and contradictions into a continent with its own set of ideas and contradictions is bound to have consequences.
The presumption of those who believed in integration is that in time everybody who arrives will become like Europeans, a presumption made less likely by the fact that so many Europeans are unsure whether they want to be Europeans. A culture of self-doubt and self-distrust is uniquely unlikely to persuade others to adopt its own stance. Meantime it is possible that many – at least – of the incomers will either hold fast to their own certainties or even, quite plausibly, attract Europeans in the generations to come with these certainties.
It is also plausible that many of those who come will enjoy the lifestyle, will take part in the aspirations and the fruits of the economic uplift so long as it continues, and yet despise or disdain the culture into which they have come. …
Surveys of social attitudes consistently show migrant communities from outside Europe to have views on the social liberalism, not to say libertarianism, of Europe that would terrify Europeans if those views came from within their own communities. The liberalism of modern Europe also provides these arrivals with some ostensible justifications for their stance. The Muslim father does not want his daughter to become like Western women, because he sees some Western women and knows what they do. He does not want his daughter to become obsessed with consumerist culture when he sees all that it produces. That which he would refute is in the society all around him.
Perhaps in time, rather than become more like the society into which they have moved, such people will become more entrenched in their own ways precisely because of the society into which they have moved. At the same time the evidence to date suggests that it is unlikely Europeans will much defend their own values before such people.
In a country like Britain it has taken decades for opposition to female genital mutilation to be mainstream. Despite being illegal for three decades, and despite more than 130,000 women in Britain having suffered this barbaric treatment, there have still been no successful prosecutions for the crime. If Western Europe finds it so difficult even to confront something as straightforward as FGM, it seems unlikely it will ever be able to defend some of its subtler values in the years ahead. …
The lack of questions and discussion about the change that is happening in Europe may in large part come down to this: it is better off not to ask the questions because the answers to them are bad. Certainly that would help explain the otherwise extraordinary levels of opprobrium heaped on dissenting voices in the era of mass immigration. In particular it explains the adamant belief that if the people shouting fire are silenced or stopped then the problem they are identifying will go away. After the offices of Charlie Hebdo were fire-bombed in 2011, Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius attacked the magazine. ‘Is it really sensible to pour fuel on the fire?’ he asked. Nobody asked him, in reply, who had turned French society into a fire. {Editor: in 2015 two Al Qaeda terrorists shot 23 in their office; 12 died.)
——————————–
About the author
Douglas Murray is the Associate Director at The Henry Jackson Society, having joined in April 2011. He previously founded the Centre for Social Cohesion, a think tank studying extremism and terrorism in the UK (now part of the HJ Society). A bestselling author and award-winning political commentator, Douglas is a regular columnist for the Spectator, where he is associate editor, Standpoint and UnHerd. He writes frequently for a variety of other publications, including the The Times, The Sun, and Evening Standard.
See his entry at Wikipedia. Also see his articles at the Henry Jackson Society website and at the Gatestone Institute.
Other posts about Murray’s book
- Martin van Creveld’s reaction to Europe’s rape epidemic.
- Warning of the “Strange Death of Europe.”
- Strange perspectives on the challenges facing Europe.
For More Information
The Gatestone Institute, a far-right advocacy group, is one of the few reporting about this problems of immigrants in Europe. As always with such sources, whether Gatestone or Wikipedia, follow the links to the original sources.
Ideas! For shopping ideas, see my recommended books and films at Amazon.
Please like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. Also see these posts about Europe, about immigration, and especially these…
- Europe’s elites use immigration to reshape it.
- Stratfor: How immigration will change German politics, which will change Europe.
- Torching Utopia: Sweden tries mass immigration.
- Sociologist Wolfgang Streeck explains the politics of the migrant crisis reshaping Europe.
- Stratfor: Is the West Being Overrun by Migrants? — By the famous sociologist and historian Ian Morris.
- Trump points to Sweden’s problems with migrants. Then they riot, again.
- Migrants’ protests begin, pushing France into a new society.
If only Europe had a better people!
This is a deeply researched look at The Crisis of Multiculturalism in Europe: A History
“This is a history of modern European cultural pluralism, its current crisis, and its uncertain future.
“In 2010, the leaders of Germany, Britain, and France each declared that multiculturalism had failed in their countries. Over the past decade, a growing consensus in Europe has voiced similar decrees. But what do these ominous proclamations, from across the political spectrum, mean? From the influx of immigrants in the 1950s to contemporary worries about refugees and terrorism, The Crisis of Multiculturalism in Europe examines the historical development of multiculturalism on the Continent.
“Rita Chin argues that there were few efforts to institute state-sponsored policies of multiculturalism, and those that emerged were pronounced failures virtually from their inception. She shows that today’s crisis of support for cultural pluralism isn’t new but actually has its roots in the 1980s.
“Chin looks at the touchstones of European multiculturalism, from the urgent need for laborers after World War II to the public furor over the publication of The Satanic Verses
“While many Muslim immigrants had lived in Europe for decades, in the 1980s they came to be defined by their religion and the public’s preoccupation with gender relations. Acceptance of sexual equality became the critical gauge of Muslims’ compatibility with Western values. The convergence of left and right around the defense of such personal freedoms against a putatively illiberal Islam has threatened to undermine commitment to pluralism as a core ideal. Chin contends that renouncing the principles of diversity brings social costs, particularly for the left, and she considers how Europe might construct an effective political engagement with its varied population.
“Challenging the mounting opposition to a diverse society, The Crisis of Multiculturalism in Europe presents a historical investigation into one continent’s troubled relationship with cultural difference.”
Europe, ‘anarchy plus a constable’, could do worse than to try China’s religion of good citizenship. It’s worked for 2,000 years and today it’s firing on all cylinders.
Umm remind me how many people were slaughtered under the rule of Chairman Mao? Was it 50 million?? I know it was the greatest mass murder ever! So explain to me the “religion of good citizenship” and how it “worked for 2000 years” ?
Christine,
“So explain to me the “religion of good citizenship” and how it “worked for 2000 years”?”
Mao ruthlessly suppressed traditional Chinese beliefs and religions in favor of communism, an import from Europe.
The “2000 years” was before Mao.
Hcat,
Since 1950 (the revolution), China’s foreign policy looks like of Quakers compared to that of the US. They have acted to restore their traditional buffer zones. Which is just good sense since official US military policy designates them as a major foe — and the US has a long history of striking others in moments of weakness.
Do you think that areas of the US that have lost faith will be left untouched?
Boiled slowly by a gradual heating of the; water the frog that has no temperature gauge, no red line… is cooked in the pot of moral relativity.
7zander,
That’s an important question. America has proven itself to have a higher — much higher — ability to assimilate people from foreign cultures than Europe. But everything has limits.
Note that frogs are too smart to be boiled slowly. Unfortunately, they’re smarter than people in this respect.
What data does he support his hypothesis on?
From a Danish perspective it makes no sense. The role of religion in the broader Danish population is an open question. One wonders if there it ever has been very strong. One can look at the letters written by priests to King Chistian 4. (1577-1648) complaining about the conduct of the peasants – with their gambling and selling food and beer in church etc.
The highest church attendance in Denmark was during the rule of King Christian 6. (1730-1746) when forced church attendance was introduced with fines and beatings for non-attendance (the law was not enforced strongly). He scared about 20% of the adult population into attending. By the end of the century things were back to normal. A priest from a rural parish (Understed, Vendsyssel) i Northern Jutland wrote in 1797 that a priest would be lucky to have 1/20th of his parishioners to attend a mass. The average attendance rate in that period is estimated to 10 people. During the 19th century you then had religious revival movements like, Indre Mission and Grundtvigianisme, that meant that by 1900 you could get an estimated 10% of the adult population to attend church services on any normal sunday.
Now we seem to be around the level of the late-18th century though there is disagreement about the data. This priest and church-historian Rasmus H. C. Dreyer argues that the Danish State Church is quite alive and doing well.
https://www.kristendom.dk/spoerg-om-kristendom/er-gudstjenester-blevet-mindre-populaere
He makes the claim that the church has never been more popular and better attended.
“Selvfølgelig er der enkelte steder og enkelte gange, hvor der kommer endsige meget få i kirke, men folkekirken er måske så populær som aldrig før. Ja, vi kan ligefrem tale om, at der aldrig i Danmarks historie er kommet så mange i kirke, som der gør nu.”
Rune,
Thanks for that interesting data. Do you believe Denmark’s experience with Christianity is typical of that in Western Europe?
Dear Rune Kramer,
Very interesting comment! I think the role of the church in the West is often misinterpreted. Sure, most folks didn’t attend regularly, but no one much disputed the church was the church, and they would buy and sell wares in the church square, attend weddings, get buried, get all wound up and turn out if a bishop rolled into town, etc. The church was a reflection and amplifier of social cohesion. So too language, shared history, kin, and traditions. This seems obvious, but increasingly it’s politically incorrect to notice such things.
I don’t know much about Denmark outside some European history at, say 5000 feet/1500 meters. But I have some acquaintance with some countries a little farther North. In Iceland, folks are trying to build a temple to the old Norse gods (who don’t seem to be smiling on their engineering issues), and it’s not really causing the same kerfuffle you might get, say, by wearing shoes in the Mosque in Mecca, or just Viewing Mecca While Christian. It may be technically blasphemous from some religious perspective, but it’s very Icelandic. And, if I had to bet, I’d bet other Nordic countries are simultaneously laughing at their bumpkin Icelandic brothers and wishing they had their own temple to Odin or whoever.
Similarly, take swimming in Oslo. On a warm summer night, lots of people who don’t know each other strip nekkid (as we say in the American South) and go swimming together. We still have de facto black pools and white pools in the South and I’m sure elsewhere, too, because social cohesion doesn’t range far from the neighborhood even today. Not every pool and maybe not even most, but certainly more than we’d care to admit. Oh, let me give Marx his due: we segregate by class, too with rich pools and poor pools.
I studied in Stockholm back in the day, and being the clueless American, I’d walk all the hell over the place just to see what was there, and for the most part it was never a problem. Hell, sometimes I was taken in by perfect strangers for a kraftor party. Being clueless can have advantages, but I wouldn’t recommend it as an exclusive strategy. Some of my adventures took me to neighborhoods in search of kebab and curry and what not and a few times I have to admit the hair stood up on the back of my neck. Not so much because I was in immediate danger (though maybe I was) but it was because everyone (or so it seemed) was staring at me as an unwelcome “other”. My colleagues thought I was insane to go where I went and lucky to make it out without incident. Roving the poorest neighborhoods in Istanbul wasn’t remotely the same, because there I was recognized as being clueless and merely curious and taken in for tea and backgammon. Tesikkur ederim, y’all! Before we leave Sweden, let me just say that a friend’s grandfather who lived way North had a bust of Lenin. True story. You can’t have a bust of Lenin, kept without irony, if you didn’t have some notion of social cohesion.
When institutions like “the church” aren’t things that reflect social norms and cohesion, what’s left? Anarchy or oppression most likely in the long term, and anarchy (it seems) can last only so long (they seem to be doing a good job of keeping it going in Libya, though). I suspect Danes can identify something about being Danish, but will that survive 10% of the population not being “traditionally” Danish. 20%? 50%? 90%? If 20 million Californians sought refugee status because they felt they were repressed by Donald Trump, could Denmark take them in without changing her character? I don’t know, but it seems to be a reasonable question. France and Germany don’t seem to be asking. The UK, Poland, Hungary, etc., are and are being excoriated for doing so.
With the very best regards,
Bill
Thanks for the insights, i found them fascinating.
7Zander,
Best of all, they’re free!
How normal the Danish experience is in a European context I don’t know. Which is why I was interested in what basis Douglas Murray has for his claims. I would think that you need to carefully go though every European region & country and evaluate the role of Christianity among the common people. It may not be as important everywhere and vary in importance over the centuries.
For example the church as the heart of the village/local community. Sometimes it is and sometimes not in Denmark. Sometimes the church was built and owned by a local nobleman, sometimes the catholic church owned the village and built the church. And sometimes it was the local community who found the money.
My guess would be that a church built by the local community would be more of a centre than a church which is the property of a nobleman who may not even live in the area. But seen over centuries it may not matter.
However, the tradition of church ships does point to a sense of civic pride but again it’s not reflected in actual attendance.
They are not votive ships as the English wiki-page erroneously states, but just gifts to decorate the church from a local parishioner.
https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirkeskib_(skibsmodel)
reply for Bill Occam:
What is a Dane is something we have had quite a bit of debate about in Denmark. A case in point is this article from a member of the successful nationalistic Dansk Folkeparti, Martin Henriksen (MP)
https://politiken.dk/debat/art5637881/Dansk-Folkeparti-Danskhed-er-sindelag
For him being a proper Dane is a question of sentiment. “Old” Danes must accept the “new” Danes as fellow Danes. Yes Old Danes (gammeldanskere) and New Danes (nydanskere) are terms we use in Danish.
Being born in Denmark and speaking the language and knowing the culture is not enough. The end goal for a migrant is assimilation – a complete immersion in Danish culture and values so that they can become Danes – part of the group. The term “nydanskere” is now used on third and fourth generation immigrants from non-Western countries. There is quite a bit of support for such a definition of “Danishness” across the political spectrum, except on the far Left and the Social Liberal Party
It’s not unproblematic with just a definition as third and fourth generation migrants rightly ask what it takes to be accepted. It creates a sense of alienation.
In the USA I doubt that would be the case with your focus on citizenship rather than group identity.
Rune,
“I would think that you need to carefully go though every European region & country and evaluate the role of Christianity among the common people”
I doubt that exercise would tell us anything whatsoever of use to Europe’s current problems. The experiment has already begun in Europe. Each year brings more data. It is an experiment with existential stakes, done by Europe’s leaders on their people, with no testing, done purely by ideology.
I and some others believe the results are already becoming visible. Time will tell who is correct.
The open borders advocates want the experiment to become irreversible before the results become clear. Much like the communists in Russia and China. I think that’s quite mad.
The majority of people don’t want unlimited Muslim immigration. I don’t think it’s a loss of religious faith that has resulted in the current situation. All it has taken is left wing politicians selling us out to gain power while shouting down anyone who disagrees as bigoted and islamophobic.
The iconclast,
“All it has taken is left wing politicians selling us out to gain power ”
That’s quite false. Open borders is a bipartisan phenomenon in both the US and Europe. Lots of conservatives love the idea — business executives, economists, politicians. That’s why the policy has gained strength during the past few decades, no matter who is in power.
For example — Merkel leads the right-wing coalition in Germany.
And who is behind the demented agenda of the leftist liberals? Lucifer! When the people turn their backs on God and think they no longer need Him, then Satan moves in and takes over… maybe slowly – but surely
Christine,
Thank you for that …interesting comment. Good-bye.
Really think through the implication of Chin’s defense of Muslim immigrant attitudes towards women.
It’s not a conspiracy or hate-rumor to say that Muslim men in Europe are systemically raping, mutilating, and murdering women of all ages, both their own and from among the native population of Europe, to enforce their ideas of where women’s place is. And Rita thinks it is unacceptable to put a stop to it. She cares not for the plight of women suffering under these conditions, of whether the victims actually agree that they should be brutalized third-class citizens.
In the same period when Middle Eastern women are being arrested for rejecting the hijab, Feminist cunts like Chin who project their rape-fetish on the entire rest of the population are writing books saying that anyone who denies Muslim men the right to repress women with impunity are the real monsters.
Growling,
All sad but true.
Two thoughts.
One, Europe killed huge numbers of its best people between 1914 and 1945 in war and genocides, and drove many of its most enterprising to emigrate when it wasn’t killing them in wars. You have to consider the psychological effects of this, they go very deep. But you also have to consider the results of losing just those people on that scale. It has consequences for the gene pool. Youu have a combination of lack of confidence, the psychological result, and lack of the traits and the people necessary to act decisively.
Two, with the EU we have the French model of senior civil service recruitment – by competitive examination. Brussels at senior levels is composed entirely of Enarques, or their national equivalents.
What they are not tested for, and evidently lack, is judgment or experience. It is ‘The Best and the Brightest’ confidently sure of their own superiority, devoid of practical experience or knowledge of the people and systems they are experimenting with, as stupid as only the very intelligent can be, making decisions with no relevant information and no knowledge that they even need it.
These two factors combine to give a fatal unrealism and vacillatory decision making to the EU.
Lack of realism for instance over the Ukraine, where they were astonished by Putin’s reaction in the Crimea, and his destablising of the Ukrainian regime, though both were entirely predictable. But they had no plan B. They do not seem to understand that when you have disarmed, and you have a highly militarized neighbor, you would be best advised to tread cautiously. Russia can be at the Rhine in weeks any time they want. Say that to the Enarques and they look at you as if you are mad. They know, you see, that it can’t happen and doesn’t matter. Just like they knew Putin would never act in regards to the Ukraine. Just like Merkel knew that the Germans would welcome the migrants with open arms.
Vacillation, well. how they handled, or failed to, the migrant crisis.
The reward for this is the sharp rightward swing in Poland, Hungary and Germany. I think it quite likely that we will see the present generation of liberal elites replaced by something quite reminiscent of the 1930s. Not the warlike nationalism, but the authoritarianism, and the targeting of foreigners, that is a real possibility. Look at the Hungarian election. There is a beast stirring there, and its carnivorous.
Read Varoufakis ‘Adults in the Room’ if you want to understand the EU. With its ‘Parliament’ commuting every two weeks between Brussels and Strasbourg, unable to decide where to locate itself, unable to initiate legislation. And weep.
In my local Catholic Church the immigrants make up at least half of the under 50’s, Irish young people have turned away from the church in the cities and towns, its the Polish and Philippinos who have filled the void, both people who have a strong sense of church and community. There are difficulties, for sure with high immigration, but there are also benefits.
Perhaps in Ireland it is different to other European countries in that we were Britians first colony, we have suffered through colonisation, had our traditional culture, political class and language destroyed, had a foreign people installed as our colonial masters, had our religion persecuted. We know what a real invasion looks like, what losing our culture actually means.
Our sense of ourself is no longer an ethnic one, we couldn’t have formed a state without a blood bath otherwise, its a shared political and cultural one, built on a revolutionary heritage. This definitely helps in assimilating people from post colonial backgrounds, for example its the Palestinians who the vast majority of Irish people have sympathy with, not the Israelis. In this shared political rather ethnic nationhood I think we are more akin to the Americans, than the French or Germans.
Gerard,
This is a common misconception – that “migrants” are a category. Their impact results from their individual characteristics, which vary widely. Education, willingness to assimilate, age, gender, and cultural similarity to that of the host. The other major factor is their number: most societies can assimilate some, but large numbers become problematic.
If the migrants are in your Church, they’re not Islamic migrants — which are the problematic ones in Europe. Especially those from failed states.
FYI https://www.dropbox.com/s/5mbuuox07xyivc2/Muslim%20Global%20Demographic%20Project%20-%20Precis.pdf?dl=0
Well, what goes around comes around, karma and all that. Europe colonized the globe, destroying numerous indigenous cultures wherever it found them. Paying a price for the actions of one’s ancestors may seem harsh, but relatively small in comparison to what was meted out to the “savages”.
Kent,
As you say, Karma and all that. But I wonder what would have happened if another civilization had first gotten modern tech. The Aztecs? Incas? Zulus? Moguls? Apache? Would they have done better or worse?
My guess (guess!) is that any civilization capable of first achieving tech would have used it aggressively. This was like the spread of disease — which did much more damage than European’s colonization. It was an almost unavoidable stage in humanity’s growth.
But, of course, that doesn’t do much to offset the Karma. I think (guessing) at some level many or most Europeans knew they were misbehaving, at least by the mid-19th century.
Politics has replaced religion in the West. People used to signal their virtue in church. Now, people signal their virtue via allegiance to Marxist theories of culture, history, gender and economics that are based entirely upon fantasy.
People who would not give a dime to a fellow citizen begging on the sidewalk will scream with ecstasy as hundreds of thousands of foreign, military age men march into their cities and onto their welfare rolls, to remain there as a permanent leisure class. One result is that many European nations are now having to raise the age of retirement to cover the cost of the rapidly growing leisure class of foreign nationals. There is a word for this process. It is called enslavement.
Brane,
“Now, people signal their virtue via allegiance to Marxist theories of culture, history, gender and economics that are based entirely upon fantasy.”
That’s an incisive observation. But why do you believe that’s a phenomenon unique to the Left? I see it just as frequently on the right. Libertarian ideology is as fantastic as Marxism. Probably more so. Marx was a powerful philosopher (unfortunately writing with primitive ideas about economics and psychology). Libertarians get their ideas from novels by Robert Heinlein and Ayn Rand — fun but quite bogus on examination.
Even more basic fantasy on the Right is individualism — the “rugged individual”, who in the real world depends on the group for security as well as prosperity.
Incisive and perceptive. I see this new religion expressed in the twisted logic of the feminists demanding a Puritan chasteness from men, freedom from the enslavement of inequality while carving an enclave of separateness.
like the BLM and First Nations they want to be part of the whole, refusing to be seen as different and all the while demanding to be seen as separate. Their institutions call for equality but hold themselves apart. Much like the ladies at Wimbledon demanding equal prize money but not being prepared to compete with them for the prize. We are the same as you, don’t treat us as though you are better than us…. but we need special categories because we are weak and helpless.
I believe, in large part, Europe is ill with the same malady as we have here in the US. Women are not raising their own children.
I understand the lure of some sort of world “out there” away from the nursery and the kitchen, but why do women persist in the notion that it is better to obey some boss in an office, store or restaurant than to be in charge of their own homes? Why are they willing to work for $10/hour so they can leave their children in the inferior care and climate of expensive daycare and then feckless “educators” who teach them gender has no meaning, polar bears are about to drown on ice floes, Islam is just as good and better than Christian or Jewish faith and is a “religion of peace”, that the way forward is abortion? What outcome could we expect from this?
I remember as a child feeling a sense of horror at the Soviet system I heard about where children were raised in institutional settings while their mothers “had” to work in factories, etc. I felt lucky to be American in those days.
Sadly, we have aped the Soviet system, which brought down the population to dangerously low levels while turning kids into little socialists who either did not think or dared not speak. Those who did went to Siberia or mental hospitals.
Europe and America share the same illness. It is “working mothers”. Of course no one works harder, or at a more important job, than a mother who cares for her children, teaches them morality and nurtures them. But we see a steady decline in this. Women are psychologically bullied into believing they are inferior if they do not work outside the home in some wage bearing job while their kids languish mentally and spiritually in some day camp for kids. Very sad.
But this, I believe, is at the very root of the “tiredness” that Douglas Murray describes very well. Those little churches in the villages are empty because so are the homes. Everyone is punching a time clock and there is no time for religion or for culture in the home any longer.
Sally,
Thanks for sharing these interesting insights!
In Dutch we do not say “Tax” or even “Tax Burden”, we use “Burden” or “Burdens” (Belastingen).
When the, then much smaller EU in 1972, decided to go for a 20% to 33% sales tax (VAT), this tax was very efficient in filling the coffers of the treasuries, victory of socialism over filthy capitalist consumers was declared.
In Belgium the ranks of bureaucrats could swell by 50%.
But this tax was also highly efficient in emptying the wallets of the ruled subordinates, the proles or the people.
The tax-serfs noticed that they did not have money left at the end of the year and postponed having the first or the next child. The taxes killed the economy and employment, reducing the replacement rate from a necessary 2.1 to 1.3 % per couple.
In 1974 the ruling class decided to import another population.
Europe’s people is not TIRED, it is OVERTAXBURDENED.
UWE,
“Europe’s people is not TIRED, it is OVERTAXBURDENED.”
That’s not even remotely true. Elections are still held in Holland and western Europe. If the people believe taxes and govt spending is too high, they can elect officials to change that.
If they prefer to whine instead, then they are tired. That’s a generous way to say it.
The media in Europe is so controlled by the governments that only 4 % of the Germans believed that Trump could even win. How biased is that ? What chances have the people to be correctly informed about their own politicians ?
How can people now that their taxes are too high? Gross pay is artificially reduced by 25 % . It is called “employer charge” . It is illegal to show the price without sales tax, or else people would notice.
Once bureaucrats and people living on welfare are 50% of the population, there is not even the faintest chance that there can be a vote for lower taxes.
In fact, almost EVERY day a tax hike is announced.
With disastrous results : hikes of 2 euro on alcohol resulted in hundreds of millions in LESS revenue.
Hikes of 2 euro per packet of cigarettes also resulted in hundreds of millions in LESS revenue, people started using less and buying more over the borders
Do not forget that people voted Hitler and Chavez democratically in power.
I predict Venezuelan conditions in a few years.
In a 100 page document with 200 economists contributing, the blame was laid on the limit of education levels, the word taxes as not mentioned once.
For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization by Charles Adams, shows that ALL civilisations die of taxes.
https://www.amazon.com/Good-Evil-Impact-Course-Civilization-ebook/dp/B009D17G8Q/
Uwe,
So you are unique in Europe, seeing what your fellow citizens do not? Congrats!
Bill, on reflection your comments on the church’s influence on society were insightful. What you describe is almost a permeation of dark hidden knowledge and influence; the actual church attendance being immaterial to the overall effect. The mere adherence to the tradition of having a church wedding, funeral, baptism had a bonding effect on the community. The norms, standards and ethics were unstated but there percolating through society.
this bond has been weakening specially in the cities replaced by secular relativism.
With the introduction of a community with no bond with Christianity the glue comes undone. The Poles and Lithuanian influx into Europe does not disturb this dark bond underlying… it is the introduction of a profoundly different religion, unseen on the surface, in daily business life by Islam that slowly poisons.
Let’s face it Britain has been absorbing immigrants and assimilating them for generations. Only when the Muslims from Bangladesh and Pakistan came were they unable to assimilate and the result is no-go enclaves.
We will have to sit back and watch in fascination as the fire that Europe has scooped into its lap begins have its inevitable effect.
Dear 7zander,
Thank you for your consideration. I am not an anthropologist, but if I had to guess, church attendance was never particularly high at any time. The logistics were just too difficult. Journals from folks on my mother’s side of the family from early to mid-19th century South Carolina revealed getting to church was an ordeal, and though they were certainly observant, I would guess they were in church twelve times a year outside of high occasions — marriages, funerals, baptisms, and the like.
It was many, many years ago, probably in the early 70s when I was visiting New York and Southern boy in me opened a door for a woman. This is something I did without much thinking, but certainly with awareness. The woman, who strangely in my mind, was probably as old as I am now (shaking fist at kids and telling them to get off my lawn) was really, really pissed. A conflict of values. There was no malice or judgement in my action, merely a reflex of my ingrained culture which is to open doors for ladies. This is a pretty small difference in cultural value compared to what Europe is trying to absorb, and I don’t think they are up to the task (the last Europeans will be Swiss). The US is in a somewhat better place, because we are very “Christian” in that anyone can become “American”. The Romans (what did the Romans *ever* do for us?) were the first that I know of to have a notion of citizenship that could be extended to the “other” which if you squint could be a Christian notion.
The United States has created a marketplace for religions, but they are primarily of a Christian flavor (there are *lots* of reasons for this). Saudi Arabia has a state run religion, and it pretty much sucks. It’s not the religion, mind you, it’s the mechanism of administration. If you want to have a *really* interesting experience, go to different churches in the US over the course of a few weeks. You’ll be recruited. I try pretty hard to admit my biases and hide my beliefs online, but I will admit I’ve been an atheist longer than about 85% of the people on Earth have been alive, but I am in no way anti religion. It’s a mechanism that lets people deal with the world based on limited information and understanding. Problems arise when the religions are in conflict. American freedom of (and from) religion is something to be revered and preserved, but I don’t think it will stand against religions that prescribe government. I really hope I am wrong.
With very best regards,
Bill