Leon Lemmer: Julian Langness oor massa-immigrasie en JK Rowling – praag.co.za
By ‘n vorige geleentheid het ek oor Julian Langness se boek, Fistfights with Muslims in Europe: One man’s journey through modernity (2016) geskryf (Praag 17.04.2016). Dieselfde rubriek handel ook oor ‘n boek van Bruce Bawer. Wat hierdie twee outeurs, afgesien van Amerikaanse burgerskap, gemeen het, is ‘n verwantskap met Noorweë. Langness het Noorse voorouers terwyl Bawer in Noorweë woon. Maar ‘n ander ooreenkoms is hier van belang: Albei het boeke gepubliseer oor die kulturele aftakeling wat veral Moslem immigrante in Europa veroorsaak.
Volgens Langness stel die Moslem-immigrante hulle religie bo alles. Hulle beoog die Islamisering van Europa, dus “to restore the caliphate” (Kindle 491). Histories is dit gedoen deur “to either kill or convert” nie-Moslems (491). Langness verwys na “large populations of immigrants displaying a combination of very high birthrates and very low labor participation rates” (528). Volgens hulle moet van “white supremacists” ontslae geraak word (2343). In laaste instansie is die doel “the abolition of whiteness” (2334). In Moslem-lande het nie-Moslems tweedeklas-burgerskap, Dhimmitude genoem, wat herinner aan die tweedeklas-burgerskap wat blankes in die nuwe Suid-Afrika het. In ons geval is die diskriminasie nie op religie gebaseer nie, maar op ras, wat dit ‘n erger vergryp behoort te maak. “Newspapers ‘were expressly forbidden to mention a person’s ethnic or immigrant background in reports on criminal cases lest a bad image be projected’ … If Norwegians were given the facts, it ‘might trigger racist responses'” (861). In Suid-Afrika is dit sedert 1994 algemene praktyk dat die ras/kleur/vreemde nasionaliteit van misdadigers nie genoem word nie.* Langness skryf tereg “The longing for tribe and heritage is one of the most innate drives that we as humans possess” (73). Ten spyte van giftige propaganda moet blankes hulle selfrespek behou (765). Sy pessimistiese gevolgtrekking oor Europa is: “A culture that is unwilling to fight for its survival does not deserve to survive” (1346). Dit kan ook op Afrikanerkultuur van toepassing wees. [* In die Weste is linkse elemente ferm in beheer van “the academy, the entertainment industry and the press” (Boek in volgende paragraaf, Kindle 2069) – ook in Suid-Afrika.]
Die voorafgaande paragraaf is op my genoemde vorige rubriek gebaseer omdat Langness in sy twee latere boeke, wat ek hier onder bespreek, hierdie standpunte herhaal. In Identity rising: How Nationalist Millennials will re-take Europe, save America, and become the new ‘Greatest Generation’ (St Paul: ES Linden, 2017, 337p; Amazon Kindle $1,14) is Langness skynbaar optimisties. Namate die getal en persentasie van Europa se nie-blanke bevolking toeneem, kom die syns insiens onvermydelike burgeroorlog nader, wat volgens hom deur die tradisionele Europeërs gewen kan/gaan word. Hy veronderstel die tradisionele Europeërs beskou hulleself “as a distinct singular group – an ‘us’ – worthy of fighting and dying for” (Kindle 808). Met die oog hierop bepleit hy ‘n terugkeer na manlikheid. Soos Friedrich Nietzche (1844-1900) het hy dit teen “men without chests” (971), oftewel mans sonder die spreekwoordelike knaters. Die kulturele marxiste, daarenteen, “declared masculinity ‘toxic’, and claims that gender differentiation should be abolished” (2352).
Francis Fukuyama het in sy boek, The end of history and the last man (1992), geskryf oor “the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government” (962). Na die Moslem-geïnspireerde 9/11-aanvalle het George Will opgemerk, “history had returned from vacation” en Fareed Zakaria het dit beskryf as “the end of the end of history” (979). Die “law of the jungle” het met die 9/11-gebeure in Amerika, die voorste Westerse land, toegeslaan (989, 1007). Daar het hierna klaarblyklik heelwat werk voorgelê om die fondamente van Westerse beskawing te verstewig. “‘Cultural-nationalism’ … opposes the third-worldization of the West and the purposeful destruction of Western culture” (2326).
Die stryd teen Kritiese Teorie, oftewel kulturele marxisme (bv in die gedaante van politieke korrektheid en regstellende aksie), is sedert 9/11 (2001) met hernude ywer hervat. “In this system of belief, blacks must take black power and wield it over whites, women must do the same over men, gays over straights, and so on. Obviously such examples point to the depths of insanity that modern progressivism has reached” (1025). “Progressivism at its core is nothing more than a nihilistic form of cultural suicide” (1034). “Indeed many have called progressivism nothing more than a new and perverted form of turn-the-other-cheek Christianity, where white racism has replaced original sin, and the suicide of the West as atonement for that original sin has replaced the rapture and ascendance to heaven” (1043). Kulturele marxiste noem “disloyalty toward family … faith … race … [and] nation” (1043) as voorbeelde van “open mindedness” (1052).
Langness se “obsession with Europe” (27) lei hom tot die gevolgtrekking dat dit die moeite werd is om vir die oorlewing van Europese kultuur te veg. Wat hy voorsien, is dus anders as wat plaaslik op so ‘n skandalige wyse plaasgevind het, naamlik dat FW de Klerk weens die wanhantering van die onderhandelinge sonder slag of stoot oorgegee het. Selfs die veel geprese Grondwet laat blykbaar die owerheidsdiefstal van blankes se eiendom toe. Wat my in ‘n sin met droefheid vervul, is dat die multikulturalisme in Europa te laat gekom het. Europese lande het deur die bank apartheid verdoem omdat daar in daardie destydse grootliks monokulturele samelewings geen begrip was vir die diepgaande kulturele verskille tussen Europeërs en nie-Europeërs nie.
Die huidige situasie in Europa toon ook dat die assimilasie en rasse-integrasie van nie-blankes in blanke samelewings in groot mate nie plaasvind nie; dat die dogma van rasse-integrasie as iets natuurliks ‘n mite van die kulturele marxiste is. “This was especially apparent to anyone who actually spent time in majority non-white areas, where blacks, Hispanics, and Muslims (especially in Europe) almost universally self-selected into homogenous communities, and treated passersby of other races with suspicion and often aggression” (1744). In Suid-Afrika maak die ANC en sy kornuite, soos Jonathan Jansen, hulle egter skuldig aan militante gedwonge rasse-integrasie. Greg Johnson stel die teenoorgestelde standpunt, ook namens Afrikaners, pragtig: “It [is] natural, normal, and right for us to love our own and to be concerned with the future of our people” (2435). Tussen die Weste (bv Amerika en Europa) en Suid-Afrika is die groot verskil dat die blankes daar nog in die meerderheid en polities in beheer is terwyl die demografiese winter (2714) reeds lank sy verbete greep op Suid-Afrika het.
Blank Europa se jong en middeljarige mense raak al hoe meer gatvol vir die situasie waarin hulle hulle bevind. “Being born in the 1980’s and early 90’s, they were the first generation that had known what was popularly called ‘multiculturalism’ since birth. While celebrated across the West as the ultimate fulfillment of liberal-democracy, this ‘diversity’ had been anything but rosy for them … they were … taught that they were ‘privileged’ as white Europeans, and that they had been born into a history of racism and oppression, and countries still steeped in each, which it was their duty to make up for” (86). Al hoe meer Europese blankes beskou hulleself as lede van “Generation Identitaire” “staging provocative public protests against what they viewed as the evils being perpetrated upon Europe” (95). In die hoofstroom-inligtingsmedia word hulle gedemoniseer as “Neo-Nazi’s” en veral in Duitsland is daar drakoniese wette teen “haatspraak” om sulke bedrywighede aan bande te lê (103). Dít is die lot van mense wat hulle vir vanselfsprekendhede soos “secure borders, secure future” beywer (111).
Soos ander behoudende skrywers noem Langness veral Wes-Europa “Middle-Earth” (270). Dit verwys na JRR Tolkien (1892-1973) se benaming vir die fiktiewe sentrale kontinent in die noorde in sy boeke The Hobbitt (1937) en The Lord of the Rings (1954/5). In die suide is “Dark Land.” Tolkien is in Bloemfontein gebore, gevolglik het hy seker geweet waarvan hy praat. Dit is die voortbestaan van die tradisionele inwoners van hierdie kernkontinent, Europa (en Wes-Europa in veel groter mate as Oos-Europa), wat tans deur massa-immigrasie bedreig word. Ek moet byvoeg dat Langness na my mening te veel verskillende soorte generasies probeer onderskei en beskryf en dat hy, ook deur te veel herhaling, neig om ‘n oorpropagandistiese indruk te wek.
Daar is frases wat treffend is en ‘n mens bybly, bv “Homosexuality was not just tolerated but sentimentalized and celebrated” (414) en Harold Rosenberg se “herd of the independent minds” (356). Die pro-massa-immigrasie dwase “saw – or wished to see – their own generosity and ‘humanitarianism’ reflected back at them” (448). “They blamed the immigrant violence [including terrorism – 602] on ‘European racism'” (555) en is vervul met self-haat (565). Guillaume Faye noem hierdie verskynsel “ethno-masochism” (565) – masochisme is die “abnormale geestesgesteldheid waarby liggamlike mishandeling of vernedering van die self ‘n noodsaaklike middel vir … bevrediging en geluk … is” (HAT). Die Arabiese woord “asabiya” word gebruik vir “the concept of collective solidarity … the ability of its [a group’s] members to stick together, to cooperate; it allows a group to protect itself against the enemies, and to impose its will on others … aggressive and defensive strength is obtained only through … the mutual affection and willingness to fight and die for each other” (808).
Oor saamstaan/solidariteit is daar by Afrikaners groot ruimte vir verbetering. Enoch Powell het reeds in 1968 in Brittanje teen massa-immigrasie gewaarsku en met verwysing na die Britse kiesers genoem:”They were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country” (491). “They were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by an act of parliament” (499), soortgelyk aan die benadeling van blankes en die eensydige bevoordeling van swartes sedert 1994 in Suid-Afrika. In Brittanje en Wes-Europa is daar volgens Langness “the spectacle of mass-immigration … carried out against the wishes and best interests of the native citizenry” (519).
Volgens Langness is kulturele rehabilitasie in sommige Wes-Europese lande nie meer moontlik nie. “Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, and the UK are too far gone” (3003). Daarmee erken Langness eintlik dat die Westerse hart uit Wes-Europa geruk is; dat Westerse kultuur eerder, of langer, in Oos-Europa sal oorleef. Hy probeer egter moedig om optimisties te wees, mits ‘n ommekeer spoedig kom. “The transformation of society can begin with a small dedicated minority” (3164) – ‘n gideonsbende; ook in die geval van die Afrikanerdom? Dit kan/moet “metapolitical ‘meme warfare’ insluit (3184); iets waarmee Praag reeds sedert 2000 besig is. “Without such a turnaround it will be too late, and by the time my 5 year old son is my age, hugh swaths of the West will have been destroyed, or at least changed into something that can no longer be called the same” (3044).
Langness voorsien dat Amerika in nasiestate/tuislande kan opbreek. “There might be a Hispanic nation in the southwest, a nation purely for African-Americans somewhere in the south, a European-American nation somewhere else, and multiple other small states, which could choose the direction they best saw fit” (3318). “I would view such a future breakup positively, specially if it prevented worse outcomes” (3335), soos nie-blanke oorheersing. “The worst-case scenario for America is that progressivism is triumphant … America would likely devolve into an even more pronounced high-crime, low-trust society. Mass-immigration would continue, eroding the asabiya of the nation until nothing is left. Everyday life would likely be like Brazil or South Africa … there would be massive crime, massive suffering, and little-to-no way to turn things around” (3335).
Daar het ons dit: Suid-Afrika as die slegste moontlike scenario vir Amerika, “soulless darkness” (3590), en dit is geskryf voor die aankondiging van die beoogde owerheidsdiefstal van blankes se eiendom. Wat ek moeilik vind om te verstaan, is dat daar volwasse blankes met (‘n mate van) skynbare verstand is wat op die ANC se beoogde onteiening sonder vergoeding reageer deur te sê hulle moet eers oor die besonderhede ingelig word voordat hulle weet wat om daarvan te dink; maw hulle is nie op beginsel teen misdaad, by name diefstal, gekant nie. Ander sê Cyril Ramaphosa se aankondiging moet deeglik gelees word. Dan blyk dit glo dat die gevolge nie so erg gaan wees nie.
Die fatale fout wat gemaak word, is dat veronderstel word dat die ANC ‘n betroubare entiteit is, dat wat die ANC sê en wat hy doen identies is. Die ANC het bv gesê hy sou geweldpleging tydens die 1990/94-onderhandelinge opskort, maar het sy geweldpleging onverminderd voortgesit. Die ANC is ‘n hoogs immorele instansie wat homself loof as hoogs moreel maar hom in werklikheid opportunisties as nie-onderhewig aan Westerse waardes soos integriteit ag en met niks vertrou behoort te word nie; veral nie met die belange van blankes nie. Die amptelike loslating in die Suid-Afrikaanse samelewing van die beginsel van die “regmatige” toe-eiening van iets in ruil vir niks gaan die land (verder) vernietig.
‘n Bundel met 18 van Langness se opstelle is gepubliseer en is gratis beskikbaar: The coming war in Europe: Essays on Europe’s coming destabilization and internal confrontation with Islam (St Paul: ES Linden, 2017, 153p; Amazon Kindle $0). Sy hooftema is weer massa-immigrasie. Sommige van sy statistiek en stellings mag oordrewe voorkom, maar hulle toon ‘n neiging wat voltrek word, al sou dit dalk langer duur as wat hy voorspel. Langness noem dat 30% van die Sweedse bevolking van nie-Sweedse oorsprong is (68) en dat die meeste tradisionele Swede 60+ jaar oud is, terwyl die nie-Swede meesal jonk is (75). “The Swedes will become a minority in their own country within 2041” (97). “In Sweden, ‘politically correct’ is an obsession worthy of demonic possession” (527).
“German 20-35 year-old’s will be a minority in that country by, at the latest, 2020” (113). Anders as in Frankryk, is daar in Brittanje groter verdraagsaamheid oor Moslemdrag: “:The UK police will now  employ Burka-clad female officers in their ranks” (1074). David Cameron, die Britse Konserwatiewe eerste minister (2010-2016), het dit reggekry om die volgende stommiteit kwyt te raak: “It is mainstream Britain which needs to integrate more with the British Asian way of life, not the other way around” (1483). Interessant is die feit dat van Wes-Europese lande verwag word om sogenaamde vlugtelinge as immigrante te aanvaar, terwyl nie ‘n enkele van die Golfstate in die Midde-Ooste dit vir hulle mede-Moslems doen nie (486).
Langness verwys na Guillaume Faye se boek, The colonisation of Europe (2016), bv sy begrip van “ethno-masochism” wat “white self-hatred” beteken en die leerstelling van “miscegenation as Supreme Value” tot gevolg het (197). Die Moslems in Frankryk “are very well aware of the fact that they are conducting an ethnic civil war and that their goal is to aggress against the indigenous peoples” (203). Baie blanke Franse se “limitless self-hatred and ideologically-driven guilt mean that any action by immigrants, no matter how horrible, can be explained by them as being caused by white racism” (203). Die progressiewes redeneer: “Immigrants struggle only because of structural inequality and racism, they commit crimes and become terrorists because they are excluded, once they feel as though they belong they will become fully integrated” (210). Sulke redenasies word geopper ten spyte van die feit dat “terrorism is now a part of life in Europe” (1427).
Faye dink nie enige van die “oplossings” wat vir die massa-immigrasie vraagstuk voorgestel word, sal slaag nie. “They include everything from a continuation of the status quo, to the utopian notion of the successful assimilation, to peacefully co-existing parallel societies within the same nation, to the idea of paying migrants to return home (as Norway has attempted to a small extent)” (223). “Only by inserting an additional variable into it can it [the problem] be solved. To Faye, that variable is civil war” (230), dus die herowering van hulle kontinent deur die Europeërs. Burgeroorlog sal uitbreek “when there was a confluence of three events: (1) when security forces are no longer able to contain Muslim criminality and aggression; (2) when the Muslims become powerful enough that they start demanding and imposing concessions upon society and the goverment; and (3) when the economy begins to fall apart (likely under the weight of mass immigration/multiculturalism)” (256). Langness voeg by: “Surely Faye’s civil war will come at some point no matter what. By the time Muslims make up 80% of the population, can any of us imagine native Europeans living with them free and unmolested?” (282). Die tragedie is dat swart oorheersing in Suid-Afrika [“the state as evil/Goliathesque” – 1408) reeds daardie 80%-merk verbygesteek het. Die plaaslike blankes lewe sekerlik nie “free and unmolested” nie.
Viktor Orban, die eerste minister van Hongarye, het die situasie in Europa raak opgesom: “For us today, what is at stake is Europe, the lifestyle of European citizens, European values, the survival or disappearance of European nations, and more precisely formulated, their transformation beyond recognition. Today, the question is not merely in what kind of a Europe we would like to live, but whether everything we understand as Europe will exist at all” (562).
Samuel Francis het soos volg oor die situasie in Amerika geskryf, wat in verskeie opsigte aan die nuwe Suid-Afrika herinner: “What we have in this country today … is both anarchy (the failure of the state to enforce the laws), and, at the same time, tyranny – the enforcement of laws by the state for oppressive purposes; the criminalization of the law-abiding and innocent through exorbitant taxation, bureaucratic regulation, the invasion of privacy, and the engineering of social institutions, such as the family and local schools; the imposition of thought control through ‘sensitivity training’ and multiculturalist curricula, ‘hate crime’ laws, gun-control laws that punish or disarm otherwise law-abiding citizens but have no impact on violent criminals who get guns illegally, and a vast labyrinth of other measures. In a word, anarcho-tyranny” (843). Langness meen omstandighede in Europa is soortgelyk aan dié in Amerika en die aanwesigheid van “no-go zones”, waarin die owerheid, bv die polisie, dit nie kan waag nie, “is a sign of a failed state” (915).
Mathieu von Rohr kom met ‘n interessant Twitter-aanhaling vorendag: “I’m tired of living in interesting times” (613). Daar word verwys na “the White Preservation movement” (1360) en ek het voorheen gewag gemaak van die wenslikheid, eintlik noodsaaklikheid, van die herwaardering van blankes, bv hulle oor die algemeen voortreflike moraliteit en hulle ongeëwenaarde prestasies in onder meer Afrika.
Wat Afrikaners vorentoe meer as ooit nodig het, is sisu. “Sisu is a Finnish word that cannot be translated metaphrastically into the English language, loosely translated to mean stoic determination, grit, bravery, guts, resilience, perseverance and hardiness, expressing the historic self-identified Finnish national character” (2072). Dit is die teenoorgestelde van sommige blankes wat “ethno-suicidalists” is (1565), dus wat met hulle gedrag die ondergang van hulle etniese groep bevorder. Wat ons as blankes moet begeer, is “eucatastrophe” wat die teenoorgestelde van “catastrophe”, soos die nuwe Suid-Afrika, is (2086).
In sy 10de opstel slaan Langness ‘n ietwat ander blaadjie om en skryf hy oor JK Rowling se Harry Potter-boeke.
JK Rowling (gebore in 1965) is ‘n Britse skryfster wat onder die skuilnaam Robert Galbraith ook misdaadromans skryf. Onder haar eie naam het sy wêreldwye bekendheid met die reeks van sewe Harry Potter-kinderboeke (1997-2007, 4195p) verwerf. Die eerste Potter-boek is deur 12 uitgewers verwerp voordat Bloomsbury ingewillig het om ‘n klein oplaag te druk. Deesdae is Rowling skatryk met reuse, luukse huise in Skotland en Engeland. Die vraag kan gestel word: Waaraan dank die Potter-boeke hulle gewildheid? Die antwoord is: Deels aan politieke byderwetsheid.
Die fantasie-element in die Potter-boeke kan in ‘n mate teruggelei word na die werke van JRR Tolkien. ‘n Deurlopende invloed op Rowling is Jessica (Decca) (1917-1996), die kommunistiese vyfde Mitford-suster, die rooi skaap in die familie. Die ander vyf Mitford-susters (Nancy, Pamela, Diana, Unity en Deborah) het nie kommunistiese neigings gehad nie; in twee gevalle (Diana en Unity) eerder simpatie met fascisme. Oor Rowling se linkse politiek is daar geen twyfel nie. Sy is ‘n ondersteuner van die Britse Arbeidersparty en die Amerikaanse Demokratiese Party. Sy is teen Skotse politieke onafhanklikheid gekant en ook teen Brexit.
Oor die Potter-boeke skryf Langness: “It proved impossible to miss their blatantly purposeful reflection of Progressive SJW-orthodoxy” (1040). SJW: Social Justice Warrior. “It was abundantly clear for all who read the books that JK Rowling wanted them to reflect the ‘progress’ of multicultural Britain that she and her ilk were so proud of, as well as serve as a warning to impressionable yound children of the evils that come from focusing on race/tribe/heritage/culture. In this regard they sought to serve as the perfect artistic metaphor or mascot for late 20th century liberal humanism … in the United Kingdom’s drive to banish all vestiges of racism, traditionalism, fascism, and homogeneity from its society during those years, its government and intelligentsia created horrors far surpassing the fictitious ones that Rowling portrayed in her books” (1052).
“Through their blind and unquestioning devotion to the religion of ‘multiculturalism’ and ‘diversity’, Rowling’s contemporaries in the UK government and media have ushered in a society more frightening than anything she wrote about in her books. This is the horrible and tragic irony of JK Rowling’s great success. Only time will tell if the people of the UK realize what has happened, and reject this real-life dark wizardry. In the world of Harry Potter, it took seven long books for evil to be defeated. Does the UK have that much time?” (1095). Langness het hierdie vraag al in 2016 gestel.
Dit is algemeen bekend dat die Potter-boeke oor bv toordery en heksery handel. Maar Rowling spreek ook haar seën uit oor bv multikulturaliteit, veelrassigheid, rasvermenging, homoseksualiteit, feminisme en internasionalisme. Dit blyk dat sy gekant is teen die uitoefening van gesag, slawerny, ras- en kulturele meerderwaardigheid, rassisme, onderdrukking, ens. Sy het beweer dat sy geen beswaar teen massa-immigrasie het nie; dat Brittanje sy grense moet oopstel en meer immigrante/”vlugtelinge” moet inneem. Sy het spesifiek teen Donald Trump se immigrasiebeleid uitgevaar. In 2017 is Rowling deur skeptici uitgedaag om van hierdie inkommers in haar ruim wonings te huisves. Daar is glo 18 ekstra kamers in haar huis in Londen beskikbaar en baie ruimte vir die oprigting van skuilings vir vlugtelinge op haar landgoed. ‘n Versoekskrif met meer as 50 000 handtekeninge is opgestel. Daar word steeds op Rowling se instemmende antwoord gewag. Sy predik oorverligte idees maar is nie bereid om op te offer en self ‘n voorbeeld te stel nie. Dit is ander mense wat die “vlugtelinge” moet koester.
Skrywer Leon LemmerGepubliseer op 15 September 2018 15 September 2018 Kategorieë Leon Lemmer, RubriekeSleutelwoord Bruce Bawer, J.K. Rowling, Julian Langness, moslems
Vorige Vorige artikel: Brief van Mr. Domestos: Waarheen nou, Gehasi?
Volgende Volgende artikel: Dan Roodt: Indrukke van Nederland