Originally published via Blacklisted News:
Neoliberal social engineers in Europe lament the rise of the so-called “far right.” In their rhetoric, the corporate media hysterically conjures the specter of the excesses of the 20th-century axis powers.
It’s full-on moral panic.
Just as the US corporate press obsesses over the MAGA-white-supremacist-racist-Nazi-bigot boogeyman to discourage criticisms of their policies, the European corporate press uses the same tactics.
If one were to consume this media exclusively, one would assume the Fourth Reich is one election cycle away.
The central question here is: why, given their opposition to the “far right,” do neoliberal policymakers insist on pouring fuel on the fire in the form of unchecked immigration when, as we’ll show, it clearly drives the “far right’s” success?
It’s almost like they revel in social conflict they themselves instigate (more on that later).
Neoliberal “experts” desperately search for alternative explanations for the explosive growth of far-right political parties in Europe. They scapegoat their leaders as mere hatemongers. They caricature their followers as unenlightened goons.
They’ll do any rhetorical trick to avoid acknowledging the elephant in the room: unchecked immigration. And, worse, immigration largely from the Third World, largely from cultures incompatible with that of their Western European destinations.
Occam’s razor posits that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
The most plausible explanatory theory for European immigration-fueled social conflicts (and the resulting electoral success British and French “far right” political parties) is Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations.”
Civilizations – especially those as disparate as Middle Eastern Islamic vs. Western ones — are “differentiated from each other by history, language, culture, tradition and, most important, religion.” Increasing forced interactions between a native population and immigrant groups fosters greater awareness of what he calls “civilization-consciousness”:
“The interactions among peoples of different civilizations enhance the civilization-consciousness of people that, in turn, invigorates differences and animosities stretching or thought to stretch back deep into history.”
In the case of the Christian European West and the Islamic Middle East, those animosities in particular indeed stretch deep into history.
What is unfolding in Europe, and has been since at least the early 2010s, is a slow-burning civilizational cold war.
The people of Western Europe, however much its politicians and the unelected EU bureaucrats in Brussels wish otherwise, have had enough immigration.
Via a 2015 poll of the British public*:
*This poll is not an outlier. The same responses in the same proportions polling data across multiple Western European states tell the same story: the natives don’t want more immigration on the scale and in the current style that threatens their cultural integrity.
At the same time that the social engineers insist “diversity is our greatest strength,” they shunt the populations they preside over into a global corporate-state monoculture.
Hence the Great Reset:
“COVID-19 lockdowns may be gradually easing, but anxiety about the world’s social and economic prospects is only intensifying. There is good reason to worry: a sharp economic downturn has already begun …
To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism.”
They don’t actually support “diversity” (whatever that overly broad and amorphous means, anyway); it’s merely a cynical rhetorical weapon deployed to justify mass immigration. In turn, the immigration is intended to collapse the vestiges of the native culture of the West so that the corporate monoculture is easier to install.
This is the same dynamic that works to break down the individual in the initial stages of indoctrination into a new social group – in the military, fraternities, etc.
But instead of personal identities, national ones are the target. The invasive ideology must first destroy and degrade the national character, to be replaced with the supranational.**
**This is why nationalists (and their symbols) in the US as well as Western Europe are the top target of the corporate state. They represent the greatest threat to its expansion.
The “end of capitalism,” “the global community,” and other utopian language understandably appeals to simple-minded, well-meaning leftists – and even to some people with no ostensible political ideology who just want to live in a better world.
The indoctrination victims don’t understand the forces arrayed against them, manipulating their better impulses to install a neo-feudal global corporate state. If being a “citizen” with a “civic duty” means anything, it’s that the job for us who can see the writing on the wall is to make our neighbors understand, so that we can resist together.
Ben Bartee is a Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Armageddon Prose, Substack, Patreon, Gab, and Twitter. Please support his independent operations however you can.
Bitcoin public address: 14gU3aHBXkNq8bDqmibfnubV7kSJqfx5LX