November 27, 2006: Whither Europe?

Ralph Peters is more cynical about Europeans than I am. In his article "The 'Eurabia' Myth" he brands the Euros as "world-champion haters." ("The notion that continental Europeans, who are world-champion haters, will let the impoverished Muslim immigrants they confine to ghettos take over their societies and extend the caliphate from the Amalfi Coast to Amsterdam has it exactly wrong.")

Well, I'm no Nostradamus, but Peters' use of the word "exactly" makes me scratch my head. How does he know "exactly"? Predicting the future in such matters is iffy at best. My personal observations are different from his, but still they are only personal. Europe was once, of course, substantially Islamic. Why couldn't it be again? The demographic trends are certainly running that way, especially among the young. And if things turn violent, who does the fighting?

BTW, Paul Belien of the Brussels Journal will be writing a response shortly to Peters' article for Pajamas.

Comments

Comments require registration through TypeKey. Abusive remarks may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Roger Simon.

James Taranto over at OpinionJournel makes this observation:

"Think about this: Peters is predicting a rebirth of European fascism, possibly including genocide--and he's the optimist of this pair."

Mark Steyn commented on Peters column, ending with this observation:

"You’ll notice that his column and mine differ not just in their approach to worldviews but in their approach to argument: mine cites four specific persons, their actions and assertions; his boldly batters anonymous generalizations. I know which I regard as more effective."

By the way, Steyn also foresees a resurgence of Fascism in Europe, he just doesn't think it will go anywhere.

"As a general rule, when 600 octogenarians are up against 200 teenagers, bet on the teens. In five or ten years’ time, who precisely is going to organize mass deportations from French cities in which the native/Muslim youth-population ratio is already – right now - 55/45?"

Posted by: LarryD at November 27, 2006 12:28 PM

Well, I'm no Nostradamus, but Peters' use of the word "exactly" makes me scratch my head. How does he know "exactly"? Predicting the future in such matters is iffy at best.

Hell, it's hard enough just to figure out what happened exactly in the past.

Posted by: Godzilla at November 27, 2006 12:44 PM

Europe was once substantially Islamic? Eh? What? Just which history can you find that in? Spain was ruled by Islam, as was a good part of south eastern Europe. But northern Europe? England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Norway, France, Belgium, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Finland? Where was Islam dominant in Italy? Even though Greece and parts of Austria may have been ruled by Islamic rulers, the vast majority of the population stayed Christian or Jewish.C'mon, Roger, shape up there!

While I hugely respect Mark Steyn, his demographic threat polemics seem to draw on the same mathematical assumptions and projections as Edwardian fears about the Yellow Peril and Victorian fears about the "dangerous classes" in England.

Posted by: adhoc at November 27, 2006 12:58 PM

After all is said and done, after the facts have been marshalled by both sides (Eurabia vs Europa), it comes down to a gut feeling. Have the Europeans lost utterly the steel that made this small peninsula the seat of mighty empires, not that long ago? Have Europeans become wimps to the core? I have to come down on Peters' side. The descendents of the Huns, the Franks, the Vikings, going into whimpering submission to the descendents of the Moor? Not bloody likely. Not before a lot, an awful lot of blood is spilt. I vote, never.

Posted by: ricpic at November 27, 2006 1:03 PM

I wouldn't say that Europe was substantially Islamic. There were certainly Islamic people in Europe, strong particularly on the Iberian Peninsula, where they held control for quite some time... but for most of what we consider Europe, Muslims had little control over politics, religion or industry. They had an impact, but it was a contributory one, rather than one that was a take-over sort of thing.

I think the author does seem to take his crystal-ball gazing too seriously. "Exactly" seems like an awful silly term to use when predicting the future. However, its not really any more prophetic than many articles I've read that were supporting the Eurabia theory. In fact, this sort of tea leaf reading seems all the rage... all over the place. Everyone is either sure that The Muslims are going to take over, or that Bush knew there were no WMD's, or that there were WMD's but they were whisked away, or that the Democrats will bring about the destruction of our nation, or that the Republicans will bring about the destruction of our democracy.

The whole system of thinking, is bullshit. Thats the stuff of 18th-20th century News Headlines. The big letters designed to grab the money out of your wallet. Surely, in this day and age of Information sharing, we can dispense with the excitatory profound statements that have little real meat and focus on sharing actual, actionable information.

Everyone can predict what WILL happen. Heck, lots of consultants make their living doing just that. Yet, it almost never comes to pass that we really have any idea what WILL happen. In the world of computers, experts predicted the demise of UNIX at the hands of NT, then NT4.0, then Windows 2000, then 2003... and now in retrospect, UNIX variants like Linux, Mac OS X and others have proven just the opposite. In some areas Microsoft has gained or maintained a market share, in others Linux or BSD has gained the market share. By far, *NIX beats Microsoft when it comes to Internet servers (web, mail, news, etc).

Ever notice that people always seem to predict an outcome that fits with their perceptions about reality?

Posted by: dclydew at November 27, 2006 1:12 PM

... Have the Europeans lost utterly the steel that made this small peninsula the seat of mighty empires, not that long ago? Have Europeans become wimps to the core? I have to come down on Peters' side. The descendents of the Huns, the Franks, the Vikings, going into whimpering submission to the descendents of the Moor? Not bloody likely. Not before a lot, an awful lot of blood is spilt. I vote, never.

Well, take a look at this:

A network of around 80 "super nannies" is being set up by the government to show parents how to control their unruly children.

It's the latest initiative in the government's battle against crime and anti-social behaviour.

It's being announced by the Prime Minister today as part of a government initiative throw the spotlight on the crime and justice system in England and Wales.

Around 80 trained child psychologists will try to improve parenting in areas with high levels of anti-social behaviour.

And this:

The call for state intervention in the minute details of family life followed a series of Labour efforts to reduce anti-social behaviour and improve educational standards by imposing rigorous controls on the lives of the youngest children.

Mrs Hughes has established a national curriculum to set down how babies are taught to speak in childcare from the age of three months.

Her efforts have gone alongside a push by other ministers to determine exactly how parents treat their children down to how they should brush their teeth...

...New powers for councils to impose parenting orders are expected to be announced in the Queen's Speech tomorrow.

Part of Mr Blair's 'Respect Agenda', they extend current powers for courts to instruct parents of children who commit crimes to attend parenting classes.

Mrs Hughes' parenting workforce will include local council social workers who are likely to have the new powers...

I think all of the descendants with steel emigrated from Europe long ago.

Anyone want to bet that this new "nanny" program will just avoid the Muslim areas. Can't offend their culture, you know.

Posted by: LarryD at November 27, 2006 1:30 PM

Ralph Peters is more cynical about Europeans than I am

Peters isn't just cynical about Europeans he's seething with bitter hatred for them. (In fact all his articles seem to be written whilst in a state of rage). He reduces all of Europe's diverse people and long history to the Holocaust and maybe the Spanish Inquisition. Last year he said Americans should side with Muslims against "the effete bigots on the banks of the Seine" during the "French intifada" then he all but sided with angry Muslims against the Danes during the cartoon controversy.

He's always been a ranter but recently I think he's come unhinged. His attack a couple of months ago on Americans for their supposed anti-Muslim bigotry was a jaw-dropper.

I think Steyn is too pessimistic about Europe's demise - even though Steyn occasionally sounds happy about it. But at least he's capable of calm assessment. Peters needs to calm down if he expects people to take his views seriously.

Posted by: Coisty at November 27, 2006 2:05 PM

dclydew wrote: Ever notice that people always seem to predict an outcome that fits with their perceptions about reality?

How could one predict an outcome that did not conform with one's notion of reality? That's called science fiction or magical realism or delusion, no? Hence I predict the Vikings will stumble on a time machine, invented by Nikolai Tesla and abandoned in medieval Sweden, and use it to transport themselves to contemporary Europe to kick Muslim butt.

Posted by: Ray Zacek at November 27, 2006 3:37 PM

Ray Zacek predicts: "the Vikings will stumble on a time machine, invented by Nikolai Tesla and abandoned in medieval Sweden, and use it to transport themselves to contemporary Europe to kick Muslim butt."

In the meantime, rather than hold their breath waiting for the Vikings to save them, they'll order prayer rugs in bulk online. Just to hedge their bets, dontcha know?

Posted by: ShoreMark at November 27, 2006 9:28 PM

LarryD quoted: "The call for state intervention in the minute details of family life ..."

Sounds like they are readying for "1984".

Posted by: Cynic at November 28, 2006 7:18 AM

Peters' argument might also have been made on behalf of Rome circa 400 AD. The Romans had indeed kicked the collective butts of most of the western world for hundreds of years. Perhaps he's right, but he fails to address Steyn et al's main thesis--the danger of radically declining birth rates.

The math is simple. Europe is depopulating. That doesn't make Eurabia inevitable--only more likely.

Certainly, Europeans can be a bloody bunch. Verdun saw almost a million casualties, but old or absent fascists aren't very effective. In 20 years most Spaniards will be old or dead. Italians, too. The new Mussolini better be a geriatrician.

Posted by: Old Dad at November 28, 2006 9:47 AM

Ray Zacek,

I've been saying that Dr. Who (or whoever with the time machine) should have gone back and flush the first koran years ago.

Posted by: Always right at November 28, 2006 10:05 AM

Peters properly criticizes Steyn's facile straight-line analysis. Things rarely go on as before for the duration Steyn assumes.

BTW, the Germans haven't changed a bit. IMO Peters was correct that the lucky Muslims will be those who are only deported.

Posted by: Tom Holsinger at November 28, 2006 10:23 AM

How do people think that Saudi Arabia and Iran (i.e. Europe's major oil suppliers) would react to Europe's taking the course that Peters predicts? Not well, I'm guessing.

Posted by: JBR at November 28, 2006 10:52 AM

Tom Holsinger,

To paraphrase the investment firms, past performance is a pretty good indicator of future results. The demographic trends Steyn notes in Europe have been in place a long time. This does not guarantee they won't change, but it would take something extremely dramatic to cause them to.

And, frankly, Steyn's analysis seems a lot less "facile" than Peters' simplistic declarations that, well, Europe had violent ethnic nationalism in the past, so they will again. Europe has changed. And the talk about Viking descendents is a little silly. These people think "cowboy" is a perjorative, for Pete's sake.

Posted by: Ofc. Krupke at November 28, 2006 4:19 PM

Gee, Officer Krupke, what investment firms actually say is that past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Posted by: Steven at November 30, 2006 8:18 AM

Email This Post