PDA

View Full Version : Is European Civil War Inevitable by 2025?



Schmetterling
Friday, May 9th, 2008, 07:31 PM
If I were to tell you that within twenty years Europe could find itself engaged in a civil war so bloody it made WWII look like a bun fight, you might logically consider me a candidate for the men in white coats. You would be wrong, however. Based on the demographic evidence collated for this article, such a scenario looks not merely possible, but inevitable. In 2005 European males aged 20-40 outnumbered Muslim males of a similar age by 18:1. By 2025 this ratio could drop to a mere 2:1.

There is a common misconception that a significant erosion of our present 95% non-Muslim European majority could not possibly occur for many decades to come. People such as historian Bernard Lewis, a man whose views on Islam are held in high esteem, exacerbate this. When he made his prediction in 2004 that Europe would be Islamic by the end of the century, he did so on the basis of an overall Muslim majority.

Although such a dire prediction is shocking, it does not force us into a position where urgent steps need to be taken to alleviate such a future. We will not be here at such a distant point and can therefore presently reject as overly extreme the actions necessary to prevent it. Suppose though, that contrary to Professor Lewis’s benign view of a “democratically Islamic Europe”, Europe’s Muslims felt unwilling to wait another 80 years to expand their caliphate via the voting booth, and decided instead to take Europe through force.

In this scenario our majority is rapidly eroded due to a number of factors. In 2005, European males aged 0-19 (those capable of fighting in twenty years time) accounted for only 10% of their total population. Muslim males in the same age bracket accounted for 23% of theirs. These figures can be seen in this table and are extracted from the population pyramids compiled by the US Census Bureau 2005. (These figures represent all the countries in continental Europe, rather than EU member states alone).

In addition, the Muslim population, with its birth rate of 3.5 children per women effectively doubles its next generation, whilst the European birth rate of 1.5 children per woman ensures the next generation is 25% smaller than that of its parents.

This loss of almost one third of tomorrow’s generation necessitates massive immigration in order to prop up our welfare states, the majority of which is set to come from Muslim countries. According to the Daily Telegraph, the UN predicts Europe will need to take in 2.2 million immigrants per year, through to 2050.

Once the Muslim population climbs over 3% of the population in Western countries, native Europeans start to emigrate. The Dutch, French, Germans and British are leaving in unprecedented numbers, as noted in a Daniel Pipes article entitled “Europeans Fleeing Eurabia” which should be read in conjunction with this article.

If it is really true that up to 40% of Muslims wish to see Europe operating under Sharia Law, then the ingredients for a Europe V Islamic civil war are already in place, save for the Muslim weight of numbers; an issue being rapidly resolved. By 2025 the combination of factors mentioned above will lead to such a massive transformation in Europe’s demographic makeup that Islam may well have sufficient numbers to confront us.

---

More (http://www.globalpolitician.com/22664-multiculturalism)

GroeneWolf
Friday, May 9th, 2008, 07:55 PM
Some of those I talked to hoped, yes hoped, that the riots in France a few years ago would lead to civil war. Their reason : the longer until it happend the weaker we will be and the stronger they will be.

But our political elite want to prentent nothing is going on and want to delay it as long as possible. But how long before war is unpreventeble. How before someone will say war will be upon you, wether you like it or not.

Guntwachar
Friday, May 9th, 2008, 08:02 PM
Some of those I talked to hoped, yes hoped, that the riots in France a few years ago would lead to civil war. Their reason : the longer until it happend the weaker we will be and the stronger they will be.


I hoped it was going to be a civil war, and for a little while it seemd to be going that way when it spread to Germany for one evening and the border region of Germany/Netherlands.
I still hope there will be comming one soon and as far as i can see we dont need much for that to happen.

GroeneWolf
Friday, May 9th, 2008, 08:13 PM
I hoped it was going to be a civil war, and for a little while it seemd to be going that way when it spread to Germany for one evening and the border region of Germany/Netherlands.
I still hope there will be comming one soon and as far as i can see we dont need much for that to happen.

I don't. Since civil war is always destructive for one's own country. But hoped for a general awaking of the public and the political elite. Now we still are in a position to solve it without the need for civil war.

Guntwachar
Friday, May 9th, 2008, 08:25 PM
Now we still are in a position to solve it without the need for civil war.

Good luck with that i dont see our goverment and politics getting changed as well as that most people also still dont care in the Netherlands.

so how would they solve it? because they sure arent doing that now.

BeornWulfWer
Friday, May 9th, 2008, 08:56 PM
Is European Civil War Inevitable by 2025?

Hopefully.

Just need a spark.

Soten
Saturday, May 10th, 2008, 10:43 PM
I think we're forgetting that the US Army and Marine Corps would probably be interferring within the hour of any European civil war...especially an ethnic one. The troops are already there.

stormlord
Saturday, May 10th, 2008, 11:11 PM
I think we're forgetting that the US Army and Marine Corps would probably be interferring within the hour of any European civil war...especially an ethnic one. The troops are already there.


Indeed, I read a Daniel Pipes article citing the probability of the US Marines being forced to evacuate entire muslim populations from Europe within 20 years being not just possible but probable. However if you mean interfering in terms of actual combat (eg with rogue elements of nations armed forces), that'll never happen, I don't think that anyone (understandably) in the US would be willing to accept 1:1 attrition rates, cause that's what there'd be if there was an attempt to fight the British army, and the casualty rates wouldnt be that much better against the French or the Germans either. Despite what lefties think, I doubt Americans would be willing to see their soldiers killed in huge numbers defending muslims, political correctness only pushes people so far, more than fighting third worlders with ak47's is a push too far.

Soten
Saturday, May 10th, 2008, 11:49 PM
I think the government would have the troops try to "keep the peace". And if this is a civil war amongst ethnic groups within each nation, meaning people in the streets fighting and not one trained army against the other, then I think that the US could just support the nation's army and police force (whether it be German/British/French/etc) in containing the whole thing.

Elysium
Sunday, May 11th, 2008, 12:55 AM
I doubt it will happen that soon, if at all.

With tightening grips on News & Media and all influential mediums, media blackouts or demonisation of the acts that they do not want will be prevalent. Furthermore, as long as the economies stay good enough to support the materialism of Europeans, they will be distracted.

Also, with each generation comes more indoctrination, socialisation which means by 2025 I doubt any European will give a shit about the ancient idea of a nation, but will openly embrace any idea that the Elite see fit.

GroeneWolf
Sunday, May 11th, 2008, 10:19 AM
Good luck with that i dont see our goverment and politics getting changed as well as that most people also still dont care in the Netherlands.

so how would they solve it? because they sure arent doing that now.

Most likely a charmsitic leader with the right mindset in nessary. Of course if that happens there will civil unrest. I agree that it that the change for succes is extremly small.

Jäger
Sunday, May 11th, 2008, 01:11 PM
Furthermore, as long as the economies stay good enough to support the materialism of Europeans, they will be distracted.
Indeed, it will start with a financial disaster, and I think we are on the best way to it, our monetary system of interest is bound to die, it simply can't work forever.

When the riots in France started, people had fears it would spread to us as well, the reason it didn't is mainly because we pay those guys so much welfare, that they are totally happy without work, while in France males who can't rip the state for child money are more dependant on a job for a good life.

ChaosLord
Sunday, May 11th, 2008, 06:13 PM
I doubt it will happen that soon, if at all.

With tightening grips on News & Media and all influential mediums, media blackouts or demonisation of the acts that they do not want will be prevalent. Furthermore, as long as the economies stay good enough to support the materialism of Europeans, they will be distracted.

Also, with each generation comes more indoctrination, socialisation which means by 2025 I doubt any European will give a shit about the ancient idea of a nation, but will openly embrace any idea that the Elite see fit.

I agree with what you stated here, though with every generation born they will have to deal with the increasing ridicule and mistreatment from non-western foreigners in their own country. I actually think that the younger generations would be the ones to grow up with more experience in dealing with muslims and may be the ones to enact a civil war against them. The only way that islam would be able to prevent this is to attempt to islamify the younger European generations into subservience.

Thrymheim
Sunday, May 11th, 2008, 08:06 PM
There is an underlying problem here, even if it were to go to war then that would only put off the problem for a generation if that, the simple demographics make it inevitable that the Muslims will take over in Europe as we simply don't reproduce fast enough.
However if they convert our younger generation to Islam then the birth rate would go up and with the exception of the religion, Europe would stay European, maybe Islam is the way forward to protect our genetics?

In any case war is certainly coming and as other people have said the sooner the better as they only get stronger.

Soten
Sunday, May 11th, 2008, 08:11 PM
There is an underlying problem here, even if it were to go to war then that would only put off the problem for a generation if that, the simple demographics make it inevitable that the Muslims will take over in Europe as we simply don't reproduce fast enough.
However if they convert our younger generation to Islam then the birth rate would go up and with the exception of the religion, Europe would stay European, maybe Islam is the way forward to protect our genetics?

In any case war is certainly coming and as other people have said the sooner the better as they only get stronger.

Well, if they go to Civil War I imagine the idea is that the Europeans kill off or send off the foreigners. So no more demographic problem.

Second, the various European peoples are more than their genetics. Without the culture, it means next to nothing. And yes I think that Islam would have a stifling effect on European culture and it would effect more than just Europeans' religion. religion is a world view and your world view will shape your entire civilization.

Æmeric
Sunday, May 11th, 2008, 09:12 PM
I think we're forgetting that the US Army and Marine Corps would probably be interferring within the hour of any European civil war...especially an ethnic one. The troops are already there.

The US may not be in a position to interfer a European civil conflict by 2025. The US will have to deal with it's own ethnic based social problems & is more likely to have a civil war by 2025.

Sobriety
Monday, June 9th, 2008, 02:19 PM
If Civil War does erupt, it will commence on a scattered location basis for a time. Not all of the EU member states will be at war simultaneously. However, it will spread gradually from one country to another due the underlying cause which is non-white Third World habitation of our collective ancestral homelands.

Indigenous Europeans will be the targets of attempted wholesale ethnic cleansing - there is no doubt about that. The trigger will be economic downturn and subsequent governmental requirement for curtailment and/or the gradual or abrupt abolition of the welfare programme.

It's in this bloodletting chaos that the EU elite, in their indescribable mendacity and cupidity, will 'make hay while the sun shines', ie, they will step up the robbery of every EU country's resources for sale to the highest Third World bidder while siphoning off the receipts and taxpayers' funds.

Were matters to escalate out of control, they'd most likely abandon their posts and flee with their families.

Mazorquero
Monday, June 9th, 2008, 04:29 PM
An interracial civil war... na, I think ethnic clansings will start when the non-European population reaches a fourth of the total, I just can't imagine Europans withstanding the situation until half Europe is Semite, they will certainly explode in wrath before. But by now Europe should be worried of the latests secession attemps in Southern Europe, if they succeed they will spread to the rest of the continent, and that will be a problem because instead of having large powerful nations, you'll have a lot of weak uncoordinated States.
Now, what makes you think Usa will support native Europeans? Uncle ZOG will have no obstacle (besides Russia and China) in controling the world if Europe falls in a civil war, imagine the gun market.

Angelcynn Beorn
Thursday, June 26th, 2008, 05:15 PM
Call me fussy, but i have difficulty taking an article seriously which talks about 'European' vs 'Muslim'. Islam is a religion, European can be either a geographic description or a racial one. Muslims come in all races, and Europeans come in all religions.

If they can't even get their basic details correct, then all of their speculations on demographics are redundant.

Scear
Thursday, June 26th, 2008, 06:19 PM
Regarding the Paul Weston essay: Is European Civil War Inevitable by 2025?



Mr. Weston’s essay is an astounding piece of journalism which successfully presents - in a form easily accessible to the masses - the inescapable realities of 21st century Europe, and the associated horrors being inflicted upon the European people by a demonstrably insane ruling class who seem hell bent on engineering the great Eurocide. To what motivating factors or underlying pathology we could attribute such villainy, I have yet to entirely identify. However it is less an imperative that people understand why this is happening, than that they be made fully aware that it 'is' happening.

I have no doubt nothing short of a full scale pan-European civil war between those adhering to a Nationalist philosophy and those serving the ill-conceived philosophy of multiculturalism, can overthrow the status quo and grant Europe a timely reprieve from a certain fate. Such an event would require a mass awakening of the indigenous European population to the unpleasant realities of the wholesale transformation of Occidental civilisation which has been well underway for decades, and which has only gained momentum in recent years. Such a popular revolt would also require that a significant percentage of Europeans actually cared enough about their respective ethnic identities, and individual dignity and personal liberties to actually find the will and ultimately the strength to make a decisive stand in defence of their societies and respective ethnos, and consequently be willing to pay the price and make the sacrifices such defiance would demand.

Sacrifices which would include making what could be the heart breaking choice between standing by personal relationships with migrant friends, neighbours and colleagues, or relatives who have chosen to fully integrate into the multicult milllieu; and the greater imperative of taking all the painful steps necessary to ensure the survival of Western Civilisation, and the peoples whose existence make it possible. After being subjected for generations to the mind warping effects of the Multicult’s PC mind control tactics, I am not entirely sure Europeans can ever care strongly enough about abstracts such as National identity, hertitage , or tradition, to rouse themselves from the torpor of their depraved indifference, blissfully self-propagated ignorance, or fatalism.

I am sure of one thing. They will eventually be dragged kicking and screaming from their refuge of comfortable conformity by the victorious masters of the Eurabian ummah who most certainly will plant the flag of their transplanted civilisation upon the shattered ruins of our own if something is not done to oppose the Islamicisation and multiculturalisation of Europe NOW!

.Scear

SwordOfTheVistula
Friday, June 27th, 2008, 09:07 AM
I doubt a open conflict will occur. Probably a similar pattern as in the US, where over a long period of time low-level violence and petty crime encourages native Europeans to flee certain districts and cities, and by the time enough people realize how bad it is, it is too late to do anything about it. Also, the ability to censor and ban political parties will enable to the liberals/socialists to hold off any anti-Islamic backlash for a longer period of time even after public opinion turns against the muslims.

It's inconceivable that the US would intervene in a European conflict anymore, unless it is against a small eastern European nation (like Serbia) which is unable to fight back, and which the American public has no connection to. The one possible exception is a scenario similar to the world wars, in which Britain becomes involved in a war and then the US is ostensibly drawn in on their behalf. After 9-11 and the Iraq War though, any war to protect muslims would be essentially impossible to sell to any sizable portion of the American public. Also, tourism and other interactions with west/central European nations is much greater than in 1917 or 1941.


However if they convert our younger generation to Islam then the birth rate would go up and with the exception of the religion, Europe would stay European, maybe Islam is the way forward to protect our genetics?

Adopting Islam sounds like essentially surrendering to them, but perhaps adopting certain elements found in Islam can strengthen our societies to a point at which we can better resist them.



Call me fussy, but i have difficulty taking an article seriously which talks about 'European' vs 'Muslim'. Islam is a religion, European can be either a geographic description or a racial one. Muslims come in all races, and Europeans come in all religions.

If they can't even get their basic details correct, then all of their speculations on demographics are redundant.

They're trying to be 'mainstream', so they use 'European' instead of 'white' in order to avoid being seen as 'white nationalist', also with using the term 'muslim' in to contrast with 'non-muslim' or 'Christian' to discuss racial issues while not appearing to do so to the idle observer.

Jäger
Friday, June 27th, 2008, 11:17 AM
BTW here is what the CIA thinks about it, since 2004, http://www.foia.cia.gov/2020/2020.pdf

Angelcynn Beorn
Friday, June 27th, 2008, 03:20 PM
They're trying to be 'mainstream', so they use 'European' instead of 'white' in order to avoid being seen as 'white nationalist', also with using the term 'muslim' in to contrast with 'non-muslim' or 'Christian' to discuss racial issues while not appearing to do so to the idle observer.

Maybe, but sloppy words betray sloppy thinking. It's like writing an article on "Christians vs Africans" and expecting to be taken seriously, even though there's a large overlap between the two.

I'm going off on a rant here, but the whole 'Muslim' bandwagon that everybody on the right is jumping on to appear PC about being nationalist gets under my skin. I don't like Islam, but at a very fundamental level the religion of an immigrant is meaningless to me compared to the fact that the immigrant is here at all.

Getting stuck up on Muslims is usually the first sign that a group is becoming civic nationalist, rather than simply nationalist. It's the inference that Muslims are the real enemy, while the millions of Hindu, Christian, and atheistic third world immigrants we have are alright as long as they blend in and aren't Muslim.

Nachtengel
Monday, October 2nd, 2017, 01:58 PM
The Coming Civil War in Europe

he Leftist-Liberal demographic engineering project of the European Union violates the rights of indigenous European peoples, goes against global trends towards the territorial partition of ethnic groups, and contradicts expert research on conditions that create ethnic and political conflict. The continuous practice of settling large numbers of non-Europeans into regions already inhabited by European indigenous populations but who have very low fertility rates inevitably alters the ethnic compositions of European nation-states, renders Europeans demographic minorities in their own homelands, affects the distribution of political power and the relations between ethnic groups, and causes a variety of other conflicts and problems, including civil war.

Engineering Multi-Ethnic States through Immigration

In this article I will be drawing on the existing research on the factors that have brought about ethnic conflict in history and in recent decades in the Third World to show that the same factors are being reproduced in Europe as our current elites go about engineering European nations into multi-ethnic states through mass immigration.

According to Myron Weiner and Sharon Stanton Russell, demographic research has found that countries with low fertility rates that also experience large-scale international migration tend to suffer from "violent ethnic conflict and political instability," an erosion of national identity and sovereignty, as well as "radicalism, terrorism, religious fundamentalism, environmental degradation, and economic growth and stagnation."1 According to Frank Salter, research shows that "ethnic diversity tends to increase social conflict and crime, undermine welfare, exacerbate ethnic inequality, racialize politics and erode civil liberties."2

According to Tatu Vanhanen, "two thirds of global variation in ethnic conflict was explained by ethnic diversity" and according to Irenaeus Eibl-Eibesfeldt "large scale mixing of different ethnicities reduces social stability and risks domestic peace."3 According to Michael Teitelbaum, "large-scale population movements across borders by refugees or other migrants can affect the cohesion of societies and generate social and political conflict both within and between countries."4 And according to Monica Toft, multiethnic states are "the most violence prone settlement pattern" of distinct ethnic groups.5

Toft explains that demographic balances are key to ensuring stability and peace in multi-ethnic states but violence and civil war can result from a shift in these ethnic balances. What causes these shifts? "Differential birth/fertility rates and economic immigration," "deliberate state manipulation," and "[m]ass migration and resettlement."6 Toft also describes the five main theories for why conflict and civil war occurs between ethnic groups: "ancient hatreds;" "modernization;" "relative deprivation;" "security dilemma;" and "elite manipulation."7

In brief, the demographic engineering of sovereign nations with low fertility populations by high fertility in-migration shifts the ethnic composition of said populations (creates multi-ethnic states) and long-standing ethnic rivalries, competition, grievances, and territorial boundaries between immigrants and the native population, as well as hostile political leadership, can make violence between ethnic groups, and between the native population and the political elite, more likely.

In European nations, contentious relations between ethnic minorities and indigenous Europeans are due, in part, to cultural and ethnic differences (i.e. Muslims, Africans, Arabs compared to Christian, secular, atheist, Europeans), past and present grievances (e.g. slavery, colonialism, wars, hegemony), and the rapid growth of distinct non-European immigrant populations. And the tensions between native Europeans and their political elites are based, in part, on hostile demographic policies that alter the ethnic compositions and undermine the distinct ethno-cultural identities, political cultures, and institutions of European peoples and homelands.

Power Transition and the Likelihood of Civil War

According to the logic of "Power Transition Theory," large-scale non-European immigration in the form of settlement in low-fertility European nation-states leads to a shift in the size of ethnic minority populations (the creation of multiethnic states) creating a "tipping" point whereby ethnic majorities become a demographic minority. According to the democratic principle of majority rule, when an ethnic majority becomes an ethnic minority they lose their legitimacy to govern the state. Just before, during, or after such a power transition occurs, power becomes contested and violence and civil wars are likely to break out, particularly if the migrants do not intend to integrate and/or are engaged in a war of opposition (Third Worldists, Islamists, and cultural Marxists).8

However, alterations to the notion of political community and national identity in Europe through cosmopolitan constitutional citizenship, as well as the replacement of ethno-European political institutions with multicultural organizations that are decidedly non-ethnically European in nature, means that such a power transition can occur earlier because majority rule becomes defined by political qualifications rooted in non-European ethnic identity political groups and pro-immigration Left-Liberal political parties.

In terms of majority rule based on ethnic rather than political groups, according to Tanja Ellingsen "wars are more likely to occur when the largest group is less than 80 percent."9 In some European nations foreign-born populations already exceed 20 percent of the national population and demographers are predicting that Europeans will become full minorities in the latter half of the 21st century. This means that civil wars in Europe are likely to occur in the near future.

Homeland Territory is a Survival Issue for Ethnic Europeans

An additional "key" reason as to why violence and civil war between ethnic groups occurs is how ethnic groups and the state view territory.10 According to Toft and Dominic Johnson, almost three quarters of all ethnic wars between 1940 and 2000 were "centered on the control of territory." The ownership and defense of bounded territory and homelands is necessary for sovereign states and is also central to international laws that emerged in the era of decolonization and post WWII ethnic group independence movements that involved "the gradual partitioning of the globe into self-determined territories." According to evolutionary theory, territoriality or the "partition" of "living space" (a universal behavioural trait) and its defence (a conditional or contingent trait) is prevalent among both humans and the animal kingdom and can ensure relatively peaceful relations between distinct groups. In terms of human territoriality, the material resources of the territory such as "water, food, and shelter," the "human contents" of the territory such as "the family, relatives, friends, allies, and ethnic group to which one belongs," and the immaterial or symbolic factor of territory, are "key" to why "territory [is] worth fighting over" for human ethnic groups.11

The symbolic or non-material factor of territoriality is the "shared history" and attachment of ethnic groups to their historic and traditional land, seen as a common home or homeland, which provides "in-group/out-group psychology" and group identity.12 Toft explains that a homeland is "an indivisible attribute of group identity," it is "inseparable from its past and vital to its continued existence as a distinct group" as it contains the very "fundamentals of culture and identity" that have developed over millennia and cannot be exchanged for another homeland. Homelands are geographically "bounded" and they sustain "cultural boundaries;" such "boundedness" is endangered by the 'other,' by ethnically distinct immigrants who threaten the integrity, sovereignty and security, the very survival of distinct ethnic groups in their homelands. As such, Toft clarifies that "Ethnic groups rationally view the right to control their homeland as a survival issue, regardless of a territory's objective value in terms of natural or man-made resources" and will engage in fighting to protect and preserve control over their symbolic territories and thus secure their collective group identities. Losing control over a homeland means the "dilution of the national group, its loss of power, and consequent diminution of national identity" as well as a loss of control over the distribution of "economic and political resources," immigration, and the cultural content of the society.13

The deep connection between homeland and the survival of distinct ethnic group identity is a key distinction between ethnic groups and states. According to Toft and Johnson,

[H]omeland territories are imbued with historic significance and their boundedness allows communities of individuals to maintain distinct identities and cultures. These unique properties mean that people and states behave differently in conflicts over homeland territories.14

For states, power and survival are seen in terms of control over material and physical territories and resources, and not in symbolic terms. Although a central duty of the state is the protection and survival of its citizens in the long-term, their focus on their own survival may trump the survival of distinct indigenous groups "who view territory as [indivisible and] inextricably bound up with their identity and thus ultimately with their survival as a group." This difference in territorial control for survival between states and ethnic groups can result in violent conflicts.15

European nation-states may rationally calculate that their survival, in terms of the preservation and enhancement of economic and political power at the global level, depends on the mass-importation of foreign migrants as a 'replacement population.' But mass-immigration of foreign ethnic migrants leading to the creation of multiethnic cosmopolitan states based on multicultural immigrant rights and an ethnically neutral abstract European identity is not conducive to the long-term survival and sovereignty of indigenous Europeans who inhabit the European nation-states as homelands. In other words, nation-state survival at the global level is overriding indigenous European survival at the homeland level.

Pro-immigration European and EU elites are engaged in the promotion of large-scale non-European in-migration, in the decoupling of European ethnic identity from political power, and in propaganda campaigns that aim to belittle European concerns and discredit their distinct identities and sovereignty over their traditional homelands, projects that have defined various Leftist-Socialist EU integration models since the time of Coudenhove-Kalergi, as such, they may be perceived as hostile to European indigenous peoples and thus illegitimate as elected political power. They no longer represent the interests, provide secure homelands, or protect the survival of distinct and indigenous European peoples. In this situation, indigenous ethnic groups may "rationally calculate" to enter into conflicts, including political struggles and violent conflicts leading to civil war with both immigrant-settler ethnic groups and the state.16

Concern, Exposure, and Action is Legitimate

Since WWII indigenous European concern over international migration and cosmopolitanism has been discredited as right-wing extremism, Nazism, and racism. In reality, anti-immigration and anti-cosmopolitan sentiments are a legitimate response of native Europeans who are being displaced of their numerical majority position, replaced by non-European migrant-settlers, and dispossessed of their political power and sovereignty over their homelands by these ideologies and practices. Such a situation has led to the rapid rise of populist and alternative right anti-immigration and anti-Islamist political parties, social and political Identitarian movements, and numerous authors and political figures that expose the agenda of hostile European elites and the threats posed by immigration, Islamism, political correctness, and multiculturalism.

Thilo Sarrazin: Deutschland schafft sich ab

Thilo Sarrazin wrote one of the most widely read and controversial books ever published in Germany, Deutschland Schafft Sich Ab (Germany Abolishes Itself, 2010). In this work he argued that "Islamic immigrants threaten Germany's freedom and prosperity because they are unwilling to integrate and rely overwhelmingly on welfare benefits."17 He has also said of Islam:

No other religion in Europe makes so many demands. No immigrant group other than Muslims is so strongly connected with claims on the welfare state and crime. No group emphasizes their differences so strongly in public, especially through women's clothing. In no other religion is the transition to violence, dictatorship and terrorism so fluid.18

Although condemned by leading elites in Germany, 89 percent of German readers of the Bild newspaper would choose to elect a party headed by Sarrazin.19

In January 2016 the chief of the Swedish army, General Anders Brännström, told his troops to prepare for a war in Europe and defend Sweden against skilled opponents that was expected "within a few years"20 and in February 2016, Norwegian Army Chief Odin Johannessen remarked that Europe "must be prepared to fight, both with words, actions — and if necessary weapons — to preserve the land and the values ​​we have in common" against the threat posed by radical Islam.21 In reaction to the 'migrant crisis' in Europe, in April 2016 Swiss People's Party (SVP) member of parliament Roger Köppel stated that "Europe is about to abolish itself" due to a "megalomaniac" open border policy, and such "overconfidence is at the root of all evil." He further stated that "The basic problem today is Islam" and that "It is an illusion to believe that politics can cope with this mass migration."22

While it is true that Europe is overwhelmed with the migrant crisis and increasingly subject to the activities of radical Islamism, the situation in Europe is not just about Islam, the migrant crisis, and the protection of cultural values; it is also about the decades-old deliberate transformation of ethnic European homelands into multi-ethnic cosmopolitan states through the mass-influx of non-Europeans and the hostile alteration of the political identity, institutions, and culture of indigenous Europeans, a situation that is creating the conditions for civil war in Europe.

This is a situation that has been deliberately created by the EU project of Leftist-Liberal and neoconservative elites and is exploited by anti-European alliances between naïve or treasonous Leftist-Socialists, NGOs, and non-European settlers. All of these groups aim to overthrow the existing political institutions and traditions of European nation-states, render Europeans minorities in their own homelands and dispossess them of their territorial and political sovereignty, eventually replacing them demographically. In 2015, Renaud Camus explained that

The Great Replacement is not a concept, it is not a notion, and it is not a theory: it is only the coining of a name for the most important phenomenon to affect Europe in the last fifteen centuries: namely, the replacement of its population and the changing of people.23

This is in direct contradiction to international laws that protect against the destruction, "in whole or in part," of distinct national, ethnic, racial, or religious groups. What is really at stake is the actual survival of European indigenous peoples as distinct and numerical majority ethnic groups in their own nations and the preservation of the historic European homeland.

Follow our ongoing coverage of the migrant invasion of the West.


[1] Myron Weiner and Sharon Stanton Russell (eds.), Demography and National Security, New York, Oxford, Berghahn Books, 2001, p.1
[2] Germany's Jeopardy, YouTube video, 30:50, posted by Frank Salter, January 5 2016; Frank Salter, Germany's Jeopardy: Could the Immigrant Influx "End European Civilization"? Council of European Canadians, January 15 2016
[3] Salter, Germany's Jeopardy
[4] Michael Teitelbaum, "The Role of the State in International Migration," The Brown Journal of World Affairs, vol. 8, no. 2, Winter 2002, 157-167, p. 158
[5] Monica Duffy Toft, "Indivisible Territory, Geographic Concentration, and Ethnic War," Security Studies, vol 12, no. 2, Winter 2002/2003, pp. 82-119 (82, 117)
[6] Monica Duffy Toft, "The State of the Field: Demography and War," ECSP Report, no. 11, 2005, pp. 25-28 (p.26); Myron Weiner and Michael Teitelbaum, Political Demography, Demographic Engineering, New York, Oxford, Berghahn Books, 2001, pp. 32-33, 46
[7] Toft, Indivisible Territory, pp. 82-84
[8] Monica Duffy Toft, "Population Shifts and Civil War: A Test of Power Transition Theory," International Interactions, vol. 33, no. 3, July 2007, pp. 243-269 (243-244, 248)
[9] Ellingsen as cited in ibid., p. 247
[10] Toft, Indivisible Territory, p. 84
[11] Dominic D. P. Johnson and Monica Duffy Toft, "Grounds for War: The Evolution of Territorial Conflict," International Security, vol. 38, no. 3, Winter 2013/2014, pp. 7-38 (15, 37, 8, 18, 31, 16)
[12] Ibid., 16
[13] Toft, Indivisible Territory, pp. 86-87, 84, 90
[14] Johnson and Toft, Grounds for War, pp. 12-13
[15] Toft, Indivisible Territory, pp. 87, 84, 88
[16] Toft, Indivisible Territory, p. 114; Weiner and Teitelbaum, Political Demography, pp. 61-64
[17] Peter Martino, Will Germany Abolish Itself and France Commit Suicide? Gatestone Institute, December 3 2014
[18] Thilo Sarrazin, Bei keiner anderen Religion ist der Übergang zu Gewalt und Terrorismus so fließend, Bild, August 26 2010
[19] Franz Solms-Laubach, Würden Sie eine Sarrazin-Partei wählen? Bild, September 6 2010
[20] Oliver Lane, Sweden's Army Chief Warns Of World War 3 Inside Europe 'Within a Few Years', Breitbart, January 26 2016
[21] Dagens Nærinsliv, Hærsjefen: Vi må være beredt til å kjempe, Dn.no, February 1 2016
[22] Roger Köppel, Terrorismus und Migration: Wir produzieren Heerscharen von Entwurzelten und Unzufriedenen, Die Weltwoche, August 13 2016
[23] John Lambton, The Great Replacement — Part I, Right On [now altright.com], December 10 2015
http://www.eurocanadian.ca/2017/04/the-coming-civil-war-in-europe.html

jagdmesser
Sunday, September 16th, 2018, 09:42 PM
“Civil war is coming to Europe,” a German city politician told me this week.


I shan’t mention his name – it was an off-the-record briefing and, anyway, in Germany there are penalties for this kind of frankness. But he was only repeating what plenty of other people say in private in Germany where I’ve spent the last couple of weeks, soaking up the atmosphere, people-watching, gauging the public mood in the wake of Angela Merkel’s open invitation to perhaps three million immigrants – most of them fighting-age males from Muslim countries. Three million is higher than the figure admitted by the German authorities, which tend to put it closer to 1.5 million. My source tells me the higher number is closer to the mark.


I was staying in Frankfurt, not one of the places hardest hit by the immigration wave. Partly this is because its traditions as an “open city” date back centuries so, culturally it has always been better attuned to accepting and absorbing immigrants from all backgrounds. Partly it’s because, being Germany’s financial centre, it tends to attract the better educated sort of immigrant. That doesn’t mean it has remained immune to the problem hardly anyone dares talk about except in private: hordes of Muslims, often with entirely different, indeed hostile (https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/09/13/teenager-arrested-in-germany-on-islamic-extremist-bombing-suspicion/), value systems who can’t or won’t integrate, and often just don’t want to integrate for reasons ranging from laziness to contempt and a jihadist desire to bring the West under submission to Islam.

You see some of them begging on the street, often young women pitiably clutching a picture of a child (which may or may not be theirs) while, a few yards back, a sullen looking male (perhaps a relative, perhaps acting as kind of pimp) lurks as her chaperone.

Mostly though they just hang in groups, in the shopping areas and squares and parks, smoking cigarettes, kicking their heels, or, if they’ve found some way of making a living, in the shisha bars and kebab houses which are cropping up all over the place.

The Germans – instinctively polite, kind and reluctant to rock the boat – affect not to notice. They’re welcoming and friendly to those immigrants who make the effort (the nice, hard-working Syrians who run the felafel store in Bergerstrasse, say), and would really rather bury their heads in the sand about the others and just pretend it’s not happening. That’s why, even now, Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) the main party of the resistance to Angela Merkel’s madcap Islamic enrichment experiment still only polls around 16 percent of the national vote. (https://www.thelocal.de/20180219/poll-afd-now-the-second-most-popular-party)


Remember that next time you’re told that the “far-right” (as the media likes to misrepresent the AfD) is on the rise and rise. It may now be Germany’s second-biggest party. But this is all but meaningless in a nation which has long been ruled by rainbow coalitions. The other parties – Angela Merkel’s majority Christian Democrats and the SPD and the Greens, especially – will make sure that the AfD stays out of power by forming alliances of convenience. So if you were pinning your hopes on the AfD rescuing Germany (and Europe) from the consequences of Merkel’s self-inflicted disaster – don’t. Things are going to get a lot lot worse before they get better.

Hence my German city politician’s talk of civil war.

And let me stress, he wasn’t talking about it with any enthusiasm. Germans have spent so many years beating themselves up about what happened under Hitler they squirm at the thought of militarism of any kind, which is why their army is so fat and useless. It was more a resigned sigh about the inevitable. I think he’s right. Or at least that his argument has unassailable logic. You can agree or disagree. It goes something like this.

Why is Germany inflicting this immigration on itself?

Apart from desperation to show itself in a good light to make amends for World War II and the Holocaust, there are two main reasons.

Economics: there is a view abroad, mostly promoted by the mainstream liberal-left but also by squishy conservatives, that Germany’s ageing population needs an influx of fresh blood. If native Germans won’t breed at replacement rates, then “guest-workers” must be imported to keep the economy going strong. Obviously, this is nonsense for a number of reasons debunked by Douglas Murray in his The Strange Death of Europe. But it appeals greatly to the German psyche: they saw what happened after the unemployment of the Weimar era and they don’t want it to happen again.


Anti-Nationalist, Post-Borders New World Order: this the world-view promoted and funded by George Soros and his acolytes, an article of faith for many on the hard left. Encouraging immigration from apparently inimical foreign cultures will ultimately make us better people. It will solve the disgusting problem of white privilege. We will interbreed and cross-pollinate and abandon our unhelpful nationalistic identities which have led to so much chauvinism and war in the past. Sure there might be the odd blip, but because this New World Order is so self-evidently desirable, no sacrifices are too great in order to achieve it.



Yes, most of us find even the first rationale abhorrent, let alone the second.

The problem is that this, pretty much, is the current thinking of the global liberal elite which dominates our governments, local governments, civic institutions, corporations, law firms and so on. Most of them probably haven’t thought it through on quite those explicit terms outlined above, but then groupthink is an insidious and pervasive thing. It is a simple, observable truth that most of our governing class – at every level, from the supranational (UN; EU), the national, to the local (councils, senior police, etc) – have bought into the idea that mass immigration and the formation of parallel communities by unintegrated Muslims is an inevitability which cannot be challenged too hard.

It’s not at all where the people are – hence the Brexit vote, hence Donald Trump, hence the wave of populist upstarts from Matteo Salvini in Italy to Viktor Orban in Hungary – but it’s definitely where most of those in charge of us are.

And this is why there is going to be a civil war.

We know, of course, that it has long been one of the missions of Islamic State and similar Muslim terror organisations – indeed it’s the goal of political Islam generally – to provoke a civil war in Europe in order to force moderate Muslims to take a side, and ultimately, to bring the whole of Europe into Islam.

What we probably mistakenly assumed is that the political establishment would be on our side in such a conflict. You only have to look around to appreciate that this is not necessarily the case.

Look at the Maoist mode of thinking which prevails in Google and the rest of Silicon Valley – and of course in academe: anything that combats white privilege must perforce be desirable.

Look at how the senior police in Britain and elsewhere determinedly promote the idea that the “far right” is as big a threat as the Islamic one, and why they stigmatise people like Tommy Robinson.

Look at how the mainstream media, even conservative imprints, frequently like to brand any vaguely anti-immigrant political movement, however middle class and determinedly non-extremist, as “far-right”.

Look at how the protest rally in Chemnitz – held to draw attention to the large number of rapes and murders inflicted by mostly Muslim immigrants on Germans – was utterly misrepresented by the media and the authorities as neo-Nazi revivalism.

Look at how the New Year mass rapes in Cologne and elsewhere were covered up by the German police and the German media.

Look at how Germans who want to find out what’s happening in their own country cannot get the truth in their own newspapers – only by reading foreign outlets like Breitbart.

Ordinary people across Europe – in the U.S. too before Trump came along – are becoming increasingly frustrated at the failure of their governing elites to take their worries seriously, especially where the two biggest worries of all are concerned: immigration and terrorism.

But instead of responding by mending their ways and addressing these issues, the elites are shooting the messengers. They are clamping down on the people who speak out about the rape gangs, the murders, the acid attacks, the antisocial behaviour who are being punished, not the actual perpetrators.

I’m sure some inkling of these truths had been swimming around my ahead before, especially after reading Douglas Murray’s The Strange Death of Europe. But it only really became clear after spending time in a country even further down the road to disaster than my own – and after talking to a German politician who spelled out the problem clearly.


This is the kind of argument, I know, which induces apoplexies of self-righteousness and shrill denials among liberals and leftists of all hues. They’ll bang on about how it’s an ill-supported, classically right-wing paranoid conspiracy theory. Of course they will: because that is the time-honoured method they have used to close down the argument, to make people embarrassed to talk about it, to bully newspapers into not covering it as honestly they should.

I welcome articulate disagreement.

But in order for it to persuade me it will have to answer a simple question:

When there is such a huge and growing gulf between where our governing, globalist elites are on Islam and immigration – and where ordinary people are on Islam and immigration – how can there ever, possibly, be a happy ending?

Breitbart (https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/16/delingpole-civil-war-is-coming-to-europe-warns-german-politician/), 16 09 2018.



On the brink of civil war: UK, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Sweden, etc. and ALL European major cities.

The 'stone-age' africoons and medieval muslims keep on coming.

Gareth Lee Hunter
Sunday, September 16th, 2018, 09:52 PM
Of course revolutionary/civil war is inevitable. Only those who believe ignorance is bliss refuse to acknowledge this impending conflict.

Oh, and not just in Europe, but the States as well. Might take longer to explode, but it's brewing here too. :nod

Actually, I can't wait to see it happen. The sooner the better. Let's get it on!

velvet
Monday, September 17th, 2018, 05:40 AM
Of course revolutionary/civil war is inevitable. Only those who believe ignorance is bliss refuse to acknowledge this impending conflict.

Oh, and not just in Europe, but the States as well. Might take longer to explode, but it's brewing here too. :nod

Actually, I can't wait to see it happen. The sooner the better. Let's get it on!

It will not be our choice, civil war is brought upon us (it is actually on already, there are countless attacks with knives every day!) and will hit the vast majority of people completely off guard.
Even the courageously demonstating, fed-up people of Saxony and Thuringia. Most of them regard this criminality, at best uncivilised behavior, they cannot imagine that there could be a plan against them carried out by their own government.

Germans are not a revolutionary people. Some hundred years ago farmers marched with pitchforks and torches against their owners, and the revolutions of 1848/1850 were not of our making, they were the effects of the earth quake French revolution, exported by dubious figures through Europe. This is our revolting bilance ever after kicking out Rome in 9 CE. So, there will have to happen a lot more until the German will revolt.

And then there's the problem that we dont have a second amandment. While it is possible to own weapons, we're talking about sport shooting in a club and professional rangers. For private persons it is very difficult to get a licence, and we even need for pepper spray a "Kleinen Waffenschein" (small licence that does not allow you to own anything that can actually shoot).

In addition, somewhen in the 2010s started a program for "unpunishable return" (or somesuch, straffreie Abgabe) for illegaly, or formerly legaly but long gone licence forms, weapons that you may have owned or inherited or whatever, promising that you would go unpunished for illegal weapon ownership.

If push comes to shove, today people dont even possess pitchforks anymore, while immigrants bring their war weapons with them, plus that they, probably, get additionally armed by our govts like the "rebels" in Syria were armed by the same western elites that plot against us.

While I generally agree to bring it on, because it must happen, the reality in Germany is bleak, to say the least...

Terminus
Monday, September 17th, 2018, 07:35 AM
If a WW3 cannot be averted, then it's nature must simply be changed. "Yet all at once mankind will realize that they are fighting a desperate war, but somehow an unjust war will become a holy quest."

The Christian "prophets" all warn of a Russian invasion of Europet started off as an ambiguous East, which later became strongly associated with Russia. The second space war is around the corner (see Carol Rosin's testimony. She was an associate of the visionary Wernher von Braun). The Jews are playing racial, religious, and social enmities against each other. Either the rebuilding of the temple of Jerusalem or the loss of the Dome of the Rock are expected to play a role in "Armageddon." Russia, China, Iran, etc., you know the drill.

But all that would just be tedious. The expectations of the ignorant must not come into being. So the actual precedent for a WW3 will be completely unexpected to all (as dictated to Emanuel Minos)... except for the blessed German peoples.


There will be a religion that will join everyone except the Jews, who will show their old stubbornness. In the Rhine there is a church that is built by the will of all the peoples. From there, where the next big war will explode, it is what the people are supposed to believe. All the confessions will be compatible.

— Wessel Eilert

At a first glance, this seems to be just another will to Christian hegemony. But note the last two sentences. There has never been a form of Christianity which united the dissident sects (without coercion). Positive Christianity came close I suppose.
Also note the mention of the Jewish refusal to enter into unity (antiquity furnishes numerous examples: Antiochus Epiphanes as described by Diodorus Siculus, 1 Macabees 1:41-43, Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus, Tractate Sanhedrin 39a. Epiphanes' treatment was no different from Titus', they both pardoned the majority of Jews. Epiphanes' contempt for Jews was no different from Caligula's, they both employed almost exactly the same means despite being centuries apart), this being their defiance to laws of consciousness (the blasphemy against the "Holy Spirit"). Very few "prophecies" actually mention Jews outside of a biblical setting.
As for the church, it will not be Christian, but either Ernst Haeckel's monistic church or Hitler's planned observatory in Linz. Such a building initiative would be equivalent to the destruction of the Dome of the Rock or the emergence of a Jewish temple.

The seer Van Rensburg, although permeated with hatred based in the Old Testament, expected such a war to be the forerunner of German emancipation.
The Jews are not really industrialist, everything they have is borrowed. So there's no doubt that the Americans will rely heavily on the German people. This will be the long awaited opportunity for Germany and Britain to come together. Hitler expected such a future alliance against America in his dying days.
Also, Germany and Russia must somehow find common grounds. As the Stratfor Jew George Friedman so candidly admitted, that is their biggest fear and perceived threat to Jewish-American world domination. That is where a Stalin type comes in, but purged of his defects, cured of his atheism.

Hitler & Stalin's reappearance, be it for good or bad, would be enough to substitute the intended petty disastrous conflict for a legendary struggle of epic proportions.

Assessing WW2 is a simple matter of determining who was fighting on "god's" side. The one who has assimilated and studied the views of FDR, Churchill, Stalin, and Hitler will have absolute certainty about this matter. You can't say that all sides were controlled, that WW2 was a scramble between atheists, that is nihilistic.


Near the Rhine from the Noric mountains [98% Austria]
Will be born a great one of people come too late [see Carl Jung's analysis of the German people],
One who will defend Sarmatia and the Pannonians,
One will not know what will have become of him.

— Nostradamus

The authenticity of the Hitler-Bormann documents is admittedly questionable, but Hitler anticipated the emergence of the Russian and American superpowers (this is also in Otto Wagener's memoirs) and warns against Germany fighting for either side. What is certain is that Germany will be at the heart of this war. The Birch tree and Linden tree prophecies aren't merely updated Catholic tradition, like most of their "prophecies" are. It's an important fact that these were largely shaped by German dreamers, mystics, and seers. This boundless aptitude for imagination has caused much harm (especially in philosophy i.e. Hegel, Kant, Marx), but has also produced pagan giants (Nietzsche), intellectual titans (Schopenhauer), geniuses (Kepler, Galileo, Haeckel), superhuman wonders (Goethe, Schiller). Even German Christians tend to be profoundly different from the usual rabble.

Is it any coincidence that G. Ward Price's testimony of seers being found along the Austro-German borders matches Degrelle's, Linge's and Speer's description of the Kehlstein mountain's (which is found on the very same borders) effect on Hitler (admitted by Hitler himself in the table talks), the very same place which prompted JFK to write down things which his secretary admits had never heard from him before.

"His mind, like that of many great leaders in the past, has a strong psychic strain. I have been told that the Austro-German borderland where he was born is known, like the Scottish Highlands, to be prolific of people with this gift of intuition."

SaxonPagan
Sunday, September 29th, 2019, 02:59 PM
Is European Civil War Inevitable by 2025?

No, but if one occurred the Whites would probably lose in several countries.

I'm not sure we could even count on the (increasingly politicised) armed forces to come to our aid.

Herr Rentz
Sunday, September 29th, 2019, 06:04 PM
You can bet the US will stick their noses in it.

Finnish Swede
Monday, September 30th, 2019, 09:27 AM
Is European Civil War Inevitable by 2025?

Just in 5 - 6 years? Very unlikely.

Today's Europeans have become ''soft''. People's pure physical conditions are often worse than earlier (more over weight people etc.), and so called discipline has disappeared from all levels of societies ... against parents, teachers etc. authorities.
Many European (men) don't even know how to fight ... not on the streets (refugees walks over them) and even less ... as organized army/military units. NATO units (= ''hired armies'') have protected those countries too long. Most of the country's don't have military training to their own men anymore (compulsory liability to military service).

https://www.swissinfo.ch/blob/34721852/ba69b305e8ab6110349747995bae5f30/milita__776_r_eng-34731260-data.jpg

Add to this soup tight gun laws and facts that most of Europeans lives in areas (cement cities) where hunting is not anymore hobby. And even their willingness to protect their own countries are pretty low (they feel more and more like being unique/independent ''global'' humans of Earth and not so tightly (as earlier) members of some country/nation/culture). All that via rising travelling, globalization, brain washing and immigration.

https://i.redd.it/nk1uzja3wvby.png

Secondly average world views/ideologies should be changed a lot. Starting from big questions: What is ''right'' and what is ''wrong''. What can be done (allowed to do) to another human beings etc.? If that size of matters will ever change again in ''civilized world'' ... much much more time will be needed anyway.

And last ... possible changes can not start via small countries (or they can ... but those will not lead anywhere ... Hungary, Czech even Poland). The real change should start from big & powerful countries (in Europe). One which is clearly more important (both politically & economically) to others than others are to it. Sorry, but my look turns to Germany. If Germany would change ... I bet attitudes could change much much easier/faster in other countries as well. At least in other Germanic countries.

velvet
Monday, September 30th, 2019, 07:55 PM
I guess the average people in Syria (Homs/Aleppo, where it started) were "not ready" for civil war either, but it's not their choice, and it wont be our choice to be in civil war, because it will be started, here as it was there, by foreign insurgence forces (otherwise known as immigrants). Plus that Europe already imported the PR-team of IS (White Helmets), distributed with the "migrant resettlement scheme" all across Europe, along with an uncounted number of actual IS fighters.

It's maybe a thought we really need to give up on to think that we'd have a choice. The choice will be to either learn fighting by fighting or to simply bend over backwards and/or be killed. They wont wait for us to "be ready" or "prepared". And the low-scale civil war (random murders, rapes etc) is already on...

In addition, (((the powers that be))) PLAN civil war in Europe for some decades already (see what Michael Hayden, CIA said already in 2008), and when it doesnt escalate big scale on its own, they're maybe sending in snipers like in Ukraine to get things going when they see fit. Which could well "coincide" with the next elections in Germany 2021...