What lies behind these delusions — which are not even taken seriously by those who utter them and who are perfectly aware of the pathological machismo characterising Muslims and their problematic attitude to women and sexuality — is simply Islamophilia and the blatant approval of our country’s Islamisation, colonisation, and cultural and demographic replacement. These Islamophilic collaborationists have made an ideological and political choice, opting to destroy and cast into oblivion our French and European identity, which they find intolerable as a result of an ethno-masochistic pathological affliction that merits psychoanalysis.
What the intellectual divide on the causes of jihadism actually conceals is the opposition between the Islamophiles that endorse it in a subtle manner and the others.
A few months after the jihadist attacks of November 2015, Eugénie Bastié, a journalist and investigator specialising in intellectual debates, published the following in Le Figaro (6th May, 2016):
The Islamist attacks have led to intellectual disagreements. … The debate centred around the interpretation of the causes of jihadism is now raging between those who perceive it as a generational and nihilistic sort of rebellion [meaning those that are Islamophilic and attempt to vindicate Islam] and the supporters of the culturalist theory that considers Islam to be the very root of evil.
Within the politically correct camarilla that espouses the first view, let us mention the presence of Michel Serres,[100] who, as part of his perfect compatibility with Islam, explained to an enthusiastic audience attending a festival organised by our self-righteous daily Le Monde that jihadist terrorism had claimed fewer victims than cancer and road accidents, before adding the following provocative and absurd formula: ‘Cigarette manufacturers are a million times more dangerous than DAESH’. Absolutely ludicrous. He is no more than a brown-nosing and sweet-talking collaborationist, bending over and taking it like a champ.
Alain Finkielkraut, the new bête noire of the self-righteous, celebrates the founding of our ‘surging national spirit’ party, of our resistance in the face of Islamic violence, which he contrasts with the ‘party of Otherness’. He continues to be ostracised and insulted, particularly by Alain Badiou, the icon of the French radical Left and ever-popular Islamo-leftist Marxist who issued this pathetic declaration after the Paris attacks of autumn 2015:
We must not forget that such frightening mass murders occurred day in, day out in other parts of the world, and still do. … Religion [he does not have the courage to say “Islam”] has always been a pretext, a rhetorical cover, one that can be and is manipulated by fascist gangs.
Here we go again… Such old Stalinist jargon cannot go unappreciated. Muslim killers and white fascists, what’s the difference! And in Alain Badiou’s eyes, these fascist groups themselves are obviously manipulated by — guess who? Why, ‘globalised capitalism’, of course! In short, it is capitalism that kills people through the arms of the jihadists, not Islam. What beautiful analytical skill, rivalling that of Soral and Francis Cousin![101]
In his desire to clear Islam and his Afro-Maghrebian followers, Emmanuel Todd prefers, for his part, to attack those that defend Charlie Hebdo, as he proceeds to denounce ‘charlist hypocrisy’. The spewing of antifa slogans and a Palestinian flag that is brandished on each and every occasion are, alongside the targeting of policemen, the daily bread of Islamo-leftists, who not only hate the French flag, a symbol of our native identity, but combine their ritualistic and overused ‘anti-fascist fight’ with a defence of Muslims, which could not have come about at a worse time. An alliance between antifascism and Islamophilia is akin to mixing chalk with cheese.
The same brainless illogicality is encountered among other, more moderate Islamo-leftists of the self-righteous Left: murderous jihadists are thus exonerated and Islam vindicated. The former are labelled ‘misled’ and ‘unbalanced’, yet are simultaneously described — in a contradictory manner, as if in an effort to incriminate French society — as being ‘desperate’ and ‘nihilists that have lost their way’. The poor despondent bastards deserve to be shown some understanding… Given their state of mind, it is no wonder that they slaughter people in the name of allah. Who could blame them, when it is not their fault?
Self-proclaimed Islamologist Olivier Roy, whose soul has surrendered to collaborationism, believes that we should not speak of ‘radical Islam’ but of an ‘Islamisation of radicalism’. Nice imbecilic jargon, I must say, representing yet another effective way to absolve Islam of its crimes. In the aftermath of the November 2015 Bataclan attacks, in which many of our French children, youths, teens, women and brothers lost their lives, this impostor wrote the following words in Le Monde: ‘Jihadism is a generational and nihilistic revolt’. Oh, really? A revolt that has lasted more than 1,400 years? Roy has adopted the insane view advocated by fashionable thug Tariq Ramadan on the relegation of young Muslim immigrants to the bottom of society (Alain Soral has claimed the same thing), implying that France is somehow responsible for this. In short, as far as these gentlemen are concerned, we were actually asking for it, asking to be targeted by this deadly jihad, right? It gets even worse, though: when it comes to vehicle-ramming attacks, which are becoming ever more frequent in Europe and involve a Muslim driver each and every time, there are none who speak of premeditated terrorism, but merely of a ‘bout of madness’. This way, one does not have to ask oneself too many questions.
Gilles Kepel, a former Islamolatrist who switched sides once he awoke to the reality of our situation, is now lucid enough to believe that the constantly rehashed term ‘radical’ is but a screen-word concealing the true face of a global ideology of conquest founded upon the ‘hegemony of Salafist discourse’, which is spreading jihadism and preparing, as part of its most important strategic objective, to ignite passions in the French suburbs. In one of Libération’s opinion columns, the author of Terreur dans l’Hexagone[102] speaks of a ‘strategy that aims to foment, in a Europe considered by Daesh ideologists to be the West’s soft underbelly, a war in which everyone shall clash with everyone else and whose purpose is to trigger the old continent’s implosion’.
There are those who suddenly become lucid and whose eyes are opened by the shock of reality, yet they always retain a disheartening sort of naivety, an excessively idealistic attitude that is as disarming as it is ridiculous. In the aftermath of the Bataclan massacre, Jean Birnbaum, the director of Monde des livres,[103] thus shared his thoughts on the issue: ‘The events that took place on the 13th of November have changed our entire perspective, and one suddenly understands the extreme urgency of answering the following question: “What were those people thinking?”’ Rarely does one have the opportunity to read such unintelligent questioning. What were those who established Soviet gulags and Khmer Rouge executioners thinking, I wonder? The answer is simple — the only thing on their mind was religious and ideological fanaticism. Nothing else.
As for the Bataclan killers, what they had in mind was the age-old ambition of having people submit to genuine Islam as defined by the Qur’an and the hadiths. The only horizons that their superstitious little brains have while waiting to be allowed into paradise lies in the killing of ‘infidels’ and apostates, just like their jihadist ancestors once did. Nothing has changed since the death of Mohammed in 632, and nothing ever will. And they are emulated by their admirers, who are all fascinated by their sanguinary games and shall swell the ranks of the ever more numerous future jihadists.
100
TN: Born on 1st September, 1930, Michel Serres is a French philosopher, theorist and author whose works revolve around subjects such as death, angels and time.
101
TN: Born in 1957, Francis Cousin is a French writer and analytical philosopher who has spent most of his life flirting with anarchism and communism. This, however, has not prevented him from maintaining close ties to certain ‘far-right’ figures.