Battle Lines Are Clearly Drawn: Multicultural Utopia VS Populist Traditionalists | Oath Keepers

HuffPost Germany Writer Calls For Replacing Germans With Migrants to Stop Populism

In a very revealing article posted by Paul Joseph Watson, on InfoWars.com, Paul points out a HuffPost Germany writer, Veit Lindner, who asserts, that to stop the momentum of the “new right,” “it would actually be best to just replace” the German people with foreigners.

Source: Battle Lines Are Clearly Drawn – Multicultural Utopia VS Populist Traditionalists – Oath Keepers

Yes, I know that many people will simply ignore / dis-count this, due to its source. That would be a mistake. The article is real, and it is scary.

Referring to the “New Right” (those who are of a traditionalist / populist mindset, who wish to preserve and protect their people and their ethnic and cultural heritage) as a “stinking flatulence,” the author of the HuffPost piece (frighteningly entitled “Repeople us! Why the German people should be abolished”) asserts that

“it would actually be best to just replace them [ethnic Germans]. Attention, Germans! Fall in for comprehensive repeopling! [Umvolkung]

“Black, brown, yellow, white, Asians and Arabs, Africans, you people from America, India, people of all faiths – come and help us! Stream in and repeople us, but thoroughly! […]

A little more genetic and cultural seed-scattering here and a little more self-abolition through reproduction fatigue there – that, as Deniz Yücel once called it, would be the ‘most beautiful side of the perishing of a people.'”

As if there could ever be anything beautiful about the perishing of a people! Imagine the outcry – wholly justified – if someone on the right were to write such a thing, and publish it in a (relatively) mainstream publication, about any demographic group except white Europeans? But no, it is not only acceptable but praiseworthy to sacrifice Europeans for this utopian multicultural future.

This is a nihilistic, vicious, hateful, and intrinsically violent vision: calling for the disruption and destruction of a people, a culture, and a society that have developed organically over centuries and millennia, to forcibly impose a socially-engineered vision believed by a small number of zealots – violent extremists, rather – to be preferable to that highly developed culture: a culture which has brought aberrations like Marx and Hitler, true, but has also brought us Mozart, Handel, Beethoven, and Strauss; glorious art and architecture; remarkable scientific and technological advances; along with, yes, pretzels with German mustard, a wide range of tasty sausages, and other features of a remarkably rich and flavorful cuisine; excellent beer; folk dances, dirndls, and lederhosen, and the joys of Oktoberfest.

And now all of this must be swept away, to make room for a new, supposedly “multicultural” future. Why? No one has ever provided any sort of remotely logical reason! Because of Hitler? That was 80 years ago! Because of the “New Right”? Well, guess what: the New Right arose precisely because of and in reaction to this extreme multicultural program the Left is attempting to impose, not just on Germany, not just on Europe, but on the West as a whole. The New Right are the antibodies, fighting the disease of Leftist insanity.

But of course, anyone opposed to the Leftists’ utopian vision will be pilloried as a racist, a xenophobe, a white supremacist. However, it is not racist, xenophobic, or any sort of “supremacist” to oppose and resist the destruction of your people, your ethnic and cultural heritage. Rather, it is a moral duty, just as defending one’s own family would be: for one’s nation and people are one’s family, writ large.

If you are a “person of colour” and are calling for this “repeopling,” you are advocating ethno-cultural genocide; if you are of European heritage, then you are advocating ethno-cultural suicide. In either case, you are bat-shit crazy (pardon my language), you are diseased, you are a vile and evil person. I want nothing to do with you, and I will do my best to unmask and denounce you as the horror you are.

Let us remember that “utopia” means, literally, “no place.” It does not and cannot exist. What utopians call for is something that is unnatural, unreal, that cannot happen. It is an illusion, a false promise of peace and cooperation that in fact could only end in death and destruction. Doubt me? Well, we just “celebrated” (some of us mourned) Bastille Day, the 14th of July, the date marking the storming of the Bastille and thus the dawn of the French Revolution.

As I have commented elsewhere, those who are actually aware of the existence of Bastille Day, here in the U.S., tend to celebrate it (if they give it a second thought) as if the French Revolution was the American Revolution, Pt. 2. It was not. Despite the cries of “Liberté, egalité, fraternité!” (“Liberty, equality, fraternity!”), it started in blood, it was advanced by blood, and it ended in blood: a dark and sinister time in the world’s history. Today’s Leftists are treading the same bloody path – one which has been tread by the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, among others.

The mindset revealed in this HuffPost Germany essay is a classic example of the old adage that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The only good thing that I see in all of this is that the extreme Leftists are finally showing their true colours. They are not tolerant, they are not peaceful, they are not compassionate, and they only want “diversity” on their own terms. I can only hope that the fence-sitters and moderates wake up to what is actually being proposed, and realize how bad it actually is, and how bad the people proposing it actually are!

Mark my words: if enough of us do not say, “No! You are wrong, you are crazy, this cannot and will not be allowed to happen,” we will find ourselves in a violent and bloody conflict that will make the French Revolution look like a walk in the park.

 


 

Nota Bene: What constitutes “genocide”? Well, here’s the UN’s definition, from its “Convention on Genocide,” which it considers (rightly) a crime against humanity:

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical [sic], racial or religious group, as such:

  1. Killing members of the group;
  2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

If you don’t think at least (b), (c), and possibly (d) describe what’s going on in Europe at present already, and particularly what is being proposed in the HuffPost Germany essay referenced above, you are not paying close enough attention!

Advertisements

Nathan Bedford Forrest | Abbeville Institute

https://americangallery.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/general-nathan-bedford-forrest.jpg?w=505&h=610

Source: Nathan Bedford Forrest | Abbeville Institute

While Nathan Bedford Forrest, the “Wizard of the Saddle,” is fascinating in his own right [*], this essay is even more important for what it says about our own time. Following are a few of the more prescient words:

“So in a very literal sense the Civil War was the first World War. It not only created a powerful nation of organized resources and potential military might, but the greater world wars took their pattern from the American one, even to the trench system Lee set up at Petersburg. These wars were internecine, all of them; but it was not in this that we find the crucial resemblances. In view of a common Christian culture, wars within Europe would of necessity be internecine, but at least at one time there were Truces of God. What this country brought to Europe was unconditional surrender…

“The result of these wars has been the self-exhaustion of Europe, the loss of prestige before the world, and another possible shift in power from West to East. We seem to accept this with a fatalism strangely foreign to us [indeed it is, given the history of Europeans prior to this age]. The battle of Lepanto was fought and won by a Christian prince [to which I would add: as was the battle at the Gates of Vienna!]. Since that time Christendom, if we can still call it such, has been free of danger [until recently], but there is a strange resemblance between that time and this. The Christian princes were divided among themselves as in our world wars; they were threatened by their own invention, the firearm, which the Turk added to the first use of the disciplined regiment.

“We have only to remember Spengler’s warning as to the folly of teaching the techniques by which the West had overwhelmed the world and wonder [is not this also true today, given that the third-world population explosion which threatens to overwhelm the West was made possible due to Western advances in agriculture and medicine?]. Will the time come when we will pray for another Lepanto? There is no Christian prince today strong enough to take a stand. This country [the U.S.] is presumably strong enough at least to risk a defense, but to stand always on the defensive is to prepare for defeat…”

I am reminded of the words J.R.R. Tolkien placed in the mouth of Boromir, prince of Gondor, in The Lord of the Rings: “Gondor wanes, you say? Yet Gondor stands. And even the end of its strength is still very strong.” True enough; yet only with the aid of the Riders of Rohan was Gondor able to break the siege by the forces of Mordor – and even then, were it not for the destruction of the One Ring and consequent overthrow of the Dark Lord, Sauron, that victory would have been but a respite.

Where are our Riders of Rohan, our Winged Hussars? And how shall we unmake the “One Ring” of our own age?

 


 

* And no, to get this old shibboleth out of the way, Forrest was not the founder of the KKK, though he was elected – in absentia, and with neither his knowledge nor desire – its head. Rather, he used his considerable moral authority to disband that first incarnation of the Klan, when it had ceased to be a protective organization, and become one engaged in mere vigilante and often criminal activities.

Refuting the Anti-Christian Animus On The Alt-Right | Council of European Canadians

 

European Identitarians should recognize that Christianity has always recognized the importance of European identity and its own contribution to this identity.

Source: Refuting the Anti-Christian Animus On The Alt-Right

As I have noted previously, I am coming increasingly (if somewhat reluctantly) to view myself as an Identitarian:

not as a political statement, but as a simple and incontrovertible fact, an expression of biological (and in the case of my European identity, cultural and historical) reality. It is the actions and reactions of people on the Left that are gradually forcing me to view this [European] identity in more socio-political terms: my heritage, both genetic and cultural, is under attack, and that unfortunate fact forces me to defend it… Like a lot of folks, I mainly want to be left alone. But I also want my people to be left alone, and not to be subsumed, oppressed, overrun, interbred, or replaced. So I suppose that makes me an Identitarian… and if so, so be it. I did not choose the label, or the fight; both were forced upon me.

But what has been very frustrating to me – both as a Christian, and as a Christian clergyman – is the extent to which many of those who share this approach are sneeringly dismissive of Christianity. Some of these are the sort of militant atheists who dismiss any religion as “fairy stories” – ignoring both the fact that fairy stories often contain encoded within them deeper and more vital truths, and also the wisdom of no less a figure of contemporary atheism than Richard Dawkins, who famously tweeted,

Before we rejoice at the death throes of the relatively benign Christian religion, let’s not forget Hilaire Belloc’s menacing rhyme: “Always keep a-hold of nurse, For fear of finding something worse.”

In other words, even if you don’t believe a word of it, mere enlightened self-interest dictates supporting Christianity as a bulwark against more menacing alternatives – such as, for example, militant Islam.

But the even more central truth that European Identitarians – particularly those who consider themselves some species of European Pagan – tend, sadly, to forget is that much of what has made Europe recognizably Europe over the last two centuries results precisely from the fusion of the Classical (Greco-Roman) and Germano-Celtic branches of pre-Christian (Pagan) Europe with the (then-) new faith of Christianity.

It was a particularly advantageous fusion, and one which led to considerable mutual enrichment, and a great fluorescence of culture on the European continent. I am generally quite sympathetic to European Paganism, having particular respect and appreciation for the Celtic and Norse/Germanic branches. But if we would revert Europe to its pre-Christian state, the simple truth is that we would revert it (at least, as regards Northern Europe, whose proponents are generally the most vocal in attacking Christianity) to an age of mud huts and blood-feuds.

I do not forget the impressive accomplishments of the pre-Christian world of Hellenistic (Greco-Roman) antiquity. But it was nonetheless the Age of Faith that raised the great cathedrals and uncounted other architectural marvels; that inspired great art and magnificent music, from Gregorian chant to Baroque; that gave even the oft-warring kingdoms of Europe a larger identity as part of Christendom; and which defended that European Christendom against Muslim invasions, from the 8th through the 17th centuries.

For Europeans to reject Christianity is, as my late mother would have put it, “cutting off your nose to spite your face.” So I am very glad to see someone from the European Identity camp mount a spirited defense of the faith, as Richard Storey has done in this essay.

He addresses three allegedly (according to its critics) unique and damaging traits of Christianity, which those opponents claim to be “the great mutations” of the allegedly pure Europeanism that predated Christianity – mutations “that gave birth to the secular ideologies of [modernism]”: individualism, egalitarianism and progressivism.

That these ideas – at least in the extreme and unbalanced form in which they are found today – are indeed “mutant” ideologies, and as such are dangerous and ultimately destructive of human life and flourishing, is a viewpoint with which I cannot disagree. But that that they are unique to Christianity, or that the Christian faith is responsible for promoting them to an inappropriate degree, is the idea that needs challenging, and challenge it Storey does.

He also points out that

“Other claims in need of addressing are the revival of the defunct Nietzschean idea that Christianity is a slave ethic, produced by Jews to weaken the Roman Empire through the promotion of meekness as goodness etc., and the beliefs that Europe was and would be more peaceful without Christianity or that Christianity is somehow anti-white/European identity.”

These false claims are also addressed in his essay. Read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest!


Notable quote:

“It is quite legitimate for nations to treat those differences [e.g., distinctions between ethnic nationalities] as a sacred inheritance and guard them at all costs. The Church aims at unity, a unity determined and kept alive by that supernatural love which should be actuating everybody; she does not aim at a uniformity which would only be external in its effects and would cramp the natural tendencies of the nations concerned. Every nation has its own genius, its own qualities, springing from the hidden roots of its being. The wise development, the encouragement within limits, of that genius, those qualities, does no harm; and if a nation cares to take precautions, to lay down rules, for that end, it has the Church’s approval.”

— Pope John XXIII (1961) “Mater et Magistra” (http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jo23mm.htm)

The Future of Europe is Civil War

https://republicstandard.com/content/images/2018/04/penisnularcampaign-1.jpg

Europe is committing suicide – or at least its leaders have decided to commit suicide. Whether European people decide to go along with this is, naturally, another matter.

~ Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of Europe

Source: The Future of Europe is Civil War | Republic Standard

“Anyone who thinks for longer than ten-seconds about the nature of faith can see how obeying the laws of God is more important to the faithful than integrating with a sad shadow of a Western civilization that knows not for whom it stands. We know not why we exist. No longer allowed a national identity, Europeans are simply chattle. Though we are told that we are free, the truth is we have no freedom at all and no respite from the Orwellian demands of our masters that we ignore the obvious in favor of the fantastical.”

Unfortunately, it is only Muslims who are allowed to – and who make up the current, apparent, majority of those who care enough to – concern themselves with obeying the laws of God, rather than the dictates of a secular state (and culture) that appears to be on its last legs – “a sad shadow of a Western civilization that knows not for whom it stands.”

A Christian who dares to say “Because God wills it” – quod Deus vult eum – is branded a xenophobe, a religious bigot, a dangerous militant extremist… while the genuinely dangerous militant extremists and religious bigots – from what has since the 7th century proven itself to be the most dangerous, extreme, militant, and bigoted religious ideology on the planet – continue to get air time: on YouTube, Facebook, and TV and radio stations worldwide. Yet those who speak out against this favoritism for anti-Western forces are frequently banned for offending against some sort of nebulous and unspecified “community standards.”

“Orwellian” is right. I have maintained for years – decades! – that George Orwell was not wrong, in Nineteen Eighty-Four, only premature. I did not know how right events would prove me to be! Not that it’s something I desire. I would have given anything to be proven wrong, but it was not to be.

Today’s version of “MiniTrue” (Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth“) insists that “diversity is our strength” (cf. Orwell, 1984: “war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength”), that “multiculturalism” consists, not in maintaining the integrity of a variety of cultures in their proper historical and geographic spheres, but forcing them together in a mixed-up mélange of “diverse” sameness… at least in Western countries.

In our present environment, that kind of “diversity” is a source of division and disruption; and that is probably intentional, on the part of those who wish to break down existing structures and institutions, and re-make society into their own kind of utopia – a plan which is more likely to result is dystopia and horrific conflict, if carried through (recall that the meaning of “utopia” is “no place”).

History has repeatedly shown us that the worst outcomes are brought about by trying to usher in some version of the Kingdom of God, whether religious or secular, by our own efforts – from the Cromwellian interregnum  in England and the “Reign of Terror” in France to Stalin’s purges in the USSR and the Cultural Revolution in China, and many more examples could be cited – and mass importation of alien peoples into Western nations is following that too-familiar pattern.

That is not to say that immigrants can never become part of a society, or contribute to it in constructive and meaningful ways. They can, and they have. But that can happen only when they enter in small enough numbers, relative to the existing population, to be readily assimilated, and when they come in with the desire to become part of that society – not to transform it into what they ostensibly left behind.

In this as in so many other regards, Nature provides a model. Alien species can and do become naturalized in new regions… sometimes, if there is a niche where they can fit in without causing strain on the rest of the ecosystem.

But if alien species are introduced into a disturbed ecosystem – such as after a fire, or in an area where the integrity of the existing ecosystem has been broken by, say, logging or development – the introduced aliens frequently become invasive, and, in the absence of natural controls, end up overpopulating and choking out the native species. This is the case in human “ecosystems,” as well, and we are seeing precisely that in our present era.

But another example from Nature is when pathogens are introduced into an organism. In this case, a sufficient volume of pathogens can overwhelm the organism’s natural defenses and kill it, of course. But the introduction of pathogens does naturally evoke the production of antibodies by that organism, that fight against the pathogen.

This is what we may be seeing in the rise of what the mainstream media dismissively, disdainfully, or fearfully refers to as “far-right” organizations. Far-right some (but by no means all) of them may well be; but if so, it is only a natural counter-weight to the far-left leanings of society’s elites, in the news and other media, in academia, and in the mainstream political establishment.

Science teaches us that the nature of systems is equilibrium; that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The so-called “far right” is by no means yet equal to the existing far-left, now well along in their “long march through the institutions” – indeed, firmly entrenched therein – but it is indeed opposite. And it may well need to grow, in both size and strength, in order to bring some measure of balance to the outsize influence of the Left, and wrest the system back toward equilibrium.

Is it possible that the pendulum may then swing too far in that direction? Of course it is. That, too, is the nature of things. But the alternative is an even more complete trashing of society as it exists, the further destruction of key human institutions such as Church and Family, Blood and Soil (*). We would then enter a long Dark Age, the duration and end of which cannot even be contemplated with any certainty or confidence.

In such a Dark Age, the defenders of the West and of Christendom would be reduced to a subjected, remnant people, and although God would never abandon us, is that really the future we want, for ourselves and our descendants? It is not the future I want!

Read, and take warning.

 


* As Stephen Clay McGehee describes the latter two concepts, “a Blood and Soil movement… takes in two of the most basic concepts in all of history: Our People, and the land of our ancestors that provides the food that feeds our people. It means that while we wish all the best toward others, our immediate family comes first, followed by ever larger circles of extended family, and then on out from there. There is Our People, and there is Other People.” He elsewhere elaborates,

“‘Blood and Soil’ are the two key components of any traditional culture. Blood and soil are also the two primary requirements of a nation 1. Blood 2 refers to the people who make up that culture. It is the direct lineage; the DNA of the people who make up that group… Blood is a broader form of family. It is the racial identity of a group of people, and it provides a strong bond among that group. Soil 3 refers to a physical location that a People call home. It is also a cultural appreciation of our place in the world, and the understanding that the soil provides the food that we eat. Some, such as the Southern Agrarians, place a greater emphasis on the soil than do other groups, but it is a crucial component of any traditional culture.”

Europe’s Civilizational Exhaustion – Gatestone Institute

Pictured: French police eject some of the 80 migrants and pro-illegal-immigration activists who occupied the Basilica of Saint Denis, on March 18, 2018. (Image source: Video screenshot, YouTube/Kenyan News & Politics)

“In Sweden, by 2050, almost one in three people will be Muslim. The civilizational exhaustion is seen in Europeans’ falling birth rates, mushrooming public debt, chaos in the streets, and a refusal to invest in security. Islam is filling the cultural vacuum of a society with no children and which believes – wrongly – it has no enemies.”

Source: Europe’s Civilizational Exhaustion | Gatestone Institute

  • Islam is filling the cultural vacuum of a society with no children and which believes — wrongly — it has no enemies.
  • In Sweden, by 2050, almost one in three people will be Muslim.
  • The European mainstream mindset now seems to believe that “evil” comes only from our own sins: racism, sexism, elitism, xenophobia, homophobia, the guilt of the heterosexual white Western male — and never from non-European cultures. Europe now postulates an infinite idealization of the “other”, above all the migrant.
  • A tiredness seems to be why these countries do not take meaningful measures to defeat jihadism, such as closing Salafist mosques or expelling radical imams.
  • Muslim extremists understand this advantage: so long as they avoid another enormous massacre like 9/11, they will be able to continue taking away human lives and undermining the West without awakening it from its inertia.

Is this really what we want? Because it’s what we’re going to get, if we don’t – collectively – wake up, and start defending what is valuable: our history, our culture, our heritage.

This essay – which makes for sobering reading, but for that very reason should be read, marked, learned, and inwardly digested by defenders of the West – continues,

Stephen Bullivant, a professor of theology and the sociology of religion at St Mary’s University in London, recently published a report, “Europe’s Young Adults and Religion”:

“Christianity as a default, as a norm, is gone, and probably gone for good – or at least for the next 100 years,” Bullivant said.

According to Bullivant, many young Europeans “will have been baptised and then never darken the door of a church again. Cultural religious identities just aren’t being passed on from parents to children. It just washes straight off them… “And we know the Muslim birthrate is higher than the general population, and they have much higher [religious] retention rates.”

That is a very dangerous and worrying combination – to put it mildly. The situation has gotten so bad that no less a figure than Richard Dawkins, who is as this essay notes is

an atheist and the author of The God Delusion, responded to the study’s release by tweeting to his millions of Twitter followers:

Before we rejoice at the death throes of the relatively benign Christian religion, let’s not forget Hilaire Belloc’s menacing rhyme:

“Always keep a-hold of nurse
For fear of finding something worse.”

Dawkins is apparently concerned that after the demise of Christianity in Europe, there will not be an atheistic utopia, but a rising Islam.

Dawkins’ concern is well-founded. Secularists and atheists of Dawkins’ ilk – not, clearly, Dawkins himself, who though misguided is vastly more intelligent than many of his followers – have been happy enough to use Islam (*) as a foil for Christianity (and I would not be surprised if many have not rejoiced, secretly, in the deaths of Christians in the Middle East and elsewhere), believing that it is doing much of their work for them, and that they can then control and enervate it, too.

This makes about as much sense as trying to chain a dragon to boil a pot of tea. What they fail to realize is that those who passionately believe in something – whether that “something” is truth or falsehood, witness the passionate belief in Communism many still possess, despite its theoretical “defeat” in the 1980s and ’90s – will always have an edge over those who believe in nothing. And unlike the heirs of Western Christendom, Islam is not tired, not exhausted: it has had a rest of some centuries, and has awoken.

It is time, and past time, for us to awaken, too – to awaken to our peril, and to defend ourselves against it. We have a moral responsibility to do so (and as Christians, a religious duty, since Islam is a false religion, and a dangerous ideology): not only for ourselves, but for our ancestors, and for our descendants. So far, we are abjectly failing both. We are betraying our patrimony, by failing to defend it, and pass it on.

What is at stake, here? Let’s look to history: when the Iberian Peninsula fell to the Muslims, it took 700 years to reconquer it – and that was with most of the rest of Europe free. How long will the Reconquista take, if the whole West should fall? None of us will live to see it! But if we fail to wake up, we may live to see that fall.

Again I ask: is this really what we want?

 


• And more generally, multiculturalism and mass immigration, which – far from being a source of strength – weakens and breaks down cultural cohesiveness and integrity, and damages the host culture’s ability to defend itself against attacks both from within and from without. But Islam is the most significant unifying force among many of these immigrants, especially in Europe, and increasingly in the U.S., too.

The Anglophilic Anglican is creating a defense of Western Christendom | Patreon

07-british-empire-lion

Source: The Anglophilic Anglican is creating a defense of Western Christendom | Patreon

A gentle reminder, dear friends: if you like what you read here, and would like to provide some tangible support as I do what I can to defend Western Christendom in her time of travail, please be kind enough to visit my Patreon page, and consider becoming a Patron of The Anglophilic Anglican. Your generous patronage is greatly appreciated!

Up to Two-Thirds of Sub-Saharan Africa’s 1.1 Billion People Want to Migrate to the EU, U.S.

An African migrant flashes the victory gesture after disembarking following his rescue from off the coast of Zawiyah, about 45 kilometres west of the Libyan capital Tripoli, at the dock at the capital's naval base on March 10, 2018. / AFP PHOTO / MAHMUD TURKIA (Photo credit should read MAHMUD TURKIA/AFP/Getty Images)

Researchers found that it is not just poverty or terror… that is driving mass migration, but because Africans want to imitate their friends and relatives who have already successfully illegally immigrated to Europe.

Source: Up to Two-Thirds of Sub-Saharan Africa’s 1.1 Billion People Want to Migrate to the EU, U.S.

We have GOT to stop thinking of this as a “humanitarian issue,” and start understanding it as what it is: an invasion!

And then, begin responding accordingly.

If we do not, the West is doomed.