The natural world is one of balance. When equilibrium is disturbed Nature takes corrective action to restore balance. Le Châtelier’s Principle states that when a system in equilibrium is subjected to a stress, the system will adjust in order to counteract that stress and a new equilibrium is achieved. Le Châtelier was concerned with chemistry, but his principle translates to a wider array of systems.
Economists apply the same principle to financial systems. An electric current induced by a changing magnetic field flows in the direction which opposes the changing magnetic field which created it. Predator and prey populations ebb and flow according to the relative stresses acting upon them. When we get hot we sweat in order to cool ourselves through evaporation.
Groups of humans are equally subject to the consequences of their actions, even though they may be unintended or unforeseen. Fruitful, successful populations thrive. Groups who celebrate a culture of hedonism and infertility will decline. The practices of successful peoples become traditions and those of failed peoples become forgotten. Widespread societal dysfunction, especially with respect to reproduction, is terminal.
Problems take care of themselves. This is often cited as an example as to why unnatural ideologies cannot sustain themselves and that we should all relax about the marching of the various feminist, homosexual and atheist agitations of the Left. Homosexuals, feminists, atheists and urbanite liberals generally have fewer children than more conservative leaning people. Their appearance in society should be regarded as an aberration which will eventually correct itself, in theory. There is however an important caveat to this. The solution you get may not be the solution you want.
What is the real problem?
It’s easy to alarm people to the danger of radical Islam, or indeed any foreign religion or culture. They treat women badly, they’re terrorists, they worship a false god, they smell bad and wear funny clothes. These things are easy to sell to the mainstream population who can salve their conscience by heaping all their problems onto something else.
A much more difficult labour is convincing people that our greatest problems are entirely of our own making, and that it is us that should change. People like having something to blame, and they prefer it to be somebody else. They don’t like to be told that they are a part of the problem, for that would require them to change, do work and not be as comfortable. Blaming others is easier than overcoming yourself. When they can blame Islam and immigration, they can remain firmly rooted in their armchairs even as the world around them falls apart.
With a magic, thermonuclear wand we could create a world where Islam and the entire Third World disappears entirely and forever. An intoxicating fantasy for some, but our problems would still remain. We would still be an ageing, shrinking population. We would still be divorced from our own history and traditions. We would still be ruled by liars and thieves. Children would still grow up without fathers and masculine role models. There would be no mechanism to protect young girls from themselves. HIV infection rates would still be growing faster than your savings account. We would still be exhausting ourselves paying for an enormous welfare state and the useless dependent class it has spawned. Pornography. Drugs. Obesity. The debasement of marriage. All of this would still be going on.
Modernity’s false solution
A fallacy has emerged in thinking that we can combat radical Islam by taking up political positions diametrically opposed to its principles and doubling down on the egalitarianism and degeneracy of the crumbling West. Less religion. Less tradition. More mindless consumption, abortions and gay pride parades. This is the modern false solution to Islam.
It’s similar to the way that libertarianism emerged as the Un-Communism whereby libertarian principles were merely Communist principles turned on their head. Rejecting all and everything of an ideology means that you also reject the fundamental things which make that ideology successful and a threat in the first place. The fight over Islam’s perceived mistreatment of women is a modernist red herring. They marry their women young, dress them modestly and have lots of children. This is precisely what makes Islam successful and dangerous. The West does the complete opposite and it is dying.
Just as you cannot beat Communism with rugged individualism, the fight against Islam will not be fought by strong, independent single mothers and godless progressives. It will not be not fought in order to preserve the rights of slatternly women to walk around half-naked, get drunk and kill the unborn children that arise from one night stands, nor for the rights of homosexuals to terrorise Christian businesses.
Instead it requires a European society which is robust, fertile and devout. In other words, not the Un-Islam, opposed on every principle, but an equal and opposite force, masculine, nativist, European and Reactionary. Indeed, if we do not provide the disaffected young men of Europe something suitably Reactionary, then they will find it themselves in Islam.
Rome then and Europe today
A society of shrieking single mothers and wayward, dissolute men is not a society at all. If a nation cannot do the basic job of reproducing itself while in the presence of a highly fertile and fiercely patriarchal alien culture then it doesn’t deserve to exist, and in time it won’t. If a nation does not produce the men who are willing and able to take ownership of their nation then it will find itself unable to stand against the march of men who will.
Radical Islam is not the problem. It’s a problem, but it’s not the problem. It is not even a symptom of the problem. Radical Islam has appeared and prospered in the West as a natural reaction to our declining society, and our failure to address and correct the problems. Islam is merely one possible solution, albeit a solution we would prefer not to happen. A healthy society should not fear barbarians at its gates.
The sack of Rome by the Goths and then the Vandals was the result of a dying and defective society. Rome was riddled with problems of its own making which it wasn’t willing to solve. The Roman Empire did not so much fall as it was instead fixed. It was not the barbarians who were the problem, but the Romans themselves. The barbarians were the solution.
This would not have been much comfort to those Romans who were killed or enslaved, but with hindsight we can see that if Rome were to survive then it would have needed to have fixed itself long before the barbarians laid siege to Rome. By then it was too late. The solution had been provided for them, although it wasn’t the solution they wanted.
Reading Edward Gibbon’s History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire makes one realise just how deep the parallels run between the last days of Rome and Western civilisation today. In the fall of Rome we have our warning from history. Today, Islam is the solution we do not want.