This was originally published at the Gates of Vienna.
The following essay by Fjordman was published a few days ago in Dagbladet. Many thanks to Cecilie for the translation.
I have challenged Marie Simonsen, commentator in Dagbladet, to provide some concrete examples of places where Muslims have lived peacefully with their non-Muslim neighbors over longer periods of time. Personally, I don’t think any such place exists, which means that the term Islamophobia, so frequently used by her newspaper and others, is completely meaningless.
In an essay of 27 October, Rune Berglund Steen, head of communications at the Centre against Racism, claims that one can turn my original question on its head and ask whether Christians are able to live in harmony with their neighbors.
I am sure that is possible, although it is striking to notice that the Centre against Racism doesn’t even attempt to answer the original question. Some would speculate that this is because they cannot answer it. Islam’s bloody borders with other peoples, from Thailand to the Middle East, are well-known and well-documented.
Thomas Hylland Eriksen from the University of Oslo points out that Han Chinese commit atrocities against Tibetans, whites against blacks and blacks against whites. “The list of groups who cannot always live peacefully together would be a long one,” according to him.
Islam is not a completely necessary ingredient for creating conflicts, which we can see in Northern Ireland and other places. I have never been foolish enough to claim that this is the case; I am merely pointing out that Islam will dramatically increase the likelihood of serious conflicts. I am currently halfway through an English language book about how Islam in my view cannot be reformed. I would be happy to publish an essay about this topic under my real name if any newspaper dares to print it, which is doubtful.
It is true that the potential for conflict exists between closely related European and Asian nations even when Islam is not present. What does that mean? Ironically, it means that Hylland Eriksen, perhaps the country’s most prominent Multicultural ideologue, and the Centre against Racism have themselves smashed the foundations of their own ideology, apparently without realizing it. World history shows, unfortunately, that ethnic diversity strongly increases the risk of serious conflicts.
The Nordic countries’ greatest advantage, historically speaking, has been an ethnically homogeneous population. Our greatest competitive advantage is now being destroyed by state-sponsored politics. As an analogy, let’s say you had a big pile of gold and professor Thomas Hylland Eriksen told you to flush half of the gold down the toilet because this was supposed to be economically beneficial.
Hylland Eriksen said in an interview in 2008 that “The most important ‘blank spot’ now consists of deconstructing the majority so thoroughly that it can never be called the majority again”. If he had said that Somalis or Pakistanis should be deconstructed, this would have triggered strong reactions. Why is it always white Europeans, and only them, who are to be deconstructed and have their countries and cultural history taken away from them?
The political scientist Øystein Hetland described me on 31 October as an extremist, among other reasons because I am very critical towards Islam, and ask what it takes to make a democratic society work. I wrote the following on Gates of Vienna on the occasion of my fifth anniversary as Fjordman: “Are Islamic teachings inherently violent? Yes. Can Islam be reformed? No. Can Islam be reconciled with our way of life? No. Is there such as thing as a moderate Islam? No. Can we continue to allow Muslims to settle in our countries? No.”
These few sentences contain all the information about Islam you will ever need. Do I regret writing this? No. One ought to tell the truth, even when it is unpleasant.