While it seems like every major story on the planet involves the Trump administration, things have actually been rather interesting in the rest of the world. Under the leadership of former ski bum Justin Trudeau, our neighbor to the north seems to be embracing some of the values that have made Europe so inhospitable to its indigenous population.

As Barbara Kay has explained both in print and other media, the proposed law by a Muslim MP targeting Islamophobia is simply a pretext to police inconvenient thought which happens to offend the political class. Keep in mind, the country was no bastion of free speech before discussion of this non-binding resolution discussed in the House of Commons of Canada. The long prosecution of Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant for dissident speech, as well as the demise of Free Dominion at the hands of inquisitor Richard Warman, attest to that.

The idea that this is simply a noble effort to protect Canada’s ruthlessly persecuted Muslim minority is belied by the robust effort that community has made to make acceptance of Islam by Canadian natives mandatory. Contrary to popular belief among the ruling class and its eager supplicants, Islamophobia is not a real issue. The terms itself is an ad hominem meant to distract from the disturbing frequency with which the adherents to Islam murder/intimidate those who are not.

If you want to experience what real fear looks like, I suggest you take a trip to Europe, where the paragons of virtue that run that continent have turned a glorious civilization into what increasingly looks like a garrison state. From the bullet-proof glass wall built around the base of the Eiffel Tower, announced in the wake of a respectful Egyptian’s jihadist machete attack at the Louvre and several thwarted Islamic terror attacks, to the fence being constructed between Latvia and Russia, to the Catholic pensioners being murdered by Saudi migrants, there are signs everywhere that Europe is under siege.

The fact that European governments are persecuting those who speak the truth about the wave of migrant crime merely serves to illustrate how warped the values which animate Europe’s ruling class are. That they continue to entrust with power, however ceremonial it may be, the same people who brought their continent to the brink of the abyss demonstrates how disconnected they are from the anger and discontent animating Europeans in France, Denmark, the Netherlands and throughout a continent being ravaged by undiluted multiculturalism, moral relativism, and perpetual open borders.

The fact that the vast majority of Europeans vehemently oppose further Muslim immigration is deemed irrelevant by those who want to transform the continent of Europe. Those who rule have made the replacement of Western peoples with Islamic settlers a priority, despite the intense suffering of the Middle East’s persecuted Christian minority, and woe to anyone who opposes this grand project. 2016 was not the end of the fight against this mentality-which has governed the West for over half a century-it was just the beginning.

Update: Yes, I realize that this image macro has a typo, but there’s only so much proper grammar you can expect from people on the Internet. 

One of the more  arresting scenes in Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s memoir takes place when she visits her dying father in a London hospital. A man that despised the West, who tried to force his daughter into an arranged marriage which would have enslaved her to purdah for the rest of her natural life, yet exploited its generosity and technological prowess in order to prolong his existence, the dialogue between father and daughter vividly illustrates the problem of Muslim integration.

An even starker, more immediate contrast between these two irreconcilable civilizations occurred earlier in that chapter, when Ayaan was walking towards her father’s deathbed and came across a group of women-presumably-enshrouded in niqabs. Women who proudly  embraced a symbol of 7th century Arab-Muslim hegemony and hatred of Western values were now defiantly walking through Europe’s commercial capital. The shock evinced by Ayaan, who was born into the Hawiye tribe in the Horn of Africa, merely served to demonstrate the journey-not only in distance, but in mentality-which she had made over the 4 decades of her life, and the emotional and intellectual stagnancy so many others who came there remain mired in.

I was reminded of these scenes while reading about the latest atrocity perpetrated by a Somali refugee, or a Norwegian-Somali, in the bizarre parlance of the UK press, on the streets of London. It’s difficult to say whether the political leaders who have brought this dystopian hell-scape to our shores fully understand the implications of what they’re doing, or if they even care. As others have pointed out, the woman who once (correctly) branded multiculturalism a failure has now come around to the conclusion that the people who she rules need to fuck off. It’s entirely possible that our current political class simply believes that the periodic bloodlettings of infidels, systemic rape and sexual dehumanization of Western women, and psychic terror inflicted upon the indigenous population is the cost for vibrant diversity. The enormous powers they’ve accumulated in the process, including encroachments upon the speech and free assembly of their most prominent critics, simply being a fringe benefit.

However, it’s worth contemplating what the end game of these catastrophically stupid politicians looks like. After all, it’s hard to see how you preserve your cherished modern nostrums of LGBTQ rights whilst importing millions of people who would like nothing more than to throw gay men and gender non-conformists off of the highest rooftop. Just ask the residents of Europe’s former gay Mecca, Amsterdam, if  you can catch them when they’re not fleeing from their country’s newest additions. Enlightened liberals rightly condemn the shameful treatment of scientific visionary Alan Turing, yet the fact is that he would have probably been hung from a crane if he lived in a nation whose cultural peculiarities these same progressives demand we understand and even accept.

But what if the nastier byproducts of Islamic, third world immigration, e.g. honor killings, Taharrush, and attempting to assassinate people who draw things, could be magically eliminated before these folks crossed customs? Wouldn’t the ineluctable pull of diversity convince you to embrace the importation of millions from Somalia, Bangladesh, and the like? Well, no, I don’t think it would. Even if I were to accept the somewhat implausible story that the latest murder spree in the heart of Europe had nothing to do with Islamic dogma, I’m still not certain how this is a justification for completely effacing the historic American nation and European continent.

Perhaps this truly was an instance of a mentally unstable young man going postal, and not a carefully plotted jihadist plot. But even if that’s the case, I fail to find that reassuring. As numerous international bodies have documented over the past 3 decades, the rate of untreated mental illness in Somalia is astronomical. I described a case of one such disturbed young woman several years ago, but that portrait is by no means an aberration. The idea that we’re helping mentally unbalanced individuals by transporting them into a wholly alien culture, putting them on the dole, and asking them to integrate-much less enhancing the quality of life in our nations-is so absurd as a proposition that it could only be accepted by someone completely divorced from reality.

We’re being asked to accept the notion that the deracination of millions from the third world, who have a completely different value system and religious ethic than the people they’ll be forced to interact with for the rest of their lives, is somehow a brilliant idea. This is why cultural Marxism is a mental illness.

Update: The jihadist truck driver, Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel, was known to police, naturally. 

English language updates from Michael Horowitz. 

What we know. 

A timeline of the attack. 

The Nice attack: a firsthand account. 

What pathological altruism looks like. 

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. 

Flashback. 

A reasonable solution. 

A column written by Pat Buchanan in the wake of the Pulse night club massacre. 

Let’s not forget the real victims of this horrific event. Muslims who might briefly feel guilty about the massacres of innocent human beings which their co-religionists routinely commit. 

State of emergency. 

More coverage of the ongoing terror attack in Nice. 

A minimum of 60 fatalities. 

What will it take?!

Unconfirmed local reports that the driver has died.

Yet another attempted mass murder in the streets of France. Follow live coverage on Sky News. More photos and video coverage, courtesy of Heavy.

To paraphrase the late Joe Sobran, hate speech is any speech liberals hate. Now that leading Web giants and the EU superstate have cemented a pact to target this pernicious threat to civilization, we’ll all have a better understanding of what exactly the egalitarian left considers to be hateful. The question remains, what do we to in order to make our voices heard in the face of an open conspiracy to silence them? The first step is refusing to be cowed into submission. A perfect response, which utilizes Twitter’s platform in order to expose the cowardice and hypocrisy of this campaign, is the I Stand With Hate Speech hashtag.

Aside from leveraging media attention to highlight our perspective, it also rejects the central premise of our ideological opponents. Namely, that we can be shamed into not expressing opinions which dissent from the culturally Marxist weltanschauung. One of the most powerful tools in the regressive left’s arsenal is its willingness to declare widely held, factually based beliefs off-limits. To delegitimize perfectly acceptable thoughts through a campaign of intellectual intimidation-a campaign aided by the cowardice and lack of will displayed by its opponents. We can’t defeat the left without disarming social progressives of one of their chief weapons, and the only way to do that is by refusing to be shamed.

Per Gavin McInnes, these people feed upon admissions of guilt from their enemies. They refuse to debate the actual issues because their arguments are meritless, which is why they focus upon extracting confessions from those who hold heretical opinions, a la the medieval Roman Catholic Church. Truckling to their demands does not make them more conciliatory or open to dialogue. To the contrary, it only emboldens them, as liberal college professors and presidents throughout the country have discovered through their encounters with the Black Lives Matter mob. These people do not want to entertain a rational discussion, they want a pound-or several pounds-of flesh from their enemies.

The only proper response to this jihad against free thought and expression is…fuck you. We won’t apologize for or minimize our beliefs because they are correct-and held by one of the most enlightened human beings on the planet, BTW. Imbecilic buzzwords like “xenophobe” and “racist” should have no impact on someone who realizes their intent, which is simply to bully you into submission. We all need to shed our fear of ostracism, like Pax Dickinson, which is paralyzing and inimical to the preservation of Western civilization. Regardless of one’s feelings about Donald Trump, and I’m the first to concede that he’s a deeply flawed candidate, he must be praised for being the first national conservative to confront the social justice warriors and their media enablers on their own terms.

The specter of a man who simply refuses to be shamed into obeisance, who rejects the cultural shibboleths of the institutional left, has sent the media into a tailspin and forced social progressives to reexamine their entire political strategy. After all, what do you do when the only weapon in your rhetorical arsenal, i.e. condemning your opponents for their non-bien pensant views, is a dud?

There are a number of strategies the right can and should implement as its ability to broadcast its political philosophy becomes increasingly circumscribed. Leveraging new media against one another is one such possibility. Creating our own platforms, professional and compelling ones, to disseminate our views is essential. But so is using existing platforms which are committed to the free exchange of ideas, even those ideas which challenge the prevailing kultursmog. One of the most heartening recent developments is the proliferation of Bitcoin, which gives ordinary individuals a decentralized alternative to the existing government-created and administered fiscal institutions.

Even so, I think what we need to keep in mind while pursuing all of these paths is the need to internalize a rejection of the left in its entirety. Not simply the principles of the left, but its primary mode of discourse, which includes a refusal to accede to any of its premises-including their demand that you apologize or modify what you believe because it’s “racist,” “sexist,” or “xenophobic.” We need to follow the lead of the late Andrew Breitbart, as well as men like Mark Steyn, Gavin McInnes, and Ezra Levant, and tell our enemies that they don’t get to dictate the terms of debate. They don’t get to force us to voluntarily give them our scalps as a sign of contrition for having transgressed leftist norms.

Our enemies need to be crushed, and the first step to doing so is refusing to bend the knee to their soul-enervating, culturally destructive, idiotic beliefs. Just as the soldiers of Allah gain strength through the cowardice of their enemies, the left is likewise empowered by any sign of weakness or contrition. The only solution to this problem is to be bold and proudly declare your beliefs, regardless of the consequences. It’s not only a risk dispersal strategy but a sound philosophy of life. Don’t allow your enemies to choose the field of battle, it’s a sure-fire way to be defeated, which is something we cannot afford as a civilization. It’s time we stopped being penitents and started being aggressors.

When I first saw the now infamous Google doodle published last week I was a bit perplexed. Was every social justice warrior’s favorite search engine honoring an unsung Asian suffragette, or perhaps one of Anita Sarkeesian’s cyber-feminist forebears? As it turns out, Google was paying tribute to a Marxist, anti-American demagogue who admired cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal and the late Al Qaeda emir Osama Bin Laden. Yuri Kochiyama would cut an odd figure today, coming as she did from what’s now one of the most well-educated and generally well-off non-white ethnicities in this country; a group which politically is more often associated with the liberal, yet deeply patriotic, Japanese-Americans living in Hawaii than avowed Maoist revolutionaries. Even her experience as Nisei living during an era where she and her family were interned for years and dispossessed of their worldly possessions doesn’t fully explain her radicalism when you consider the path taken by her  contemporaries under similar circumstances. 

However, there was an undercurrent of Leninist and culturally Marxist thought running through the Asian-American community during the peak of ’60s and ’70s radicalism, even among normally staid Japanese-Americans. Although never approaching the critical challenge posed to the state by Communists in Japan, which has been chronicled brilliantly by novelist Haruki Murakami, this subculture did exist within the United States. The fact that Ms. Kochiyama existed is not nearly as curious, for some people, as the reasons behind Google’s decision to honor her on its flagship search page. Of course, for those of us who are immersed-unfortunately-in the ideological warfare that has engulfed more and more of the private sphere, the fact that the most-visited website in the world would choose to valorize a woman with a burning hatred of the United States is not surprising in the least. Although the creators of and executives within Google are doctrinaire Democrats, I have no doubt that they would categorically reject any association with the founder of Al Qaeda and the Great Helmsman-although I wouldn’t describe them as the sworn enemies of the Chinese Communist Party either. That said, the climate within their company is such that there is no internal pushback against a decision to extol thoroughly loathsome individuals who would have crushed Google in its cradle, if given the opportunity.

If you think I’m jumping to conclusions, I would direct your attention to the case of my friend Oleg Atbashian, creator of the coruscating satirical website known as The People’s Cube. A site that was purged from Google’s database in such a comprehensive and swift manner that it would have made the man of steel himself blush, and which was only restored after a successful, nationally publicized Internet campaign on its behalf. Of course, Google representative Matt Cutts denied any political motivation behind his company’s initial decision to cast TPC into the Outer Darkness, which seems to be a common refrain for Web behemoths accused of purposefully manipulating what you come across online. It seems like a convenient dodge, especially when they have repeatedly done things which cast doubt in the minds of their critics, such as cut off the advertising stream to conservative weblogs and ban advertising for perfectly legal products which are being targeted by powerful government officials and leftist grievance organizations.

Tomorrow, I’ll examine another global source of information-and disinformation-which has been accused of distorting the online playing field in much the same way.

For those of you still laboring under the impression that Islam is not at war with the West-including the presumptive Democratic nominee for President-I have some shocking news. It turns out that the followers of Mohammed have other ideas. The plan to assassinate free speech, counterjihad activist Pamela Geller-which was, thankfully, thwarted through the work of the FBI and a tactically placed drone strike-was simply one of many plots devised by jihadist networks which have agents inside of the United States. Networks that have yet to be penetrated by American human intelligence and which now have a steady supply of recruits thanks to horrifically misguided immigration policies.

What should continue to infuriate those of you who have been paying attention is the way this issue is being framed by willfully ignorant and/or malicious hacks within the enemedia. A typical example of journalistic malpractice can be found in the Daily Mail, which-as Robert Spencer points out-has the strange distinction of being the newspaper most preoccupied with the Islamification of Europe while simultaneously denying that Islam itself is a problem. Apparently, the target of at least 2 known assassination plots provoked her would-be murderers by publicly dissenting from the dogma promulgated by the Fourth Estate’s favorite religion. A religion which is unique in enjoying blanket immunity from criticism.

Perhaps that has something to do with how adherents to the Religion of Peace deal with legitimate critiques of their faith. A pattern of violence and coercion that can be traced back to the founder of this religion, who himself didn’t countenance rational criticism. This campaign of brutality and intolerance has been so successful that it has silenced all but a few courageous voices in the West, which in turn makes it that much easier for jihadists to hunt down its intended targets, a reality which hasn’t been lost on Mark Steyn. It has also turned the mainstream media, ranging from commercial and public broadcasting networks-both radio and television-cable news, national and regional newspapers, and incredibly powerful websites into mouthpieces for the most retrograde, illiberal ideology known to man.

One wonders if the people asserting that Pamela Geller “provoked” these Islamic bombs-duds, fortunately, in this case-feel the same way about Gerard O’Neill and Dick Lehr. Did they provoke mobster James Bulger Jr. through their critical investigative reporting into his murderous criminal empire? What about controversial author and radio host Howie Carr? Was the grizzled Irish mobster nicknamed Whitey justified in his attempt to eliminate Carr for his insolence? Employing the logic used by the regressive left to slander Geller and her allies in the counter-jihad movement, one would come to that ineluctable conclusion.

What’s perplexing  is the implicit assumption that by blackening the name of  notorious “Islamophobes” and trying to preempt any public debate on the nature of Islam these journalists are assuring their own safety, which could not be further from the truth. The idea that you can somehow preserve the institutions of Western civilization  for yourself while eroding them for your perceived enemies-who actually believe in and exercise those values, unlike your reactionary Islamist allies-is a staggering form of cognitive dissonance. The brutal, globally shared execution of non-right wing, non-Islamophobic journalist Steven Sotloff should have demonstrated this, if the murder of dozens of other journalists, NGO workers, and even an Israel-hating, Italian Marxist did not. Somehow, the rather elementary notion that you can’t compromise with people who demand your complete and utter submission-up to and including your own death-hasn’t penetrated the minds of those who man North American and European news desks.

The collective amnesia these individuals must suffer from is astounding to contemplate. I would recommend reading The Camp of the Saints, a grim portrait of the future of the West, but I doubt it would change their minds, which seem predetermined to ignore any portions of reality which conflict with their surreal conception of human nature. Then again, there’s always the chance that some will come to their senses. If so, perhaps Pamela Geller won’t be our Cassandra. If not, we have a bleak future, and many regrets, ahead of us.

Paul Weston’s speech, unfortunately, has been removed from Youtube. However, watching this question and answer session-while you still can-will be an illuminating experience, rest assured. The lecture he had originally planned to deliver was quashed, naturally, by brutal, anti-Western thugs who happen to make their habitation in Canada. Illustrating, once again, the obstacles we face in spreading the truth about the greatest threat to Western civilization in the contemporary era.

Ezra Levant points out, once again, the stupidity of those overseeing Europe’s migrant crisis by traveling to Malmo, one of the first cities in a post-European Europe. A continent that many of its inhabitants find increasingly uninhabitable.

Ezra Levant captures what’s wrong with the current state of affairs in a nutshell. Glenn Reynolds contributes his own insightful thoughts to the thwarted Islamic terror attack in France in USA Today.