By Morten Messerschmidt of Dansk Folkeparti
June 5th, 2008
Last Monday (Pakistan, June 2nd 2008) we again experienced the tragic reality of the 21st century. Terror struck at Denmark — and we now find ourselves with such countries as UK, US, Spain, etc., singled out by Islamic fundamentalists as their main enemy. And why? Well, if you ask Radikale Venstre [centrist political party], we have only ourselves to blame. We shouldn’t have been sticking our necks out. If we had pursued a less active foreign policy, we would not have disturbed anyone, and thus no one would have disturbed us — this is the cheap world view on the Danish political left wing.
Unfortunately, the world is more complex than this.
When terrorists increasingly strike Western targets — in particular in those countries spearheading the fight for freedom, democracy and the rule of law — this is due to the Islamic fundamentalists feeling themselves under pressure. They feel under pressure in Iraq, in Afghanistan — and in the countries they rule, where their model for society leads only to stagnation. On the other hand, they feel encouraged by the fact that never before have so many Muslims lived in non-Islamic countries. Their fingers are itching to declare Jihad.
At the beginning of the 21st century the citizens of the West constitute only 14% of the world’s population. By 2025 it is expected to be only 10% because our population is in decline. On the other hand, we see Muslim minorities having a significantly higher rate of birth than the Europeans. This is the hope the fundamentalists attach their aspirations to — the hope that Europe one day will have an Islamic majority and the Caliphate can be reestablished. This is by no means a remote utopian dream — and the independence of Kosovo has fueled that dream anew.
However, simultaneously with the hope to spread Islam to the entire world, the Islamic countries in the Middle East are hovering on the brink of collapse. The demographic development by itself provides part of the explanation — in 1950 Iraq had a population of 5.3 million, Saudi Arabia 3.2 million. In 2000, the population of Iraq was 25.1 million and that of Saudi Arabia 21.5 million. In 2050, the UN expects the two countries to have populations of 63.7 million and 49.5 million, respectively.
No culture and no society can create food, jobs, housing, water, education or other basic necessities to match such an explosive population growth. And as opposed to the development in Europe, where social causes and poverty led to revolutions and reforms, the mindset of the Islamic civilization is so radically different from ours so that revolutions in our sense do not take place, only reactionary anti-solutions.
- - - - - - - - -
Our part of the world never had extensive natural resources. Our economic success is not based on richness of nature, but on the particular world view and ideals that arose during the Renaissance. From this arose a form of organization and working that created the conditions for a rational, democratic and highly productive society.
The poverty in the ‘Third World’ is not caused by lack of natural resources. Poverty arises, as does wealth, from the collective contents of a culture, its religion, values, traditions, language, institutions, art and organization.
Last summer I again had the joy of visiting Israel. A country which I admire and consider a strong alliance partner for Denmark. When comparing Israel to its neighbors, one truly realizes the significance of differences in culture. Israel is a democratic, modern, and highly diligent country — in spite of the fact that it has had less than a century to build it, and is largely situated in an infertile desert. Arabs around them have created nothing but desert — mentally and physically. Yes, for where Islam advances, so does the desert.
It is thus no wonder that some cultures cause people to flee them, and some cultures become attractive to refugees. Only a culture granting freedom of thought and speech, to create a personal life — only such a culture can create functional societies. While the West has created progress and let the ideals of freedom propagate, Islam is still dominated by a closedness and totalitarianism which tightens the grasp on its adherents and turns back development, away from the modern world and into the ignorance and religious fanaticism of the Middle Ages.
I remember when as a child my mother would make me watch movies about young people who, lured with promises of never-ending friendship and eternal salvation were pulled into a cult that completely absorbed their lives. The movies were an attempt by my mother to induce independence and to show me how to say ‘No’. Only now have I come to recall these movies — now that the increasing number of headscarves make me understand my mothers’ fear.
How can anyone, raised in one of the countries that gave rise to universal suffrage, after having attended Danish public school, and after having a normal Danish childhood, suddenly acquire the idea that women may not show the least bit of skin to the outer world, may not be alone in a room with other men, may not shake hands with men or look them into their eyes? What kind of brainwashing have these girls been exposed to — how do they turn into covered, scared and disturbed little girls, who prefer to live under male domination, disguised as religious requirements, rather than as a free person?
Now I understand what my mother feared. The extensive nihilism and shame of being Christian and Danish makes young people, through its lack of conviction, easy victims of indoctrinating sects. Here they can find the prescribed way to live life in each and every detail, which seems a much more attractive choice than the wilderness of choices offered by a life in freedom.
In a society where anything is possible, the weaker of the young are naturally attracted to sects, where they through convincing speech are offered a prescription for what to eat, how to dress, what they may say, whom they may talk to, whom they may look at, when they must sleep, when they must pray, etc. The answer to all questions of life can be found in the will of God. And God cannot be wrong, can he…? Precisely as God could not be wrong, when hundreds of young people in the US took their own lives in the firm belief that aliens would lead them to a higher form of life. Or be wrong in the sick sex-cults, which occasionally are heard of in the press. Or be wrong for the poor people who have lived now for a year in a hole in the ground in Russia. God is never wrong — this is the advantage of being God. Or rather — of writing political manifests in the name of God.
I fear — as do many Danish parents, I believe — that my daughter one day might come home and explain that through such a sect she has found the proper contents of life. That she might have found the truth and that she from that point no longer may look her father or other men straight in their eyes, but instead would cover up in a prison of clothing, that she may claim only half inheritance, that her witness at court has only half the weight — and other sick ideas, that such sects are able to brainwash their adherents with.
Until recently I did not believe that we in Denmark should see the expansion of a sect like those who in the movies possessed the hearts and heads of our young. Never had I thought that Danish girls would prefer repression over freedom. I thought this took place only in movies and in the mind of a few confused individuals. I was wrong.
And for this reason it is vital that we work for a global unity of what values must prevail. The war in Iraq shows clearly how difficult it is to change a culture. One may wonder, then, how come most westerners understand the problems of bringing our values of freedom and human rights to the Islamic countries, but on the other hand carry the conviction that Muslims will become secularized the moment they arrive in Europe. Actually, the opposite is the case.
The regional government of Nordrhein-Westfalen has sponsored a large research report among second generation Turkish immigrants in Germany, and found that 20% of them consider the use of violence acceptable to enforce Islam.
Large population groups in Europe feel positive towards Sharia. Even highly educated people share this demand. The perpetrators of 9/11 were highly educated. Highly educated Muslim girls in Denmark defend the murder of Theo van Gogh. And during the Muhammad crisis we experienced large demonstrations, torched embassies and a large majority of Muslims in Denmark demanding restrictions on freedom of expression.
As a response to the terrorism we are told that we should give up our national independence and let EU fix the problems. But EU has given up on immigration and does not desire to protect its borders. The leading countries in the European Union — France, Germany, Belgium — have not understood that the dictators have to be overthrown in order to create progress. They have in the past achieved great profits by striking deals with the dictators. Recall, for example, how most of Saddam Hussein’s weapons were made in France.
For this reason, the European Union is scared silly of hearing the critical voice of its citizens. This is the reason we were denied referendums on the new treaty. This is why the Danish parliament refuses to accept the proposal by Dansk Folkeparti to at least send each citizen a copy of the Lisbon Treaty. In spite of the fact that the new treaty transfers unprecedented amounts of power to the European Union. Matters of foreign policy, social and employment policies are now to be matters of the European Union. And the new Charter of Fundamental Rights makes the European Court of Justice the sole arbiter of our civil liberties, and that in the light of Europe having to be increasingly diverse and multicultural.
The European Union also intends that anyone with a legal residence in one European country can move freely to another and settle there. If you have merely crossed the Eastern border, which in large areas is completely unguarded, well, then you have access to the Europe without borders.
The new EU agency for human rights is going to pick up policy from the Beate Winkler Center, to register Europeans not toeing the line on multicultural ideology. A couple of years ago it was discovered that the center was covering up a report on anti-Semitism in Europe. Entirely against her anti-European malice the report described clearly that the increasing number of assaults against Jews were largely done by young Muslims. This scandal, however, has not kept the EU from upgrading the institute to an agency, with a much larger number of employees and extensive funding. Further, Beate Winkler has been replaced with Morten Kjærum, who we only know too well.
The European Union is refusing to face up to reality. In June 2003 the Commission published a report claiming there was no correlation between immigration, crime and unemployment. The facts on the ground were explained away by racism among the Europeans and in the media. The EU is silent about the fact that immigration from the Islamic world also imports the traditions of these countries for violence against women and the entire culture of violence common in most Islamic countries. The EU wishes to hide the fact that Muslim immigrants have a very low frequency of employment, and that the poverty problems of the Arab countries are moving along with them to Europe. Rather than telling the citizens the truth, information is being hushed up, researches are being frozen out — and instead they impose a dictionary of political correctness, trying to ban words such as “Islamic terrorism”.
The European Union is not a solution to the problems of Europe. The EU is part of the problem itself. We have but one chance to save civilization and the stability of the West in the 21st century. We must extend the best of this civilization in peaceful cooperation with others. And a large majority of the people share the desire for such a cooperation.
Unfortunately, the United Nations is now dominated by madmen such as Robert Mugabe and Ahmadinejad. My message to the UN must therefore be: Let the mad, undemocratic regimes take over UN. We do not need to join company with these countries and provide them a platform for their endless attacks on civil liberties and the free world. Apart from the Security Council we do not need the United Nations. We do need, however, United Democracies. The UN has served its purpose — and today, when the War on Terror increasingly is a battle of values and ideologies, those of us who share the ideals of freedom and democracy must stand together against those who seek to destroy our world.
Unfortunately, even internally in our civilization we have people who struggle against freedom. The European Union is working for a multicultural Europe, of which the Lisbon Treaty is a clear example of. The cultural nihilists of the Left are preaching humanism, human rights, anti-racism — and subsequently denouncing anything with a trace of nationality and national pride. The old nation-states are to be destroyed; anyone will have the right to cross the borders, settle wherever they desire, and enjoy the fruits of what others have created.
In Germany, England, the Netherlands, Belgium, France and Sweden, the feeling of national identity has successfully been subjugated, creating countries with insecure and bewildered citizens. People are seeing their history revoked, their identity, their pride. This is very skillfully done by the Left, who in most of the old part of the EU dominate the educational system and most of the media.
The nations are gradually losing their option to wield any political power. The EU elite with the new treaty — the one we’re not permitted to vote on — are doing all they can to further multiculturalism, for the simple reason that Europe is much easier to govern if there is no sense of national identity. The more power is centralized, the more opaque society becomes for the citizen, and the more irrelevant democracy becomes.
The Danish government seems to aim for a vote on our EU opt-outs this fall. Last week the minister of finance asked the parliament for funding for such a campaign. Which by itself is natural. What is odd is that the government refuses to tell us what the vote will be about, when the voting is to take place, and how long a campaign we will be having. How can the parliament reasonably approve funding for a campaign we do not know the particulars of?
I must say, in honesty, that the way the Danish government handles this affair is disappointing. While our prime minister has stated clearly to the foreign media that the government wants to remove our opt-outs, it has completely stopped providing information at home. We know very well that secret negotiations between the EU-supporting parties are taking place — and this is exactly the reason that we deserve a clear answer. In the Danish Peoples Party we are prepared to fight for the cause. For this is a matter of Danish freedom.
Since the euro was introduced [translator’s note: Denmark does not participate, and has its own currency], Danish economy has reached an all-time high. The previous minister of finance happened to say that if the trend continues, we’d be able to purchase the whole world. So why remove a currency that has given us such marvelous results? And what exactly is this ‘euro-table’ the government craves to be sitting at? The countries already in the eurozone are stating clearly that there’s no influence to be had.
It would be even more problematic if the government puts our opt-out on justice and domestic affairs up for vote. We all know that our strict immigration policy needs reservations against the EU immigration policy. The rules, which since 2001 have limited immigration, cannot be upheld if the legal opt-out is removed. And we would then be part of the common legal policy, with an obligation to accept anything from any other EU country. Must Danish police really be forced to, uncritically, accept any request from the police of Greece, France, Romania or Bulgaria? These countries have been sentenced hundreds of times for violation of basic rules of fair justice — are we to grant their authorities direct access to Denmark? Of course we are not.
Basically, this is an issue of freedom. And freedom is exactly fundamental to our Constitution, which today celebrates its 159th birthday. It has been claimed that the Constitution is outdated and old, that the language is complex and incomprehensible. As a consequence, our Constitution has to be rewritten, it is said. These objections, in reality, cover the desire of the Left to radically alter the foundation of our society. Recall that the EU until a year ago still worked to get a constitution of its own. And that this was supported by a large majority in our parliament. The parties who wish to change our Constitution, are part of this majority. They want our monarchy out and they want to remove the special status of the Lutheran Church. In other words: They intend to remove Danish identity from our Constitution.
But we will not yield. Denmark is Danish. Denmark is Christian. We have our monarchy. And Denmark is the land of the Danes. Neither the Left, the EU, nor the Islamic fundamentalists will be permitted to change that.
The terror attack this Monday do not cause us to waver. We do not follow the false worldview of the Left and do not grovel in fear before those who cannot stand seeing a cartoon or hearing words they disagree with. Both with respect to the EU and with respect to the fight against terror, this is an issue of freedom.
We [the Danish Peoples Party] have brought Denmark back in the proper direction. We have success because we are right. And we have the energy and the will to defeat those who fight against freedom.
Happy Constitution Day!