Europe's ticking time bombby R.J. StoveNews Weekly
, May 19, 2001
R. J. Stove outlines recent German proposals for increasing the white European birthrate in the face of promised Islamic inundation.
La Pasionaria, the Spanish Civil War's Stalinist harridan, must be chuckling in her grave. Less than three decades back (despite her own best 1930s efforts in establishing a sun-drenched gulag), Spain was still a recognisably Christian land, with every intention of remaining so.
Today, as secularised and nihilist as anywhere else in Europe, Spain wins the demographic booby-prize: a birthrate of 1.07 children per woman. As Associated Press' Madrid bureau proclaimed on February 3: "The fertility rate in Spain has now fallen to the lowest ever recorded for any nation in human history."
Read that last sentence again. Nothing in mankind's annals has matched this societal death-wish. Presiding over it is Spanish PM José-María Aznar, nominally a Catholic, whose recent achievements include permitting full pension rights for homosexual couples (The Economist,
November 25, 2000).
Perhaps he has simply attained a keener insight into his own church's sexual morality than has every Catholic theologian over the last two millennia.
Elsewhere in Europe, certain leaders dare to query the cultural self-hatred which Aznar exemplifies.
One such is Bavaria's Premier Edmund Stoiber, whom The Financial Times
reported last February 1 as recommending that present child allowances be trebled.
To an interviewer from Germany's Bild am Sonntag,
Stoiber complained that the national birthrate - while, at 1.38 per cent, slightly improved from its 1990 level of 1.3 - is still low enough to be "a ticking timebomb for the social security system and our whole economy." He wants to see mothers getting the equivalent of $US16,500 per child, as opposed to the $US5,500 per child they now receive.
Merely to suggest such a course of action in Australia would, of course, elicit howls of rage from the chattering classes who see nothing wrong in extorting from taxpayers 90 times that amount on Lucian Freud's exercises in depravity.
Even in Europe, it runs counter to the whole program for human betterment as propounded by French PM Lionel Jospin, who recently upbraided Stoiber and his fellow Bavarian officials for valuing Europe's "religious legacy" (Chronicles
, May 2001). But Stoiber has attracted several local defenders, including a party colleague who recently contested office on a specifically anti-immigration platform: "Children, not Indians".
The same sentiment has been heard from the Oriental end. India's Foreign Minister deplored last year the brain-drain by which his country's best and brightest flee their homeland for Europe (Korea Herald, January 17, 2000).
European whites' demographic situation might or might not be salvageable by methods akin to Stoiber's. In America the point of no return was long ago reached, indeed passed. The Californian State Government's Proposition 187, vigorously supported by voters in 1994 and restricting welfare access for philoprogenitive illegals, was struck down the following year by Federal judges, who deemed it "unconstitutional".
Nowadays - as The Age exulted on May 2 - whites with English as their first language are a minority in 48 out of America's 100 biggest cities: including such long-time Anglo-Irish redoubts as Boston.
Two centuries before public papal osculation of Islam's sacred text, Gibbon (in Decline and Fall's Vol VII) foresaw the cultural fate that millions of Europeans wish to embrace, at whatever cost to recognisable Christendom. Had Islam been victorious at the Battle of Tours (732 AD), Gibbon wrote, "the interpretation of the Koran would now be taught in the schools of Oxford, and her pulpits might demonstrate to a circumcised people the sanctity and truth of the revelation of Mohammed".
An admittedly extreme view, supporting this conclusion's continued plausibility, came from French Muslim spokesman Mohammed Sabaoui (Catholic
, December 1998 - January 1999):
"Our well functioning, 'peaceful' invasion of Europe has not been completed yet. We want to act simultaneously in all host countries. Since you keep on making more and more room available for us, we would be stupid not to fully profit by it. ... You have framed laws that penalise those who utter any racist expression against us. And you can't see how blinded you are ... One only respects that which one fears!"
It is tempting for us as individuals to sympathise with Muslims' loathing for the West's moral decay. Amid the wider strategic issues involved - the issues which Lenin summarised in his rhetorical question "Who whom?" - sympathy and antipathy are alike irrelevant. As B. A. Santamaria observed in News Weekly on July 21, 1990:
"[T]o ensure the demographic decline of the West, Western governments provide more child care places to absorb more women into their workforce, while marriage laws dissolve the traditional family ... The demographic pincer movement is already evident."