The fall of the Berlin Wall and subsequent dissolution of the Soviet Union turned out not to be hugely positive for the US, as so many US policymakers thought it would be at the time. From Andrew Bacevich at consortiumnews.com:
Andrew Bacevich highlights some of the world-shaping developments that Washington policy elites overlooked back in 1989, when the U.S. was intoxicated by a belief in its own omnipotence.
President George H.W. Bush “jamming” with campaign strategist Lee Atwater during inaugural festivities on Jan. 21, 1989.
Thirty years ago this month, President George H.W. Bush appeared before a joint session of Congress to deliver his first State of the Union Address, the first post-Cold War observance of this annual ritual. Just weeks before, the Berlin Wall had fallen. That event, the president declared, “marks the beginning of a new era in the world’s affairs.” The Cold War, that “long twilight struggle” (as President John F. Kennedy so famously described it), had just come to an abrupt end. A new day was dawning. Bush seized the opportunity to explain just what that dawning signified.
“There are singular moments in history, dates that divide all that goes before from all that comes after,” the president said. The end of World War II had been just such a moment. In the decades that followed, 1945 provided “the common frame of reference, the compass points of the postwar era we’ve relied upon to understand ourselves.” Yet the hopeful developments of the year just concluded — Bush referred to them collectively as “the Revolution of ’89” — had initiated “a new era in the world’s affairs.”
Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, History, Imperialism, Military, War
Tagged China, Europe, George H.W. Bush, Islam, Soviet Union
There are things that cannot be publicly discussed in France, notably criticism of Islam. From Guy Millière at gatestoneinstitute.org:
- Defending someone who is accused of being a “racist” implies the risk of being accused of being a “racist” too. Intellectual terror reigns in France.
- France is moving from a “muzzled press to a muzzling press that destroys free speech”. — Alain Finkielkraut, writer and philosopher.
- Writers other than Éric Zemmour have been hauled into court and totally excluded from all media, simply for describing reality.
- In a society where freedom of speech exists, it would be possible to discuss the use of these statements, but in France today, freedom of speech has been almost completely destroyed.
- Soon in France, no one will dare to say that any attack openly inspired by Islam has any connection with Islam.
|(Images source: iStock)
On September 28, a “Convention of the Right” took place in Paris, organized by Marion Marechal, a former member of French parliament and now director of France’s Institute of Social, Economic and Political Sciences. The purpose of the convention was to unite France’s right-wing political factions. In a keynote speech, the journalist Éric Zemmour harshly criticized Islam and the Islamization of France. He described the country’s “no-go zones” (Zones Urbaines Sensibles; Sensitive Urban Zones) as “foreign enclaves” in French territory and depicted, as a process of “colonization”, the growing presence in France of Muslims who do not integrate.
The stunt is self-evidently brilliant. The article is a long-winded analysis, which is like analyzing a joke, but SLL does it best to publicize and encourage all such subversion. From Alaa Al-Ameri at spiked-online.com:
Posters bearing that message have appeared in a town in Massachusetts. No one knows how to react.
Trolling the woke left has become a popular pastime. It can be clever and funny, but it can just as often be a crude attempt to elicit outrage for its own sake. Rarely, however, does something show up that is easily dismissed as ‘trolling’, but which is so remarkably incisive and apt that it rises not only to the level of satire, but borders on civil disobedience.
Think of Posie Parker’s billboards quoting the dictionary definition of the word ‘woman’. The power of such acts comes from two things. First, they acknowledge – usually with irreducible simplicity – that something that went without saying a moment ago has suddenly become unsayable. Secondly, the outrage they provoke does not come from any epithet, caricature or insult, but rather from having the nerve to draw the viewer’s attention to an act of cognitive dissonance that we are all engaging in, but would rather not acknowledge.
If someone is murdered for his religious beliefs and nobody hears about it, he’s still dead. From Raymond Ibrahim at gatestoneinstitute.org:
- Many of the world’s most persecuted Christians have nothing whatsoever to do with colonialism or missionaries. Those most faced with the threat of genocide — including Syria’s and Iraq’s Assyrians or Egypt’s Copts — were Christian several centuries before the ancestors of Europe’s colonizers became Christian and went missionizing
- The BBC report highlights “political correctness” as being especially responsible for the West’s indifference….
- Among the worst persecutors are those that rule according to Islamic law, or Sharia — which academics such as Georgetown University’s John Esposito insist is equitable and just. In Afghanistan (ranked #2), “Christianity is not permitted to exist.”
|UK Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt (pictured) commissioned an “Independent Review into the global persecution of Christians,” which was recently published. (Photo by Jack Taylor/Getty Images)
“Christian persecution ‘at near genocide levels,'” the title of a May 3 BBC report, cites a lengthy interim study ordered by British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt and led by Rev. Philip Mounstephen, the Bishop of Truro.
According to the BBC report, one in three people around the world suffer from religious persecution, with Christians being “the most persecuted religious group”. “Religion ‘is at risk of disappearing’ in some parts of the world,” it noted, and “In some regions, the level and nature of persecution is arguably coming close to meeting the international definition of genocide, according to that adopted by the UN.”
Emmanuel Macron warns against anti-Semitism among the Yellow Vests, but ignores the obvious anti-Semitism of much of France’s Muslim population. From Guy Millière at gatestoneinstitute.org:
- “It is up to us to give a political meaning to the [“yellow vest”] revolt. The goal is not simply to challenge an increase in taxes, but the political system that induces it…” — Elias d’Imzalene, French Islamist preacher, November 23, 2018.
- “Macron hates the yellow vests and wants them to vanish. He wants to win European elections and needs the Muslim vote. He knows perfectly well who the anti-Semites are today, but will not attack them. He needs them. He attacks [only] those who are dangerous to him. “— Éric Zemmour, French author, February 19, 2019.
- Other people noted that holding a demonstration that excluded the right-wing National Rally party was a move aimed at diverting attention from the real anti-Semitic danger. They also suggested that political parties which support the murderers of Jews were precisely those which deny that radical Islam is a danger.
|After sixteen Saturday demonstrations by the “yellow vests,” who began in November by protesting French President Emmanuel Macron’s increase in fuel prices, the controversy seems to have taken a darker turn. Pictured: “Yellow vest” protestors near the Eiffel Tower in Paris, France, on March 2, 2019.
After sixteen Saturday demonstrations by the “yellow vests,” who began in November by protesting French President Emmanuel Macron’s increase in fuel prices, the controversy seems to have taken a darker turn.
Europeans don’t want to be centralized and they’re not too found of immigrants, either, as the EU finds itself whirling apart. From gefira.org:
The end of the EU and the Balkans as China’s foothold in Europe
Though the end of the European Union is inevitable, the proponents of a further integrated or federal superstate are busy making a last effort to achieve their goal. The opposition against the project is mounting with every day. Europe is suffering from economic stagnation, and is facing a demographic calamity.
The pro-European establishment’s last hope was the newly-elected French President Emanuel Macron who was to revive the economy and integrate the European Union under French leadership. Gefira was of the opinion that all these expectations were misplaced. The once great nation is broken beyond repair. France’s problems are much worse than those of Italy. Though Italy has a higher debt-to-GDP ratio than France, France has a larger budget deficit, and the difference is that while Italy has a trade surplus France has a trade deficit, so the country cannot pay for its imports.
Slowly but surely, sharia law is worming its way into the fabric of European law. From Soeren Kern at gatestoneinstitute.org:
- The ruling, which effectively opens the door to legalizing Sharia-based child marriages in Germany, is one of a growing number of instances in which German courts are — wittingly or unwittingly — promoting the establishment of a parallel Islamic legal system in the country.
- “Germany cannot, on the one hand, be against child marriages internationally, and on the other hand, be for such marriages in our own country. The best interests of the child cannot be compromised in this case. (…) This is about the constitutionally established protection of children and minors!” — Winfried Bausback, Bavarian lawmaker who helped draft the law against child marriage.
- “We should consider one more thing: judgments are made ‘in the name of the people.’ This people has clearly expressed through its representatives in the Bundestag that it no longer wants to recognize child marriage.” — Commentator Andreas von Delhaes-Guenther.
|The Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), Germany’s highest court, has ruled that a new law that bans child marriage may be unconstitutional because all marriages, including Sharia-based child marriages, are protected by Germany’s Basic Law. Pictured: The Bundesgerichtshofbuilding in Karlsruhe, Germany. (Image source: Andreas Praefcke/Wikimedia Commons)
The Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH), Germany’s highest court of civil and criminal jurisdiction, has ruled that a new law that bans child marriage may be unconstitutional because all marriages, including Sharia-based child marriages, are protected by Germany’s Basic Law (Grundgesetz).