You are here



There is no surer path to Muslim violence than through the legitimization of Muslim grievance. And once you accept the legitimacy of the grievance, then you are also bound to accept the legitimacy of the violence that follows.


The fundamental Muslim grievance is that they are not in power, not just in Israel where the world has accepted their demand to be in power as a wholly moral and legitimate demand, or throughout the Muslim world where Western governments have helped bring the Islamists to power with bombs and political pressure. The fundamental grievance is that they are not in power... everywhere.

If you believe that Islam is the fundamental law of mankind, that all mankind at one time were Muslims and that there is no true justice except through Islamic law-- then it follows naturally that Muslims have been cheated of their rightful power, that they are forced to live under "atheistic" regimes and that "justice" demands that the world "revert" to Islamic rule.

It's why the rhetoric of democracy falls notoriously flat when it comes to Islam. Muslims are not out for representation except as a preliminary stage to absolute power. They may route the guardianship of that absolute power power in various ways, through a dictator or some form of popular democracy, but these are only vehicles for the imposition of Islamic law.

The absolute power of Islamic law is justified by its origin in Allah and the unjust nature of non-Muslim law is equally proven by its lack of divine origin. If you take Islamic assumptions at face value, then this makes perfect sense. Therefore a devout Muslim cannot view a non-Muslim society as just. Equating an infidel code with Sharia is blasphemy. And so the logic of Islam dictates that Western Muslims must view themselves as oppressed.


For 1400 years Islam has subjugated all other religions. What if, for the first time, Islam found out what it meant to be treated like a dhimmi?


A close relative of mine was bullied out of her job by Muslim youth gangs. Although this happened many years ago, she still lives with the psychological scars to this day. She fears that those youths (now middle-aged) will find out where she lives now and come to attack her if she speaks up about her experiences. When you have seen and experienced these things up close and personal you get a very different perspective on such notions as “diversity is strength”.

I have also lived in liberal/middle class areas, where the schools are still full of mostly white British faces (you see the odd brown and black face, but the white British are still in the majority). I also know well enough the experiences of students in our universities, who see a different side of “multi-culturalism”. Students mingle with people from all parts of the world, most of whom are fluent English speakers and who tend to also have more liberal attitudes to life. It is easy for these people to mingle and become friends. (Of course in some of our universities there is a rather larger Muslim presence and in these institutions the atmosphere tends to be somewhat more complicated).

For the most part, the people who live in these liberal/middle class areas know very little about the experiences of those “common people” who live in the poorer areas. They are not confronted daily with the realities of crime gangs and race replacement – as the saying goes, “ignorance is bliss”. They are not completely ignorant of course, from time to time they will see the odd news story about crime or the odd “isolated” terror attack, but thanks in no small part to the mainstream media’s habit of glossing over such incidents (or failing to mention them at all), they soon go back to their daily lives.

These liberal minded people have been well-schooled in the language of “political correctness”, they believe that those who complain about immigration are “racists”. They feel superior to the “bigots” and “racists”, (the common people), who live in the poorer areas. It’s easy for them to dismiss the fears that plague many of the common people, that Britain is going to one day become a Muslim majority country for example. They have not seen for themselves how quickly the ghettos are growing, and they have not experienced the joys of living in the vicinity of large new mosques.

News Date: 

On 19 March French newspaper Le Figaro published a pamphlet titled “No against Islamist Separatism“, signed by 100 French intellectuals, denouncing “a new totalitarianism threatening freedom in general.

What follows is a translation of the entire pamphlet, with the most notable segments highlighted:


Why was economic development retarded in the Middle East relative to Western Europe, despite the Middle East being far ahead for centuries after the fall of Rome? A theoretical model inspired and substantiated by the history of interest restrictions suggests that this outcome emanates in part from the greater degree to which early Islamic political authorities derived legitimacy from religious authorities relative to those in Europe. This entailed a feedback mechanism in Europe in which the rise of commerce led to the secular (and eventually religious) relaxation of interest restrictions while also diminishing the Church’s ability to legitimize political authorities. These interactions did not occur in the Islamic world despite equally amenable economic conditions.

Czech Republic (the)
News Date: 

Czech president Milos Zeman said in a televised interview that integrating Muslims into Western Europe was "practically impossible".

Speaking on local TV on Sunday the country's premier said: "The experience of Western European countries which have ghettos and excluded localities shows that the integration of the Muslim community is practically impossible."

News Date: 

Teachers in some of Berlin’s most heavily migrant-populated schools have complained that they are seeing a large increase in bullying along religious lines, primarily from Muslim students. Hildegard Greif-Gross, director of the Peter Petersen Elementary School in Neukölln, claimed that there are many examples of religious bullying even with younger students. Greif-Gross said that Muslim students would bully others on as little as bringing a ham sandwich for their lunch because they were taught pork is forbidden in Islam, Berliner Zeitung 


Of late, more emboldened jihadis have dropped the façade that Zionism lies at the heart of the conflict. In an article unambiguously titled, "Why We Hate You & Why We Fight You," the Islamic State confessed that "We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers." As for any and all political "grievances," these are "secondary" reasons for the jihad:

What's important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary [...] The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay (the) jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you [emphasis added].

From IS's and other Islamists' perspective, then, this threefold choice—conversion, subjugation/jizya, or the sword—is the ultimate source of conflict between Islam and everyone else... Nor is Islamic supremacism confined to modern jihadis—history makes an equally ironclad case.


Will Muslim spokesmen in the West denounce this call as un-Islamic, or remain silent about it? I’m betting the latter, in light of passages like these that make it clear that al-Qadi is speaking in complete accord with the Qur’an and Islamic law:

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, and do not forbidden what has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and do not acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

A hadith depicts Muhammad saying:

“Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war…When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them…. If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them. (Sahih Muslim 4294)

MEMRI, December 17, 2017:


See also:

From MUQADDIMAH by Abd Ar Rahman bin Muhammed ibn Khaldun (1332-1406)

In the Muslim community, the holy war [jihad] is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force ... The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the Holy War was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense ... They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people. That is why the Israelites after Moses and Joshua remained unconcerned with royal authority [e.g., a Caliphate]. Their only concern was to establish their religion [not spread it to the nations] … But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.

A respected and celebrated Islamic scholar, Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), studied Al Qur'an in its original Arabic and other Islamic texts.


The best example I know that gives insights into the functioning of a complex system is with the following situation. It suffices for an intransigent minority –a certain type of intransigent minorities –to reach a minutely small level, say three or four percent of the total population, for the entire population to have to submit to their preferences. Further, an optical illusion comes with the dominance of the minority: a naive observer would be under the impression that the choices and preferences are those of the majority. If it seems absurd, it is because our scientific intuitions aren’t calibrated for that (fughedabout scientific and academic intuitions and snap judgments; they don’t work and your standard intellectualization fails with complex systems, though not your grandmothers’ wisdom).


Subscribe to Supremacism