And another great essay from Fjordman:

[..] Sweden is a great example of why we need limited government, a state that only upholds law and order and does not concern itself with pushing a particular ideology on its people.

Why does the government dispense with the social contract and attack its own people? Well, for starters, because it can. The state has become so large and powerful that is has become an autonomous organism with a will of its own. The people are there to serve the state, not vice versa. And because state power penetrates every single corner of society, there are no places left to mount a defense if the state decides to attack you. Its representatives are no longer leaders of a specific people, but caretakers preoccupied only with advancing their own careers through oiling and upholding, and if possible expanding, the bureaucratic machinery.

[..] A characteristic of the situation in Western Europe is that we have more and more laws, yet at the same time more and more lawlessness. The German journalist Jens Jessen claims that his country has been gripped by a “prohibition orgy” regarding tobacco, cars, cheap holidays and computer games, television and fast food. The process is “disconcerting and almost grotesque in its systematization.” He believes there is some level of compensation going on for the powerlessness of politicians.

Parallel with an explosion in street crime, the state turns on its law-abiding citizens with a proliferation of regulations and an inflation of laws. The less control the state has over the the most important tasks of society, the stronger its desire to assert its power over the tiniest details becomes. Or is it a subtle show of force, a constant reminder to the average citizen of who’s boss, a sign that resistance to state policies is feared?

As Jessen points out, the dangerous thing about this spirit of prohibition is that “once it’s out of the bottle, it spreads like an infection” whose first casualty is tolerance: “The fettered citizens are going to loll in security; the more unbearable the state regulations, the more relaxed they will feel. But such a society, one that makes the individual citizen and he alone responsible for all possible environmental sins, can easily become the blind accomplice to the worst catastrophes on the international stage.”

[..]When does the rule of law break down? It breaks down when laws are no longer passed with the consent of free people, when citizens no longer feel that the law is just, when regulations become so numerous that it is virtually impossible even for decent individuals not to break the law on a regular basis and when the authorities are incapable of protecting their country’s borders while criminals rule the streets. It breaks down when the law appears increasingly arbitrary, when it invades the most intimate details of the life of law-abiding citizens while it allows great freedom to criminals. In short, it breaks down when it no longer corresponds to reality and to the sense of justice experienced by ordinary people.

Unless current trends are changed, I fear parts of Western Europe could reach critical mass soon.

Do read the whole thing.

Continuing with the theme of the day, The Chronicle Review has an excellent essay by Walter Laqueur today, adopted from his forthcoming book “The Last Days of Europe: Epitaph for an Old Continent”, which will be published next week (h/t The Brussels Journal):

This, then, is the picture of Europe in the first decade of the new century. It is a picture of gradual decline. Future historians may well be at a loss to understand why the sorry state of affairs was realized only late in the day, despite the fact that all the major trends — demography, the stalling of the movement toward European unity, and the crisis of the welfare state — had appeared well before the turn of the century.

The decline of the Roman Empire has been discussed for centuries, and it could be that the discussion about the decline of Europe will last as long. Decline often does not proceed as quickly as feared; there are usually retarding circumstances. But it is also true that, for better or worse, the pulse of history is beating quicker in our time than before.

There is also a danger that we will throw up our hands in despair and accept with resignation Europe’s future role as a museum of world history and civilization, preaching the importance of morality in world affairs to a nonexistent audience. Surely decline offers challenges that ought to be taken up, even if there is no certainty of success. No one can say with any confidence what problems the powers that now appear to be in the ascendancy will face in the years to come. And even if Europe’s decline is now irreversible, there is no reason that it should become a collapse.

There is, however, a precondition — something that has been postponed. The debate should be about which of Europe’s traditions and values can still be saved. The age of delusions is over.

Around the middle of the 7th century the Sassanid Empire of Persia, devastated by defeat at the hands of the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Empire (an event referred to in the Koran as a “victory for believers”, because the Romans were Christians, and thus believing ‘People of the Book’), was overrun by invading Islamic Arab armies. According to Muslim custom prior to declaring war the leader of the Islamic Caliphate, the Caliph Umar, sent a letter to the Persians inviting them to Islam (or else). Here’s the letter and the reply of the leader of the Zoroastrian Persians, Shah Yazdgerd III:

Text of the ultimatum from Omar Ibn-Khat’tab the Calif of
         Islam to the Iranina Sovereign, Yazdgerd III:

 

Bism-ellah Ar’rahman Ar’rhim To the Shah of the Fars

I do not foresee a good future for you and your nation save
        your acceptance of my terms and your submission to me. There was
        a time when your country ruled half the world, but see how now your
        sun has set. On all fronts your armies have been defeated and your
        nation is condemned to extinction. I point out to you the path
        whereby you might escape this fate. Namely, that you begin
        worshipping the one god, the unique deity, the only god who created
        all that is. I bring you his message. Order your nation to cease the
        false worship of fire and to join us, that they may join the truth.         

Worship Allah the creator of the world. Worship Allah and accept
        Islam as the path of salvation. End now your polytheistic ways and
        become Muslims that you may accept Allah-u-Akbar as your savior.
        This is the only way of securing your own survival and the peace of
        your Persians. You will do this if you know what is good for you and
        for your Persians. Submission is your only option. Allah u Akbar.

The Calif of Muslims Omar Ibn-Khat’tab

---

 

Response of the Persian King:

In the name of Ahuramazda, the Creator of Life and Wisdom.

From the Shahan-Shah of Iran Yazdgerd to Omar Ibn Khat’tab the
        Arab Calif. In your letter you summon us Iranians to your god whom
        you call “Allah-u-Akbar”; and because of your barbarity and
        ignorance, without knowing who we are and Whom we worship, you
        demand that we seek out your god and become worshippers of “Allah-u-Akbar”.

How strange that you occupy the seat of the Arab Caliph but are
        as ignorant as any desert roaming Arab! You admonish me to become
        monotheistic in faith. Ignorant man, for thousands of years we
        Aryaee have, in this land of culture and art, been monotheistic and
        five times a day have we offered prayers to God’s Throne of Oneness.
        While we laid the foundations of philanthropy and righteousness and
        kindness in this world and held high the ensign of “Good Thoughts,
        Good Words and Good Deeds”, you and your ancestors were desert
        wanderers who ate snakes and lizards and buried your innocent
        daughters alive.

You Arabs who have no regard for God’s creatures, who mercilessly
        put people to the sword, who mistreat your women and bury you
        daughters alive, who attack caravans and are highway robbers, who
        commit murder, who kidnap women and spouses; how dare you presume to
        teach us, who are above these evils, to worship God?

You tell me to cease the worship of fire and to worship God
        instead! To us Iranians the light of Fire is reminiscent of the
        Light of God. The radiance and the sun-like warmth of fire
        exuberates our hearts, and the pleasant warmth of it brings our
        hearts and spirits closer together, that we may be philanthropic,
        kind and considerate, that gentleness and forgiveness may become our
        way of life, and that thereby the Light of God may keep shining in
        our hearts.

Our God is the Great Ahuramazda. Strange is this that you too
        have now decided to give Him a name, and you call Him by the name of
        “Allah-u-Akbar”.

But we are nothing like you. We, in the name of Ahuramazda,
        practice compassion and love and goodness and righteousness and
        forgiveness, and care for the dispossessed and the unfortunate; But
        you, in the name of your “Allah-u-Akbar” commit murder, create
        misery and subject others to suffering! Tell me truly who is to
        blame for your misdeeds? Your god who orders genocide, plunder and
        destruction, or you who do these things in his name? Or both?

You, who have spent all your days in brutality and barbarity,
        have now come out of your desolate deserts resolved to teach, by the
        blade and by conquest, the worship of God to a people who have for
        thousands of years been civilized and have relied on culture and
        knowledge and art as mighty supports.

What have you, in the name of your “Allah-u-Akbar”, taught these
        armies of Islam besides destruction and pillage and murder that you
        now presume to summon others to your god?

Today, my people’s fortunes have changed. Their armies, who were
        subjects of Ahuramazada, have now been defeated by the Arab armies
        of “Allah-u-Akbar”. And they are being forced, at the point of the
        sword, to convert to the god by the name of “Allah-u-Akbar”. And are
        forced to offer him prayers five times a day but now in Arabic;
        since your “Allah-u-Akbar” only understands Arabic.

I advise you to return to your lizard infested deserts. Do not
        let loose upon our cities your cruel barbarous Arabs who are like
        rabid animals. Refrain from the murder of my people. Refrain from
        pillaging my people. Refrain from kidnapping our daughters in the
        name of your “Allah-u-Akbar”. Refrain from these crimes and evils.

We Aryaee are a forgiving people, a kind and well-meaning people.
        Wherever we go, we sow the seeds of goodness, amity and
        righteousness. And this is why we have the capacity to overlook the
        crimes and the misdeeds of your Arabs.

Stay in your desert with your “Allah-u-Akbar”, and do not
        approach our cities; for horrid is your belief and brutish is your
        conduct.

Yazdgerd Saasaani

Is that a ‘no’, then?

This wasn’t the first ‘invitation to Islam’ for the Persians. A few years earlier, Muhammad himself had sent the following letter to the Persian king who preceeded Yazdgerd III, Khosrau II:

“In the name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful. From Muhammad, the Messenger of God, to the great Kisra of Iran. Peace be upon him, who seeks truth and expresses belief in God and in His Prophet and testifies that there is no god but God and that He has no partner, and who believes that Muhammad is His servant and Prophet. Under the Command of God, I invite you to Him. He has sent me for the guidance of all people so that I may warn them all of His wrath and may present the unbelievers with an ultimatum. Embrace Islam so that you may remain safe. And if you refuse to accept Islam, you will be responsible for the sins of the Magi.”

All rather ironic considering that it is the Persians doing the letter sending these days - the US, Germany, Italy, China and the Vatican have all recently received “contractual obligation” missives from Iran.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Perri Nelson’s Website, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, basil’s blog, Overtaken by Events, Pirate’s Cove, Conservative Cat, High Desert Wanderer, Right Voices, Pursuing Holiness, and Conservative Thoughts, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

A great essay over at the Brussels Journal:

Recently I began to post articles about my experiences on the Dutch-language section of The Brussels Journal. Since then I have received threats from Islamists, warning me to stop. I will not stop because it is important that people know what is going on. I have many Muslims friends who are also opposed to the radicals. They keep me informed about what is going on, but cannot say this in public for fear of reprisals. As Theodore Dalrymple said: “On a micro-level people are now living in a totalitarian climate. In our Western societies. Within our Western societies there is a micro-totalitarian climate.” This is something we should not tolerate. If we do, we, too, will soon be living in a totalitarian society.

Europe is being confronted with a new challenge: Islam and its influence on political, social and economic policy. Muslims give different interpretations of what Islam means. Islam as a fixed doctrine does not exist. This makes dialogue with the Islamic community extremely difficult. To be sure, there are a certain number of tendencies which – depending on schools and traditions – claim to be interpretations of an Islamitic doctrine. But the very absence of a well defined doctrine makes Islam a Trojan horse. You have to wait to see what is inside, and the latter could be a big surprise. Unfortunately, a radical version of Islam is becoming dominant in Europe. It is the so-called “European Islam,” promoted by modern Islamic philosophers like Tariq Ramadan.

[..]

Read the rest.

UPDATE (16/3): Some background on the author of the above from the Washington Post: “Islamicization of Antwerp”, by Paul Belien, who runs the Brussels Journal:

The decisive battle against Islamic extremists will not be fought in Iraq, but in Europe. It is not in Baghdad but in cities like Antwerp, Belgium, where the future of the West will be decided.

   I recently met Marij Uijt den Bogaard, a 49-year-old woman who deserves America’s support at least as much as Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

   Ms. Uijt den Bogaard was an Antwerp civil servant in the 1990s, who spent many years working in the immigrant neighborhoods of Antwerp. There she noticed how radical Islamists began to take over. “They work according to a well-defined plan,” she says.

   One of the things Ms. Uijt den Bogaard used to do for the immigrants was to assist them with their administrative paperwork. Quite a few of them came to trust her.

   About three years ago, young men dressed in black moved into the neighborhoods. They had been trained in Saudi Arabia and Jordan and adhere to Salafism, a radical version of Islam. They set up youth organizations, which gradually took over the local mosques.” The Salafists know how to debate and they know the Qur’an by heart, while the elderly running the mosques do not,” she said They also have money. “One of them told me that he gets Saudi funds.” Because they are eloquent, the radicals soon became the official spokesmen of the Muslim community, also in dealing with the city authorities. Ms. Uijt den Bogaard witnessed how the latter gave in to Salafist demands, such as the demand for separate swimming hours for Muslim women in the municipal pools.

[..]
In the end she was fired. She is unemployed at the moment and gets turned away whenever she applies for another job as a civil servant. Last week, she learned that city authorities have given the job of integration officer, whose task it is to supervise 25 Antwerp mosques, to one of the radical Salafists. Meanwhile, the latter have threatened her with reprisals if she continues to speak out.
   After her dismissal Ms. Uijt den Bogaard went to see Monica Deconinck, a Socialist politician who is the head of the Antwerp social department, to tell her about the plight of the Muslim women. Ms. Deconinck said, “You have taken your job too seriously and tried to do it too well,” adding that she cannot help, although she sympathizes.
[..]