The identitarian miscalculation

The identitarians – a far-right racist and Islamophobic movement (originally based in France but which has since spread across many EU member states) best known for violently breaking into and occupying mosques in order to intimidate Muslims – view the European Muslim community as their primary enemy. It is their opinion that their countries in future will either belong to themselves or to Islamic sharia law. They believe that these are the only two realistic contenders for control, as they believe that these are the only two groups willing to fight. The believe that everyone else, especially leftists (by which they mean non-Muslim leftists, since for some reason they do not consider Muslims to be leftists, even though Mohammedanism is a universalist religion and Muslims overwhelmingly vote for left-leaning parties), are cowards who will not be doing any fighting at all in the event of civil war, and therefore are irrelevant.

Hence the identitarians want civil war (by which they really mean expelling all Europeans of so-called “Third World origin” (by which they really mean anyone who is “non-white”) by force) to start fairly soon, because they calculate that they stand a greater chance of winning if the war begins sooner rather than later. This calculation is based on estimating the relative number of combatants on each side, which they typically do by comparing the Muslim population % in a country against the far-right vote % in a country. They understand that not all far-right voters will fight, but also that not all Muslims will fight, so they assume a roughly similar fraction from each group will fight.

Over the past decades, the general trend is that, as the European Muslim population % has increased, so has the far-right vote %. It used to be that the far-right vote % remained lower than the Muslim population % in most EU member states, but over the last few years (due to much help from Zionist reverse-bluff propaganda campaigns to increase bigotry in general and Islamophobia in particular), the far-right vote % has been leapfrogging ahead of the Muslim population % in one EU member state after another. This fills the identitarians with confidence in winning a hypothetical civil war should one break out in the near future. The more optimistic identitarians believe that many non-far-right voters, and even much of the police and military, will side with themselves in such a scenario, making victory even easier. Others believe that the police and military will deploy against them, but that this will prove that the state is “treasonous” and lead to even formerly apolitical civilians joining the identitarian side in large numbers. The more pessimistic identitarians warn that the %s are not as in favour of the identitarian side as they appear, noting that much of the far-right vote % comes from the elderly who mostly lack the physical condition to fight effectively, whereas the Muslim population % is composed of a significantly younger age profile. But even the pessimists hope for civil war soon, as precisely because of their pessimism they believe the numbers will soonest turn against the identitarians. And, regardless of optimism or pessimism, all identitarians believe that the numbers will turn against themselves sooner or later.

Accordingly, much of identitarian activism consists of trying to provoke angry reactions from European Muslims via all kinds of street bullying, ranging from vandalizing mosques with pigs’ heads and pigs’ blood, or turning up at Islamic events eating bacon and drinking alcohol, to pulling headscarves off Muslim women’s heads and spitting on babies/toddlers in prams/strollers if they have Muslim parents, in addition to all kind of verbal and graphical prodding (such as producing insulting visual depictions of Mohammed) directed against the Muslim community as a whole. (Just like the typical system-savvy classroom bully, they are careful to stop short of causing actual bodily injury to Muslims in all their bullying, in order to take advantage of the dishonourable Western legal system that does not recognize the justice of physical retaliatory violence in response to non-physical initiated violence, and which will therefore prosecute any Muslim who does so – honourably – retaliate.) They want European Muslims to one day lose their temper and become violent on a large scale beyond what the police can handle, whereupon identitarians – while still possessing the advantage in numbers – can then have a “legitimate” excuse to take the law into their own hands by killing as many Muslims (as well as even non-Muslim Europeans of so-called “Third World origin” at the same time) as possible and scaring the rest into fleeing from their homes.

genident

The symbol that claims it is heroic to bully innocent people based on ethnic background, because it is “identity”. Or something.

It is remarkable that the European Muslim community has so far mostly refused to be provoked, instead often returning the hostility towards them with friendly gestures, such as handing out free tea and biscuits to mosque prostestors. Indeed most Muslims still believe they can win over the identitarians’ hearts (and even convince them to convert to Islam!) with works of kindness and charity, unaware that identitarians are heartless barbarians who care nothing for such higher qualities, but solely about preservation of “identity”. If civil war were to break out suddenly, many of these well-meaning but naive Muslims would not be ready to defend themselves and would become the first victims of massacre.

But does this mean the identitarians are assured of victory? Absolutely not. I submit that the identitarians have miscalculated the strength of their enemies in one crucial way: they neglected to count us. By “us”, I mean the True Left, which (while we welcome Muslims) consists mostly of non-Muslim leftists, the very people whom the far-right has pissed off the most with their pro-tribalism rhetoric over the years ever since 9/11. In their rightist disdain (which, incidentally, we share) towards the pacifistic and disorderly False Left, they never even considered the possibility that there could exist a militaristic and disciplined leftism which is as happy to bring the fight to them as they are happy to bring the fight to European Muslims (and more broadly Europeans of so-called “Third World origin”). The difference between us and the rightists is that they chose their target groups based on them being of supposedly ‘wrong’ identity, irrespective of how the people in such groups behave as individuals, whereas we chose our target groups because of how their people behave as individuals.

So the actual estimate of comparative force goes like this. Virtually all European Muslims are left-leaning. Of non-Muslims, only about half are right-leaning. So simply bring in the left-leaning non-Muslims (also about half of non-Muslims) into the calculation, and the numerical advantage is on the left at once, as we get to add Muslims to our total.

Identitarian horde: I ~ ir(N-M)

SJW army: W ~ j[(l(N-M) + M]

where N is total national population, M is population of Muslims, (0<l<1)+(0<r<1) =1 is the left-right split among non-Muslims, 0<i<1 is the proportion of people willing to fight for identity and 0<j<1 is the proportion of people willing to fight for social justice.

Is i=j? Perhaps not. The identitarians will certainly try to ramp up their i value as much as possible using their propaganda of fear and hubris in order to make up for their starting disadvantage, but again nothing is stopping us from doing the same for our j value with our own propaganda of honour and empathy. Moreover, they underestimate our j value because they have mistakenly assumed that the only European Muslims willing to fight are fundamentalist Muslims willing to fight for establishing sharia law, when actually there are many more non-fundamentalist Muslims who care nothing for sharia law but who would not hesitate to fight for a True Left renowned for its anti-Zionism.

The identitarians will also try to increase their r value at the expense of our l value, but again we can counter them in a direct propaganda tug-of-war. One may think they have an advantage here due to the post-9/11 popular trend of swinging right (in line with the Zionist script), but remember that they need an r>l by a sufficient margin to enable (r-l)(N-M)>M in order for I>W. For example, if M/N=0.1, then (r-l)>0.1 would be required for I>W. And M/N will continue to increase over time, so they will need to maintain an ever bigger (r-l) margin. Whereas we merely need to hold r~l, and M will sweep in to tip the numbers in our favour as an arithmetic certainty. On the political front, this means we do not need to try to win over current rightists by making concessions to them on some issues (nor should we do so, as their demands are fundamentally unethical), but rather need to (and should) concentrate on galvanizing current leftists by strengthening the foundations of leftist issue positions. This is exactly what the True Left is out to do.

Then it just comes down to fighting ability. They can train and equip and organize, but so can we. And never forget that we are biologically more advanced than our enemies. The same empathy that guides our fairness and kindness surely also gives us the latent ability to tactically out-anticipate our more emotionally primitive adversaries in war. We know how to look at the world through their eyes, but they cannot even begin to imagine what the world looks like through our eyes (for if they could they would be on our side).

As for the police and military, they are more likely to side with the identitarians if we do not show up and the conflict is purely identitarians vs Muslims, as in this case it will be easier for them to accept the rightist narrative of the war as “non-Muslims vs Muslims” (with the identitarians deceptively claiming to represent the views of non-Muslims as a whole). If we do show up, however, we vastly increase the chances of the police and military siding with us, as our presence will shatter the rightist narrative and prove the war is about Islamophobes vs non-Islamophobes (or – let’s face it – racists vs non-racists, since the identitarians frequently claim to be able to tell who is a “Muslim” by skin colour). The greater the % of non-Muslims showing up to defend their Muslim fellow Europeans, the weaker the rightist narrative becomes.

It is even possible that, if we show up in sufficient force at pre-war demonstrations and other events, we could avert civil war altogether by setting a vivid example of pan-universalist* religious fellowship as part of a healthier and more positive vision for the future. Indeed this outcome is what we should initially aim for and most hope to achieve.

(* Judaism is excluded, as it is a tribalist religion.)

In other words, we can win this, as indeed we deserve to. For whereas they fight for an abstraction called “identity”, we fight to protect real people with real feelings: our friends and neighbours, our teachers and classmates and students, our employers and colleagues and employees, people we grew up with or otherwise people whom we expected to always be around town and part of our daily lives, dentists and fitness instructors and school principals and repair mechanics and shopkeepers and landscapers and bus drivers and restaurant waiters and security guards and social workers and weekend volunteers and local councillors and media celebrities, and – by far most important of all – children who never had a choice in where they were born but who just happened to be born here and now love it as their only home. We fight against enemies who say openly that none of the feelings of any or all of these people matter compared to “identity”. They are dead wrong, and they will discover this for themselves when they meet us on the battlefield.

generation-identity

We accept your declaration of war, identitarians. However, we will not accept your surrender. This war ends only when every last trace of your inferior DNA has been cleansed from the world. You asked for it by bringing genetics into the discussion.

Advertisements

One thought on “The identitarian miscalculation

  1. [Quote] in order to take advantage of the dishonourable Western legal system that does not recognize the justice of physical retaliatory violence in response to non-physical initiated violence, and which will therefore prosecute any Muslim who does so – honourably – retaliate. [End quote]

    I lay down my life to ensure that those who lie, cheat and steal, and who think themselves clever and superior, doing what they do to feed their ignoble egos, should not remain unfamiliar with the severest retribution.

    Civil war is merely a backdrop for retribution to complete its course. Come zero hour, those ignoble and diseased in their hearts will be subjected to [censored] unprecedented in human history.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s