Be nice. Separation from Islam and from Muslims, unless the latter commit much further transgressions, should not to be carried out in a spirit of anger. This is normal self preservation, as mundane as keeping the bull and the bear in separate spaces. We discarded this common sense due to our own foolishness. Muslim countries have not.
Muslim citizens of the West who behave lawfully, contribute economically and choose to ignore or battle against the incendiary aspects of their faith, cannot be penalized for the idiocy of their host countries in having allowed them to settle there. However inconvenient, however costly their continuing residence in the West, the West has no moral right to kick them out, though it has the right to cordon them off from jihadi influence.''
So, we're back to where we started. This is where I came in. When I first started blogging, these arguments were going back and forth: are there ''moderate Muslims"? Is Islam the enemy, or is it some bizarre thing called Islam-ism? Is it Wahhabi Islam? Is it jihadism? The whole argument seemed to be so much pedantry and hair-splitting. I've challenged those in the 'moderate Muslim' camp repeatedly, and asked why these fabled creatures, supposedly making up the majority (or a substantial minority) within Islam don't speak up and fight the fight against the supposed ''extremists who've hijacked Islam.'' But apart from some occasional murmured statements that reek of ambiguity, the supposed 'good guys' of Islam have kept a very low profile.
This whole line of thought is getting the infidel West nowhere. We dither over the morality of repatriating people from alien countries and cultures; we fear wronging the supposedly innocent people in the course of dealing with the bad guys. But in a crisis, we lack the time for such niceties. Our parents' and grandparents' generation understood that; survival matters. We owe our own more consideration and concern than we owe people who, born here or not, are strangers among us. Seiyo praises the Moslems for being xenophobic and ethnocentric and clannish, but yet he warns us to 'be nice' and not wrong the Moslems 'who behave lawfully, contribute economically'', and so on. But as I've said before, many Moslems who've committed harmful acts were, up to the point of commiting those acts, 'behaving lawfully' and even 'contributing economically.' The 7/7 bombers in Britain fit Seiyo's description; if I remember correctly, at least one of them was a doctor.
And Seiyo's admonition to 'be nice' and to distinguish between the dangerous aliens amongst us and the 'economic contributors' who make no waves could also be applied to all the aliens who live in our countries. Here in the United States, our main problem, and the most immediate threat, is the Mexican/Latin American invasion. There are plenty of pro-open borders people who sabotage all our efforts to enforce our immigration laws by arguing that the Mexicans are mostly people 'who behave lawfully and contribute economically', -- at least since they illegally entered our country. So according to Seiyo's dictum, we have 'no moral right' to kick them out. So we are held to a much higher standard than the rest of the world, we in the Western countries. Mexico certainly feels no moral qualms against kicking illegal 'entrants' out of their country, yet we are duty-bound to 'be nice' because Mexico's colonists in the U.S. "contribute economically" and keep their heads down? No, this is exactly how we got into this insane predicament in the first place; we are becoming a people with no self-preservation instinct and with an obsessive desire to be fair to everyone except ourselves, our kin, and our posterity.
We can argue over whether it's Americans in general who are responsible for these perverted notions of morality, or whether it's an outside group which is manipulating us from within. If the latter, then that is an argument for excluding alien peoples whose interests are bound to conflict with our own.
But whatever the etiology, the sickness is likely to be terminal unless dealt with and cured.
It seems to me that Seiyo contradicts himself. He deplores our lack of an immune system but when our national immune system has broken down, allowing outsiders to invade, he scolds us about thoughts of 'kicking them out'. What else does the human body's immune system do, if we are to use that analogy, but defend against invading pathogens?
How, to repeat the perennial question, can we be sure of aliens who 'behave lawfully and contribute economically" when they have in the past shown a proclivity, in some cases, to suddenly become a threat? Does Seiyo deny the existence of, say, Moslems practicing taqiyya and kitman, who may for some time be outwardly harmless, while secretly plotting some harmful act? Does he think that all criminals, all dangerous people, always display some outward signs to announce that they are dangerous?
What of the phenomenon, seen both in this country and in the UK, of 'law-abiding' immigrants producing radical offspring? Sometimes young people from 'assimilated' families become radicalized and act out dangerously.
The same thing happens with many immigrant groups to some extent, it seems; the immigrant generation may be more interested in economic betterment, while the children grow up on the anti-White propaganda that is so prevalent in the West, and become radicals and malcontents.
I also think that Seiyo's obligatory and ritualistic slap at 'frothing supremacist wannabe Nazis' is just a way of saying 'but not me, I'm not racist.', a way of distancing himself from the opprobrium that comes to anyone who takes a strong pro-White or even simply pro-Western stand. And his statement that there are only
...at most five names of public resonance who speak up for the right and duty of the countries of the white peoples, with their own gene pool and a great and distinct history and culture anchored in Jerusalem–Athens-Rome, to remain as a cradle of that gene pool and culture.''
is rather unfair to the many people in the blogosphere who do speak out, and many citizens who do what they can in whatever way they can. Perhaps to people who move in the rather limited counter-jihadist circles, it seems that there are 'at most five' (probably the 'big names' he mentions early on) who are doing anything at all.
Ultimately I get the sense that Seiyo is one of those cosmopolitans who has no particularly strong and unequivocal ties to any country or tradition except for 'the West' which is rather a diluted allegiance these days.
I suppose in a very broad sense we are on the same page, Seiyo and people like me -- but in a sense we are not; he seems to be counseling simply more of the same; be tough but not too tough. Accept Moslems, in small doses, anyway, and make peace with their presence. Accept the reality that the West will not truly be Western anymore; that's the practical result of following the course he recommends.
But a little leaven leavens the whole lump; we could tolerate small numbers (very small numbers) of aliens in our midst if and only if we kept them at arm's length; no citizenship, no equality between aliens and citizens, no deferring to alien traditions, no curbing of our own rights to free speech and freedom of worship for the sake of avoiding offense. No political correctness. No affirmative action. No special privileges. When in Rome, do as the Romans do; no multilingualism and multiculturalism. But no doubt this would 'offend' some. The very presence of aliens in our midst constricts us and causes us to behave unnaturally, at least as long as our present twisted belief system prevails.
As long as we have even the faintest vestiges of this deferential liberalism in our society, we will be easy prey for invaders. And Seiyo seems unwilling to acknowledge that some invaders take the stealth route, and the long-term strategy; they don't always show their hand at first. They can often appear harmless and 'friendly' until reaching critical mass. No, only if we cleansed our societies of all this watery 'tolerance' could we be equal to the task of preserving our heritage and our people in our homelands.