Islam as Vanguard against Liberalism?

Incompatible paths: Europe and Islam

Sietze Bosman argues that Islam, far from offering a true alternative to liberal decay, imposes an alien framework incompatible with the European race soul and must therefore be removed to preserve Europe’s civilizational essence.

In the tumultuous conditions of contemporary Europe, many people find themselves adrift on an ocean of sociological chaos. A few decades of liberalism have destroyed nearly every tie to tradition and heritage that one otherwise would have in stable and ethnically monolithic societies. While many philosophers, thinkers, sociologists, religious figures, and activists are considering ways to overcome our plight, one remarkable phenomenon deserves some scrutiny — the self-proclaimed vanguard position of Islam, and its allure that draws rootless people into its fold.

Islam claims it acts as a fitting antidote to the liberal dissolution of all values once held dear in the West. And for many who find the current situation intolerable, on the surface Islam may seem an attractive bulwark against the traditional void the West has become. But does Islam actually provide a plausible and genuine framework of values and moral teaching? To answer such a question, we ought to examine the very root prerequisites one has to meet to be rightfully considered a Muslim. This is because, just as with Christianity, great variations in the interpretations of the doctrine exist. To find the root of Muslim-ness, we must find the demands in the doctrine that all variations of Islam agree upon.

This sounds far more enigmatic than it turns out to be. It is sufficient to look at only two precepts:

Every and all people who wish to become Muslim must affirm there is but one God, Allah.

One must accept that Mohammed is his messenger.

Before we proceed, it is important to note that the doctrine of Islam is not just limited to the teachings in the Quran; rather the entirety of the doctrinal texts is a complex constellation of sources, commentaries, sayings of Mohammed, and many other theological works. There is in fact not one single verse in the Quran that is not mirrored with a commentary in the commentaries.

One of the root causes for such unclarity is that when the Quran was finally compiled from many fragmentary sources by Caliph Uthman, the document was written down with only consonants, just as the original Jewish Torah. One “word” can have multiple meanings. The introduction of vowels, or rather dots and other markings indicating a vowel, also known as Harakat or diacritical marks, did not happen until the 8th century.  

The original consonantal text could be understood by contemporary native speakers of the language, but beyond that, it was almost impossible to accurately interpret the text and distil a uniformly accepted version. To this day, Muslim scholars still debate the interpretation and correctness of the Umm al-Kitab, the Quran, the holy “mother of the book” created by God and which has been at his side forever and is to be considered perfect.

In essence, the great body of doctrinal sources cannot confidently tell what a Muslim is supposed to be, nor can it tell him exactly how to obtain a place in heaven, other than performing jihad or immigration in the name of Allah.

So, back to the two precepts the various Islamic variations agree on. Mohammed is the messenger and final prophet of the one God Allah. Everything Mohammed claimed to be religious doctrine came to him through revelation by the archangel Gabriel. The revelations are therefore to be taken as literal instructions from God. If we find revelations and actions given and performed by Mohammed that can be seen as immoral actions or contradicting the “merciful and forgiving” nature of Allah, then both can be dismissed as being problematic to the formation of a plausible and genuine alternative worldview to dwindling classical Europeanism.

Mohammed is the prophet of Allah, period. And Mohammed was the strictest Muslim ever. He could not logically be something different. However, Western converts are unfailingly brought in with sweet talk about some moderate Islam that preaches tolerance and forgiveness. And here we run into a big problem, as Mohammed clearly states that a Muslim must follow all demands made by Allah (and him), including the five pillars of Islam. These are:

1. Shahada (Faith): The declaration of faith, professing that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammed is His messenger.

2. Salah (Prayer): Performing the five daily prayers facing the Kaaba in Mecca. These prayers are obligatory and serve as a direct link between the worshipper and Allah.

3. Zakat (Charity): Giving a portion of one’s wealth to those in need, typically calculated as 2.5% of savings annually. It purifies wealth and promotes social welfare.

4. Sawm (Fasting during Ramadan): Observing fasting from dawn until sunset during the month of Ramadan, which involves abstaining from food, drink, and other physical needs.

5. Hajj (Pilgrimage): Undertaking the pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in a lifetime, if financially and physically able. Hajj occurs during the Islamic month of Dhul-Hijjah.

Failure to perform these acts is considered by Mohammed as a form of “hypocrisy,” of which is said in the Quran:

Surah An-Nisa (4:145): “Indeed, the hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the Fire, and you will not find for them a helper.”

So, unless one is physically unable to perform the pillars, one is not a true Muslim if one does not observe them. To go beyond the demands of the five pillars, Allah revealed:

Surah Al-Baqarah (2:2): “This is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah.”

There is not, and there can never be, doubt about the teachings and demands from Allah eternalized in the Quran. On top of that, the Quran says about Mohammed:

Surah Al-Ahzab (33:21): “There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and who remembers Allah often.”

And:

Surah Al-Qalam (68:4): “And indeed, you are of a great moral character.”

Allah considers Mohammed to be an exemplary and exalted Muslim, as is clear from the various revelations from Allah to Mohammed. This is problematic because Mohammed cannot in any real sense be upheld as a role model for moral behaviour, like Christ can be, for instance. And as he is upheld by Allah as the primary example for Muslims forever, this does not look very good on “merciful” Allah either.

This article does not allow space to elaborate on all the questionable acts performed by Mohammed, but at any rate, a summary should include political assassinations, ethnic cleansing, genocide, sex with children, slavery, pillaging, fighting wars of conquest, demanding a share of the spoils of said conquests, lying and being deceitful, and opportunism. They were all part of the primary Islamic example’s personality. To this day, there is still debate about Mohammed’s attitude toward sex with deceased women. The fact that there is debate means there is not a flat-out rule against it, and some Islamic sources give rules or requirements for necrophilia. In fact, there have been attempts in Egypt to introduce into law the possibility of having farewell sex with your wife up to six hours after death. Something that seems wildly remote if the source documents were clear about this being haram. Here I must quote Raymond Ibrahim:

This interpretation is given much more weight when one considers that the secondary meaning for the word I translated above as ‘lay with’ is ‘intercourse,’ further demonstrating that the proposed Egyptian law is, in fact, based on this hadith: after all, the Arabic root-word used for ‘intercourse’ in the phrase ‘farewell intercourse’ is derived from the same root-word that Muhammad used to explain what he did with the dead woman (d-j-‘). As if this was not enough, necrophilia finds more validation in Islam’s legal texts. For example, according to al-Sharwani’s Hawashi, ‘there is no punishment for having intercourse with a dead woman’ and ‘it is not necessary to rewash the dead after penetration.’

Mind you, all of the things he did were based on the revelations he got from Allah. And as he was, and still is, the most exalted example of Muslim behaviour, one cannot draw any other conclusion than that these acts were done with full endorsement from Allah.

The superficial allure Islam offers, with its emphasis on family structure and unity in the umma, is but a thin veneer over a body of religious teachings that utterly fail to be a moral haven for those who find themselves incompatible with the repugnant values of woke Europe today. Islam may seem like a powerful means to counter all the woke intersectional garbage we are being inundated with, but to be a true Muslim is to be a “slave” to Allah. It means to be a subject in a theocratic system that has religious rules and precepts for virtually every aspect of your life. How to sleep, how to eat, how to have sex, how to put on your shoes (yes, really), how to use the toilet, etc. One is a slave in Islam because one is never to question why these demands are made.

Here are some examples:

“When you put on your shoes, start with the right foot, and when you take them off, start with the left.” (Sunan Abi Dawood)

Avoiding sleeping on the stomach: The Prophet discouraged sleeping on one’s stomach. He is reported to have said: “This is a position that Allah does not like.” (Sunan Abi Dawood)

“When one of you yawns, let him cover his mouth with his hand, for the devil enters.” (Sahih Muslim)

“Your wives are a place of sowing of your seed, so come to your tilth when you wish...” (Sahih Muslim) (this literally means have sex with your wife anytime you want, regardless of her mood)

There are specific etiquette guidelines for entering the toilet: It is recommended to enter with the left foot first and to say a supplication, such as: “O Allah, I seek refuge with You from the male and female devils.” (Sunan Abu Dawood).

Upon exiting the toilet, it is recommended to leave with the right foot and say a supplication, such as: “Praise be to Allah who has removed the harm from me and granted me relief.”

And so on, and so forth.

Islam confines its true adherents to a very strict, all-encompassing framework. And, as already mentioned, one can only be a Muslim if one is a true adherent. Minos (Muslims in name only) are, according to the sayings of Mohammed himself, not real Muslims. Every single one of the intrusive dictatorial prescriptions must be met, there is no doubt about that.

This conflicts with the very essence of the European race soul. Europeans have always striven for excellence in art, architecture, literature, music, theater, landscaping, etc. The European soul ultimately needs surroundings like the classics, created in order to remain sane. Europeans create a very specific aesthetic and only that very specific aesthetic can soothe the European soul. The natural inquisitiveness and creativity of the European soul would be quashed and banished under Islam. The only art that is permitted under Islamic rule is of a theological nature and without the creativity and ingeniousness of the Europeans, those same Islamic nations would have been stuck in the time of Mohammed, as Islam permits very little progress.

The very heartland of Islam, namely countries like Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, and Dubai, apparently know full well they do not stand a chance economically if they keep to Islam too tightly, as the abundance of the petrodollar has transformed these countries into capitalistic hedonistic expressions of money power. All of the forbidden sins within Islam can be indulged in without problems.

Wahabism is the strictest form of Islam around and yet with all this wealth still did not manage to produce an exalted Islamic paradise where most Muslims would like to live. Instead, they build ski resorts in the bloody desert, seven-star hotels renowned for their tacky interior design, goofball artificial islands off the coast, and some of the most expensive real estate (and prostitutes) in the world, including the Burj Khalifa, the highest building in the world. This seems like just another example of a purely economic dick-measuring contest. Perhaps they meant to reference the eternal erection martyrs have when they get to their seventy-two virgins. Oh, and let’s not forget that most of it is built with slavery, basically.

In short: Islam does not provide a true spiritual experience that is discernible to the superficial Muslim, and converts will ultimately necessarily remain superficial Muslims. It would take a lifetime to pore over the sources and find some transcendental truth, something only a rare few were able to do. Besides, this transcendental truth is shared with Christianity and Judaism, so no need to go to Islam specifically.

We must also acknowledge that the growth of Islam in Europe is heavily dependent on immigration of Muslims. There is no real movement of Europeans converting to Islam, as of yet. That is of course not growth, but dispersion from other countries. Many of the bold claims that Islam is the fastest growing religion rest on flimsy foundations and a lot of assumptions, not least the fact that all inhabitants of Islamic countries are counted as Muslims, while there may be significant minority groups. Iran is counted as Muslim, yet most of the people regard themselves as Persians and hate the regime. Islam is not growing in real terms by birthrates, as these too have plummeted in the Arabic world, nor by conversion. Islam has always spread by violence and war, not because its message is one that appeals for its profound spiritual teachings.

The European soul does, however, need true spiritual experience, and it needs its surroundings to reflect that need. Islam and the European soul are utterly incompatible, and Europeans will never convert en masse to Islam willingly. Because of this, there is no room for Islam in Europe, and no quarter should be given. The world is big enough for Islam to have its place. I believe Europe can, and should, have friendly relations with the Islamic world. Many people do find value in Islam. This should be respected, as long as it is removed from Europe entirely, along with every other religion or ideology that cuts at the root of the European race soul. If not, war seems inevitable, for the existence of the Europeans is not negotiable.