Europe’s Muslim Crisis: Immigration, Islamism & the Fate of Western Civilization | Yaron Brook Show - Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
A lot of the fund of Littlest fo Last Little
and an individual loss. This is the show, all right, everybody,
welcome to your own book show on this Saturday, Sober fourth.

(00:28):
But everybody's having a great beginning of your weekend. Oh right.
I'm still not one hundred percent there, not even maybe
fifty percent. I'm not sure. So you'll have to bear
with me if I'm a little slow today, and both
mentally and energy wise, we will see. But this is

(00:51):
uh yeah, this whatever it is, this COVID, it's taking
a lot, taking a lot out of it. All right,
let's let's jump in. I thought today we do kind
of take on a topic, a topic that keeps coming
back and people keep writing to me about and people

(01:14):
keep misrepresenting my views on and and I thought we'd
kind of cover it well a to z. I don't
know if we'll cover a to z, but let's say
a to s ada M and I don't know. We'll
cover a lot of it. And of course it's a
great opportunity for you to ask questions about this topic

(01:37):
in particular, or about anything else you want to ask.
The super Chat is available to ask about anything. But
it would be good if we kind of add out
all the questions around this issue, all the questions about
specifically Islamic immigration to Europe, what to do in the future,

(01:58):
what to do with the most that are there, how
to approach immigration in the future. Uh yeah, any anything, anything,
any questions you have about these things, ask now or forever,
hold your peace or something like that. As now. It's

(02:18):
an opportunity. This is this is the show. We're going
to try to cover it all. I'm open to talk
about other things. I know some of you wanted me
to talk about the Piece deal. There's just nothing new.
They're going to start negotiating tomorrow. I mean, it's all babe.
Just when on television and say it's done done. Yell absolutely,
there's no question. Hostages are coming home, you know. So

(02:41):
he's he's on the assumption that nothing can go wrong.
I don't know anything that you guys don't know. I
think I will talk about it tomorrow probably and Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.
It'll be in the news every day. We'll see how
this evolves and how it develops. Been happy to ask
answer any questions you have in the super chat around

(03:05):
it on once we complete our discussion of of Islam
in Europe. All right, I see Michael's already coming in
with one hundred bucks, so we're already well in our
way to reaching our goals in terms of super chats,

(03:26):
So just remind you they all goals. This show is
funded to contributions from people like you, so thank you
to all of you who contribute to the show. Don't
forget Patreon dot com. You can put in your on
book show and become a monthly supporter. Or PayPal is
another way to become a monthly supporter and support the show.
You can also go to Twitter right now and let

(03:48):
the world know that we're doing this show right now,
so maybe more people can come. They can ask the questions,
get it off their chest, you know, lecture me tell
me why I'm wrong. It'd be good to air all
these issues out, all right, So let me just say
I you know, first, my proposals around this are not

(04:12):
proposals that have that are what I think will happen.
There are proposals around what I think is politically feasible.
I have no idea what's political feasible, and the political
feasible is pretty lame and pretty limited. And this is

(04:32):
what I would propose if I were running for the
government of the UK or France or Germany. This is
what I think Europe should do. This is what I
think political parties in Europe should propose, should stand by,
should implement, Whether it's doable, whether the citizens would go

(04:53):
for it, I have no idea, But that's true of
any radical proposals. They're always going to be questions about implementations,
about the ability to implement, given the world in which
we live. But you know, this is again what I
think should happen. Why is this even an issue? Right? So,
I'm very poor immigration, as you know, I'm poor immigration

(05:16):
pretty much everywhere. I would love to see a world
in which we have, for the most part, with some
security screenings and some yeah, basically security screenings. I would
like to see a world of open immigration. This is
an issue because there's basically a war going on, a

(05:44):
war that we'll see how things go with his own
ramas and what happens in Iran and what happens in
a few other places. Could be that the war is
going to be winding up winding down in the years
to come. But there is a war going on, and
that war fundamentally is between the West, between those who
old Western values and between Islamism, between the Islamist powers

(06:10):
in the world, you know, motivated primarily or guided primarily
funded primarily by Iran and often by Katah, and in
some of the other Islamic countries in the Middle East.
This war is being fought as we speak, and in
h in Africa, it's a it's a war being fought

(06:30):
in Israel. It's a war being fought all of them,
at least in one way or another. It's a war
that's being fought on and off over the decades, at
least over the last four so decades in Asia, in
India and Pakistan, but also in place like Indonesia and Malaysia,

(06:52):
though it's on a on a Philippines or so on
a on a lower flame over there more recently. It
is a war between those who would impose Sharia law,
would enslave all in the entire world to a Sharia
law based system, to Islamic law. They would impose it

(07:14):
by force, and those who would like to hold on
to the vestiges of Western civilization, the vestiges of enlightenment
that we still have. It is an undeclared war at
least in terms of those who are more aligned with
the West. It is a word that the Muslims, the

(07:35):
Islamists know that they are waging. They know the purpose,
and they know their motivation and their goal, and know
what they want and know exactly what they seek to achieve.
But it is a war which the West has chosen
to ignore, to pretend it doesn't exist. Islam, after all,

(08:00):
George Bush told us, was a religion of peace. Uh.
Islamists so a tiny little minority. They're not you know,
they're not serious. They can't really achieve their goal. They're
not you know, there's not there's no there there, there's
there's nothing to be worried about. Be happy, just just

(08:23):
you don't don't think about it. Don't think about it.
That's the context. The context is that there's all going on.
And within that context there has been a large increase
in Muslims living in Europe. And of course, one of

(08:45):
the big questions how many of those Muslims, of Islamists,
how many of them are committed to this ideology and
and part of the problem is we we don't even know,
We don't really have good stats on that. But it's
important because they are if they are Islamists, they are
agents of the enemy, which we again unknowingly maybe to ourselves,

(09:09):
are at war with. So there is all going on,
and that's one of the many problems that immigration that
is expressed through immigration. It's not the only problem, you know,

(09:34):
the issues of crime and poverty and culture and all
of that, But those I think are minor problems. Those
are not problems that are that difficult to solve, and indeed,
the proposals I have which solve those problems at the
same time. But the only reason this rises to actually
being a substantive issue is that there's a war and

(10:01):
they've taken up aalms, and they have institutions, and they
are organized, and there is if you will, you know,
they're guiding principles and guiding organizations and coordination across different
organizations under the big broad umbrella of the Muslim Brotherhood

(10:23):
or maybe other umbrellas. But it's real. It's real, And
those of you who don't believe it's real, just remember
isis not that long ago. Well, Ice is still alive
and well, both in Iraq and Syria, but also in
Northern Africa. So's a Kaida. They're both very active in Afghanistan,

(10:43):
and the spin offs are active in Pakistan. And Hamas
is no different than ISIS and has no different goals
in ISIS and Rizbala is maybe Shiite instead of Sunni,
but fundamentally shares the same goal and same motivations and
same you know, long term aspirations as ISIS and al

(11:08):
Qaida and all of these. So you know, the issue
here is that all these entities exist. Another thing that's
really really important to note when they are confronted militarily,
because it's all they're defeated easily and quickly. This is

(11:33):
a one which one of the sides, the side of
the Islamists, is very weak. They have no capacity to
build weapons. They can steal them, they can buy them,
but they can't build them. They can't improve them, they
can't innovate. They can terrorize, but not for very long.

(11:54):
Once a Western force, any Western force really is ralled
in the United States, fans any Western force, it takes
the war seriously, it can wipe them out. It can
wipe them out in a matter of days, weeks, months,
But they can be wiped out. Isis was destroyed once

(12:14):
the West became semi serious and actually it was Russia
that took that one pretty seriously. You know, Iran is
maybe a force, but it too is a paper tiger,
as Israel showed in its twelve day war against Iran.
You know, Iran is an insignificant military force, insignificant military power. Again,

(12:40):
there's no there, there, there's nothing if one identifies it.
So the real problem with this war is not the
strength of the enemy. It's the unwillingness of the West
to recognize that it is at war it seriously and

(13:01):
to deal with it. So that is the context. And
in that context they are significant numbers of Islamists in Europe,
some in the United States, really all over the world
who are acting as agents of the enemies of the West,

(13:24):
whether explicitly as part of networks or implicitly as those
who would advocate for sure real law, or those who
on occasion pick up a knife and commit acts of
terror in support of the goal of the enemy without
any coordination, as did you know that the monster who

(13:48):
killed the Jews in the UK a couple of days ago.
So there's a war once I knows it. Now the
site doesn't. The one side is committed, it knows what
its goals. It knows what its long term mission is.
The other side doesn't want to see it. It's buried
its head in the sand. But when it brings its

(14:09):
head out of the sand and it confronts the situation,
victory is easy, simple, quick, not that big of a deal.
So what do you do about the fact that is
now a significant number of Muslims in Europe? Well, my

(14:31):
view is the uh, the only problem with Muslims in
Europe is the extent to which those Muslims affiliated with
associated with supportive of or potentially supportive of the Islamist cause.
To that extent, they are agents of the enemy and

(14:51):
they need to be dealt with. So what should Europe do. Well, first,
your past to recognize that's it. It's a war. It's
a pretty low flame war. It's not one that they
need aircraft carriers for. But they need to recognize that
the war, and indeed Europe is doing the opposite. It

(15:14):
would be great, for example, if European countries, the European
country I was in charge of, in order to deal
with the Islamic problem in Europe, would for example, declare
made a declaration of hostility to Islamism, maybe a declasion
of war, maybe a declasion of some kind of declasion
of hostility, declaring that Islamism is an enemy. It is

(15:39):
hostile to everything Europe stands for and believes in. It
is Islamism, by its very nature, is militant. It is
about using force, it is about violating rights, and it
is about the negation of any kind of separation of
state from religion. And there needs to be an unequivocal,

(16:03):
unequivocal declaration that that is unacceptable, that is evil, and
that is wrong, that is anti the principles on which
Europe stands on, and that this particularly European country is
going to dedicate itself to separating state from religion and

(16:28):
to fighting Islamism, and for all its citizens to recognize
that Islamism Sharia law will never ever ever become the
governing law in a particular country. So first politicians need
to go out there and say, those seeking sharia law

(16:52):
in this country, it's never happening, never going to happen.
And to the extent that you advocate violence to achieve this,
you are the enemy. So that has to be the beginning.
So that's step number one. It then has to declare

(17:17):
that anybody affiliated with this ideology, anybody who takes an
active role in support of establishing Sharia law or active
role in support of a terrorist organization, they will be deported.

(17:38):
There we send out of the country, and if they're
applying to immigrate to the country, they will not be accepted.
That is as part of the background check. Support for
organizations promoting Sharia law, organizations promoting terrorism, and that includes
by the way, Jamas, you're out of here. That is

(18:05):
you know. Of course, this will require a huge mental
shift in Europe because that means that Europe needs to
become the number one ally of Israel and needs to
support Israel's attempt to destroy Islamism in Israel, to destroy
Islamic organizations like Hamas and Islamic Jihad and Risabalah and

(18:26):
Iran and all of that. So active support for sharia,
the establishment of Sharia law, active support of terrorists organizations,
active supports of terrorist organizations in cludey Hmas, any terrorist

(18:50):
organization that is affiliate with the Islamist movement the Islamist
world is reason for deputation and for denial of immigration status.
Now in terms of Islamism to a loge extent, that is,
most of what you need. Now, what do you do

(19:15):
with the fact that Muslims making such a different culture
to Europe and they come and they leach off the
welfare state, and you know, they they have rape gangs
and they treat women horribly, and they get involved in
violent gangs and they do all stuff like that. What

(19:38):
do you do with that? Well, here again it's fairly simple.
You do the opposite of what Labor Party is doing
right now in the UK. First you declare an un compromising,
unbending commitment to the rule of law, and then the

(20:02):
law applies to everybody. You don't get special treatment because
you're a Muslim or you immigrant. Everybody is treated the same.
You rape, you go to jail for a very very
long time. You murder, you go to jail and we

(20:22):
throw away the keys. You participate in any kind of violence,
I think penalties should be increased, particularly in Europe, where
you guys are particularly particularly lenient when it comes to
penalties visa your violent crime. So by by the law,

(20:47):
I mean the biggest problem in Europe has is that
it doesn't it doesn't prosecute immigrants who violate the law.
And what does that do And encourages people to violate
the law. Second, so rule of law. You know you

(21:09):
got rape gangs, then you don't put them in jail. Fava.
They should never see the light of jay. You rape
the little kids, you should never see the light of day.
And it doesn't matter what your colored skin is. It
doesn't matter where you come from, doesn't matter what your
religion is. Second, immigrants should get no welfare, zero zilch.

(21:43):
They should get no welfare. And by the way, if
policemen are not doing their jobs in terms of prosecuting
the rule of law, then the policeman should be fired.
If cities telling their policemen local policemen don abide by

(22:05):
the law, then the city should be taken over by
the national government and the police should be fired and
the city council should be fired. There's a law in
the land. You've got to abide by the law, and
if law enforcement won't do it, then their law enforcement

(22:25):
needs to be replaced. There can be no tolerance and
should be zero tolerance. The police will look the other
way because they're members of the same tribe of their
friends or whatever. And indeed, you know police don't do
their jobs, should be tried for corruption and everything else,

(22:47):
just like you would treat anywhere else. So rule of
law number one second zero welfare. Immigrant should get no welfare.
Now I don't think anybody should get welfare. Welfare should

(23:09):
be zero for everybody, but at the very least immigrant
should get no welfare. There should be no incentive to
come in order to get welfare. So you come to
work or you don't come. You don't get housing, you
don't get put up in hotels, you don't get benefits,

(23:31):
you don't get paid, and not to work. You don't work,
you starve or let local charity take care of you,
or you get kicked out you leave. Generally, the immigration
system should be shifted from an asylum immigration system, which

(23:53):
should be basically zero, to an immigration system that is
built around work. You want to come and work, welcome,
You're not gonna get any welfare, and if you don't
work after a while, you're gonna be asked to leave.

(24:16):
So rule of law no welfare. Immigration based on work.
And when you qualify for citizenship. Citizenship should be tough.
So one you know, it should take a long time
before you qualify for citizenship. I don't know, twenty years

(24:38):
or more. And when you qualify for citizenship, you should
have to pass a pretty rigorous task that shows your
familiarity with the political system. You should be able to
you should have to swear alliance to this political s

(25:00):
system and thus a rejection of the idea of Sharia law.
So citizens, you cannot become a citizen. You cannot start
voting until you are fully committed, until you've been in
the country for a long time, you speak the language fluently,

(25:21):
you understand the political system involved, and this is true
in the United States as well, and you've embraced that
political system, and you've excluded in this case we're talking
about Muslims. You've excluded Sharia law as a possibility to
the extent that you support Youuria law shouldn't become a citizen,

(25:47):
should not be allowed to become a citizen. So these
are the basic requirements. Declare war are still to Islamism,
Read out those of which are rea or terrorism and

(26:07):
throw them out. Don't allow them into the country, make
immigration work based, enforce the rule of law, reject welfare
for immigrants, and make citizenship hard to get and requiring
a real commitment to the political system and really to

(26:29):
the culture of the place. Do that through language, for example,
and work, and I think if you do those things,
Islam is not a problem in Europe. Immigrants will assimilate,
they will secularize, they will move away from whatever culture

(26:54):
and whatever religious threat they might pose to the to Europe,
to the UK, to Frans to whatever it happens to be.
All the problems in Europe today a consequence of the
fact that these principles are not practiced. That there's a
buryed a head in the same mentality with regard to Islamism,

(27:17):
that immigration is based on welfare, on guilt, on asylum,
not on work. Indeed, the places where you have the
worst outcomes for immigrants are those places that he cease
to insist the least about work requirements, and it's just
the least about assimilation. Those places that segregate immigrants and

(27:47):
therefore don't require assimilation are the ones that have the
biggest problems with immigrants. If you assimilate, if you acquire language,
if you acquire work, and you're rigorous in imposing the
rule of law, and you weed out the radicals like

(28:13):
in moms in mosques preaching the takeover of the British
government and the position of Sharia law should have long
been gone from Britain, you know, in moms in mosques
hailing terrorist organizations are Hamas Chris bala isis al Kaida,

(28:36):
or there was the Brotherhood and more generally should be
gone from Europe to the intellectual leadership that makes that
possible should be gone, all right, So that is my solution.
Now to what extent, How big of a problem is this, right,
how big of a problem is this? To what extent

(29:02):
the Muslims in Europe identifies Islamists? How many Muslims are
they in Europe to begin with? So it's really hard
to get kind of statistics about the Islamism thing because
I think partially because Europeans don't want to know. It's
part of the bury their head in the sand. They
don't want to find out, they don't ask the surveys.

(29:26):
But you know, it appears that if you look at
various areas in Europe and different areas are gonna get
us slightly different results. You know, Muslim particularly recent immigrants,
have a very favorable view of sharia law, but very
few of them actually want to impose it on the

(29:48):
country that they're coming into. So you know among For example,
in France, in twenty nineteen, a poll showed that a
significant number forty six percent of farm born Muslims believe

(30:10):
Sharia law should be applied in the country. Now it's
not clear what that means. Does that mean like marriage
law should be applied to Muslims in the country, or
does it mean that it should replace the existing law
of France. But among Muslims born in France the number

(30:31):
is only eighteen percent. Generally, it seems that it's you know,
well under twenty percent of Muslims that actually want to
impose Sharial law beyond their own Muslim community. Let's see,

(30:51):
it's it's probably around you know, two percent of Muslims
in Europe who actually want to replace existing low with Sharia.
So twenty percent would leturial law to be applied to
them in a sense of marriage and civil law like that,

(31:11):
but two percent wanted to apply to the entire country. Okay,
two two percent is a lot of people. If there
are millions of Muslims, two percent could be thousands. And
those are the people who grab knives and attack people.
Those are the people who commit terrorist attacks. Islam is

(31:32):
going to do a lot of damage before it is
completely pacified, because it doesn't take much to do damage. Sadly,
a small minority, a tiny minority, concrete, real havoc. But

(31:53):
part of declaring one's hostility to Islamism and in a sense,
declaring war with it, is beefing security, beefing up monitoring,
beefing up intelligence and stopping them. All right. Uh so,

(32:13):
you know, it's it's really odd to tell. We see
videos all the time with people during these demonstrations going
up to cops and yelling, you know, we want to
post your real law in the UK. We want sharia
law everywhere. Is that one guy? Is that one hundred?
Is it one hundred thousand? Is it a million? Do

(32:35):
we know? It seems like we know very little. Maybe
somebody should do more research and try to figure this out.
It seems like it would be an important data point
to have. Right again, different polls, so different things. Sony
four percent of Muslims in the UK in twenty sixteen

(32:58):
said they supported ISIS. A four percent is a lot
supporting ISIS. That's about as evil as it gets. And
doing something about those four percent. They should be watched, monitored,
and some of them should be deported immediately. So you know,

(33:23):
it's it's going to be important to identify, monitor and
get rid of how big is how big is the
is the Muslim population in Europe. I mean, you'd think
that they're going to be taking over any minute now

(33:44):
by kind of the panic that so many people express.
Let's take a few countries, Fans for example, Fans, I mean,
let's I also have here. Yes, so France has today
between five to six million Muslims. They constitute between eight

(34:08):
to ten percent of the population, eight to ten percent
in some areas. It's much more than that, if you
go to Marseilles, for example, some neighborhoods in Paris. In
some areas you don't see wisdoms anyway, but eight to
ten percent of the total population if immigration continues, let's say,

(34:32):
at medium levels, or even if high immigration. And given
that you know France, the French, they don't have a
place for births, but they have a reasonable level of
having children, not like Italy, where it's completely shrinking that

(34:58):
by twenty fifty, you know, Muslims might be between thirteen
to eighteen percent. Say neither case. Are we talking about
the fact that Muslims are going to be a majority
even by twenty one hundred than not a majority. They're

(35:18):
not close to being a majority. In a place like France,
Germany Muslim population is six point one percent. And you know,
even if you have crazy high migration, like you're in
the mid twenty teens, which is unlikely, it might reach
by twenty fifty, might reach again twenty percent. Twenty percent

(35:42):
ceased to be the highest percentage you could get to
by by twenty fifty if you had really high migration
and you didn't put any of the restrictions that I
talked about in place. Let me see, I know, to
see if the UK, I thought I did Frans the

(36:06):
United Kingdom twenty fifty projection is that if you had
a high immigration migration, no deportation, high migration, you would
get to sixteen point seven percent of the UK population
by twenty one hundred. You maybe get to twenty percent.

(36:28):
Now that's a lot, but it's it's not a majority.
And by then twenty one hundred, that's what sixty something
is seventy seventy seventy five years. How many of those
are regional Muslims, even Muslims, how many of them have

(36:50):
completely assimilated become secular. How much is islami in a
factor And suddenly if you take into account the way
I think about it, that is, you know, the complete
repression of anybody supporting Sharia or the explicit advocacy of

(37:15):
rule of law and oppression of welfare. So immigration rates
would come down. Right. A lot of Muslim immigrants who
come are coming for the paycheck. So if you get
rid of the wef estate, as I said, for immigrants,
if you make citizens re climate really difficult, if you're
a hostile to Islamism, immigration would plummet. Immigration Muslim countries

(37:44):
would come down. Now UK created this mass anyway, because
the UK was doing you know, this is a consequence
of Brexit. If the UK was still part of the EU,
then it would have a lot of immigrants from Ukraine
and would have a lot fewer immigrants right now from

(38:05):
Bangladesh and Pakistan. So yeah, anyway, so yeah, work requirement,

(38:25):
no welfare, apply the rule of law, tough suggestions, requirements
and make it really difficult for anybody to uphold charial
law and to advocate for Islamism. And the problem of
Muslims in Europe is solved, all right. I am open

(38:54):
to questions. Let me, God, my voice is going again,
so we're not gonna go for very long today. Sorry,
but my voice just doesn't exist the last few days.
Uh okay, let me remind you of our sponsors. One

(39:18):
of our sponsors hand to shut Wealth and to shut
wealth dot com hander shot is with two tees, hand
to shot wealth one would and then dot com slash ybs,
where you can find information about products that they have
that can really help you reduce your capital gains taxes.
If you've got a big stock portfolio, that is, that
has a lot of capital gains and if you sell

(39:40):
stock you're gonna pay a lot of capital gains taxes,
or if you're about to sell your company and dread
the idea of paying a third of whatever you get
in taxes, well, contact hander shot wealth dot com slash

(40:00):
ybs to get information about how they can reduce your
capital gains or defer it significantly in a way that
really reduces your tax load and enhances wealth creation. You
can find an interview I did with Robin about this
on my playlist on the sponsors we talk about We

(40:21):
talk about this issue and you'll learn a lot, I
think from that interview. I think you'll enjoy it and
you'll see if this is a product that might be
something you would be interested in. Alex Epstein alex Epstein
is a sponsor of the show. Alex is, of course

(40:44):
the world expert on energy use, the world expert on
fuss ol fuels and electricity and energy, on environmentalism and
climate change and all this stuff. And you can read
him alex Epstein dot substack dot com. Alex Epstein does
upsteck dot com. There's just an Alex Ai that you

(41:06):
can ask questions of. I mean, you will learn so
much from reading Alex so much about kind of one
of the most crucial questions that we have today and
one that is so contested out there in the world.
And finally that I'm an institute. Let's see that they
were we were promoting. They wanted me to promote something different.

(41:30):
Let me there, it is, all right, let's see. So, yes,
the Atlas Shrugged Essay contest. I don't know if any
of you applying, but there is, uh there's an Adoles
Shrugged Essay contest, and there's a deadline. The deadline for
the essay contest is October thirty first, So it's the
end of this month, the essay contests. The winner of

(41:55):
the essay contests, you win twenty five thou dollars. I
didn't know it was that high. Anybody wins the Atlas
shruggessy context because twenty five thousand dollars. It's open to
high school, college and graduate students worldwide, and you know
you can you read the novel, engage with ideas, and

(42:18):
you answer a question. Again, twenty five thousand dollars. That's
a lot of money. Again. Entry deadline is Oktober thirty. First,
if you're a student, you've read at La Shrugged, and
you have until the end of the month to submit
the essay. To get more information, to get what the
essay looks like and how to do it and how
long and all of that, go to ironran dot oak

(42:40):
slash slash start here inran dot org slash start here. Oh,
Troy just showed up and did five hundred Australian dollars.
Thank you, Troy. That is greatly, greatly, greatly appreciate it.

(43:04):
So thanks Toy. I'll remind everybody you can still ask questions.
I'm not gonna go for very long. As I said,
my voice is fading, and I will try to do
shows every day this week, but they might still be
shorts until I get my voice in my energy back.
It's it looks like this is gonna be a while.

(43:27):
We will see, all right, Thanks toy, Thanks John Baiales
for doing a sticker. Let's see, Thank you Ryan. Let's
see who else did a sticker today? Thank you Steven? Whoops?
All right, I think that's all. Yep, that is all

(43:48):
the stickers that we have. A toy with five hundred
stallion dollars really got us to our targets. So I
appreciate that. And let's see. Reminded every body to use
Patreon patreon dot com to become a monthly supporter of
the show. Very very valuable member. This show is only
made possible because of you. Your monthly contributions, your super

(44:14):
Chat contributions are what makes this show possible. And so
without you, I can do this, So please keep them
coming again. You can do it through Patreon, you can
do it through PayPal, and you can do it here
through super Chat. Really really really appreciated. I see Jeremy
just became a member, so you can also become a

(44:35):
member on YouTube. So all different ways to support your
own book show. One other way which we haven't had
anybody do in a while, I guess I haven't advertised
to either, is you can sponsor a show. That is,
you can pick a topic. You can send me a
series of questions or chat with me about what you
would like cover it, and I will do a show

(44:57):
on a topic of your choosing for one thousand dollars.
So one thousand dollars and I will talk about whatever
you would like me to talk about. So let me know.
All right, let's jump in with uh and Michael another
one hundred dollars question. Michael did this yesterday as well.
Thank you, thank you, Thank you, Michael. I really appreciate that.

(45:17):
So Michael asks, what Donald Trump is clearly showing is
that we do not have three functional branches of government.
Were one branch trying to dominate the other two, and
we see Congressional Republicans acting as if they are cabinet
members and Trump administration. Yeah, I mean, I think that's
absolutely right. I think that we have a dysfunctional Congress

(45:40):
and it's been dysfunctional for a while. Trump has suffaced
that in a way that we haven't seen with any
other administration. He's surfaced that because he does whatever the
hell he wants, in Congress will do nothing, nothing to
stand in a way to block him, to counter him,

(46:02):
to you know, and to try to reassert its own
power again. This is a consequence of decades and decades
and decades of dysfunction, of decades of not passing laws,
of decades of basically handing to the executive more and
more and more power and being willing to tolerate that.

(46:22):
And Donald Trump now is the beneficiary of all that,
and the exploiter, the exploiter of all that. And that
is what he is doing, and he is making it
clear that Congress is useless. Now, let us hope, and
a real push needs to be made to reassert congressional power.

(46:44):
It is really, really important that we have a fully
functional government, not just the government of a strong executive
and nothing else. So we need a strong Congress. We
will see the extent to which the Supreme Court, the
Court seemed to be standing up to Trump, or see
if the swim Court is willing to let that stand

(47:06):
and willing to do its constitutional job of checks and balances.
But one thing is unequivocal, and this is what Michael
is pointing out that Congress has defaulted on its responsibilities,
and it's a damn tragedy that they're not taking it
more seriously and that they're not introspecting and thinking about it.

(47:27):
But a rebirth, a re energizing, re energizing Congress should
be a big part of whatever future agenda a decent
political party has in America. Right equal to reality? Off topic,
but I know an atheist who claims the Enlightenment came

(47:49):
from Christianity. Any book recommendation showing it was actually against
religion and a Christianity was irontained enlightenment and not its source.
You are going to have a wait. There will be
a book coming, I don't know when on this particular
topic or authored by Don Watkins and myself, So it's

(48:16):
it's in the works. The talk I gave this summer
at o'conn was in a sense kind of an outline
of the project. Uh. But but there is a there's
a book project in the works around exactly this question.
The you know, if you're willing to do the work,
there are lots of books that show that, but but

(48:38):
you have to do the work yourself. Nobody actually walks
you through it. We will, We'll walk you through it.
We'll walk you through how the Enlightenment is not christian
The Enlightenment is a rejection of Christianity. It's it's lighting up.
It's it's it's enlightening after an era of lack of light.

(49:01):
But it is exactly it's The Enlightenment isn't move away
from religion. It's not a complete rejection of religion. And
that's part of its weakness that it doesn't completely reject religion,
and it doesn't have a complete philosophical alternative to religion.
That is part of its weakness. But it certainly is
a move away from religion. It doesn't come out of Christianity.

(49:24):
It develops in spite of and to spite Christianity. And
to do that you would have to do a lot
of reading around the Enlightenment. You know Jonathan Israel's book
Books in the Enlightenment, the fantastic books that I've talked
about in the past called The Closing of the Western Mind,
which shows how Christianity closed the Western Mind, and then

(49:47):
the reopening of the Western Mind showing what led to
the reopening of the Western mind. But Christianity is the
enemy of reason, the enemy of thought, the enemy of progress.
And you know, and to the extent that Christianity's reasonable,
it's because it has been influenced by the Enlightenment, not

(50:09):
the other way around, Brian. With Trump taking over the military,
are you going to move to Portugal? Will AIRI move
to another country? I'll ask again in a year, Yeah,
ask again any year. The answer now is no. You know,
Trump is not taken over the military. He is according

(50:30):
to American law. He is the commander of a chief,
always has been every president is. Nothing special has happened.
What's happened is the use of the military in the
American streets. We will see how that develops, and how
that develops, and how that evolves, and whether that justifies
running away or not talking a year. But no, I

(50:54):
have no plans to absolutely not bread pants hi on.
I'm curious if you read The Mohammed Code by Howard Bloom.
It's a scathing indicament and condensation or history of Islam,
highlighting the West's evasion. I had to put it down
many times, and maybe it's too angry. I haven't. I haven't,

(51:18):
but I've read a lot of stuff on Islam. I
know exactly the extent to which the West has evaded.
So it wouldn't I'm sure it wouldn't surprise me. I
don't think there's anything particularly new. And again, you know,
to the extent that Islam goes stronger, it's only because

(51:39):
of the west evasion. Islam has nothing to offer the world.
It has nothing to offer its own people. It's weak.
Uh it's it's weak. It's pathetic, it's it's it's it's
it's it's there's nothing there. Uh So, so I would
it's only the sanction of the victim. It's only the

(52:00):
sanction of the West that makes Islam have any any
strength at all, has any bearing on the world. By
the way, my talk from Okon on the West, on
Western civilization in Christianity is available now on my channel
on YouTube and on the I'm an Institute channel, but

(52:21):
it's on my channel, so you can find it right now.
You should go watch it. I think you'll find it.
It's a forty minute talk with a Q and A
I think you'll find it interesting and you should send
your friend. Equal to reality, you should send your friend
to listen to my talk. I lay out the argument

(52:43):
there lyon is it legit to criticize the worn drugs
because there's no defined enemy. Is a warn Islamism similar?
It is different because it's an ideology. Is it like
if not had been a globally sporadic versus concentrated in Germany. Yeah,

(53:08):
that's a good question. I mean, I wouldn't I wouldn't
say that the war is with Islamism. Islamism needs to
be identified as the cause of the enemy, the ideology
of the enemy. But the war needs to be with
specific organizations. That is, the war needs to be with
the Muslim Brotherhood, with Iran, with Ramas, with Balah, and

(53:32):
with all the different spin offs of the Muslim brotherhoods
in Europe and elsewhere. So one of the things that
you need to do. One of the things that you
need to do is once you identify Islamism is the
ideology of the enemy, now you have to make a

(53:53):
list of all the organizations, all the entities, all the
country trees, the constitutomy. But you're right, you can't fight
an ideology. You have to fight a concrete political entity
eon Ramas, Muslim otherhood. But to do that, to be

(54:18):
able to identify which entities you're fighting, you have to
know what the ideology is Liman, thank you for the
question that helped me clarify that for everybody. Andrew feel bad.
Dems and Republicans agree on subsidizing people for healthcare. That
odds of a power for power's sake. It's a crude

(54:42):
political climate. Both sides agree on the fundamentals. You fight
to the death comments. Yeah, no, absolutely. I mean I
haven't commented on the government closure because it's all theater.
It's meaningless, it has no real meaning ideologically or existentially
or economically. It's a power grab each party. It's a

(55:03):
power grap and it's a performance art, right, So each
party is trying to be perceived as tough for its
own voters before their twenty twenty six elections. So Democrats
have to do something because otherwise they seem like they're
caving to Trump on everything. And Trump has to be
perceived as going after the Dems and getting them and

(55:25):
schooling with them. So he's going to use the shut
down to shut off all the favorite programs of the Democrats.
It yeah, it's one hundred percent power. There's no fundamental
difference between the two political parties. You know, maybe they
disagree about transgender and sports. That's one issue I think

(55:47):
they disagree about. But what else do they disagree about?
Not much, right other than that, gay marriage maybe, but
that's about it. It's these a few culture issues, abortion,
a few cultural issues, and everything else they agree on.
They agree on spending our money like there's no tomorrow.
They agree on subsidizing everything. They agree on essentially planning

(56:11):
the economy. They agree on the government should have immense power.
They agree on everything. So if you think, as some
of you think, I think that the most important issue
in the world is transgender in sports, then that makes you,
you know, you hate the fact that sports. Then you

(56:35):
vote for one party and if you have a different
perspective and transgenderism in sports, you have a different I mean,
that's it. No, there's no difference in immigration, not really,
Now would you boil it down? I mean again, immigration
was used more as a club than as a difference. Ideologically,

(56:57):
there's very little ideologic difference between the two parties and
immigration when you boil it down. They don't like immigration.
Now Democrats have become more the party of immigration because
Republicans don't like immigration, so the Democrats are the opposite.

(57:20):
Not because there's any real belief, not because there's any
real belief. Remember that Biden negotiated this immigration deal with Republicans.
There was going to close the border and basically dramatically

(57:42):
limited immigration, and he was fine with it in congression
of Democrats will fine with it and Republicans ultimately wouldn't
pass it because Trump wanted the immigration issue for the campaign.
But there was a lot of agreement around immigration across Yeah.

(58:04):
I mean, they are Democrats on the left who want
the chaos and who want just to bring in whatever,
but they don't dominate the Democratic Party. The people who
dominate the Democratic Party would have cut a deal, but
Trump didn't want a deal. So yeah, maybe there's some
differences on immigration, but they're not big. And whose side

(58:26):
are you on on that one? I'm probably more in
the Democrats side than the Republicans. So yeah, when Bush
tried to pass biparties and immigration reform and it looked
like it was going to pass, Democrats killed it because

(58:47):
the unions slapped them down. Unions anti immigration. So Americans.
The reality is Americans. Americans say in polls they're very
pro immigration, but the activists on both parties, both left
and right, do not want immigrants, the unions don't want immigrants,

(59:11):
and of course Maggot, the mago or the Republican base
doesn't want immigrants. So but the parties are not that different.
Parties are not that different, Jamie. A YouTube video titled

(59:31):
the Death of Economics one to one ft MESI, who
were a guy apparently with an ECON degree, claims were
foolish to believe in supplying demand and that rent weight
controls on bad. Can you review refute it? I'll look
for it. There's really good article. I think it was

(59:55):
in the Law Street Journal by Brian Abracht abr on
exactly this. He shows quite the opposite. Supplying demand work
beautifully and the laws of supplying demand work amazingly and
a great at predicting. And you know, so this is

(01:00:17):
whatever this video is. It's foolish, all right, Michael. Do
you think Americans are more prone to initiation of force
than Europeans because Americans are saturated with an immaturity and
narcissism the Europeans have grown out of. He continues, there's

(01:00:38):
more pressure to appear materially successful as a way to
achieve suitour self esteem in the US that doesn't exist
in Europe. You know, I don't know. I don't know
if that's true. You know, this is a complicated question
of what is it about America that makes American you know,

(01:01:00):
more violent society? And look, even with all the terrorist
attacks in Europe, America is a more violent society and
more likely to die of a violent crime in the
United States than you are in Europe. Even though we
have a lot less terrorism from Islamists, we have a

(01:01:20):
lot more violent crime. Now what makes that? So? What
is it about Asian cultures that makes them so nonviolent?
Like Japan and South Korea unbelievably low crime rates and
no violence. I mean, that is a complicated question and

(01:01:44):
I don't have an answer to it, but there is
something and the sounds contradict you, but there's something about
the ambition, the willingness to break social conventions that exist

(01:02:06):
in American society that when filtered through bad values and
and and and and and bad choices and and maybe
this pseudo self esteem and narcissism that Michael's talking about
produced violence. So, uh, you know, the the these other

(01:02:32):
cultures are more uh, I don't know, rules following uh
less entrepreneurial less innovative, less ambitious, which makes them less
violent maybe, but also makes them less of all the

(01:02:55):
positives that associated with that and most of these positives.
And again it's when that ambition gets channeled into bad
values in bad directions. Uh, that's you know, when bad

(01:03:17):
things happen on that end. You know, Latin American culture,
which is not particularly ambitious, is quite violent. So the
countries which have some of the highest violence rates in
Latin America and Africa, and it's not linked there to ambition.

(01:03:38):
So you'd have to really think through culture and attitude
and and and exactly what's going on and why some
cultures are more likely to be violent than others. I
don't I don't have I don't have an answer. It's
not like, yeah, what's the similar between I don't know,

(01:04:02):
violence and Olsavado and violence and America and violence in
Central Congo. I mean, you have to control for so
many variables. But I don't know. I do think that
the fact that Europeans a little bit more passive, less
take initiative, less ambitious has something to do with it.
But those all virtues. So why do virtues lead de

(01:04:24):
vice only when they're filtered through something like narcissism or
or you know, a desire for pseudo self esteem materialism.
I like numbers. How does left Islamist alliance fit within DIM? Well,

(01:04:45):
I mean I think that DIM will teach us that
it's not I think, you know, I don't know how
it fits. Put it that way. I shouldn't speak for DIM.
It's not sustainable alliance. It's not an equilibrium alliance. It's
an alliance of convenience that falls apart at the at

(01:05:06):
the at the earliest opportunity. You could see that with
the flotilla that that came across the Mediterranean. As soon
as some of the Islamists discovered that some of the
activists and the flotilla were gay, they wanted to walk away.
There was a huge fight between the different elements within

(01:05:26):
within the flotilla. They separated, they disintegrated. So I think
the leftist Islamist alliance is unstable. It cannot survive. It's
it's a it's an alliance of opportunity, nothing more neo.

(01:05:47):
How can the government find out whose Islamists are not
without mass surveillance, Well, you don't need mass aveilance. All
you need is to survey those mosques that are teaching
Islamist ideology, those preachers that are advocating for Sharia law
that is completely legit, and they should be surveyed, and

(01:06:09):
they're being surveyed today. You know, you have already intelligence
agents in many of these Muslim communities because you're monitoring
them because there's terrorism there. It's not that hard given
that to be able to identify you is and isn't

(01:06:29):
affiliated with these groups, So not that hard to do
they congregate together, particularly today, Michael, is there a chance
that stock crocket boom is not a bubble? AI? Is
that revolution? I mean, anything's possible. I just think that
what you're seeing right now is probably massive over investment

(01:06:52):
in AI infrastructure. And how that all plays out I
don't know exactly, but the valuations right now AI might
be a revolution. But how you turn that revolution to money,
which is what you would have to do in order
to make these valuations make sense. Nobody has that business

(01:07:13):
model yet that I've seen. You know, how can vetting
be done in individuals from third world countries if their
governments don't have data on their citizens? Oh? I mean,
it's not that hard to vet an individual. And if

(01:07:33):
there's no data. You have to make the call about
whether you want to give them the benefit of the
doubt or not. I don't think it's a big risk
and I don't think there's a big issue about who
you let in. Once they're in, you can keep surveying,
surveilling them and for period. You can give them a

(01:07:56):
period in which they're being surveyed and to see if
they're if they're part of any kind of hostile group
or it what happens when the majority of police and
prosecutors and Muslims. Then you live in a Muslim country.
But where are the majority of police when prosecutors Muslim?

(01:08:20):
And if it's a local issue, then fire them if
they're not abiding by the law. The central Gumma should
have that power. And if it's at the federal level,
then it's too later. Ready they're all Muslims already, so
you're living in a Muslim country. Move But if you
follow the rule of law, and if you've done all

(01:08:40):
these things, then that will never happen. Jacob, how much
of this plan can be done as a solo European
country versus the EU as a whole? Would you have
to leave the EU to employment specifically deportation. No, I mean,
look at how much Denmark has done relative, for example,
to Sweden. Denmark has done a lot of this, has

(01:09:05):
deported a lot of people that has a very different
immigration policies than Sweden does. And indeed, in twenty fifteen
when all the Muslims were coming after the Serians Civil War,
they didn't come to Denmark. They went right through Denmark
to Sweden. Because Denmark was giving no welfare, was giving
zero welfare, was not hospitable, Sweden was. They skipped Denmark

(01:09:33):
and went straight to Sweden. Curious if you said this
to Harry and he gets and if he gets it,
I don't think I said anything here that I think
Harry would disagree with. I'd be surprised. Psa Urons Oconn

(01:09:53):
Talk has recently been available on the Aris YouTube channel.
It's on my channel forget a Rice channel. Check it
out on my channel, Jamie. The video is by the
videos by channel called Unlearning Economics and it does takedown

(01:10:14):
videos of Thomas soul Milay speaks unfavorably of Melay speaks unfavorably.
Henriy Hazlitt seems like a leftist with a vendetta yeah,
I mean, yeah, I mean it makes sense, but yeah,
it makes sense for a leftist to do that, but

(01:10:38):
I can't imagine that there's any real quality there. All right,
thank you guys. I better get off because I am
losing my voice. I apologize for this being a short show.
Thank you again for all the support. Thanks to all
the super chatters in particularly, thank you, thank you, thank you.

(01:11:01):
Really really appreciate it. And I will see you guys
probably tomorrow, probably do something again, another show show tomorrow.
Hopefully my voice will get a little stronger. I will
get a little stronger from show to show. Please subscribe
if you're not a subscriber and like the show before

(01:11:22):
you leave, like the show before you leave Patreon, don't
forget that. Bye, everybody, see tomorrow.

All Episodes

Europe’s Muslim Crisis: Immigration, Islamism & the Fate of Western Civilization | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Europe’s Muslim Crisis: Immigration, Islamism & the Fate of Western Civilization | Yaron Brook Show