A Place To Belong: Assimilation or Conquest?

The history of the world has been primarily one of conflict. The main source of the that conflict has been the result of a clash of cultures, resulting in wars, conflicts, genocides, brought about by manufactured starvation through the withholding or deliberate destruction on natural resources, the intentional infection of various people by some biological agent (whether they actually understood as such or not), enslavement, or simply being breed out of existence. I'm sure there are many more examples, but you get the picture.

Direct conflict seems to be the most common. We don't know how many people have died as a result of wars or conflicts down through history, though we can make reasonable guesses with increasing accuracy we come closer to the actual event, but even that's occasionally sketchy since no one really takes time to count the dead during a battle and often, war crimes are hidden or written off as something else. We do know, for instance, that approximately 100 million died just in the 20th century alone; perhaps more when events like trauma, wounds, the long term effects of disease or radiation are factored in.

So what happens when cultures come into conflict? Well, first, I think we should define "cultures" to get a better understanding of what we're talking about. Webster's New World Dictionary defines culture as "the ideas, customs, skills, arts, etc of a given people in a given period: civilization". It also includes in the definition "mannerisms or speech". I would expand this to includes values based not just on a common history, but also on a common religion when that religion has been thoroughly integrated throughout society to the exclusion of all others.

Hinduism, which is prevalent in India, is a good example. It, along with a common historical tradition, has created its own value system, including moralistic code of conduct and behavior towards others. It has superimposed a caste system and specific conduct both within the caste and in dealing with those outside of one's own caste for instance (of course, the caste system has, to a large degree, broken down due to outside influences, the least of which being improved education. We can find the same thing in Japan (which has its own history of a caste system as well), China, and throughout Asia and Africa.

Again, most of this has faded due to the influence of mostly outside factors, especially as they became increasingly in contact with the West, which has tended to be more egalitarian by comparison. Both China's and Japan's feudal systems began to lose their influence after contact with American, British, Dutch, and Portuguese sailors increased. Initially, contact was based on the notion of trade; mostly of goods, etc, but pretty soon it encompassed the trade of ideas. I guess we can chalk that up to natural human curiosity! After all, Mankind is an inquiring species. We are hardwired to investigate and explore; to learn through trial and error.

But what if we must deal with two (or more) cultures which come into conflict? Where both are firmly entrenched through their own common histories, evolved laws, values, especially those based on religion or a political ideology? What happens then? When we look at Rome, with its Greco-Roman values and religion(s), we generally find conflict; often violent conflict. We find two competing social systems struggling for dominance. Eventually, it comes down to the one with the strongest military and best social organization which is able most successfully to impose itself on the other. Of course, it's not entirely a "one-way street". Even the weaker culture is sometimes able to imprint itself on the more dominant culture, especially if its stronger than the other in that area (certain medical practices or engineering techniques for instance).

The Celts were, to varying degrees, able to withstand the Roman legions, and thus avoid complete assimilation. The Germanic tribes were much more successful since they were militarily superior to their Celtic cousins as well as made better use of natural barriers. Eventually, Rome began to adopt and adapt to other cultures, languages, and even religions in the name of multiculturalism, even though many had little or no skills which could benefit the Empire; many didn't even bother to learn the language. However, everyone followed the same Roman laws and paid homage to the dominance of the Roman State, at least for a time. But in time, even that failed and Roman collapsed into a series of petty kingdoms, which rose and fell in relation to their own interactions with other cultures. China suffered a similar fate, despite a relatively homogenous population.

However, religion, is often see as a unifying factor, which it is; at least except for the religions it's seeking to replace. It's not uncommon to see the new religion replace the old religion by adopting some of the more popular traditions of the previous religion, including sacred sites. In England for instance, the Christian missionaries would often take over a sacred pagan site by dedicating it to a certain religious figure or "saint" (especially if the "saint" is a native to the region) and/or rededicate it to a specific "miracle" similar to, but slightly different, from the previous religion.

Also, another form of eradication of the previous religion is by converting their gods into sometime to be feared or made fun of. For instances, fairies and sprites, and gnomes became "demons". Snakes, once seen as symbols of power and knowledge, were now reinterpreted as harbingers of evil, like black cats or ravens were. Some are ridiculed, or simply made to be forgotten. The Celtic god of the hunt, Cernunnos, also known as the "horned god" which represented the male aspect of nature, became the prototype of the "devil" or Satan. The more dominate female aspect of nature, such as "The Great Mother", Isis or Hera, was now viewed as evil and twisted; something designed to trick or corrupt Man. Meanwhile, other popular gods and goddesses were renamed and remade as a "saint" or a venerated individual of the new religion such as the Celtic goddess "Brigantia" who became the Christian "Saint Brigit".

So, while religion can be a unifying factor, it can--and usually is---used as a tool of conquest. A more direct form of conquest is, of course, political ideology. Political ideology is pretty straight forward. It's a system of ideas, both theoretical and practical (if based on historical precedence) designed to create a form of societal governance. Out of this, laws to guide (or rule) society are created. These laws tend to evolve out of common practice or traditions and common values (which are, themselves, are strongly influenced by religion or prominent philosophies). Naturally, the dictates of unfolding events and the Will of the King or ruling elite, has a big influence as well.

What happens when a society, which has had time to incorporate a single religion into not just its government (thus becoming a theocracy), but also throughout every aspect of its society into one where the lives of ordinary people are solely governed by the dictates of its religious and political leaders? Historically, we often find that society stagnate. They can evolve and develop as one would expect of a society because of their strict religious dictates. Now, that's not to say they remain frozen in place. They do develop along certain, often very restricted lines so long as the authority of their religion is never brought into question.

That's the cardinal rule which can never be violated under any circumstances. One bright spot is that despite the monolithic structure of a religion, there are always variations within its structure; however, these are usually well defined distinctions. So, while one sect may not be as strict or repressive in one area, that isn't to say it isn't as or more repressive or strict in other areas. It also doesn't keep one sect from attempting to impose its interpretation on the other either. This brings us to the most pressing and relevant question.

What happens when two entirely different cultures, with wholly unique religions, traditions, values, and political ideologies come into contact? Let's look at the West. As a whole, the West tends to be very independent oriented; the individuality of the individual is paramount. It tends to be open when it comes to expressing new ideas or even values. Government is, at least in theory, democratic in that the majority decides based on the present needs of society (in some countries, this still holds true to a degree, while in others, such as the US, it's devolved into an Oligarchy where voters are given the illusion of choice by picking from pre-approved candidates who will represent the needs and wants of a small economic elite).

In terms of social values, there is little variation of the value of genders. Women and men are basically treated the same. Females have equal access to education and opportunities to succeed on their own, as well as hold any position they desire. The same goes for those who step outside traditional gender roles (ie: the LGBTQ communities). This is also true of races. Despite the recently manufactured "racial crisis" in America, anyone who applies themselves can succeed, but equal opportunity does not mean equal results. Much of that depends on the individual themselves, irrespective of their race or gender.

When it comes to religion, the West is highly diverse. At its core, the West has been Christian since roughly the 10th century. At one time, it was nearly unified in that belief, being either Catholic or Eastern Orthodox until the Martin Luther and the Protestant Revolution or Reformation in the 16th Century (and the subsequent Counter Reformation by the Catholic Church) which spread throughout Europe.

Nevertheless, Christianity has been the dominant religion of the West. Judaism has also had a strong presence in the West, beginning with the ancient Romans (most were teachers, slaves, or traders). Of course, Jews were never entirely accepted by Christianity despite its claim of common roots in Judaism. In more recent years, we've seen a decline in organized religion and a rise in more secular beliefs (or in no religious beliefs at all), as well as alternative beliefs. In past centuries, such beliefs were as good way to get tortured, hanged, or burnt at the stake by religious/state authorities. However, it has been the expanse of democratic beliefs; the sovereignty of the individuals, which has made this possible.

Now, can you imagine what would happen with this society comes into contact with another which holds that the state, not the individual, is superior; where gender differences are seen as absolute and any variations (such as education or having a profession, especially one of authority) are ruthlessly enforced or those who cross traditional gender lines are simply beaten, raped, murdered or disfigured out of hand for violating religious laws? What happens when the very notion of democracy and rule of the people by and for the people is seen as abhorrent and in direct conflict with the accepted religious laws? Even basic notions of free expression or speech are largely forbidden; where questioning religious or political authority could be fatal.

What about the notion that female children can "marry" men three or four times their age or that small boys are allowed to be raped? Even females, regardless of their age, may be attacked or raped if out alone or even in pairs, unless they are accompanied by a male relative? How do you feel about being attacked, raped, or beaten if you aren't properly dressed as dictated by someone else's religious laws? How do you feel about having no pets? What about not being allowed to drive or vote? How about watch movies in public, dancing or go clubbing?

How do you feel about slavery? What would you say to a society which, based on its religion, says anyone not of their religion may be stripped of everything and sold into slavery...or murdered indiscriminately? Your only possible alternative would be to pay a steep tax. What would you say if you were told you have very few personal, or even basic, rights because of your gender or religious beliefs? What about demanding that your religion must not "interfere" with theirs, or simply demanding that you not smoke, drink, or eat pork products---or even that none of these can even be advertised? Now, how would you feel if this same society requires you to follow their religious/societal dictates regardless of your personal beliefs?

What do you think the outcome would be if these two vastly differing societies came in close contact with each other? Which of the two would ultimately dominate the other and enforce its will on the other? Well, that's the situation Europe now finds itself in, and that may soon be the situation that the US, Canada, Iceland, Ireland, and Australia may find itself in. The notion of opening one's home to strangers in trouble is an old one; a compassionate one. However, how does handle that same situation when you're inviting individuals into your home who intend on seizing your home and all its possessions; even demanding that you leave?

Historically, differing cultures have rarely coexisted in peace, at least for long. One of two things usually happen. The first is that the host country, under the naive guise of multiculturalism, is fractured; balkanized or divided internally with the gulf becoming wider and deeper until the nation effectively stops being one. At that point, there is usually a Civil War or revolution to decide the country's fate. Sometimes these divisions are based on mythological claims of empire, but like all wars, are often violent and affects everyone, but especially more so if religion is a factor since one is fighting--- murdering and dying---for their god. Obviously, there can be no compromise. That's where we now stand in the West. The only real question is who will dominate; who will be vanquished and who will conquer?

The Changing Face of Religion in America Today

It's a common theme among those of the political Right that America was founded as a "Christian" nation. The fact of the matter is that America was established as a nation open to all religions without preference to one above another; something very rare, especially when you consider that each European country typically recognized one "official" religion and while they may (or may not) allow other faiths to practice independently, everyone still had to pay (usually literally) homage to the official State religion such as in the form a tax (or "pew tax " as they were sometimes called) so that in addition to financially supporting your church and pastor, you also had to financially support the State church too. Thus, America's position of no official church was considered more than just unique, but like so much of our revolution, it was seen as downright radical. That doesn't mean religion didn't play a part in the political life of our nation. It did, often strongly, but it was almost always some form of Christianity since that was the dominant religion in this country, and has been up until relatively recently.

In the beginning, most of the Founding Fathers, and indeed most of the Colonists were Protestants of one sort or another. However, with the arrival of immigrants from differing countries such as Catholic Ireland and Southern Germany, the Eastern Orthodox Southern Europeans, the Lutheran Northern Germans and Scandinavians, and the Jews of Germany and Eastern Europe, and the incorporating of former territorial lands from Catholic France (Louisiana Purchase) and Spain (Florida and parts of Mississippi and Alabama), and well as Alaska from Eastern Orthodox Russia, along with Texas, Colorado, Wyoming, California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada from Catholic Mexico, the religious complexion of the ever expanding America changed accordingly. Nevertheless, America remained strongly Protestant, at least in politics, and especially at the federal level. Of course, religious influence varied, as one would expect, from region to region and city to city. Yet, even with the influx of immigrants, change was usually gradual since it took time for people to spread out. Today, America is facing another religious makeover. This time, however, the change is coming more rapidly, and it's much more dramatic.

According to a January 17, 2017 Pew Report, under President Barack Obama, religious identification dropped off significantly during his eight years in office; perhaps another unintended legacy of the Obama Regime. While still America's dominant religion, Christianity dropped from 78% of population to only 71%. The report stated while Evangelical Protestantism, characterized by predominately black and/or Southern churches, the more mainstream Protestant churches such as Methodist, Presbyterianism and Lutheranism, along with Catholicism took the biggest hit. A slightly earlier Pew Report from July of 2015, showed that Islam was the fastest growing religion in the world while unaffiliated, which has been rising, is showing signs of slowing down and even reversing in some places. In the US, however, unaffiliated continues to remains strong, Islam is making inroads.

The 2015 Pew Report predicts that by 2050---only 33 years away---Islam will be at near parity with Christianity. In Europe, already reeling under recent influxes from the Middle and Near East, will see Islam making up a minimum of 10% of the total population. If present changes are any indication, the future impact will change the entire political, social, and economic face of Europe. India will remain a majority Hindu, but again, the percentage of Muslims will rise substantially in the subcontinent, making India the home to the largest Muslim population anywhere in the world, including Egypt or Indonesia. Hinduism, nevertheless, will continue to grow, though at a slower rate, as well as Judaism. According to the report, Buddhism will remain basically stable with little change. In the US, Christianity will continue to decline; from 3/4 of the total population to 2/3. Judaism will lose its status as the second largest non-Christian faith, being replaced by Islam, and settling at the third spot. As an aside, the report points out that three out of every four Christians will be living in sub-Saharan Africa.

The most obvious reason for this change is fertility rates throughout the world, but especially in industrial nations such as Japan, which is graying rapidly, and Europe; most notably central Europe and Scandinavia. One reason is the level of education. Researchers have determined that the more educated a population is the less likely they are to have children, or at least exceed the replacement level of two (the replacement level is the number of children needed to maintain or grow a population. Two children is considered "population maintenance" since they represent one child per parent). In addition, better educated societies are also usually more economically affluent. Fewer children are required to help support the family. On the other hand, poorer populations tend to high numbers of children since children are seen as a source of potential workers, especially in agricultural based economies. Additionally, some religions, such as Islam and Hinduism, simply encourage large families. The average number of children among Muslim women is 3.1 while it's 2.1 for the non-Muslim world (as an example, the fertility rate is 1.4 in Japan, Germany and Italy. Canada is 1.6, Russia and Denmark are 1.7, Norway is 1.8, while the US is 1.9 yet Nigeria is 5.4 and Ethiopia is 4.1) At the same time, various religions view women as "inferior" and of little societal value outside of their role as "breeders" and keepers of their husband's home and hearth.

So, how does this fare for the U.S.? A more recent Pew Report from January 2016, indicates that Muslims make up just 1% of the total population. However, that number is certain to change. Under President Obama, the U.S. engaged in a change of its foreign policy when it came to immigration. As a result, the U.S. would open its door to over one million immigrants from the Middle East, mostly Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, although many are in fact actually coming from places like Egypt, Sudan, Lebanon, Iran, and other parts of the Near East and would not be considered war refugees. While these individuals are overwhelmingly Muslims, others actually from the war torn areas of Syria and Iraq who are not Muslim, such as the Assyrian Christians, who are the oldest Christian sect in the Middle East, the Yazidis, and even the Kurds, are being denied an opportunity to leave, be it for Europe, the U.S., or elsewhere even though the world is keenly aware that each group have been a principal target of ISIS and other extremist Muslim terrorist groups. Thousands have been hanged, beheaded, shot, and murdered in every other conceivable way while young girls have been forced into sex slavery. Those very few who have made it to the Muslim dominated refugee camps in Europe have often been beaten, raped, robbed, or killed. Of course, there are the other, predominately Muslim, refugees coming to America from Somalia, Sudan, Ethiopia, and other poor countries.

As a result, the Muslim population in America, will go from the current level of 1% to perhaps as high as 3%, and continue to rise thanks to current immigration quotas and fertility rates (with the current trend globally, Islam will become the world's largest religion by the end of this century. Islam will make up the majority of the world's population with Christianity and Hinduism being at near parity with 35%). As in the past, these demographic changes will result in a change in everything. Most importantly, however, will be the changes in the body politic. Many of the Islamic extremists, who seem to dominate the conversation both here and in Europe, are demanding the adoption of Sharia Law and its universal application to everyone, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. Already there are "no go" places in Europe, such as England and France, where Sharia law is applied, complete with Sharia courts and roving Sharia "police" patrols who seek to enforce Sharia law on anyone they find in violation. A few have begun demanding that the famous neighborhood British pubs bordering these "no go" zones be shut down. These courts even impose fines, "taxes" and other penalties while local authorities are either powerless or unwilling to do anything to reassert national laws.

In Germany, where their love of beer and pork are legendary, local Imams (Islamic religious teachers) have begun demanding that Germany cease serving beer and any pork products or face possible "reprisals" (and yes, that includes the Oktoberfest). Some business owners have cowered and removed the items from their public menus, although they are still available, they must be consumed in private. Women in Germany and Scandinavia (and other countries), especially young women, are often harassed, attacked, raped, and occasionally murdered or disfigured for being alone without a male escort or for how they are dressed. Some have begun insisting that women be removed from schools (women are not be educated according to some interpretations of Islamic doctrine). In Africa and the Near East, it's not uncommon for girls attending village schools to be randomly beaten with canes or have acid thrown in their faces and that men and women be separated at all events as well as wear head scarves. There are even reports of roving "rape gangs" attempting to impose their own "penalty" for any non-Sharia compliant females they see. The attacks occur as often in daylight as night. Some have been at parks, beaches, public gyms and swimming pools. Local officials, including the police, have sought to defuse the situation by shifting the blame onto the victims.

What we are witnessing is more than just the influx of refugees from poor, uneducated countries, or from countries with a different religion. We've experienced those before. There is often a cultural shock on both sides and period of adjustment, but eventually the new group blends in with the existing population with some adaptation and little practical changes religious beliefs. This is different. This is a clash which involves the basic tenets of Western society such as relationships between individuals, gender equality---women have few rights and a second or even third class societal status (or the right to work, vote, equal pay, no driving, no freedom to go anywhere without a male escort). There is little freedom of expression, be it movies and television shows (or very limited genres) , music, dress, expression, as well as the freedom of association. Some adherents of radical Islam firmly believe in no movies or television or music such as rock, pop, jazz, country, R&B, Rap, and so forth. They believe in complete and absolute separation of the sexes. Strict restriction of what women can and cannot wear, what can and cannot be exposed, denial of women's right to open expression or to vote).

Men too must maintain certain "conservative" appearance and a mandatory beard. In short, they don't believe the same basic freedoms which are the foundations of Western Culture. They believe this must be applied to everyone regardless of their religious beliefs (in fact, non-Muslims must either convert or pay a rather steep religious "tax"). They insist on a universal prohibition of certain foods regardless of your religion or culture, oh, and no alcohol. That's right, no beer, wine, whiskey, vodka, or anything else. No smoking---of anything---either. Oh, if you're gay, bisexual, transgendered, or whatever, you are going to be very unhappy. Those are crimes and they punishable by death. No exceptions. So, what we are facing is a influx of individuals whose culture, values, and religion are all rolled into one. Where there are no exceptions. Their tenets are absolute. They don't negotiate them and they are unalterable. Thus, what we have are challenges to our Western cultural foundation with its values and traditions with it notion of democracy and individual freedom; to our Constitution and the rights it outlines; to our rule of a common law free from religious or sovereign dictate.

In Europe, we are witnessing what is referred to as "population replacement' which is when one group, usually the native population, is systematically replaced by a newer population and with it, a wholesale transformation of society. We could be, at some point in the near future, witness the same event here in the United States. We already have populations refusing to adopt the predominate language, English, or our culture in favor a "multiculturalism" which fosters separation rather than inclusion as did the "melting pot" concept. Now, with this latest threat, we may see the ultimate folly of multiculturalism.


Pew Report: Religion Plummeted in America During Obama Era


The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections 2010-2050


A New Estimate of the US Muslim population


Islam Will Surpass Christianity To Become The World's Largest Religion, New Report Say