Interview
in the Hapeles Orthodox Jewish
newspaper. Here is the original English interview:
“1) What are the differences
between the Muslim and Western man?
Nicolai:
Working with Muslim clients I found four important psychological
differences. Understanding these differences makes us more able to
understand the psychological aspects of integration problems that the
West experiences when it comes to Muslim immigrants.
The
first difference concerns anger. Western cultures see anger as a
weakness, and expression of anger is a way to lose social status. In
the Muslim culture, where , “might is right”, anger is seen as
strength. Some Muslim communities even declares “days of anger”, where
they try to convince others by screaming, shooting in the air and
hopping up and down. While we Westerners see such behaviour as
embracing or even psychiatric, Muslim cultures defines our lack of
aggression as weakness, that can – and should – be exploited. To avoid
such invitations to exploitation, we should speak the truth, make
demands, be consequent – and carry a big stick.
The
second difference concerns honor and self confidence. Inside the
Western culture it is generally seen as a sign of honor and self
confidence, if we are able to handle criticism either with and shrug
(if we disagree) or with a “I think you are right – thanks for helping
me to improve”. In Muslim culture, it is honorable to defend against
criticism with aggression and exhibit the courage to risk physical
confrontation – no matter if the criticism is true or not. Islam can
not defend, Islam can only attack. This is why we very seldom hear
Muslims defend their religion through logic or reason, but almost always
with intimidation and violence: It does not matter who is right, it
matters who is the strongest. From the perspective of traditional
Muslim culture, the Western concept of honor is dishonorable. It makes
us look pathetic and fearful, and for a religion that is basically
imperialistic and aggressive, it is an invitation to attack.
The
third difference concerns self responsibility, and here the
psychological term “locus of control” is important to understand.
Western culture leans towards an inner locus of control, meaning that
we think that our lives are mainly governed by inner factors, such as
our own choices, our own view and our way of handling our emotions.
That is why we have countless therapists, coaches etc., and countless
books and magazines, which all aim at helping us to be better at
helping ourselves. Muslim culture and especially Islam is strongly
characterized by outer locus of control. Everything happens
“Inshallah”; almost every aspect of life is regulated by Islamic law,
the brutal sharia that steals away so many human rights from the people
living under it; male authorities – fathers, big brothers, uncles,
imams, etc. – make the rules and have enormous power over especially
the women. There is very little room for personal choices and freedoms,
and this naturally creates a feeling of outer locus of control: Your
life is created by outside factors, and the freedom to explore and
train inner locus of control is very limited. This is also the reason
for the world famous, and – from a Western perspective – embarrassing
and childish victim mentality, that characterizes many Muslim
communities and immigrants. When this victim mentality meets with our
Western compassion and questions like “what would you like to do”,
integration is doomed to fail. Only now Western authorities are
beginning to learn that we need to meet Muslim immigrants with demands,
consequences – “you have to do this and that and this is the
consequences if you do not.” People with outer locus of control mostly
have very little control and needs clear communication, a clear frame
work and clear consequences if they break the rules. But even though we
are starting to realize this now, it might be too late to stop the
failed integration of millions of people from this very different culture
from destroying our societies.
The
fourth difference concerns tolerance and openness. In the West, being
“tolerant and open” is considered a de facto definition of a good
person. Hundred years ago, “good persons” went to church every Sunday,
while today they stand with #RefugeesWelcome signs on train stations.
In Islam, at good person is somebody adhering strictly to the sharia,
which is very intolerant and closed – even violent – towards outsiders.
One does not have to be a rocket scientist to predict how the meeting
between to such different cultures will evolve: As a cultural osmosis,
the “open” culture will be consumed by the intolerant culture: The
cultural exchange will be a one-way street. This is what is eating up
our countries these years in the form of Islamic parallel societies
that develop into small Gaza Strips with extreme dense population;
radical Islam going viral; poverty, low education and dependence on
economic support from outside; and a hostile and violent attitude
towards their non-Muslim surroundings: A constant source of aggression
that needs constant containment in order not to spill over and into its
context.
2)
What are the characteristics of Arab culture, as expressed in
communication with the Western world?
Nicolai:
Arab culture’s, or Muslim culture’s exchange with the Western world is
mainly characterized by the Western world trying to contain – or
sometime even harvest and exploit it through proxy wars – Muslim
aggression. There is very little communication based on the two parties
being equal. Instead, the West use appeasement, diplomacy, bribing or
bombs in an attempt to tame the constant flow of violence and
aggressive imperialism. From the Islamic side, they instinctively have
spotted our weaknesses mentioned above, and they are convinced that
through the power of their god and through patience and intimidation,
they will continue and finish the work that their prophet began
one and a half millenium ago and which has already emptied most of the
Middle East, North Africa and great parts of Asia from non-Muslims.
3)
How can a Muslim change and build a different personality that
integrates in the western world?
Well,
since this would mean that they would have to adopt a long list of
human rights (democracy, freedom of speech, sexuality, religion, etc.)
that the sharia punishes with death, it would first and foremost be
based on security for those wishing to change. We can start by
undermining the sources of the sharia, the imams and the mosques.
4)
If they are so different, what are they looking for in Western
countries?
Nicolai:
Safety, freedom, money and material goods, uniting with their families,
and spreading the sharia. Unfortunately, on an average, they give very
little back to the countries they enter, and often their concept of
freedom is not compatible with human rights and democracy. Of course
there are also many Muslims who want to really integrate and embrace
our values and rights, but much too often they are stopped by their
Islamic surroundings or their own lack of motivation or skills.
5)
One who does not integrate – what happens to him? When does he turn
into a criminal and when does he run a normal life?
Nicolai:
To integrate you need three things. You have to want it, you have to be
allowed by you Muslim peers and family, and you have to be able to.
Much too few Muslim immigrants, refugees and their descendants manages
all three. Because of their intolerant culture, they many have very
little or no feeling of commitment and thankfulness towards non-Islamic
culture and societies. And if our Western welfare societies provides
them with food, money and housing – even if they do not integrate one
inch – why should they integrate? And if we let radical imams and
mosques spread all over, how can we expect that any attempt on
integration into our Wester values will be supported by the Muslim
community? And if we do not discriminate between what immigrants we
take, and therefore end up with millions of illiterate, uneducated and
often inbred migrants, how can we expect that they are able to
integrate into our high tech, knowledge-based civilized societies?
6)
What often happens in the next generation – in both cases?
Nicolai:
The first generation often has a sense of thankfulness to the country
receiving them. Statistics show that the following generation are more
criminal. Those who really integrates often have to live in fear from
the practising Muslims. Some even need police protection.
7)
What are the consequences of a failed immigration?
Nicolai:
Ultimately it will lead to civil war inside our countries. The point
where we could handle this challenge without blood, sweat and tears was
passed decades ago. I blame our politicians and media.
8)
How can the western world deal with it successfully?
Nicolai:
a) Stop Muslim immigration. b) Help refugees in their own region, where
they feel home with their culture, language and climate. In this way we
can afford to help many more, and not just the young men that are sent
here. On top, the refugees will not have to live with the extra
traumatization that happens when especially disadvantaged people move
to a completely other culture. c) Honorary repatriation for non-citizens
who are not self-supporting, speaking the language and law abiding. d)
Long prison sentences in prisons outsourced outside Europe to Muslim
criminals (so they do not radicalize and intimidate non-Muslim
prisoners in national prisons, cheaper). e) Close down every mosque and
Islamic organisation that do not actively support democratic values and
human rights and which do not openly and pro-actively reject the
criminal principles and verses of the Islamic scriptures and of the
example of their prophet. f) Integration should be based on demands and
consequences. Not complying should lead to honorary repatriation.
9)
The protesters against Islam-phobia, what leads them? Are they right
and honest, or is it a cover for something deeper?
Nicolai:
The greatest islamophobes are to be found among the Muslims themselves.
Only fear can lead people to accept such a suppressive system. As one
imam said, Islam would have been long gone, had it not been for
sharia’s death penalty for apostacy. I think Western protesters against
“islamophobia” are either afraid to confront an obviously criminal,
sexist and fascist ideology and its intolerant and violent adherents,
or they are simply being naive and a modern day version of the “good
people”. The violent “anti-fascists” I consider a reincarnation, half
joking, of the Inquisition.
10)
After the Danish Mohammad cartoon was published in the news – what did
you learn from the reactions of both sides (Islamic and western)?
Nicolai:
We learned that giving into Muslims demands will just lead to more
demands. That we have to find our footing, define our values and
borders, and we ready to protect them by any means necessary. And
Muslims got aquinted with the concept of Free Speech.
11)
What reactions do you get from your writings?
Nicolai:
I think many people find that a psychological perspective on the
subject helps to understand the dynamics of the situation. I have of
course been accused of racism from the Left, but I am no racist. Islam
is not a race. It is a weapon of mass destruction (that the CIA have
been exploiting for decades) and the greatest enemy of peace, freedom,
democracy and human rights. I was born into a Leftist family, and the
values that I grew up with – the equality of women, a critical view on
the dangerous power of religion, and the freedom for the little guy to
speak freely – I consider basic values of the Left. I feel today that I
am a Leftist, but somehow the world changed, and today basic Leftist
values are, if applied to Islam and Muslim culture, considered “far Right”.
I do not care. I am true to myself and wish happiness and freedom for
everybody, Muslims and non-Muslims.”
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment