Quite frankly, I can’t bring myself to get choked up when barely-literate, Eurocentric “closet”-bigots whine about the future of “The West”. Put simply: if they had any idea what the hell they were babbling about, they couldn’t be advocating the sort of nonsense they do.
- “Europe” (as a self-contained, monolithic cultural “unit”) is a myth (in the modern sense of “pernicious falsehood”). Margaret Murray’s “witch-cult” bullshit posits a unified, Pre-Christian religion permeating all of what we now classify as “Europe”.
This is false to the point of overt idiocy. Quite simply, the only reason “Europe” appears to have a common history is because the area now designated as “Europe” was, at one point, subsumed within the Roman Empire.
Thus, “Europe” was hardest-hit when Christianity became the “official” religion of the Roman empire (and all non-christian religions were persecuted.)
The “Constantinian Shift” cemented this lamentable “conversion at sword-point” thing, to the point where the Pre-Christian history of “Europe” was mostly erased by what we now know as the “Roman Catholic” church. The demonization of “Pagans” was politically expedient.
So there’s the first major problem: “European” history for the last 1500 years or so has been overwhelmingly dominated by two religions — both of which are “foreign” to Europe (in the sense that they originated in the Middle East): Christianity and Judaism.
So, yeah: I can’t bring myself to get incensed over the possible “Islamization” of Europe — seeing as CHRISTIANITY was originally perpetrated on Europe at sword-point, and “European” jewry was pretty much an artifact of what Jews describe as “the Diaspora”.
2. The “Roman Empire” lasted 1000 years longer than what most “Western History”-fetishists (mistakenly) believe:
Let’s do a thought-experiment: Assume that — for some reason — Washington D.C. is rendered unsuitable as national capitol (Say, nuclear attack or bioterrorism). However, the “Continuity of Government” thing (largely) works, and those in power are able to (mostly) relocate to Colorado Springs.
Importantly: there is NO discontinuity between the “Washingtonian” era, and the “Colorado Springs” era.
Now, assume further that (even though there has been serious disruption in the vicinity of D. C.) there is “still” regular communication (and even some travel) between the “provisional” capitol at Colorado Springs, and the East Coast.
That, in a nutshell, is essentially the real history of what his (mistakenly) termed the “Byzantine” empire: there WAS no such thing. The “Eastern Roman Empire” continued unbroken, for another thousand years.
The Eastern, or Byzantine, half survived for another 1,000 years after the “fall.” Yes, the city of Rome did fall to a tribe of marauding Germans called Vandals. But, as far big deals go, Rome being sacked (again) was a minor blip on the Mediterranean radar. The empire’s capital, Constantinople, had surpassed Rome in wealth, population, and political importance long before. In fact, when the Vandals sacked Rome in 476, the city wasn’t even the capital of the western empire—that honor fell to Ravenna.
And as for horn-helmeted invaders showing up and trashing the empire? It’s a bit more complicated than that. The “barbarians” (i.e., the Goths, Ostrogoths, and Germans) had been part of the Roman Empire as client-states, an increasingly large portion of the Roman military, and quasi-citizens. When the last Western Roman emperor was deposed in 476, Odoacer, the Goth who replaced him, wasn’t in any hurry to change things, and made sure to at least pay lip service to the true emperor in Constantinople. For the average Roman, life carried on as usual for decades after the last emperor wore his final purple cape.
This sounds a bit strange unless you’re aware that during the last two centuries of Roman primacy, the distinction between “Roman” and “barbarian” was a gray area. Rome’s military power always depended on its ability to pour a seemingly endless stream of its citizens into the meat grinders the empire called its legions. We’re talking about a society that treated the loss of tens of thousands of its troops like a minor inconvenience along the path to inevitable victory. As its frontiers lengthened and centuries of Russian-esque casualty rates took their toll, the empire’s endless reserves of men began to dwindle.
Rome responded by replenishing its legions with foreigners from the same frontiers the empire was attempting to defend. Germans and Goths filled the Roman ranks by the end of the fourth century AD. In response to the increasing threat of the Huns, the empire allowed Gothic tribes to settle along the Danube river and serve as human walls between the Huns and the rest of the empire. Even the Vandals of later pillaging fame only came into the empire because they were recruited by a rebel Roman general to aid his bid for power.
Pretty soon the “barbarians” weren’t just front-line stabbing fodder. They became officers and generals and controlled much of the imperial administration. For much of the fifth century, the empire was ruled essentially by a string of men descended from Rome’s former enemies and newest allies/mercenaries. After a coalition of the desperate finally defeated the Huns in 451, it was incredibly difficult to tell where Roman-ness ended and barbarianism began. The last regent of the empire was actually one of Attila the Hun’s former officers. And Odoacer, the barbarian who assumed control of Rome after the last emperor was deposed, received commendation from Constantinople for instilling some law and order into western Europe.
What essentially ended the Empire wasn’t foreign invasion, but a series of civil wars that wracked the frontier. The Roman army with its barbarian weaponry, dress, and generals squared off against itself over and over, reducing the western empire into countless fractious kingdoms with only brief unity under a handful of warlords-emperors, all of which gives new meaning to the saying, “we have met the enemy and he is us.”
So, no: The “Roman Empire” didn’t fall in 476 AD — it merely failed to “jackboot” about 1/2 of its territory back into line.
Now, I’ll admit that there was a very reasonable purpose in the attempt by European Elites to “Re-write” their own history: if any of their victims knew the TRUTH about what had happened, “Europe” would most likely have dissolved into a blood-soaked ruin centuries before any “renaissance” could take root.
- If the “Constantinian shift” had been common knowledge, (IE: if Europe’s peasantry had known that their ancestors had been “Converted” at sword-point), the sane and principled response would have been for those peasants to RISE UP EN MASSE AND ANNIHILATE THE ORGANIZATION WHICH HAD BEEN TERRORIZING AND EXPLOITING THEM FOR CENTURIES. “The Church” would most likely have been annihilated.
- By the same token, it would be damned difficult to foist the “Divine Right of kings” on a populace who knew that those of “Royal Blood” were nothing but a gaggle of (mostly inbred) thugs in funny hats. Both “Statecraft” and “priest-craft” required that the “authority” of those PRIVILEGED by the Church and State be “respected” (feared?) by their victims:
The “sanction of the victim” is the willingness of the good to suffer at the hands of the evil, to accept the role of sacrificial victim for the “sin” of creating values — Leonard Peikoff
So, yeah: it makes perfect sense that those “in Power” would re-write history to portray themselves as virtuous.
In the same general vein, the (continued) fetishization of the Antebellum Southern U.S./”Confederate” States of America persists in portraying slave-owners as cultured, genteel etc. — sitting on the veranda, sipping mint juleps — surrounded by smilingly happy “darkies” — when, in reality, the most virtuous and just outcome would have been for the slaves themselves to rise up en masse, systematically slaughter every slave “owner” within reach, and burn every “Plantation” to the fucking ground.
(I can’t help but think that — especially in light of the infamous “one-drop rule” — it wouldn’t have been a great idea for former slaves to systematically rape “The Missus” after making her watch “Ol’ Massa” get his head cracked open with a hatchet — so as to ensure that there would be NO “whites” left within the boundaries of the former Confederacy within a few generations).
But, I digress: the only way for the (former) Confederacy to survive more or less intact, was for the descendants of the victimizers (Southern “Whites”) to continue victimizing the descendants of their former PREY (Blacks).
Gotta give ’em credit: They were able to “milk” another FULL CENTURY of (comparative) privilege out of tyrannizing/slaughtering Blacks.