“The Islamists hate us because we no longer believe in anything,” Oriana Fallaci wrote, and after her death the West did everything in its power to confirm this bitter truth. The divisions between European leaders after Hamas’ attack on Israel are emblematic of this, in the angry and futile quest to maintain the impossible (and unfair) balance between the only democracy in the Middle East and those who want to erase it. Unfortunately, Europe’s great misunderstanding remains that the Islamic rejection of Israel is based solely on a national dispute, that is, on the land “stolen” from the Palestinians, while the issue is fundamentally based on a religious doctrine that requires its existence. Believers to destroy Israel. But it is unfortunate that we persist in not understanding the fact that a historical movement has been underway for some time, in which the Islamic vanguard succeeded in transforming belief in God into an ideology aimed at imposing religious and totalitarian authority over all “infidels.” This moderate Islam, although torn by infighting, has not completely distanced itself from radical extremism, as demonstrated by the widespread silence of Arab capitals regarding the kibbutz massacre. Europe must realize that it will not be able to save its soul and skin by denying its roots, or continuing not to choose between Israel and Hamas.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time that democracies, which do not know how to recognize the danger of the mass totalitarian movement that strongly fanaticizes them with Christianity, have struggled to understand why it is attacked. However, it must be historically clear that fundamentalism, like Nazism, Islam also wants a world free of… Jews. The dark evil of the ancient continent is well defined by Rootless, the 2004 book co-authored by Marcelo Pira and Joseph Ratzinger (pictured), in which four concepts (Europe, relativism, Christianity and Islam) are formulated with focused ingenuity. At the heart of the problem. This is a topic that the then President of the Senate discussed a year later in his speech at the Rimini meeting. Berra spoke of multiculturalism and tolerance as Western society’s flawed response to the question of how to deal with other cultures, and he gave a clear answer: In order to welcome others, we must first be aware of our own values. “We cannot ask for respect, and no one will respect us, if we do not begin by respecting ourselves, if we are asked: Are you a Jew and a Christian?” We respond like Peter who denied. Or if we are asked: “Do you believe in the value of your tradition?”, we act like Pilate, who did not care. Berra replaced the word “respect” with the word “tolerance”, because tolerance is an overused term, which has lost the meaning acquired through the Enlightenment, and has become a passive acceptance of everything proposed by the other.
There is no passivity in Hobbes, Locke, Bayle, or Voltaire. But today, the term tolerance has become a justification for a night in which all cows are grey, in which all traditions and all cultures are on the same level. This is not the case, it cannot be so, and therefore, when all other avenues have proven ineffective, the right to use force against those who use violence to destroy our values, our culture and our society can also be justified. The idea of society. Even on immigration, Bera’s lesson should be carefully considered: Either we commit ourselves to integrating others by making them citizens of our civilization with our education, our language, knowledge of our history, and sharing our principles and values – or the integration game is lost from the start. In his speech in Rimini, Pera revived the concept of “citizens”, a concept that allowed the Roman Empire to deeply integrate different cultures and societies. Essentially there was a strict concept that belonging to the same community required sharing the same rules, and being subject to the same law. The difference between the tolerance of Christian societies compared to Islamic societies is that Justinian grafted the great legacy of Roman law onto Christianity.
But in Islam, religion is the law, and it is a mortal sin for parts of Europe to be handed over to Sharia law. If we retreat from the absolute affirmation of human rights in the name of “tolerance,” we are betraying the principles of Western civilization. On the other hand, Europe is doing this culpably, and the teachings of Berra and Ratzinger are the basis for saving our history, and it is a mortal sin to surrender parts of Europe to the commandments of Sharia. If we retreat from the absolute affirmation of human rights in the name of “tolerance,” we are betraying the principles of Western civilization. Europe, on the other hand, is guilty of doing so, and Berra and Ratzinger’s teachings form the basis for saving our history.
“Freelance social media evangelist. Organizer. Certified student. Music maven.”
