Attention to the actions and stated or inferred motives of others has survival value in a group setting. If it is wildly exaggerated, however, fueled by an unfounded mistrust of others, paranoia is present. To be (severely) paranoid is to be insane. And in the case of insanity, judgment is impaired.

So, who subscribes to the point of view that Third-World immigration to Europe literally represents a covert operation to bring about the end of Western civilization as we know it, including freedom of speech, parliamentarism, and the rule of law? And would a master plan to eradicate Christianity and put Islam in its place be conceivable?

Alternatively, we may assume that the conspiracy theories represent mock allegations intended for negation by ridicule. During the Cold War, by comparison, it was a favorite discipline amongst left-wing intellectuals — convinced that the future belonged to the progressive avant-garde (and the Soviet or Chinese empires) — to ridicule those who warned against communist totalitarianism; the latter were accused of McCarthyism (i.e. portrayed as half-witted reactionaries succumbing to the so-called “Red Scare”).

Since then, we learned that the suspicion of widespread communist infiltration of the “open society” (as defined by the Austrian-born philosopher Karl R. Popper) was well-founded; it affected daily priorities in the art world, education system, and civil service. The ridicule, typically exercised with an air of intellectual superiority, was intended to suppress opposition to totalitarianism — to silence the voices of freedom. Those, who were already in league with the foreign enemy (e.g. members of the communist parties), would feign idealistic naivety and righteous indignation; cynical at heart, they knew only too well how intensive, if not extensive, the subversive work of breaking down the open society really was.

Aliens have been pouring into Western Europe since the end of World War II. Providing the human material of enormous population movements, which have transformed that outermost corner of the continent beyond recognition, they have arrived in waves. Originally, they derived from European colonies in the process of gaining their political independence. Some arrivals from Africa and Asia were simply due to postcolonial privileges bestowed on former subjects. Whatever the prospects of cultural integration, people from the most distant places in the world were graciously received as part of a large-scale social experiment — and offered naturalization.

Other arrivals from overseas reflected postcolonial conflicts between rivaling population groups, typically as ethnically defined; victims of deep-rooted tribalistic sentiments, economic favoritism, and violent persecution had to seek refuge with the former colonial rulers. Gradually, however, immigration assumed other forms.

In the 1960s, villagers from disadvantaged parts of Anatolia were imported by governments across Western Europe to perform unskilled tasks in the industry. The economy was booming at the time, the demand for labor correspondingly urgent. The foreign job seekers, whose arrival brought on the second wave of mass immigration, were naively labeled “guest workers.” As implied by this title, they were meant to return to their country of origin once they had saved enough money to build a house in the village — or whatever the dream was. 

However, the West fell into its own “tolerance trap.” With imprudent optimism as a hallmark, the politicians of the time failed to realize the long-term consequences of their decisions. Instead of heading home, Anatolian workers brought their large families along. Permitted by the laws, which had been liberalized on this point to accommodate the temporary needs of the industry, they applied for “family reunifications” etc.

If not exactly encouraged by Western governments, alien communities — so-called “enclaves” — became bridgeheads for a fast-growing diaspora. Mostly inhabited by Third-World migrants with an intolerant view of faith and freedoms, their appearance marked the joint entry into a “transitional society,” that is, an unstable historical entity characterized by (a) a dying Christianity, (b) the eventual defeat of humanism to revolutionary — and totalitarian — ideologies (i.e. socialism, Islamism), and (c) social upheaval. 

Unlike the tyrannical governments of Arab oil states, where Asians are hired on the terms of domestic slaves, Europeans have proved unable to dispose of their “guest workers” at will. Once settled in Europe, aliens enjoy the same rights as native Europeans. So, they have come to stay.

A third wave of migrants reached Western Europe in the 1980s. Not only the former colonial powers, but also Western countries in general, were apparently expected to compensate the developing countries for the alleged injustices of the past (i.e. racist, colonialist) by accepting anybody claiming “asylum” at the border. Presumably a demonstration of political penance (and guilt), this gesture was specific to the West.

Muammar Gaddafi — the epitome of a sly, capricious tyrant — prophesied that Europe, the ancient stronghold of Christianity (and the refuge for Christians persecuted in the Middle East and Africa), would eventually be conquered by Muslims, though thanks to baby carriages rather than tanks. In a speech given in Timbuktu, April 10, 2006, he summarized the matter as follows:

We have fifty million Muslims in Europe. There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe — without swords, without guns, without military conquests. The fifty million Muslims of Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades. Allah mobilizes the Muslim nation of Turkey and adds it to the European Union. That is another fifty million Muslims. There will be a hundred million Muslims in Europe. Albania, which is a Muslim country, has already entered the European Union. Bosnia, which is a Muslim country, has already entered the EU. Fifty percent of its citizens are Muslims. Europe is in a predicament, and so is America. 

Time is indisputably working for the Islamists; they know it — and they love it. Imams all over Europe, speaking with a double tongue (cf. the notion of “taqiyya”), as has become their historical privilege, routinely congratulate each other on the so-called “opening” (i.e. conquest) of their host countries. While assuming the traditional role of victim in the public debate, where they may count on the fanatic support of the “progressive elite” (not to mention the extra-parliamentary stormtroopers in black combat suits), and solemnly assuring the loyalty of the congregation to society, they instruct their fellow believers on the weakness and imminent downfall of the West — in Arabic, Urdu, and Farsi. 

Nobody in their right mind would suspect the individual person presenting at the border of complicity in a conspiracy. Migrants, given the willingness to break up and sacrifice everything to improve their living conditions, have a habit of going where others before them have gone to find the best prospects for prosperity, safety, and well-being. As it turns out, the urge to go out in search of “greener pastures” is something fundamental to our nature. At the hands of human traffickers, however, many migrants risk their lives to reach Europe. So, honestly, the lanky teenager, the heavily pregnant mother, or the toddler with the chubby cheeks are not under suspicion of foul play.

The growing minority of non-Westerners, sooner or later to become a (democratically competent) majority, taking over neighborhoods and entire cities, constitutes an irresistible power base. And many of those dedicated to the expansion of a foreign dominion, including those posing as civil rights activists with a religious twist (i.e. campaigning against “social injustice” and “racial discrimination”), are prepared to take advantage of it. They do not refrain from inciting general envy and distrust. Division in society is their ultimate chance to gain control. Thriving on conflict and chaos, they behave as real conspirators.

However, the alien conspiracy, opportunist in nature, is but “secondary,” as it were. Thus, there is another conspiracy that is far more alarming. Revolving around the willingness of European progressives to ruthlessly sacrifice their own home and family for the sake of power, this is the “primary” one. The nature of its scheme goes well beyond naivety. It involves powerful politicians and decision-makers. 

After the general election and change of government in May 1997, the leadership of British New Labour, emboldened by the landslide victory and ready to make long-term plans for success, decided to open the floodgates to the masses of the Third World, thereby changing the composition — and political disposition — of the electorate forever. The central party adviser Andrew Neather subsequently revealed that the fateful policy, which the leadership (for obvious reasons) kept a secret from the public, had been explicitly devised to “… rub the Right’s nose in diversity”.

In other words, the objective was strategic: To change the ethnic make-up of Great Britain. The leadership expected infinite popular (i.e. alien) support for the party in return. Such was the treacherous calculation. Since then, Lord Mandelson, the former secretary of state for business, confessed as much as the following, the sinfulness of which cries to heaven:

In 2004, we were not only welcoming people to come into this country to work; we were sending out search parties. 

Selling out your own nation to remain in power! A high-trust society that has taken centuries to build is being dismantled. On the other side, anarchy awaits. — May the names of those responsible in Whitehall go down in infamy.

Image: Public domain.