For one thing, I actually like the latter.
Thank you Miecz for providing three of the pictures for this page.
A lot of people claim to criticize “Western civilization” these days, but then direct their criticism towards what is not actually Western civilization. This causes a lot of confusion, which I hope this page clears up. It should be noted in particular that our definition of Western civilization is very similar to the ZC definition (of course, ZC is pro-Western whereas we are anti-Western). Miecz’s table shows this clearly:
BS, in contrast, is increasingly falling apart by refusing to admit that Judaism is part of Western civilization. PC and BS are two sides of the same perspective, so if PC makes no sense, BS can make no sense either.
It goes without saying that we absolutely disagree with the PC narrative that Islam is part of Western civilization. Instead, we consider Islam to be the statist successor to the Roman Empire, and hence as statists side with both*. This is a consistent position, and in fact the National Socialist position. On the other hand, those who complain about the historical Islamic rule in Europe should on the same grounds complain about the historical Roman rule in Europe also, but they don’t, because they have double-standards.
(* Also, the Muslim rulers treated the Cathars better than the Judeo-Christian rulers did, but that’s a separate point.)
I would also like to use this chance to promote JJ’s essay currently posted over at the True Left blog:
JJ dissects US history along almost exactly the same faultlines that I here try to draw attention to. Please (especially our American commenters!) offer him feedback and help get more discussion going over at the True Left blog.