In one of the most famous passages of his Summa Theologica, the great Catholic philosopher Thomas Aquinas (1225–74) considers this delicate question: “Whether the blessed rejoice in the punishment of the damned?” He concludes that, yes, they do: “the saints will rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, by considering therein the order of Divine justice and their own deliverance, which will fill them with joy.”

Xenophobes in charge

Aquinas reached that conclusion many centuries ago, but it has “contemporary resonance,” as the Guardian might say. What do nations like Hungary, Poland and Slovakia feel as they watch the vibrant enrichment of Western Europe? I think they must be rejoicing in “their own deliverance.” No suicide-bombers for Hungary. No rape-gangs for Poland. No FGM and drug-resistant TB for Slovakia. What’s more: Hungary, Poland and Slovakia don’t want to experience any of these things.

Beast in the East: Robert Fico

To the Guardian and other liberal outlets, this merely confirms the depravity and backwardness of politicians like Viktor Orbán, Beata Szydlo and Robert Fico, who are the xenophobic prime ministers of these nations. In a shameless rejection of all decent progressive principles, Orbán, Szydlo and Fico place the welfare of their own citizens above the welfare of the vibrant vulnerable. Indeed, Fico has crystallized his hate into a single shocking phrase: Islam na Slovensku nemá priestor — “Islam has no place in Slovakia.” Ach, if only he would consider what Slovakia is missing:

Indian Muslim woman ‘raped and murdered in honour killing’ after starting relationship with Arab man An Indian Muslim teenager involved in a relationship with an Arab man was kidnapped, raped and murdered in a suspected “honour killing” in London, a court has heard. The body of Celine Dookhran, 19, was found stuffed in a fridge with her throat slit after a second woman who was also attacked raised the alarm from her hospital bed. The two women were said to have been bound, gagged and kidnapped by masked men on Wednesday. They were taken to a house in Kingston-upon-Thames, south-west London, where they were both raped and Ms Dookhran was killed. Mujahid Arshid, 33, of no fixed address, appeared before Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court on Monday charged with the murder, attempted murder, and two counts of rape and kidnap. He appeared alongside Vincent Tappu, 28, of Acton, west London, who stands charged with kidnapping both women. (Indian Muslim woman ‘raped and murdered in honour killing’ after starting relationship with Arab man, The Independent, 25th July 2017)

Teenage girl ‘raped in Birmingham train station attacked again by second man she begged for help’ A double manhunt is under way after a 15-year-old girl was raped by two different attackers, including a man she flagged down for help. Detectives said the teenager was first assaulted in a secluded part of Birmingham’s Witton railway station, near the Aston Villa football ground, some time between 7pm on Tuesday and 2am the following morning. The victim had walked to the station with her friend, but was led away by a man who approached her. Shortly after that attack, the girl walked out of the station and flagged down a passing vehicle to ask for help. However, after getting in the car she was then raped a second time by another man. … The first attacker is described as Asian [i.e., Pakistani or similar] with light skin, brown eyes, of a skinny build and about 6ft tall. He was wearing a track suit top and bottoms, black trainers and was in his early 20s. The second attacker is also described as Asian, in his early 20s, 5ft 6/7ins tall, of large build with a tight-cropped beard and was wearing a blue jumper and black jeans. (Teenage girl ‘raped in Birmingham train station attacked again by second man she begged for help’, The Independent, 25th July 2017)

That’s just a little of what Hungary, Poland and Slovakia are missing out on by refusing to accept Muslim immigration. Britain, by contrast, definitely has a “place for Islam,” and Muslims have worked hard to re-pay British hospitality. When it comes to violence against women, melanin-enriched Muslims really put stale pale males in their place. Even so, a connoisseur of Muslim vibrancy might quibble about the “honour-killing” of Celine Dookhran (see above). It’s a little disappointing that she merely had her throat slit, rather than her whole head cut off.

But look at it from a practical point of view: a complete body can be “stuffed in a fridge” in a single, simple operation. A severed head complicates matters. One might drop it, then have to chase it as it rolls away into an awkward corner. The honour-killers obviously foresaw these difficulties and put criminal efficiency above Islamic aesthetics. Rape and throat-slitting were enough; rape and decapitation would have been over-egging the pudding. I for one am not going to criticize them for their decision.

Feminist priorities

But you might expect Britain’s feminists to be sending a lot of criticism their way. You might also expect feminists to have something to say about the double-rape in Birmingham. Curiously, this hasn’t happened. Appalling crimes against vulnerable women have been greeted with silence. Compare the feminist reaction to the “BBC pay scandal”: feminists were boiling with rage and indignation. Rich liberal women aren’t being as grossly over-paid as rich liberal men for their participation in the BBC’s incessant liberal propaganda. Feminists are horrified.

But feminists are tongued-tied when two teenage girls experience much, much worse from the Patriarchy. A 19-year-old was kidnapped, raped and murdered in London. A 15-year-old was raped in Birmingham, then raped again when she sought help. And all those crimes reflected an “entrenched culture” of misogyny and male supremacy. Why no detailed analysis and condemnation from the Sisterhood?

The answer is simple. Yes, the crimes were spectacularly brutal and misogynistic, but they were allegedly committed by non-Whites. If feminists drew attention to them, they would be undermining a central tenet of liberalism in general and feminism in particular: the Omnipotent Evil of the Stale Pale Male.

Malleus Maleficorum

Like the fallen angel Satan in traditional theology, Stale Pale Males are in liberal ideology the ultimate source of all the world’s ills. Stale pale males, or the cis-het ones at least, have to be overthrown and crushed by a Rainbow Alliance that includes both feminists and Muslims. On the one hand, mass immigration from the Third World means mass murder, rape-gangs, honour killings, female genital mutilation, grope-festivals , cousin-marriage and exotic diseases. Liberals are supposedly hostile to all those things. But mass immigration also means guaranteed votes for progressive parties like Labour in the UK and the Democrats in the United States.

In short, although Western women are badly harmed by mass immigration, the Rainbow Alliance benefits. So feminists have a choice. They could oppose mass immigration and defend Western women, or support mass immigration and strengthen the Rainbow Alliance. It’s not a tough choice: the Rainbow Alliance funds feminism. That’s why feminists prefer to ignore Muslim misogyny (with honourable exceptions like the lesbian Julie Bindel). Vibrant non-White Muslims are enemies of the Stale Pale Male; therefore feminists want as many Muslims as possible in the West, whatever the consequences for Western women. Indeed, the more badly non-White men behave, the better they appear in feminist eyes. The non-White men are emphasizing that they are not stale or pale and that they are hostile to Western civilization.

Hiding hate-facts

And do overweight, unattractive feminists secretly enjoy the thought of ordinary women being harmed by vibrant enrichers? I’m thinking of feminists like Barbara Roche, the Jewish immigration minister who opened the borders under New Labour, and Jenni Murray, the part-Jewish matriarch who oversees Woman’s Hour at the BBC. Feminism benefits from rape as a general phenomenon, because it provides support for feminist claims about male brutality and misogyny. But a dangerous hate-fact must be hidden: the much higher rape-rates among non-Whites and Muslims. That hate-fact isn’t good for the Rainbow Alliance.

Not a typical Syrian refugee: Rania’s Odyssey

Nor is another hate-fact: that the “vulnerable refugees” seeking “sanctuary” in Europe are overwhelmingly healthy young men who are migrating for economic reasons, not to save their lives. Liberal outlets like the Guardian and the BBC pretend otherwise, constantly using images of helpless women and children to accompany their pro-refugee propaganda. The Guardian is at it again with Escape from Syria: Rania’s Odyssey, a video about an affable, attractive, educated young woman that gives a false picture of the so-called “migrant crisis”:

Rania Mustafa Ali, 20, filmed her journey from the ruins of Kobane in Syria to Austria. Her footage shows what many refugees face on their perilous journey to Europe. Rania is cheated by smugglers, teargassed and beaten at the Macedonian border. She risks drowning in the Mediterranean, travelling in a boat meant to hold 15 people but stuffed with over 50. Those with disabilities are carried across raging rivers and muddy fields in their wheelchairs. (Escape from Syria: Rania’s Odyssey, The Guardian, 2nd August 2017)

The censorship solution

The Guardian doesn’t care about the true picture: liberals are interested in power and feeding their own narcissism, not in truth. Indeed, truth can be a handicap to those seeking power. When you have reality on your side, you want to persuade your opponents; when you don’t, you need to silence your opponents. Censorship can be much more effective than persuasion. And persuasion is, in a way, an admission of weakness. It depends on “a humble attitude towards facts and the rules of logic,” as Leszek Kołakowski put it in Main Currents of Marxism (vol. 3, 1978). In other words, by seeking to persuade, you are appealing to something higher than your own force of will and preferences.

The totalitarian tribe

Such intellectual humility is not palatable to totalitarians, as Britain’s vibrant Jewish community has just demonstrated. An Irish journalist called Kevin Myers said something completely unacceptable about the “BBC pay scandal.” It was unacceptable because it was true: Myers pointed out that the two highest-paid women at the BBC are Jews called Vanessa Feltz and Claudia Winkleman. He then said: “Jews are not generally noted for their insistence on selling their talent for the lowest possible price.” From the shrieks of outrage that greeted his words, you would have thought that he had called for yellow stars to be issued to all Jews in Britain, preparatory to their mass round-up and incarceration.

The Jewish thought-police didn’t lower themselves to debating the truth of what Myers had said. That would have been difficult and anyway, its truth was utterly irrelevant: what mattered was that Jews didn’t like it and that their will had to prevail.

And it certainly has: Myers has been dismissed from the Sunday Times and cast into the outer darkness, despite his loud protestations of admiration and respect for the “Jewish community.” As Mark Gardner, the “communications director” of the Community Security Trust, has simultaneously gloated and lamented: “Myers’s squalid example of blatant antisemitic language was swiftly dealt with but the premise of Jews and money and cunning remains rampant.” In other words, although Jews enjoy both enormous wealth and the political power that comes with it, the goyim are not allowed to raise these topics. Any goy who does so will, like Myers, be “swiftly dealt with.”

“Don’t debate: defenestrate!”

As I said above, censorship can be much more effective than persuasion. Myers wasn’t debated: he was “dealt with.” Jews do not have a “a humble attitude towards facts and the rules of logic.” Instead, they have a firm belief in two things. First, that Jews must be immune from scrutiny and criticism. Second, that Jews must be treated at all times as helpless victims at constant threat of persecution. To underline their helplessness, they crush all opposition without mercy. When Jewish power can’t be discussed, it can’t be challenged. And that’s the way Jews like it.

But so do lots of others in Brave New Britain. As Jonathan Sacks, Britain’s former chief rabbi, once pointed out, the Jewish love of censorship has infected many others on the left: “The process … began with Jews, before being taken up by blacks, women and gays. … A culture of victimhood sets group against group, each claiming that its pain, injury, oppression, humiliation is greater than that of others.”

Splits in the Rainbow

Rabbi Sacks forgot to mention Muslims, who have seen how effective accusations of “anti-Semitism” have been and created a victim-wail of their own: “Islamophobia!” All of these groups are interested in power, not in “facts and the rules of logic.” They’re wise in their preference, because facts and logic aren’t on their side. Nor, in fact, is history. The Rainbow Alliance is riddled with contradictions and held together only by a shared hatred for the cis-het gentile Stale Pale Male.

But ideologies that depend on inflating the ego do not make for successful alliances, because every victim-group wants to be King of the Castle. Big cracks are already apparent in the Rainbow: see the non-White progressives who demand submission from their White comrades and the conflict between the trans-friendly feminists and the “trans-phobic” feminists. These splits are only going to get bigger. As the Rainbow falls apart, the Alt-Right will continue to rise.