The Refugee Crisis: A Moment of Truth for Left and Right


A hot topic on the minds of the media and intelligentsia is the current refugee crisis in Europe. However, few media outlets and influential people have offered an objective understanding of the situation, as most are tainted with liberal bias and Atlanticist chauvinism.

So we must ask ourselves, with a sober mind: what has facilitated the mass movement of peoples in modern times, and more specifically, what are the current material and cultural conditions that have been facilitating the mass movement of refugees to the Atlanticist sphere? With this piece I would like to address the current circumstances facilitating the refugee crisis, their effects, and how it will shape the coming geopolitical situation.

A key element to understanding the refugee crisis is understanding the circumstances of the war in Syria. The war in Syria began in the spring of 2011, preceded by a certain Western-backed movement of “protesters” who were striving for a May ‘68 style uprising. The United States and Israel’s continued support for terrorist groups such as ISIS And the FSA caused further slaughter and destabilization in the region.

The ensuing conflict produced millions of displaced migrants. In 2015, Syria produced the most refugees since World War II. However, the legitimate Assad government has defended Syrian sovereignty and tried to maintain the integrity of Syrian statehood amidst war and population displacement.

The main obstacle is relating a factual understanding of the crisis that is free of any liberal or Atlanticist bias to working people. There are two popular conceptions surrounding this crisis that are espoused in our contemporary landscape. The first conception, often espoused by the liberal intelligentsia, tries to suggest that the mass movement of peoples to Europe and the West in general will facilitate a “diverse society.”

According to liberals, a “diverse Europe” will be the flagship of a more just world. This is an outright falsehood which ignores the unbearable conditions that liberal policies have left in the Middle East and the consequences of population-change to the self-determination of Europe itself. The liberal view boils down to the destruction of peoples’ homelands being all good and well as long as such facilitates a more diverse West. This is the sickness of the modern liberal left.

The other notion, held by the contemporary (so-called) ‘far-right’, (you should always read scare quotes there whether or not they appear) is that the mass movement of migrants is a planned invasion of the European homeland orchestrated purely by radical ‘Islamists’. There is planning, and there has been a plan, but the details, reasoning, and supporting details of this tell a different story than what the ‘far-right’ generally leaves out. The ‘far-right’ would have you believe that every young Arab male is personally plotting to take over Europe as revenge for the crusades. This is false, as it ignores the current economic conditions that facilitate the mass movement of these migrants, which are also part of a legacy of European colonialism and neo-liberalism.

But the ‘far-right’ admittedly, has it right in this regard, namely, that the influx of hundreds of thousands of Middle-Eastern “settlers” is slowly but steadily deteriorating the living conditions of indigenous Europeans and provoking various antagonisms. It is also engendering and creating a cultural shift which works contrary to the rights of self-determination of European peoples, as enshrined in the UN’s founding charter, and countless other tracts and conventions which reaffirm these rights globally. I use the term settler here rather than “migrant” because as the situation now stands, it doesn’t seem that many of the migrants wish to return to their homelands, and they are building colonies. 

While there is a plan, the main plan is not to Islamicize Europe. Certainly there are ‘stooges’, certain Imams, radical clerics and their adherents, who absolutely believe – and act upon – this idea that there is a plan to Islamicize Europe. That is their plan, indeed. But there is another plan, which is already succeeding, and works against Europeans as well.

This actual, larger plan, in reality, is to breathe further life into this ‘Clash of Civilizations’ model, to radicalize Europeans against Islam – not just for the pre-planned or controlled purpose of ‘re-claiming Europe’ for Europeaness or European ideals (more on that problem in a moment) – but to build support for Israel’s wider territorial and power aspirations in the Levant, Egypt, and Iraq. The idea here, seen in what may be a Mossad controlled ‘Identitarian’ movement of the ‘far-right’ in Europe, such as with ‘Generation Identity’ or ‘Defense Leagues’, is to create a pro-Israel, pro-Zionist vector within historically anti-semitic circles, and flip them into pro-Zionism and anti-Islam.

The identitarians talk about many social ills, but do not adequately connect these to A.) Capitalism or B.) The ‘globalization commercial culture’ which already muted, supplanted, diverted, and deranged European culture long before the arrival of mass waves of Arab settlers.

The physical appearance of an invasion by a more obviously different culturally and phenotypically ‘other’, as in the Arab, strikes a greater emotional chord when compared to the unseen hands of the real power elites and manipulators, who are more egregiously – that is more effective – in their Anti-European program.  These less obvious, less apparent, but more virulent plots against European peoples came in the form of intellectual movements in academia on the one hand, and through the large Atlanticist banking institutions and financial sectors, which together demonstrate a coordination of efforts between these and Zionism, which have long diverted, derailed, and deranged European culture.

In short, Europe, at least Western Europe in particular, lost to late capitalism in its globalization commercial culture phase, those things which were uniquely or historically and popularly (as in people) European. This hit very hard by the late 1980’s and 1990’s. But the twisted ‘anti-imperialism’ culture of the European far-left, at least at a certain point in their development, shared with the bourgeoisie the myth of a trans-class alliance or a trans-class interest in pursuing globalization, sometimes under the brand ‘internationalism’.  Part and parcel of this myth, this lie really, was that all Europeans were to blame for the colonial and imperial projects of the European elites. Therefore, all Europeans must ‘share the brunt’ as the ‘chickens came home to roost’ in the form of the so-called ‘refugee crisis’.

However, in recent developments, certain strains of both the right and the left have been following syncretic patterns. United in contempt for the Atlanticist war machine, this development is appearing in a time when the liberal establishment is shaky and producing contradictions in cultural and material life, rather than producing results and order. The liberal paradigm which upholds the slogan “democracy and freedom” is withering away, and the establishment is starting to reveal itself as the hive of criminals and manipulators that it truly is.

- Advertisement -

The breaking down of barriers in the far-left and the far-right is the result of an inculcation of a common anti-establishment, anti-liberal, and anti-Atlanticist praxis. This coalition of minds can strive to fight in a unified front against the Atlanticist empire, and are some of the only minds that have a sober understanding of the refugee crisis as a mass movement of cheap labor facilitated at the behest of the industrialists and plutocrats.

This development could be absolutely revolutionary in the praxis of anti-establishment politics. In the words of professor Aleksandr Dugin,“What we are against will unite us, while what we are for divides us…”  Syncretism here is a conscious effort with plenty of potential given today’s arrangement of contradictions. 

But this is the simple truth about the way the refugee crisis is being handled by the powers that be; at the behest of Angela Merkel and other crooks (even though she has previously and very publicly admitted that ‘multiculturalism is a failure’), the EU’s borders are now virtually non-existent, and to top it off, a poor vetting process has enabled various people from all over the Middle East and Africa to enjoy practically free reign within various parts of the EU.

Rather than successfully alleviating the pain and suffering brought upon actual refugees from Syria, the looseness of EU “open border” policies has literally and figuratively opened the gates to criminals and terrorists. The ease with which the Paris attackers in 2016 were able to gain entry into Europe was tragically fatal.

The breaking down of borders to facilitate this mass migration experiment has caused uncertainty among the indigenous European population. As I suggested earlier, the typical far-right notion is missing the mark: the notion that this influx of migrants is a planned Islamic invasion in the hands of ‘Islamists’ alone, is faulty, due to the lack of a thorough understanding of the material circumstances of what is facilitating the mass movement of peoples. Yes there is a plan, but it is not a Muslim plan, it is a Zionist plan, and one that could have only come about once Europeans no longer had a European culture to support and in turn support it. Therefore the ‘Ziophilia’ of the European far-right identitarian movements need no longer conceal their support by, and towards, the Zionist settler entity occupying Palestine. 

There is a huge difference here. European ‘anti-Islam’ and calls for a stricter migration controls, is nominally – and not entirely inaccurately – about defending Europe. The Zionist project in the middle-east called ‘Israel’ is an intrusion into that region, where Arabs and Islam are indigenous, and ought to self-create their own trajectories and determinations without Zionist interference.

However, under any circumstance it must be understood that the policies of the EU are not only extremely dangerous for the cultural and material existence of the indigenous peoples of Europe, creating harmful divisions between the working class by facilitating a fragmented society of alienated workers, but also an outright violation of international law.

The ratification of the United Nations Charter at the end of World War II placed the right to self-determination of nations as paramount in matters of international law and diplomacy. By virtue of that right, all nations under the UN may freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. The technocrats, plutocrats, and industrialists of the EU who deny peoples the right to self-determination are some of the most vile criminals to hold any seat of power.

Of all the very important observations that Karl Marx made in his works, one that is paramount is that the competitive drive for profits always incentivizes the capitalist class to seek out ways to ease the process of the extraction of surplus value from the labor market.

There are basically two methods in which the capitalist class does this: either through automation of production, which significantly lowers the value of human labor in the market through the incorporation of industrial machinery to do the jobs of workers, or through the importation of foreign labor, which offers the bourgeoisie a cheaper alternative than to pay any indigenous worker a decent, livable wage.

And among the contributions of Martin Heidegger, we can understand that the defect in European thought which arose over 2000 years ago but whose contradiction only becomes more evident today, is that which falsely identified society as something separate from people. This is what resulted in the possibility of such absurd formulations such as ‘austerity and mass foreign migration may hurt the majority of people, but it’s good for society’.

There is one root of the migrant crisis at hand: profits – profits for the plutocrats, technocrats, and industrialists of the Atlanticist empire on that end. In terms of the ‘narrative’, it is simple clash of civilizations. The terror unleashed in the Middle East by the Atlanticist empire has displaced millions, and now millions of cheap laborers are literally being shipped to the continent from the Mediterranean Sea. This will only further alienate the workers of both Europe and Syria through forced assimilation, i.e., to be reduced to a rootless pool of slave labor for the capitalist class to exploit.  Among these migrants are also those with great skills and educations, and the brain-drain this creates also works against the self-determination of Syrians, Iraqis, Libyans, and so forth. 

This is the root of the migrant crisis: to create a clash of civilizations in which Israel emerges stronger, and for the financial sector to which it is related, imported labor and super-profits for the Western capitalist class.

Subscribe to our newsletter
Sign up here to get the latest news, updates and special offers delivered directly to your inbox.