Winston Churchill Gets the Last Word on Islam

Last month, police were deployed to form a ring of steel around the statue of Winston Churchill in Parliament Square, London, to protect it from the hands of an irate pro-Palestinian “mob.”

Surely there is something of an irony here: although Churchill is being targeted on the hackneyed view that he was a leading member of the White Patriarchy and therefore inherently evil — BLM attacked this same statue for that very reason in 2020 — the British statesman did, in fact, have some insightful things to say about the religion of many of his would-be attackers.

Consider the following quote from Churchill’s 1899 book, River War: An Historical Account of the Reconquest of the Soudan (vol.1):

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

The United Kingdom — as well as many other Western nations and polities that host large Muslim populations — has been learning the truths of this excerpt the hard way. As just one example, crime, including sex crimes, has soared in the UK. This is unsurprising, since “insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live,” to say nothing of the aforementioned “degraded sensualism,” “fanatical frenzy,” and “slovenly systems.” (It’s the same throughout European nations with large Muslim populations. In Sweden, violent crime has increased by 300% and rapes by 1,472% — thanks to its burgeoning Muslim demographic.)

Note, too, Churchill’s fair observation that “Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.” This assertion perfectly explains the truth behind so-called “moderate Muslims” who end up making for good citizens in the West. They are good in spite of, not because of, the teachings of their religion.

Churchill is also noteworthy for warning against the dangers of pacifism in the face of growing threats — another topic relevant to the UK’s circumstances vis-à-vis its overwhelming Muslim population. While the following excerpt was written in response to the policy of appeasing Hitler leading up to WWII, it is especially relevant to the UK’s “migrant problem” and the appeasement with which it has been met. This has resulted in a demographic conquest: in the very capital of the UK — London, where Churchill’s statue stands, and where a few days ago rioting Muslim mobs hurled trash at passive police — the name “Muhammad” is today the most popular name for newborn baby boys (as well as in several other Western capitals, including Amsterdam, Berlin, Brussels, Oslo, et al).

While it is doubtful that Churchill — or any other Brit born in the late nineteenth century — could ever have conceived that Britain would willingly give itself over to Islam, here are his rather applicable words concerning passivity in the face of growing threats (in this case, Hitler):

[I]f you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

Such words are proving increasingly ominous for much of Western Europe — with Londonistan at the fore.