NS Military Realism Consultancy Thread Mk X Purps Safe Space

[Allanea]

I'm not sure what it is that Europe is doing that is held to be 'kowtowing' to Islamists.

[Purpelia]

The West isn't Islamized. It's doing reasonably well. Terrorism is - as Gallia pointed out - at reasonably low rates.

In terms of actual Muslims no, not at all. In fact, for such a minority population of which an even minor minority is politically active in the way we are discussing their impact on society and politics is shocking. Now, if we were to accept all those migrants that would change as their number would grow massively and we'd get into real problems. But right now that's not the point here.

The issue we are facing in the west is not that suddenly we'll all wake up under Sharia. It's that radical Islam is becoming ever more a crucial and inextricable part of our political dialogue. Our politics are becoming "islamized". And as this happens the shock waves that propagate our social and political landscape have been immense. The EU is basically splitting in two over the migrant crisis. Societies are internally splitting between the politically correct and the wrongthinkers. Politics is being split between ever more radical solutions. England left the EU. And most worrying of all radical ideologues from both sides, but mostly the so called "left" have taken Islam up as a talking point to advance their authoritarian agenda.

And that all is a direct consequence of western liberalism being corrupted by concepts such as multiculturalism to the point that the average western youth has lost touch with their cultural identity and now seeks outlets in these radical ideas.

The mythology that Europe was going to get taken over by MENA immigrants has been around at least 1923.

I am more concerned about it being taken over by European ideologues claiming to be fighting these immigrants.

The specific myth of Eurabia dates back to 1976.

More like 711 AD...

Europe was supposed to 'become Islamic by 2015', then '2030', then '2050'. If they don't change the topic, in 2100 they'll be telling us about how Muslims will conquer the Western world any day now.

And that is scary. Not that they will do it but that people are using it as a talking point. We need to address something about our societies in order to stop this before it gets used to send us to a very dark place.

[Allanea]

I am more concerned about it being taken over by European ideologues claiming to be fighting these immigrants.

We should never cave in to radical ideologues seeking to subvert Western civilization.

Namely, of course, I speak of the people who make up nonsense like Eurabia.

[Purpelia]

I am more concerned about it being taken over by European ideologues claiming to be fighting these immigrants.

We should never cave in to radical ideologues seeking to subvert Western civilization.

Namely, of course, I speak of the people who make up nonsense like Eurabia.

But again, what alternative do you see. What way out do you see that we can take? Because from where I am standing the only light I see at the end of this tunnel is a runaway train.

[Allanea]

We should never cave in to radical ideologues seeking to subvert Western civilization.

Namely, of course, I speak of the people who make up nonsense like Eurabia.

But again, what alternative do you see. What way out do you see that we can take? Because from where I am standing the only light I see at the end of this tunnel is a runaway train.

We don't need a 'way out', we're doing reasonably okay.

[Kouralia]

How exactly are the two options restricted to 'Become a Sharia-governed state' and 'Remove anything that is not a good, white, Christian population'?

[Purpelia]

But again, what alternative do you see. What way out do you see that we can take? Because from where I am standing the only light I see at the end of this tunnel is a runaway train.

We don't need a 'way out', we're doing reasonably okay.

Are we? Look at the current social discourse and all the horrific SJW uproar that's been going on where they want to turn over liberalism and impose censorship and the rule of their own ideals at the expense of all. Look at how the EU is fracturing because one side refuses to accept that it's not their moral requirement to accept every migrant who comes. Look at the shit show that is american politics all the way back from the patriot act to the modern day and the media uproar against Trump where racism is used not as a real thing but as a codeword for "we don't like this guy".

How exactly are the two options restricted to 'Become a Sharia-governed state' and 'Remove anything that is not a good, white, Christian population'?

Well they bloody well shouldn't be. There should be an option that says "lets remove islam from being the #1 talking point and remove the moralizing "left" that's acting as insane as the radical right while we are at it and return to an era of intelligent thought."

I am pro stalinist and even I see the current left as crazy because they basically use race realism. So like the question here is not "how do we stop Islam from dominating Europe but How do we stop Europe from imploding and using Islam as an excuse."

[Allanea]

Are we? Look at the current social discourse and all the horrific SJW uproar that's been going on where they want to turn over liberalism and impose censorship and the rule of their own ideals at the expense of all. Look at how the EU is fracturing because one side refuses to accept that it's not their moral requirement to accept every migrant who comes. Look at the shit show that is american politics all the way back from the patriot act to the modern day and the media uproar against Trump where racism is used not as a real thing but as a codeword for "we don't like this guy".

These things are of course annoying and stupid, but they're not actually a threat to Western civilization and its way of life.

It truly does not matter in the long term whether Europe is organized as a 'European Union' or a 'European trade area' or whatnot. I'm confident in saying that most of Europe will not become a gigafascist shithole (except maybe Hungary)?

Every period of history has its own dumbass moral panics, and throughout their history Western democracies have done things far worse than the Patriot Act. I'm not suggesting that these things are good, but I'm suggesting that there's a degree of play in what constitutes a 'Western democracy', and that Western Democracy had survived radical leftists far scarier than those on modern college campuses (including actually violent left-wing movements), as well as eras when radical racial movements were committing 100+ terrorist attacks against Muslims per day. The idea we are standing on the brink of catastrophe is brought to you by politicians and clickbait salesmen who are unable to conceive of a true era of privation and oppression because they've never lived it and they are not educated enough to imagine it, and by geopolitics obsessives who think even the tiniest foreign policy setback for the United States is exactly the same as ZE CZECHOSLOVAKIA.

The idea that we must have the precise 'geopolitical arrangement' that we have today, or we are going to have OMG ZE HOLOCAUST is essentially a form of the Simpsons' tiger-repelling rock.

[Gallia-]

Most of Western Europe will probably fracture, or adopt Islamist norms to try to appease terrorists, in the future.

I don't think that's likely, at all.

Interesting. Why do you think that?

Try this example:

Canada is already doing the same to appease the PRC lobby. When/if the Turkish lobby grows powerful enough to become a serious demographic minority that demands attention from politicos, they may very well be forced to appease various Islamic world leaders like Canadian parties have been forced to appease Chinese-Canadian voters, either by being pro- or anti-PRC. The pro-PRC lobby in Canada is growing, though. The NCCC (National Congress for Chinese Canadians), for example, and the CMTCCO (Confederation for Metropolitan Toronto Chinese Canadian Organizations) are raking in many more Chinese immigrants, per year, than the competing anti-PRC organizations, like the MCRO (Mainland Chinese Refugees Organization).

So dig this: the Canadian government has had the big wool pulled over their eyes by the Communist Party (or maybe they're just stupid idk) and is throwing money and technology hand-over-fist right in the PLA's lap. The Communist Party/Politburo/PLA is spouting mad nationalist memes that are infecting everyone within earshot in the People's Repression of China, and the Chinese immigrants are naturally growing bigly. At some point it has to give: the major metroplexes of Canada like GTA and Vancouver are being inundated with pro-PRC lobbyists and voters. They don't necessarily like the PRC, per se, but you better not emphasize that the PRC needs to change their approach towards human rights because we aren't voting for you if you do that.

This is double downed by the fact that MCRs (Mainland Chinese Refugees) tend to arrive illegally, like Mexicans or Syrians, which only makes it worse for the actual defenders of democracy seeking to find safe haven in the shores of Western civilization: instead they find Jinping's shills have already arrived on the last ferry, had their residency papers processed, are probably working for $50,000 CAD (approx. $400 USD) per annum or something as an engineer at Bombardier. That's assuming Bombardier actually does anything worth engineering I guess.

How do you address the human rights of people living in PRC when if you dare touch the topic, a huge swathe of the most powerful urban voting blocs in Canada don't vote for you? Simple: You don't. You swallow the bitter pill, do business with China, don't bring up Tienanmen, maybe censor some web pages, keep allowing Chinese firms to invest, restrict the arrival of political asylum seekers from the PRC, until one day you wake up and find yourself looking at a gigantic PRC flag in the lobby of the Canadian Parliament. Maybe you won't have a communist party censor on every apartment block, but the people who are trying to escape the People's Repression will not be turning to Canada, because it has been made a shill of the Politburo. And possibly because they would be arrested and extradited to face LaoGai.

The USA is somewhat immunized against this because it has many more immigrants who genuinely don't like the PRC, President Trump has done like two and a half good things (bombing Assad, recognizing the ROC, and shilling for the cut off of technology transfers to the Politburo and PLA), and it doesn't really rely on Chinese immigrants to the same extent (or, indeed, immigrants at all) that the rest of the West does to keep its economy afloat by contributing more net taxpayers [you hope].

In truth, Canada has done none of this, and has actually (in)actively contributed to the compromising of the military-supranational security of the Western World by selling advanced high-technology computer/communication systems used by NATO to the PRC, and by pulling from F-35.

But I guess saying "It couldn't happen here," is a good defense against subversion.

One day you wake up and find out that the bulk of continental Europe has banned democratic asylum seekers from Turkey or something, indirectly of course. They will say they will ban "illegal immigrants" or "illegal arrivals" or something instead, but the fact would be that they would be shilling for the undemocratic portions of the world by essentially naming and shaming political refugees who will have nowhere else to turn in Eurasia. So democracy eventually loses its moral foothold in something like three quarters of the world.

Even more dramatically, changing demographics in Russia means that Russia might align itself with Saudi Arabia when it becomes plurality Sunni. It might not actually change things, superficially, since the West would still be "anti-Russia" and Russia would still be "anti-West". But on the deeper level, the differences are no longer "free" vs. "unfree", but rather "Sunni" vs. "Wrong kind of Sunni". You may see "Western" countries pull Qatar into their orbit or something to spite Turkey and the Saudi-Russian axis, start supporting global Islamic terror groups, and generally take a deeper and more weighted standing in the eternal Islamic Civil War. The USA will pull away from Europe and try to turn its attention to the Chinese, and maybe it will actually eat Canada to keep the PRC from getting their hands on it, or maybe Canada will join it voluntarily because demographics have forced it to dissolve.

The point is that the post-WW2 order is collapsing and taking Western Civilization with it. Instead the future will be something unrecognizable to the modern eye. Something like, I don't know, a split between the Islamic Empires of Russia, Saudi Arabia/Pakistan, Iran, and Europe; and a split between India and the PRC/Pakistan. Eurasia's geopolitical tension are becoming the world's geopolitical tension because Eurasians outnumber every other group in the world. With it, the winds of change means that the traditional Western shilling for "more democracy" is now irrelevant. The West has neither the muscle nor the clout-affording human capital to push its morals through.

Bye bye democracy, hello despotism.

How exactly are the two options restricted to 'Become a Sharia-governed state' and 'Remove anything that is not a good, white, Christian population'?

Unfortunately, that ship sailed about 50-60 years ago. The West has been diminishing in global importance since the late 19th century, though. WW2 wasn't a "triumph over evil", it was a dead civilization fighting over the table scraps.

Anyway, the options are to "listen to voters and sacrifice your morals," or "hold onto your morals and lose your job," because the anti-human rights pro-Saudi/PRC/Russia/<adversary> foreign policy lobbyists are too big to ignore. This is not "a minaret in every man, woman and child," it's "a Kissinger in every cabinet," instead. It would be like if Labour was an IRL KGB plot or something.

So there is much, much more at stake. That is, Western nations' political-economic sovereignty. The exorbitant privilege of "choosing your friends" is simply disappearing for the West and appearing for the East.

Future Western nations will be client states, or perhaps thralls, of the despotic global empires.

The mythology that Europe was going to get taken over by MENA immigrants has been around at least 1923.

We already know that you support the dismantling of the UN and a return to pre-UN levels of global war.

The reality is that all that matters is this:

1) I am a Westerner.
2) It is in my best interest that the West remain the preeminent military-economic power in the world.
3) The West is declining in economic and military power in favour of competitive states.
4) This is bad, see 2.
5) Corrective action should be taken.

What constitutes 5 is probably situational depending on the power we're talking about. For Russia, it would be building up a powerful military, evicting it from Ukraine with all force, and putting this powerful army on the NATO-Russian border. Perhaps for all time. Perhaps until Russia collapses again and the Duchy of Muscovy decides it wants to join NATO.

For Saudi Arabia, it would be seeking to cut off its primary source of economic power (oil) through energy independence in at least the largest economies of the West. This means building up American energy exports and pushing them to Western Europe and NATO allies, to try to build a majority independent source of energy. Once Saudi income has been cut out from underneath it, their economy collapses due to lack of oil revenues and you have a revolution when bread prices go up so high that people begin to massively starve and decide they've Had Enough. Alternatively they just massively starve and Saudi Arabia becomes a backwater, again. Either is a good outcome from where I'm standing, because it means Saudi Arabia loses its ability to exert pull on Western foreign politics.

For the PRC, it would be cutting off its access to Western technology and building up resource independence vis-a-vis the PRC, weakening its growing industrial economy and techno-military industrial base. When the PRC can no longer copy every Western weapon on the market, when it can no longer influence every Western politician in NATO, and when it can no longer send communist party agents overseas armed with briefcases of money, it will become much less potent a foe. Primarily by slowing down in growth and perhaps hitting the developmental wall that the West has hit much sooner. cf. Saudi Arabia, although the Communist Party isn't stupid so they aren't putting their eggs in the one basket of "oil exports", so they will probably not be mass starved: just massively weakened in tax revenues.

It's quite simple to address these problems, in theory, but Western politicians do not really have the nads to do so. There doesn't even really need to be specific reasons why "the West should remain big" except for the fact that I happen to live in the West and moving to the PRC would be a pain. OTOH, if you did conduct mass economic warfare against the West's adversaries, you would possibly lose the moral high ground. But I'd rather the West stick to its guns than become shills of actual despots just to stick to their jobs. If the choice is between losing your morals and losing your morals, I'd rather you lose your morals in a way that weakens your enemies rather than empowers them, so at least your enemies do not gain advantage.

Israel, being in a unique position of being able to choose its friends, can happily waffle between supporting Putin or supporting Merkel or supporting Trump, depending on its mood at the time. It has sufficient economic independence that it is not a problem. Perhaps that is why you seem to think that a very narrowly Israeli steeped viewpoint can be applied to the West writ large?

The West is not Israel, and arguably, Israel is not the West. Israel has a bunch of unique quirks and interesting features that make it incredibly different from the Western World as we understand, mechanistically. I suspect that the reason that Israel and the West align morally is more accidental than intentional, too, since Israel is explicitly a state founded on a belief of ethno-religious superiority. It's not as imperialist as the PRC, but the belief that the Jews are God's Chosen People has some uncomfortable implications re: Western egalitarianism. More concretely, the Israeli TFR has remained positive despite extensive mechanization of its civilization, for reasons that aren't entirely clear to me on a micro-scale.

Now, on the surface, this seems to be a positive trait. If the TFR growth is representative of Israel's population then it is broadly good because it means the number of net taxpayers will increase at an ever declining rate. If the TFR is confined to Haredim or something, then it might be bad, because it is an increasing number of actual social parasites who are both able bodied and supported by the state draining resources, so that would be problematic. So I guess it depends on which way the pendulum swings re: population growth in Israel as to whether or not TFR is positive or not.

In most Western countries, taxpayers are not growing, while dependents are. If this is equally true for Israel, then it's in the same boat and may suffer the same fate.

that Western Democracy had survived radical leftists

Did it "survive", though? Are you actually a time traveler from 1927 who can make that judgment accurately? I await your amassed evidence. Never mind that the only reason the West is not going to win the war against despotism is simple demographics. Westerners aren't breeding. So the last man will be a despot. I know that things immediately after you die don't bother you, but I think a lot of people actually have some care for what the world would look like when their children grow up. At least, people who have futures.

Of course, if you never have kids, it's really easy to not care about the future because you have literally no future. People with children have futures, because they will be remembered by people when they die. People who don't have children are immediately forgotten.

[Purpelia]

The idea that we must have the precise 'geopolitical arrangement' that we have today, or we are going to have OMG ZE HOLOCAUST is essentially a form of the Simpsons' tiger-repelling rock.

Well of course not. But there is something to be said about objecting to things you feel are wrong when they start happening as opposed to when they run their course and get to a really dark and bad place even if that place is not literally Hitler.

Like for example I would much rather have the Europe we had 10 years ago than the one that exists today. And frankly I'd much rather have the Europe we had in 1910 but that's a different story.

[Puzikas]

I wish I could see the world through your lenses.

[Purpelia]

I wish I could see the world through your lenses.

Well yea, I guess you would. Now, obviously the best Europe ever would be 1910 + Soviet Union instead of Russia. But we ain't getting that

[Puzikas]

I mean collectivised. Not just yours. I already saw it through yours, I guess, just, you know, not from on top of an ivory tower in a lovely first world nation from the safety bubble where I have things like, you know, heat, food, and a promise the state won't seize what we have for 'the greater good' or 'the cause'.

[Gallia-]

And frankly I'd much rather have the Europe we had in 1910 but that's a different story.

I, too, enjoy the idea of open sewers, no paved roads, and dying from heatstroke every waking moment because air-conditioning does not exist. Oh wait, no I don't. On the whole, contraceptive effects aside, mechanization is universally positive. Contraceptive knocks it down severely, but it is still net positive, because mechanization has the potential to expropriate birth from evolution into the hands of man.

If we can unequivocally prove that men cannot birth themselves in assembly lines, then you may have a strong case, but the effects of non-mechanization vs. the effects of eternal contraception are the same in the long run: extinction.

I'd still rather be air-conditioned if we're all going to die in the future, because it will help me control the panicked sweating. But perhaps Purpelia is a gross barbarian who sleeps naked or something.

I mean collectivised. Not just yours. I already saw it through yours, I guess, just, you know, not from on top of an ivory tower in a lovely first world nation from the safety bubble where I have things like, you know, heat, food, and a promise the state won't seize what we have for 'the greater good' or 'the cause'.

Three hours later Puzikas's house was eminent domained to make way for a new highway bypass. In the name of "economic efficiency" and "transport rationalization".

[Austrasien]

How exactly are the two options restricted to 'Become a Sharia-governed state' and 'Remove anything that is not a good, white, Christian population'?

We are kind of in the wrong thread.

[Puzikas]

Three hours later Puzikas's house was eminent domained to make way for a new highway bypass. In the name of "economic efficiency" and "transport rationalization".

I mean more "lol you didnt meet quotas sleep on streets"

Not "lol your land is now for highway"
which happened where I live

It's different enough to me, where loosing my family"property" in the USSR was a very real risk as only one member of my family was of working age and capabilities-and was in the military.

[Dostanuot Loj]

I mean collectivised. Not just yours. I already saw it through yours, I guess, just, you know, not from on top of an ivory tower in a lovely first world nation from the safety bubble where I have things like, you know, heat, food, and a promise the state won't seize what we have for 'the greater good' or 'the cause'.

My friend, I kinda know where you're coming from. I grew up in abject poverty in a first world country. The kind of abject poverty I have come to understand people in this country don't believe exists. It's a lot of fun to see what people who have always had everything complain about stupid little things.

[The Eternal Aulus]

Islam is, in my opinion, not the biggest threat we face now. The biggest face we fear now is, as mentioned before, fragmentization and implosion of the EU. I think we are past the point of no return, and we can better start collecting our BOB just in case.

Stay woke, buy a shovel, make some caches in the forests nearby, shit's going loose sooner or later.

[Laritaia]

Islam is, in my opinion, not the biggest threat we face now. The biggest face we fear now is, as mentioned before, fragmentization and implosion of the EU. I think we are past the point of no return, and we can better start collecting our BOB just in case.

Stay woke, buy a shovel, make some caches in the forests nearby, shit's going loose sooner or later.

oh noes a bunch of bureaucrats in Belgium will lose their jobs.

it truly is the end times.

[Gallia-]

Islam is, in my opinion, not the biggest threat we face now.

Now why do you think that?

More abstractly, the biggest threat we face is mechanized civilization. The problem is that the West was the first bloc of mechanized civilizations, and now it will suffer the worst of them all, because the rest of the world is mechanizing but still retains the TFR advantage of agrarian economies. There's no return from the precipice of extinction once you go mechanized, so what will probably happen is some sort of Resnick-esque book ending for Mankind: In a few centuries, when the West and its people are an academic memory, the East has since been colonized by Africa, and the Africans are suffering the same problems of mechanized civilization that the West, the East, and everyone else before them had, then the Last Man will be hovered out of his home overlooking Olduvai by a bunch of Lagos Robotics Corporation medibots to see the sunset. We might not know what language he speaks, or what religion he has, or what he looks like, but he will be the last man who dies after seeing the final sunset in the birthplace of mankind.

Olduvai: First man, last man. Because all good stories return to their starting points.

Islam is, in my opinion, not the biggest threat we face now. The biggest face we fear now is, as mentioned before, fragmentization and implosion of the EU. I think we are past the point of no return, and we can better start collecting our BOB just in case.

Stay woke, buy a shovel, make some caches in the forests nearby, shit's going loose sooner or later.

oh noes a bunch of bureaucrats in Belgium will lose their jobs.

it truly is the end times.

LOL. The end times will be when the bureaucrats in Brussels are replaced by Imams in 40-50 years. At least for Europe. America will probably be OK in that it will go from being a white, Christian country to a brown, Christian country. And probably the place that the Muslims ship the whites to in a couple generations when they decide they need to ethnically cleanse the minorities who are hogging all the resources.

I suppose we can't really blame Western governments in Europe for sowing the seeds of their own destruction. The alternative would be a gradual depopulation due to low births and forcible colonization of the West by the Chinese or something.

But that would be better.

The point is that the civilizations that exist in Europe will not exist anymore in the future. They will be totally different civilizations with not even a single strand of thought connecting the two. Europe might even descend back into occasionalism if the Asharites make a return in Sunni Islam, completing the descent into a new dark age where events are caused by Allah's direct intervention in the universe instead of deterministic cause-and-effect chains. The metaphysics of the Asharites is what ultimately what doomed the "Islamic Golden Age" to a fizzle in the end, and what will probably doom "Europe" in the future.

An interesting AH is what would happen if the competitor school to the Ashari had won the doctrinal war and instituted something resembling Western cause-and-effect instead of intellectual degeneration.

The Islamic/Arabic Golden Age might have been more than an industrial age Dialectical Marxist meme then.

---

Galla will have Truck Divisions.

Specifically, troops will be moved in 5-ton MTVs, 2.5-ton LMTVs, and 1.25-ton HMMWVs, with their guns towed by 5-ton MTVs, their supplies carried by 10-ton HEMTTs, and their missiles, radars, and command posts hauled by 10-ton HEMTTs and 5-ton MTVs in expansible vans and semitrailer vans. Most guns will be towed except the HIMARS, but do rockets really count as a "gun"? Ok, the mortars will be self-propelled in HMMWVs.

Convince me this is a garbage idea. Or don't. I think it's cool because trucks are cheap and Galla has a eternal glut of manpower.

[Allanea]

. There's no return from the precipice of extinction once you go mechanized,

Obviously. The vast paleontological record of dozens of species who've gone extinct after becoming mechanized civilizations speaks for itself.

[Gallia-]

. There's no return from the precipice of extinction once you go mechanized,

Obviously. The vast paleontological record of dozens of species who've gone extinct after becoming mechanized civilizations speaks for itself.

I'd say the century or so of sustained birth rate drops in mechanized civilizations speaks for itself. The societies with the highest birth rates in Western countries are non-mechanized or social parasites like Amish or Haredim. Coincidence? Perhaps it's a choice between contributing to society and breeding, more accurately, that causes the low TFRs. When you have a country of net taxpayers you have a country of net non-breeders. So you can choose to die by working yourself to death and possibly retain some edge, or you can choose to die by being blown the fuck out by people who are industrious and capable of working.

Both means you are conquered by the people in the next village. Or in this case, the next continent.

But since we're talking about generational timescales and you seem to have trouble visualizing trends beyond the next five minutes, I don't really expect you to have any evidence to the contrary nor say anything besides reaffirm your faith that everything will be OK. Historical determinism didn't work for Karl Marx. Not sure why it would suddenly work for Francis Fukuyama.

[Allanea]

But since we're talking about generational timescales and you seem to have trouble visualizing trends beyond the next five minutes, I don't really expect you to have any evidence to the contrary nor say anything besides reaffirm your faith that everything will be OK. Historical determinism didn't work for Karl Marx. Not sure why it would suddenly work for Francis Fukuyama.

But... historical determinism is literally what you're arguing for.

[North Arkana]

But since we're talking about generational timescales and you seem to have trouble visualizing trends beyond the next five minutes, I don't really expect you to have any evidence to the contrary nor say anything besides reaffirm your faith that everything will be OK. Historical determinism didn't work for Karl Marx. Not sure why it would suddenly work for Francis Fukuyama.

But... historical determinism is literally what you're arguing for.

Galla-chan logic is metaphysical levels of insane troll logic. Don't even try.

In the meantime I fight the endless fight of trying to convince people that endlessly updating and upgrading old platforms (tanks, ships, aircraft, etc.) doesn't work as well as they hope it does.

Also trying to reason with "EVERYONE MUST WEAR GAS MASKS OF SOME SORT ALL THE TIME IN MY MILITARY" is a hopeless exercise.

[Gallia-]

But since we're talking about generational timescales and you seem to have trouble visualizing trends beyond the next five minutes, I don't really expect you to have any evidence to the contrary nor say anything besides reaffirm your faith that everything will be OK. Historical determinism didn't work for Karl Marx. Not sure why it would suddenly work for Francis Fukuyama.

But... historical determinism is literally what you're arguing for.

What you are saying: "The West has always triumphed over its enemies, so therefore it will always triumph over its enemies,"
What I am saying: "The West only triumphed over its enemies by taking advantage of unique situational factors that do not exist anymore,"

You are arguing for historical determinism, in the sense that the West's victory is somehow predetermined from some God-on-high who decreed "liberalism will conquer all," or something. You have said, after all, that Fukuyama was right, "it's just taking longer than he expected," so unless you recant that statement, you are literally saying that the West's victory is predetermined. Guess what: It isn't. Western victory hinges on causality. Determinism, not pre-determinism, is what you should be looking at. The knock-on effects of not taking seriously the suddenly dropping TFRs of the early 1900s is coming back to bite the West in the ass roughly 200 years in the future.

Namely, the West's economies are ultimately shrinking as a result of long-term population reduction (post-2050 will be big). This is ultimately the root cause. If you can eliminate this (it is probably impossible without dramatic and drastic political change), then you eliminate the problem, which is quite simple: The West's enemies are growing big, and the West is growing smaller.

By the time the West comes to need to triumph over its enemies, "the West" will not exist anymore. It will be "the Islamic States of Europe" vs. "the Islamic Federation of Russia" vs. "Islamic Republic of Iran" vs. "Saudi Arabia". But that's hopefully in the latter half of this century, when pretty much every alive today, except the very youngest, will be dead. In order for the West to survive, the solution is simple: have positive population growth. Unfortunately, the West does not have positive population growth. Unless you are Alberta. Even Israel, with its titanic growing population, is just going to be a bunch of Haredim in the future who are basically welfare parasites that contribute nothing.

So really, the only solution is to mechanize birth.

But that's impossible given the changing political-religious climate of the West, the need to pander to large religious population groups, and the increasingly shrinking taxpayer base to fund the basic research to even figure out how birth works.

So basically what will happen is this:

1) Declining birth rates means declining taxpayer base
2) Declining taxpayer base means shrinking government budgets
3) Shrinking government budgets means reduced basic research investment
4) Reduced basic research investment means slowed scientific growth

The clock is ticking. If the West is going to survive as it exists, and not as people in Saudi Arabia, Syria, or other rightfully angry and scorned folks who still hold a mean grudge think it should exist, then it probably should have considered the problem decades ago. We don't even know how placentas work so we can't actually start mechanizing birth, and that is before we figure out how to make artificial amniotic fluids or whatever you'd need to gestate a new generation of people, and setup production lines, and wait 20- to 40-odd years for the test tube generation to grow up and see what improvements need to be made to the next batch.

We'd probably be cutting it close if we had birth factories right now. Is it possible that future trends could change this? Sure. But the way we're headed, they look more likely to accelerate the decline of the West than slow it down, let alone reverse it.

There are bunch of justifiably and understandably angry people, smacked by the West 100 years ago and still seething angry, who are coming for it. And they are getting stronger, because they are breeding. The West is getting weaker, because it isn't. What will probably happen, if we are lucky, is that the minority secular/Christian population of Europe will be mass ethnically cleansed by putting them on boats and shipping them to America. If we are unlucky, what will probably happen is that the worst of the West will institute a wholesale requirement that children convert to Islam and perhaps try to extort the last drops of money out of Europe by instituting a jizya on the dhimmis. Get ready to pay your property tax, your income tax, and your infidel tax in the future, at least in the worst afflicted parts of Eurasia.

Alternatively, get ready for mass Balkanization and breakup of European states into ethnic nation-states. Again.