by France Cukjati
All indications are that 2020, regardless of the coronavirus pandemic, will mark our present and future lives. Political relations are being exposed and strained, and worldview issues are coming to the fore, which we have kept telling ourselves not to open.
The Slovenian nation has long been divided. The “cultural struggle” of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries took place at the level of words, evidence, and strife, and the communist revolution plunged us into a bloody rift. Towards the end of the last century, the conflict seemed to subside and partially changed its face. But in essence, it is still an ideological conflict between the Roman-Christian tradition and new ideologies that are more or less just everyday consumer in nature and are used to justify not exactly humane and noble goals.
If either side does not base its views on indisputable facts, but indulges in blind hatred, then the “cultural struggle” cannot be overcome or at least mitigated by dialogue. Instead of a clash of arguments and a search for truth, we get a clash of “life and death”.
That left-wing post-communist politics, with its media arsenal, tolerates or even justifies and encourages such a situation is understandable, as it is written on its skin. If the center-right government happens to want to curb the rampant transition pathology and ensure more justice, pluralism and trust in the rule of law, a mechanism of vulgar opposition is triggered, such as shouting on the road: “Kill Janša!”, “Death to Janšizm” and so on. If the ministers and prime minister, responsible for the functioning of the state and its institutions, point out the non-functioning of law enforcement agencies or the “strange” operation of state’s RTV, the judiciary, education and so on, there is an avalanche of criticism of how right-wingers dare to interfere in “our” “autonomous and independent” institutions.
Even an ordinary citizen rightly wonders whether state institutions can really be so “autonomous and independent” that they do what they want and regardless of the expectations of those we pay? Can law enforcement agencies really “autonomously and independently” refuse to deal with major and practically exposed criminal acts, such as laundering of Iranian money and robbing the country by purchasing overpriced vascular stents? Can the judiciary really be so “autonomous and independent” that it sends innocent people to prison with its left hand and protects real criminals? Can state-owned RTV really be so “autonomous and independent” that it calmly lies and distorts the image of the center-right government and its actions?
It is bad for a country which important institutions, that are supposed to be “autonomous and independent”, are run by people without conscience and moral integrity. So people who are not “autonomous and independent” as they are obviously controlled by other interests and other people. Woe to a country in which even a legally elected government responsible for the functioning of the state is not allowed to monitor the functioning of its “autonomous and independent” institutions.
The clash of civilisations
In 1993, the famous American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington predicted that after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, cultural (and religious) identities would become a major source of conflict and global warfare. We did not take his prophecies seriously until the massive incursion of radical Islam into Europe began. The Islam that establishes Sharia law in its “no-go-zones” and proves its hatred of traditional European culture over and over again with terrorist attacks, the rape of European girls and blatant demonstrations under the slogan “Islam will dominate the world, freedom can go to hell!” (Islam will rule the world – damn freedom!).
This is not a revolt against European social policy, this is not a struggle for survival and daily bread, a struggle for a just and legal state, because they have it all. It is a fight for something for which these warriors are willing to sacrifice everything Europe has to offer them, even their lives. It is not just a verbal, quarrelsome, ideological clash, it is a bloody clash of life and death. This is the “clash of civilisations.”
Even the Slovenian “cultural struggle” of leftists is not a struggle for survival and daily bread, a struggle for a just and legal state, a struggle for audibility and media attention, because they have all this more than others. It is a struggle for an ideological interpretation of the facts of life. The struggle for the interpretation of the right to property, private initiative, media freedom, the struggle for the interpretation of hate speech, the autonomy of the judiciary, etc., even the struggle for the interpretation of biomedical facts about gender. In the background, one can feel the growth of the ideology that we Slovenes experienced already during the time of fascism and Nazism, and especially during the time of communism. It is an ideology that allows the “avant-garde” the freedom to lie, steal and kill. An ideology that contradicts traditional Western culture. Even among Slovenes, therefore, the “clash of civilisations” is still taking place more and more obviously.
The Slovenian conflict also seems to be escalating into physical violence. That it is less and less a clash of words and arguments and more and more a clash without content, for no reason, we have seen in a series of Friday’s cycling protests. There was no sensible programme in them, no concrete content requirements, but only blind hatred. Equally meaningless were the violent demonstrations on November 5th, in which an adrenaline-fueled fighting mob spontaneously was released, which in itself has little political significance, but is very useful for the implementation of left-wing totalitarian ideologies and terrorist organisations aimed at organised hatred, harm and kill.
The struggle for traditional democratic principles
With increasing urgency, we are faced with the question of whether Europe will be able to maintain its way of life, freedom of speech and a democratic society without sharia “no-go zones”? Will it be able to control its borders, or will it blink drunkenly at the illegal intrusion of endless crowds of unknown people? Will it be able to preserve the foundations of its identity, which is in the coexistence of cultures and identities of all European nations? Will it be able to maintain a critical appraisal of all the new ideologies that some ideological enthusiasts invent and brutally impose on others? Will it be able to preserve the foundations of social coexistence, summed up by ancient principles such as do not lie, do not steal, do not kill?
All these issues are becoming more and more popular. It is becoming increasingly clear that this is indeed a clash of incompatible civilisations. Sharia and Western law are not compatible. Nor is a culture of lies, deception, exclusion, and hatred compatible with a culture of truth, honesty, and a willingness to coexist and find solutions together. Primary value multiculturalism is not possible! We are not talking about skin colour or other physical signs, but about the value-opinion definition of a person, society, nation.
The clash of civilisations is escalating. This is frightening, but at the same time it seems to be a necessary phase in the evolution of the human ideological spirit. However, this conflict can only end with the victory of truth and “common sense” that has matured through millennia of Western cultures, from Judeo-Greek-Christian to Enlightenment. It will not go without exposing and dismantling blind aggression, blind hatred, and blind exclusion, in which many are still trapped.
This is the path that is destined for us. The path that is being drawn in the “revolutionary” year 2020.
Dr. France Cukjati is a Slovenian theologian, physician, politician and conservative thinker. He is a former member of parliament and president of the Slovenian parliament.
