Reflections on a World Gone Mad, Part 3

The fifth annual Forum of the UN Alliance of Civilizations met in Vienna on February 27th and 28th, and Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was one of the attendees. She has filed a account on what she observed, and discusses the larger ramifications of the AoC in the ongoing Islamization of the West.

The report below is the final part of a three-part series. Previously: Part 1, Part 2.

Reflections on a World Gone Mad
Part 3: Implementing the results

by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

How does the Alliance of Civilizations propose to implement its strategies of re-education? In order to achieve alignment with demands voiced by the OIC, the Alliance aims to address youth, education, media, and migration, picking up initiatives proposed by the OIC:

1.   Intercultural and interfaith dialogues
2.   Media education
3.   Teaching religion in school
4.   Governmental, university, and civil society programs and initiatives “that educate and empower Muslim immigrants in the US and Europe”. (Bat Ye’or, p. 163)


Concerning education, it was Kofi Annan who, back in 2004, urged the “need to unlearn the habit of xenophobia, that people are taught to hate by leaders who exploit fear, ignorance or feelings of weakness.” In order to combat this, we must engage in the process of unlearning the stereotypes about the “other” or “the others”, unlearning the habit of xenophobia, and unlearning intolerance.

And what better way to accomplish this evil than to re-educate youth? This constitutes Goebbels-like indoctrination at the lowest and weakest level of society, our children, who are to be conditioned to tolerate even the intolerable.

Would that include tolerance of religiously sanctioned domestic violence? Just a cultural matter which must be respected. Acceptance of the death penalty for apostasy? A minor matter which inter-religious dialogue can talk away. A woman receiving only half of what her brother inherits, as sanctioned by religious law?

So this is suddenly no longer a matter of fundamental rights after all, and must be unquestionably respected in the name of diversity? And why is there nothing said about religious and cultural norms and practices which promote hatred of Jews, Christians and apostates, those institutions which oppose freedom of expression and which see blasphemy as a serious moral vice, or even a capital crime to be punished according to sharia law?

How does one square this circle of preventing one thing — undefined hatred, according to the Alliance — by allowing and “safeguarding” something else — freedom of expression? I have asked the OSCE about this apparent contradiction, but then again, neither the OSCE not the UN has any misgivings about this discrepancy.

Sampaio even goes as far as to question whether “existing legal instruments on freedom of thought, conscience and religion are capable of meeting the new ongoing challenges.”

Once re-education through changing laws and norms has been successfully implemented, the Alliance will turn “to a wider strategy: education about all religions and beliefs so that myths and misconceptions can be seen for what they are.” This is to be followed by media literacy in order to prevent the media and the internet from being used to spread hatred, whilst safeguarding freedom of opinion and expression. (Sampaio address to the OSCE Conference on Tolerance and Non-discrimination in Astana, June 2010).

We now turn to the youth who are seen as a crucial participants in the Alliance. In the so-called Concept Paper presented to the attendees of the Global Forum, we are told that “experts and participants endorse nurturing dialogue, starting at a young age [my italics], and to create public space for inclusive cross-cultural, inter-religious and intra-religious interaction”, in addition to teachers’ awareness of their social and moral responsibilities. How are these social and moral responsibilities defined? Whose morals are to be taught? These are innocuous words without any substantive meaning and it seems this is intentional.

To underscore the importance of their contribution to the Alliance of Civilizations, the youth held their own one-day forum prior to the Global Forum. Here some of the recommendations presented to the Global Forum, beginning with a group discussion on the topic of Integration — Diversity, multiple identity and social inclusion [pdf]:

Recommendation 1:

Creating polylogue between various stakeholders including civil, government, business community with an aim to enhance political and active participation of minorities in society to ensure and / or create long-term social inclusion and integration. We propose this through including migrant histories in the political discourse of host nations, by highlighting and replicating best practice outreach and affirmative programs and actions and by ensuring that outreach is comprehensive and inclusive through political campaigns/elections.

Recommendation 2:

To achieve a successful inclusion crossing language divides and creating a sense of community, we recommend to provide children with free education equally in their mother tongue and the main language spoken the respective region/country, create an international open source platform where migrants can share their experiences, needs and best practices to achieve mutual benefit and to guarantee equal and free access to quality of language education for refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants, regardless of their legal status.

Group discussion on the topic: For a new narrative on migration [pdf]:

Recommendation 1:

Form a task force which includes all stakeholders -especially migrants -to develop practical solutions through a multi-perspective approach in order to depoliticize the narrative of migration.

Recommendation 2:

Make the path to citizenship easier.

As expected, the content is a bit shallow. The language bears a remarkable similarity to that of the Alliance.

The message of the two-day Global Forum may be summarized as follows:

Islamophobia, xenophobia, and racism must effectively be countered by even more dialogue and more funding.

The only concrete result the Global Forum presented to the participants and the media might be summed up as follows:

“More dialogue for more dialogue, which needs more funding.”

A plenary hall full of Neville Chamberlains smiling benevolently and chanting in a single unified voice:

Peace in our time with the help of dialogue and harmony!

We strive for unity in monocultural dhimmitude!

For more on the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, see the OIC Archives.

7 thoughts on “Reflections on a World Gone Mad, Part 3

  1. Pingback: Alliance of what? Reflections on a World Gone Mad — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami

  2. Sampaio even goes as far as to question whether “existing legal instruments on freedom of thought, conscience and religion are capable of meeting the new ongoing challenges.”

    Not really a question, more a statement of despair from a truly progressive prostitute willing to sell out everything. We cannot possibly meet the ‘challenges’ of submission required by the ‘immutable’ Koran. What to do, what to do?

    Spanish university professor Isaias Barrenada finds it “very difficult to define ‘civilization”– that doesn’t instil confidence, or does it?

    • I agree with Sampaio, of sorts. I wonder whether “existing legal instruments on freedom of thought, conscience and religion are capable of meeting the new ongoing challenges.” are able to reform Islam.


  4. @Elisabeth,

    You have touched here on the way these people use language – I don’t know if you have ever come across John Loeffler, who has talked a lot about both education and the use of language by these people – Here’s a clip.

    The gist of it is that these change agents will deliberately use vague language so that people will agree to what they’re proposing, each assigning a different meaning to the terms of the agreement. So everyone thinks they’ve all agreed to what’s been proposed, but in reality they have not!

    And so on … Loeffler really knows his stuff, he’s been doing this for a long time. You can download individual talks & radio shows for $1.99 at his website, Steel on Steel. He’s also got a few downloadable videos on his site, the last one I got was $4.99, so it doesn’t exactly break the bank to check out some of his material. He talks also about the Delphi Technique and so forth, which these people use to achieve “agreement” at their get-togethers – and how to disrupt them!

  5. Nick – could you please direct me toward the video you mentioned, especially the last topic? I find myself in a community planning group which is freely salted with “professionally” trained green and climate change activists. Battling through the obligatory vision statement, your second paragraph of your response to Elizabeth hit me like a sledge hammer because the “popular version” of the vision statement is chock full of those vague and fuzzy words.


Comments are closed.