We Still Have An Historic Lifestyle

The historic [life] style is founded upon accumulated experience of mankind, and in the United States is influenced by our Puritan heritage. It has many characteristics, and those which are most cherished are the ones against which the young rebel with most vigor.  For example, the traditional style is based on a belief in God as manifested through organized churches. It respects authority. It is patriotic and sponsors a deep regard for the military, in which a large proportion of our population has served at one time or another. It believes that men lead happier lives they practice thrift, charity and personal responsibility. It believes that honest work is good for a man and preaches allegiance to the firm for which one works. It believes in the sanctity of the home (unless where divorce is necessary) and respect for elders (unless they become a burden). One of its basic tenets has always been a naive and beautiful faith in universal education, not merely as a tool for getting ahead but as a way to attain a good life. Finally, it has adhered to conservative modes of dress, speech, music and ornamentation.

At least ninety percent of the American population subscribes to this traditional life style and considers it flexible enough to accommodate anyone willing to give it a fair test. It can be summed up in a series of aphorisms: “A man’s word is as good as his bond If a man works he’ll get ahead. America has usually tried to do the right thing. Get an education and you can accomplish anything. God is watching.”

James A. Michener, Kent State: What Happened and Why [1971], pg. 63

I would say this is still the traditional lifestyle and those types who rejected this in 1971 are still the same types who reject it now. They want to “rebel against the system” the same way they did in 1971—aggressively and sometimes with violence. They are typically anti-law enforcement. Their sexual morals are about as bad as they can get. That will always be the way the “woke” LEFT operates. They hated the USA then and hate it now.

The Perfidy of Islam

"Deception jihad” entails the use of “concealment, manipulation, and misdirection” to gain the upper hand over infidels. “Political jihad” consists of “the deliberate, organized use of electoral and governmental mechanisms to advance, protect, or normalize Islamic ideological objectives.” (One recent example is Hamtramck, Michigan, where “demographic consolidation produced a Muslim-majority electorate” and an all-Muslim city council.) And “missionary jihad,” a.k.a. proselytizing or da‘wah, has always played a key role in Islamic expansion, serving as “an opening act that softens resistance, secures alliances, and builds legitimacy long before force or policy takes over.” (Nowadays, a common example is interfaith programs, which serve jihad by parroting “grievance narratives,” selectively quoting Islamic scripture, drawing moral equivalencies between Islam and Christianity, and depicting Muslims always as victims, never as aggressors.)

Bruce Bawer, A Taxonomy of Jihad: How Does Islam Conquer?

How Islam Conquers the World

Then there’s a form of jihad that too many Westerners still get wrong – namely, “migration jihad.” If Muslims move West, it’s not just to collect welfare; it’s to do their part in serving the Islamic strategy of hijrah, which Cyrus defines as “a deliberate shifting of populations to create new centers of influence, reshape societies from within, and slowly tilt political power toward Islamic governance.” The very first example of hijrah was Muhammad’s own move from Mecca to Medina, and ever since then, the aggressive stage of Islamic expansion has been preceded by the “soft invasion” of hijrah. 

It’s an old story, yet Western governments still don’t get it. And thanks to their ignorance, many European neighborhoods are now sharia-run enclaves where “police tread lightly, women are harassed for uncovered hair, and dissent against Islam is prosecuted faster than open calls for jihad.” In the U.S., under both Barack Obama and Joe Biden (and with the help of Christian “charities” and “Islamic advocacy organizations”), armies of Muslims were settled in selected cities – Minneapolis, Dearborn, etc. – to form the basis for new Muslim enclaves. “Muhammad’s original migration model,” Cyrus points out, “is still being followed: enter as a guest, grow into a bloc, demand accommodation, then rule by numbers.” 

Bruce Bawer, A Taxonomy of Jihad: How Does Islam Conquer?