LOL.
Could be.
His was more than a little dry if it was (admittedly, I was a bit rushed in reading it), or preferring the drip grind, p'raps I'm blinded by my own.
As far as Europe is concerned, the author, while otherwise making a splendidly competent case, prefers to deal in causes rather than remedies (except by inference), but even there he missed a major element. IMO, the projection of ecumenism upon Islam was clearly displaced since, as a religion, it is entirely underserving of that distinction. One also wonders why the Church so willingly capitulated to socialsim, as its nexus in public schooling worked wonders to the effect he bewails. That capitulation conceded systemic alienation of the rearing of children from the primary responsibility of imparting faith and culture. It abetted the Gramscian objective of depriving succeeding generations from their inheritance in Western Culture.
Insofar as America is concerned, we are simply too late to act selectively in controlling immigration and expect time alone to bind our cultural wounds. Besides controlling the borders, we now have to focus instead upon successful assimilation. In addition to (and distinct from) absorbing Latino culture, we have to face the seeming contradiction between the stated goals (ghouls?) of Islam and the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
Here is something I wrote last year on that topic,:
There are, however, limits to free association. There is one major religion operating within this country with a written doctrine that advocates complete overthrow of the Constitution and replacement of our entire body of laws: Islam. When free association is used for purposes of sedition and bigotry we must make exception concerning free exercise. It is a test of our ability as a nation to make distinctions upon individual behavior that may do more to transform an ancient religion for the better than all the soldiers in the Middle East.
Happy now? ;-) CO