The fanatical puritanism behind mainstream Islam should dismay everyone who believes in freedom—particularly as it derives its meaning and significance for Muslims in a matrix of legalism intimately tied up with militantly supremacist expansionism.
Especially, Islamic puritanism should dismay and disillusion Latinos and young African-Americans—for no other culture is as antithetical to the earnestly delicious promiscuity of Latin and Afro-Caribbean music, as well as the uniquely black contributions of jazz, rap and hip-hop.
Take a look at the TV shows Dance 360 and Soul Train (yes, the train is still running on time after all these years): On the latter show, as the latest rap, hip-hop, soul and R&B music plays over the loudspeakers, the cameras move in and among male and female dancers, mostly black or brown, with a few whites here and there, the women wearing provocative miniskirts, high-heels, midriff-baring blouses, and cleavage-plunging necklines gyrating their hips in intercourse-miming moves, and the men doing likewise.
On the former show, as a crowd of young people, men and women, all races, watches, participants from among them will volunteer to come out into the dance circle—the “dance 360”—to show off their dance moves, with women often displaying the most outrageously sexual kinetics with their lithe and flexible bodies.
These two shows, and the broader subculture they reflect which has infectiously influenced not only blacks but youths of all races throughout not only the US but throughout the world by now, must obviously deeply offend and outrage Muslims. When Muslims in their anti-Western apologetics frequently mention the “moral degeneracy” of America and the West, they never mention blacks, but surely, they must be thinking of them—or perhaps they are cleverly neglecting to mention them.
And then, one wonders what American Muslims do during Mardi Gras in New Orleans? Good God, they must go into their basements and hide until it's all over! And what about Muslims in Rio de Janeiro, during Carnaval? Same thing. The American Latin culture in general, with its rhythmic sensuality pulsating out of the wonderful mix of “branco, preto, mulato”*—must be viscerally anathema to American Muslims, South, Central and North.
The Islamic revulsion that Muslims must feel at the sight of spectacles like Carnaval—with its mixing of men and women, white, black, brown, in lascivious dance to pulsating rhythms in the heat of the day or the flames of the night—should be made public to Latinos and Blacks of the Americas, so they can see the true colors of Islam underneath the clever whitewashing of it as simply a “cultural” vehicle for a Third Worldist ethnic militancy against white Western “oppression”.
And hopefully enough of them will see this awful truth the easy way, rather than the harder way, at the brunt of Jihad and soul-killing Sharia.
____________________________
* (“white, black, and mixed”, from the wonderful spoken commentary by Vinicius accompanying Toquinho’s version of the classic Brazilian song by Baden Powell, Samba de Bênção.)
3 comments:
Erich,
Maybe I am going to be a litle bit off topic but I want just to assert something: To rebuk the attacks on "latinity".
Yes, I know, I am a pain in the ass and you did not attacked latinity. Also, I know and perfectly understood your "strategy" and I credit you for that. But...
"The fanatical puritanism behind mainstream Islam should dismay everyone who believes in freedom."
I do not think puritanism goes against freedom. They handle hands in the parks. Traditional "Latin" culture is indeed more "puritane" than in the rest of Europe. Just consider Catholicism vs Protestantism or the, it could only came from Spain, Opus Dei.
"Latinos and young African-Americans"
Yes, probabily you are not counting me there but you said "Latinos". I will respond over "Latinity, in Europe and Latin America".
"the earnestly delicious promiscuity of Latin and Afro-Caribbean music"
As I said, I'll ignore non Latins. First of all, I do kind of morally abject promiscuity. We have then to draw a line between "promiscuosity" and "sensuality". I cannot think of nothing inherently "promiscuous" in Italian/Spaniard/Portuguese/Southern-French derived music, so I'll assume that there are foreign influences. That "promiscuity" does not derive from Latinity. Sensuality does. Example? Argentinan Tango. Sensual? Yes. Promiscuous? Difficultly.
You then go speaking of an eventual "moral degeneracy". One does not have to be a muslim to realise it does exist. Once again, I'll say promiscuity is (in most cases) moral degeneracy.
But, is it "Latin"? Of course no. Actually, in Latin areas, we vallue highly sensuality but promiscuity is only wanted by the men-looking-for-sex and, and this is very important, was NOT SOCIALLY VALLUED in "Latin" societies before the advent of "Leftism". Which came from non-Latin European sources. In this I can include Mulitculturalism and "American influence", but not only American but nowadays also English, French (non-Latin), etc.
For instance: Pop culture. You are aware of the promiscuity. Now, lets look for "Latins". I think that Latins don't need "promiscuity" to be "cool", or did not needed it. The same does not happen in other pop cultures. Take, for instance, this Mexican pop star (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez13nnRdj3U) singing a "sensual" music: "The Bar teases me". The lyrics are sensual and sexy, she even says "don't fall in love, all I want is your money" but, excepting this verse, where is the promiscuity of the star?
Now compare this to non Latin pop stars in Brittain, America, etc... who sing the same kind of provocative-sensual music...
You see, I can give you more examples. So, I conclude, Latinity and promiscuity do not match. Latinity and sensuality, its perfect.
Sorry for diverting the theme and for being such a pain in the ass but that's the kind of logic that seperates Anglo-America from the broader U.S.A. but does not separate Latin-America from well, you get it. The vast majority of America is latin, but linguistically only.
Your post is interesting, nonetheless...
afonso,
Thanks for your comment. You raise a lot of interesting points, most of which I think I disagree with.
First off, I was referring mostly to New World Latin cultures, not Mediterranean. The New World Latin cultures have over the centuries involved considerable influences from native Indian cultures and African slave and immigrant cultures. These non-European influences have become more and more influential throughout South and Central America (and the Caribbean), the more that these areas have loosened up and opened up to the increasing democratic influences of the West as well as the very influential atmospherics of U.S.A. pop culture -- which has had global influence particularly in the last generation from the late 1960s to the present.
"The fanatical puritanism behind mainstream Islam should dismay everyone who believes in freedom."
"I do not think puritanism goes against freedom."
It does to the extent that it is legislated, with penalties for breaking laws. Of course, I do not believe in the absolute opposite of puritanism -- it's a matter of degrees. But I do tend to support a society that errs on the side of freedom when maintaining that difficult balance. Of course I do not support everybody walking around nude at all times, or people having sex in public, etc. However, I do support having entertainment events like Mardi Gras or Brazilian Carnaval, where there is a lot of flagrant stuff going on (women lifting their shirts in the street to show their breasts, etc.).
"Traditional "Latin" culture is indeed more "puritane" than in the rest of Europe."
In one sense, yes, but in another, no: Italy is a Catholic country, and their television shows and magazines show a lot more nudity, have a lot more sexual expression, than is generally done in the USA.
And speaking of American Latin cultures, again, we have Brazil: The city Rio de Janeiro has a gigantic statue of Jesus overlooking the city, but at the same time they have Carnaval with all its nudity and pagan black magic dancing, etc. A paradox.
"Just consider Catholicism vs Protestantism or the, it could only came from Spain, Opus Dei."
Actually, Protestantism has more of a puritanical streak than Catholicism -- in practice -- particularly Mediterranean and Latin American Catholics. I have known a few of these types of "southern" Catholics, and while they are very pious and religious-minded, at the same time they are much more sexy in mind & heart, enjoying the passion of sex etc., and forgiving sexual sins as just part of life that cannot be controlled, than the "Northern" Protestants.
"We have then to draw a line between "promiscuosity" and "sensuality". I cannot think of nothing inherently "promiscuous" in Italian/Spaniard/Portuguese/Southern-French derived music, so I'll assume that there are foreign influences."
When I used the word "promiscuous" in my essay, I was kind of playing with the word from its literal Latin origins: literally, it means uninhibited mixing. And in the context of Carnaval, it is the mixing of men and women in the street, dancing to music together. We know from various behaviors of Muslims throughout the world that they do not like men and women mixing together -- and horrors if men and women are dancing together! Muslims try to legislate against this and punish those who break the law, and this is puritanism taken to a fascistic degree. A law against dancing!!!??? That's too far. It shows a puritanical disease of mind. (One major Muslim cleric of supposedly "moderate" Indonesia recently tried to ban the cultural traditional practice of female drummers in public music concerts!)
"That "promiscuity" does not derive from Latinity. Sensuality does. Example? Argentinan Tango. Sensual? Yes. Promiscuous? Difficultly."
Sure, I agree the Tango is sensual but not promiscuous. But the line between the two is difficult to draw, and I certainly don't want a Religious Police deciding for the people where that line is.
Your examples of Latin-based pop music being less promiscuous is probably correct. But pop music & pop culture are not all of culture, and I do think there is a kind of underlying openness to sexuality that is more frank among Latins than it is among "Northerns". To be fair, both Latins and "Northerns" indulge in kind of contradictory paradoxes with regard to the balance between prudity/crudity. They just accent it in opposite ways.
Erich, you made many good points as usual. If I had my blog functioning right now, I'd take somme excerpts from here. Food for thought, really.
Concerning Latin America, I am wondering for some time why is that - especially in terms of music - Brazil, Mexico, Cuba (or the caribean) and even Argentina have created so much, let's call it, culture and cultural genres (I mean good ones.) in comparison to Portugal and Spain. I've came to the conclusion that it's a question of disparity of population: 50 millions against 350... I just wanted to say this.
I knew you were directing your speach to "Americans".
I do not think I will make you agree with me but, I do think that a little bit of legislation is not bad. Of course, we don't want to ban "carnaval" (You know the Brazilian, the Portuguese is to make somewhat "violent satires" of the powerfull and to attack the neighbours with jokes, and, in a considerable number of villages, the boys hide their face and are premited to "abuse" a little bit of the girls, etc) or singing, or dancing nor will we veil our women.
But, I don't believe in the good Human and as such I think that a considerable percentage of the people will take an advantage whenever they get one, that "good-costumes-law" can only protect the people. It protects more than the people, it protects the individual.
And no, I am not going socialist because we have to understand that not long ago, the "comunity" had this power; nowadays, nobody is afraid of being ostracised. It is this "social freedom" that makes the need of a little of legislation. I am not expecting you to agree with me on this but, I'll leave an example.
The Pope is against condoms. Everybody thinks the pope is an hypocrite. But, how can the Pope give condoms to Catholics and then say, "Have only marital sex. You and your wife must be faithfull to each other. Go and multiply yourselves."?
You see, it's this kind of legislation, in the Vatican, there shall not be condoms for sell... The problem is when (and this is a leftist dogma) the laws do not protect the culture who create the law. Law and culture must handle hands. In a way, that is our problem - or one of them - especially in Europe.
About "purity" and "puritanism", I agree with you 100%. I, and maybe this is so abstract that it is convinient, draw a line between what is sensual and promiscuous. In a "Southern Latin" way, sensuality is pure. It's "puritanism" in it's zenit!
But it then draws a circle and when you reach "promiscuity", you have no purity whatsoever, you have lowered yourself... Maybe this can be very convinient but in a (great, great) way, it's what I feel.
And of course, I am not saing that there are no promiscuity here and no sensuality up there (USA, Northern Europe).
And I wouldn't say that that strains of islamic are "puritane". That avertion is like... well, did you read 1984? Did you remember what they did to sexual impulsions? Islam makes me think of it.
"But the line between the two is difficult to draw, and I certainly don't want a Religious Police deciding for the people where that line is."
Sure, neither do I. After all, the nocive thing is the "promiscuous thoughts" that undermines and "destroy" the "culture/Tradition", not promiscuos dances and words...
Post a Comment