Sunday, October 04, 2009
Closing the barn door—not after the horse has got out, but after the wolves have got in.
Recently, I published here an unstinting encomium of Diana West. Well, nobody’s perfect.
A flaw I noticed recently occurred within the context of her formulation of what our war is really about—and it is a well-articulated formulation:
It is not, as our presidents vaguely invoke, a war against "terrorism," "radicalism" or "extremism"; and it is not, as the current hearts-and-minds-obsessed Afghanistan commander calls it, "a struggle to gain the support of the (Afghan) people." It is something more specific than presidents describe, and it is something larger than the outlines of Iraq or Afghanistan. The war that has fallen to our generation is to halt the spread of Islamic law (Sharia) in the West, whether driven by the explosive belts of violent jihad, the morality-laundering of petro-dollars or decisive demographic shifts.
However, when she gets around to articulating what concrete measures this war properly understood entails, she veers over into incoherent Austerism:
Halting the spread of Islamic law in the democratic West requires halting Islamic immigration. . .
That’s all fine and dandy, but that’s only half the problem. She makes no mention of what to do about the millions of Muslims already within our borders. And, as I have argued before with reference to Lawrence Auster’s similar scheme, the problem of the numbers of Muslims within the West is only going to increase as the years go by, through a combination of continued immigration and high birth rates (as well as, perhaps only marginally, increased conversions to Islam within the West). It is eminently reasonable to suppose that neither Diana West’s proposal nor Auster’s similar proposal is going to be implemented for years—if not decades—from now.
That means that while the West is dilly-dallying and ignoring Diana West and Auster, we will grow so many more Muslims within our borders, the problem of Islam will have become (if it is not already so now, for that matter) relocated to a domestic Western problem. At that point, several years (if not a few decades) down the road, to “halt Islamic immigration”—as Diana West and Lawrence Auster sternly intone as though that were a tough no-nonsense measure—would be like closing the barn door: not after the horse has got out, but after the wolves have already got in.
An Iron Veil
Auster’s Insufficiency and Incoherence