Lawrence Auster writes about Spencer's views on Islam as elicited in a recent interview by the so asymptotic as to be nearly PC MC Jamie Glazov of Front Page.mag (or whatever its precise title is), and chides him once again for failing to prescribe a cure based upon his diagnosis:
Naturally (no, unnaturally), Glazov doesn't ask Spencer what we should DO about Islam once we understand the truth about it, and Spencer for his part doesn't volunteer what we should DO about Islam once we understand the truth about it.
One could accuse Auster of the same thing with regard to another sociopolitical problem: Auster has innumerable articles and essays about the problem of blacks in America (let alone also elsewhere in the West), and as far as I have seen, he never says what we should DO about that problem.
For myself, I don't fault either Spencer or Auster for failing to come up with a specific plan on what to do about the problem. It's not their job. Calling attention to the problem is their job (and the job of the mainstream media, whose members are not doing their job). Figuring out ways to manage that problem is the job of our pathetic failures otherwise known as our political representatives.
Certainly, theories from civilians about what to do are welcome, but they -- or their absence -- are not some kind of litmus test of overall legitimacy. We are currently in a War of Ideas phase, unfortunately (since we should be well past that stage -- but again, that's not the fault of us civilians), where information and realistic counter-propaganda is of utmost importance (if only because our sociopolitical mainstream remains bewitched by pro-Islam propaganda). In this current phase, the work of both Spencer and Auster is valuable -- as long as they stop being asses about other things outside their expertise.
Further Reading:
Elucidating a little further on this phenonemon:
The inconsistency of Lawrence Auster
No comments:
Post a Comment