Adieu, Gates of Vienna

(Note: See the Update at the end.)

In response to this recent essay by Paul Weston on Gates of Vienna, typically (for Weston and for that blog) indulging in gloom-and-doom about how nearly rotten to the core the current West (as exemplified particularly by the U.K.) is, a commenter named "andy" wrote:

While Mr Westons analysis is bang on about the historical aspects, I`m more optimistic about the future than I was 5 years ago, people seem to be waking up to the reality of the betrayal of our people and the reasons behind it in ever increasing numbers,the only downside is that to remedy the situation may take some considerable violence.

I then responded:

I agree with andy; and I would add, I don't share the dark alienation from our authorities which Weston and many others here tend to indulge in. Yes, some tiny minority of Leftists are evil, but not nearly in numbers or influence sufficient to explain the mainstream dominance of PC MC -- which depends on masses of relatively good, decent, intelligent people of various myriad points on the sociological spectrum (far more diverse than the quaintly archaic "Elites-Commoners" polarization meme would have it); and which is the sole reason why all this sh*t is being enabled throughout the West and has been gaining ground for the past 50 years.

One of the two Gates of Vienna owners, Dymphna, then wrote this comment to me:

"Perhaps you don't share their particular dysphoria. However, there is a long trail of evidence behind you, in this blog, of a tendency toward "dark alienation" re your own specific themes.

"Same war, different battles, Hesperado.

"Mr. Weston's lucid analysis of what he sees in his country certainly reflects the view of many, many others. So many that it is at times heartbreaking.

"To decide that ppl like Sameer and Weston are "indulging" themselves sounds, at best, unkind. They live there, they witness the daily degradation, they live with a clear memory of their country when it was a very different place.

"NOTE: In future, please find a real word instead of merely sticking an asterisk into a scatological commonplace. I'm leaving this one stand, but it's the last one. In case you haven't noticed, these words seem to breed in the threads and pretty soon we're up to our knees in sloshy effluvia.

"True, it's a bit of work to polish & then brandish a larger word, but it's a good example for our homeschoolers. They need to see that arguments can be robust without resorting to terms like the one you used here.

"More civility. pls."

I then replied, after thinking about it for a few minutes:

Speaking of crossing lines: a blog owner warning a reader and commenter that the phrase "tends to indulge in" (itself set in an entirely reasonably mature and unremarkably intelligent comment) is somehow bordering on incivility, crosses the line for me.

My search for a normal, healthy, non-dysfunctional discussion venue revolving around the problem of Islam on this great Internet apparently continues.

Conclusion:

This wasn't the first time Dymphna has warned me about crossing some invisible line of subtle decorum hypersensitively tripwired with unreasonable demands. But it is the last.

If Paul Weston's skin, and the skin of others at Gates of Vienna who share his views, is so thin it can't take the phrase "tends to indulge in", then one wonders if they have the mettle for the struggle ahead we all face -- even if it will be considerably less apocalyptic than the one they so fervently expect.

I had thought, after having been banned from Jihad Watch for the umpteenth time (back in September of last year) for outrageously hypersensitive and specious reasons, that at Gates of Vienna I could settle in for some intelligent, stimulating, sometimes provocative but always mature conversations about various aspects of the problem of Islam without having to worry about a censor hanging over my shoulder chilling the atmosphere of what should be conducive to classically liberal discourse and disagreement (would anyone of sense and sensibility warn Edmund Burke to refrain from using the phrase "tends to indulge in" within the context of a mature and intelligent critique?) with warnings and threats of censorship or worse.

Apparently, I was wrong.

At any rate, my link to Gates of Vienna will remain on my blogroll (though for some reason neither Dymphna nor Baron Bodissey saw fit to include mine on theirs all these months (if not years) during which they have come to know me), because as a site of information about the problem of Islam (as I explained back in January in my essay here In defense of Gates of Vienna blog), it is among the best. As a venue for discussion among concerned individuals in that regard, however, I am sorry to say it suffers too often from hypersensitive and irrationally irritable comment monitors.

Someday, there will appear on the Internet a site for any and all of those concerned about the problem of Islam to get together to share information and to hash out their ideas, differences and agreements -- without irrational censorship getting in the way. I hope to see one before the apocalypse comes.

Update:

On second reading, I apparently misunderstood the gist of Dymphna's objection: rather than objecting to my phrase "tends to indulge in", she was objecting to my 4-letter word rendered into a 3-letter word with an asterisk. Nevertheless, prior to this, she has warned and threatened me about my writing manner and content which had nothing to do with cuss words -- and this time most of her issue-taking with my comment revolved around my unvulgar content; so in my evident haste, I assumed this was one more time.

So, my leave-taking still stands (as do some of my other points, particularly the one about thin skins). I don't like authorities breathing down my neck policing my writing, particularly when I take pains to post relatively mature and intelligent comments.