Friday, January 11, 2013

"Just the facts, Mo'ammed"

The Counter-Jihad movement (not yet a movement -- but that's another story, for another day) still desperately needs an Anti-Muslim Manual (AIM).

To be done right, this AIM would have to be created by a team of individuals, at least some of them experts in various related fields and languages, whose efforts should be funded (unless we were lucky enough to find such a team willing to spend hundreds of hours of their time for no pay; which is rather improbable and should not be expected). 

As for the content of the AIM, there would be an ingenious way to flesh it out thematically: simply conduct a somewhat devious R-&-D phase where various individuals, acting as "plants" so to speak, would engage various Islamopologists of different flavors in lengthy debates. The real purpose of these "debates" would not be to really debate, but rather to record the assertions/claims/responses made by the Islamopologists involved. In doing so, I'd wager we will have amassed probably 50% of what we need. (This of course can also be supplemented by simply researching past debates and discussions.) 

Needless to say, this method of deriving most of the content has the advantage of getting it from those who, as Robert Spencer has remarked, seem to have their pulse on the general PC MC template out there (the very same template we need to engage and refute) -- so much so that they, as Spencer said, seem to be "reading the same memo".

Once we have amassed this complex, jagged heap of raw material, the next phase would be to organize it by topic and subtopic, and by the primary bifurcation into 1) Claims for How Great Islam Is vs. 2) Defenses Against Criticisms of Islam. The third phase would be the writing of Counter-Claims for #1, and Refutations of #2. Supplementing this would be Claims for How Bad Islam Is not covered by our Counter-Claims. 

In tandem with this third phase would be the meticulous and scrupulous tracking down of adequate source citations (ideally supplying primary sources for each point, augmented by at least two secondary sources).

Phase Four would be the editing process, where the organization of all the text is tightened up usefully subdivided categories; setting up a digitally annotated index (a long alphabetical list as comprehensive as possible and cross-referenced, with each word or phrase a link taking the user to the relevant place); and the prose is trimmed of all fat, throwing away any needless introductions and extraneous descriptions and adjectives and anecdotes and scenarios: Mostly "Just the facts, Mo'ammed". 

A fifth phase should probably be included -- namely, a review, proofreading and editing process, perhaps integrating a wider discussion from people outside the team, for suggested additions/subtractions. It should be kept in mind, however, that this AIM would most likely not be something a consumer reads from cover to cover, like a book; but rather would be a source used by the user of the manual in his communication with his audience of one or more people. More often than not the manual user will be picking and choosing bits and pieces here and there, of varying lengths, guided by the index -- and then often leaping from one point to another that may well be not immediately adjacent in the manual. Hence the crucial digital format, where space and place practically no longer matter for a written text (not to mention that one can access needed text at lightning speed -- and for that, of course, besides the Index, the Search function would be indispensible -- and which will be much more flexibly portable, contained in a little phone or small tablet or even streamlined laptop). 

Plus, as a digital document, it would be easily revisable, and after it's deployed in the field, those initial uses would be "test runs" that might expose flaws that need correcting and fine-tuning.

Now all we need are sponsors, influential supporters, and financial backers.  Mr. Spencer...?

Further Reading:  


Anonymous said...

Hi Hesp: I have always thought that you were right about there needing to be an AIM manual as you describe.

Unfortunately, I see three HUGE obstacles:

1. Getting experts to give up their individual intellectual property to a community resource.

2. Getting an AIM manual done before the United Nations takes over the internet and institutes Islamic blasphemy laws that apply to the United States via treaty - and the rest of the West because Western leaders are absolute traitors.

3. Getting anyone to listen. None, and I mean none, of my friends and relatives has the slightest interest in hearing anything about Islam. All of them have forcefully told me to STOP talking to them about Islam in any way, shape or form. Their minds are turned OFF - completely and permanently.


Hesperado said...

Well Egghead, you may be right, but I remain unconvinced about your more important demurrer -- #2. As for #3, while I agree it's a general problem, it's not monolithic and varies greatly.

I get the impression from various comments you have made over a long period of time in this context that you are a strict and desperate pessimist ("desperate" meant literally, not colloquially). Am I right? If I'm not, could you explain how so?

Anonymous said...

Hi Hesp: I am unsure what you mean by desperate pessimist. I googled both words, but I guess that you would have to explain what you mean particularly for me to answer you. That said, I freely admit that I am the hopeless pessimist to your cockeyed optimist because I disagree with you that Western people are blissfully PC MC for "good" reasons (pun intended). My thesis is far darker where I believe that Western people are purposely PC MC for "bad" reasons (pun intended).

As for point #2, I would contend that the MORE (pun intended) people get an inkling of the pure complete and total evil of Islam, the MORE (pun intended) people ferociously fight to maintain the PC MC illusion of "Islam is ok - and most Muslims want to be and are our friends - and stop being mean to Muslims because YOU might hurt their precious feelings and make them hurt people" with themselves and others.

But, I am an optimist that God has the power to overcome Islam, and I predict that we are all going to be praying a lot more to God for help in the years to come. :)


Hesperado said...

I agree about the perverse dynamic of PC MC, where the worse Muslims behave, the more PC MC goes into denial mode.

How do you envision God overcoming Islam? It sounds like you think non-Muslims are not going to provide any hope in that department; so what, are we just going to have to wait for the apocalypse? (it could be another 2000 years, or 200,000...)

Anonymous said...

Well, Hesp: I think that we in the counter-jihad movement can see that it is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better. No problem on the apocalypse because Islam comes with a built-in apocalypse - as everyone is eventually an infidel - even faithful Muslims who fail to get stricter and stricter with Islam!

I highly suggest that you read Lame Cherry every day. LC is a COMPLETE genius! Regularly, LC causes me to re-evaluate the way that I view current world events.

LC contends that our new demi-God intends to supplant every past and present leader - in every country - of every color. The idea is that if people try to stop him, we have already given him the official power to drop a nuke on some city or another - depending on his mood that day - just to distract - or gain power - or get revenge - whatever works that day.

One bitter little boy IS Islam's built-in apocalypse!


Traeh said...

Egghead, you mentioned that your friends and family had turned off to any talk about Islam.

Have you seen the citizen warrior website? It deals a lot with the question of counterjihad persuasion techniques, attitudes, styles: rhetoric in the good sense.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Traeh! I enjoy reading your comments. I'll check out the web site, but I have been emailing and informing people for so long that I know all of the excuses.

Three people over the years have told me that my message would be more acceptable if I handled it differently, but the truth is that there is NO 'good' way to tell people that Islam is pure evil and all practicing Muslims are evil - and both Islam and Muslims need to be banned from Western society - in the same way that our very wise ancestors completely banned all Islam and Muslims from Europe.

A lot of Westerners know one or two 'nice' Muslims - and REFUSE to consider or believe that their 'nice' Muslim friends could and would believe, practice, and financially support bad Islamic ideas and actions - and then Westerners extrapolate that the majority of other Muslims CANNOT possibly be that bad either.

Most people just ask me to stop talking to them or emailing them about it because they do NOT want to be 'haters' or they do NOT want to be 'depressed' because life is depressing enough.

To which I say to myself, 'Just wait until the bomb drops....'


Hesperado said...

Yes Egghead, on your last point to traeh -- the main reason why our fellow Westerners resist a reasoned discussion about Islam (which perforce means exposing its dangerous and evil core, not just peripheral "extremisms") is that they are afraid of themselves -- they are afraid they have an "Inner Hater" inside them (what White Westerner doesn't...?), and so they practically feel that we, who bring up how bad Islam is, are TEMPTING them, sucking them down to the dark side where they will succumb to their worse natures. Most of them do this semi-consciously, not consciously.

By pushing us away and avoiding the issue (at best -- some actively demonize or attack), they are externalizing what they fear about themselves.

Their fear is, needless to say, ungrounded. There is no Evil White Genocider inside them screaming to get out. But because they think there is, and because they think that any substantive criticism of Muslims would coax it into the open, they resist Islamocriticism in a variety of ways, as much as they can, even to the point of going into logical contortions, or childish denial of a mountain of evidence, and distortion of our motives.

Hesperado said...

One addition to what I wrote (in CAPS):

"By pushing us away and avoiding the issue (at best -- some actively demonize or attack), they are externalizing AND PROJECTING ONTO US what they fear about themselves."

Anonymous said...

Yes, Hesp! Most people are sadly confused about WHO their enemy is.

Westerners have fully internalized Pogo's idea that 'we have met the enemy and he is us' EXCEPT that, truly, we have met the enemy and he is Nazi and Muslim and Marxist and Black Liberation Theologist and various manifestations and combinations of such!

To wit, I have NEVER hurt anyone, but members of all of those groups would rape, torture and murder ME and my family in a NY minute!