Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Coffee & Counter-Jihad

The “elites” (I only put mock quotes around it because such a term unduly delimits the sociocultural and demographic breadth of PC MC, as my previous essay on Elitistics suggests) are notoriously irrational about what they perceive to be a “right wing” danger, and they likely exaggerate that way beyond its reality.

Secondly, the Western “elites” are not utterly incognizant of the danger of Muslims. In fact, they are virtually as cognizant as are those in the minuscule Counter-Jihad; the major difference is that PC MCs tend vigilantly to suppress their rational fears of Muslims, and the more industrious among them elaborate a veritably complex paradigm of Denial inside their heads about it (co-dependent, of course, with the rich content of a shared Weltanschauung). As with most psychological conditions of denial, the thing they are in denial about is not rendered inert, but still exerts a good deal of effect upon their thoughts and actions. Thus the "elites" in various ways continue to pursue quasi-rational policies with regard to the danger of Muslims—considerably (if not, at times, comically and grotesquely) handicapped by the other half of their schizophrenic psyches working overtime to suppress that rational fear of Muslims.


Anonymous said...


This is completely unrelated to the subject of your post.
I just needed a way to contact you.
The reason you can't see my replies to you on the JW is that for some reason my comments are not getting through. This is a bit frustrating not least because I have sent a sharp reply to "Mr.Dude" address to me. I wouldn't like to him interpreting my silence as his victory.
take care,

Hesperado said...

Hi thomas -- which thread? There seems to have been so many different ones where Mr. Dude has been despoiling.

Anonymous said...

Hey Hesperado,

I remember that my comments did eventually arrive, but I already forgot on what thread. It doesn't really matter now, as JW has advanced by at least 15 threads since then.

Ah, Mr.Dude... I don't really understand R.Spencer doesn't ban that insect considering his success paralyzing the blog on so many threads. Strange...
Take care,

Anushirvan said...

I have often though about this very issue, and I totally agree with what you're saying.

Over to something related, if you like:

I was wondering if you had read the JW blog post "Hamas-linked CAIR fails to strong-arm Florida university into canceling counter-jihad speaker". I had left a comment at the very end of the comments section, (evaluating Jonathan Matusitz' take on things), which goes as follows:

"This is going nowhere fast. I find it quite baffling to think that Matusitz deems it necessary to incorporate “relative deprivation” and “oppression” into this, and consequently turns this into an abstract dissertation on terrorism in general, rather than Islamic terrorism specifically. He is diluting all the issues that should be relevant in the 21st century that way.

Neither oppression nor relative deprivation have anything to do with this. The core precept of Islam is hakimiya, which represents the universal validity of Islam’s doctrine, symbolized by the Sovereignty of Allah over all the nations of this world. In two words: global hegemony, akin to the Cold War dialectic the West had to face up to with regards to Communism !

That is the main instigator of Islamic terrorism, that is exactly why we speak of a global umma, this is about world domination. Hakimiya is the core constituent of Islam, posited by Muslims around the world as the only viable world view that transcends all others on this planet. From hakimiya derive all the other concepts that are linked to it, like Tawhid and the interlocking concepts of Shirk, Bid’ah, Taghut, al wala wal bara, Jahiliyya, Kufr, Takfir..etc. And of course, the institutionalization of Sharia Law, that simply serves as the demonstrative reign of terror, with which people can be submitted to this world view with unrelenting violence.

All the rest of it is bullshit. I have been watching this for about 45 minutes now, and absolutely none of these concepts have come to the surface ! This is infuriating !"

I found it quite odd that Matusitz tried to cling to the ridiculous notion that relative deprivation or oppression could be an instigator of Islamic terrorism, (the victimization issue) plus the fact that he also seemed to want to turn the general public's attention away from the real causes of Islamic terrorism, which in my opinion is reflective of the denial mechanism you describe.