Taking the temperature of the Counter-Jihad, part 3

My multi-part essay I'm working on here represents a slow, bite-sized exploration of a subject matter in my mind so complicated it looms as a formidably tedious task. 

In part 2, I wrote:

"Still, the Counter-Jihad has to do something.  It has to cultivate itself as a nucleus of an ongoing hopeful transformation of the West.  Right?"

What do I mean a "transformation" of the West?  Of course, I mean a change in the paradigm of PC MC that has become a dominant and prevalent fashion throughout the mainstream West.  I don't mean some kind of general transformation of everything in the West. (Indeed, some in the Counter-Jihad do talk that way, about a general transformation; but that seems to me to be an unnecessary, counter-productive distraction from the primary exigency of protecting our societies from Muslims.)

Before the Counter-Jihad can do that, however, it needs to develop a coherent platform.  And in order to do that it needs to have a Conversation among its members.

Would that Conversation go on forever, with internal bickering that never resolves itself?  That of course would be most unfortunate.  There certainly do seem to be deep differences of opinion one can detect these past few years, from the disagreements (sometimes petty, sometimes more mature but still serious) among the rank-and-file civilians, all the way up to the apparent fights amongst its unofficial leadership (cloaked as those fights seem to be behind the closed doors of the "Gentlemen's Club" about which I've written in the past).

At any rate, it's worth a try.  And the best vehicle for such a Conversation would be some sort of online chat room that has voice capability -- a kind of international electronic town hall meeting.