Tuesday, March 08, 2016

Better Cops Watch

If there were a Better Cops Watch, I'd be the only one manning it, apparently.  Not only am I the only person in the Counter-Jihad using the term, I seem to be the only one in the CJM (Counter-Jihad Mainstream) who even notices it as a problem -- indeed, most of the CJM seems complacently gulled by Better Cops such as Maajid Nawaz, Zuhdi Jasser, Asra Nomani, Tarek Fatah, and on and on.  And that, of course, is precisely the paradoxical problem.

So, if there were a Better Cops Watch, it would be much like Jihad Watch (or the former companion blog maintained by Robert Spencer years ago, Dhimmi Watch) -- a running log cataloguing 1) the ongoing shenanigans of the Better Cops; 2) analyses of the specious sophistry they indulge in while pretending to be "reformist"; and most importantly 3) the depressingly common incidence of members of the Counter Jihad -- civilians and leadership alike -- being duped by the Better Cops.

Exhibit #37,084 today exemplifying #3:

Alison Bevege, Australian journalist, otherwise a fearless Counter-Jihad activist Down Under, recently making Counter-Jihad news ("The Aussie woman who stood up to Hizb ut-Tahrir") by successfully winning a law suit against the Islamic movement Hizb ut-Tahrir for the crime they commit in segregating women from men in public events -- a crime on the books in the enlightened West.  And, of course, not only is this a distinction for Bevege in the realm of counter-lawfare, but so too the long road she took in bravely pursuing this salutary end, along the way receiving the requisite death threats and accusations of "racism", etc.

Okay, now we've established her CJ cred.  And what do I see within 90 seconds of perusing her Twitter page?  Something which is deeply depressing, but just as deeply unsurprising, by now:

In reply to GillM
Alison bevege ‏@AlisonBevege Jan 28

@Gill_Merman We can support secular muslims in their reform efforts while attacking Islamist theocracy – like here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpSHDaMLsnY

And where does that link lead?  Why, it leads approvingly to a typical video by the oily pseudo-reformer Maajid Nawaz -- whose sophistry Andrew Bostom has described as “disingenuous drivel” and Diana West has described as “double talk and deception”, and about whom I have written a few times here on my blog.  Maajid Nawaz, a "secular Muslim" whom "[w]e can support" "in their reform efforts" -- so earnestly tweets Alison Bevege.

My eye just caught another offending asymptotic twitch-tweet from Bevege, revealed in her opposition to the Good Cop Muslim Hanan Dover (also in Australia):

HD also dislikes malala yousafzai as if that could be humanly possible

Good Gravy!  Even the Jihad Watchers have (mostly) disabused themselves of their gushing admiration for Malala (take a gander at their many comments on Malala's recent condemnation of Trump).

And, as we 17.5 Better Cops Watchers know, a staple of the CJM Dupe in this regard is a vigilantly critical eye on the Good Cop all day long -- while being otherwise seduced by the Better Cops.


Egghead said...

Read this article and apply its base premise to Western Muslims instead of white Christians:


We are in for a world of hurt....

Hesperado said...

Thanks Egghead. The writer of that article gets a lot of things subtly wrong, all in the same sense: His contrasts between right and left. He articulates at least three:

1) Unlike the left, the right has an unrealistic airbrushed, idealized view of the "good old days", "with the dirty bits brushed off"

2) Unlike the left, the right perceives threat from the Other and from change; and

3) Unlike the left, the right has more of a sense of Self -- "more attuned to in-group/out-group distinctions and to the purity of the in-group".

He may be right about the right, but he's wrong that the left doesn't indulge in exactly the same things, only just from the opposite mirror-image.

1) The left has a mythologized view of the past as always sordid under a surface veneer of seeming goodness -- with that sordidness always due to the evil of white Westerners, and never to do with non-white non-Westerners -- thus they have airbrushed any essential goodness out of the past.

2) The left does in fact have a threat perception: evil white right-wingers and/or Christians, and this threat perception is easily as high if not higher than anything right wingers indulge. The irony is that their vigilant threat perception is most often calibrated with direct reference to any criticism of non-white non-Western threats -- deemed by the left to be axiomatically non-existent, and hence any concern about such non-white non-Western threats (par excellence now, of course, being MUslims) itself becomes the threat about which society must remain hyper-vigilant! Thus it's not that, as the writer says, We could just as easily say that the left side of the spectrum scores high on "obliviousness to threat" -- it is rather that the left is selectively oblivious to the Muslim threat, while being quite lucidly paranoid about the supposed white Western right wing threat.

3) And thus, finally, the left maintains just as much -- if not more -- of an in group/out group distinction; it just inverts it inside-out: in its civilizational and psycho-cultural self-hatred, it has cultivated a perversely paradoxical paradigm whereby it relocates its allegiance to its own out-group while directing its hyper-criticism, shame, guilt, veering into condemnation (hence, "self-hate") against its own in-group -- its own civilizational and psycho-cultural Self.

I delved into this issue at least in part back in 2009:

Leftists are not Relativists