I betcha I can make a rhyme, out of anybody's name
The first letter of the name I treat it like it wasn't there
But a 'B' or an 'F' or an 'M' will appear
And then I say "Bo" add a 'B' then I say the name
Then "Bonana Fanna" and "Foe"
And then I say the name again with an 'F' very plain
then a "Fee Fi" and "Mo"...
-- The Name Game, by Shirley Ellis (1964)
֍ ֍ ֍ ֍ ֍
A recent Jamie Glazov discussion with Stephen Coughlin features one of the main facets of the Problem of the Problem (i.e., the secondary problem of the Western Mainstream dealing inadequately with the primary problem of Islam) -- the failure to "Name the Enemy".
At the beginning, Jamie Glazov starts off by noting that Trump has been calling out Obama on his failure to name the problem of “radical Islam”.
It is exquisitely ironic that Glazov, on his own show featuring the problem of “Naming the Enemy”, has to provide a buffer to protect Islam by qualifying it with “radical”, as though there exists a non-radical Islam that is not our enemy.
When Coughlin begins responding, he doesn’t advert to Glazov’s gaffe, but proceeds to the mainstream problem of not naming the problematic extremism that is besetting the world as being specifically “Islamic”. That’s a subtle distinction; and if it implies that our only problem is “Islamic extremism” and not simply “Islam”, then we still have a problem of the problem of the problem -- a tertiary problem, where the Counter-Jihad, in complaining about the secondary problem of the problem (i.e., the problem of the Mainstream in its inability to deal adequately with the primary problem, Islam) itself equivocates on naming the primary problem -- not Islam itself, but “Islamic extremism”. At best, we have so far with Coughlin a failure to clarify this important subtlety. One bracing, refreshing, and easy way to do it would be to boldly condemn Islam itself.