Saturday, June 25, 2016

Debbie Schlussel rains on our parade

As the entire Counter-Jihad Mainstream celebrates Brexit, leave it to Debbie Schlussel to point out uncomfortable truths.  The title of her essay, Brexit, Schmexit -- all irrelevant without Islamexit, says it all.   And the rhetoric of apodictic pessimism she proceeds to frame her jeremaid in is like a blast of freezing water on our heads, eliciting a foreboding frisson of disillusion & disenchantment.

After describing the toxic, pernicious and alarmingly dangerous shit Muslims have been fomenting in the UK for years (and her description is a mere abbreviated overview) she delivers a knock-out punchline of a metaphor:

It reminds me of the fat chick who insists on drinking a Diet Coke, when she’s eating a giant pepperoni pizza with double cheese. The Diet Coke is the EU the Brits are whining about, and the pizza is jihad which the UK is consuming with gusto.

Schlussel goes on to use rhetoric of apodictic pessimism; not saying the situation is horribly dire, but effectively saying it's over, there's no hope, not only for the UK but for all of us:  the West is toast.  My readers know that back in September in the wake of the Paris attacks, I "snapped" and began using rhetoric similar to this.  But my rhetoric has never been meant to be apodictic and prophetic, since I, any more than anyone else, do not know the future.

Certainly, in the realm of human affairs, nearly anything's possible; while on the other hand, Schlussel's rhetoric of apodictic pessimism is not set in stone either.  It's a matter of probabilities and likelihoods.  If we look at how the mainstream West is now, where after every Muslim attack, the entire West recoils into neurotic (if not psychotic) contortions of denial of the problem of Muslims; and if we chart this perverse reaction having become worse in the years since 911, not better (a cursory look at the reaction to the Orlando attack is maddeningly sobering in this regard), we see that the West is slowly but surely setting itself up for a situation where the only remedy, Total Deportation, will be impossible without a general breakdown of our societies into zones of civil unrest, riots, rampant criminality, and pockets of killing fields, emergency martial laws, etc., where the "cure" would entail effective self-destruction through devolution of order on a mass scale.

And that scenario seems to be the most optimistic.

Where I disagree with Schlussel's rhetoric is her apodictic implication that it is now and always will be impossible for Total Deportation to be instituted to help avert the looming catastrophe -- where she uses rhetoric that implies it's simply not going to be done, now or ever, period.  I think, on the other hand, that we have a certain period of time before it becomes literally (as opposed to rhetorically) too late.  How much time that is, I have no way of knowing; but I would say decades.  I agree with Schlussel, however, in that after a certain period of time, it will be effectively hopeless.

The only reason I hedge my rhetoric and don't just fall into the arms of hers, is that I see the forest for the trees -- the massive superiority & sophistication of the West relative to the primitivism of its Mohammedan invaders -- a superiority is on all levels, including technological & military.  Our only real Achilles heel is our ongoing politically correct myopia -- a myopia so massive it has the real and high probability of being the one thing that will enable these primitive fanatics to overrun and overtake us, eventually.  I only disagree that it's a done deal already, now.  Certainly the gloomy pessimism Schlussel articulates is tempting to indulge, and I have done so myself here on my blog ever since the September Paris attacks.  But to me there is a fine line between feeling the gloomy conviction that a Western (Re)Awakening is highly unlikely, and asseverating that it's actually impossible.

With a situation as dire & devolving as ours in the West, a Jeremiah like Schlussel is sorely needed as a shot in the arm to a Counter-Jihad Mainstream continuing to fool itself in a variety of ways (e.g., its stubbornly persistent inability to condemn all Muslims), including a rosy enthusiasm about Brexit.  And the extremely high likelihood that the Counter-Jihad Mainstream won't heed, let alone even notice, Schlussel's warning, is yet one more stone to lay on our collective Western grave.


Anonymous said...

Perhaps you should take heart from history and the fact that Jews have been deported from European countries at least 109 times. The Jews have been, historically, the people who literally opened the gates of European cities to Moslem invaders, worked with them and, even when Islam was not yet present or a palpable threat, were openly conducting themselves in ways which were destructive to the Christian majority. They still do and in Europe have been one of the most vociferous forces in furthering the 'multicultural,' 'multiracial', miscegination agenda, helped enormously by the fact that the American 'neo-cons' in successive American governments, and with the Jewish lobby (second largest next to NRA), have pushed to implement foreign policy which, in destabilising the Middle East quite deliberately, has contributed to the invasion (not 'refugee flight') of Europe and Great Britain. A great part of understanding the real purpose of the 'counter jihad' is to note what is never said about the history of Judaism, of Jews in their relations with Europeans (except the usual propaganda of the 'virus' of "anti-semitism") and of their goals (Tikkum Olam via the Coudenhove-Kalergi 'vision' of a new "Eurasian Race" of Africans and Asians to replace the Caucasian Race and ruled over by the 'Master Race' --- C-K's words, not min --- of the Jews, due to their presumed 'moral superiority', a scheme that forms the backbone of the European Union and was supported in its beginnings by Jewish financiers).

Anonymous said...

typo, sorry: C-K-s words, not mine

Egghead said...

No time today to re-examine Schlussel's site, but here is what I said on May 1, 2015, and I rather doubt that anything has changed:


Schlussel's lens is Judaism: How does everyone and everything affect (the plight and persecution, that's a given of) Jews?

Schlussel's morality seems to be: 'Everyone should argue for, and everything should occur for the benefit of Jews - OR ELSE.'

Egghead said...

Let us return to question the bias and basis of Eric Voegelin for a brief moment. According to the article below, Voegelin was NOT a Christian, and Voegelin vehemently disagreed with ALL (religious) doctrines and ideologists because ALL would lead to Gnosticism.

Hesp, I realize that this may be quite difficult for you to hear, but (if the article is correct), then Voegelin's recent popularity and ascendency is part and parcel of the PC MC dismantling of the white Christian West.

The act of believing and saying that ALL (religious) doctrine and ideologists are evil simply leads to the SAME false equivalency among peoples and cultures as PC MC which says that all peoples and cultures are good.

The lack of (religious) doctrine and ideologists is (moral) anarchy - rather than order - which is what we are seeing in the modern irreligious Western world.

Furthermore, the moral vacuum will be filled by false religions portrayed as populous political movements. Can anyone seriously think that humanity - in the here and now - is more moral or 'orderly' when worshipping a human Karl Marx than when worshipping a transcendent God?!

Voegelin also (studiously) misses the point of how would people and cultures live by (Christian) ethics if those ethics were NOT first conveyed via (religious) doctrine and ideologists?!

Rather than simply creating heaven on earth, Christian (religious) doctrine and ideology is meant to make life on earth more bearable for putative victims of powerful people.

In any case, if the anti-religious Voegelin misunderstands Christianity and its singular value to humanity, how would I trust that he understands Judaism?!

Hesperado said...

The author of that piece on Voegelin, Glenn Schram, is in a few subtle ways straw-manning Voegelin; so in the end, it's not really about the actual Voegelin. I may elaborate further at some later date.

Egghead said...

Ok. :)