Tuesday, June 14, 2016

In a war of ideas, words matter.


Every action begins as an idea.

The Counter-Jihad's main activity involves the various "battle spaces" (as Frank Gaffney puts it) in the war of ideas.

The main purpose & object of this war of ideas is to wake up the West to the problem of Islam.

In pursuit of this purpose & object, the Counter-Jihad needs to think carefully about the words it chooses to communicate.

Many words (pun intended) could be spent expatiating on this issue; and Lord knows I've done it in dozens of essays here (and elsewhere) over the years.  Today, I advert to just one example, from a Jihad Watch commenter, one "Alarmed Pig Farmer", whom I have noticed is one of the somewhat better (i.e., somewhat tougher on Islam) commenters at Jihad Watch, a Counter-Jihad community that seems to abound in Softies.

Apropos of a recent interview Robert Spencer gave on Newsmax TV concerning the Orlando ghazi, the interviewer used the term "radicalized" and then Spencer followed suit uncritically.  In a moment of critical intelligence, "Alarmed Pig Farmer" picked up on that:


I winced when Spencer used the term radicalized. Radicalized compared to what, the Holy Ko-Ran? I know use of commonly recognized terms is the basis of human communication, but everybody knows what activated means, so why not use the correct and accurate term even when radicalized is introduced by the host? Here’s why not: radicalized, tiny minority, extremists, perverters and all the rest are misleading in the most fundamental and dangerous way.


I would only add that while I agree that the term "activated" is better than "radicalized", still, "activated" remains dicey, because it still can imply that Muslims who don't explode (or shoot, or stab, or behead, etc.) are somehow "dormant" in some sincere way -- either 1) not pretending to be non-violent while biding their time for more opportune occasions to wage jihad of the sword, or 2) are not also pursuing one or more of the other myriad forms of jihad.

P.S.:  A related issue:  the term "the Counter-Jihad" has unfortunate connotations, in that it implies a distinction between Jihad and Islam.  This isn't necessarily so; the former could well be metonymy for the latter.  However, not everyone will take it that way, and many will receive it as reinforcing an artificial distinction between Jihad and Islam. A better name for the Movement would be A.I.M. -- the Anti-Islam Movement.


Egghead said...

When do we start treating family members as accomplices?!


Anonymous said...

Since radicalized derives from 'radical', meaning the root or source, Spencer probably accepted the word 'radicalized' as a way of seeming to agree with PC terminology and still move the discussion along. I don't know if he then explained the root beliefs of Islam and that funding of jihad ("to fight in the way of Allah") is one of the purposes of Zakat, one of the Five Pillars of Islam. What is termed the 'counter-jihad' is a largely Jewish front in which Jewish interests and the 'cause' of Israel predominate and will therefore not seriously apply itself to preventing the islamisation of the West since the judaisation of it in social issues, education, media propaganda and legislation has been proceeding for some time, largely uncontested. The two ideologies feed off of one another,Islam originating in Judaism, in the same ways as do moderate Moslems and 'radicals' (jihadists). And the same argument used as an apologia for Moslems is used for Jews although, to be fair, most people are very unfamiliar with the facts of Talmudic Judaism, nor that it, and not the 'torah' of the Old Testament, is the 'root' of the belief system.

Egghead said...

I agree. Jews MUST avoid - and now forbid - non-Jews from taking a serious look at Islam and talking about Islam because, to pull that string, leads DIRECTLY to Judaism and its deleterious ideas, plans, and effects. That's what happened with me, and I was formerly the MOST genuinely moral PC MC person you could meet - which is why I can simultaneously both agree and disagree with Hesperado that PC MC Western Christians are 'good' people with 'good' motivations.

One point that is CRUCIAL for people to realize is that Jews are Jews EXACTLY as Muslims are Muslims - with regard to an artificial distinction between radical versus moderate. There is often an artificial distinction that attributes 'blame' to Ashkenazi Jews, but hundreds of years of history in the West show that Sephardic Jews actively promote Islam in concert with Ashkenazi Jews. It helps to know that Sephardic simply means 'from Spain.'

Egghead said...

Here's the plan to control (i.e., censor) the internet:


Egghead said...

Newt Gingrich proposes creating a new House Un-American Activities Committee - and revoking citizenship of natural born citizens who pledge allegiance to ISIS.