Another thing I've noticed about them -- they tend to wear rose-colored glasses about the future threat of Islam, though sometimes not consistently (as when they magnify the corruption and danger of Leftists to an almost ludicrous, comic-book degree, in effect making their apparently malevolent superpowers the worse problem).
One example of this is the tendency for Counter-Jihad Softies to ridicule Muslims they are engaging with online (whether in discussion forums, or more dramatically, in Paltalk chat rooms where, in addition to typing text in real time, chatters can also speak on the microphone and take turns, generating mini-debates, discussions, or diatribes). This ridicule is most often expressed as demeaning insults (e.g., "Muzzies like you drink camel piss" or "Whatsa matter? Did you have a marital spat with your goat this morning?" etc.). In addition to the ridicule, there is the tendency to get embroiled in wrangling "debates" with various and sundry "Muzzies" -- where the predictable result is that the Muslim in question proceeds to do an elaborate tap-dance of stonewalling taqiyya and prevaricating sophistry while the Counter-Jihadist browbeats him (or her) with a deluge of data from the Koran, hadiths, tafsirs, and Islamic history.
The problem as I see it with this ridicule and these kangaroo-court "debates" is that they confer too much respect on the Muslims in question. We already know their taqiyya tactics backwards and forwards, and all they do each time is repeat them with slight variations, and this has been going on for years. A much better expenditure of our time would be to ignore any and all Muslims while we talk about them (in the third person even when they are present in a discussion forum or chat room) and their Islam -- and, more importantly, while we dialogue about how to fine-tune the still amorphous, not quite yet existing, Anti-Islam Movement.
Psychologically, I think this penchant of the Counter-Jihad Softies reflects their view of Muslims as more or less clowns and country bumpkins from the desert. This minimizes drastically the danger they pose, and leavens with too much of a vibe of slapstick comedy their deadly-serious fanaticism that continues to endanger our lives in various ways. Part and parcel with this, the Counter-Jihad Softies tend to minimize the intelligence of Muslims, reducing them to hapless, retarded Middle Eastern versions of the dueling banjo-picking hillbillies of Deliverance. This, again, is a reckless miscalculcation of what I call the fanatical intelligence of the Mohammedan -- an intelligence born of the single-minded hatred for the Other cultivated by Islam, and the assiduous obsession with doing everything for the goal of subjugating that Other by any means necessary. (This is not to say that there don't exist many stupid and comical Muslims out there; it is only to caution against generalizing that into some kind of standard baseline.)
Psychologically, I think this reflects an underlying, semi-conscious denial of just how afraid and frustrated they feel about this metastasizing problem of Muslims in our midst, any number of whom, at seemingly random times and places, may explode, stab, shoot, or drive vehicles into crowds. Or far worse, in the coming decades, as our children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren grow up to a world increasingly beset by a global revival of Islam, and a persisting denial of that fact by our political representatives, news media, academic experts, and influential celebrities. Often, the Counter-Jihad Softies will deny that they are afraid of Muslims -- but what rational person would not be afraid of a frighteningly random, often unpredictable, and escalating violence popping up in various places all over the world, driven by some strange, grotesquely ghoulish species of religious fanaticism we had convinced ourselves over the 20th century -- as we advanced in our Fukuyamish Progress toward the Millennium, with a Seinfeld laugh track for our charming foibles -- was a phenomenon of the distant past, or of fantasy novels and sci-fi movies?
Part of this psychology manifests itself in tough bravado: "If those damn Muzzies try that in America, we'll show them -- we have guns!" Cough, cough. Muslims have already "tried" that in America, several times, to the tune of thousands dead. And it is reasonable to suppose that more of that is to come -- despite Trump's fine-tuned vetting process for foreign immigration of Muslims.
Another example of this psychology is in the Counter-Jihad reviews of the new movie about the Boston Marathon razzia in 2013, Patriot's Day. Even Debbie Schlussel gave it a glowing thumbs up (with tangential caveats). One discerns in her comments about the Kevin Bacon character -- who plays an FBI agent who was worried that the dragnet to capture the Tiny Minority of Terrorists Who Have Nothing To Do With The Islam of Most Decent Law-Abiding Muslims in America might paint that Vast Majority of Decent Law-Abiding Muslims in America with a broad, bigoted brush -- that she thinks the movie was actually criticizing him. Methinks she was reading into the movie what she herself feels. This reflects an interesting psychology, whereby what the Counter-Jihadist thinks must be felt by the Mainstream. What planet is Debbie on? Does she honestly think that the major Hollywood bigwigs who gave the green light to this picture would be on her side on this?
2 comments:
The basic thing the counter-Jihad softie is unable to digest - much like the mainstream population at large - is the idea that we have a block of 1.8 BILLION potential, if not actual, enemies
Yes Nobody. We also need to understand what "enemies" in this context means, in terms of their willingness and concrete ability to not only pop up at random with violence against us, but also infiltrate in myriad subtle ways so as to enable far more horrific attacks on us in the future -- after decades of economically and infrastructurally and psychologically destabilizing attacks (and fear of attacks) have had their effects, at some future date (I estimate approximately 100 years, give or take) reducing us (the entire West) just enough to be brought down by bigger, more concerted attacks into general breakdown.
Thus, even if a Counter-Jihadist Softy may understand generally what you say about all Muslims being potentially/actually our enemies, their soft perspective will minimize the "enemy" part to merely a static stance of actual/potential enmity in a vague way, not the metastasizing enmity it actually is -- motivated, inspired, and guided by the blueprint of fanatical hatred and infiltration encoded in Islamic texts, tradition, history, and culture.
Post a Comment