If you ask American, Israeli and European liberals and leftists what the key problem with Islam is, they will answer that there is a lack of tolerance. Not of course a lack of tolerance on the part of the throat-slitters, car burners, gang rapists, car bombers and hate preachers of Islam. On the contrary they will assert that there is a great tolerance deficit on the part of Western nations toward Islam.
Since progressives tend to define minority status as proof of oppression, violence is simply another way that the minority responds to being oppressed. So if a pair of well off middle class Muslim professionals drive a car bomb over to a Scottish airport, clearly they were reacting to a whole boatload or planeload of oppression. Perhaps they were outraged over a terrorist being downed by a drone, or saw the name of Allah in an ice cream cone, or maybe it was all the unveiled women. Those are just details in the bigger picture. And the bigger picture is that every First World nation is oppressive and racist. Muslim violence is comeuppance or blowback, and the only solution is to be more and more tolerant of Muslims.
Having classified Western nations as always being in the wrong, and Muslims as being always in the right, where reasonable people see a failure to fight terrorism, progressives see a failure to fight intolerance.
Given a mandate, conservative governments will try to get to grips with violent Islamists. Liberal governments will try to get to grips with anyone who criticizes Islam. And naturally it becomes a good deal more difficult to point out that Muslim violence is a serious problem, when you've passed laws prohibiting anyone from making any mention of Muslims and violence in the same sentence.
This has the convenience of making it illegal to point out the stupidity of progressive policymaking, which is something that their fellow People's Democratic regimes routinely do, at least until everyone begins starving to death. Tens of thousands dead in America, Europe, Israeli and Australia has not done much to chip away at the insistence of multiple governments that Islam is a religion of peace. And even conservatives have adopted the liberal mantra that Islamic violence is something carried out by splinter groups, in response to not being tolerated enough. The solution being more cowbell, or more tolerance. But so far the "Hug them until they love us" approach has not yielded any dividends, except more bombs and bullet holes, and bodies in morgues.
The progressive insistence on a black and white worldview, and on locating the locus of evil within their own society, has made it impossible for the vast majority of them to even consider the possibility that the violent, reactionary, patriarchal and misogynist ideology they should be fighting is Islam, not Christianity or Judaism.
But the problem with expecting people to think outside the box of their beliefs, is that it's simply easier for them not to. For progressives the problem remains not Islam, but people who aren't tolerant enough of Islam. Which creates a rush to feed the "intolerant ones" to the Muslim Crocodile of Peace, in the hopes of being eaten last.
The shocking truth though is that the problem has never been a tolerance deficit, but a tolerance surplus. Tolerance is all very well good, but there are some things that shouldn't be tolerated. Murder, rape, car bombings, airplane hijackings and Imams preaching all of the above under the green flag of Islam top the list. The more the tolerance surplus grows, the worse the violence becomes.
Urban policymakers found this out the hard way when they tried to tackle crime by blaming society, not the criminals. Prisons became revolving doors. Cops became social workers. Crime became rampant. It took a new generation of conservative politicians to pass mandatory sentencing laws, victim rights bills, restore the death penalty and stop coddling criminals. And so the tolerance surplus was closed.
Until the tolerance surplus with Islam is closed, the violence that Islam brings to our shores will continue.
Another marvelously Orwellian description of our useless and clueless leadership from both parties. As far as I am concerned, the real root of the tolerance infection is OPEC oil money. The first time Arafat and his goon squads hijacked a plane or otherwise attacked any US citizen or ally, the state sponsors of terrorism (who bankrolled and protected him and his goon squads) should have been targeted. Of course, these same sources of terror money no doubt have acquired an army of lobbyists and financially dependent politicians as well. Alas but how far down the sewer line has the great defender of freedom fallen.ReplyDelete
We have all sorts of finances and resources to reward bad behavior, but none to defend our freedoms, allies and our very lives. Of course, Europe is every bit to blame as well. After squandering two generations of their best and brightest people in highly lethal versions of "King of the Hill," they apparently decided to sit back and let us defend them while they indulged themselves in every fantasy imaginable.
The Left (and many self-identified "Liberals") deny the existence of evil when it applies to groups they pity, but are wont to apply the monicker to groups they disagree with, particularly when those groups are in power. Power is all that matters to the Leftist, yet when they gain power they give up on the idea of justice or proportional response. It's a great game: evil does not exist, yet all who oppose them are evil. That's why the only potent responses to Leftism are (a) refusal, and (b) satire. Refusal denies them their assumed power over others, and satire makes mincemeat of their ideas. The injustice of "social justice" mocks the concept of justice, while laughter is irresistible. Therefore, we must happily demonstrate that Leftism is a farce, a mockery of humanity, and the only way through all that is joyful suffering. They are left powerless because they believe so strongly in the power of the "social" aspect, the blind superiority of their ideas, and the moral supremacy of their feelings. This is why they can never tell the truth about what they're going to do, which disfigures concepts like truth and honor. This is why Leftism is corrosive and destructive... it's a progressive disease. In the end, all Leftists are humorless complainers who are unable to navigate the social implications of their beliefs. The wreckage they leave behind is further justification for their cause. That's why the Leftist mantra is more, more, more. They have no real respect for, or solidarity with, human beings. Human beings are a disease, a pestilence, a collection of malfunctioning DNA. They cannot accept that man is flawed, so man must be destroyed. This is the locus of self-loathing, and self-loathing is a necessary condition for a Leftist convert. Their only way out is to be needed, to make themselves necessary, indispensable. Thusly, their only reprieve is pity, which is the furthest realm of condescension. The bottom line is: you're stupid. Leftism is fundamentally misanthropic.ReplyDelete
Leftism is the application of marxist ideas in the political realm for the purposes or acquiring money and power. "Tolerance" for the allegedly powerless in society/world is simply one of the tools in the tool box (deconstruction) for opposing political enemies.ReplyDelete
Once some group becomes a Leftist-Designated Victim of Oppression, it can oppress others to the fullest extent of its imagination without leftist disapproval.ReplyDelete
Lots of morality is choosing sides. Implicitly they regard mainstream society as the enemy and on a fantasy level align with all the alternative choices.ReplyDelete
It is always amazing to see how liberal political dynasties seem to be born out of "tolerance" movements. The conservatives may have overcome the liberal crime problem in the big cities but the urban machines are now stronger than ever. Guiliani was only successful because rich liberal white Americans and rich Manhattan dwelling Europeans were having their own issues with crime and the mentally ill homeless. Giuliani spectacularly failed in removing the underpinnings of Democratic Club corruption and the power of the teacher's unions. It is almost as if these things are purposely meant to tie down society until a kleptocracy is firmly in place and then conservatives pick up some of the qualify of life mess (but only as villains and never as reformers). I for one am tired of our Occupy government but Islamoterror makes sure we will be living under it for a long time. We are a fractured society. If Islamoterror kills a Occupy type liberal senator's child we will suddenly see a "conservative" response.ReplyDelete
Every species survived and evolved successfully, by remaining within the protection of the herd, school, flock, pack, etc., and those survival genes are among the strongest that every one of us inherited. When born within the herd, it is very difficult to leave it or go against it. Dangers lurk outside, waiting for the maverick to wander away, and it is difficult to not follow and remain close. Young people who were not indoctrinated by their families, probably are drawn to, or "educated", into adopting a protective herd. Once a member, it is difficult to overcome the comfort and perceived security, mental or physical, that the herd provides. That is how I explain why people I otherwise respect, who depend on intellect and scientific principles to succeed in their day jobs, but do, and think, irrationally, condone, and believe self-destructive things. Once in their pack, they do what the pack does, eat what the pack eats, kill what the pack kills, all without a second thought, because they're comfortable and subconsciously secure doing it.ReplyDelete
That's pretty simple reasoning, maybe, but who hasn't done something that, in retrospect, made us ask "Why?" If it involved sex, we were not surprised. That's the other major internal driver that is behind a lot of irrational behavior.
If you don't understand your enemy, you can't defeat him. Change the leader, or make him fearful, and you can probably change the behavior from destructive to peaceful. That is what needs to be focused on, and is the simplest solution I can see. Better ideas welcome, but no more whine; I'm trying to quit, thank you.
Thanks once more for your devastating article, as usual deconstructing the liberal-leftist fallacies and reducing them to dust.
I took the liberty to translate it into Portuguese (see text below) and publish it on my FB page, naturally mentioning the author and linking to your blog.
Oops, perhaps I should have requested for previous authorization to do this?
Please let me know in case you don't agree with the translation...
TERÇA- FEIRA, 10 DE MARÇO DE 2015
O SUPERÁVIT DE TOLERÂNCIA
(Postado por Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog)
Se você perguntar aos liberais e esquerdistas norte-americanos, israelenses e europeus qual é o problema do Islã, eles responderão que é a falta de tolerância. É claro que não se trata da falta de tolerância por parte dos cortadores de gargantas, queimadores de carros, enforcadores, estupradores e pregadores de ódio islamistas. Ao contrário, eles afirmarão que há um grande déficit de tolerância por parte das nações ocidentais em relação ao Islã.
Numa espécie de cálculo político, assumimos que aqueles que explodem sinagogas, esfaqueiam suas irmãs até a morte por usarem calça jeans, e sequestram e decapitam pessoas que não lhes agradam, são as vítimas da falta de tolerância. Para um “progressista”, a violência brutal de uma minoria é sempre o sintoma de que eles estão sendo oprimidos, ao invés de eles serem considerados os opressores.
Como os progressistas tendem a definir o status de minoria como uma prova de opressão, a violência é simplesmente outro modo como a minoria responde ao fato de ser oprimida. Assim, se alguns muçulmanos profissionais de classe média alta, economica e socialmente bem situados, colocarem um carro com explosivos num aeroporto escocês, eles estão claramente reagindo a uma imensa carga de opressão. Talvez estivessem indignados porque um terrorista foi abatido por um drone militar, ou viram o nome de Alá numa embalagem de sorvete, ou então foram ultrajados pela visão de mulheres sem véu. Estes são apenas detalhes num quadro maior. E o quadro geral é que toda nação de Primeiro Mundo é opressiva e racista. A violência islâmica é apenas uma retribuição justa, e a única solução é ser cada vez mais tolerante com os muçulmanos.
Tendo classificado as nações ocidentais como estando sempre erradas, e os muçulmanos sempre certos - enquanto as pessoas razoáveis enxergam uma falha no combate ao terrorismo - os progressistas identificam uma falha no combate à intolerância.
Quando no governo, os conservadores tentarão acertar as contas com os islamistas violentos. Já os governos liberais tentarão perseguir qualquer um que criticar o Islã. E, naturalmente, fica bem mais difícil afirmar que a violência muçulmana é um problema sério, quando você aprova leis proibindo mencionar as palavras “violência” e “Islã” na mesma sentença.
Isto apresenta a conveniência de tornar ilegal o ato de denunciar a estupidez das políticas progressistas, coisa que seus colegas dos regimes Democráticos Populares fazem como rotina, ao menos até que todo mundo começa a morrer de fome.
Dezenas de milhares de mortos na América, Europa, Israel e Austrália não fizeram muito para desencorajar a insistência de diversos governos em relação à idéia de que o Islã é uma “religião de paz”. E até os conservadores adotaram o mantra liberal de que a violência islâmica é uma anomalia praticada por grupos dissidentes, em resposta a não serem tolerados o bastante. A solução seria, nesse caso, mais tolerância. Mas até agora a solução de “abracá-los até que eles nos amem” não rendeu quaisquer dividendos, exceto mais bombas e furos de balas, e mais cadáveres nos cemitérios.
(# of characters exceeded, text divided into 2 parts - see part 2)
A insistência progressista numa visão de mundo em preto-e-branco, e em localizar a raiz do mal na sua própria sociedade, tornou impossível para a vasta maioria deles, de sequer considerar a possibilidade de que a ideologia violenta, reacionária, patriarcal e misógina que eles deveriam estar combatendo é o próprio Islã e não o Cristianismo nem o Judaísmo.
Mas o problema em esperar que as pessoas pensem fora dos limites das suas crenças, é que para eles é muito mais confortável não fazê-lo. Para os progressistas, o problema não está no Islã, mas naqueles que não são suficientemente tolerantes com ele. Isto cria uma necessidade constante de jogar os “intolerantes” ao Crocodilo da Paz do Islã, na esperança de serem devorados por último.
Assim, os esquerdistas israelenses oferecem os chamados “colonos” em sacrifício, como sendo o problema. A Europa oferece Israel como o problema. Os esquerdistas europeus oferecem os conservadores europeus. A América oferece a Europa, Israel e qualquer um sobre quem possa pôr as garras da sua política externa. O Crocodilo da Paz sorri, mastiga e demanda mais alimento.
Porém, a verdade chocante é que o problema nunca foi um déficit de tolerância, mas o excesso dela. A Tolerância é muito “boazinha” mas existem coisas que nunca devem ser toleradas. Assassinatos, estupros, carros-bomba, sequestros de aviões, e supostos religiosos pregando todas as ações acima em nome da bandeira verde do Islã, estão no topo da lista de tais coisas não toleráveis. Quanto mais a tolerância aumenta, piores ficam as condições de violência.
Legisladores urbanos descobriram isto do pior modo possível quando tentaram combater o crime culpando a sociedade ao invés dos criminosos. As prisões ganharam portas giratórias. Os policiais foram transformados em assistentes sociais. O crime se tornou dominante. Foi necessária uma nova geração de políticos conservadores para aprovar leis criminais rigorosas, leis de proteção aos direitos das vítimas, restaurar a pena de morte e parar de passar a mão na cabeça dos criminosos. Deste modo a tolerância exagerada foi neutralizada.
Até que o superávit de tolerância em relação ao Islã seja neutralizado, a violência que essa ideologia traz às nossas fronteiras vai continuar.
The long-time liberal standby of excusing muslim terrorism is "If they're being occupied/oppressed/colonized, they have the right to fight back any way they can."ReplyDelete
I wonder what said liberals would do if they were being colonized and occupied and oppressed (with sharia) by these same people they excuse.
I think the elementary flaw of those inclined to move mountain & sea for the sake of pacifying the barbarians is evasion. But I find that evasion is elementary to most everything that plagues our culture. - djrReplyDelete
The Tyranny of Tolerance, much like Kathy Shaidle's "Tyranny of Nice". Yes, there are lots of fine and lovely Muslims, but too many Muslims means way too much Islam. I am not a Muslimphobe, but I am hopelessly Islamophobic.ReplyDelete
Stop all Muslim immigration to the West forthwith. Much better to keep the foxes out of the henhouse instead of preaching the virtues of tolerance and co-existence to the chickens.
Thank you Daniel for another great article - you always manage to complete the half-sentences in my head and allow the 'other shoe' to drop'.ReplyDelete
We're screwed. While it is in the nature of man to have power corrupt him, our electoral system does not somehow prevent the election of psychopaths to power, and our ability to enforce accountability is also limited (foxes guarding henhouses). And so we have leftists and RINO's preaching a tolerance that merely kicks the can down the road and avoids (at our expense) the hard choices that are needed to reverse this lunacy and to start fighting back against these primitive savages aka muslims.
The only good thing about the islamopunks aka ISIS would be that progressives are being forced to chose between go back pro West or get “headed off”. What a pickle¡ They just wanted to travel to Europe not having to tell they are Canadians. Gee¡ It is trendy to be American again. In a certain sense they are kind of patriotic. Lame too, I should say.ReplyDelete
Daniel, would you consider reprinting an article you published about a year ago "The innocence of Obama". I think that article more than any other gets to root of much of these issues: That our elites have vouched for these people and the excuses are just a feeble attempt to cover up their treachery. For some reason I can't find it when doing a search.ReplyDelete