Obligatory Disclaimer: If what I write doesn't describe you, then I'm not talking about you.
I lost count.
I find that depressingly, most conservative commentators have not been very insightful about the problem posed to us by Islam. Whiskey and Larry Auster have done the best job that I've seen, and between the two of them they've really nailed the issue.In essence, advanced audio/visual technology means that any insult to Islam that occurs anywhere can easily be broadcast to large swathes of Muslims in Pakistan, Waziristan, or wherever. Combine that with today's ease of travel and you get a situation that simply did not exist even prior to, say, 1999 or so, which is that anyone, anywhere in the world, who insults Islam has now invited himself to become the target of fanatics who may not even live in the same country (or continent!).The only way to stop this, going forward, is to disallow a Muslim presence within our countries. As Auster says, that sounds extreme, but - what else is there? To just kind of hope that radical Islam "settles down" and "modernizes"?I am now of the firm belief that Islam represents the end-point of "everything is equally valuable" multiculturalism: either Islam will dominate the culture that doesn't believe in itself, or Islam will be destroyed. I see no other likely alternative.I've got to say, the end-point has arrived even more quickly than I had expected.
Most "conservative" commentators are useless at opposing Islam because they accept the liberal premise that America is a "proposition nation" not a nation traditionally composed of a majority group of a specific (non-Islamic) race, culture, and religion. Also, of course, they have been conditioned to avoid saying anything that might bring an accusation of "raaaacism!" against them. As these "conservatives" are unprepared to argue except on liberal terms, they have little basis to oppose the spread of Islam here.
Islam will actually be able to spin itself in an appealing way to multiculturalists. Namely, with the canard that Islam is tolerant, and has a history of permitting other "people of the book" to live under Islam as dhimmis provided they pay a religion tax. In other words, Muslim apologists will argue that Islam is more multiculturally tolerant than Christianity is, and that people are better off with Islam in charge than they are either (1) with Christianity in charge or (2) fighting a losing war against Islam.Of course, the seculars are screwed either way, as the European seculars are finally starting to admit when it comes to Islam. But Islam itself will be able to argue that it's a better option than "intolerant" Christianity, and when you take that and combine it with the innate tendency of our elite to loathe anything Christian and Western and to prefer anything exotic and non-Western, you have a recipe for the kind of disaster we can see unfolding in slow motion in Europe today.
Post a Comment