The refusal to big-up Western values has been institutionalised in the idea of Islamophobia, which is not just about protecting Muslims from assault or discrimination — a noble thing to do — but is about policing any expression of belief in the superiority of Western or enlightened values. In the words of the Runnymede Trust, which shaped the definition of Islamophobia, any suggestion that the Islamic way of life is ‘inferior to the West’ is an expression of prejudice, and everyone should be taught that the Islamic outlook is ‘as equally worthy of respect [as Western values]’. Laws and codes against Islamophobia represent the institutionalisation of relativism, the suppression of loud and proud defences of the virtues of Western life and thought.Prejudice is pre-judging a thing. The problem is that we've gotten to the point that any judgment at all, regardless of the evidence, is forbidden as if it were a judgment in advance of the facts.
How Can You Defeat ISIS if You Won't Stand Up for Western Values?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I once made a feminist liberal very uncomfortable by relaying the story of General Sir Charles Napier. And how he, by use of force, forbid and stamped out the practice of Sati. I said that it was absolutely Imperialism for him to do so, but asked her if she thought that simply being Imperialist made it wrong or bad. It took her a while to craft an answer which basically amounted to, "I'm not going to say it was wrong to stop the practice, but he should have found another way to do it." And by doing so, got her to agree with the idea that just maybe not all cultures are equally good, and maybe there is something to this whole "Imperialism isn't all bad" idea.
For those who do not know the story, General Sir Charles Napier was the British Commander-in-Chief in India, and was approached by Hindu priests who objected to the British prohibiting the practice of Sati (burning the widow of a dead man alive upon his funeral pyre) as was their custom. The General was reported to have replied:
"Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs."
everyone should be taught that the Islamic outlook is ‘as equally worthy of respect [as Western values]’
These people are incapable of rational thought.
While PEOPLE are always to be respected, thoughts and ideas, religious or not, may not be worthy of respect at all.
There is a Catholic truism: "Error has no rights." Note that "error" is not a person.
Societies and individuals have a God-given right to self-defense. It is impossible to legislate against 'thoughts or ideas,' of course. But rightly-ordered societies have implemented various ways to suppress certain kinds of problems, beginning with shunning, and including outright expulsion.
Napier's comment elegantly shows the limits of Cultural Relativism...what happens when two different cultures must coexist in the same space? If CR is all there is, then the only way of resolving disputes is the appeal to force.
Several years ago, I sat in on a college class in which the (very atypical) professor challenged the validity of CR....the reaction of the students was interesting, they seemed almost disoriented by the challenge.
The collapse of the West's civilizational self-confidence is at the root of our problems with Radical Islam.
In 1950, Arthur Koestler published an interesting novel which is about this collapse of civilizational confidence...especially in Europe...in the face of the threat from aggressive Communism. It is a very dark book, and convincingly dark...yet the West did survive the Soviet threat. But the current threat?...not clear.
The book, 'The Age of Longing,' is nowhere near as well-known as Koestler's 'Darkness at Noon', but deserves to be. I reviewed it here:
http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/11799.html
Imperialism makes very good use of xenophile traits.
Strangely enough, Euros believe themselves to be xenophiles and the rest xenophobes, Islamophobes.
A pacifist, weak decadent, bunch of EU Euros that believe in xenophilia, love of the alien, will not be able to integrate the Islamic xenophobia and militancy.
As Brussels and other places Burn to ensure that is locked in.
Post a Comment