Friday, March 12, 2010

Et Tu, Ayaan?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has now joined the Greek chorus of “conservatives” who decry the positions and tactics of Geert Wilders and the PVV. Our Flemish correspondent VH has prepared a brief report, and includes this note:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali (Conservative?) started with the Socialists (PvdA) and left for the VVD because of the Socialists’ position on Islam (and, possibly, to become an MP and receive protection). She did not leave the PvdA particularly because of its Socialist positions on other issues.

She has also never really been a great fan of Geert Wilders. “His policy is unworkable,” is somewhat of a simple statement for a think tank member. It would be interesting to hear her ideas for dealing with Islamization. PvdA, CDA and VVD still have no idea; on the contrary, they are part of the problem themselves.

Maybe Hirsi Ali is seeking a “moderate Islam” and thinks the West still has a few decades to experiment a little?

VH’s translation of today’s news article:

Hirsi Ali distances herself from Wilders

Former VVD MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali finds Geert Wilders a populist who comes up with unworkable proposals, but she thinks he will win the election. Hirsi Ali says this an interview with the VARA TV-guide [VARA is connected to the PvdA; Labour Party, Socialist].

Hirsi Ali worked closely with Wilders when they both were still VVD MPs. In the meantime he has gone too far, according to Hirsi Ali. “His policy is unworkable. Wilders is a populist who makes clever use of the symbols of Islam, such as the mosque, the Koran, and headscarves.”

Wilders has had so much success, according to Hirsi Ali, because he brings up a real problem that other parties ignore. “Wilders is motivated, tenacious, and steadfast. His campaign is flawless. All indications point to a victory for him.”

The PvdA, the CDA [Christian Democrats], and the VVD [center right] are avoiding the problems around the Islam, according to Hirsi Ali. “If the three major parties come up with answers and form a front against radical Islam, Wilders will lose the election. But I don’t see that happening.” [emphasis added]

In 2006, Hirsi Ali moved to the United States, where she works for a conservative think tank. Her autobiography My Freedom sold more than one million copies worldwide. Monday she will publish the sequel, titled Nomade.

Diana West points out Hirsi Ali’s use of the modifier “radical” when referring to Islam. Does this indicate a change of position on her part? In the past, like Geert Wilders, she has always referred to “Islam” — with no modifiers — as the problem.

VH adds this flashback from 2003:
- - - - - - - - -
[2003] Hirsi Ali shocks PvdA with changeover to VVD — Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the political scientist who was threatened with death following statements about the emancipation of Muslim women, shifted from the PvdA to the VVD. PvdA chairman Koole was shocked. Koole (PvdA): “Her contribution was very welcome. The Labour Party is the party of the emancipation of women. She put that theme very strongly on the agenda.” Koole said that he had not approached her for membership of parliament yet, because he thinks it is too early.

Now that Hirsi Ali will become the VVD candidate for parliament, she can count on security from police again.

Hirsi Ali thinks that the VVD is more positive towards the rights of (Muslim) women than the Social Democrats. She finds that the PvdA too easily hangs onto the supporters of “multiculturalism” and “Muslim conservatism”. The conservative Muslims, according to Hirsi Ali, seem intent on silencing woman. The contacts with the VVD were via the former minister Neelie Smit-Kroes (now EU), who was committed to getting more women into the parliamentary fraction of the VVD.

Hirsi Ali is now ensconced in the AEI, so what the heck is going on here?

Is she climbing on the bandwagon by joining the wave of “anti-fascist” protest that is now being directed at Geert Wilders by traditional American conservatives?

Or, as a newly-minted libertarian, has she adopted the open-borders platform of the libertarians? The pure libertarian position is diametrically opposed to Geert Wilders’ stance on immigration.

I don’t offer any answers to these questions, but this story bears watching.


Hat tip: Paul Belien. Some of the English wording in the translation of the first article was suggested by Paul.

32 comments:

Robin Shadowes said...

Or maybe it is the same age old taqyyia all over again? Can we really trust she is an ex-muslim?

Nilk said...

I suspect that she's been copping a bit of a caning in some circles for her new reputation as a partner in the Niall Ferguson marriage breakdown and would need to distract some attention.

Fjordman said...

So, at the end of the day, although Ayaan Hirsi Ali does show great personal courage in confronting the death penalty for leaving Islam, she is first and foremost a Socialist and a Feminist. Maybe Lawrence Auster was right in his skepticism toward her all along. It's funny how people like me are considered to be "white bigots" when the truth is that even we consistently show immigrants too much good faith.

heroyalwhyness said...

Hirsi Ali is one confused cookie in this piece. In one breath she states:

“Wilders is motivated, tenacious, and steadfast. His campaign is flawless. All indications point to a victory for him.”

yet in the next breath:

“His policy is unworkable. Wilders is a populist who makes CLEVER use of the symbols of Islam, such as the mosque, the Koran, and headscarves.”

A flawless yet unworkable campaign in which "all indications point to a victory"?


IMHO, The entire counter-jihad movement should be so FLAWLESS, CLEVER and SUCCESSFUL!

I'd be curious to see if Hirsi Ali continues down this path in the near future. In all fairness, she was never in the "Clash of Civilizations" camp. She was a signing sponsor to this 2006 MANIFESTO: Together facing the new totalitarianism which explained:

Quote==> ". . .Islamism is a reactionary ideology that kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present. We reject the "cultural relativism" which implies an acceptance that men and women of Muslim culture are deprived of the right to equality, freedom and secularism in the name of the respect for certain cultures and traditions.

We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of "Islamophobia", a wretched concept that confuses criticism of Islam as a religion and stigmatisation of those who believe in it. . ."<==

She used the term "Islamism" not "Islam". Hmmmm.

jeppo said...

The Baron wrote "Hirsi Ali is now ensconsed in the AEI, so what the heck is going on here?"

I think you just answered your own question: She's ensconsed in the uber-neocon AEI, and Geert Wilders wants to pull the Dutch troops out of Afghanistan, an anathema to those warmongers.

Krauthammer, Kristol, Beck and now Hirsi Ali have all turned on Wilders because he doesn't support their Islamo-democratization pipedream.

From Auster's blog.

Lygeia said...

Well, this is certainly interesting. I think this is a mixture of taqiya (Muslim lying) and a desire to embrace a more "conventional" worldview due to her relationship with Niall Ferguson.

According to Wikipedia, Niall Ferguson is a proponent of "counterhistory" otherwise known as "making it up" or envisioning alternate historical scenarios to events that have actually happened (such as the South wins the Civil War, Germany wins WWII, and other such down-the-rabbit-whole intellectual wanking off).

This seems so odd though from someone who is credited with writing "Fitna." Perhaps Hirsan Ali did not realize the publicity she would receive from that movie and she was surprised by it.

I have posted before the Islam is the ultimate sleeper-cell ideology. It lurks in the consciousness and comes barreling out of the mind at the most unexpected times.

4Symbols said...

In hoc signo vinces

Hirsi Ali has always had her feet in both camps, no surprise there.

Niall Ferguson is a neoliberal-conservative, like their neoliberal-socialist allies in the British political power elite they say radical islam, I say islam.

john jay said...

friends:

you all look for explanations, but ignore the obvious.--

she has taken complete, total and absolute leave of any good sense she may ever have possessed.

she is out of her bonkers!!

who else is there in holland, in the whole of europe, who has wilder's bona fides to take on islam?

to defend her rapidly vanishing legacy?

to redress & redeem the death of van gogh?

to prevent the netherlands, holland, the whole of europe from being swept away by the islamic tide?

what an absolute, self absorbed, idiotic twit!!!

john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa

p.s. cannot see the forest for the trees? egad. she wouldn't see the forest if it fell on her.

instead, she calls it down on wilders!!

as bugs bunny was wont to say, "what a ultra maroon!!" egad.

john jay said...

p.s. and, if promoting book sales was her motive, by getting "before the public," i suggest her reward for such a stupid motive is to absolutely shun the book, boycott it, and shun and boycott her.

what a twit. just an absolute stark raving idiot. jjjay

laine said...

Sigh. It means one can't put one's faith in any single western warrior who may turn out to be false, or burnt out or influenced by their sexual partner or boss, or competing for fame/money.

It is shameful and beyond depressing how few public conservatives are astute enough and brave enough to support Wilders. His only chance of survival is if his would be killers see that he rides such a wave of massive support that it would be dangerous for them to martyr him.

john jay said...

laine:

it would also be very nice if conservatives who do support wilders would stop bickering between themselves, and understand that support for him must be fairly united in order to be effective.

it would be nice, in other words, if the inhabitants of the conservative movement were not as egocentric as the rest of the world's inhabitants.

nice. not likely. laughing.

i have been reading isaiah for the last several days. not much has changed in the world.

john jay

Armance said...

My admiration for Geert Wilders increases every day. I liked him since the beginning, but I considered him basically a liberal with a tough, courageous stance on Islam. He looks more and more as a genuine Dutch patriot, with a realistic view on the unique evil of Islam but with an equally realistic view about immigration, multiculturalism and American neocons. I don't know if he was like this since the beginning or if he has moved beyond liberalism forced by certain circumstances, e.g. the relentless attacks on him not only from the left, but also from the phony, multicultural, traitorous "right".

Anyway, Ayaan Hirsi Ali's viewpoint was somehow expected. As Fjordman pointed out, by the end of the day she's a socialist and a feminist, an internationalist liberal, an ideological leftie - and ideology trumps everything. Her concerns are not related to the preservation of the Dutch culture or to the survival of Western civilization in general. She believes in something abstract and ineffable like "freedoms", but she's not able to grasp the fact that these "freedoms" did not emerge from nothingness but they are the product of a certain civilization.

john jay said...

armance:

well put.

john jay

Jedilson Bonfim said...

Just yesterday, Jihadwatch brilliant commenter DumblesdoryArmy posted the following quote by her:

"I have a confession to make.

"If you are Jewish, I used to hate you.

"I hated you because I thought you were responsible for the war which took my father from me for so long...

"When we had no water, I thought you closed the tap...

'If my mother was unkind to me, I knew you were definitely behind it.

'If and when I failed an exam, I knew it was your fault.

'You are by nature evil, you had evil powers and you used them to evil ends' {in this she is restating what, as a Muslim child, she was taught to believe about Jews - dda}.

'Learning to hate you was easy.

'Unlearning it was difficult."

Reproduced in the 'Introductory Quotes' of Andrew Bostom's 'Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism'.


Maybe she just doesn't see the point of tackling mahoundianism in guaranteed-to-succeed fashion as Hugh Fitzgerald has suggested ad nauseam.

Luke said...

I read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's book Infidel.

Altough a a good story about the long and difficult road she traveled, I had the impression she really did not come to grips with the problem posed by Islam.

I think she still has long way to go. The circle has not been squared. Likely it is not in her to see the truth. We all have a tremendous ability to deny basic truths when they are personal.

Luke said...

the duplicity that muslims are raised in a difficult baggage to abandon.

for muslims truth is a variable.

El said...

yes, auster said this a long time ago, and he was right. hirsi ali is has no sympathy whatsoever for the historic nations of europe. europe is a big disneyland for all the decrepit third world peoples of all the world. wilders threatens that, so she condemns him.

auster is usually right.

Sean O'Brian said...

Niall Ferguson is a neoliberal-conservative, like their neoliberal-socialist allies in the British political power elite they say radical islam, I say islam.

Yep. He was a Thatcherite but he now calls himself a "liberal fundamentalist". Like Michael Portillo, his conservatism begins with wanting to liberalise the economy and ends with full-blown social/cultural liberalism thrown in as well.

I read Ms. Hirsi Ali's autobiography which I really enjoyed. It's especially good in helping one understand the situation in Somalia today. Unfortunately though she is incoherent politically and even in her account she seemed to struggle with even conventional Dutch politics.

Armance said...

Sometimes false allies are more problematic than outright enemies. First we acknowledge that Islam represents an unprecedented threat to the European civilization. Then, we move forward and decide to do something about it. How did we invite Islam in our midst? The logical answer is: through immigration. We should stop immigration and mass-immigration in itself is damaging for the European nations. The next conclusion is: it is desirable to preserve the ethnic composition of our nations as they are now. Some liberals are able to understand why the first step (criticizing Islam) might be necessary, but the next two steps are tantamount to fascism for them. The fact that such a thing as a "historic nation" exists is beyond their worldview and too dangerous to be uttered in public.

Fjordman said...

Armance: This is the "idea nation" concept, which is championed by the United States, France and Sweden, or the Axis of Evil if you will. Yes, people who are stuck in this mindset will see all other alternatives as a form of Fascism, and those who support them will get the Serb treatment.

El: Larry Auster can be spectacularly wrong on a number of issues, but he's usually good on Islam. In the case of Ayaan Hirsi Ali I must admit that he showed better instincts than I did. I don't think she's evil and she can still have her uses, but ultimately she doesn't think that European and Western countries have a particular ethnic identity or history. Our countries are empty vessels that exist solely to "liberate" people like her.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Wilders is a staunch defender of private property, including the right of the Dutch to own *their* country.

That, of course, puts him on a collission course with just about every supranational organisation that exists, including the European Union and the United Nations. Not to mention the Bilderbergers...

Armance said...

One of the things that strike me about immigrants is that an overwhelming majority of them - and not only Muslims - are unable to express gratitude or appreciation for their host countries. Instead, they respond with hostility, complaints, whining and accusations. I mean, imagine that you are Ayaan Hirsi Ali and you are freed from the nightmarish fate of a Somali woman. Wouldn't you be grateful to the people who welcomed you, who offered you a shelter, a better future and the chance to live your life in dignity? Instead, she calls one of the political leaders of this country "a populist" and she comments on what is workable or not for the Dutch. In what quality? Isn't this arrogance and ungratitude of the worst kind? Isn't this an immoral stance, like insulting and backstabbing your benefactor?

SoteriA said...

It is not a stretch at all that she is still trying to purge her heart & mind of all the Islam disease that once infected her. To me her mixed messages on Wilders and personally her declaring to be a atheist makes me think she is still fighting some darkness that hides somewhere in the back corners. If she only understood how different the God of the Bible is described than satan's sock puppet in allah is presented in the quran, she could find the freedom she is really looking for.

john jay said...

armance:

you have put the head of the nail squarely on the face of the mountain, ... , er, hammer.

yes, you are absolutely right.

who is hirsi to be telling the dutch what they should do, and who is she to denounce dutch "populism."

this whole business of you cannot be dutch so that i can be muslim is a moral inversion of the worst order, and i for one do not know why people put up with it.

armance, you have a way of getting to the nuggets.

john jay

Winston said...

Been to Holland and lived there for a short time. While I agree with Wilders position on Islamism and immigrations issues, I've never encountered any one Dutch citizen who was his fan (I lived in a relatively small city).

john jay said...

winston:

the times they are a'changin'.

this next election cycle, you will find that about 25% or more of the electorate are wilders' fans.

perhaps more.

you are talking about the man who has a reasonable shot, according to all the pundits, of being the next dutch prime minister, ... , if he can put the coalition together.

interesting. will he serve in office from jail? or, will he reform the government from the streets?

john jay

nimbus said...

Winston, I wonder how many ppl toe the PC line in public, but in private, amongst friends, or alone in the voting booth, express themselves differently. In certain circles, it is not beneficial to your career to espouse certain affiliations.

laine said...

John Jay's point above deserves reinforcement and extrapolation to: "I can be a Muslim anywhere in the world and the corollary is that you cannot be Dutch/(fill in your own culture) even in your own country because Muslim trumps Dutch and Muslim chooses not to be Dutch".

john jay said...

laine:

i couldn't have said it better myself.

and, as a matter of fact, i didn't, because i couldn't have said it better myself. not the native wit. laughing.

yes. yes. precisely. you have said it precisely.

this is what the wielders of multiculturalism mean, when they speak "equality," they mean everyone and everything must give way to them.

george orwell said it best so many years ago in animal farm, "we are all equal on this farm, and some are more equal than others."

totalitarianism is totalitarianism, ... , religious, social, political, ethnic, familial or otherwise.

they are to be fought and opposed at every ditch, including the last one. the sooner, the better.

as far as i am concerned, hirsi is not dependable to cover anyone's 6 in the western democracies. she hasn't learned much from being among us.

it is not that she criticizes wilders, ... , hey, it's a free country. it is not even that she criticizes him for a fault he does not possess, or in a manner that demonstrates she is not really conservative: that is her choice.

the trouble is that she demonstrates she is a farm animal on orwell's back 40, who insists upon being more equal than the rest of us. she says he cannot have the effrontery to insist on being dutch. even while she asserts the right to be what she is, wherever she is. and, as laine says, one must give way to the other.

i wonder if orwell would even feel the need to talk about such things? he would probably just say, "covered that. been there, seen that, done that."

john jay

john jay

EscapeVelocity said...

If advocating pulling troops out of Afghan theater helps Wilders get elected Prime Minister of the Netherlands, Im all for it.

Though Im with the NeoCons on sticking it out there. The US is always does the most heavy lifting anyways.

Monsieur Calguès said...

nimbus,

I think a lot. Bruce Bawer mentioned in his book that a lot of Europeans badmouth the U.S. at first and then grudgingly praise it after they've had a few drinks. He also said Europeans are not nearly as inclusive in defining who is one of them as one would expect, i.e. only an ethnic Dutchman can be a real Dutchman. This is even so among many lefties.

Fjordman,

I'd love to know what issues Auster is spectacularly wrong on. It seems to me he's right on just about everything. His batting percentage is as high as anyone in the blogosphere.

Fjordman said...

Monsieur Calguès: In my opinion, Larry Auster is spectacularly wrong when it comes to evolution, to mention one ting. But his political instincts are usually good, yes.