Monday, April 11, 2011

Different Peoples, Different Differences

Below is a meditation on the recent Koran-burnings and the deadly violence that ensued, as seen through the lens of small-town Danish culture.

Many thanks to our Perth correspondent Anne-Kit for this translation from Sappho:

Different strokes for different folks
April 8, 2011
Column by Claus Thomas Nielsen

No double standards

Claus Thomas Nielsen“Well, obviously there are different rules for different people,” said the indignant man at the opposite end of the dinner table. A guest at the dinner party had been to Argentina and was telling us about Argentine towns on the pampas where third-generation immigrants were still attempting to uphold a certain level of Danish identity.

The anecdote led to this moralistic statement:

“So there are people and there are people. We are proud that Danes in Argentina are maintaining their own culture, but at home we demand that Muslims assimilate!”

Yes, that’s just terrible, isn’t it? What terrible double standards!

The thing is, however, that this is not a case of double standards. Double standards are about treating what is the same, differently; it isn’t about treating the different, differently.

And of course people are exactly different: Firstly, they can be different by degrees; secondly, they can be good or evil, truthful or mendacious, friendly or hostile, etc.

These differences are real, and naturally we need to treat people differently according to who they are.

Likewise, books that are about freedom and forgiveness must be treated differently than books that are about submission and terror.

Some books deserve a certain measure of reverence, others deserve only contempt. We all know the movie scene where the hero scrunches up the threatening letter and throws it into the fireplace with contempt. Needless to say, this is how we ought to treat threatening books as well.

If Hells Angels move in

I live in a Jutland [Danish mainland — the capital Copenhagen is on the island of Zealand] country parish with 800 inhabitants. This doesn’t sound like much, but nevertheless we have many foreign guests:

We have people living here who come from Germany, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Zealand, Copenhagen, Funen, Britain, Australia and the US.

This is not a problem, and if another 10 ordinary American families suddenly decided to come and live here in our beautiful and exotic region I doubt whether this would cause any problems either.

They would be well received, and on the whole we would think it right and good that they maintained as many of their homeland’s customs as possible.

But what if the new arrivals consisted of ten Hells Angels bikers from Copenhagen, who brought their families to our town and insisted that — in the name of tolerance — they keep not only their eccentric apparel and manner of speech, but all of their peculiar Hells Angels culture with its religious cult of black angels from hell?

What if there were a couple of Hells Angels children in each year group at the local school, and their parents demanded that their customs and their view of women be accorded equal status with the majority view?

In other words: What if they insisted that in future the parish should be bi-cultural, with the Hells Angels culture as one of these two cultures?

Well, within a very short space of time the rest of the inhabitants (including the other new arrivals) would start insisting that the worshippers of hell’s angels either renounce their faith and way of life and be fully assimilated into our parish, or that they immediately leave the parish and settle instead in a place where they would fit in.

Not because we are intolerant and against freedom, but in order to preserve the parish as a place for free and tolerant people.

(To call giving space to a hostile culture “openness” and “freedom of religion” is to use the language to tell a lie, just as the word “multicultural” is nearly always a euphemism for a polarised society.)

In other words, we parishioners would give the adherents of the angel religion a choice. And it is not beyond possibility that, in order to facilitate their choice, we would do as they allegedly did a few years ago in Thyborøn, when Hells Angels chose to culturally enrich this small fishing village via their presence during the summer vacations:

With 3-4 of their shiny Harleys sitting at the bottom of Thyborøn harbour, the rest of the culture-enrichers chose to turn their headlights back towards Copenhagen.

And I don’t think it was the physical act that made them leave. No, it was probably the comical situation that did the trick:

Picture a corpulent, tattooed and leather-clad rider from hell watching, slack-jawed, as his proud mount slowly sinks towards the bottom of Thyborøn harbour, with smiling fishermen looking on. In a society where people snigger every time they see a biker, their terror would never work.

So does that mean that the good people of Thyborøn are intolerant? No, there is nothing to indicate that, but they do seem to know the difference, by and large, between good and evil, right and wrong.

You see, there really is such a thing as “different strokes for different folks”. There is a difference between people, between cultures, between religions, and between civilizations. Some are good and some are evil. Some are about liberty, about love and equal value and others are about power, hatred and terror.

And it is the latter category that we should keep at bay.

That is why I hope that my own parishioners would act like the doughty fishermen of Thyborøn. There is just one small problem: Our own little harbour is just a couple of meters deep, so it isn’t really suitable for sinking Harleys.

Bonfires

It would be more practical to heap them up and set fire to them together with the black angels’ holy writs and insignia.

In the same way it would have been beneficial to the world if for instance the German and Russian populations of the 1920’s and 30’s had collectively agreed to burn the law books that were symbols of their nations’ enslavement.

And we might have helped them along with a few supportive bonfires of our own.

Of course we should not ban the books; burning them represents simply a symbolic liberation from their contents. And bonfires work. Any oppressive system works only as long as fear reigns. The oppressor has lost his power when the oppressed smile indulgently before they turn their backs.

But what if other Hells Angels followers in Berlin heard of their co-religionists’ humiliation at the hands of our parishioners, and they chose to attack the Danish embassy, kill 38 people and decapitate two female office workers?

Would that make us feel guilty and send us a warning to stop offending the religious sensibilities of Hells Angels followers?

No, on the contrary, this act would show that we did the right thing. They really do need to be fought with all available means. Anyone who previously had any doubts about the intrinsic evil of Hells Angels should now be convinced.

All other decent human beings should now feel compelled to reach for the cigarette lighter themselves.

Fear the fear

Only when we all say: I, too, am a Geert Wilders; I, too, am a Kurt Westergaard; I, too, am a Terry Jones; I, too, am a Lars Vilks [and we might now add: I, too, am an Ann Barnhardt! A-K] — only then will they understand that their terror does not work on us.

When faced with systems that are built on submission, the only thing we have to fear, quite literally, is fear itself. Who, then, are the accomplices to the 70 or so murders that have occurred since the latest Koran-burning by Terry Jones?

General Petraeus is, and so is Obama. When these infantile statesmen refer to the Koran as the “Holy Koran” and condemn the burning of pages made of paper as strongly as they do the decapitation of nurses, then they demonstrate that terror works.

We don’t need fewer bonfires, we need more.

And when it is clear for everyone that we are no longer afraid, then it is not unthinkable that the same fearlessness could start spreading slowly through the oppressed Muslim masses.

You see, each time the violence fails, a little piece of Allah is chipped away, and in the end there will be nothing left of the tyrant. That is why his adherents are so afraid and so angry.

Deep inside they know that Allah is a weakling, whose only weapon is fear. When that fear disappears, Allah and his prophet will disappear as well.

Like dew when touched by the sun.

Claus Thomas Nielsen is the vicar of Stauning.

54 comments:

Franklin said...

Gosh! You folks know nothing about Hells Angel Cuture...unless it has been assimilated into each European Nation it happens to reside in...Hells Angels and Islam cannot be compared! Hells Angels MC are a world wide union of motorcyclists who are honorable individualists! Islam is a political religion from HELL!

Anne-Kit said...

Franklin, surely Hells Angels are not just motorbike enthusiasts and honourable individualists, but having said that, I don't think the author means to equate the two cultures ...

It's an allegory, a musing on what might happen if we all agreed to stand up to terror and stop suffering in silence.

He is using a true story from a small locality to make people think about the bigger picture.

Blogger said...

>We don’t need fewer bonfires, we >need more.

Exactly! And I am mulling over some options myself ...

Anne, I sent a message to you via Baron. I hope you get it.

Anonymous said...

In my opinion, he uses an allegory BECAUSE he is presumably AFRAID of naming the real problem of Islam. Thus, he has more FEAR of being accused and convicted of a "hate crime" against the evil Islamic "religion" and foreign Muslim immigrants than Muslims in his home country and overseas have of committing violent crime against everyone else.

As I have said before, the wrong people are afraid of the wrong things.

Until the right people are afraid of the right things, all humans shall lack peace.

Zenster said...

Some books deserve a certain measure of reverence, others deserve only contempt. We all know the movie scene where the hero scrunches up the threatening letter and throws it into the fireplace with contempt. Needless to say, this is how we ought to treat threatening books as well.

I have already made my views on book burning quite clear. The author's statement is equally clear and worth every consideration.

The Qur'an is nothing more or less than a threatening letter to all of modern civilization and deserves to be treated as such.

Anne-Kit said...

"And when it is clear for everyone that we are no longer afraid, then it is not unthinkable that the same fearlessness could start spreading slowly through the OPPRESSED MUSLIM MASSES.

You see, each time the violence fails, a little piece of ALLAH is chipped away, and in the end there will be nothing left of the TYRANT. That is why his adherents are so afraid and so angry.

Deep inside they know that ALLAH IS A WEAKLING, whose only weapon is fear. When that fear disappears, Allah and his prophet will disappear as well."
(Capitals mine)

Egghead, do you want to maintain that this guy is "too afraid to mention [...] Islam"?

The power of allegory is precisely that it makes the reader/listener take a fresh look at a familiar concept.

This particular allegory is also FUNNY! The author's whole point is that if we laugh at terror it will eventually slink away.

I welcome the suggestion to bring humour into the Counterjihad's arsenal. Laugh at the Devil and he will flee! Or, as Shakespeare put it:

"Oh while you live, speak the truth and shame the Devil." (Henry IV)

bewick said...

I cannot match the literary eloquence of the author or of the blogger comments but offer a slightly different allegory.
Here in the UK there are, in some ancient towns and villages, preserved "village stocks".
I have long said that such should be revived and used as part of the legal process.
The wayward of our population would be humiliated and shamed, and likely no longer a problem,were they to suffer the public humilation of being chained to the stocks and pelted all day with rotten eggs and such by the peers and neighbours.
Just a thought.

Hesperado said...

When these infantile statesmen refer to the Koran as the “Holy Koran”...

It's worse than that. They (and their mainstream media and/or State Dept. transcriptionists) refer to that religious military imperialism manual as the "Holy Qur'an" -- complete with, as Diana West put it in her usual slyly wry way, that "politically correct apostrophe".

Sagunto said...

Hear, hear:

"Only when we all say: I, too, am a Geert Wilders; I, too, am a Kurt Westergaard; I, too, am a Terry Jones; I, too, am a Lars Vilks [and we might now add: I, too, am an Ann Barnhardt! A-K] — only then will they understand that their terror does not work on us.
[..]
We don’t need fewer bonfires, we need more.
"

Very worthy addition, A-K!

And people, the author is just using metaphor to make a point, no more no less. Like A. N. Whitehead said: "A man's reach should exceed his grasp, else what's a meta for?" ;-)

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Hesperado said...

Franklin protested:

Gosh! You folks know nothing about Hells Angel Cuture...Hells Angels and Islam cannot be compared!

Franklin goes on to assert that the Hell's Angels are an admirably civic-mminded organization like the 4-H Club or the Rotary Club or something. While no doubt there do exist Hell's Angels who do not cause trouble, enough of them have caused sufficient trouble over the years to justify the suspicions and concern of decent people (i.e., people who manage to keep their anti-social dysfunctions at a minimum in the interest of social harmony + those relatively fewer people who actually have no anti-social dysfunctions but actually enjoy being nice to other people).

Franklin's dudgeon also seems to be imbued with a misapprehension of the elementary function of the analogy. Usually, an analogy is not meant to draw an equivalence, but to highlight certain similarities. That the anti-social proclivities of, and the dangers posed by, the Hell's Angels are astronomically minuscule compared with Muslims is beside the point of the analogy.

All that said, the analogy suffers from one glaring omission: the Racial Factor. The vast majority of Hell's Angels are white. Were they non-whites and non-Westerners, they would magically be accorded with approximately the same "respect" and deference for their "culture" as Muslims continue to be.

I.e., the issue really isn't about a group, or sub-group, that acts in anti-social and dangerous ways: the issue is about whether such a group or sub-group is white Western, or not. That's what makes all the difference in the world for the PC MC which, with the wickedest irony, white Westerners themselves have elevated into mainstream dominance in their own societies.

Apparently, Franklin missed the day in Logic 101 when simple analogies were discussed. When A is compared with B as sharing certain

Anglichan said...

I've just received an email from a Pakistani Christian website. Often the hotheaded perpetrators of incitement don't suffer the consequences of their actions but innocent people do.

'The outrage and violence meted out on Christians in the Middle East and South Asian subcontinent, as a consequence of Pastor Jones last burning incident has still not dissipated. A Christisn man in Pakistan is still on the run after condemning the incident whilst in discussion with colleagues at work, who still set on him despite his assurances that the incident was not one universally endorsed by Christians.

We are surprised that America does not have a set of incitement of hatred laws that can protect the world from his actions, which have served no purpose but to create alienation and conflict.'

http://britishpakistanichristian.blogspot.com/2011/04/christians-in-middle-east-and-south.html

Hesperado said...

Anne-Kit wrote:

You see, each time the violence fails, a little piece of ALLAH is chipped away, and in the end there will be nothing left of the TYRANT. That is why his adherents are so afraid and so angry.

This can be refuted on a historical basis. In fact, for approximately 300 years after the 17th century, the West attained an astounding degree of global superiority, striding all over what is now known as the "Third World" taking over lands one by one and occupying, administering and improving them (as much as they could be improved, given the inferior human material and cultures endemic to those regions,Muslim and non-Muslim alike).

During those approximately three centuries, the West defeated Muslim armies hundreds of times in various battles, skirmishes and wars. (Of course, there were exceptions -- which prove the rule -- e.g., the long-standing annoyance which the Muslim Maghreb (i.e., the "Barbary Pirates" as they are euphemistically known) caused the West for quite a while -- but eventually their asses were kicked too, soundly and roundly, and the piracy ended after the mid-19th century. The only Islamic land that was not taken over was Arabia and the truncated Ottoman Empire (nicknamed, for good reason, the "Sick Man of Europe").

By 1923, that downward spiral into weakness and insignificance reached its nadir when the Caliphate itself -- a holy theocratic institution going back to the 8th century -- was dismantled with unceremonious and devastating humiliation to cap off three centuries of weakness and defeat Muslims had been living with at the hands of the West.

So, according to Ann-Kit's thesis, that should have been the end of Islam. By the early 20th century,they should have shrivelled up with their tails between their legs and slunk away never to be seen again. And many in the West actually believed that Islam was on the wane and would not survive Modern Progress.

One astute scholar of Islam, however, the Dutch Snouck Hurgronje -- who worked for the Dutch government that had conquered and administered Muslim Indonesia for centuries -- wrote presciently in about 1916 that although Muslims seem weak and backward by comparison with the rest of the world, it is not unlikely, given the fanaticism and resolve that inflames them so trans-nationally, that there will be a resurgence of Muslims geopolitically around the globe within approximately a hundred years from the time of his writing.

When Muslims are brutally responded to, they do shrink back -- but only temporarily. It's in their cultural and psychic DNA to be eternally prepared to plot and plan to resume the jihad, no matter how devastatingly they may be temporarily treated and defeated.

(Note to Baron: I just spent 30 minutes Googling trying to find Hurgronje's quote and citation, but failed, though I found a copious jungle of interesting albeit extraneously peripheral and irrelevant information while looking: if an Anti-Islam Manual existed as a computer program, I could have punched in the coordinates and found it in 10 seconds.)

Hesperado said...

Anglichan wrote:

"We [presumably meaning Cispondians] are surprised that America does not have a set of incitement of hatred laws..."

As I understand it, incitement laws are intended to prevent speech by X against Z that would incite Y to agree with X about how Z are bad people, and then to translate that agreement into violence against Z people.

In the Terry Jones case, however, we have a case of a speech (loosely defining a symbolic act as "speech") by X against Z that is having the unintended effect of inciting not Y people -- who may agree with X about how bad Z people are -- but rather of inciting the very same people, the Z people (whom X's speech is condemning) to kill X and Y people.

Let's use an analogy to clarify. Imagine that over the past decade there had been a resurgence of neo-Nazi hate speech and violence by neo-Nazis against non-white minorities throughout England. Then, fed up with this, a liberal pastor in Blackpool videotapes himself burning a copy of Hitler's Mein Kampf. As a direct consequence, innumerable neo-Nazi hooligans all over England, Europe and America riot and kill liberals and non-white minorities, and continually threaten to do more of the same.

Would this Blackpool pastor be criticized, or even condemned, much less charged with an incitement-to-hatred crime?

Sagunto said...

Hesperado -

"One astute scholar of Islam, however, the Dutch Snouck Hurgronje -- who worked for the Dutch government that had conquered and administered Muslim Indonesia for centuries -- wrote presciently in about 1916 that although Muslims seem weak and backward by comparison with the rest of the world, it is not unlikely, given the fanaticism and resolve that inflames them so trans-nationally, that there will be a resurgence of Muslims geopolitically around the globe within approximately a hundred years from the time of his writing."

Very true. I have some orig. writings by Snouck right here, dating from 1912 ("De Islam") in which he says something to the same effect on page 30/31. There was another writer who warned about the resurgence of Islam: the close friend of Chesterton, Hilaire Belloc.

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Sagunto said...

Hesperado -

In de 1930's, Hilaire Belloc wrote the following:

"Of every dozen Mohammedans in the world today, eleven are actually or virtually subjects of an Occidental power.
It would seem, I repeat, as though the great duel was now decided. But can we be certain it is so decided?
[..]
I doubt it very much. It has always seemed to me possible, and even probable, that there would be a resurrection of Islam and that our sons or our grandsons would see the renewal of that tremendous struggle between the Christian culture and what has been for more than a thousand years its greatest opponent."


Sag.

Sagunto said...

Afterthought and "sign of the times".

The above quote by Belloc, about the resurgence of Islam, is from his 1936 book, called "The Great Heresies".

Interesting and telling detail: in the version recently issued by Wilder publications, the following disclaimer warns us that:

"This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race have changed before allowing them to read this classic work."

The reprint, by another publisher (TAN Publishing) doesn't contain the PC disclaimer.

Sag.

Anglichan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anglichan said...

Ooops. Too angry when replying. Angry words stir up strife- just what I've been complaining about.

Erich said...

Sagunto,

Thanks for the Belloc quote -- I knew that one too, but it had slipped my mind at the moment.

I believe this Western idea that Muslims were basically a harmlessly quaint collection of tribes with strange, antiquated (and sometimes charmingly exotic) customs had become the norm by the 19th century, and perdured well into the 20th. Indeed, I believe that was one reason why the Reagan Administration in the early 1980s could think of using (and helping) central Asian Muslims to fight against the then more pressing and seemingly dangerous enemy, Communist Russia. In certain important ways, that meme continues to exert influence on the thinking of many PC MCs (along with contradictory notions, as it is common for the PC MC mind to be able to hold together an incoherent mush of of paradoxes).

4Symbols said...

In hoc signo vinces†

" ... resurrection of Islam and that our sons or our grandsons would see the renewal of that tremendous struggle between the Christian culture and what has been for more than a thousand years its greatest opponent." - Hilaire Belloc

One big problem the future European generations particularly in the U.K. have renounced and rejected their Christian culture.

Anonymous said...

Hi Anne-Kit (and Sagunto):

You're going to have to try harder if you're going to convince anyone about your replies to my comment.

I copied the entire well-written essay into Word and searched for the word "Islam" to NO avail. The word Islam does NOT appear in the essay.

Next, I searched for the word "Muslim" which appeared twice - both in FAVORABLE terms.

First, the Muslims are mentioned in an anecdote which, if quoted, clearly portrays the PC MC opinion of Muslims as victims of Western prejudice.

Second, the word "Muslim" appears as a part of another PC MC sympathetic phrase, namely "oppressed Muslim masses."

Really, now, what exactly would be doing the oppressing of the Muslim masses, Western prejudice or Islam?

Hmmm, the European FEARFUL of PC MC retribution said to himself like a robot, "Mustn't mention ISLAM. Mustn't mention ISLAM. Mustn't mention EVIL of ISLAM." Ha! :)

Anonymous said...

In all seriousness, the essay is a brilliant example of how an author suffering under SEVERE STATE CENSORSHIP uses ENCODED LANGUAGE to convey controversial ideas as best possible under difficult circumstances.

P.S. Sagunto, I appreciate all of the historical information and quotations.

Anne-Kit said...

Egghead, you need to take a deep breath and start again; you have obviously got off on the wrong foot with this piece.

1) Why are you so fixated on the word Islam? We've got Muslims and Allah, do you need it cut out in cardboard?

2) The first mention of Muslims is indeed in an anecdote that shows the PC MC opinion of Muslims as victims of Western prejudice. However, it is a direct quote from a person with whom the author DISAGREES and spends the ENTIRE rest of his essay proving wrong. Get it?

3) In your second example you claim that by using the phrase 'oppressed Muslim masses' the author implies they are oppressed by Western prejudice, not other Muslims.

Hello?? Earth to Egghead: Read the whole sentence again: "And when it is clear for everyone that we are no longer afraid, then it is not unthinkable that the same fearlessness could start spreading slowly through the OPPRESSED MUSLIM MASSES." Looks like Muslims oppressing Muslims to me, baby!

He then goes on to call Allah a weakling.

Forget word search, engage brain and deductive reasoning skills.

I rest my case.

Sagunto said...

A-K,

It has been reported that Egghead will descend to earth any time now and on second thought is likely to submit that you have a point. She's a good sport. And so are you.

Take care,
Sag.

Anne-Kit said...

Thanks, Sag. We should really conserve our collective energies for fighting the enemy, not each other, but I guess a brisk little skirmish to settle a misunderstanding doesn't hurt.

Like siblings fighting (I wouldn't know, I'm an only child!) - it hones the skills.

And Danes have a pretty unique sense of humour which can sometimes be too subtle if you haven't grown up with it :-)

Sagunto said...

A-K,

"I wouldn't know, I'm an only child!"

Call an ambulance, someone please help this poor thing!!!

Subtle Danish wit might be beyond the grasp of my quite boorish Dutchy Lowlander nature.

But you're absolutely right, and don't think for a minute that I wouldn't appreciate a good-hearted "sisterly" catfight every now and then. So, helpers away, and we're off to the second round! Do your skirmishing, and do it well ;-)

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Anonymous said...

Anne-Kit and Sagunto: As an alien American, I am going to stay in my spaceship and beam down these questions:

If the author was unconcerned about religious hate speech laws, would the author have mentioned Islam by name instead of dancing around the elephant in the room?

If the the author was unaffected by PC MC ideas, would the author have designated the majority of Muslims as being oppressed masses instead of free will actors?

If the author was employed in a secular instead of religious capacity, would the author have been as concerned about writing passages referring to Muslims that, if quoted out of context, would appear positive to Muslims?

Sagunto said...

Earth to Eggy -

1) No

2) Yes

3) Yes

You seem to display some familiar mind-reading "must be PC MC" reflexes that I have questioned in some other commenter ;)

I'll leave the floor to A-K now.
Beam me up Scotty.

Sag.

Anonymous said...

To be clear, the article is perfectly well-written under the strictures faced by the author - strictures that I have the luxury of pointing out until Obama manages to institute religious hate speech laws here. :)

To write an entire essay critical of Islam without mentioning Islam must have been a "fun" intellectual challenge. I am giving the author his "props." :)

Sagunto said...

Egghead -

Beam doesn't seem to work.. (perhaps the infamous Blogger-daimon is taking revenge on my successful exorcism).

So I'll just drag myself back behind the dikes, into the Dutch swamps and leave you with the observation that it is perhaps somewhat ironical that one of the central tenets of Hesperado's valuable PC MC thesis is that there's too much talk of Islam (no moderate Islam, and so on) and too little of Muslims (moderate Muslims, supposedly existing in large quantities). Now this author here speaks of Muslims and not of Islam, and yet PC MC is still invoked to find fault with this article. I thought his opinion matched very well with that of Ann Barnhardt when she speaks of Muslim women and children.

In short: PC MC applied in this inferential, mind-reading manner seems to become a "jack of all trades", and not really a useful theory.

Now I'd like to see some feline action ;)

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Anne-Kit said...

Well, my last comment didn't appear, so hear goes again, from memory (you might have two slightly different comments appearing)

Sag, you've said it better than I could. My case stays rested, I have nothing new to add.

Egghead, you and I seem to be talking at cross purposes. I can't get my head around your way of reading this essay. Your reasoning seems tortuous, your tunnel vision focus on one missing word - Islam - strikes me as petty. I am not going to spend any more time trying to convince you, we simply have to agree to disagree.

It's home time and my turn to cook :-(

You could try writing to the author, Claus: ctn@km.dk (I got it from his website, it's not secret). He has read my translation here earlier but is probably not aware of the latest comments.

Bonne chance!

Anne-Kit said...

Oh, and Sag: I wasn't referring to my own humour above, but Claus's in the essay ... and Danish peculiar humour in general.

Sagunto said...

A-K,

I know. And by the way, I have just been informed that serious scientific research has established that Danes and Dutch are very similar in cultural traits and mentality, so with a little effort, I should be able to appreciate Claus's wit.

Take care,
Sag.

Btw.: "Claus" is a typical name for Germans that no Dutch parent would ever give to his child. So if this turns out to be fairly common among Danes, then I still have some way to venture into the intricacies of the Danish sense for irony ;)

Sagunto said...

continued..

A-K,

We in Holland have two instances of the name Claus in a public context, both cases accompanied by the order, "raus" (meaning "get out"):

1) anti-German sentiments in the sixties and seventees, culminating in the slogan "Claus 'raus", applied to Claus von Amsberg, spouse of princess and later, Queen, Beatrix of the Netherlands.

2) anti-VS sentiments still omnipresent, culminating in the same slogan, now directed at "Santa" Claus, who is considered to be an overweighted, morally vacuous, and generally ridiculous rip off of the one and true national patron saint of Holland and Amsterdam, which is "Sinterklaas" of course, a.k.a. Saint Nicholas, bishop of Myra (and Black Pete).

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Post scriptum:
Still hoping for you two "honing your skills", like you said so yourself, in a scriptural catfight. I'm sure it will be as entertaining as it will be informative.

4Symbols said...

In hoc signo vinces†

The motorcycle club allegory gives us a big clue into one of the problems of the cross-cultural trance that the West is in.

In the allegory of the Thyborøn Citizens they betrayed themselves in that they were still capable of discrimination and resistance against a cultural schism from within their own culture but find themselves unable to discriminate and resist an alien culture - islam.

A real world example of cultural schism hypocrisy can be found in the U.K. when the British people attacked indigenous European immigration in particular Polish people (Nigel Farage are you listening) but were in a state of mutikulti political paralysis to discriminate and resist Third World and islamo immigration.

Loosely speaking discrimination and resistance to inside cultural schisms motorcycle club members, the indigenous underclass and internal European immigration is what I would term 2nd phase Multiculturalism.

Sagunto said...

4Symbols -

"A real world example of cultural schism hypocrisy can be found in the U.K. when the British people attacked indigenous European immigration in particular Polish people (Nigel Farage are you listening) but were in a state of mutikulti political paralysis to discriminate and resist Third World and islamo immigration."

You got that right.

Sag.

panzer said...

Vicar, I am glad I found you. I posted this article to our FaceBook page: Patriots Memorial Center, a center dedicated to teaching our Lord's value to new generations of Americans.

I was very blessed to read sanity come from a secularized Europe.

Amen and God Bless,

Michael

Anonymous said...

Anne-Kit: You exhibit a dismaying tendency that I find sadly typical of many women debaters - namely, when your ideas are challenged via comments, you interpret an attempt to discuss ideas as a "fight" to which you respond with personal insults.

To review, I accurately described that the author omitted to label Islam in his article to which YOU took great umbrage and commenced with an immature round of insults and name-calling.

In addition, I noted that the use of the word Muslim was cleverly manipulated so that any quotations including the word Muslim would be socially acceptable to the PC MC crowd.

In spite of my observations, I was very generous to the author whom I believe must be careful of wording due to current religious hate speech laws.

Hesperado said...

Sorry Sagunto,

"Erich" is my other screen name.

Anonymous said...

Sagunto: Hesperado's PC MC theory IS applicable where the majority of practicing Muslims are labeled as "oppressed Muslim masses."

In this case, the PC MC pretense is that terrorism (jihad by another name) is supported and conducted by a tiny minority of practicing Muslims.

People who label the majority of practicing Muslims as "oppressed" take away the free will agency of Muslims and represent Muslims as being passive victims rather than active participants in the crimes of Islam.

Anonymous said...

Past and present history CLEARLY reveals that practicing Muslims are the oppressors rather than the "oppressed" and seek to continue their reign of terror against other religions.

Recent polls indicate that Muslims around the world fully support the implementation of Sharia Law which is the primary aim of Islam.

Recent behavior shows that practicing Muslims are perfectly willing and able to place European cities - as well as Middle Eastern countries - under the rule of Sharia Law.

Sagunto said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sagunto said...

Egghead -

You wrote:

"Sagunto: Hesperado's PC MC theory IS applicable where the majority of practicing Muslims are labeled as "oppressed Muslim masses."

Nope, could be, but not necessarily. And I'd rather call Hesp's PC MC assertions a "thesis" that could become part of a theory.

I mentioned Ann Barnhardt and what she said about Muslim women and children unable to escape Islam. Her feelings of pity for these people (though she still holds them personally accountable for being in the system) are testimony to the time-honoured tradition of Natural Law philosophy, with roots in- and outside the Latin Church. She also mentions her own rediscovery of the Tridentine Mass, so there's no question as to what kind of tradition she belongs. That position could i.m.o. be quite comparable to what the author of this piece has said.

Moreover, he describes these Muslims as being oppressed. Are we going to claim that there's no intra-Islamic oppression and mind-poisoning indoctrination going on? Nowhere does he state that the oppressed Muslims are to be considered "moderates" who don't themselves believe in Islamic violence against the rest of the world. If he had said something to that effect, yes, then PC MC thesis would have been appropriate. Now, you're simply inferring too soon. PC MC thus becomes the proverbial bed of Procrustes instead of a sound theory.

In short: I wouldn't like to see a position that might be based on Natural Law philosophy, prematurely tarnished by labelling it as politically correct cow towing. That would be an unfortunate but glaring example of this PC MC thesis gone "viral".

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Sagunto said...

Erich -

I know, don't be sorry ;-)

Sag.

Hesperado said...

Sagunto,

"I'd rather call Hesp's PC MC assertions a "thesis" that could become part of a theory."

Until I see at least one million Westerners gathered in protest against Islam (anywhere), I will call it a fact,not a thesis or theory.

Sagunto said...

Hesperado -

You wrote:

"Until I see at least one million Westerners gathered in protest against Islam (anywhere), I will call it a fact,not a thesis or theory."

I think that's a fair deal. You're on.

Holland is part of the West. We have a party here that has been called a single or "one issue" party, and you know which one that is.

A vote for that anti-Islam party has been derided as an "Islamophobic" protest-vote.
At the last parliamentary elections people in the Netherlands did what no opinion poll had predicted: they voted for Geert Wilders in large numbers, well over one million.

So, a substantial part of your thesis is indeed based on fact. Some of your assertions however, based on your views about PC MC, are not always supported by thorough observation. Meanwhile, I think it is a most valuable asset to the still incho.. well you know the drill.

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Anonymous said...

Sagunto: Ralph Waldo Emerson asked, "Could Shakespeare give a theory of Shakespeare?"

"Emerson's rhetorical answer is, no he could not. This quotation is therefore a gloss on Emerson's theory of action and its dialectical relationship to theory and reflection."

Source: Dictionary dot com

Thus, according to Emerson' idea, Hesperado cannot give a theory of Hesperado.

However, I guess that I can. Ha!

Anonymous said...

Oddly, I first typed the word thesis in my comment last night, so my subconscious evidently agrees with you (or maybe I remember you using that word regarding Hesperado's idea?!). But, I changed the word thesis to theory because (I think?!) that is how Hesperado has presented his ideas.

But, in googling both words now, it seems that either word would suffice if theory is used as a non-technical term.

Anonymous said...

Thesis:
"1. a proposition stated or put forward for consideration, especially one to be discussed and proved or to be maintained against objections: He vigorously defended his thesis on the causes of war."

Theory:
"1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity."
"2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact."

Source: dictionary dot com (Random House Dictionary 2011)

Anonymous said...

Sagunto: My thoughts follow.

"And when it is clear for everyone that we are no longer afraid, then it is not unthinkable that the same fearlessness could start spreading slowly through the oppressed Muslim masses."

Here, the author presents the wise Western "white" culture as the liberator of "fearful" Muslims - insulting at best and patently false at worst.

What if Muslims really WANT to be Muslims - with all of the terror that entails? After all, Muslims come to "free" nations - and promptly institute Sharia Law.

More than seeing a million infidels stand up against Islam, I would like to see a million Muslim WOMEN stand up against Islam in the West and demand that the West protect their God-given rights.

Anonymous said...

After really considering Sennels idea to educate Muslim women about their Western rights, I recently changed my mind and now think that perhaps there is merit to educating Muslim women (especially girls) in the West about their Western rights - assuming that the West STOPS using Sharia Law against Muslim women in the West and requiring that Muslim women attend regular classes in order for the family to receive any state benefits including food and housing.

Anonymous said...

"You see, each time the violence fails, a little piece of Allah is chipped away, and in the end there will be nothing left of the tyrant. That is why his adherents are so afraid and so angry."

Here, the author seems to leave his initial phrase in an unfinished state. I assume that the author means to say, 'each time that the violence fails to achieve its intended goal to control infidel behavior or to implement Sharia Law.'?

In any case, the author posits that Muslims are afraid and angry. Maybe, maybe not.

Then, the author contends that Muslims are afraid and angry because of infidel behavior. Again, maybe, maybe not.

As has been discussed at this site, even if Islam were the only religion on Earth, Muslims would fight each other: Shia versus Sunni versus all other Muslim offshoots.

Anonymous said...

"Deep inside they know that Allah is a weakling, whose only weapon is fear."

Here, the author again insults the Western adversary of Islam by underestimating the power of Allah. Far from being a weakling, Allah has been very powerful at convincing Muslims to subdue infidels for 1,400+ years.

The author contends that Allah's ONLY weapon is fear. Well, fear - and Muslim control of oil and weapons of mass destruction.

Anonymous said...

"When that fear disappears, Allah and his prophet will disappear as well."

Here, the author presents that idea that fear is the only motivator for Muslims staying Muslim.

Really? What about all of the other motivators like religious belief, pride, power, money, lust, or pedophilia?

Saying that Allah and Mohammed (hey, I just realized that the author cleverly avoided using the word Mohammed, too!) will disappear is unrealistic - until the New World Order RFID chips us all. Ha! Sorry, I couldn't resist! :)