The attack against criticism of the Islamic religion continues. Like the Soviet Union of yore, the West along with the Islamic world treats critics of the privileged ideology as madmen suffering from a mental disease, an irrational fear, in this case a new-fangled disorder called Islamophobia. This is modeled on xenophobia, “fear of strangers”, and ultimately on genuine diseases like agoraphobia, “fear of public places”, and arachnophobia, “fear of spiders”. The crusaders (or rather the muhajedin) against this disease are not missionaries who claim to love the people they accuse of being devil-worshippers, they are simpler and more straightforward: they just hate these dissenters. They do not wonder why the “Islamophobes” disagree with the official appreciation, they have no time for such luxuries. They simply try to impose their own hatred on public opinion and on lawmakers, for, like Islam itself, they would like to institute laws everywhere prohibiting criticism of Islam.
Allotments create takers and supports well-paid bureaucracies.
A perceptive, inquisitive and respected friend inspires this week’s Duly Noted. Sam L., who manages his own business, heads a community level grass-roots organ of a Swiss political party. The material he sent circulated as a personal note and reveals a suppressed fact. His stumbling into a reality that PC asks us to handle by covering it up resulted in the consternation of the surprised engineer. The same pertains to the addressees of the note.
In his monumental Experiment in Autobiography (1934), the English novelist and public intellectual Herbert George Wells (1866 – 1946) claims to understand the German dictator Adolf Hitler intuitively. The discussion will shortly come to that – but first some background.
Writing of his “mid schoolboy stage” at Thomas Morley’s school in 1878 and 79, and trying to reconstruct his thirteen-year-old worldview, Wells recalls, along with much else, his adolescent fondness for indulging in compensatory military fantasies rooted in a rebellious but invariably thwarted libido dominandi. “The flavor of J. R. Green’s recently published (1874) History of the English people had drifted to me either directly or at second hand,” as the autobiographer writes, “and my mind had leapt all too readily to the idea that I was a blond and blue-eyed Nordic, quite the best make of human being known.” Wells remarks that, “England was consciously Teutonic in those days, [and] the monarchy and Thomas Carlyle were strong influences in that direction.” Discussion of Britain as a romantic “Keltic Fringe” hung in the air, as Wells writes; “and the defeat of France in 1870-71 seemed to be the final defeat of the decadent Latin peoples.” The convictions that, “We English, by sheer native superiority, practically without trying, had possessed ourselves of an Empire on which the sun never set” and that, “the errors and infirmities of other races” were compelling Britain towards “world dominion” fastened themselves unquestionably in young Georgie’s mind. The adult Wells would put it this way: “All that was settled in my head,” such that the array of associated notions informed the lad’s “active imagination.”
In moments of levity, this writer presents himself as a “professional immigrant”. Indeed, by choice or driven by vainly resisted forces, his life had to be repeatedly relocated. The experience of starting anew is as unpleasant as it is also valuable. In the aftermath of the US’ election, the migration experience became a recognized topic of significance.
Migration is not only a force that determined the US’ election. A new movement of peoples is tied to the appearance of unwelcome immigrations throughout the developed world. This new immigration, its political impact and its social consequences, will serve as a subject of future discussions.
After the choice, a new chance to return the merchandise.
Understandably, America’s election, lost by the Republicans, owns the front pages. The volume of the coverage suggests that all has been said about the event. However, by looking beyond the “immediate trauma”, several observations emerge.
2012 has been a year of great turmoil for the euro. But our common currency is not the only thing that is in crisis. OUr economic theory is too, and even more so. For decades, macro-economic policy has been conducted within a Keynesian framework. And while no Keynesian economist has predicted this crisis, or is even able to explain its causes, we are still listening to them today to get out of the mess they brought us into. I would say that this is a problem of legitimacy.
Invention is a means to overcome non-conforming facts.
We like to ignore the forces that will determine our lives. The prize of shortsightedness is high for those that ignore the discernible trends. Frequently, what the unaware regards as a positive or negative “accident” is only in its minor details accidental. In reality, such mislabeled events are the consequence of earlier choices and are, therefore, foreseeable for those that look beyond appearances. The aware know that behind the confusing scenery, there lurks a decisive truth and that it is the real puppet master that pulls the strings.
Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte is in Istanbul this week to meet with his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, with a large retinue of Dutch CEOs in tow. The aim is to boost bi-lateral economic ties between the two NATO allies, which are now valued at over €5.5 billion a year.
Highly unlikely to figure in the official talking points is any mention of lawsuits that were brought against a Dutch citizen by two Turkish citizens -- Mustafa Y. and Osman B - in 2008 and 2010, respectively, and which still have not been taken up by Dutch or Turkish prosecutors.
Why the delay in prosecuting the case? Perhaps because the plaintiff -- Mr. Joris Demmink, former Secretary General of the Royal Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice -- was, until his retirement two weeks ago, the Netherlands' highest ranking law enforcement official.
Nothing is beneath the dignity of our attention, so even the municipal elections of Belgium, on Sunday 14 October 2012, can be deemed to have their importance. I cannot discuss every trend that came out of the results, but a few stand out.
On the Walloon side, little remarkable happened. All four established parties (Socialists, Liberals, Christian-Democrats secularized as “Humanists”, and Ecologists) held their own, the Socialists even strengthening their dominant position. Some personal issues are of some interest, e.g. how a coalition managed to oust the 20-year mayor of Molenbeek, Philippe Moureaux; this coalition was engineered by the Christian-Democrats in revenge for their own ousting from the coalition in the city of Brussels, where the Socialist mayor Freddy Thielemans strengthened his position.
There is a saying that civilizations are more often destroyed from within than by armies attacking them from without. And it is in this context that one particular question has been puzzling me for quite some time: Who poses a greater threat to the fabric of Western society and our individual liberties such as freedom of speech, the Islamists or the Political Correctness (PC) brigades? For isn’t there palpable public resistance to sharia law in the West, but scarcely any opposition to the abominations of the sexual revolution? Except when a scandal like that of the late BBC presenter Jimmy Savile surfaces and reminds us of the dire condition of children in 21st century Western society, sparing not even hospitalized quadriplegics from pedophile abuse. Despite all this, the erotocratic PC elites keep dominating universities, governments and the mainstream media with their agenda in favor of LGBTIQ - this never quite complete acronym for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer advocacy groups. However it seems nothing can stop the train of the top-down global sexual revolution. This amounts to nothing less than the left version of colonialism – political dominance via international policy bodies such as UN and EU.