Sunday, January 10, 2016

The Ghosts of Charlie Hebdo

Mark Steyn is politically much further to the right than I am, but his anniversary column (The Ghosts of Charlie Hebdo) on the Charlie Hebdo massacre says what needs to be said:

Without free speech, there are only the official lies---about who's killing Jews in Copenhagen, who's sexually assaulting women in Cologne---and there is nothing to say in response to either except to crank up the old joanna for one more chorus of "Imagine".

What happened on January 7th 2015 was terrible. But our response to it made it more terrible and emboldened civilization's enemies. With respect to the late Charb, the choice is not between dying standing up or living on our knees---for those who choose to live on their knees will die there, too, cringing and craven. As I said a year ago:

The weepy passive candlelight vigils---the maudlin faux tears and the Smug Moral Preening overdose---aren't enough. If you don't want to put out the fire, it will burn your world to the ground.

Rob's comment: The question is, Why is the right so much better at understanding Islamic fascism than the center and the left?

Labels: , ,


At 4:09 PM, Anonymous Gregski said...

Your question, "Why is the right so much better at understanding Islamic fascism than the center and the left?"

As a right-wing fan of your blog I am willing to share my perceptions about the right-wing side, though I doubt I will disclose anything you haven't already discerned.

Throwing homosexuals to their deaths; taking women as sex slaves; using mosques as garrisons, armories and firing platforms, marrying 12-year-old girls and denying them schooling. To the Right, these are uncontroversially seen as manifestations of radical evil, invoked though the agency of individual men. Such manifestations are worthy of more vigorous and focused moral condemnation than diffuse "evils" such as, say, racial insensitivity or climate change or traveling by car rather than by bicycle. The Right's inquiry into the ideology behind this radical evil does not flinch from its findings: the battlespeak plainly in view on the pages of the Holy Koran and those specific passages' raging popularity among the losers of civilisation.

Yes, I called them losers. Their hard feelings might be provoked by that. Indeed, tolerance for others' and one's own hard feelings, accompanied by intolerance of radical evil, might be one of the things that distinguishes the Right's treatment of Islamofascism from the Left's.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home