Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 01/26/2007 View Thu 01/25/2007 View Wed 01/24/2007 View Tue 01/23/2007 View Mon 01/22/2007 View Sun 01/21/2007 View Sat 01/20/2007
1
2007-01-26 Home Front: Culture Wars
The Scapegoats Among Us
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by 3dc 2007-01-26 00:21|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Not I. In the face of reality like that, I find Ian Buruma and only Ian Buruma guilty of the murder of Theo van Gogh. Islam was his motive. He still clings to his reason to kill, so he must be made an example. What's so confusing about it ?
Posted by wxjames 2007-01-26 09:40||   2007-01-26 09:40|| Front Page Top

#2 Thank you so much, 3dc. An excellent article that I feel is well balanced and addresses a meta-issue that makes many of the loose pieces of the puzzle fall into place.

For instance, her going after SOME elements of the anti-illegal immigrant issue is spot-on: she points out that SOME of them talk as if illegal immigration is a greater danger to the Republic than Radical Islam. yet, she does not tar EVERYONE concerned with Illegal immigrants with the same broad brush, but does point out that, when weighed in the scales of danger, poor catholic mexicans crossing the border to get jobs pose a lesser threat than Islamists posing as students while planning terrorist attacks. A problem, yes. The BIGGEST problem we're facing? No way. I found that helpful.

Here's a great quote:

In sum, just as the paleoconservative and nativist wings of the right appear to have channeled the anxiety of the post-9/11 years into one relatively safe scapegoat — largely Hispanic illegal immigrants — so have the libertarians and some liberal allies fingered their own culprit in the “theocrats,” “Christocrats,” “Christianists,” and “Christian nationalists.” At the heart of their case is an obnoxious positing of moral equivalence among “fundamentalists” and “theocrats” irrespective of religious stripe. Accordingly, anyone believing anything based on any holy writ whatever is suspect, no matter whether the message being received is that two hundred babes must die in Chechnya tomorrow or that two hundred trees should be planted in Tel Aviv by Texan evangelicals to hasten the second coming. As with the example of illegal immigration, this rhetoric all makes perfect sense — or would in a world where Jerry Falwell calls down fatwas on NARAL, the 700 Club sends suicide bombers into the Key West Fantasy Fest, and Richard John Neuhaus posts death warrants on ewtn whenever he wants the members of Moveon.org decapitated.


This goes into my list of "articles to cite to prove my point".
Posted by Ptah">Ptah  2007-01-26 09:45|| http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org]">[http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org]  2007-01-26 09:45|| Front Page Top

#3 That is a money quote, Ptah. Nice find!
Posted by BA 2007-01-26 10:02||   2007-01-26 10:02|| Front Page Top

#4 A very interesting read, thanks 3dc for posting it.

I think the author misses the point about anti-immigration sentiment in the US today. It doesn't have anything to do with "brown-skinned" immigrants; it has to do with real or perceived economic threat as numbers surge. Ask a few Germans about the economic impact of joining Eastern and Western Germany; they get it.

"No, perhaps the anti-Americanism of today is best understood instead as a way of being furious in public with somebody for the insecurities and anxieties wrought by Islamist terrorism in this world, including in increasingly Muslim Europe — an option made even more attractive by the safe bet that Americans, unlike some other people, are unlikely to respond to this rhetoric, let alone to editorial cartoons, by burning cars, slitting throats, or issuing death threats in places like Paris and Amsterdam and Regensburg and London."

It is astonishing to me, though, that Europeans, frightened and unhinged as they may be, prefer to scapegoat the US (the one country that presents Europe with a real chance of countering the threat) over forgetting pride, holding their noses and helping America make sure that an undefeatable force-"Islamism"-doesn't cause their beloved countries to disappear forever. I guess, like the Palestinians, they have their choices to make. If helping America is so distasteful, they will choose the "Hamas" way and precipitate their own despair and loss, but will keep the "pride" derived from their anti-Americanism.
Posted by Jules 2007-01-26 10:09||   2007-01-26 10:09|| Front Page Top

#5 Jules, you are right about the economic-impact intent behind the "anti-illegal" backlash against the Beltway. But, I'd also add, there are a LOT of us out there that disagree with it, just because it's our laws.

Listen, I can NOT blame them for doing their darndest to cross the Rio Grande, in search of a better life. I DO fault the gov't for not enforcing the law, and for having silly policies (like "Catch and Release") that could result in jihadis (not just Mexicans) entering with intents to do us harm.
Posted by BA 2007-01-26 11:02||   2007-01-26 11:02|| Front Page Top

#6 Exactly, BA. The law-abiding aspect and the linguistic unity aspect also are important. Like you said, in their shoes, I would try to escape my terrible circumstances. I'm sure they don't appreciate our view of the "rule of law" aspect, if for no other reason than that "law" in Mexico is so soluble with its bribes and so inescapable in its questionable convictions, it has little in common with our understanding of the word.

Ah well, I'll let it go and return to the thread's topic. I actually saw a couple non-Americans stand up for the US on a BBC blog the other day-it was truly surprising. That site is nearly wall to wall US hatred.
Posted by Jules 2007-01-26 11:31||   2007-01-26 11:31|| Front Page Top

#7 I think the author misses the point about anti-immigration sentiment...

I read this, or something very like it, a few weeks ago, and it seemed to me that the author was trying desperately to find scapegoats of the right to match those of the left, so as to appear even-handed.

I read a lot of righty blogs, and I don't hear anywhere near the hysteria that the author seems to find, just a disgust with the government for not enforcing its own damned laws.

So either she's reaching, or y'all are not the right-wing death-beasts you thought you were.
Posted by Angie Schultz 2007-01-26 19:44||   2007-01-26 19:44|| Front Page Top

18:57 jacksonsa
23:44 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:36 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:31 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:27 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:22 Anguper Hupomosing9418
22:47 DMFD
22:38 gromgoru
22:31 xbalanke
22:26 Classical_Liberal
22:25 xbalanke
22:21 3dc
22:19 Xenophone
22:17 gromgoru
22:08 USN, ret.
22:05 xbalanke
22:05 USN, ret.
22:00 Eric Jablow
21:56 USN, ret.
21:53 Anguper Hupomosing9418
21:50 Verlaine
21:47 USN, ret.
21:43 Anguper Hupomosing9418
21:42 USN, ret.









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com