From Victor Davis Hanson's Private Papers (thanks to Mike):
[Editor’s Note: Dinesh D’Souza’s recent work on Muslim culture and the decadent West has received a great deal of criticism, but not quite like the letter below recently sent to the website.]Dear Mr. Hanson,
I greatly appreciated your just and thoughtful critique in "The Enemy at Home." As a woman from South Asia, originally from a "traditional Muslim" community, and now domiciled in the U.S., I have much to say to Mr. D'Souza — but feel there's no use in doing so. I have seen him on TV and believe he will not be open to a differing opinion, not even if it comes from a Muslim woman from one of the cultural groups at the heart of his thesis. So I address this to you.
My first question to Mr. D'Souza would be: "whom do you mean when you speak repeatedly of traditional Muslim societies, how many women from these societies did you interview in your research for this book?" This is a rhetorical question because I know the answer to it already — hardly any. Women in traditional Muslim societies are not prone to spending time alone with unrelated men, freely expressing opinions on matters central to their community.
If Mr. D'Souza thinks he has had such interviews he is mistaken. He may have spoken to women from more liberal Muslim communities who do not as yet represent the majority of women in Islam. That he has spoken to men is clear, of course. This analogy is a stretch, but I am going to use it anyway to make my point. It is as though Mr. D'Souza, in writing about the Holocaust, bases his conclusions on conversations he has had with the guards at concentration camps because he had no access to the prisoners.
That being said, I would like to tell Mr D'Souza that he is wide of the mark — not completely without an insight or two, but so wide that his thesis has no value to Muslim or non-Muslim. Mr D'Souza believes that it is not freedom but the abuses of it that threatens patriarchy in Islamic societies: the clothes that Britney Spears wears, same sex marriage, pronography etc. A classic example of not being able to see the woods for the trees.
What threatens patriarchal Muslim communities are not the excesses of Western societies but its very norms. Individualism and the relatively equal position of women manifest themselves in the opportunities females have to pursue education and economic independence. And these principles of individual freedom and equality, even Mr D'Souza will agree, are neither Right nor Left, but simply American. There is no way that Muslim women, in great numbers, can be granted similar opportunities without it eventually shaking their societies at their very foundations. Whatever else the Taliban is obtuse about, they understand perfectly the concept of the slippery slope — allow a girl child to be educated at all, and you never know where she will end up — perhaps like me, with only tangential ties to some of the core values of the conservative Islamic community I was raised in.
When I go back home to my country of birth, as I frequently do, I see the changes that education and economic independence have wrought in a once very orthodox community, which slowly allowed its women a more Western lifestyle. Women are waiting longer to get married, having fewer children (going against the Islamic obligation to increase the "Umma" — the community of Muslims), going out of the home to work, often choosing a spouse against the wishes of the family, and initiating divorce in numbers that were unthinkable in the past. The great strength of Muslim societies, the stability of its families, and the cohesiveness of its communities, is beginning , in some places, to fray at the edges and the anxiety provoking question for those who care about this, as I do, is —how much can the foundational thread of conservative Islamic societites, —women's submissiveness, and their economic and social dependence on men — be pulled out, without it unraveling the entire fabric?
In the face of this challenge there are those who believe that the solution lies in reverting to fundamentalist Islam, and among such people could well be some future terrorists. There are others who know there is no going back. To do so would be to tolerate, for instance, some of the rules that governed my mother's life. No leaving the house without a chaperone, no signing your own marriage certificate, and most tragic of all, no going to school, no matter how much you love to learn. Or it could mean, as it did with a schoolmate of mine, a seventeen year old girl would be forced to marry a fifty six year old man, because her family forced her to. If she could have fended for herself, she may have fled her family. But she could not, and went through the marriage ceremony tears pouring down her face.
How can Muslim societies strike a balance between the needs of the individual and the need of the community so as to stay true to some of its better traditions and avoid the breakdown of family and society that has taken place in the West? There are no easy answers to that, and certainly none so easy as staying as far away as possible from pornography, or even making it more difficult for a woman to get a divorce. If Mr D'Souza has any advice to give on this issue, I would like to hear it. Turning the TV off when Britney Spears appears, I know to do on my own.
Thank you for your time.
It just boggles the western mind when you realize that western American women such as my wife's cousin would accept Islam.
Having grown up with all the educational advantages and the vast array of equality and freedoms granted to all citizens in this country, WHY, WHY, WHY would an otherwise intellegent western girl accept this slavery and total domination from a "MAN"--Give me a break!!
She heard and read all the womens lib stuff going to college. She refuses to even talk to her family who are loving and understanding but say, "Oh well, just another way to God".
WRONG!!
The only explanation is resident in her demeanor, facial looks, slavish devotion to the "cults" leader, just like Jim Jones, Koresh,etc. If they say drink the koolaid or blow yourself up they blindly obey and take their kids with them.
The ONLY explanation that makes any sense is classic total demon possession. Its usually proceeded by an athestic rejection in college of mom and pop trusting God in and through a denominational church.
Spelling error--"Atheistic" rejection of God, not athestic.
The Bible says---"A FOOL has said in his heart there is no God"
What happens to the seventeen year old when her husband dies in a few years? In these backwards countries with no social network what does a young widow women with a large young family do?
guide inside - Was she bi-polar?
Like address allowing males to kill females.
islam does not deserve to survive.
Hopefully this will make a dent of Dinesh D'Souza's think skull. This woman knows the enforced Koranic idiocy of the Muslim cultures. Their repressiveness. Their enslavement of women. She can testify from direct experience thus is more "authentic" to some people. Hopefully D'Souza will accept her critique while he arrogantly rejects those of white Americans who are very learned about the "real Islam", but haven't lived it. Not that D'Souza has either
Here is a thoughtful woman who retain a "tangential" relationship to her parent's faith (the faith that her ancestors were forced into) and who wishes "to stay true to some of [the] better traditions and avoid the breakdown of family and society that has taken place in the West."
What is to become of a society that operates on little faith at all? And if we operate with little faith, what do we have to offer to people who were born into a destructive tradition?
guide inside: if you want a quick answer to why modern Western women throw themselves into the abyss of Islam - go to San Francisco or Los Angeles and make a study of the porn industry and the local "scene". There you will find thousands of young women, many of them from socially solid backgrounds and with considerable education, making a living by being physically and mentally abused on stage and screen, and enjoying it. You might also try and assess, from what you see, how much of the San Franciscan "gay" and "alternative" population show evident signs of being committed, if not addicted, to sado-masochist relationships and patterns of behaviour. Sadism and Masochism are not occasional features of "sexual liberation"; they are at the core of it. There is something about women, especially, which, if not properly socialized early in life, absolutely drives them to masochistic patterns of behaviour. Islam in the West is just one feature of the contemporary cult of sadomasochism - though it may well turn out to be the deadliest.
With their polygamy and extreme domination of women, the Muslims have a very efficient breeding machine, and they know it. It's a tool of war and Jihad. They can flood the world with Muslims and these Muslims will go to war for lebensraum. If women get somewhat liberated in Muslim lands the birthrate will go down the demographic Jihad suffers
Every black turbaned psycho Imam knows this
Someone who is against the degradation and dehumanization of women is against Islam. If women want to become Muslims or make porn we can't, in a free society stop them. We CAN step in if a woman is threatened or enslaved to be a Muslim or make porn. Or if little girls in our grade schools have a visiting speaker who tells them that being Muslim or making porno are wonderful liberating choices.
Very interesting, guide inside. I wonder about that myself all the time. It seems in America (though I'm no expert), that many people turn to the American form of Islam for its order, codes of conduct, etc. It's also a thug religion which might give people a feeling of security -- the way gangs give many youths a sense of security, belonging, etc.
I still haven't a clue why D'Souza wrote that book. A mind like his, with employment at an insanely brilliant think tank, doesn't just ignorantly or accidentally write a book like that. There's a motive behind it and I'm not accepting the given excuse that he's just ignorant of Islam. Call me a conspiracy nut, but I think there is something behind it.
This debate stirred up by D'Souza is not only silly, it's a diversion. We're now being lulled into a sense that if, only if, the Moslimas could be set free all would be well and the horrifying spectre of the global Jihad called in '96 will fade away.
Do not forget that we're up against a relentless army hellbent on taking over the world and destroying freedom. Setting all Unicorns aside, Moslems, including Moslimas, are quite happy with themselves. The men can be hypocrites and the women can be breeding cows.
But whatever a Moslem is, he or she is a person who worships lying, hate, murder, rape, oppression, robbery, slavery, pedophilia, pedarism, terror and war... and that's no good.
"Thank you for your time."
-- the final sentence in the open letter to Dinesh D'Souza above
Dinesh D'Souza regrets. You see, Dinesh D'Souza, the man with a different book about a different subject every four, or three, or two years, not to mention all those conferences, all those meetings, all those lecture tours, all those ways to get money, money, money, and push that career, career, career, as a Bright Young Conservative, doesn't have the time to read widely, and think, and re-read, and read some more, and think some more. He is not a cultivated man, and he has no vast stores upon which to call, even though he is quick to prate about "illiberal education" there is no sign that, from his Dartmouth Review days onward, he ever had the "time" -- it takes time, time and deliberate otherworldiness, at least for a time -- to give himself that education.
It is instructive to compare his frenetic and empty prose with, say, that of C. S. Lewis in "The World's Last Night and Other Essays." Take, for example, "Screwtape Proposes a Toast." Or to compare the busy careerist, so like those he deplores, or pretends to, with Jacques Barzun, any page of Jacques Barzun, say one page in "The American University" or "Teacher in America" or "The House of Intellect." A product of a different age, with different standards, and not really as far from the things he deplores as he thinks.
If you want to see why Dinesh D'Souza, and the Rest of the Boy in the Racket, don't have "time" to think, just go to www.dineshdsouza.com, and once you have read through, by clicking on the left, the potted autobiographical self-promotion, click on "Events" and this is what you will find:
EVENTS CALENDAR 2007
FEB 13, 2007 Hillsdale College event, Fort Myers, Florida
FEB 13, 2007 Palm Beach Republican Club, Florida
FEB 15, 2007 San Diego Institute, San Diego
FEB 16, 2007 Reagan Ranch, Santa Barbara
FEB 21, 2007 Pepperdine University, Malibu, California
FEB 22, 2007 Malibu Women’s Republican Club
FEB 23, 2007 Republican Leadership Conference, Colorado Springs
MAR 08, 2007 Service Management Conference, Las Vegas
MAR 09, 2007 FTI Consulting, Vail, Colorado
APR 11, 2007 James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia
APR 12, 2007 St. Sebastian School, Boston
APR 21, 2007 Daughters of the American Revolution, Columbus Ohio
APR 23, 2007 Western Illinois University, Macomb, Illinois
APR 26, 2007 Young Presidents Organization, Palm Beach, FL
MAY 11, 2007 Cornell College, Mt. Vernon, Iowa
MAY 17, 2007 Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, Oklahoma City
JUNE 11-12, 2007 Freedom School, Tempe, Arizona
JULY 07, 2007 FreedomFest, Las Vegas
SEP 20, 2007 Whitworth College, Spokane, WA
Busy, busy, busy, is Dinesh D'Souza. In a way that those poor old fuddy-duddies C. S. Lewis, and Jacques Barzun, would never have been, would never even have comprehended.
Autres temps, autres moeurs.
And how.
"Autres temps, autres moeurs" means "other times, other customs."
Hugh, when's your book coming out?
""Autres temps, autres moeurs"
should be...
"d'autres temps d'autres moeurs"
From a native French speaker
guys perplexed above at the behaviour of women above:
have you considered genesis 3(I think) where I understand during the curses such a man having to toil in order to eat because the ground now has weeds, and so on, does it not say something like "womens' desire will be to be ruled over by their husband"
I'm not sure the exact wording but I think it is interesting that in all cultures and ages there seems to be elements of this.
Even the most feminist ladies I have known that have "fancied" me surprised me with their subversiant traits. I wasn't surprised by their ferocity in demanding "masculine" behaviour but by the fact they were.
It is interesting that religions have more devout female adherents than male ones because in a religion one takes the subversiant role to a divine whatever.
I think the laura mansfield site has an interesting expose of the methods used to attract women.
Our western culture does not help when masculinity is seen as contra family and children.
My very successful friend in GE has to explain to other male collegues that he actually wants to spend time with his wife and child!!!
If family and community were more important to westerners then maybe we would see the point of resisting the jihad.
“…because her family forced her to. …and went through the marriage ceremony tears pouring down her face.”
Tears, a typical fruit of rotten vines. Harvested largely by the females in Islam. It’s tradition.
""Autres temps, autres moeurs"
should be...
"d'autres temps d'autres moeurs"
From a native French speaker"
-- from a posting above
No, it shouldn't.
"Autres temps, autres moeurs" is a fixed phrase. It was used not as part of a sentence, and was a comment, as that fixed phrase, independent of any grammatical or syntactical requirements that might be imposed were the phrase part of some longer utterance.
Here that phrase stands alone.
And I stand uncorrected.
D’Souza is a moron, doesn't understand what he has writtten. He ought to ask other nations including Muslim female sufferer what Islam has been doing to them over thousand years?
D’Souza has some illness, nothing of a kind that a bit of spanking from a bunch of Talibans can't cure.
He ought to spend some weeks in Afghanstan to face-up the reality and read their history books before write a worthless essay about Islam.
Nearly all societies and nearly all religions are inbred with gender discrimination. Catholicism, for example, as found in the scripture of Genesis, with Eve, not only lesser than Adam, being derived from one of his ribs, but in its secularized practices today, evident in the fact that women of the church cannot attain the same heirarchical level as men. The only difference between them is the degree of discrimination.
Also in reference to Catholicism, are the differences between the texts of the Old and New Testaments. The former, originally serving organized religion by societal control through fear, as was needed at the time, as compared to the latter, more or less still societal control but now metered with empathy and love. The different tone between the two texts is remarkable. Islam is obviously stuck in the strict adherence to the former, never properly undergoing its much needed reformation.
The historical secularization of the West, even with its pros and cons, is in stark contrast to societies dominated by Islam. Even being a Christian, I do not wish for a society dominated by theocratic rules at every turn. I relish the free-will given to all people and realize that being told how to live, how to think, et al, is not a life worth living.
D'Souza's well-documented faults in his book, as expressed by the author of the open letter to him, strikes at the central core. D'Souza offers no solutions, not realistic, tangible ones anyway.
Islam is currently corrupt on so many levels. Emulation of its moral doctrine, independent of the "convert or die" mantra, to a sentient mind, is regressive, not progressive. Islam spends it's day finding someone and something else to dominate and adulterate. The Islamic male brings very little positives to the table. They offer no cures, no solutions, only that damned book they have vested nearly all into.
For examples sake, if Islam did cover the world and subjugate all to it's will, would there be peace? Would the global Islamic society be functional?... Doubtful. A society of all equals is a utopian dream and could not possibly sustain itself for long.
Islam only functions as a resistive political tool, whether any external oppression truly exists or not. Its doctrine served Muhammad well during his time here on Earth. It does not however, serve Muslims in today's world well, with the exception of providing solace for the masses who are discouraged of individual thought and effort at every turn. It is the eternal "underdog" syndrome, even though it is self-inflicted.
Islam is not what anyone should morally aspire to be. The Qur'an doesn't build hospitals. The Qur'an doesn't provide clean, running water or electricity. The Qur'an can't provide early earthquake detection. The Qur'an cannot roof, feed or clothe your family.
MusHuntCowboy
Maybe he is fine with the reality in Islamic countries. Maybe this twerp loves the idea of all-encompassing Sharia law. In fact, some on the Christian Right look at Islamic nations as models for America. This twerp D'Souza will be instrumental in implementing 'morality' laws in this country, you watch.
EVENTS CALENDAR 2007
FEB 13, 2007 Hillsdale College event, Fort Myers, Florida
FEB 13, 2007 Palm Beach Republican Club, Florida
FEB 15, 2007 San Diego Institute, San Diego
................
Busy, busy, busy, is Dinesh D'Souza. Posted by: Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 13, 2007 10:29 AM
There is nothing wrong with being busy, afterall he is trying to sell many copies of his book. The content of it is so mis-leading that it is damn right dangerous when not compared with other books, for example 'The Truth about Mad MO' by Robert Spencer.
Anyone know how old this guy D'Souza is? What kind of name is "Dinesh?" What's his country of origin from his name?
darcy
He is Indian. D'Souza is a Goan Catholic name.
MusHuntCowboy
In fact, some on the Christian Right look at Islamic nations as models for America. This twerp D'Souza will be instrumental in implementing 'morality' laws in this country, you watch.
Posted by: wrathofasma at February 13, 2007 03:04 PM
You're hallucinating again. Look around, America is becoming more "secularized" every day. Morality is not dead, but it is terminally ill; it has been replaced with moral relativism and political correctness. The so-called "Christian right" is not interested in a theocracy here or anywhere else. They are fighting to preserve a modicum of traditional values, like the family, the backbone of every civilized, successful society. Is that so horrible?
With the corrupt, greedy, power-hungry people running this country, you need not worry about morality laws. It's the "hate speech" and "hate crime" laws that will do us in, and they are on the drawing board as we speak. They will empower and embolden muslims even more, and silence the Cassandras, whose plaintive warnings about the perils that lie ahead been largely ignored. That's what you should worry about, not the "Christian right."
Thanks all! I didnt mention that my wifes cousin was Catholic in her youth when in her parents home and that she married an Iranian Muslim and wears the burka.
looking at D'Souza's schedule its evident he will be consumed with travel, MSM events, and book signings, to do little else.
Methinks its always, all about the money. Think up something that nobody has said before, publish, and hope the media calls.
>Busy, busy, busy, is Dinesh D'Souza. In a way that those poor old fuddy-duddies C. S. Lewis, and Jacques Barzun, would never have been, would never even have comprehended.
Thanks for bringing up Barzun -- a man not mentioned enough.
D'Souza lives here in San Diego in the largest nouveau riche community -- Fairbanks Ranch. You don't (can't) live in Fairbanks unless you're loaded. This explains his speaking schedule.
"Thanks for bringing up Barzun -- a man not mentioned enough."
--- from a posting above
Google "Barzun" and "Jihad Watch" and "Hugh" and see what comes up.
You are right, however. Jacques Barzun is not mentioned enough, and he is not read enough. Were I on a certain Board of Overseers, I'd make sure that all the candidates for President had read "The House of Intellect" and "Teacher in America" and "The American University." And then I would make those books the subject of a discussion with that candidate.
And if I were giving a French course, I would assign Barzun's vademecum on French versification.
And if I were giving a course in Western civlization, I'd assign, at the end, Barzun's "From Dawn to Decadence."
And if I were giving a course on English composition I'd assign "A Word or Two Before You Go" and "The Culture We Deserve."
I won't comment on his books on Berlioz and Debussy, but I'll bet they have their place in the assigned texts, or just on the bookshelf, for those who read and run, too.
There aren't that many people who are never wrong. I can only think of a handful now alive, and another several handfuls of those who have died. It's always comforting to know, or to know about, or to be familiar with the work of, such people. Jacques Barzun is one of them.
How succint:
What threatens patriarchal Muslim communities are not the excesses of Western societies but its very norms.
Well said, well said indeed!
>And if I were giving a course on English composition I'd assign "A Word or Two Before You Go" and "The Culture We Deserve."
Yeah, and Simple And Direct.
And Begin Here; and Darwin, Marx, and Wagner; and I've got one on my shelf that I haven't read yet, called Science: The Glorious Entertainment; and ...
I just love the fact that he's blurbed Nock and considers him important, and pushes John Lukacs as often as he can.
Here's a link to a letter sent to Victor Davis Hanson regarding Mr. D'Souza. Interesting read as it 's written by a Muslim woman.
http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/lettertoauthor021307.html
Niv