| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
TERROR suspects could be given taxpayer-funded counselling for being angry or having low self-esteem.Under the proposal, the [Australian] Federal Government would provide psychological counselling and anger management support to terror suspects and those subject to control orders. – from this article
Not real comprehension. Not any sense that there may be something wrong with the naive and sentimental love-affair with the idea that People Are the Same the Whole World Over or People All Want the Same Thing or We Are All God's Chillun' or Why Can't We All Get Along or If Only We Could Speak to Each Other We'd Be Able to Iron Things Out or Everyone Deserves High Self-Esteem No Matter What (in Louisiana this used to be translated as: Every Man a King) or...oh god, fill it in yourself.
Everything, anything, to turn the Real World and its Real Threats -- the Nazis, the Communists, and those who believe, who agree (or might believe, or might agree, if they felt their triumph was inevitable) that "Islam is to dominate and is not to be dominated" -- into something small, tame, and manageable.
To the social workers of this world, it is all about low self-esteem.
But even if one were to grant that there is certainly "low self-esteem" among many Muslims, at the very same time that all too many have inculcated in them a sense of the permanent superiority of Muslims and the duty to make Islam everywhere prevail and Muslims to rule everywhere, what should we do about it? If some are poor, and that causes "low self-esteem," should we Infidels supply those tens or hundreds of billions of poor Muslims with Infidel aid, or should we rather suggest that the cause of their poverty is the inshallah-fatalism of Islam itself? And should we not further add that the diversion of time and resources by Muslims into the waging of permanent Jihad is not the way to create even a rudimentary economy (see Gaza, see "the West Bank")? And should we not add, still further, that if the poor Muslims need capital, they have only to knock on the doors of the rich Muslims, the ones who since 1973 have received, without any effort, some ten trillion dollars in OPEC revenues? Oh, and wouldn't that be better for Muslim self-esteem anyway -- not to receive aid from the hated enemy, the Infidels, but from nice, generous fellow members of the umma al-islamiyya?
Doesn't that make more sense, if we are so solicitous of Muslim self-esteem problems?
And what about all the other political, economic, social, moral, and intellectual failures of Muslims? Shall we participate in their fantasies about the exaggerated "greatness" of the Islamic past? Shall we refrain from pointing out how much of that "past" -- more than a thousand years ago -- is well "past," and that the question What Have You Done For Me Lately is not exactly irrelevant? And should we point out how much of that "great Islamic past" was so short-lived in nature, and consisted of serving as a mere transmitter of the discoveries of others -- Chinese paper-making (see Dard Hunter), Hindu algebra and the concept of "zero" (see any history of mathematics), and some Greek works, including part of what Aristotle wrote, which Arabic-speaking Christian and Jewish translators were responsible for translating -- and then ultimately those works, which had so little effect in the Islamic world, were received, gratefully, back in the Europe from whence those works first originated?
Are we Infidels doing the intelligent thing by pretending to believe in the wonderfulness of Islam, or in refraining from pointing out the connection between Islam and despotism, Islam and the failure of economic development, Islam and the stifled artistic expression, and deep discouragement of the habit of free inquiry required for the enterprise of science?
Muslims in the West, or Muslims in Dar al-Islam, now come up against the non-Muslim world and have to endure, in their minds, this paradox:
They are, on the one hand, deeply committed to, and devout believers in, the Rightness and Only Truth of Islam. And in Islam, there is no real pluralism. Islam is not meant to be one faith among many, for "Islam is to dominate and not to be dominated." Muslims, rightly, must rule. Rightly, the Shari'a, or a system that does not violate the Shari'a and attempts to approximate it, must be the legal framework for Muslims wherever they live. And of course non-Muslims must ultimately face the same three choices they have always faced under Islam: death, conversion, or (if they are considered to be People of the Book, ahl al-kitab, as are Christians and Jews, or in some expanded definition, even Zoroastrians, and still later, even Hindus who needed to be kept alive to pay the Jizyah) dhimmitude. And "dhimmis" are not in Muslim-ruled societies treated as equals, as part of a committed pluralism. They are subject to all kinds of permanent disabilities that together amounted to a status of humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity.
Should we ignore all this? Or would we not be doing Muslims a favor, helping them to possibly change their texts (if such were possible), or at least to cause some Muslims, especially non-Arab Muslims, to see Islam itself in a new and different light -- as the source of so much of what causes them to feel "low self-esteem"? Would it not be a favor to them to help them come to realize the ways in which Islam was not a blessing but a curse, for their own non-Arab peoples, a vehicle for Arab cultural, linguistic, and other kinds of imperialism?
And Infidels need to know the truth about Islam, and have a firm understanding of how the teachings, attitudes, and atmospherics of this Total Belief-System explain the failure of societies suffused with Islam -- political failures, economic failures, social and moral and intellectual failures.
It is the only way.
It is the best kind, the only legitimate kind, of intervention that might be beneficial. The very idea of participating, as Infidels, in some vast folie à deux, where we all agree that Islam is just great, the greater, the very greatest, in order to cure "low self-esteem" by Muslims, is merely the apotheosis of the social-work mentality that becomes more obviously comical, and at the same time, more obviously dangerous, every day.
Posted by Hugh at February 25, 2007 8:06 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Who has unshakable self esteem?
Dictators, serial killers, and cult leaders to name three. OK, so maybe self esteem isn't all it's cracked up to be. But worse than that, a mujahid who thinks he's headed to a paradise of virgins under the shade of swords isn't lacking in self esteem, its concern for the lives of the unbelievers.
I guess I should be used to this sort of malignant suicidal stupidity by now. But I still think those who are charged with solving the problem should show at least a rudimentary knowledge.
Posted by: Beagle![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at February 25, 2007 1:21 PM
Ahmedinejad: Our nuclear program is like a train with no brakes or reverse gear.
Condeleeza: We want a stop button so we can talk.
Good God.
at February 25, 2007 1:33 PM
"in Islam, there is no real pluralism. "
.....come to think of it , in Islam there is no
intermutual identification either....Muslims are content with killing each other at a rapid pace....
...yessir....Islam the Religion of Peace and tolerance....
at February 25, 2007 2:26 PM
Has there ever been a Muslim claim to greatness that panned out under serious examination?
Greco-Roman civilization was already higher than anything Islam accomplished before Islam even existed, so even at its zenith, Muslim civilization was nothing special in the grand scheme of things. Islam's alleged contributions to the history of human advancement all wither under serious historical analysis (the "zero" being a prime example) or they gave them up willingly (e.g. alcohol) or they never followed up the original invention with subsequent improvements (like with algebra, all of the improvements to which came out of the West for a long time after the original discovery, although I am aware there are controversies surrounding the claim Muslims discovered algebra).
I guess there is one Muslim claim to greatness. They are the greatest self-deluders in history. I refuse to become a "co-dependent enabler" (I figured some psycho-babble would be appropriate to this thread) of that mental pathology.
Posted by: venividivici at February 25, 2007 2:33 PM
'To the social wankers of this world, it is all about low self-esteem.'
I just had to correct that.
It is, but not only:
There is an industry, a whole industry of social wankers out there, whose parasitic existence is secured by the bloated, ever growing welfare system.
Here in Australia we have spent billions and billions over the years for Aboriginals (who can do no wrong) and who rarely manage to enter the mainstream because of the social wankers who teach them the entitlement mentality, including the 'stolen land' crapola , and since it is just so much more comfortable to sit on your ass and rely on the cargo cult and the steaming gravy train that just keeps coming, nothing will ever change.
And now the social wankers discovered the Muhammedans...
Pathetic!
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 25, 2007 2:41 PM
One can marvel on what it might be like putting the typical Islamic Jihad madman or one of the leading clerics of Iran or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia on the psychologist's couch. Were their "religious belief excuse" removed, what conclusions would the psychologist come to?
Beliefs about world domination, delusions of superiority over non-cult believers, anti-sematism and all-encompassing conspiracies, pedophilia, suicide bombing justification, polygomy on a large scale in an imagined afterlife -- just to start. A psychologist or psychiatrist could make a career writing about the patient's groundless delusions. That is if the religious belief excuse were removed from the equation.
Posted by: Abraham_Lincoln at February 25, 2007 4:12 PM
Quick, what's a movie title for a Jihadist version of ANALYZE THIS ???
Posted by: Abraham_Lincoln at February 25, 2007 5:55 PM
The prerequisite for any sort of pyschological therapy is that the patient wants to change. I guess that is why they are calling this "counselling". Lowers the bar.
Sheik is right, but the current government is a big improvement on the previous one who set the whole Aboriginal Minding Industry up in the first place. They are actually trying to fix it (at least they were - I am a bit out of touch). But it is a pretty awful problem that has only been made worse by government busy-bodies.
Posted by: Brett_McS at February 26, 2007 4:32 AM
I don't agree with Beagle that huge self esteem is a common trait of dictators and serial killers. Lack of SE is indeed the problem with these people - the psychologists have it right in that respect.
Where the Self Esteem Crowd can go wrong is to assume that it is "everything"; that it can exist in a vacuum irrespective of achievement or expertise. Real self esteem comes from real achievement - not from getting medals on "everyone wins a prize" days. That sort of self esteem is very fake and very brittle.
Posted by: Brett_McS at February 26, 2007 4:39 AM
Abe: An Imam learns the terrible truth about his psychiatrist: "Honey, my shrink's a Yid!"
Posted by: Brett_McS at February 26, 2007 6:44 AM
The knuckleheads have actually noticed something significant, but as generally the case, the dumber ones mistake the effect for the cause, and the smarter ones actually try to hijack the facts to twist them into justification for their propaganda.
Yes, low self esteem is meaningful.
It is the outward sign of being disgraced in your own eyes.
The interesting question is always how you got there.
The fact is that mohammedan cultures promote habits of thought, ideas and behaviours that without any doubt inspire low self esteem for the reasons above and more.
The undeniable fact of life, of nature in fact, is that to have good self esteem you need:
You do the math.
Posted by: joeblough at February 26, 2007 3:13 PM
"Abe: An Imam learns the terrible truth about his psychiatrist: "Honey, my shrink's a Yid!"
Posted by: Brett_McS"
hahahhahaha!
Posted by: Abraham_Lincoln at February 26, 2007 4:50 PM
So this is where my tax dollars go.
Bloody annoying.
Posted by: Ozi_bloke at February 26, 2007 8:57 PM
"Oh,and wouldn't that be better for Muslim self-esteem anyway -- not to receive aid from the hated enemy,the Infidels, but from nice,generous fellow Members of the umma al islamiyya?"
-Hugh
Logically it sounds like such a concept would be more agreeable for Muslim self-esteem since Infidels are the plague. Then one remembers the thrill of dominating and intimidating others, which in these cultures is seen as a badge of "honor", as evidenced by the sermons and mass behavior of Muslims across the globe. A great many still cannot see that this adversary has never been governed by the motives,goals and methods of western Socratian thought and traditions. Such short-sightedness never takes into account the need for Islam to dominate;to place a collar upon all. This mandate to rule is psychological and pathalogical and bent on fostering the conditions crucial to controlling the masses and creating the recurring political formula of the caliphate.
Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at February 26, 2007 10:58 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)