Last night, Mark Steyn discusses a frequent preoccupation of this site, the growing authoritarianism and thuggishness of the Left (and Leftists’ Islamic supremacist allies). They don’t want to debate, and probably know in their heart of hearts that they would lose any debate, and so instead they are increasingly moving to crush all dissent.
Dov Berrol says
Unfortunately, this is a result of what I would call the “headphone” generation which started with the personal headphones sold for transistor radios in the 1960’s. These baby boomers block out what they don’t want to hear and fill their ears with only what they choose to listen to. “Fast Forward” to today and you have the “I” Phone Internet generation that is much more focused on “me” and what “I” have to broadcast to the world, than having a normal, calm face-to-face human conversation. It matches very well with the one-way directives to submit that we find in Islam.
Shmooviyet says
@Dov Berrol:
Agreed! Brilliant connection between your “headphone generation” and the texting, FB, selfie-taking narcissism of so-called SJWs, who’ll scream at anyone –regardless of race, sex, color– with a differing viewpoint.
Look at how a face-to-face ends up: a phony tough screaming in another’s face “you’re not wanted here”, “we’re not listening to you” etc., with a flag held up in attempts to block from cameras any physical attack likely to happen.
How can they not see their resemblance to 1930s brownshirted street thugs?!
Dov Berrol says
Indeed! And this headphone generation is now in power in the Social Sciences departments of most western universities. They accept only candidates towing the leftist line, and then they only promote and support students who agree with the Marxist totalitarian ideology, then the doctoral advisory committees only approve PhD’s who agree with their anti-West viewpoint. The final step is giving lifelong tenure to these leftist professors and the cycle begins all over again. It’s the complete opposite of evaluating acceptable students in the Pure Sciences of math and physics and chemistry and biology.
Jerry says
The first time I heard Mark Steyn speak I knew he was one of “us,” someone who completely understood the islamic threat and the left’s complicity. His manner of speaking is sharp and to the point and his sarcastic wit always seems to serve his argument well. And he’s so right about the left’s propensity for violence, they can’t win the debate so they’ll try and destroy it instead. We’ve all seen how Spencer and Geller are treated for speaking the facts, anyone that dares to tell the truth about islam is deemed a racist-bigot-islamophobe. But no honest person can deny muslims’ religious motivations for conquering and killing the “infidel,” and the left’s willingness to lie and fight for them is as predictable as the rising sun. Muslims and their leftist allies are simply incapable of challenging our views on an intellectual level, so their only recourse is violence and a draconian attack on our right to dissent. And their hypocrisy would be amusing if not so deadly. They make a criminal spectacle of bacon on a mosque door but totally ignore every ugly fact that proves islamic doctrine is a national and humanitarian threat. They are mocking the victims of islamic jihad with their lies and indifference, and they provoke further violence by ignoring the facts that expose muslims’ murderous ideological motivations. It’s a crime what the left is doing for islam, they are providing material aid to the people and ideology that threatens our lives and nation. There’s a name for such people and it starts with a “T.” I bet you can all guess what that is.
Jerry says
I want our political and religious leaders to be brave enough to publicly denounce the ideological hatred and violence in islam. I want them to soundly condemn the bigotry in that religion and to acknowledge truthfully the causal link between it and the violence it’s causing. I want them to stop pretending that muslim enclaves are an asset to western society, they aren’t. I want them to stop ignoring the rape of our women and kids as if it never happened. I want them to stop punishing the rights of the average citizen for the ill-actions and crimes of muslims. I want them to stop pretending that the reason muslims are terrorizing is because of some imaginary “islamophobia,” it’s not an irrational fear when their religion says to kill us and they actually are. I want our leaders to have enough compassion and decency to respect the facts even if they support an ugly conclusion. And when the facts say islam is a major motivator of violence and bigotry, then I think it behooves our leaders to respond with moral and legal efficiency. And when the facts say that islam is a major threat to our culture and freedoms, then it’s matter of national security that should be their utmost concern. Islam and ideologies like it are the reason we have guns and bombs. In a perfect world it might be different. But with islam we will always be in a state of war, because their “religion” deems it so.
simpleton1 says
Good points Jerry
“criminal spectacle of bacon on a mosque door ” = a lame version of the “broken window” policy.
At the same time pointing to the ‘risk’ is much higher, that the majority population would have the greatest number of “extremists”, and so they will be the greatest problem. Yeah right.
“islam we will always be in a state of war”, as in the past 1400 years, and everything is being used on their declared foe, the “unbeliever”
Too much red tape these days Jerry.
Health and safety for one would not allow for such heroism/leader to rise and win the day., to have a man like Churchill.
Nor do I want to be defeatist, but at least a part of a remnant; to carry the knowledge forward, to encourage the spread, so as an ember, when there is a fan of wind, plus the surroundings being dry, then fire/truth will reignite for the right people/leaders to come forth.
C T says
Who needs debate?
Just put up billboards quoting the problematic parts of the the Quran and ahadith (the ones claimed to be authentic). No explanatory words other than their source and who considers them scripture. As boring as a textbook, as un-interpreted as can be.
I vote for Quran 4:34 outside NOW (maybe throw in pics of a couple of women looking battered) and the ahadith about killing the men who did as they did in the city of Lot in areas of San Francisco and DC (OK, with that one you should probably put a disclaimer saying that the poster is against that ahadith).
How can posting Islamic scripture be considered hate speech? This is what is preached, and people need to know it. Then people will see that hate speech is what Islam is full of and realize the con that “Islamophobia” is.
simpleton1 says
A very good point CT.
Even some muslims may see the double meanings.They will have to decide, whether to continue backing Mohammad’s sayings, advice, actions and deeds.
We must become the strong horse, so that they can apostatize.
For all the people to see, with an understanding of the koran with abrogating verses, that nullify the very nice fluffy peace verses.
The truth may appear boring, but it is always relevant.
Wellington says
I heard Steyn last night and he was right on point. The Left is almost entirely responsible for the great descent in civil discourse in America. As an example, when was the last time a right-wing group shut down a left-wing speaker? College campuses are now, with few exceptions, centers of leftist indoctrination. Violence, as in California and Vermont recently, is entirely leftist inspired. The New York Times functions in an alternative leftist universe as do so many other media outlets.
The Left also, and as Robert Spencer has mentioned innumerable times, shills for Islam nauseatingly so. The Right is not blameless but compared to the Left it is as nothing. And the sheer hatred for Donald Trump by leftist loons galore is truly sickening. Yes, many on the Right, including myself, profoundly disliked much of what Obama did as President but the overwhelming tendency by those on the Right who disagreed with Obama was to indicate aversion to his policies and his overall foolishness rather than manifesting rank hatred for the man and wishing for his death as is very much the case now with Trump (think, as examples, Kathy Griffin and the current production of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar in NYC).
The Left in America is out of control. The Right is not. Huge difference. Those who think the Right is worse or that both are equally to blame simply don’t have both their feet on the ground.
gravenimage says
Fine post, Wellington.
billybob says
I think I have the solution. We need to promote the art of classical debate in our schools. These debates will be very structured with rigid rules ensuring mutual respect. Values of honour and integrity will be fostered. Things like ad hominem attacks will lose you points very fast. So will the use of well known fallacies like “No true Scotsman” and “Broken windows”, etc. In fact, there could be ways to foster audience participation too with rewards to members of the audience who spot falsities or gimmicks.
These debates will be lucrative for the debaters, who will gain not only street cred, but also cash from a pot distributed according to points gained on either side. Topics will be chosen from contemporary issues that are widely debated today including the most controversial topics such as gun proliferation, abortion, and Islam. In fact the more incendiary the topic, the more points one gains for being cool, self-restrained, and polite.
Now here’s the clincher. Debating teams are chosen at random as what side to debate on. Think about the power of that. Think of your strongest held beliefs. Imagine having to formulate an argument that goes against your strongest beliefs! Would you have the courage to do the necessary research to make a good argument? This is clearly not something for the faint hearted. The point in the end is not who is right or wrong but how well they debate the topic – Marquis de Queensbury rules and all. People are welcomed to continue to hold their own personal point of view. In fact, someone who wins a debate arguing his against own personal beliefs will be highly respected as a debater.
Now I will take this one step further… Developing some minimum level of skill will be a core requirement to graduate, just as basic literacy and numeracy are also required.
How do we bring this about? With Go Fund Me pages to finance debates, donations from ordinary folks and endowments from corporations and the wealthy. WE COULD TRANSFORM SOCIETY IN JUST A FEW YEARS! Imagine the education people will receive when they go researching both sides of contentious issues in order to more effectively debate whatever side.
Think what an education our young people would get out of this. Not only would they learn that most things are not black and white, but rather represent endless shades of gray. They would also learn how to discuss things as adults in an adult manner. For one thing, these attack ads in political campaigns would become a thing of the past and considered barbaric. For another, people would be far more savvy voters and consumers. Nobody is going to pull the wool over their eyes so easily. And just maybe, better social harmony will be end result with a population making better collective decisions.
gravenimage says
Mark Steyn on Tucker Carlson: “The Left wants to prevent debate from taking place”
………………………
Tucker Carlson and Mark Steyn are correct. Kudos to both of them for speaking out.