One of the points Lawrence Auster makes frequently is that liberals are continually being "shocked" by reality, and no matter how many times they are "shocked," they always find it "shocking" when the same thing that "shocked" them before happens again. Naturally, this was on my mind as I read this article, and I couldn't help but notice the number of times the word "shock" appears:
- "Germans were shocked to learn that two of the bombers were native-born and had common German names, Fritz and Daniel."
- "As shocked as they were by the arrests, the idea of spying on other Germans unnerves many in civil-rights minded Germany , where government surveillance recalls memories of Adolf Hitler."
- "She noted that while it was a shock to hear of an Islamic terrorist named Fritz, it also was a shock this summer to hear of terrorist doctors in England and Scotland."
- "That their names are Fritz and Daniel is shocking, but only means that the known spectrum of terrorists has now increased."
Now, one might be tempted to ask, since the Koran is filled with exhortations toward violence against non-Muslims, since Islam has a long history of warlike agression against non-Muslims dating back to its very founding, since the newspapers have been filled with an unending stream of reports of Islamic terrorist attacks on the Western world for decades now, why exactly is it so shocking to discover Muslims planning to kill Westerners? One might as well be "shocked" to see the sun rise in the morning.
But of course, if one subscribes to the liberal view of man as basically good, and evil arising only from external corrupting influences, and the view that everyone in the world wants to live in peace, love, and harmony, and the view that modern liberal secular democracy is the best way of life ever to exist anywhere, and that this fact is self-evident to everyone in the world, so that no one, having been exposed to this way of life, could possibly have any desire to live any other way, I suppose events like this are shocking. Besides, you can't kick that murderous invader out of your house; that would be discrimination.
By the way, the article states that one of the terrorist plotters was a white German convert to Islam, and implies that a second was also, though no information about him has been released. What can Europeans conclude from this information?
"This is what we can expect for the future: The attack plots are going to come fast and furious," he said. "And, as is clear in both these attacks, they're operating in new vistas. Terrorism in Europe is a part of life now."
Ah, terrorist attacks are just going to happen and there's nothing we can do about it. We might as well shrug our shoulders, mutter "it was nice while it lasted," hunker down, and prepare to die. Say, have these Europeans been reading John Derbyshire?
1 comment:
True, in part. Your argument is that a liberal non-discriminatory mentality is preventing Germans from proactive thinking: like deporting Muslims.
But the liberal view of man as "basically good, and evil arising only from external corrupting influences" would mean that such folk would be compelled to go find those "corrupting influences" to remove them, rather than doing nothing.
And so some liberals do: the appeasement increases, the "don't offend the Muslims" policy strangles free speech, etc. The Left gets Lefter (if I have the lingo correct).
But I think many people don't think about it at all: it's just a problem-solution mentality. And many people don't solve problems because of things like (a) they can't see any solutions (b) nobody around them is doing anything about it (c) they have more pressing problems to deal with (d) and so they're just conditioned to this suppress the problem as "too hard, forget about it".
So, in addition to trying to reach liberals by way of logic and evidence, the challenge is to reach the other folk who's views aren't well formed beyond "ah, too hard, forget it".
You have to move the issue to front-and-centre of peoples' minds, and then you can find out if they really are hamstrung by values/logic/evidence, or they just can't see any solutions they can get behind.
That's quite a challenge.
Post a Comment