Monday, February 19, 2007

Denizens of the PC realm

"4 of 28 people found the following review helpful: Offensive and Poorly-Written, February 18, 2007
Reviewer:
C. Marshall "cmstar17" (USA) - See all my reviews I accidentally purchased this book online and, after realizing my mistake, sat down to read through a few chapters. Everything I read was unfounded and offensive, the epitome of partisan hackery. If you value your ability to think freely and interact compassionately with the world, do NOT read this book. Comments (4) Was this review helpful to you? "

This is a review of 'America Alone' from the Amazon US website. Mark Steyn noticed it too,

"But C Marshall calls it "unfounded and offensive": "If you value your ability to think freely and interact compassionately with the world, do NOT read this book." Instead, do as C Marshall tells you: that's the best way to maintain your ability to think freely."

One of the most prominent features of the politically correct establishment is their complete lack of desire to confront facts outside their comfort zone. Viz, this story from Emory University about the comical lack of honesty Ex-President Jimmah Carter has shown since he wrote a book about the Israel/Arab conflict. Mr Carter included copious blurb indicating that he was writing the book to help promote debate and dialogue blah blah blah, and ever since has energetically avoided any debate about it. A group of Emory University professors have publically called him on this, and it remains to be seen whether he can screw his courage to the sticking point and debate people who disagree with him AND know the facts.

Do you get the impression that C Marshall, Jimmah Carter and many many other people embedded in the giant warm fuzzy Politically Correctosphere believe that NOT reading books by the people they disagree with will give them the "...ability to think freely and interact compassionately with the world"? I recently had an argument with a colleague about the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians, and virtually every word she said was parroted propaganda from the many Pali mouthpieces, and virtually none of it was true. I mean, verifiably and demonstrably not true, objectively not true, go-and-see-for-yourself not true. I didn't point this out aggressively, but I did try to insinuate a few facts during the occasional pauses in her diatribe. She kept on saying "I sympathise with the Palestinians!" in a very in-my-face way, as if she would definitely slap me if I suggested that might not be a right or good thing to do. My response was "I sympathise with the Palestinians too [although it must be said that my sympathy for them is a lot like my sympathy for the German populace in the direct aftermath of WWII- larded with a great consciousness of how much their travails were self-inflicted]. I also sympathise with Israelis." She stopped on hearing this, as if the tape recording had run out, and lost interest in the conversation completely.

It has been of great interest to me that many people outside the Politically-Correstosphere have started reading books about Islam, about Muhammad, about Middle Eastern history, culture and politics. Much of this is on the basis that one should know ones enemies at least as well as ones friends, but whatever. There is an obvious willingness to engage with 'the other' and find out what their properties are; what their strengths and weaknesses are; what their nature seems to be. The Politically Correct legions are not like that- they are satisfied to echo back and forth between each other the same formulations, the same theories and motifs, the same truthy factoids (truth lite). And if anyone tries to intrude into this circle jerk, they are met with great incivility and blocked off. Which is weird, because people often imagine that the messages of Political Correctness are liberal ones, free-speaking ones, voices of the enlightenment. They are not. Political Correctness is the voice of a suffocating political orthodoxy, whose progenitors are the Germany of Hitler and the Russia of Stalin.

The content of this political orthodoxy is the anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-male, anti-Christian hodge-podge of ideologies that washed around US universities in the 1960's. The petulant and the resentful children of the rich sucked up a noxious, confused brew which they've been quaffing ever since, and now they are disoriented and lost because of it. The world just didn't correspond in any way to the great mish-mash of hippy counter-culture memes, but they used to try to make the facts conform anyway. I say used to, because they now seem to have given up even that vain enterprise, and have now chosen the path of sticking their fingers in their ears and going la-la-la I can't hear you!

The problem for America, and by extension America's friends, is that many of the petulant and resentful now occupy government jobs, both elected and bureacratic and they don't love us. They don't want us to win. They believe that every little child crying in an African hell-hole is our fault. They believe that the Israelis are fascistic baby-killers. They believe that America is all about the corporations and the preppies and the Republican old boys network. And they believe that all the brown people and the yellow people and the black people are just lovely and if only the conservative/Republican death merchants would leave them alone they would be getting on in perfect harmony together in their picturesque, bucolic little countries, paragons of understanding and natural virtue (see the Borat movie). Any evidence to the contrary is... unnecessary.

I remember saying in an earlier post that these acid-and-marxism-deformed minds would soon be leaving public life aka Bill Clinton, and that we would be in much better shape as a result. I think that was premature- they have spawned a whole generation like themselves, and it is them, as well as the Islamofascists who we must engage in battle.

No comments: