1
   

Leftists and "Humiliation"

 
 
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 03:45 am
She gets off-track a couple of times, especially in the paragraph that starts with "The left-liberal Western media..." but most of it is right on target.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


By Phyllis Chesler
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 24, 2004

Given that we are under attack and at war, a certain fraying of nerves is understandable, but outright insanity is not. Lately, I have observed some fairly psychotic behavior in public places, mainly among the chattering classes, not among ordinary civilians who better understand that the terrorists mean to kill us and that appeasement is not an option.

For example, in the midst of a quiet cafe dinner, a soft-spoken artist friend suddenly began screaming: "I hate President Bush, I wish he was dead." Her face got red, and she screwed up her eyes. I was taken aback. Her rage was irrational and out of context; we had not been discussing the upcoming election or the ongoing war in Iraq. And, how could anyone be so angry, or rather so irrational, about a political figure?

Once, while lecturing in England, I found myself dining out with an anti-Apartheid activist at the very moment that Nelson Mandela was released from jail. This scholar literally climbed onto the table and roared for more than 5 full minutes. She kept pumping the air with her fist. Her voice became coarse. I could not understand such ferocity and pent-up emotion unleashed so bizarrely in public.

I can understand marshalling arguments, point by point, against a particular political policy. I can understand faulting President Bush for either not going far enough to win the war in Iraq or daring to begin that war at all--as long as the person is speaking in a reasonable, rational way. I can respect a balanced analysis--such as the recent one by Mark Helprin in the pages of the Wall Street Journal (5/17/04) in which he describes "the Democrats (as) guilty of ideological confusion about self-defense, the Republicans of willful disdain for reflection, and both... for subjecting the serious business in the life of a nation to coarse partisanship."

But I cannot understand what is going on when presumably enlightened artists and scholars reduce complex realities to slogans, and create straw men against which to vent vast, irrational rage. This is precisely what frenzied Islamist mobs do when they burn the American flag and lynch and mutilate corpses of American soldiers.

The western multiculturalists insist that we have dangerously "humiliated" the Iraqi male prisoners because we put women in charge of naked men and then subjected those naked men to further humiliation by posing them in pornography-like photographs, and forcing some men to wear pink women's undergarments.

In my view, this is possibly the result of a culture saturated with runaway pornography. It is disgusting and I oppose it, but it does not compare to the be-heading of Daniel Pearl and Nicholas Berg or to the real torture practiced by Saddam Hussein in Abu Graib and most Arab and Muslim despots against their own people.

The multiculturalists do not protest at all when male Palestinian terrorists dress as women in order to kill Israelis (which they have done at many an Israeli checkpoint). They did not condemn the Palestinian terrorists who shot and killed an eight-month pregnant Israeli woman and her four children, aged 2 to 11 at point-blank range; rather, they blamed the woman for "provoking" her own murder by living in Gaza. The multi-cultis did not cry "humiliation foul" when two other Palestinian terrorists dressed as women in order to shoot down the mourners at this poor woman's funeral.

The left-liberal Western media (heavily influenced by the Left Academy) is not behaving objectively or rationally when it not only fails to note that "pornography" is really "torture," but ardently defends the rights of pornographers and traffickers; our Talking Heads worship the First Amendment and are "sex-positive" in outlook. They do not condemn torture when Arabs or Muslims practice it, only when it is practiced, even to a much lesser extent, by America. (By the way, I oppose torture in all but the most extreme of circumstances. I am demanding that our intellectuals eschew double standards and be even-handed with their condemnations).

Something has gone very wrong in America among its Thinking Classes who hate the very country that allows them to publicly criticize its policies and who love those countries in which dissent is punished by torture and execution. Stalinism, Hitlerism, totalitarianism--long nurtured by the former Soviet Union through both the United Nations, the Arab League, and the PLO--are living and breathing among our intellectuals, academics, and left-liberal media. American intellectuals also slavishly follow the lead of their European counterparts.

As a psychologist, I must ask: are our intellectuals brainwashed? What cult has done this to them? How might they be de-programmed? Are such accomplished and privileged adults still angry at their parents, spouses, or employers or are they angry at themselves for having failed to "overthrow capitalism" in their lifetime? If so, do they think that we all deserve to die for their failure? Do they honestly believe that the jihadists will provide the socialist or feminist Paradise for which they long?

I do not think I can persuade such intellectuals to understand that their lives and ways of life are in serious danger and that self-defense is crucial; that there is nothing we can do that will "appease" Islamist rage (sacrifice Israel, retreat from Iraq and Afghanistan, veil our women, allow Arab honor killings to be carried out in both Eurabia and North America).

It is clear: The terrorists have embarked on a program to kill all non-Muslim infidels--it's precisely what al-Zarquawi said on the video before he be-headed Nicholas Berg--and the danger coming our way is even greater from Muslim Indonesia.

What I can and must do is suggest--no implore--President Bush to send more troops to Iraq immediately and to use all means at our disposal to stop the Islamists in their tracks--at least for another 500 years. Otherwise, we will be annihilated.

Link
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,959 • Replies: 79
No top replies

 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 06:26 am
Hmmm - just as a start, Indonesia has a tolerant and non-fundamentalist Islamic tradition - which continues overall.

Recent events have encouraged an upsurge in fundamentalism - at present it is a gross exaggeration to say what this person has said especially when the Indonesian government is striving to deal with it.

Re the "pornography" aspects - when will people grasp the simplest differences between deliberate and abusive humiliation of non-consenting prisoners, and paid - if, in my view, incomprehensible - work? It seems a simple enough distinction - similar, in its way, to the differences between consensual intercourse and rape. I have no idea what the writer means by this increasingly weird apologia about "runaway pornography". Or the "hazing" stuff. (Edit: I am aware that the present writer does not mention the absurd minimization of serious abuse as "hazing" - I see, however, a similarity between this pseudo-excuse and the "runaway pornography" furphy). Is "runaway sadism" or "runaway bureaucracy" a similar excuse for torture in Saddam's prisons?

As for the male Palestinians dressing as women to bomb - well, the dressing as women aspect is once again clearly consensual - but perhaps not the aspect of their behaviour which is the most obvious focus of interest.

Sorry - who doesn't condemn terrorist murders? Who here has not? Does it not make sense to be more activist in outrage about acts committed by the forces one pays, than by foreign terrorists, already being hunted by these same paid agents? After all - one has some chance of influencing how the matters are investigated and prosecuted by one's elected representatives than one is able to influence shadowy terrorist leaders in other countries. When Australian soldiers are caught in such activities, I assure you I shall be far more agitated about it than I am about American ones. We ought by rights to be more vocal and activist about our own, no? We have more chance of influencing the outcome.

I do not know why the writer's friend was so distressed and extreme in her anger about Bush - she makes a great deal of an act of personal loss of control - what has this to do with the average anti-war response? Or indeed, the average pro-war excitement? many here debate fiercely - few scream in this way. Of those who do, I observe similar frenzies on both sides. Which is a pity - such extremely polarized debate always is - whichever side it is on. Let us all strive not to scream in unreasoned hatred.

As for the excitement at the realease of Mandela - frankly I can understand it. Those who worked to assist in the change in South Africa experienced a moment of pure, almost unimaginable joy and hope at Mandela's release. A release symbolizing a change many had never thought to live to see - especially without further terrible bloodshed and suffering. I am sorry the writer found such pure emotion coarse. Some might find the expression of joy at a birth similarly coarse. Perhaps the writer is somewhat unusually sensitive, and might avoid occasions of human emotional expression such as these - and things like football matches and such.

The writer's language is interesting in the lumping together of people as the enemy - "the multi-culturalists" - our old friends "the chattering classes" (there is some irony about posting such a criticism as this on a debate forum, or indeed writing it for a magazine, but I digress)

The author's perhaps not so amateur psychoanalyzing is also interesting - as the writer projects her ire on huge groups of folk, she complains about their doing so - a fascinating mirroring.

By all means let her share her fear of Islamic terrorists - I find them very frightening, too - and raise her concerns that the threat is not being taken seriously.

I would prefer that she do so in reasoned argument, not in a highly emotive diatribe that illustrates the very anger and projection that she castigates.

Next, please.
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 06:29 am
Word up bunny.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 06:31 am
Sorry?
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 06:33 am
I concur.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 06:35 am
Oh.

: )
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 09:35 am
cavfancier wrote:
Word up bunny.

Apparently ebonics is not used in Australia. Laughing Just another reason they're better than we are.

dlowan wrote:
Hmmm - just as a start, Indonesia has a tolerant and non-fundamentalist Islamic tradition - which continues overall.

I have the impression from past news articles that Indonesia is an extremely repressive Muslim nation with a tradition of civil unrest and vigilantism. The Internet is highly regulated to disallow citizens from accessing information outside the country, and ethnic Chinese citizens are regularly subjected to heavy persecution. Or am I thinking of Malaysia?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 10:27 am
The writer condemned the incidents at Abu Ghraib, but quite correctly pointed out they pale in comparison to the beheadings of Perle and Berg.

She is also correct, I believe, re Indonesia. I have read that there is concern about militant Islamic terrorists groups being imbedded in and training in Indonesia. She did not imply that Indonesia itself supported these.

She did not say that it was coarse to celebrate Mandela's release but that the woman's voice 'became coarse'.

And I concur with her take that the liberal left engages in tirades, insults, and passionate objections/insults at any real or perceived sin of the current administration while exhibiting little or no passion re the very real obscenities and murderous brutality committed by almost anybody else. Indeed, it is not uncommon that the sins of other countries are essentially justified because of the sins of the current administration.

I think the writer was dead on accurate in her observations.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 10:31 am
I agree with the Wizard of Oz.
0 Replies
 
BoGoWo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 10:35 am
nah, nah, na, nah, nah!
my abuse is worse than your abuse!
i told you so!


[ Shocked Rolling Eyes Crying or Very sad ]
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 11:47 am
Tarantulas wrote:
cavfancier wrote:
Word up bunny.

Apparently ebonics is not used in Australia. Laughing Just another reason they're better than we are.

dlowan wrote:
Hmmm - just as a start, Indonesia has a tolerant and non-fundamentalist Islamic tradition - which continues overall.

I have the impression from past news articles that Indonesia is an extremely repressive Muslim nation with a tradition of civil unrest and vigilantism. The Internet is highly regulated to disallow citizens from accessing information outside the country, and ethnic Chinese citizens are regularly subjected to heavy persecution. Or am I thinking of Malaysia?


'Hooked On Ebonics' changed my white world, Tar. You should try it out. I hear it's on sale at the Piggly Wiggly for just $9.95.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 11:49 am
Canada still has Piggly Wigglys? I'm moving to Canada Smile
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 11:50 am
Actually we don't foxfyre. Wal-Mart is still a new concept here.
0 Replies
 
BoGoWo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 11:52 am
Nonsense Cav; we still have Piggly Wiggleys, but they are on farms, out in Saskatchewan!
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 11:57 am
That's not Canada Bo, that's the prairies.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 03:09 pm
We still have the Pig n' Whistle coffeeshop in downton LA (at least I think we do). The hugest breakfast in creation as I remember. Well, maybe except for Ollie Hammond's in Hollywood.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 04:25 pm
Tarantulas wrote:
cavfancier wrote:
Word up bunny.

Apparently ebonics is not used in Australia. Laughing Just another reason they're better than we are.

dlowan wrote:
Hmmm - just as a start, Indonesia has a tolerant and non-fundamentalist Islamic tradition - which continues overall.

I have the impression from past news articles that Indonesia is an extremely repressive Muslim nation with a tradition of civil unrest and vigilantism. The Internet is highly regulated to disallow citizens from accessing information outside the country, and ethnic Chinese citizens are regularly subjected to heavy persecution. Or am I thinking of Malaysia?


Lol! Yes, they have a history of highly repressive political regimes - though there is some change at present.

Their ISLAMIC tradition, however, is a highly tolerant one - except for brief outbursts of horror (and one big continuing one, on a particular island - some islands of the archipelago have fairly unique cultures, and are far from the centres of power - it is a spread out and very populous country - lots of diversity) which seem to relate as much to economic envy as anything else.

It is the biggest Islamic population in the world and has traditionally, as I said, embraced a tolerant form of Islam.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 04:31 pm
Of course, they now have a radical Islamist group, linked to AlQuaeda - which presents a significant risk (in terms of likelihood of further attack) to Oz - but this is a TINY group compared with the population.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 04:45 pm
dlowan wrote:
Of course, they now have a radical Islamist group, linked to AlQuaeda - which presents a significant risk (in terms of likelihood of further attack) to Oz - but this is a TINY group compared with the population.


If the experts on Radical Islam are correct, Wahhabism has penetrated Indonesia and because the Wahhabists are so aggressive it will spread like a cancer.

But you don't need to worry in OZ----with your restrictive immigration policies, you won't have to worry until the next Olympics.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 05:26 pm
Lol! Wrong, as usual, Perc.

What has immigration to do with terrorists?

Er - here is news - Indonesians can visit on tourist visas at will. For six months. Unless we know they are terrorists, they ar efree to do as they wish.

I expect terror attacks. I doubt that any but a tiny minority of Indonesians will ever be part of them, and that the majority will be appalled. The Bali bombing had a far more profound effect on the Balinese - INDONESIAN CITIZENS - than it ever did on Oz.

The writing was on the wall re that after we went into Timor - which Australians DEMANDED the government react to and send in troops.

Risk of terror is life, now. C'est la vie. We are not especially protected.

But I shall not become paranoid about Indonesian Muslims in general whatever happens - well, unless the whole country vows to kill us!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Leftists and "Humiliation"
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 11/14/2024 at 11:44:12