Islamophobia — A Dangerous Misdirection

Standard

“Islamophobic!” It seems to be the accusation d’jour lately. All one needs to do to be accused is express concern over the new Moslem mosque being constructed down the street or about the population statistics that show an increasing Moslem population or even just make a comment about a news story that tells of some new act of barbarism perpetrated by the Moslem lunatic fringe.

Now there certainly may be some few actual Islamophobics in the world — but not many. To have a “phobia” you must have “A persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of a specific thing” (From the American Heritage Dictionary). Since Sept. 11, 2001, considering the media hype and the misinformation, considering the strange nature of the Muslim religion (strange, at least to ‘Westerners’) and considering Islam’s obvious desire to ‘Islamize’ the world, an honest fear of Islam can hardly be considered irrational and “Islamaphobia” must be considered a tool, used by the politically correct to make you feel guilty about worrying about your lives and the future of your culture.

The question we all need to consider (and this “we” also includes the British, Dutch and French who have serious problems with Muslim immigration) is how to ease the tension, calm the fears, get focused on the real problems and resolve them. As I see it, the “real” problems are two:

1) There is a very real, very radical and very dangerous faction of Islam that wants world domination for their religion at any price.

2) In many parts of the world (I’ve already mentioned the UK, France and the Netherlands) countries are being overrun by Moslems and, due to the rigid nature of the Moslem religion, they can not (or will not) assimilate. They are, in fact, doing what the radical elements want done, they are, by sheer numbers, Islamizing these countries.

The answer to problem number 1 is obvious: Radical Islamic forces must be destroyed — they must be dealt a killing blow. Not to do this, or be willing to allow your government to do it, is to willingly submit your entire culture to destruction. That may seem harsh and perhaps “Islamophobic” but I feel that it is a very real assessment of the situation.

My answer to problem number 2 is straightforward but not simple: forced assimilation; and that must start with a common language. Many governments (the U.S. government is clearly no exception) have gone far out of their way to accommodate every immigrant (even illegal ones here in the U.S.) by providing government forms in almost every imaginable language, by holding a very soft line on enforcement of immigration laws, and by mandating accommodations in medical facilities and other government controlled facilities (accommodations that have many of those facilities on the brink of bankruptcy).

Frankly, the benefits of forcing a common language are questionable — Islamic culture is still Islamic culture no matter what language is used to express it but there is a hope that it can be the first step in the long assimilation process. Language is, after all, clearly the lynch-pin of any culture.

And make no mistake about it, the unthinking politically correct forces in the world will reject solutions such as mine and will continue to use senseless epithets such as “Islamophobic” but they must be ignored (or be given psychological counseling). We are in a very real culture war with a very real and powerful enemy. Right now, Europe is the primary battleground, but in the long run, the United States is the primary target.

LINKS:

Turkish Daily News: OSCE expert raises concerns over Swiss Islamophobia

Guardian Unlimited: ‘Martin Amis is no racist’

Blog posts:

Liberal Conspiracy: Ken Livingstone’s report on Islamophobia

Dhimmi Watch: UN investigator: “Islamophobia” on the rise, especially in Europe

Whymrhymer’s P.O.V. can also be found at the Blogger News Network and at the American Chronicle.

Another Step Toward Quasi-Socialism?

Standard

NOTE: In case anyone has noticed, I’ve been away from this forum for awhile; I’m back now and I’m as opinionated (or, if you prefer, obnoxious) as ever.

One of the big debating points between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in their recent Las Vegas debate centered around which one of them would provide more people with health care. That’s a bad sign! It’s a sign of the direction of our country and of the defeatist attitude that we, as a nation, have adopted.

The proposal for Universal Healthcare is, of course, just a small part of the overall picture but it is a great indicator of our country’s dilemma. What’s our country coming to when candidates for the presidency are so confident that the majority of Americans are ready to hand over their health care needs to their government that they use that as an incentive to get votes?

If Obama, Clinton or one of the other advocates of Big government (the ‘nanny-state’) is elected in November of ’08 its a sure sign that we are on the road to socialism. The real horror of this is that we are not being forced in that direction, we have simply given up — we’ve been convinced that we are not capable of running our own lives without a huge government safety net. It also indicates that we, as a nation, have lost faith in the free enterprise system that made our country the richest, most productive country on earth.

Since it’s inception, our Federal government has grown and grown in size as well as in scope. The ‘size’ is not necessarily a problem, its a symptom and a result of a growing population, but the growing scope of government — that’s a problem. The Federal Government no longer has self-imposed limits and it does not seem to recognize Constitutional limits; every small concern of an individual or a family has suddenly become a Federal problem. There is practically no aspect of life where you don’t run into government restrictions, “incentives”, mandates or, at least, taxes.

Now I used the term “socialism” rather loosely and want to emphasize that pure socialism, in the context of America and the values that America was built on, is a concept that is simply obscene. In a socialist state, the government controls the distribution of wealth and resources and control’s the ‘means of production’. America, fortunately, is NOT there yet, not even that close, but the trend is obvious. The trend is also scary!

Today, our government’s biggest expenditure (I believe the figure is 65%) is for entitlement programs from Social Security, to Medicare and Medicaid to free heathcare to welfare. What, I am asking, has happened to self reliance and personal responsibility? Those two concepts were the very foundations of our country’s founding and of it’s success — now these concepts are strictly the provence of groups that are ‘popularly’ considered fringe groups such as Libertarians and Objectivists. If these are concepts of the “fringe” I suggest that we all start heading in the direction of that fringe. Our government, our country, is on a collision course with socialism and We The People have the power either to alter that direction or to give in to our insecurities and allow the current trend to run it’s disastrous course.

News Links:

Washington Post: A Sharp Divide on Health Care

Voice of the Times: Daniel Boone vs. Nanny State

From the Blogosphere:

Moonbattery (From the U.K.): “Stewardship”: The Latest Euphemism for Nanny State Totalitarianism

BizzyBlog: Top 5 Economic Myths, with Links to Related Posts

Whymrhymer’s P.O.V. can also be found at the Blogger News Network and at the American Chronicle.