Outrage and sensitivities

[erudito]

A quick Google™ search turns up many incidents of Muslims burning Bibles. These pass with minimal, if any coverage, in Western media. They certain do not become cause celebres. Partly, this is because no Westerners are involved, and that makes such incidents inherently less newsworthy in the West

Comments

<---

[hannahsarah]

I am SO tempted to declare an "Everybody use this icon" Day.

Re: <---

[erudito]

An inflammatory icon there :)

Re: <---

[hannahsarah]

OK, is this one better?

;-P

Re: <---

[erudito]

It is certainly more something :)

[marycatelli]

One of their own imans pointed out that Muslims -- the men at least -- are cats not human in the way they act.

No one seems to notice that if they are
1. unable to control themselves, and
2. a danger to themselves or others
they are therefore legally insane.

Ouch!

[erudito]

The combination of domination and submission in the logic of Islam is a bit difficult.

Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels has some pointed things to say based on his work with young criminal Muslims.

Re: Ouch!

[jordan179]

Another way to put this is that Muslim cultures are, in fact, less sane than Western ones, because the Muslim cultures discourage facing personal realities. Instead of solving one's problems, one is encouraged in Islam to look for others to blame for and retaliate against for them -- which only leaves one with more enemies and one's problems still unsolved.

However, note this: all this assumes that the victims of one's attacks respond by effective enmity, causing one to suffer for one's own aggressions. If they instead give in and give one things to appease one's wrath, then this mode of behavior, though insane, can be effective as long as one still has victims to plunder.

In other words, the West is ENABLING Muslim aggression by trying to appease them.

Re: Ouch!

[erudito]

Part of what is going on is the consequence of occasionalist metaphysics: the psychological and cultural consequences of believing that the universe has no structure beyond God's Will, so causal efficacy comes from somewhere else, not one's own actions.

But there is also a clash between the philosophies of rationality and those of will.

If people could apply a consistent set of criteria to actions, that would help too.

Progressives and Muslims

[jordan179]

The difference in the status accorded (non-progressivist) Western sensitivities and other (in this case, particularly Muslim) sensitivities is about two status issues being tied together. The first is Muslims are given much higher status in having their sensitivities count than non-progressivist Westerners. But that is just the product of another status game: that of gentry progressives over their fellow citizens. It is precisely by “understanding” how “wrong-headed” their fellow citizens are that the gentry progressives get a sense of belonging to a moral elite.

... and this allows them to simultaneously view themselves as super-intelligent and super-rational compared to non-progressives, while utterly abandoning induction, deduction and debate in favor of argument from authority and ad hominem. As I've seen demonstrated by "progressives," both on your blog and in other venues, too frequently to be worth naming (though I could name names, if requested

Re: Progressives and Muslims

[erudito]

Have you read Tom Kratman's dystopian novel Caliphate? It plays out the sort of scenario you are discussing.

A post where the author defends his demographic projections is here.