Gay groups & Islamofascism
As I’ve been pretty swamped for the past six days due to my trip to Santa Barbara for the David Horowitz Freedom Center retreat, then a journey to Carpinteria for dissertation research at my grad school, I haven’t had time to blog as regularly as I would have liked and have also fallen behind on my reading.
This morning, finally finishing Mark Steyn’s most insightful book, America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It, I took note of an observation in the concluding chapter. He wonders at the reluctance of the chattering classes to condemn Islamofascism:
Behead sodomites and mutilate female genitalia, and gay groups and feminist groups can’t wait to march alongside you denouncing Bush and Blair.
As we’ve noted numerous times before, gay groups seem more interested in denouncing Western conservatives than addressing the plight of our fellows persecuted by Islamic tyrannies. It seems they’re reluctant to take issue with radical Islamicists because they see their activities as manifestation against the oppression of Western “imperialism.” They represent just another member of the coalition of the oppressed.
No wonder David Horowitz has speculated about an unholy alliance of “Radical Islam and the American Left.“
But, educated on the previaling bromides in academia and of left-wing movements that the real enemy in our own attitudes, all too many fail to see the dangers abroad.
31 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
I think a number of psychological and moral factors come into play. You mention their West-Left guilt. (A First World / white person can never challenge a Third World / brown person.) I would add:
- Their focus is on their own, immediate victim status (real or imagined). They may need to play up their victim status - for fundraising, for martyrdom, etc.
- As individuals, they may need political/indirect “revenge” on the conservatives (real or imagined) that they have received hurts from (real or imagined).
- Finally, the truth about Islamo-fascism is kind of horrible to contemplate. I think a lot of people prefer living in bubbles of ignorance/denial, like it’s still the 1990s, and want to do it as long as possible.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 5, 2008 @ 2:06 pm - June 5, 2008
I just finished reading ‘America Alone.’ To tie your post in with the theme of the book, people who only care about their own lives and comfort are incapable of sustaining a society. For a society to be sustained, you need families. Because when people have kids, they actually care about where society is headed.
Childless gays, not so much. Why should European gays give a damn if all of Europe is Islamified in the next generation? They’ll be dead by then. And the largely childless left sides with them. Preening about multicultural tolerance brings tangible rewards (pats on the back from your left-wing buds) in the present. Making sacrifices to secure the future of Western civilization… again not so much.
Comment by V the K — June 5, 2008 @ 2:08 pm - June 5, 2008
Not just “unholy” but incredibly self-destructive and stupid as well. One would think that the people with the most to lose (although arguably that would include ALL of us) would be the strongest supporters of wiping out this threat.
Comment by John — June 5, 2008 @ 2:17 pm - June 5, 2008
People are too spoiled in this country. Because the number of Muslims haven’t reached a critical mass (yet) there isn’t much violence being commited by Muslims against others, the problems of overseas are abstract.
Gay people rather say they fear a CHristian theocracy. This allows them to think that they are actualy fighting the real theocrats and so it allows them to ignore the real threat. A lot of people on the Left have been doing this lately if things can judged by the number of books that have come out lately.
Comment by Vince P — June 5, 2008 @ 2:28 pm - June 5, 2008
I think the problem is that leftists make excuses for the inexscusable under the rubric of tolerance. The notion that sometimes things are just wrong seems to elude them.
As for being childless, all the leftists I know are up to their eyeballs in children. In fact, all the gay couples I know have them. The childless ones are the heterosexual couples of my acquaintance.
Comment by Brian in Brooklyn — June 5, 2008 @ 2:33 pm - June 5, 2008
I think we can all agree that many in academia (especially gender studies) and many gay rights groups are far to the left of most gay people, including those of us who consider ourselves liberal. They don’t speak for anyone but themselves and don’t have anywhere near the influence they believe themselves to have. (I’m tempted to say they have none whatsoever but that would be unfair but so far as I can tell the only influence they have is on each other.)
Comment by Houndentenor — June 5, 2008 @ 3:21 pm - June 5, 2008
Horowitz is a hoot. but alas, despite all of that which you think: the real elephant in the room is the nearly seven billion homo sapiens on the planet. a planet that is constructed for about only 3 billion with lifestytes of the average middle class joe.
Comment by markie — June 5, 2008 @ 4:29 pm - June 5, 2008
So, markie, I guess you and all your crowd will soon be committing suicide to help restore the balance? Or are you just a bunch of preening hypocrites?
Comment by V the K — June 5, 2008 @ 4:48 pm - June 5, 2008
markie, what a nut you are. The planet can hold as many people as people + technology will permit. But by all means: Please put us in balance, like V says, starting with your own suicide.
What I came to say: Speaking of Islam and gays… guess who is against gay marriage? (and willing to blow people up, to stop it: which ought to please markie; murderers and enviro-wackos being natural allies)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 5, 2008 @ 5:55 pm - June 5, 2008
(ps: my request is not for markie’s literal suicide, but for him to practice what he preaches… or to change what he preaches, since it so obviously can’t and shouldn’t ever be practiced)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 5, 2008 @ 6:15 pm - June 5, 2008
just goes to show how much some know about population dynamics and what happens when species starts to eat itself out of house and home.
Comment by markie — June 5, 2008 @ 6:20 pm - June 5, 2008
#11 - Population dynamics isn’t an exact science, markie mark. And if you think it is, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you.
You may be too young to recall Paul Ehrlich’s book “The Population Bomb” written in the early 1970s. This kook said by 1999 we’d have total destruction of the hemisphere due to overpopulation, the Great Lakes would dry up and the entire West Coast would disappear into the sea.
Thirty-five years later, Lake Erie is still palatable, but Dr. Ehrlich is not.
Try again.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — June 5, 2008 @ 6:26 pm - June 5, 2008
Population dynamics? That’s the primary theme of America Alone.
Replacement level for a stable population is 2.1 children per female. The average among European countries is 1.58 children per female. In the Arab world, the rate is a multiple, not a fraction, of 2.1 children per female. If your population goes into decline, your culture goes into decline. Secular Western culture is dying out. Arab-Islamic culture is ascendant. The former has tolerant views of homosexuality, the latter does not.
Now, if markie wants to whine about resource depletion without ending his own participation in it, I submit that he is a preening hypocrite. Shall we take a vote on this?
Comment by V the K — June 5, 2008 @ 6:43 pm - June 5, 2008
Aye.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 5, 2008 @ 7:25 pm - June 5, 2008
we sure as hell can make it place (and are) that is none to less an enjoyable place to live.
Well , lead the way and depart from us. We would enjoy that.
Comment by Vince P — June 5, 2008 @ 9:12 pm - June 5, 2008
Vince makes an excellent point. The left is in fear bases denial about the real threat of islamic terrorism, and deep down they know it as well as we do, which is why, to puff themselves up and feel less like such raging pussies, they have compensated by increasingly waging war against the make-believe threat of “Christian theocracy” knowing damn well there is zero danger in doing so.
Comment by American Elephant — June 5, 2008 @ 9:30 pm - June 5, 2008
No, markie isn’t going to kill himself, nor is markie going to scale back markie’s own lifestyle to a third world level “for the good of the planet.” No, s/he’s just going to whine about how horrible it is that Americans are raping Mother Earth so we can have cars and cheeseburgers, and s/he’s going to feel smug, because even though s/he’s not going to do a damn thing that will *significantly* reduce his/her/its personal environmental footprint… markie will feel superior than those who don’t constantly whine and fret about environmental apocalypse.
Comment by V the K — June 5, 2008 @ 9:34 pm - June 5, 2008
Do I have that about right?
Comment by V the K — June 5, 2008 @ 9:35 pm - June 5, 2008
This is very dangerous what he’s saying here.
Islamic End Time beliefs are like the mirror image of the Bible End Time. Islam says that the Mahdi and Muslim Jesus do exactly what the Bible says the Antichrist and False Prophet will do.
http://www.joelstrumpet.com/?p=1291
Ahmadinejad says Mahdi and Jesus soon to appear
Breitbart: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predicted on Monday that Muslims would uproot “satanic powers” and repeated his controversial belief that Israel will soon disappear, the Mehr news agency reported. “I must announce that the Zionist regime (Israel), with a 60-year record of genocide, plunder, invasion and betrayal is about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene,” he said.
“Today, the time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started.”
Since taking the presidency in August 2005, Ahmadinejad has repeatedly provoked international outrage by predicting Israel is doomed to disappear.
“I tell you that with the unity and awareness of all the Islamic countries all the satanic powers will soon be destroyed,” he said to a group of foreign visitors ahead of the 19th anniversary of the death of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
Ahmadinejad also again expressed his apocalyptic vision that tyranny in the world be abolished by the return to earth of the Mahdi, the 12th imam of Shiite Islam, alongside great religious figures including Jesus Christ.
“With the appearance of the promised saviour… and his companions such as Jesus Christ, tyranny will be soon be eradicated in the world.”
Ahmadinejad has always been a devotee of the Mahdi, who Shiites believe disappeared more than a thousand years ago and who will return one day to usher in a new era of peace and harmony.
His emphasis on the Mahdi has been a cause of controversy inside Iran with critics saying he would be better solving bread-and-butter domestic problems rather than talking about Iran’s divine responsibility.
Comment by Vince P — June 5, 2008 @ 9:48 pm - June 5, 2008
I don’t agree with what markie says, but I will defend to his extinction his right to say it.
Comment by heliotrope — June 5, 2008 @ 10:42 pm - June 5, 2008
There are many reasons why liberals are incapable of condemning the Islamic Republic of Iran’s leaders, laws and practices: (1) acute narcissism; (2) historic investment in their own “oppression” eclipsing the true suffering of all others; (3) obtuse, irrational hatred of Christians and conservatives; (4) pathetic inability to acknowledge the existence of evil in the world, outside the Republican party; (5) plain, old-fashioned moral relativism; and on and on and on…It’s disgusting, and immoral. Liberals have literally lost the ability to distinguish between objective right and wrong.
And even if you can get a liberal to unequivocally call Ahmadinejad and his band of sick Imams EVIL and condemn their actions, particularly against gays, it’s worthless anyway, because the same liberal that will go out on a limb and call hanging gays in the public square “wrong,” is unwilling to close the loop and state (without the mealy-mouthed equivocations) that Iran CANNOT and WILL NOT have nuclear weapons, even if that means taking military action to prevent it. They can’t do it. They can’t put the two concepts together. And what that means is that liberals regard Iran’s sovereignty to commit heinous acts of serial murder as outweighing America’s moral authority to decide when enough is enough. Consequently, they end up condemning nothing. Saying something is wrong or evil, but disputing the U.S.’s right to put a stop to it is no condemnation at all. Just cut the cr*p and tell the truth—Iran’s draconian oppression of gays (and everyone other than Muslim men) is UNFORTUNATE. That’s what liberals really believe—it’s all VERY TOO BAD. Upsetting business. Tisk, tisk and all.
Just watch—either the idiot sock-puppets on this blog (Dave, Kevin, etc.) will not chime in at all, or they’ll try to change the subject in some silly, pointless way instead of addressing Iran and what MUST be done. Seriously, any minute some ignorant jac*ass is going to post a comment on here blaming the whole thing on something like overpopulation, or other such embarrassing nonsense, AS IF any of us would believe something as stupid and inane as……………….oh……………um……………hi markie. Welcome.
Comment by Sean A — June 5, 2008 @ 11:13 pm - June 5, 2008
I think the same folks who demand the infanticide in America consider the hanging of gays in Iran as “extremely late term abortions”. Guess that’s how they reconcile that.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 6, 2008 @ 1:28 am - June 6, 2008
That, or they just don’t find Iranian dudes sexy enough to care. I think it’s probably the latter.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 6, 2008 @ 1:39 am - June 6, 2008
I have many friends in the city of San Francisco. I live in the burbs as an openly gay man because the people in the burbs are far more tolerent and friendly than the echo chamber people in SF. And that includes Evangelical Cristians who are neighbors and friends. They are far more likely, in my experience, to recognize the danger presented by the Islamofasicts. As much as I defend Isreal, my Christian neighbors defend my right to live in peace. I’d rather live next to a solid Christian or Jewish family anyday as opposed to living in the ghetto that San Francisco has become. When I see groups like the “Queers for Palistine”, who protested the celebration of Israel’s 60th aniversery, I am beyong belief. The Palieos are the first to kill gays and lesbians, but PC SF thinks they are so right that they can overcome this abiding hatred by defending those who want to kill them. IDIOTS all.
Comment by John — June 6, 2008 @ 2:34 am - June 6, 2008
#24: “When I see groups like the “Queers for Palistine”, who protested the celebration of Israel’s 60th aniversery, I am beyong belief.”
Queers for Palestine? Now, that’s a group I hadn’t heard of. Clearly, they’re too obtuse to give any thought to what life must be like for GAY Palestinians. I’m sure their lives are peachy. Hamas LIVES for the gays. Do a google search for “gay Palestinians” and you get hit with a tidal wave of stories about gay Palestinians fleeing to Israel to escape death at the hands of their own people (and being granted asylum to stay with their lovers in peace-loving, tolerant Israel). Their analysis of the issue is: U.S. supports Israel + Palestinians kill Israeli Jews = they support Hamas. People like that are useless, lost.
Comment by Sean A — June 6, 2008 @ 4:37 am - June 6, 2008
Last Sunday I was in front of the Met in NYC where the Israel parade came to an end and the participants lingered to dance, sing and just express their high spirits. But, there were also a certain number or glum people I talked with. They were Jews who oppose Zionists and blame Israel for the “Jewish problem.” (I do not think any of them came to watch and be glum. They were merely threading their way along 5th Avenue.)
As I chatted them up, I mentioned the current candidates and they seemed to be most comfortable with Obama, but also certain that Hillary would stay away from taking on Iran in a military way. I was also struck by the constant theme that the Palestinians had been screwed by the creation of Israel.
In all, I only talked with about 20 such people in the course of the day, but the divide was clear. I also talked with a number of Jews who were of the mind that Israel would have to bomb Iran and that the United States would come in behind her. Their chosen scenario seems to be that it will happen before the Bush Presidency ends. They do not see a ground war, just a pounding of the nuclear sites, particularly those surrounding Teheran.
I have never understood why so many Jews are joined at the hip with the Democrat party. Many seem to have a love for state socialism that is remarkable. I wish now that I had asked about the treatment of gays in the mid-east, but I totally missed the opportunity and my notes are less meaningful as a result.
Comment by heliotrope — June 6, 2008 @ 8:32 am - June 6, 2008
Check out the latest from zomblog:
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=23
Comment by John — June 6, 2008 @ 8:42 am - June 6, 2008
#5: “As for being childless, all the leftists I know are up to their eyeballs in children.”
Which is, of course, an indictment of another useless, ineffective, bloated government agency: Child Protective Services.
Comment by Sean A — June 6, 2008 @ 10:37 am - June 6, 2008
Me either. But there is a lot of collectivism and group-identity in the Old Testament. God is often shown punishing the people collectively, rather than as individuals. Many of the Jews who established Israel were hard-core socialists, believed in communal living on kibbutzim, etc. It’s ironic because anti-Semites caricature Jews as extreme capitalists who secretly run the banking system, the media, etc.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 6, 2008 @ 1:35 pm - June 6, 2008
#29: Including Karl Marx, one of the biggest anti-semites of them all.
Comment by Attmay — June 6, 2008 @ 2:55 pm - June 6, 2008
#5: “As for being childless, all the leftists I know are up to their eyeballs in children.”
Are you the same person who all the straight couples he knows are swingers?
Comment by American Elephant — June 7, 2008 @ 8:36 pm - June 7, 2008