Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Still connecting bad Dots and fictional Dots

If you ever wanted proof that the Jews are no better equipped to learn from their mistakes now than they have been for thousands of years, read Bret Stephens' latest column. It came under the title: “Islam and the Radical West” and the subtitle: “The political orthodoxy of the left is the gateway drug to jihad,” published on April 12, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal.

Once you get past the personal experience he lived through – which he says comes to mind whenever the subject of Islamist radicalization comes up – you quickly realize that he is on a path to repeat what he and all those like him have been echoing for some time now. It is the false notion that an “agent of radicalization” such as Anwar al-Awlaki, sitting thousands of miles away, can turn perfectly content and well adjusted young men and women into suicidal terrorists just by corresponding with them.

Well, you shouldn't give all the credit to the Awlakis of this world, he hastens to add. That's because these people succeed only where others have prepared the terrain for them. And these would be the Western giants in the caliber of Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and perhaps Franz Fanon who produce works that are based on the political orthodoxies of the modern left.

So you wonder: What does that mean? Is Bret Stephens suggesting that we should emulate the Nazis and light bonfires in which we burn the books and the films that were produced by those authors? No; Bret Stephens does not come right out and says so. But he concludes his piece with a lamentation to the effect that the West has not recognized that the moral nihilism of the terrorists is the logical outgrowth of the moral relativism that is the default religion of today's West. And he leaves the decision up to the reader to burn or not to burn.

But those were the dots that our author saw fit to connect. First came the moral relativism of the West, he says, and then it spawned the jihad practicing terrorists. Thus the moral of the story we must draw from his reasoning can only go like this: To do away with jihad, we must first get rid of the West's moral relativism. It does not matter how you do it, just do it … starting in the schools, the media, the churches or whatever.

The reality, however, is that if you get rid of relativism – which he denigrated by attributing it of the left – you can only replace it with the sort of absolutism which he undoubtedly would attribute to the right. And this prompts the question: What has the right done for America that is worth celebrating? Well, the history of the American right as an offshoot of the European right, and then a stand-alone American conservatism, is well documented and there in the history books where it can be reviewed.

But what we must do is avoid immersing ourselves too much in that history trying to understand the current situation. That's because what exists today is so different from anything that happened in the past, the way to understand the current reality is to start from scratch and walk through the events of the recent past while holding a search light in one hand and a magnifying lens in the other.

What hits us in the face when we do that is the reality that the conservative movement in America today is nowhere near being like the conservative movement of yesteryear. Looking for the pivotal moment when the movement changed direction, we find it to be the time when the Jews shed the liberal mantle and put-on the conservative one. They called themselves the new conservatives or neocons. And true to the form that Bret Stephens is suggesting, these people started practicing a most rigid kind to absolutism.

So we ask: What have these people done to the conservative movement? What have they done to the Republican Party that was the flagship of that movement? And what have they done to the America that used to be a shining city on the hill guiding the world to moderation whether someone chose to be governed by a liberal regime or a conservative one?

Well, what made America the model of good governance it used to be was the tolerance it had for the views of everyone. The liberal Jews then brought to it taboos that must be avoided because they might violate Jewish sensitivities, and the neocons brought to it taboos that must be avoided because they might violate the dogmas that are created for the day. The net result has been the destruction of the conservative movement, the near destruction of the Republican Party and the feared destruction of the America that used to be.

If you want to know what magic the Jews have been using to destroy this much of a superpower in such a short period of time, the answer is that they connected bad dots with dots of their imagination, thus created pictures on a daily basis that no one recognized.

In short, the Jews have been doing what Bret Stephens is trying to do with his most recent column. It is brewing the poison that is killing America so very softly.