« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Jihadi John Puts The Lie To The Progressive Theory of Terrorism

Mohammed Emwazi Never Suffered From Poverty Except In His Soul

Democracy In The Hands of Knaves and Fools

Democracy In The Hands of Knaves and Fools

Listen my five or so Constant Readers. Draw nearer still as I enlighten you in The Gospel of Post-modern contained within the hallowed verses of The Book of Harf. If only we could just find all the jihadists employment at Sports Authority or Walmart. They’d happily ring up our orders, accept a minimum wage level of subsistence and give up all vestiges of religious extremism.

Sounds good, sounds easy. Best of all, it’s a whole lot nicer than having to be vulgar and kill our way out of a war that the other America started. Buying into this load of hooey “tastes good” as far as narratives go for the Progressive Left. If ChimpyBushMcHitlerburton had just understood that, the average Iraqi would be shopping now at Home Depot instead of Home Despot. It’s only when vicious and uncompromising reality intrudes that we see this for the twaddle that it utterly, yea verily is.

The masked “Jihadi John” killer who fronted Islamic State beheading videos has been identified as Mohammed Emwazi, a British computer programming graduate from a well-to-do London family who was known to the security services.

There are two things that The Harfists of the Obama Administration seem deliberately determined to miss in their pet theory of Islamic Terrorism. First, they assume the terrorists are desperate souls, waifs of a 3rd world Post-modern economic desert. Which doesn’t explain either Mohamed Atta’s Architecture Degree or Mohammed Emwazi’s prowess in computer programming. It shows up also in the increasing production quality of the beheading videos such as the one recently shot in Libya. Before we should call these people the JV, let’s have David Axelrod or Hillary Clinton try their hands at Visual Basic, Architecture or Internet video editing.

The other mistake in Harfian Logic that seems so obvious that it almost has to be deliberate is that Democracy is seen as an unalloyed good. No work of intellectual craftsmanship has done more to damage and enstupidate American leadership than Francis Fukuyama’s “The End of History and the Last Man.” The words leading us to a comfortable yet ineluctable state of lethal ignorance follow below.

“What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.

The self-satisfying Denning-Krueger Effect Serum contained in this thesis was that we, Team America World Police, had THE ANSWER™! We owed it to the rest of the world; whether they liked it very much or not. We were to go forth and make disciples of all nations.

It was more addictive than the meth being cooked at the trailer park down yonder. For example, the oozy, Post-modern Marxism of Thomas P.M. Barnett told us to take up the White Bread’s Burden and emanate our fundamental swellness from our Core to mind the poor, suffering souls out there in The Gap. So a bunch of arrogant, know-it-all, Americans are telling people smart enough to design buildings and program software how much pity we have for their cultures. Better yet: we’d like to feed them a handful of grubs in a manner reminiscent of Dian Fossey with the gorillas in the mist.

Liberal Democracy is no slam-dunk as a great form of government. It has a fundamental weakness that cannot be corrected without destroying its fundamental form as a manner of social governance. A Liberal Democracy is only as smart, foresighted and capable as the electorate that installs it.

Give all the orcs in Morder the suffrage; and you shouldn’t be too shocked if the Hobbits are all getting roasted on sticks. And finally, who says that we really offer the rest of the world something a savvy consumer would buy if operating with perfect information. I described the Pitchfork Dilemma faced by Egypt when we rammed Democracy down its throat. Here I blogged The Arab Spring of 2010.

So who should the Egyptians vote for? Stoning the adulterers or killing their reasons for continuing to exist? I’d feel happier having a choice between Howard Dean and Pat Buchanan. I’m not vindictive enough to accuse the Egyptians of proudly voting for a party that wants to stone adulterers and cut the hands off of all thieves. Honor killing isn’t what I would consider a popular platform – unless plan B involved my cultural identity destroyed and my values subjected to tyranny. So Egypt has no desire to subjugate its economy to the electronic herd or wear the golden straight-jacket. They also had no desire to submit themselves to a coercive military-led junta. Like the Germans chaffing under the punitive Treaty of Versailles, the Egyptians stood ready to vote for any alternative at all that represented Plan C. The Muslim Brotherhood, in all its backward, brutal glory, checked that box.

People all over the Middle East are seeing the West put them in the same position as we put Egypt in The Arab Spring. The people smart enough to design their own housing or program computers see themselves being fed to electorates of ignorant, inbred savages as a fallen branch is fed to the wood-chipper after a storm. They can get out front and lead that mob or have it outvote them in an election over who gets eaten for dinner on the savage island from Lord of The Flies. ISIS, in all of its wretched, hate-filled execration; is the opportunity to get out front and try and direct that slow parade of the zombie mutants away from Hell.

Get Alerts