Friday, June 01, 2007

Glick on multiculturalism

Personally, I find Caroline Glick a well-meaning,educated and above all perceptive writer. However, sometimes the conclusions she draws from the correct premises she puts out are left to be desired.

She starts off rather brightly in her latest column, pointing out how the ruling establishment in Europe is embracing an insane and ultimately suicidal ideology of multiculturalism, which is totalitarian to boot. She then, goes on, however:

Like the totalitarian ideologies of the 20th century, multiculturalism identifies the Jews and the Americans as its chief enemies. Both must be defeated for their refusal to destroy themselves and merge into the post-national thought stream. And like their 20th century predecessors, the multiculturalists of today embrace radical Muslims who share their rejection of Judaism and Americanism.

The multiculturalists convince their societies to accept their own destruction by indoctrinating their fellow citizens through their education systems and media.

Needless to say, the consequences of this state of affairs are not localized to Europe. As they do towards their own people, the European elites work tirelessly to subvert American and Israeli cultural confidence and to undermine every action the two nations take to combat the forces of global jihad. Whether by condemning the US incarceration of jihadists at Guantanamo Bay, claiming that Zionism is racism, attacking the US campaign in Iraq, financing Israeli anti-Zionist pressure groups and the Palestinian Authority, or insisting that Iran should be negotiated with, the EU works to compel the US and Israel to stand down rather than defend themselves and to convince American and Israeli societies that we are unworthy of being defended.



While she is right, in my opinion, about Israel, I am afraid when it comes to the USA she is engaged in some wishful thinking. One should not be influenced by the globalist-leftist European mainstream media that writes about Bush "the evil conservative crusader" and other cliches. Back in the the old Cold War days, communist propaganda refered to socialist and social-democratic parties in the west as "imperialist sellouts" but this did not make the latter right-wing all of a sudden. In exactly the same way European press ramblings do not make George Bush a crusader.

You think I'm being outrageous? Let's look at the facts. Bush is indeed fighting a war, but he repeatedly refuses to identify the enemy. "War on terror" is an empty phrase, terror is a tactic. Bush has never suggested he is fighting global Jihad except for the one time he uttered "islamofascism" (and never again). Memebers of his administration go out of their way to emphasize that this isn't a religious conflict. The war in Iraq is not a war against global jihad, it never was, but a war which now squanders resources for a utopian "democracy for Iraq" project which is in fact the ultimate multiculturalist enterprise(I will explain in another entry). Furthermore, the USA itself is very often joining in on the pressure on Israel to make further concessions to the Arabs.

Whatever measures the USA is taking against jihadist, they are half-hearted and measured just enough to prevent another 9/11. No real strategy exists to actually win the war, no real plan to crush the jihadists. But even this is to outrageous for the standard European liberal, just like it was outrageous for doctrinaire marxists for a socialist to allow any kind of private property. That is why the impression is created that the USA is the brunt-bearer of the fight against global jihad.

Where do we go from here? Until the enemy and the objectives are properly defined, we are on the road to perdition and multiculturalist hacks will in fact be stronger every day in spite of the complete bankrupcy of their views and the disastrous effects they have on their societies.

No comments: