[lit-ideas] Militant Islam? What, me worry?
- From: "Lawrence Helm"<lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:40:01 +0000
Mike,
You're doing the same thing that Andreas and Simon did. As I said, said, said,
said, said, I haven't made up my mind which paradigm is correct. I haven't been
utterly convinced by either side; so I have been investigating both of them.
But the Knee-Jerk-Left reacts every time I read a book on either side. If I
read one supporting the Fukuyama, Barnett, Roy, D'Souza side, up comes one
knee. If later I read a book on the Huntington, Fallaci, Bawer, Berlinski,
Selbourne side, up comes another knee. I've explained what I'm doing several
times.
But, you might object, why did I write as I did to you, if I haven’t made up
my mind? Because if true, it is of vital interest to the future of the West.
Ignorance has never seemed bliss to me. I want to know if, I can manage to find
out. Making fun of Steyn may be easy because he had a poor education, but Bat
Ye’or is a step up from Steyn in terms of scholarship.
Well, there is one paradigm I've dismissed, as you guys have dismissed both the
paradigms I’m considering. I’ve dismissed the Marxist-Leninist paradigm.
Some Leftists still embrace some element of that, but there are variations in
the Leftist camp. Some deny that they hold Marxist-Leninist views. Some just .
. . I began to say "hope for the best," but it is more than that. They expect
the best. But, I would ask, upon what their expectations are based? They aren't
studying anything. They have better use for their time, so are they assuming
something that keeps them from believing either the Fukuyama or the Huntington
paradigms. I ask, what is your paradigm? What gives you the comfort that
everything is going to turn out okay? What leads you to believe there is no
reason to worry about defending our way or life? Or perhaps you don’t hope
for the best, perhaps you expect the worse and are just seeking something to
get you by while ignorant armies clash by night.
In military parlance you hope for the best but plan for the worst. The worst in
this case is the Huntington paradigm. If we are going to have these ongoing
clashes because Civilizations are at root incompatible and hostile toward each
other and require "Core States" to keep them in line, then we should approach
this problem understanding our role and seek the path with the best chance of
success. If Huntington is as perceptive as many think he is, what shall our
descendants say later on about the people whose philosophy was "eat, drink, and
be merry?"
An old box of obsolete hard drives fell out of a dusty closet in a deserted
house in 2107 and on one they found Lawrence urging on the investigation, and
Mike saying, what a waste of time you are engaged in Lawrence, you should do
things that make you happy. What does Mike care about such a box of hard
drives, he might say in 2007, he won’t be around to be affected by them, but
now may be the time to affect the future? We can’t do so, at last can’t do
so in a positive manner, through ignorance.
You, Andreas and Irene are in a backwater. You accept neither paradigm and yet
you haven’t one of your own you can put forward. You eat drink and are merry,
but Andreas and Irene live more consciously in the smoke of the
Marxist-Leninist paradigm. In one sense they realize it is in ruins, but in
another they wish that its positive aspects had won out. Perhaps they have a
reason, albeit a nostalgic one, for embracing neither Fukuyama nor Huntington.
It is too much like going over to the enemy. Perhaps one or the other
represents the future, but they don’t wish to go there. They don’t wish
either to be true. They may agree at some level that Hegel was right and that
Capitalism is winning over other systems of society, but this is the seventh
level of hell for them.
I don’t have the impression that you are quite as worried about the future as
Andreas and Irene, but that may be only because you are more adept at eating,
drinking, and merriment. But if you were to worry at all, which you can’t
escape doing from time to time in a temporary, hypothetical, sort of way, it
would be about the success of Capitalism, a.k.a. Liberal-Democracy, and the
defeat of the Marxist-Leninist paradigm.
You agree with Andreas and Irene, but don’t worry so much about it. You avoid
their depression. The real danger lies in Liberal-Democracy, not in Islamism or
Militant Islam. Good grief, you might have said in a politically incorrect
moment, those guys wouldn’t know a successful economy if they blew one up.
What an absurdity, you perhaps think, for the worriers to imagine that the
Islamic barbarians could conquer the glory that is the West? Look at the
beautiful European cities. Look at the culture. Look at the dynamics of the
powerful EU. Why would the worriers think that could be conquered by barbarians
who can’t even keep their own countries running? Well, don’t take too much
comfort in that, Mike. Great civilizations are always conquered by barbarians.
The time seems to come when the Roman Senators and their like quit worrying and
spend their time in eating, drinking and merriment of one kind and another –
and then the barbarians come.
Lawrence
------------Original Message------------
From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
LH:
>>Will putting your head in the sand really make it all go away?<<
I know your paranoia keeps you occupied, but I wonder does it make you happy or
fretfull? Hopefully the former, I'd hate to think anyone could be so fretful.
Mike Geary
Memphis
Other related posts:
