Breivik, Islamophobia, and the Destructive Culture Wars in the West

Terrorism • August 2011 • Views: 977

Some readers may have already seen the article by Bret Stephens that cites me.

In a superb new book, “Heaven on Earth: The Varieties of Millennial Experience,” Boston University’s Richard Landes notes just how pervasive this kind of impulse has been throughout history and across cultures, and how much its many strains—Christian, Marxist, Islamist, Nazi, environmentalist and so on—have in common. Breivik, Mr. Landes says, was of a piece: “Like many active cataclysmic apocalypticists, he believed that the socio-political world is in huge tension, like tectonic plates about to crack, and if he can set off a small explosion in the right place it will unleash far greater forces.” In this sense, Mr. Landes adds, “the thing he resembles most is the people he hates.”

Recent Pages by Glaber:
PomoMarx: Eagelton tries to make Marx and 21st century progressive Spielberg's Alien "Other" On the nature of Islamophobia: Jacobs vs. the “liberal” Rabbis on the Boston Megamosque From Useful Idiot to Useful Infidel: Meditations on the Folly of 21st Century “Intellectuals” Reutersgate 2.0: Honor-Shame vs. Liberal MSNM

Jump to bottom

3 comments

shutdown Aug 2, 2011 3:43:56pm

The Romans coined the expression si vis pacem para bellum (if you want peace, prepare for war). The opposite is also true, and a lesson that the obsessive peace camp in Israel, who believe that adopting the Palestinian narrative will bring peace, might well take to heart: si vis bellum, para pacem. You cannot make peace with apocalyptic enemies. But you can defeat them without descending to their level. You will certainly not defeat them with cowardice masquerading as generosity of soul.

Your link caused me to take the time to read the entire post; I had not been to Landes’ blog for a while. Thanks for the link.

The Ghost of a Flea Aug 2, 2011 5:47:18pm

Excellent writing doesn’t change that:

1. He’s citing Bruce Bawer as a serious observer and effective critiquer of Islam. Bruce Bawer being an advocate of Eurabia and Islamist takeover of Europe in 30 years through breeding, and yet another ranter/raver about multiculturalism and leftist elites destroying Europe.

2. He’s eliding all “leftist” critique of anti-Islamist commentators into the narrow band of critique that is pro-Palestinian and unquestioning accepts the Palestinian narrative. Citations to articles and sources which indulge in accusations against amorphous “liberal elites” reinforces that beneath the intellectual posturing are lazy category-cladistics and unjustified assumptions.

3. All of Landes’ posts follow the same rhetorical structure—deferring discussion of issues on “his” sides of politics, in spite of nominal and minimal recognition, while cataloguing with excrutiating detail the pathologies of the other (while accusing them of lack of self-examination). A particularly vivid example of this being Islamophobia and Criticism of Islam, which defends, amongst others, JihadWatch and Robert Spencer. Again the false balance is a prominent feature—a formal distinction of critique versus -phobia is presented, but never engaged nor applied. Instead, the bulk of the document is a recitation of the “realities” of Islam (all negative…some of which are not “Islamic,” and some of which assume as-written scripture 100% represents religion-as-praxis).

4. The above approach is particularly foul when applied to Utoya—trim the nice verbiage and Landes is saying “…lots of kids died because of this guy who thought he was complying with my thinking, and that gives me pause for about two sentences, but let’s change the subject to how this prove how misguided pro-Palenstinian Europeans are.” His follow-up post Operating on a Media Holodeck continues this deferral…he’s glossing around the children being shot to talk about the sad mental state that put them in the line of a bullet.

Nominally, I agree with what Landes communicates: his critique of unquestioning supporters of Palestine, his desire for genuine and open critique of Islamism—but he’s purposefully engaging in rhetorical games to wedge open the discussion for irrational and dishonest participants like Spencer. Either he suffering from a dose of false consciousness himself or he’s presnting his arguments in bad faith.