mm175: "Islamofascism" – Deal with it!

October 22, 2007

MUDGE’S Musings

shortattention

“Islamofascism” – Deal with it!

We have stated before in this space that we’ll accept a good idea, regardless of its source, in this case, the diffident and soft-spoken Christopher Hitchens in today’s Slate.

In that spirit, we present: Islamofascism.

It’s a valid term. Here’s why.

By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Oct. 22, 2007, at 11:33 AM ET

The attempt by David Horowitz and his allies to launch “Islamofascism Awareness Week” on American campuses has been met with a variety of responses. One of these is a challenge to the validity of the term itself. It’s quite the done thing, in liberal academic circles, to sneer at any comparison between fascist and jihadist ideology. People like Tony Judt write to me to say, in effect, that it’s ahistorical and simplistic to do so. And in some media circles, another kind of reluctance applies: Alan Colmes thinks that one shouldn’t use the word Islamic even to designate jihad, because to do so is to risk incriminating an entire religion. He and others don’t want to tag Islam even in its most extreme form with a word as hideous as fascism. Finally, I have seen and heard it argued that the term is unfair or prejudiced because it isn’t applied to any other religion….

… The most obvious points of comparison  [between Islam and Fascism] would be these: Both movements are based on a cult of murderous violence that exalts death and destruction and despises the life of the mind.

[Please click the link below for the complete article — but then please come on back!]

Defending the term “Islamofascism.” – By Christopher Hitchens – Slate Magazine

So, anyone reading this with access to one of the events on a nearby campus this week — go listen.

shortattention

Free my phone!

Walt Mossberg of the Wall Street Journal and his All Things Digital blog states a cogent case for demonopolization of the cellular telephone industry.

Suppose you own a Dell computer, and you decide to replace it with a Sony. You don’t have to get the permission of your Internet service provider to do so, or even tell the provider about it. You can just pack up the old machine and set up the new one.

Now, suppose your new computer came with a particular Web browser or online music service, but you’d prefer a different one. You can just download and install the new software, and uninstall the old one. You can sign up for a new music service and cancel the old one. And, once again, you don’t need to even notify your Internet provider, let alone seek its permission.

Oh, and the developers of such computers, software and services can offer you their products directly, without going through the Internet provider, without getting the provider’s approval, and without giving the provider a penny. The Internet provider gets paid simply for its contribution to the mix: providing your Internet connection. But, for all practical purposes, it doesn’t control what is connected to the network, or carried over the network.

[Please click the link below for the complete article — but then please come on back!]

Print : Free My Phone

Monopolies of all kinds are unpleasant. This writer rails against his monopoly cable television / Internet Service Provider that also (heaven help us!) wants to be our telephone company!

Walt, at least with cell phones, I’ve got choices.

shortattention_thumb[5]_thumb[2]

Innovation Nation: Losing our edge

This Business Week book review is definitely worthy of attention.

Innovation Nation

Innovation Nation: How America Is Losing
Its Innovation Edge, Why It Matters,
and What We Can Do to Get It Back

By John Kao; Free Press; 306pp; $26
The Good An insightful, and scary, account of the innovation challenges faced by the U.S.
The Bad A key issue gets little space: the role of global corporations in innovation’s changing geography.
The Bottom Line A very useful book that punctures America’s complacency about innovation.

In a Sept. 7 speech before a World Economic Forum meeting, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao announced his country was “pursuing an innovation-based model of development.” Why should America care if China puts innovation at the center of its next five-year plan? In fact, why worry about Brazil, Britain, Canada, Denmark, India, Israel, Korea, or other countries whose government policies push innovation? After all, Google (GOOG ), Facebook, the iPod (AAPL ), and the Boeing (BA ) 787 Dreamliner all have “Made in America” stamped on them. Right? And we have Silicon Valley. They don’t.

Well, actually they do. In fact, as John Kao, an innovation consultant, points out in his new book, Innovation Nation: How America Is Losing Its Innovation Edge, Why It Matters, and What We Can Do to Get It Back, all the key advantages once enjoyed by the U.S. are going, going, nearly gone. In a scary, insightful, and ultimately very useful book—written to inform the 2008 Presidential primary agenda—Kao punctures America’s smug self-congratulation.

[Please click the link below for the complete article — but then please come on back!]

America’s Fleeting Edge in Innovation

Innovation has been a key theme at BW for some time, and one wants to hope that the message is getting through to business leaders. One wonders, actually, whether any corporation near you ever has hired the likes of Mr. Kao, an innovation consultant.

Can’t happen soon enough, apparently.

It’s it for now. Thanks,

–MUDGE

Advertisements

mm150: Islam, the Marxism of Our Time

September 23, 2007

MUDGE’S Musings

Sept. 11, 2001 was Pearl Harbor for this generation of the people of the U.S.

And, while Pearl Harbor shocked that generation into the realization that the world they lived in was suddenly at war, in reality that war had begun almost every else many years before.

In fact, John Keegan, the outstanding military historian, begins his eminently readable history of World War II with the Versailles Peace Conference that ended World War I, because the errors of omission and commission committed there at the end of the first Great War set into motion the geopolitical forces that led inexorably to the second.

Indeed, Margaret MacMillan’s excellent history of that conference, Paris 1919, illustrates that we reap today, 88 years later, in the Middle East and Balkans, just to name two of the most egregious examples, the bitter harvest of many of the often well-intentioned but ill-chosen decisions made there.

Thus, our War on Terrorism, declared after the tragedy of the Twin Towers, was similar to our declaration of war against Japan on Dec. 8, 1941: We came very, very late to an undeclared war that, at a minimum, could be traced back to the formation of the State of Israel in 1948, or even the Balfour Declaration of 1917, or even way back, to take the extraordinarily long view, to the Crusades.

Western culture has shared the planet with Islam for 1,300 turbulent years (as if the preceding 5 billion were any less so!).

One might posit that Western Europe learned imperialism from the example set by Islamic culture. It is a fact that the enslaving of sub-Saharan African people by Europeans was learned from, aided and abetted by Arabic traders, who had begun the horrifying practice centuries before Henry the Navigator set his fearless explorers loose.

All this as introduction to some interesting reading encountered this week.

cityjournal

Islam, the Marxism of Our Time by Theodore Dalrymple

Some troubling signs in Europe

17 September 2007

From an Islamist point of view, the news from Europe looks good. The Times of London, relying on a police report, recently observed that the Deobandis, a fundamentalist sect, now run nearly half of the 1,350 mosques in Britain and train the vast majority of the Muslim clerics who get their training in the country. The man who might become the sect’s spiritual leader in Britain, Riyadh ul Haq, believes that friendship with a Christian or a Jew makes “a mockery of Allah’s religion.” At least no one could accuse him of a shallow multiculturalism.

According to Le Figaro, 70 percent of Muslims in France intend to keep the fast during Ramadan, up from 60 percent in 1989. Better still, from the Islamist point of view, non-practicing Muslims feel increasing social pressure to comply with the fast, whether they want to or not. The tide is thus running in the Islamists’ favor.

The writer’s analogy: that fundamentalist Islam has become the refuge for the young and disaffected in Western culture, in the way that superficial Marxism was for previous generations.

[Per L-HC’s reformed process, please click the link below for the complete article — but then please come on back!]

Islam, the Marxism of Our Time by Theodore Dalrymple

All this suggests that Islam is fast becoming the Marxism of our times. Had Fritz G. and Daniel S. grown up a generation earlier, they would have become members of the Baader-Meinhof Gang rather than Islamic extremists. The dictatorship of the proletariat, it seems, has given way before the establishment of the Caliphate as the transcendent answer to some German youths’ personal angst.

This is good news indeed for Islamists, but not so good for the rest of us.

A blogger I had not before encountered, but added to the blogroll2 thanks to this submission, a psychiatrist calling herself Dr. Sanity, responded to the City Journal article, by indicting the current state of Western culture that is providing safe harbor for Islamic fanaticism.

Dr. Sanity: Islam and Marxism: A marriage made in Allah’s socialist paradise

In an article from City Journal, Theodore Dalrymple makes a compelling case that Islam is fast becoming the Marxism of our time.

I want to take Dalrymple’s analysis one step further. Islam is not simply the alternative that today’s angst-ridden, alienated youth turn to because Marxism is waning in intellectual circles; it’s extremism and violence resonates harmonically with the socialist revolutionaries of the 20th century; and they have appropriated the jihad as an essential component of their political and intellectual strategy to revive Marxism in the 21st century.

Let us take a look at the strategy and how it has evolved to include the Islamic fanatics.

Multiculturalism and political correctness are two of the fundamental pseudo-intellectual, quasi-religious tenets that have been widely disseminated by intellectuals unable to abandon socialism even after its crushing failures in the 20th century. Along with a third component, radical environmentalism, they make up three key foundations of leftist dogma that have been slowly, but relentlessly, absorbed at all levels of Western culture in the last decade or so–but primarily since the end of the Cold War.

All three have been incorporated into most K-12 curricula as well as the academic curricula in Western university and colleges. In combination, they are the toxic by-products of postmodern relativism.

Dr. Sanity includes a useful map (MUDGE loves maps) of the evolution of the Marxist/Islamist union.

[Per L-HC’s reformed process, please click the link below for the complete article — but then please come on back!]

Dr. Sanity: ISLAM AND MARXISM – A MARRIAGE MADE IN ALLAH’S SOCIALIST PARADISE

A bracing analysis. Thanks, Dr. Sanity!

Finally, since there’s a war on, we turn to this look at a less than formal effort to reach the “Arab Street” with a more balanced view of U.S. policy:

At State Dept., Blog Team Joins Muslim Debate

nytimes

By NEIL MacFARQUHAR

WASHINGTON — Walid Jawad was tired of all the chatter on Middle Eastern blogs and Internet forums in praise of gory attacks carried out by the “noble resistance” in Iraq.

So Mr. Jawad, one of two Arabic-speaking members of what the State Department called its Digital Outreach Team, posted his own question: Why was it that many in the Arab world quickly condemned civilian Palestinian deaths but were mute about the endless killing of women and children by suicide bombers in Iraq?

Among those who responded was a man named Radad, evidently a Sunni Muslim, who wrote that many of the dead in Iraq were just Shiites and describing them in derogatory terms. But others who answered Mr. Jawad said that they, too, wondered why only Palestinian dead were “martyrs.”

The discussion tacked back and forth for four days, one of many such conversations prompted by scores of postings the State Department has made on about 70 Web sites since it put its two Arab-American Web monitors to work last November.

The postings, are an effort to take a more casual, varied approach to improving America’s image in the Muslim world.

Imagine! The George III-marginalized State Department actually figuring out how to used that new-fangled Internet thingy, and blogging in a potentially useful way!. The mind bloggles. Sort of a micro version of Radio Free Europe; one has to wonder whether the effort is worth the expenditure, however tiny.

[Per L-HC’s reformed process, please click the link below for the complete article — but then please come on back!]

At State Dept., Blog Team Joins Muslim Debate – New York Times

So, what do we learn from today’s trifecta of stories related to Islamic culture and its transactions with the West?

We’re at war, people.

Not the war that the simplistic Bush administration (as in naively incompetent, for which there is no excuse nearly seven years in) would have you believe.

We’re at war with Islam (as the Western world has been for 1,300 years); and with our own university-grown pestilences of “multiculturalism, political correctness, and radical environmentalism,” as Dr. Sanity reminds us. And there’s no moral high ground in war.

And I don’t believe that we’re winning.

It’s it for now. Thanks,

–MUDGE

Non-commercial Note!: the links to Amazon.com used above are for the convenience of faithful reader and represents no commercial relationship whatsoever. Left-Handed Complement should be so fortunate as to ever collect remuneration of any kind for this endeavor. I can link, so I link. It’s technology. It’s cool. Deal with it.