This past weekend brought us yet more reminders of the stark realities of radical Islam. In St. Cloud, Minnesota, eight people were stabbed by a Somali man who made references to Allah. In New York, a bomb exploded in a dumpster in Chelsea, injuring 29 people. Another unexploded bomb was recovered by authorities. In Seaside Heights, New Jersey, a pipe bomb exploded along the route of a Marine Corps charity run. Two more bombs were recovered. An Afghani named Ahmad Khan Rahami, reportedly the bomber in the latter two incidents, was captured by police after engaging in a shootout.
The usual suspects are urging us not to jump to conclusions, and stressing that they have not found links between these attacks/attackers and ISIS or other radical Islamic organization (clinging to the silly and quaint notion that a tangible link to a governing organization is necessary to validate the roots of these attacks). These urgings echo President Obama’s early messages regarding the Orlando night club mass shooting earlier this year.
In reply, I suggest the Duck test:
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Radical Islamic terrorism exists. It is a reality of today’s world. It is common enough to warrant the presumption that acts of violence of a particular sort are rooted in Islamic terrorism until shown otherwise. This is not, obviously, a court-of-law standard. But, just as we do not need a court of law to assume, until evidence to the contrary arises, that acts of inner city drug violence are gang-related, we are fairly safe in making initial presumptions that acts of terrorism today are most likely born out of radical Islam.
Obama has been peddling a narrative that we should not name the enemy because it undermines efforts to combat the enemy. This narrative reeks of bitterly clinging to the failed vision of multicultural harmony. It ignores the cold reality that radical Islam is not going to be tamed by supposedly enlightened liberal bullshit, and it perpetuates the error that is multiculturalism.
For most of its existence, this nation has been a melting pot. Immigrants have been coming to America to become part of America. They arrived here and adapted to American ways. Their numbers have been large enough to change the flavor of the American stew over time, and American culture is the better for it. But, possibly since it’s been the norm for so long, this melting pot approach to integrating immigrants into our culture is considered old, passe, benighted, and even racist by the Best-and-Brightest of modern times. Instead of expecting those new to our nation to adopt the ways of their new home, these Best-and-Brightest tell the new arrivals that they should celebrate their differences, elevate them above those ways, and stand apart from the new culture in which they find themselves.
The Best-and-Brightest then tell the rest of us that we should respect and celebrate the differences of our new neighbors, even when those differences are incompatible with our long-established mores. Thus, as current example, the oppressive and illiberal tenets of Islam are accepted as “part of their culture,” and we aren’t supposed to point out how those tenets are incompatible with American liberty. Naturally, this breeds resentment, but it’s not just the resentment of supposedly bigoted and Neanderthal natives. The new arrivals are certain to have a harder time fitting into their adopted society because of the lack of assimilation and adaptation. New immigrants typically seek out their own when they first arrive, and the presence of their own in the new culture helps them transition and assimilate more comfortably. But, when “their own” haven’t themselves transitioned and assimilated, the new arrivals remain isolated and “apart.” Some of them become alienated and resentful over time. The fringe characters become likely targets for the radicalizers who wish to find new tools and patsies to carry out bad acts, both directly and via the generalized dissemination of the radical Islamist message. The latter seems to be, at this juncture, what created this weekend’s terrorists, what created the Orlando shooter, and what has created a number of other domestic attackers.
The fundamentals of liberty preclude forcing immigrants to assimilate into our societal norms. However, this doesn’t mean that they cannot be told that this nation embraces liberty, and that whichever of their old cultural ways that clash with liberty will not be accepted. Instead of telling those new among us that they can embrace the beliefs that conflict with American ideals, laws and protections, we should be telling them that we expect them to understand and conform to the fundamentals of liberty. That liberty, incidentally, fully encompasses their right to embrace their religious beliefs and the behavioral tenets those beliefs prescribe. It also fully encompasses their right to proselytize regarding those beliefs. It does not, however, accept that their beliefs are superior to those of others, or that they can elevate the rules of their beliefs over the law of the land and the liberty of others. Our message regarding the latter should be one of dispassionate rejection rather than multicultural affirmation.
I’m not going to blame America for the terrorism being perpetrated upon her and upon other Western nations. Blame is proximate – it lies squarely on the backs of the perpetrators. I am, however, blaming modern American multiculturalism for impeding the proper reaction and response to acts of terrorism. I am blaming multiculturalism for the discord and divisiveness in our society. I am blaming multiculturalism for poisoning the melting pot.
Loading ...
The Democrats really have a tin ear on this subject, too. Obama prez-splains repeatedly on the subject, denigrating American culture, Christianity, and Judaism, while elevating Islam to unrecognizable heights. DiBlasio wants to double down on Muslim immigrants, because so far that’s worked out *so* well. And the State Department announces that it inadvertantly made more than 1000 refugees that were classified as too dangerous to stay into citizens overnight. It’s really hard *not* to believe that there is a concerted attack on American culture going on by the DNC and by the Left in general.
And this puts the whole exercise into the context of the Left’s culture wars, which have been going on for the last fifty years. They never got the memo that they won; instead, they keep driving America towards the abyss. Some even acknowledge this in unguarded moments.
I’m prompted to offer a modified version of a Santayana quote: “Fanaticism consists of redoubling your efforts when you’ve achieved your initial goals.”
Just as they’re not satisfied with genuine equality, they’ll never be satisfied with what they have achieved.