Confronting Hate
I’ve posted a comment on Roger Simon’s blog about anti-American hate-mongering. Anti-American bigotry is nothing new and has been documented by Jean Francois Revel in his book Anti-Americanism. This hate, of course, says something about them, not us. Here’s what I wrote on Roger’s blog:
One is tempted to dismiss European anti-Americanism as a distasteful remnant of the tradition of prejudice common among Europeans. After all, unlike the Jews, we are not powerless; this hate doesn’t seem as ominous as the anti-Semitism of the 1930s. And the Europeans feel smug in their hatred since the multi-racial country they hate, America, exempts them from the racist label. However, such hate still corrodes the soul; continental Europe is sick.
The dangerous part is that sickness is contagious. Far from innocuous, hatred creates an environment where vicious acts are possible. Fueled by European hate-ideology, dictators and court intellectuals of third-world countries scapegoat America for the intrinsic failures of their own culture. One week before 9/11, this hate reached a climax in the UN sponsored conference in Durban, South Africa.
It is this kind of hate that makes 9/11 possible and acceptable. I've accused the UN of playing a key role in creating this atmosphere of hate. We are far too polite in confronting the hate-mongers when we are the objects of hate. It's time we got some moral backbone and responded with the righteous indignation this hate-movement deserves.
posted by Jason Pappas at 11:06 PM
8 Comments:
Much of the Antiamericanism is anticapitalism. Bernard Levy wrote a book on the subject.
I am reading Oriana Fallacis take on America and she makes our case as well as anyone. If you haven't read the Pride and the Rage you should. Every page is a jaw dropper.
Righteous indignation went out the window when moral relativism came through the door. (Apologies for the trite metaphor)
But it is true, AOW.
I've read some of Fillaci, beak, in the bookstore. A powerful writer.
Anti-Americanism is fashionable amongst the chattering classes, but there are many British, like me, who know which side our bread is buttered.
Old Peculier,
I know Brits of the second type you mentioned. Glad to know that you are among their number.
Thanks, OP. I had originally put Continental European but the phrase was too wordy for good reading. I think of the leftist criticism in the English speaking countries as self-criticism as the cultures are essentially the same. Even the Continental attacks are led by the left with some of the nationalists (in France) jumping in. In actuality, my blog entry reads as a total indictment of all the people on your side of the pond which I regret. But sometimes writing like a lawyer, with a string of qualifiers, just becomes dull.
On our recent vacation we passed through London and Paris. London always seems like our second home (not that we’ve been there that much.) It’s just that having lived all our lives in NYC, London seems more “at home” to us than Naperville Illinois ... not that there's anything wrong with Naperville.
My friend Beakerkin knows what I'm talking about (I know you're out there, beak).
AOW, you had an interesting story about meeting the fellow from Afghanistan. And OP had some interesting comments on Jihad Watch about the many Muslims she’s met around the world. Both reminded me of an argument/conversation I had with one Muslim fellow online this past spring.
He read some of my blog and was quite upset. (Can you imagine that!) We argued about Islam for a while but he, of course, wanted to argue sociology and I wanted to talk about what Islam is according to the religious texts and the original historical practice. He kept calling me a bigot, as usual, and asked about my knowledge of actual Muslims. I assured him that I’ve met many Muslims and I appreciate that not all Muslims want to emulate Mohammad, the warrior.
Finally, I said that living in New York City means that I’ve met Muslims from every Islamic country in the world. I probably have a better sample of Muslims that someone who has only lived in one Islamic country. I mentioned that most of the arrogant condescending anti-kafir Muslims that I’ve met were Arab (with a few exceptions of course.) And the Bangladeshi Muslims that I’ve met love America and were generally agreeable.
It turns out that the fellow was Bangladeshi and never lived elsewhere. He wished he had the opportunity to meet people from all over the world. Furthermore, he was upset about the growing power of the Arabs, in particular Saudi Arabia, in Bangladesh. They create schools that teach jihad and are poisoning the minds of the young. The Bangladeshi government is corrupt and can be bought off by the rich Arabians. He felt helpless.
My heart went out to the fellow. He may not agree that Islam is susceptible to such influence because of intrinsic flaws but he clearly doesn’t like what he sees. And he is helpless but not just because of the money factor. As Robert Spencer keeps pointing out, those that don’t want to practice the full jihadist Islam as Mohammad exemplified as he rose to power, just don’t have a good argument to refute the jihadists. The texts are on the side of the jihadists.
Jason, you're back! Good post. I think it all comes down to vanity. Plus, even so-called intellectuals can think in terms of bumper stickers. Perhaps especially intellectuals! One of Revel's points was that the anti-American Europeans demonstrably had no idea what they were talking about. Their America was a concoction of their prejudiced minds.
<< Home