Who Goes There?

Spring Fundraiser 2013, Day 4

The theme of this Fundraising Week is “putting our heads over the parapet”. That is, we’re looking at the inherent risks associated with being a Counterjihad writer or activist.

Needless to say, opponents of Islamization are not the only ones to face such risks. Anti-abortion activists, “race realists”, those in favor of drastic limits on immigration, skeptics who doubt the ability of the United States to conduct successful “nation-building” in the Third World — any of these positions can put a target on the forehead and cause career difficulties for academics, journalists, and government employees. Opposing Islam invites the attention of the death-to-infidels crowd as well as the opprobrium of the entrenched Left, so it may be the most risky of occupations. Yet we are hardly alone.

Tip jarThe decision whether to blog anonymously is a crucial one. If you put your real name out there, you may face an unbelievable level of hostile scrutiny as a result. If you have a job, and your employer learns of your opinions, you may soon find yourself looking for work. If you are an untenured academic, tenure may forever elude your grasp. And if you work for the government or a large corporation, you may be subjected to mandatory re-education diversity training, even if you are lucky enough to retain your position.

So it’s no wonder that so many Counterjihad writers and bloggers use pseudonyms. That’s how I started out, mostly to make it less likely that my (liberal) employer would learn of my moonlighting as an Islamophobe. I stayed with that protocol for a couple years after being laid off, having seen the frightening things that happened to prominent writers who dared to stand up to the Islamic behemoth.

I decided to go fully public several years ago when I started writing for Big Peace (whilst retaining the pickelhaube here, since this is the persona with which I have been “branded”). Writing under my real name seemed a natural move by then — I was too old to expect to find another full-time programming job, and had no reputation to ruin. Furthermore, you gain more credibility and respect by using your real name, even in a field as widely loathed as this one.

If I had it to do over again, I’d probably have dropped the pseudonym sooner, right after being laid off. However, I wouldn’t advise everyone to do the same thing; it depends on your circumstances. People who have young children or live in culturally enriched neighborhoods take much larger risks than I do. Those who are young enough to have career prospects may not wish to destroy them utterly.

And, most important of all, writing the sort of thing you read here is actually illegal in many Western countries today. Just ask Lars Hedegaard, or Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, or Stéphane Charbonnier. Unless you are wealthy enough to afford high-powered lawyers, writing the truth about Islam can be a serious legal risk in many parts of what used to be called the “Free World”.

There are several considerations to ponder when the virtual cry of “Who goes there?” rings out ahead of you:

  • Do you know the password?
  • Are you better-armed than the guy on the other side of No Man’s Land?
  • Do you have good body armor?

And the most important question:

  • Do you have anything left to lose?

As more and more people answer that last question in the negative, the Western resistance to Islamization will become truly formidable.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Yesterday’s donors came from far and wide:

Stateside: California, Florida, New York, Virginia, and Washington

Near Abroad: Canada

Far Abroad: Australia, Bulgaria, Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, and the UK

Thanks to all of you for your kindness. Our thank-you notes are going out fairly rapidly this time, although we still have quite a few left to do.

The tip jar in the text above is just for decoration. To donate, click the tin cup on our sidebar, or the donate button, on the main page. If you prefer a monthly subscription, click the “subscribe” button.

5 thoughts on “Who Goes There?

  1. “Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose.”

    From “Me and Bobby McGee”
    By Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster

  2. “That’s how I started out, mostly to make it less likely that my (liberal) employer would learn of my moonlighting as an Islamophobe.”
    I’m not “happy” to read Islamophobe, in my opinion it doesn’t fit right here. Some time ago (Nov 2012) the German blog “Politically Incorrect” published some news (http://www.pi-news.net/2012/11/us-medien-lehnen-kampfbegriff-islamophobie-ab/) where, refering to AP Stylebook, it is said that you shouldn’t use the term “phobia” in political (or socail) context. I think they’re right because if you look up phobia in an encyclopedia, you will find definitions like: irrational fear (e.g. acrophobia).
    IRRATIONAL fear. I don’t think this fits islamophobia, because it is not irrational.
    An article in English:

  3. Down there: The sign on the Pickelhaube ist apparently a pigeon … and not an Eagle.

    It eventually has been before an Eagle – as Barons mentalities partly are still under this influence – but most in his soul is loosing also already parts of the smaller wings …… humanity closes in !

  4. Tiedar spoke the truth. You, Baron, are not a phobic. A phobia is an irrational, unrealistic fear of something, and there is absolutely nothing irrational about fearing Islam, especially when you find out that the U.S. State Department is importing more than twenty thousand Muslims per year into this country.
    We have to fight the idea that reasonable fear of Islam is irrational. Unfortunately it’s hard to come up with an alternative term that is both accurate AND catchy. I’ve tried “Islamo-realism”, “Islamo-awareness”, “Islamo-facists”, “Islamo-subversives”, “Islamo-Nazis” and several other more accurate but un-catchy terms, but I haven’t found one that is both accurate AND likely to take hold of the public imagination.

  5. Instead of “Islamophobe”, how about “islam critic”?

    But another thing: When theres a term for those who dislikes and criticizes islam, it only seems fair that those who like, protect and advance islam and islamic interests, should also have their own term. Islamophile. This term will fit dhimmies as well as muslims alike. And it could simply replace the term “muslim”, since “muslim” in pc press has become a neutral word, describing only what family one has been born into, and taking away the active, ideological choice it is, to label oneself as a member a definitive ideology, such as islam. Islamophile suggest that you have taken an active choice, or at least that you arent excused for not having. Just as a child born to communist parents doesn´t become a communist as an adult, unless one chooses to, and thus is responsible for ones own choices.

Comments are closed.