Our British correspondent JP has collected a number of quotations relating to various themes that are swirling around: The Big Lie, Orwellianism, Emperor Obama, etc. He includes this introductory note:
The process that is now underway in the West might be described as Gleichschaltung — a word that is well-known to students of the Third Reich, an umbrella term used to describe the stifling of dissent. Synonymous phrases in our context might be: to make sharia-compliant, render into dhimmitude, make the general population accepting of the Big Lie. If we can put words, even loan words, to processes such as these, we can chip away at the bewilderment so many people experience when faced with the apparent intransigence of politicians and others to recognise what is staring us in the face.
Perhaps Gleichscharisierung would be the right neologism, analogous with Islamisierung — the German word for “Islamization”.
The Wikipedia definition of Gleichschaltung does a good job of describing what I have been trying to get a fix on:
Bringing into line … Among the goals of this policy were to bring about adherence to a specific doctrine and way of thinking and to control as many aspects of life as possible.
Richard J Evans’ translation of the term: forcible coordination.
Islam and Sharia in a nutshell.
Collected by JP
American Iron Curtain
Only when Americans see the wall, when they sense its shadow over Missouri and Florida, over New York and California, from ocean to ocean and border to border, will they be ready to tear it down.
There are two narratives of the Arab Spring. In one of them, the people rose up against the tyrants. In the other an international conspiracy of Western and Muslim countries collaborated with the Muslim Brotherhood to take over Arab countries.
To the Muslim Brotherhood, democratization means the same thing that a plane ticket does to their Al Qaeda splinter group. A Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide was once quoted as saying, “Democracy is like a pair of slippers that we wear until we reach the bathroom, and then we take them off.” The Brotherhood was booted out of power because it decided that Egypt was already in the toilet and that it could take off its democracy slippers prematurely.
In the minds of that paper’s editors [Aftenposten], the impulse to appease would seem to have become utterly reflexive — along with the ability to deny effectively, even to themselves, in precisely the way Orwell outlines, that they’re acting on such an impulse.
Non-recognition of reality is the first principle.
Being human, politicians lie. Even in the best regimes. The distinguishing feature of totalitarian regimes however, is that they are built on words that the rulers know to be false, and on somehow constraining the people to speak and act as if the lies were true. Thus the people hold up the regime by partnering in its lies. Thus, when we use language that is “politically correct” — when we speak words acceptable to the regime even if unfaithful to reality — or when we don’t call out politicians who lie to our faces, we take part in degrading America.
Like a band that only knows one song, politicians only know one response to Islamic terrorism.
The moral argument for freedom is the self-organizing principle of individuals. The moral argument for compulsion is that the system is superior to individuals. The left has chosen central planning in human rights as it has in every other area of life. It believes with the paradoxical perversity of doublethink that freedom can only come from government because only a central authority is qualified to provide the equal distribution of freedom within carefully planned limits.
This abrogation of freedom is the logical end result of the left’s entire pattern of reasoning which rejects the individual for the collective, the working man for the planner and the people for the ideological expert. These forms of repression are expressions of its rotten notion that the left may do anything and everything in the name of freedom except actually allow the people to be free.
Church and State
The United States is following the European course of rendering the distinction between the state and the church irrelevant by making the state into the church and mandating that everyone worship it. As in 19th century Europe, deliberate clashes are being stirred up between the values of the state and religious values for the purpose of demonstrating that the values of the state are supreme.
The UK is filled with Pakistani, Afghani and Somali settlers who live by the values of their home countries and inflict those values on the natives as they colonize the physical and social territory of the United Kingdom.
We are now on the cusp of colonization by an imperial juggernaut that has found a winning strategy: not confrontation but infiltration. It need no longer frontally assault the gates of Vienna; it enters the civil nexus and the body politic surreptitiously, taking out citizenship as a way of taking out the opposition. Terror, for all the devastation it wreaks, is merely a tactic that accompanies this larger strategy. And we who are Islam’s victims are really, for the most part, its collaborators, for if we are to be defeated, then we will have defeated ourselves, succumbing to our own weakness and obsequiousness, or to an erroneous calculation of where our interests lie.
The “security” of Liberal Newspeak comes from that sense of mutual identity through conformity. Everyone has access, community and shares their concerns which are all about conformity. It’s an unbroken loop of reassuring gibberish punctuated by bursts of anger at outsiders who are not part of the hive and don’t understand how important community access and engaged listening really are.
The real conspiracy is the Open Conspiracy, it’s completely out there.
Sometimes a conspiracy theory exposes a conspiracy. Sometimes the conspiracy theory is the conspiracy.
It should not be forgotten that previous dark ages were limited geographically, a future one may not be. In the past, enlightenment in one part of the world helped end a dark ages in another. But in the age of globalization this may prove much more difficult. Hence, the stakes today are higher than they have ever been. So, following Mansfield one may ask, shall we go backwards? Shall free institutions fall? Shall the world and its hopes fall with us? In other words, will the Dark ages return?
We may agree or disagree, but at the present juncture, there can be little doubt that an Islamic volkswanderung is well on the way to completing its mission of Musliming our teetering democracies, and a new “Dark Age” is looming on the western horizon.
There is nothing diverse about a diversity that collectivizes the experience of every individual to ensure mass conformity even in the industrialization of celebration.
The left liberals who think that respect for diversity is the recipe for their tolerant paradise on earth will soon come up against the hard reality of the culture war where the Islamists merely use our tolerance, until they get power — and then will end all diversity representation just like they will end all tolerance.
Freedom of Religion
We didn’t ban the Communist party, but we should have. Freedom of Religion is absolute, but it does exist on the assumption that the religion in question is not a criminal ideology dedicated to the destruction of the United States. And that is exactly what Islam, like Nazism or Communism is. Freedom of Religion was meant to protect religious freedom, not protect religious terrorism.
It [the mosque] is probably the most insinuatingly effective weapon in the Islamic arsenal that threatens the faltering integrity of a once virile and self-confident culture. Weakening the host culture against the assault on its cohesiveness and longevity are the elitist, self-proclaimed guardians and promoters of what they regard as cultural propriety, aka the multicultural swindle that erodes national coherence. The scourge of Islamic supremacist doctrine and practice, operating under the phony rubric of “religious freedom,” should be resisted at every turn.
Freedom of Speech
The first line of offense by a totalitarian society against freedom of speech is crowdsourced to the people in the streets. It begins with the imposition of a social norm, escalates to punishments for violating that norm and concludes with gulags and firing squads.
Liberalism, progressivism and the various names by which the modern left identifies and is identified is the belief that the ideal can and must be made real. That anything short of the ideal is a savage state of repression, tyranny, patriarchy, fascism and the whole litany of crimes against ideal humanity. […] The ideal is slain by the real…
The secular god of the progressive ideal has become an entity of life, death and rebirth. Its failures only incite its followers to believe that it will come again. It does not matter how many gulags and mass graves lie in its wake. It is a matter of faith. And in a secular world, there is nothing left to believe in except a better world.
Of all the troubling aspects of the Obama presidency, none is more dangerous than the president’s persistent pattern of lawlessness, his willingness to disregard the written law and instead enforce his own policies via executive fiat. On Monday, Mr. Obama acted unilaterally to raise the minimum wage paid by federal contracts, the first of many executive actions the White House promised would be a theme of his State of the Union address Tuesday night
[I]t insists on being a public religion because theocracy is what it was built to do. Islam was not the religion of the oppressed. It was the religion of the oppressors. It equates morality with authority. If it doesn’t control the public square, then it has no function.
Islam is a religion of Peace. That is as certain as the three slogans of the Ministry of Truth; War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery and Ignorance is Strength. […]
George Orwell struggled to publish Animal Farm because no one wanted to hear anything negative about Stalin and the Soviet Union. Today, Islam and the Caliphate have taken the place of Communism and the Soviet Union. The new Doublethinkers of the left have drafted Orwell into their Ministry of Truth that claims Islam is a religion of peace, that the Freedom and Justice Party of the Muslim Brotherhood does not stand for the enslavement of half the population and that ignorance of these things is not a weakness, but a strength.
Islam, like the left, pursues the ideal at gunpoint and destroys its followers and the ideal in the process leaving behind obscenity and abomination. By the time it’s all over, what is, is worse than what was. Not only is the ideal unmet, but the real has been defiled beyond all imagination.
And what is the source of Islam’s power? Comedy Central reminds us of that again. Its power is simple enough. Its followers are more willing to kill those who resist, than those who are not its followers are willing to resist them.
The operation of “stealth jihad” coupled with the “rule of numbers” — predicated on the unwillingness of Western leaders to recognize the enormity of what is transpiring, and the self-delusion or ignorance of the majority of ordinary citizens — together render the coming hegemony of triumphalist Islam entirely probable.
Obama has claimed that the United States is “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.” While the actual number of Muslims is in dispute, Islamerica is no match for Eurabia or Eurasia.
Young Israeli men today, young Israeli Women today, are fighting for our freedom, are fighting for our civilization, and like Bosnia, like Kosovo, like Nigeria, like Sudan, like the Caucasus, like Kashmir, like Southern Thailand, like Western China and the South of the Philippines, Israel is situated exactly on the dividing line between Dar al-Islam, the Islamic World and Da al-Harb the non-Islamic World. It is no coincidence that it is precisely this dividing line, where blood is flowing and war is raging in many many areas.
Jihad isn’t an act of violence; it’s an act of faith.
The big point about Obama is that he is the incarnation of the left. A very pure incarnation. The rest follows from that. The left doesn’t follow laws. It doesn’t compromise. It has no regard for any external ethics other than its own. Its goal is absolute power.
The left cannot escape its own materialism. Its attempts at adding an ethical dimension to materialism fail because its ethical dimension is still materialistic. Its pathetic efforts at injecting pastiches of Third World and minority spirituality into its politics to provide the illusion of a spiritual dimension are hollow and racist. The left cannot fill its own hole, because it is the hole.
Like Islam, it provides something for people to believe in, but the thing it provides is the compulsion to find meaning by forcibly remaking other people’s lives in a perpetual revolution which becomes its own purpose.
Liberal intelligence exists on the illusion of its self-worth. The magical thinking that guides it in every other area from economics to diplomacy also convinces it that if it believes it is smart, that it will be. The impenetrable liberal consensus in every area is based on this delusion of intelligence. Every policy is right because it’s smart and it’s smart because it’s progressive and it’s progressive because smart progressives say that it is. Progressives manufacture the consensus of their own intelligence and insist that it proves them right.
Liberals don’t believe that the people they lie to are their equals. If they did, not only wouldn’t they lie to them, but they wouldn’t subscribe to a skewed leftist take on liberalism that compels them to take away choices from people for their own good.
Both the moderates and the extremists are Islamists. They both want an Islam that is a public religion. And that is not only a public religion, but the public religion. It is not only the extremism of means by those who wish to make Islam into the religion of the state rapidly and violently that ought to concern Cameron; but it is also the extremism of ends that is Islam regardless of whether its rule is achieved by the bomb or the ballot box that ought to worry him.
Distinguishing moderate and extreme Muslims is as useful as making distinctions between moderate and extreme Nazis and Communists. These distinctions did and do exist, but they are less relevant in the context of an overall ideology whose goals are war, dominance and subjugation.
[A] mosque is not like a church, synagogue or temple; it is “a center of power used for political and military purposes.” Studies have shown that a large majority of mosques act as recruitment hubs for jihad, foster the imposition of Sharia law, and labor to drive a sanctified wedge between Muslims and non-Muslims. For Islam, which makes no distinction between church and state, between the things which are God’s and the things which are Caesar’s, between synod and politburo, is not a religion like Christianity or Judaism; it is a political movement garbed in the trappings of a religion, or alternately, a religion whose primary agenda is the conquest of the world through political, cultural and military means.
One mosque in Europe is worse than nuclear.
“We must close the door before they Muslim this country too.” For him, the word “Muslim” has become a verb.
While Western societies in general define a good person as being open and tolerant, Muslims are told that they are superior to non-Muslims, destined to dominate non-Muslims, and that they must distance themselves socially and emotionally from non-Muslims. The many hateful and dehumanising verses in the Quran and the Hadiths against non-Muslims closely resemble the psychological propaganda that leaders use against their own people in order to prepare them mentally for fighting and killing the enemy. Killing another person is easier if you hate him and do not perceive him as fully human.
Let me begin with a categorical statement that, given current events and recent political history, can be easily defended: Barack Hussein Obama is a wilful, indoctrinated child of the Left with strong Islamic sympathies who is not fit to govern.
Obama isn’t a normal politician; Chuck Schumer and Lindsay Graham are normal politicians. They annoy us because they’re so transparently from the same planet as us. We and they have the same touchstones for fact, meaning, mendacity, excess. Frankly, I suspected back in 2007 that this wasn’t the case with Obama — and then he went to Berlin for his Riefenstahl moment, and set up Grecian columns to frame himself in Denver, and I was sure of it. Common sense enables us to recognize that Obama is an outlier. We don’t have to rethink our comfortably cynical ideas about politics and politicians because of Obama. But quite a few of us probably need to rethink Obama.
The liberal media manipulates its readers, listeners and viewers the same way that liberal governments manipulate their citizens. Unlike Clinton’s lie, Obama’s lie was not one man’s mistake, but a movement’s arrogance. And not only hasn’t Obama stopped lying about his lie, but the media and the rest of his movement haven’t stopped lying about his lie.
“I can do whatever I want.”
He believes that ObamaCare will work because socialized medicine is on the right side of history and the free market is on the wrong side of history. It is this faith in a radical muse of history that will fix websites, soothe terrorists and calm the angry peasants that moves him from one disaster to another.
Ideology drives the Obama agenda. And American allies, like Americans, are expected to be grateful for the privilege of sacrificing their own interests for his political agenda. It hasn’t worked out that way in the real world. The millions of Americans who work for a living may have no other option but to endure the depredations of a radical activist, but American allies have begun making different arrangements.
The Obama administration’s indictment of critic Dinesh D’Souza on campaign finance law violations is a reminder that it’s dangerous to be in the opposition when the president is a lawless strongman who knows the media will protect him no matter what.
And what is his modus operandi? “Obama,” writes Dinesh D’Souza in Obama’s America: Unmaking the American Dream, published just prior to the 2012 election, “is possessed of a certain low cunning that makes him politically formidable. Obama’s skill…is to figure out what the American people want to see and hear, and then give it to them, while doing something entirely different.”
What I’m describing here is the classic tin-pot dictatorship. We never thought it could happen here, and yet, here it is. It’s taken a while. Those of us in this room knew what was going on from the beginning before he was even elected president, but now it’s starting to dawn on more and more people what is really happening here.
Open System — Closed System
In an open system, you choose the life you live. In a closed system, your life is mandated for you. An open system believes in the genius of the individual while the closed system believes in the genius of the visionaries of the ideology and the moral purity of the bureaucrats who implement it.
No question about it: Orwell was the prophet of our times. But did he ever imagine that Orwellianism would begin to take serious root in the West not as an outgrowth of European fascism and Communism but as a cowardly response to the religion of Muhammed?
Right Side of History
“As frustrating as HealthCare.gov may be sometimes,” Obama told ObamaCare navigators and volunteers. “We’re on the right side of history.”
They are the “Soros Socialists,” successful people who want to stay rich and powerful. They do this by espousing social programs and making pronouncements, few of which affect them even minimally. But they have the image of being generous egalitarians and the image is all. It prevents them (their power and greed) from being scrutinized by others — and even more importantly it can prevent them from scrutinizing themselves.
The larger truth is that statist collectivism is the Thing out there that is all about lies. In an important sense, this isn’t about Obama; it’s about what is inevitably involved when an idea of statism seeks to take over our lives. If it hadn’t been the person Barack Obama, it would have been someone else. A bottomless well of lies stretching all the way down to a dark underworld of fear and death is what statist collectivism offers. Few peoples have had the warning period we have, in which to watch a lengthy, surreal panorama of lies unfolding in slow motion while we are still standing aboveground, in the light.
When ordinary Americans talk about tolerance, they mean tolerance. When the left talks about tolerance, it means intolerance.
Totalitarianism relies on harnessing the darker emotions in the human catalog; fear, sadism, hate, contempt and the sense of power that derives from causing harm to another beneath the mask of the self-righteous inquistioner whose moral authority allows him to both inflict and enjoy the torment.
America is drifting into totalitarianism because of the left’s exploitation of social failures. The critical mass of social breakdowns, from gang violence to terrorism to poverty, justify the nanny state, the police state and all the other totalitarian states of authority. When there is nothing and no one else to trust, a failed society turns to a tyrant who can cut through all the red tape and govern with pen and phone.
Solzhenitsyn showed that totalitarianism works by leading people to take part in the regime’s lies, and that it does so mostly by a host of petty incentives. Then he wrote: “the simplest and most accessible key to our self-neglected liberation lies right here: Personal non-participation in lies. Though lies conceal everything, though lies embrace everything, but not with any help from me.”
An army of millions is worth little, without the warrior’s tale. Strategy is technique, firepower is capacity, both begin and end with the human mind. “Why do we fight,” is the question that the warrior’s tale answers far better than any politician could. “We fight because this is ours. It is our honour, our duty and our war. We have been fighting for hundreds and thousands of years. This is what makes us who we are.”
For Western elites, Islamic acts of terror are not an outrage, but an inconvenience, that upsets the public and makes it harder to push forward on the larger agenda of integrating the Muslim world into the modern world through immigration and democratization.
Another answer to the “What if?” question is this one: it means human government can, in fact, be hijacked and perverted — even when we’re the ones who cast the votes on it, and even when the chief executive is brought to power by the means specified in the U.S. Constitution. Yes, we can be deceived. The most highly credentialed among us can be the most deceived of all. This is as good a time as any to take that to heart.
Great damage has been done. Consider for a moment that whatever theories we have about Obama, whatever prevarications and deceptions of which we are aware or unaware, are known equally to our adversaries — the intelligence agencies of China, Russia and Iran. Even if they were too dumb to figure it out for themselves, which they’re not, they read our newspapers and blogs.
These totalitarian — or near totalitarian, depending on how you want to parse it — states depend on lies for their existence. In Obama they have found a partner in crime, a semblable, as Baudelaire would say. They are currently exploiting this. In all likelihood our world will never be the same. This is no cause for celebration by any American.