Rembrandt Clancy has translated a recent article by Hans-Peter Raddatz about the European Left’s concern that Jews in Europe may be turning towards the “populist” Right in the face of the Islamic onslaught in Europe.
The translator includes an introduction, plus a full translation of the article referred to and criticized by Dr. Raddatz in his essay.
Islamo-IQ and the Inversion of European Intelligence
by Rembrandt Clancy
The following article by Dr. Hans-Peter Raddatz, “Gottschlich and the Totalitarian IQ”, is a critique of a slightly earlier article by Maximilian Gottschlich entitled “Are the Jews being taken in by the Right?”. Dr. Gottschlich is professor emeritus for Journalism and Communications at the University of Vienna. He has been involved for years with the pursuit of Jewish-Christian reconciliation (diePresse.com).
Because Dr. Raddatz makes frequent reference in his article to Prof. Gottschlich’s contribution, we supply a translation of the latter which is to be found at the bottom of this posting. The Gottschlich article expresses some of the properties of Critical Theory belonging to the Frankfurt School: — Christianity is toxic; an ‘eye to the Right’; universal, mostly unconscious European anti-Semitism and the portrayal of Germans and Austrians as hostages to their National Socialist past. Considering that favoured minorities are not normally subject to Critical theory, Prof. Gottschlich gives Islam a singular function when considered against the background of the Jewish-Christian “dialogue” mentioned above.
Gottschlich and the Totalitarian IQ
by Hans-Peter Raddatz
21 June 2016
Original German-language source: Politically Incorrect
Translation: Rembrandt Clancy
Just as Sigmund Freud once sensed “discontent in the culture” [Unbehagen in der Kultur], so today, discontent with interculturalism is spreading throughout all of Europe: there is a growing resistance in civil society, which on account of progressive Islamisation is beginning to realise that “tolerance” is another word for the globalist-socialist expropriation, which, with the diktats of the appropriately billed “EUSSR”, is merely continuing the tradition of European systems of violence.
Proof of the growing neo-totalitarianism resulting from this are the endlessly varying formulae opposing xenophobia, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, all of which, taken together, constitute stern psychologisms which co-opt thinking in a radical way, for as is often emphasised by their protagonists, there is “no alternative”. Also, when Germany, for example, takes in two-thirds of all EU immigrants, and recently 1.5 million of them in a single year, the politico-media agitprop commissars see in citizens who speak of being overwhelmed by immigrants, nothing other than “Islamophobic incendiaries” who “foment anti-Semitic conflicts”, add peace-spoiling “fuel to the fire” and understand democracy as a “neo-fascist state”.
He who has no alternative reveals his complete absence of knowledge and urgently requires recourse to enemy imagos and defamation, for these spare thinking; but he is also constrained to the psychic projection of his own deficiencies onto opponents of the system. Just as it was favourable for the red-brown forerunners and Islam to project an identical enemy imago onto the Judeo-Christian old-culture, so too in the current modern age, all “values” are inverted, be they democracy, morality or also what was formerly called “common sense”.
Therefore the measurement of intelligence and the ability to think are likewise completely inverted, these having been geared at one time to the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) of the old culture. With this inversion, the return of the intercultural activists to the primitive “thinking” of the pre-modern era saves us from the danger of prejudice, for the assessment of which a mirror image of IQ is now entirely sufficient: in other words, the more radically an apostle of tolerance champions the continuing presence of an overwhelming number of immigrants, the higher is his Islamo-IQ, and of course the lower is his IQ when set against the standards of the old Europe.
To access a ready source of information about the inversion of intelligence, the “journalism expert” Maximilian Gottschlich, among others, provides abundant treatises, including the pompously entitled “Unredeemed Shadows” (2012) [Unerlöste Schatten]. Their historical and logical deficits leave no doubt about the cultural IQ of the author, but they do leave open the question as to what persuaded the editor of the Schöningh Publishing House to indulge this poorly done, substandard work. A condensed version of the same work, to which the controversial mainstream author has given his best, prompted corresponding indignation. It was an article he published in the Vienna press, “Are the Jews Being Taken in by the Right?”. (06 June, 2016).
The kernel of the matter is that Gottschlich’s products offer a representative synopsis of the principle battle-clichés and submission-diktats of the “cultural dialogue”. In the case of this article, however, given the bombastic bromides which fill the gap left by educational poverty, the author rather ensures laughter on the side of the old IQ. Thus, across the span of two-thousand years, “Christendom” is supposed to have pursued nothing other than the persecution of Jews; and its modern successor, the critical — and naturally “populist” — civil society, is only motivated to persecute Muslims, who pursue a new anti-Semitism.