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.
By virtue of his limited culture IQ, Gottschlich, being dependent on the mainstream, cannot be aware that God [Gott] — in the present case Allah — is true to form — laying bare his own deceits [Schliche] and is dispelling the chimaera of his endless circularities about the endangered state of Israel,  a process, however, which is also being supported or financed by Jewish run foundations and banks. While the clerical potentates frequently enough contravene the Truth imperative of the Christian God and call for the “proper reading of the Koran”, it is in the Koran that Allah officially claims to be the best of deceivers [Sura 3:54] and to be swift in his reckoning (Sura 3:19, 199). Therefore it is no surprise that since the Enlightenment, His form of domination could become the Realutopie and the most efficient means of Western extremism in the era of electronic communication.
For this licence attached to the vehicle of Islam, together with strict networking of mosques, serves as a convenient instrument of deception between tolerance and criticism, which manipulates the population and the embattled culture with ever increasing success, but also ever more blatantly. Gottschlich laments the new exodus of Jews from the countries of Europe, but without bringing himself to mention the compliant gear in the transmission, that all this is owing to the drift of the EU toward the subvention of violent Palestinian groups and to its collaboration with the OIC [Organisation of Islamic Cooperation]; to say nothing at all at this point of the history which substantiates the anti-Jewish pogrom as the invention of the Muslims (Granada 1066).
This mechanism is officially known as “deregulation” and countless institutions currently feed on it, notably the universities and NGOs; by continuing without the limits of the old reason, it suppresses constructive thinking, overburdens tolerance with its totalitarian method and provokes growing resistance in proportion to its coercion (see above). The resistance necessarily appears to the activists logically as “incitement to hatred” and “racism”, for it demands a simple right to exist in a democratic constitutional state, which, however, the elites of the global “structural change” must, just as logically, refuse in order to retain their power.
The guarantor for retention of power is the post-modern or late-clerical inversion of the IQ, which combines ignorance with arrogance, launders the rabble who are in the politico-media and ecclesiastical echelons of power and gives Islamic violence the appearance of a natural “enrichment” or “a return to God”. While for years the tradition of European social ethics has been regarded as “fascist repressivity” and critical democrats have been deemed “conspiracy thinkers”, Gottschlich’s collection of clichés, which is aversive to the old IQ, takes on unintended value due to its suitability for making absolutely clear to those in “wonderland” Europe, who are capable of thinking, the monstrous dimension of hatred in the “cultural dialogue”.
|1.||“discontent in the culture” [Unbehagen in der Kultur]: “Das Unbehagen in der Kultur” is the original German language title of Sigmund Freud’s Civilization and its Discontents.
|2.||“No alternative”: This is one of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s often repeated phrases. Chancellor Merkel has been nicknamed TINA after the English “There is no alternative”. Dr. Raddatz has frequently referred to it as a phrase expressing a totalitarian spirit.
|3.||“all ‘values’ are now inverted”: This phrase refers, of course, to Friedrich Nietzsche’s intuition of a future “transvaluation of all values” (Umwertung aller Werte)
|4.||“that God [Gott] … is the present case Allah — is, true to form, — laying bare his own deceits [Schliche]: The sentence depends on an untranslatable play on Maximilian Gottschlich‘s surname, which is a compound of Gott (God) and Schlich (trick), hence “Godtrick”. Allah is the great deceiver, hence Gottschlich is ironically identified with Allah, the master of deceit.
|5.||Maximilian Gottschlich’s “endless circularities” [Endlosschleifen]: The German word here means “infinite” or “endless loops”, presumably a deceptive circularity of argument or even a latent tautology. Islamic terror increases anti-Islam feeling in Europe; the growing intolerance to Muslims in turn increases their anti-Semitism; since all anti-Semitism is the same, Jews are not to escape unscathed.
|6.||“clerical potentates … call for the ‘proper reading of the Koran’”: Pope Francis, in his Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium (2013), writes the following:
|7.||“Deregulation” and “structural change”, in the sense used here, refer to the planned transfer of resources or wealth from the indigenous people of a nation to alien interests or to the elite. In a very recent article Hans-Peter Raddatz uses the term “deregulation” as follows:
In “Expensive Tolerance“ (2004) Dr. Raddatz writes as follows about “deregulation and “structural change”:
|8.||“gives Islamic violence the appearance of … ‘a return to God’“: The idea that Islam has brought God back to Europe is attributable to French Cardinal Jean-Louis Pierre Tauran, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. In 2008 Cardinal Tauran made the following statement in a speech:
Are the Jews being taken in by the Right?
By Maximilian Gottschlich
Original German Source: DiePresse.com
Translation: Rembrandt Clancy
16 June 2016
The media in Israel have for a long time been reporting a plan for gradual rapprochement of the Jewish community with the FPÖ [Freedom Party of Austria]. The denial on the part of the Jewish Religious Community [an official body sanctioned in law] followed promptly: There is no such plan! However, the issue is not off the table, because there is a deeper underlying problem.
All across Europe the right-wing populists are positioning themselves, not only as the authentic and watchful protectors of the Christian West, but also as the new protector of Jewish interests in Europe. The chairman of the European Conference of Rabbis and the chief Rabbi of Moscow, Pinchas Goldschmidt, in an interview with the Kurier, noted that the anti-Muslim propaganda of the Right has seduced a fair number of Jews in Europe to vote for Right-wing populists such as the president of the National Front in France, Marine Le Pen, or for FPÖ presidential candidate, Norbert Hofer, who lost by only a narrow margin.
Not a few Jews see the right-wing parties as the lesser of evils in the face of a spreading and radicalising Islamism and Islamic anti-Semitism in the middle of Europe. This hope is naïve, and demonstrates moreover a judgement lacking in political discernment.
The Jews today are faced with a threefold, anti-Semitic, situational threat. First of all, there is the violence-prone, globalising, Islamistic anti-Semitism. At the moment, the greatest danger to life and limb for the Jews originates from that. Then there is the anti-Semitism rooted in the deep collective layers of the European society, an ever persisting, latent-to-manifest ecclesiastical-Christian anti-Semitism. Thirdly, anti-Zionism and anti-Israelism meet with broad social approval; they penetrate all areas of society and have become an ideology binding Left and Right.
These diverse anti-Semitisms together yield a poisonous mixture of anti-Semitic stereotypes, clichés and fantasies of world conspiracy. The common intersection among these three anti-Semitisms is hatred of the Jewish state. This hatred originates not only in the minds of the migrants from Turkey and the Arab-Islamic countries of origin, but also thrives on the fruitful soil of societies with a European majority. That is what makes up the particularly explosive force of the situation.
It consists in the fact that Islamic Jew hatred amalgamates with anti-Semitic resentments firmly anchored in the Christian formed collective unconscious of European society to form an explosive mixture. The European majority societies on their own account have a distinct anti-Semitic immunodeficiency, especially Germany and Austria, the successor states of the Third Reich. They are unable to mount anything decisive against Islamic anti-Semitism.
And yet it is precisely those who never tire of wallowing in this anti-Semitic sediment, those who make policies with anti-Semitic resentments, prejudices and conspiracy theories, who are to protect the Jews against Muslim Jew hatred.
That the situation for Jews has worsened through the wave of migration, there can be no doubt. According to a study published in 2014 by the British Kantor Center, anti-Semitic attacks have increased by 38 percent Europe-wide. The data show that the majority of the anti-Semitic attacks in Europe are carried out by Muslims.
Not without justification, the current President of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, Josef Schuster, made it clear that many asylum seekers come from cultures wherein hatred toward Jews and religious intolerance are deeply rooted.
Hatred does not differentiate
Empirical evidence proves Schuster correct and justifies his concern about the security of Jews in Germany and elsewhere in Europe: the highest concentration of anti-Semitic attitudes worldwide is to be found in the countries of the Middle and Near East as well as in North Africa; that is, among three-quarters of the population.
But all that, however, does not make the Right-wing populists the natural allies of Jews in the Diaspora. Who thinks and votes in this way must ask himself: ‘are the neo-fascist, right-wing populists the enemies of my Islamic enemies and therefore my friends?’.
And: could there not — sooner than many among the Jewish voters for Hofer and Strache might like to think — be a rude awakening once the Right is in power and the page turns again in the populist wind?
In addition to this, another circumstance comes into view: increasing xenophobia and polarisation in society are creating a climate of hatred, which not only affects Muslims. The heated climate of opinion worsens anti-Muslim resentments and it also worsens the anti-Semitic resentments. For hatred does not differentiate. If asylum hostels are burning then synagogues could also burn once again at any time.
One should not surrender to the illusion of believing that in the wake of the aversion and dislike of Muslims in Europe, the Jews will remain unscathed.
The Jews in European societies are to be seen none the more positively only because Islam is increasingly viewed as negative, and in the wake of the Islamic terror in Europe, the right-wing aversion to Muslims in Europe, fuelled by populism, is increasing. The growing intolerance against Muslims does not neutralise the phobia for everything Jewish which is still deeply rooted in society.
No less absurd is the assumption that the “moderate” Muslims are the natural allies of the Jews, because even they are also supposedly against Islamic terrorism. Leaving aside the fact that a fair number of “moderate” Muslims in the West sympathise with the IS and also sympathise with their radical enmity toward this very same West and its value system — where then, are the Muslims who are speaking up credibly against the anti-Semitism in their own ranks?
Whether alliances of convenience — be they with right-wing populists or with “moderate” Muslims — can hold to what they promise, must be decided with a single question: how seriously do they take the fight against anti-Semitism, in whatever form it appears? For as long as there is any doubt on this question, such alliances of convenience are also going to be in doubt, for they fail in their purpose; namely, to contribute — 70 years after the Shoah — to the ability of Jews in Europe to lead a life in security and social recognition.
Dr. Hans Peter Raddatz was born in 1941. His specialities are Middle Eastern and Oriental studies and Economics. After being active for many years representing the interests of international banks in the Near East, he wrote numerous books on the fundamentals of globalisation, Islam and the Islamisation of the West. He has made contributions to the Encyclopaedia of Islam and has translated Bat Ye’or’s Europe, Globalization, and the Coming of the Universal Caliphate, providing it with a commentary.
For previous essays by or about Hans-Peter Raddatz, see the Hans-Peter Raddatz Archives.