A picture paints a thousand blog posts

Now that Geert Wilders is the leader of a Second Chamber fraction 9 members strong, the discussion on what and what does not constitute racism is back with a vengeance. Although, if Godwin's Law holds for political debate as it does for messageboards and newsgroups, the left (including coalition members) have already lost the debate. With regard to Wilders the Dutch bien-pensant have repeatedly and publicly made allusions to the NSB and the persecution of Jews during WW2. And one PvdA luminary, who shall not be named for she is Elsbeth Etty, has the temerity to refer to the motto of the Waffen SS: Unsere Ehre heisst Treue. Godwin says: You lose!

What is so exasperating in these discussions on immigration, allochtone issues and racism is the confusion of terms that seems to be upheld on purpose. We have written about the word 'allochtone' and its ever changing meaning before. As it is now, for all practical purposes the word means someone from a non-western, islamic background. But, given the original meaning of the word, it is an excellent stick in the hands of the left to beat the right into submission. Any criticism of muslims is criticism of allochtones is criticism of all non-western immigrants is racism. QED.

The same goes for issues around immigration. While the cabinet maintains the Netherlands and Europe need immigration of skilled labour and 'knowledge workers' to combat the predicted economic effects of the aging of the population, it is virtually impossible (NL) for skilled labor from India or China to come to the Netherlands. On the other hand, any illiterate worshipper of the big, black stone idol with a second or third degree cousin in the Netherlands is eligible for a permit as long as his sponsor meets the requirements set by the government. And thus, while the Indian Hindu that would be an asset to the Dutch economy is turned away, the Moroccan muslim is allowed into a life of government benefit cheques and housing subsidies. But pointing this out will lead to the same accusations of racism via the same baiting and switching of different meanings of the same word and render the criticaster helpless in the face of righteous leftist indignation.

The most egregious confusion of terms is being perpetrated by Mohammed Rabbae (NL) this week in Trouw dagblad (print version only). In a piece that was meant as an answer to an op-ed by Wilders c.s. Rabbae, himself a traditional muslim firmly embedded within the Dutch really left in general and GroenLinks in particular, is peddling his new term to designate critical thinking on matters muslim: Islam-racism. Yes, gentle reader, you read that right: Not just ordinary racism, but ISLAM-RACISM.

Obviously, 'islamophobia' doesn't quite sound malignant enough, doesn't condemn the receiving party quite so devastatingly as the accusation of 'racism'. But straight up 'racism' doesn't do the trick either, for that one is too easy to prove false. And thus the brilliant Rabbae comes up
with 'islam-racism'. As bad as racism, but particularly designed to protect the prophet (may pork dung be upon him).

On the various blogs critical of islam and its guardian, multiculturalism, it has been argued again and again that islam is a religion or an ideology and as such principally independent of anyones origin or race. Hence criticism of islam, muslims or 'islamophobia' by definition is not racism. But recently I found the picture that makes the 1000 blog posts worth of explanation redundant:


The text reads: "Against Islam = Racism?" The people pictured are Ayaan Hirsi Ali (on the left, ofcourse) and Abdul-Jabbar van der Ven (NL) an indigenous Dutch of Roman Catholic parents, who converted to islam at the age of 14. Van er Ven created some infamy for himself a few weeks after the murder of Theo van Gogh by openly wishing Wilders a case of terminal cancer on a national talkshow broadcast on Dutch TV. With one small illustration the whole 'anti-islam = racism' meme is effectively defused. Can't get it better then that, can you?

What all this implies is that it is high time we clean up the public debate. Stop using the word "allochtone", but use the proper word in the proper context. The Utrecht neighborhood Ondiep did not have an 'allochtone' problem, it had a Moroccan problem. And if one looks deep enough into it, I bet one will find that at its very core it is a muslim punk-jihad problem.

We should not be afraid to name names. Obliquely referring to 'allochtone issues' muddies the waters, leaves everyone wide open to accusations of the racism police and prohibits a clear identification of the problem. Moreover, it unjustly tars whole groups of immigrants who have nothing to do with Dutch contemporary miseries.The word 'allochtone' should never be used in public again. Ever.

Don't get dragged into a discussion about allochtones versus autochtones. This is not the issue. Refuse to discuss racism when islam is at the heart of the discussion. Racism is not the issue. And I dare say muslims in general are not the issue. What is the issue is that section of the muslim population in Netherlands, and Europe generally, that is actively subverting our society, ever so patiently readying it for introduction of Sharia rule, a 1400 year old totalitarian system that leaves individuals no freedom but only slavery. We should never lose sight of that very real issue.

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...