Xenophobes Bore Me

Column by Paul Bonneau.

Exclusive to STR

Sometimes I think people of a certain mindset (*cough* “conservatives” *cough*) would feel lost without someone to fear. Pick any forum with a good crop of ‘em, utter the word “Muslim,” and watch the whole lot turn into instant collectivists, the very people they claim to oppose. Like Pavlov’s dogs, the ruling class rings the bell and those people start salivating. It’s embarrassing.

“Let’s kill all those murderous Muslims!” This is the level of conversation when that little bell gets rung. It goes downhill from there.

You then usually get to read about all the beheadings, “grooming” and other similar tropes. I mean, it’s enough to get a person to jump into a car and do a drive-by shooting at the first woman you see in a head scarf. “It’s a good thing I shot her; now she can’t behead me!”

This is one of the latest, “Nothing to do with Islam.” I responded there, “I wonder how many Iraqis and Afghans have been killed by American soldiers? I suppose it is all right though, because that has nothing to do with Christianity.”

I mean that seriously. What if we took all the killings in the Middle East accomplished only by the believers in Christianity, and compared that with all the killings in the whole world over the same period accomplished only by the believers in Islam? Seems to me that Islam would be a piker in the killing sweepstakes, compared to Christianity. Maybe we should be sneering at Christianity as the “Religion of Peace.”

Never mind that our Christian nation (so-called by many Christians) is the world empire, with all that implies--all empires being maintained by theft, rape, murder and torture. Yeah, a YouTube beheading is always going to get some views, but where are the Gitmo tortures on YouTube?

Now, this is not to say that ethnic differences don’t exist. There is the well-recognized effect whereby a minority of 1% causes little trouble because the people tend to try to fit in to the dominant culture, while a minority of 20% causes plenty of problems because they become strong enough to contend with the dominant one and wish to substitute their culture over the dominant culture.

But that is a fault of government, isn’t it? Nobody really cares if Muslims want sharia, as long as they want it only for themselves. The imposition of sharia on non-Muslims certainly is going to be resisted, and rightly so; but that is only possible where an all-powerful government exists. If we had Panarchy, it could not be a problem.

And why do places like France and England have their Muslim problems? Empire brought it to France (Algeria), and to England too (Pakistan). Now they have large enough numbers that they cannot absorb. What would have happened without an empire? No problem at all.

I guess it’s asking too much for conservatives to think this through and see who the real culprit is (government and the ruling class). I guess it’s asking too much for conservatives to not be collectivists.

Ethnic squabbles, the friend of the ruling class. Just as good as racism. Good old “Divide and Conquer.” No wonder the ruling class wants to install sharia on the peons--just enough to cause trouble.

I have known Muslims, and my wife deals with them frequently, in her work placing people (of all religions or none) in tech jobs. None of those we knew ever blew up a shopping mall, even with FBI promoting that all over the country, to beat the band. What’s wrong with those guys anyway? Not even a beheading?

I guess I just have a hard time being a collectivist. When I hear about something like the Charlie Hebdo thing, I think, “Two bastards finally got tired of Charlie’s sneers. Idiots encountering other idiots.” Or I may think, “Another false flag courtesy of the US government--that bit about leaving their ID behind was cute.” What I don’t think is, “Dang that Islam again!” It would just seem ridiculous for me to do so, given that “my” government and various European governments have been over there for decades, invading, occupying and installing puppets for so long. I mean, what do you expect when you do that to others, anyway?

Your rating: None Average: 8.5 (2 votes)
Paul Bonneau's picture
Columns on STR: 106


Samarami's picture

The science of rulership has apparently included that incestuous relationship between psychopaths of state and lunatics of religion from the beginning of recorded history. In fact the earliest records are religious records. The progenitor of "science" was highly religious.

What has rather recently been labeled "Stockholm Syndrome" is soundly collectivist, and has apparently been around since the first human beings drew breath. But state media are duty-bound to present it as if it were "discovered" after an incident in 1973, and only affects those who form an allegiance with non-state bandits (around 8% of folks, according to the Wikipedia article).

Divide-and-conquer is, indeed, the battle plan for excellent rulership.

Good essay, Paul.