Book Review – America Alone: Very nice review of Mark Steyn’s book on how we are civilization’s last hope to keep the world from Islamization – Europe is succumbing due to it’s multicultural subjectivity. My favorite quote, which is on its way to becoming a classic:
You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.
- Liberals are the minority in the US: This recent AP poll shows that there are twice as many conservatives in America than liberals (41% : 21%).
- 101 Great Blog Post Ideas: Ever wonder what to write about? Here’s some suggestions to "make your blog sizzle"
- Global Warming is not a Crisis: Listen to the debate on NPR.
My plea to all fundamentalists, Christian and Muslim… Peace
This is a picture of Earth. Yes. If you look very carefully and closely, you'd see it. Just below the center line, on the right side, bathed in sunbeam. Yes, it's that speck of dust.
Pale Blue Dot
If religious fundamentalism takes over the world here is what will happen…
A German policeman shoots individual Jewish women who remain alive in the ravine after the mass execution. (1942)
My $.02
God's plea is to stop sinning and return to him. There is no peace as long as men act wickedly. And human goodness apart from God denies the true aphorism, 'ultimate power corrupts ultimately.' You will either serve the loving and truthful God, or the humanist state.
In the end, there will never be total peace on earth until after redemption is complete. I know that's throwing out pearls to be trampled on, but there you go.
Cin,
That is a horrific picture. But as I must note, it wasn't religious fanaticism there, but rather, Social Darwinian eugenic fanaticism.
And while your appeal to peace is well meant, I personally do not think that devotion to the earth is what will bring peace to mankind. While education and understanding and tolerance help, what really brings peace is righteousness, virtue, and purity inside the hearts of men.
That is, until you and I and everyone else starts LOVING what is right and CEASING to participate in and condone evil (a.k.a. "sin"), there will be no peace.
And if you would like to take it one more step biblically, until we get resurrected physical bodies upon the return of Christ, we will always have sin with us. The best solution is to begin the process of having
– our spirits regenerated through faith in Christ
– our souls renewed through learning to think like Christ
And that we can do until the redemption of creation is completed by the resurrection.
Of course, most humanists do not believe in redemption or regeneration of the spirit or body, but rely solely on what materialist man can directly affect – the souls of men (mind, emotions, intellect) via education and legislation. While that is fine work, it is, imho, incomplete without addressing the root cause of man's fallen nature.
Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity — in all this vastness — there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us.
Well, that is a bleak world view. While some may consider that empowering, and while the opposite extreme of "God will help us so we need to nothing" is the disempowering view, the biblical view teaches that faith and responsibility go together.
A world where we are alone in a dark empty universe may be the materialist's way to see things, but this bleak vision is the product of a faithless, perhaps even hopeless world view. Rather than an appeal to reality, I see this as an appeal to faithless responsibility, with all of our hopes pinned on our own ability to do good. To mimic the style of one great actor, "I pity the fool whose solution to man's problems rests entirely on the goodness of man."
And btw, Cin, you need a blog because your post seemed a little off topic and long. Not that I mind, but it just seems you have a lot to say and share, and must resort to putting your content into comments.
I had considered giving you an author's spot on our blog, but because your content is often decidedly un-Christian, I think readers might get confused that this blog actually supports your stances (even though it would actually just be providing a forum for an opposing view).
And regarding this topic, does anyoneone have anything to say about the thesis of the book mentioned? That America alone is left to contend with Islam because the liberal Europeans are mired into ineffectiveness by their lack of discernment and hyper-multiculturalism that values all systems as roughly equal in value?
That is a horrific picture…. blah blah blah…Social Darwinian eugenic fanaticism
Yes. Though, if God exists that picture is part of His plan. What a horrible thought!
I tend to agree with Shakespeare about this. "And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me; no, nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so."
Seeker, when will you stop suckling at religion's tit and start thinking for yourself?
I had considered giving you an author's spot on our blog but because your content is often decidedly un-Christian…
After 3 days of commenting on Our Takes these guys gave me author privileges. Look at the comments and you will see there is a nice mix of views. I guess that they think their Christian readership is strong enough to withstand the posts of an infidel. To bad you don't give your readers the same credit.
And regarding this topic, does anyone have anything to say about the thesis of the book mentioned?
It's just more hate mongering. I bet I can give you a synopsis sight unseen it's so predictable: Liberals are to blame. Only the shining city on the hill is a beacon of hope. blah blah blah
The reason i would not give you a spot here is:
1. You often resort to insults. In this one comment, you insulted me 3 times.
2. Because we are not an open rant and discussion site. We are a site that portends to speak about things Christianly. As such, just as we would not allow unbelievers to be church leaders, I would not want non-Christians being thought leaders here. I get to choose what kind of site I want.
Some sites don't even allow trolls and dissenters to comment. Others don't allow comments at all. So we draw the line where we want, not because we are insecure, but because this is not merely an open forum.
3. Your comments often show a total disregard for what we are interested in, such as
Such anti-intellectual nonsense such as that earns no points at all with me.
You often resort to insults. In this one comment, you insulted me 3 times.
You are being way too sensitive. When you indirectly associated me, as an evolutionist, to that policeman shooting dozens of naked Jewish women in the head, that was insulting. I only asked you when are you going to start thinking for yourself instead of just repeating right wing rhetoric? The other 2 insults you mention, I don't see them.
Because we are not an open rant and discussion site.
Pot calling the kettle black.
just as we would not allow unbelievers to be church leaders
I agree. In the same vein, that's why we should never allow creationists to be scientists.
I get to choose what kind of site I want.
You're THE "decider."
So we draw the line where we want, not because we are insecure, but because this is not merely an open forum.
You do realize that I'm happier as a commenter don't you? I've already got 3 blogs to post on, my movie blog, my SU blog, and Our Takes. It's been more than a year, if I was actually unhappy about this arrangement I'd have been gone long ago.
Such anti-intellectual nonsense such as that earns no points at all with me.
My comment was meant to be negative points for you not earned. "America Alone," the thesis of this book mirrors Seekers views; Liberals are to blame, Islam is bad, America Rocks. Nuff Said. Here's a tip, the link for it is broken.
When you indirectly associated me, as an evolutionist, to that policeman shooting dozens of naked Jewish women in the head, that was insulting.
Um, I didn't mention you at all. In fact, I was merely associating social darwinism and eugenics with nazism. That only applies to you if you think the shoe fits, and I in no way insinuated that you were in any of these camps.
"America Alone," the thesis of this book mirrors Seekers views; Liberals are to blame, Islam is bad, America Rocks.
Well, maybe I did not make it clear, but that's not what I perceive the book to be. What it is saying is that subjective moralism and an undvervaluing of the objective principles that made the west great have made Europe fall victim to Islam. And if Europe succumbs to Islamification due to it's rejection of Christianity and acceptance of a multiculturalism that says we should equally value all opinions, especially tolerance who is left to defend freedom from Islam?
Only America. I think this point is important because I don't think secularism can save us either. But that's a whole other discussion.
I in no way insinuated that you were in any of these camps.
Good. I'm glad you admit social Darwinism and eugenics are a perversion of evolution, for I am an evolutionist.
…due to it's rejection of Christianity and acceptance of a multiculturalism that says we should equally value all opinions, especially tolerance
Translation: Liberals are to blame.
And if Europe succumbs to Islamification…
Translation: Islam is bad.
Only America. I think this point is important because I don't think secularism can save us either.
Translation: America Rocks!
You see Seeker? As I said before, same old same old. [yawn]
Good. I'm glad you admit social Darwinism and eugenics are a perversion of evolution, for I am an evolutionist.
LOL, nice non-sequitur. I never said that it is a perversion of Darwinism. I would say that eugenics is a conclusion that flows naturally from Darwinism. I would say that such a conclusion, in the absence of any other ethical concerns, is an inescapable conclusion from Darwinism. As I have discussed, I do not think that Darwinism can disown social darwinism as a "perversion" of it's tenets.
Historically speaking, the link between Darwinism and Nazism has been pretty well established, even if such results were unintended. Ideas have consequences.
Now, this doesn't mean that I think that Darwinists are proto-nazis or eugenicists. But I do think that their denial of the link between them, both logically and historically, is convenient on their part.
This is a classic logical error – that if I criticize or condemn an ideology, that I am condemning people. Most Darwinists are regular good people trying to live life. Same with Muslims. But they are duped by their respective ideologies, with various consequences (and Islam is much more egregious than evolution).
Translation: Liberals are to blame.
Well, a certain kind of liberal, yes. Extremist secularist anti-religionists, subjective moralists, those who value tolerance without any concern for balancing principles that keep us from tolerating evil.
Translation: Islam is bad.
I am surprised that is even debated. Islam proves itself every day in the news, and across the world. Is there any Muslim nation where a non-muslim could live freely? Is there any nation where Islam exists that doesn't have some sort of growing violence, war or genocide going on?
Westerners are asleep to what the distinguished Islam scholar Bernard Lewis calls the third Islamic war against Europe. Islam is and always has been racist, anti-Christian, anti-semitic, and bent on violent world conquest. I will post on this more later today.
Translation: America Rocks!
For all it's warts, America is still the most free and desirable society in which to live in the world. Our principles are a beacon of light to nations that do not have freedom. And the author is arguing that no other nations have the strength of principle or resolve to resist Islam. So yes, American rocks, but not because we are Americans, but becuase ideologically, we are the worlds last, best hope. If that makes you yawn, you have definitely drunk the self-denigrating cool-aid of liberalism.
I would say that eugenics is a conclusion that flows naturally from Darwinism.
Oh, so therefore you do indirectly associate me with social Darwinism and Eugenics. How insulting! You keep on contradicting yourself.
Regarding your interpretations of "America Alone," I told you so.
Only in that if you deny the obvious connection, then yes, I am saying that I find your conclusions bogus. If you take that as an insult, i can't help you.
If you take that as an insult, i can't help you.
:) Now that you have provided me with justification, your own to boot, I can say the following and if you are insulted, I can't help you…
"Being an asshole and stupid naturally flows from being a fundamentalist Christian." It's the obvious conclusion.
My, you have a stunning intellect.
It's not surprising you think so, considering you dug your own grave on this.
So, you feel that you've won this discussion have you? LOL. Comfort yourself all you want.
Peace.
OK
I can't resist…
A university faculty is home to people whose profession is thinking. To survey such a population is a valid way to select for people who think, as opposed to a random sample of the general population.
From that point of view, we see that among people who think, 72% are liberal and 15% conservative. Among elite thinkers, the portion of liberals goes up 87%.
Thinking leads to liberalism. Think about it.
I'll see your Evolution leads to Nazism accusation and raise you a Christianity leads to Stupidity accusation. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-beinhart/shor…
Seeker,
I am coming to this discussion a bit late and I have no intention on getting into the mix with you and Cin, but I have a reply to the following:
And regarding this topic, does anyoneone have anything to say about the thesis of the book mentioned? That America alone is left to contend with Islam because the liberal Europeans are mired into ineffectiveness by their lack of discernment and hyper-multiculturalism that values all systems as roughly equal in value?
I, like a few people that do read this blog, do have something to say about the thesis espoused by this book. Actually, we have covered this thread on numerous occasions (albeit not directly tied to this book). The problem my friend is that, with all do respect, you are so convinced about this Islamic problem that no other form of dissent, opinion or perspective is readily received by you. So, there really is no point in making a comment about it.
Its not that I think this view and theory is correct or accurate or even reflect social/economic/political realities of Europe, because I do not. As you well know, my previous work and education was in the area of European Affairs and International Peace and Security. So, I know quite a bit about this issue.
Bare in mind, that this is just my experience. Others that also disagree with this European failure with Islam may have similar views or alternate perspectives.
This is my observation about this topic and the author on this blog that has decided to cover it. Don't take offense, but that is how I see it.
Silver
Why are Americans so stupid?
I have to say that I've asked my self this question many times and I still don't have an answer. Where did America go so horribly wrong?
Others that also disagree with this European failure with Islam may have similar views or alternate perspectives.
Silver, if there is a secular European failure with dealing with Islam, I think it's also possible that the United States has already made the same mistakes, but with fundamentalist Christianity instead of Islam. I'd be interested in hearing your opinion about that considering the European perception in the video above. It's so embarrassing.