What do you mean “educated”?

Vox Day is right.

It is apparent that the cunning plan of Western liberals to destroy the Dar al-Islam  by pushing secularized Western education on Islamic women has been comprehended by the strategists of the global Caliphate…Now liberals like Kristof are aghast at the fact that the very young women they intentionally turned into cultural weapons on behalf of their secular ideals are being targeted for enslavement and destruction. But what else did they expect? It would appear they were misled by the widespread failure of the Christians of the West to respond to the successful capture of their daughters by the secular establishment into thinking that the Muslims of the South and East would be similarly complacent.

Actually, Boko Haram is just as adamantly opposed to boys receiving Western education, and the boys they murder outright, but since those are just boys we in the West have of course already forgotten about them.

The fact that we are the aggressors in an African culture war is only concealed by the language we use to describe what we’re doing, a language that assumes a Western monopoly on legitimacy.  What are Westerners and those under their influence doing?  “Why, just providing education to boys and girls!”, I hear you say.  Who could possibly object to that, right?

Well, what do we mean by “education”?  Let us try to see things as a sociologist would, regarding all cognitive systems as social systems and considering them apart from their alleged truth value.  From a sociologist’s point of view, what is special about sending children to Western-style schools?  If they hadn’t gone to such schools, are we to believe that their minds would have been left totally blank?  No, that can’t be it.  Every culture on Earth teaches their boys and girls what they need to know to function in their station, and it gives them enough ideas about the world to satisfy basic curiosity and legitimize the tribe.

Is it that being taught in a school is the generally superior way of learning?  No, that can’t be it either, given the way we speak of Muslim schools as a malevolent force for extremism.  We may say that school is the most wonderful thing in the world, but we don’t like it when Muslims provide it for themselves.

When we say that girls need education (because, again, who gives a shit about boys?), we mean that it must be education with Western content.  Why is this?  From the sociologist’s perspective, there can be no answer to this question.  The only answer is that the Western system of ideas is Truth, that it alone counts as “education”, and that all outside of it is error and darkness.

Now, I think Western beliefs are indeed more reliable in some subjects but perversely wrong in others, but that’s not the point.  The point is that this is where liberalism always leads.  It claims not to enforce any beliefs, but because authoritative action always involves enforcing beliefs, the liberals just do it without realizing they’re doing it, without any sense of when it is inappropriate for them to do it, and without being able to so much as acknowledge the existence of other principled points of view.

Of course, we Christians and Muslims also believe our beliefs are true and seek to enforce them, but we are less totalitarian than liberalism in that we are authority pluralists.  God Himself might establish a Papacy or Caliphate to promote the true Faith, but He also put children under the rule of their parents.  Tellingly, in the wake of Boko Haram’s kidnappings, (mostly) Westerners have started passing around a #BringBackOurGirls hashtag on Twitter.  If they think they own girls in Africa, is there any doubt they think they own yours?

12 Responses

  1. The primary strategic objective in any culture war is to capture the rising generation. Boko Haram seems to be taking this maxim very literally, since culture warriors normally capture the rising generation by capturing the instruments and institutions of secondary socialization. If Boko Haram were a leftist outfit they would get teaching certificates and send job applications to the Board of Education. Heck, they would be working very quietly to become the Board of Education!

  2. I am glad to see a Catholic recognizing liberalism for what it really is, a system of totalitarian intolerance.

  3. Of course, we Christians and Muslims also believe our beliefs are true and seek to enforce them, but we are less totalitarian than liberalism in that we are authority pluralists

    Well Catholics don’t try to assert our beliefs anymore even most “traditional” and “conservative” Catholics accept and defend liberalism.

    I am also amused by Protestant-right-liberals like Vox Day. How do they propose to fight feminism? With more “freedom”?

  4. because authoritative action always involves enforcing beliefs, the liberals just do it without realizing they’re doing it,

    Mmmmmm. John Dewey did not know what John Dewey was up to? I think the statement above is right as long as we are talking about useful idiots. But, they are not all useful idiots. Some serve Satan with gusto.

  5. In Europe, many Muslims, and especially Muslim women, are manifesting their confidence in the Republic and proclaiming their adherence to its values.

    The president of the Muslim women’s movement, « Ni Putes Ni Soumises » [Neither Sluts nor Door-mats] Sihem Habchi, in a forceful attack on “multiculturalism” has demanded “No more justifications of our oppression in the name of the right to be different and of respect toward those men who force us to bow our heads”

    Rachida Dati, herself a Muslim and former French Minister of Justice (garde des Sceaux) told the National Assembly that “The Republic is alone capable of uniting men and women of different origins, colours and religions around the principles of tolerance, liberty, solidarity and laïcité making the Republic truly one and indivisible” Likewise, Fadela Amara, another Muslim and former Secretary of State for Urban Policies has declared that “For this generation, the crucial issues are laïcité, gender equality and gender desegregation, based upon living together in harmony throughout the world, and not only in France”

    All three are firm supporters of the principle of the Jules Ferry Laws that public education should be obligatory, free, and lay [obligatoire, gratuit et laïque]

  6. Conservatives have been overly optimistic in assuming that Muslims won’t be corrupted by the atheistic Left just as easily as Christians have. Immigration turning Europe into a Muslim state was the best we could have hoped for at this point, but these impious, state-worshipping women are probably a better sign of the future.

  7. The French Republic, built on the ideology of Liberalism and in the name of individual freedom, ejects God from the public square and from the hearts and minds of individual men and women. It calls for the primacy of the human will to supercede God’s will and causes men and women to view sinful acts in violation of God’s laws as merely value neutral “different” experiences.
    .
    The same liberal ideals and values of the French republic that “frees” Sihem Habchi from the “oppression” of her Islamic faith’s standards for right living have invaded Catholicism by tempting Catholic women and men to free themselves from Our Lord Jesus Christ’s love. It mocks and negates His personal invitation to each of us to voluntarily choose Him and to conform ourselves to His ways so that, by faith and with His Grace, we may be saved.
    .
    An unformed and unbridled human will, unaided by God, will eventually lead man to engage in acts which will corrode the human spirit and destroy the human person. We were made for God, not the disordered, purposeless pleasures of a licentious world.
    .
    For Catholics who have succumbed to unhealthy freedoms by indulging in acts contrary to God’s laws a/k/a Sin, Jesus has graced us with the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Through Reconciliation, God forgives the transgressions of a repentant heart and wipes clean the dross attached to our souls by reason of our iniquities.
    .
    We are free to choose God or the empty promises of a Liberalism that will be nowhere present when our souls depart this world to stand before God in judgment. We should choose wisely.

  8. ISE

    I am also amused by Protestant-right-liberals like Vox Day. How do they propose to fight feminism? With more “freedom”?

    I’m not a right liberal, but I believe the thinking is that once the artificial constraints for feminism are removed (affirmative action college admissions, hiring quotas, welfare for Baby Mamas, etc), it will collapse naturally because it will immediately become apparently that women cannot really survive with out men and that Strong-N-Independent is a really a myth, an illusion kept afloat by a web of unseen support.

  9. Sunshinemary,

    I understand that that is his argument and it is a shallow one. Here’s what his economist-hero says:

    It is not the practice of birth control that is new, but merely the fact that it is more frequently resorted to. Especially new is the fact that the practice is no longer limited to the upper strata of the population, but is common to the whole population. For it is one of the most important social effects of capitalism that it deproletarianizes all strata of society. It raises the standard of living of the masses of the manual workers to such a height that they too turn into ‘bourgeois’ and think and act like well-to-do burghers. Eager to preserve their standard of living for themselves and for their children, they embark upon birth control. With the spread and progress of capitalism, birth control becomes a universal practice. The transition to capitalism is thus accompanied by two phenomena: a decline both in fertility rates and in mortality rates. The average duration of life is prolonged.” — Ludwig Von Mises Human Action

    I have never seen Vox or any other “capitalist-anti-feminist” address this profound insight of Von Mises. As Mises shows, so much of what underlies this hedonistic narcissistic culture we inhabit is the direct fruit of the “progress of capitalism.” The social breakdown we are experiencing is not solely the fault of the state. Indeed many of the programs you mention are merely examples of the state facilitate female and minority participation in the market as middle class professionals. These programs are merely ancillary not the cause.

    Even beyond that, the idea that these forces can be defeated by a loose collection of people who’s sole uniting principle is their individualism again shows a lack of seriousness surpassed only by so many “alt-righters” devotion to the market.

  10. @Ita Scripta Est,

    While birth control is (probably?) more common generally to this time than to past times, it certainly is not equally common to the whole population vertically.

    As I’ve said before, nothing in the universe is distributed evenly, or evenly randomly–and that includes the use of birth control.

    Capitalism by itself does not necessarily result in a hedonistic narcissistic (etc.) culture. Markets were relatively unhindered in the past (e.g. early 19th century), but demand fell into line atop a fairly buttoned-up Victorian culture.

    A good analogy might be magnets (culture) placed below a sheet of paper with iron filings (demand) on top: the arrangement of the iron filings will depend upon the arrangement of the magnets below the paper. In this analogy, government–and its loose or tight regulation of markets–is more like straightened paper clips resting on top of the paper–they will restrict and influence the movement of the iron filings somewhat, but paper clips are themselves influenced by the magnets as well.

    The mother of the degradation we see today is, I think, individualism, since individualism is the impetus behind feminism, multiculturalism, etc., driving demand for abortion, birth control, divorce, gay marriage, 56 gender flavors on Facebook, Facebook itself, etc.

    Is individualism an inevitable result of capitalism? I’m agnostic on that one. Seems like a chicken-and-the-egg problem to some extent too: once individualism has taken hold, capitalism reigns, and any notion of having capitalism without individualism goes down the memory hole.

  11. Ita Scripta Est
    I would find Mises’s analysis more convincing were it not for the example of 19th century France, where the rural birth-rate plummeted amongst the least “bourgeois” section of the population – the peasantry.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: