Sunday, November 06, 2005

The Poor Little Dears

So, I've been thinking about elephants lately.

Having been raised in the English manner in which the avoidance of unpleasantness has been raised to the level of a universal national neurosis and the ability to speak obliquely is among the most important of social skills, I am thoroughly conversant with the technique. But I always wondered how far it would go.

What if the elephant is not simply docilely pottering about the living room breaking the occasional piece of china while it tries to take tea with you? What if the elephant is maddened and armed? What if it is connected to a well-funded and organized international elephant terrorist underground and is carrying automatic weapons and molotov cocktails and is being egged on by its friends at the mosque and motivated by the complete lack of realistic opposition by the owners of the house?

How far can the elephant push it before ghost of Nelson is awakened and someone grabs the Winchester over the mantel?

I know nothing about being French, but it seems that the dhimmis running that country want to do one thing: no matter how hard they are pushed, they will never ever admit to once having been a Catholic country, which is the only thing that will allow them to address what is happening to them. The Muslims know perfectly well what they are conquering, even if the conquerees have forgotten. (Actually there is something grimly entertaining in watching the European reaction. "But we overcame our oppressive and primitive past so that everyone would love us! Why don't you love us?!")

The desire in Europe is not only to repudiate their Catholic history, but to deny it ever existed ("we have absolutely no idea what ancient civilization built this large pointy building, but it is clear that it was exceedingly primitive and savage..."). The trouble is, that it is the very post-Enlightenment thinking they wish to preserve that produces the current paralysis. The Muslims, never having experienced either the civilizing influence of Christian thought and morality, or the moral paralysis of 18th century French liberalism, are taking the weakness of the French response, as a sign of, well, weakness.

I had to laugh when I read that the mayor of Evreux, Jean-Louis Debré -- a confidante of Chirac -- had said:

"To those responsible for the violence, I want to say: Be serious! ... If you want to live in a fairer, more fraternal society, this is not how to go about it."

He clearly has no idea what sort of assumptions he is staring with or that only a man of Christian and post-Christian thinking could possibly have said something like this and that it is going to be heard by the men torching their government-funded suburban slums, if it is comprehended at all, as more proof of European weakness, an invitation to come and burn down the Mayor's own house.

One French politician, don't remember which one, frankly said that there is a civil war going on. But of course, we must avoid at all costs identifying parties A and B in the war. It is, as it always was, a war between Islam and Christianity, but it is a Christianity that has suffered for 250 years from a terrible suicidal mental illness called, Modernity. Islam sees what the rest of us see, that Christianity is weak; weak unto death. The Imams directing the show in France probably see themselves as administering a mercy killing to a hopeless case. Indeed, it may be so. And the avoidance of this admission is going to be costly indeed. In fact, I think it will actually literally cost all.

Of course, the CBC has been covering the violence in France. I woke this morning in time to hear the nine am broadcast.

(Sarkozy) said authorities had to be firm, but also understood the feeling of injustice in poor neighbourhoods, where people are battling high unemployment, poor housing conditions, racism and other social problems.

The broadcast news was extremely careful to omit one very important point in its lachrymose coverage of the youffs doing the burning and pillaging, and focused on the terrible social and employment prospects of these poor underprivileged "French youth," and the awful frustration they must be feeling their intractable situation. (CBC didn't use the word "intractable" of course.)

Interestingly, the Post didn't mention the M word either and went with the "poor underprivileged youth" whereas the online edition of the CBC's news actually did use the M word, to wit:

Many people view the violence as the expression of pent-up anger by the country's unemployed and underemployed youth, particularly in Muslim immigrant communities, and as a sign of the difficulty North Africans have experienced in trying to integrate into French society.

But certainly the general gist is that the poor poor Muslims are being excluded from the benefits of France's material wealth (the example cited is a health club that they could not join). The underlying theme, moreover, is that it is racism that has inspired the white (Christian) Frenchies to keep these desperate young fellows down and if only they could have a job that would include membership in a nice health club, they would have no reason to resort to violence.

Naturally, it is also the fault of the white (Christian) Froggies that the Muslim culture is being oppressed. That headscarf ban for instance...

As one man surveyed the damage, he complained the local mayor hadn't done enough to help those who need jobs and support. He pointed out a recreation club that he said was off-limits to the young men in the area. "This is why they burn this."

Interesting though, that the Post buried the story in the front section, under World News, A-12 and the CBC has it as the top story on their website complete with pics of the burning cars.

The big story in the World News section of Saturday's Post was of anti-Bush protesters at the World Summit of the Americas and a nice big pic of a surprisingly British-looking yob kicking in a shop window with his Doc Martens, eagerly being pursued by a pack of photographers.

The Muzzie riots in France got a side column, no pic.

Isn't the Post supposed to be a Jewish paper? While the Post has shown few signs of being pro-Bush, I would have thought that what Steyn identified as the ongoing "low-level intifada against synagogues, kosher butchers, Jewish schools," in France might have inspired a little more interest from the Aspers.

I might go out today and see if I can find a real Jewish paper and see what they are saying. There must be one in Tranna somewhere.

Ah, here's the one o'clock news from the Communist Broadcasting Service of Canada. Let's see if we can jot down some of the key phrases, "Urban violence. 1300 vehicles... unrest in immigrant neighbourhoods... years of broken (government)promises... the citizens living in these areas have been hearing about ambitious (welfare) projects...poverty and unemployment are rampant... deep frustration..."

Nope, not even their old dodge phrase, "sectarian violence" that they liked when the Muslims of Indonesia were killing East Timorese Catholic priests and bishops.

As usual, Steyn says it better than I.

"French youths fired at police and burned over 300 cars last night as towns around Paris experienced their worst night of violence in a week of urban unrest."

"French youths," huh? You mean Pierre and Jacques and Marcel and Alphonse? Granted that most of the "youths" are technically citizens of the French Republic, it doesn't take much time in les banlieus of Paris to discover that the rioters do not think of their primary identity as ''French'': They're young men from North Africa growing ever more estranged from the broader community with each passing year and wedded ever more intensely to an assertive Muslim identity...


Mr Warren offers some good advice to those of us who cannot stand to turn off the CBC...

Curiously, four different Doganlistas have independently reported to me what they heard from CBC News on rising this morning -- about how the rioters in France are poor underprivileged youff & blah blah blah. May I counsel Dogans, especially the women, to use their native wits & not set their clock-radios to wake them with the CBC News? What are you, crazy? Suicidal? Neurotic?

As the soon-to-be-Doganized Marchioness Judith of Anderson notes, CBC stands for "Cretinous Bastards on Coke". You don't need to know their opinion of anything. Surely you can find a C&W station.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I have to say your analysis of the situation is pretty accurate... As a trad - catholic French I very much suffer from this constant denial of our (so amazing) catholic history. My country has fallen in an age of schyzophrenia in which christians can think (almost) whatever they want at home but will have to proclaim the opposite in the public arena (hurrah for the republican "values" of clericality, if someone has any idea of what that means, I'm interested)
Our Lady of Holy Hope, Convert us...