January 20, 2006

HE'S NOT CRAZY, HE'S A CHOMSKIITE (via Gene Brown):

The not-so-mad mind of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Victor Davis Hanson, January 20, 2006, Chicago Tribune)

In all his crazed pronouncements, Ahmadinejad reflects an end-of-days view: History is coming to its grand finale under his aegis. So the name of the haloed Ahmadinejad will live for the ages.

But for now, barring divine intervention, Ahmadinejad's task poses two small hurdles: getting the bomb and preparing the world for Israel's demise.

Oddly, the first obstacle may be easier. [...]

[R]aising doubts about that genocide is now Ahmadinejad's aim just as much as targeting downtown Tel Aviv. Holocaust denial is a tired game, but his approach is different.

He has studied the recent Western postmodern mind, nursed on its holy trinity of multiculturalism, moral equivalence and relativism. As a third-world populist, Ahmadinejad expects that his own fascism will escape scrutiny if he just recites enough the past sins of the West. He also understands victimology. So he also knows that to destroy the Israelis, he--not they--must become the victim, and the Europeans the ones who forced his hand. Ahmadinejad also grasps that there are millions of highly educated but cynical Westerners who see nothing much exceptional about their own culture. So if democratic America has nuclear weapons, why not theocratic Iran? Moreover, he knows how Western relativism works. So who is to say what are "facts" or what is "true"--given the tendency of the powerful to "construct" their own narratives and call the result "history." Was not the Holocaust exaggerated, or perhaps even fabricated, as mere jails became "death camps" through a trick of language to take over Palestinian land?


It worked on Simon Jenkins.

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 20, 2006 4:20 PM
Comments

Back on OCT 21 you poated an article on Iran which contained this excerpt:

"Mohsen Rezvani, a young philosopher wearing the robes and turban of a mullah, to laughter around the table. Islam, Rezvani said, is "anthropologically, theologically, and epistemologically" incompatible with liberal democracy. Anthropologically, because liberal democracy is based on liberal individualism; theologically, because it excludes God from the public sphere; and epistemologically, because it is based on reason not faith."

These guys understand our diseased members better than they do, and can play them like a violin.

Posted by: Luciferous at January 20, 2006 5:10 PM

He doesn't even understand liberal democracy, getting all three items wrong.

Posted by: oj at January 20, 2006 5:53 PM

I agree that he gets all three wrong, but he does seem to understand how American liberals or European social democrats see liberal democracy, no?

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at January 20, 2006 6:09 PM

The farther Right you are the closer to Left....

Posted by: oj at January 20, 2006 6:19 PM

"He has studied the recent Western postmodern mind, nursed on its holy trinity of multiculturalism, moral equivalence and relativism." Their vulger mantra being "If it feels good do it."

If Ahmadinejad didn't understand, he does now. Understands that the West has lost, or is fast losing, the will to defend itself ... it despises itself and in reality knows not why. The West, in this case, meaning most of the EU and half of the USA, brainwashhed since the 1790's, have become like the dancers in Dracula's castle in B rated films; mere transparencies, wispy ghosts with utopian smoke dreams hoping the hypnotic music never ceases in their world of vacant minds.

Mahmoud has plans for them ... for us.

Posted by: Genecis at January 20, 2006 6:40 PM

"When Abraham Lincoln spoke in his famous Gettysburg speech of 1863 of 'government of the people, by the people, and for the people,' he gave the world a neat definition of democracy which has since been widely and enthusiastically adopted. But... nowhere in the Bible is the word democracy mentioned. Ideally, when Christians meet, as Christians, to take counsel together, their purpose is not (or should not be) to ascertain what is the mind of the majority but what is the mind of the Holy Spirit - something which may be quite different."

"Nevertheless I am an enthusiast for democracy. And I take that position, not because I believe majority opinion is inevitably right or true - indeed no majority can take away God-given human rights - but because I believe it most effectively safeguards the value of the individual, and, more than any other system, restrains the abuse of power by the few. And that is a Christian concept." --Margaret Thatcher

Posted by: Noel at January 20, 2006 9:31 PM

That "of the people, by the people, for the people" bit gives me a headache. I get the gist, but I don't think it makes any logical sense.

Posted by: Pepys at January 20, 2006 9:47 PM

It's Creation by God that requires us to treat each person with dignity and makes us all equal.

Posted by: oj at January 20, 2006 10:14 PM

Nuke 'em 'till they glow.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at January 21, 2006 12:47 AM
« NOW FRANCE WILL REALLY NUKE HIM: | Main | THE STRIP NAME IS UNFORTUNATE GIVEN THE TOPIC: »