Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Linda Sarsour, the Stealth Jihadist

And from Brooklyn, yet, with an exaggerated Brooklyn accent, making a career of selling America her Islamic version of the Brooklyn Bridge.

Fresh from the beauty parlor, giving us the finger
Everyone with half a brain has fallen for Linda Sarsour’s stealth jihad in a hijab. But not me. Never me. Virtually every time I see her photo flashing the ISIS symbol of a finger pointed in the air (to Allah, he’s the greatest, don’t you know?), I want to reciprocate with a middle finger. And I do, even if it’s to a picture of her carefully made-up mug.

Nathaniel Zelinsky writes in Foreign Affairs that the gesture refers to the tawhid, "the belief in the oneness of God and a key component of the Muslim religion." More specifically, though, it refers to their fundamentalist interpretation of the tawhid, which rejects any other view, including other Islamic interpretations, as idolatry. Zelinsky writes that when ISIS uses the gesture, it is affirming an ideology that demands the destruction of the West, as well as any form of pluralism. For potential recruits around the globe, it also shows their belief that they will dominate the world.

Sarsour to say the least, is not a nice person. Daniel Pipes published a long list of Sarsour’s publicity stunts and consummate narcissism and alleged achievements in a long post in March 2010.

Mar. 8, 2011 update: Sarsour has tweeted a stunningly crude and vicious attack on two anti-Islamist leaders: "Brigitte Gabriel= Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She's asking 4 an a$$ whippin'. I wish I could take their vaginas away – they don't deserve to be women."

Feb. 8, 2015 update: Sarsour just can't get enough of her alleged beauty. Her remarks (ignorant typo left as is) on this Instagram picture: "Blue is a power color. Maybe your born with it, Maybe it's Maybelline, I praise the lord that I am born with it. #media #womenarebetterateverything #women." Oh, and what to make of the infantile feminism, "women are better at everything"?

Sep. 9, 2014 update: Sarsour squealed "hate crime" when a street person in Brooklyn accosted her on Sep. 3, winning national attention for her plight and the alleged problem of anti-Muslim bias. For example, the mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio, wrote her a tweet: "New Yorkers stand with you, @lsarsour. Our city will never condone such glaring acts of bigotry and intolerance."

But Christine Sisto writes today at "Hate Crime? Not So, Says Brooklyn Community. A hate crime making national headlines is debunked by the locals" that Sarsour has transformed the local drunk into a bigot for her own purposes. Brian Doherty, a retired police officer, speculates that she hopes to succeed Bay Ridge's term-limited councilman in 2016: "She's attempting to make it political because she has her eye on [Vincent] Gentile's seat."

Aug. 29, 2014 update: How charming. Sarsour entered a CAIR raffle, won a Koran, and now proclaims her good fortune to the world. We had no doubt that she supported CAIR, the illegitimate step-child of Hamas and therefore of the Muslim Brotherhood, but now we have proof.

Pipes’s column is a good half-hour read to absorb the life and lies of Linda Sarsour.
Pamela Geller has an appropriate take on Sarsour in her January 21 column, “Women’s March Organizer is a vicious Jew-hater with ties to Islamic Terror”:
Notorious Islamic Jew-hater Linda Sarsour is one of organizers of Saturday’s Women’s March. Ironic, of course, we have never seen Sarsour stand against the gender apartheid, honor violence, or the oppression and subjugation under Islamic law. No, what Sarsour agitates and incites against is the Jewish state and its people.

Born in 1980 in Brooklyn, New York, Linda Sarsour is a Palestinian-American community activist who has served as executive director of the Arab American Association of New York (AAANY) since 2005. She is also a board member of the Muslim Democratic Club of New York (MDCNY), and a member of the Justice League NYC.

An outspoken critic of Israel, Sarsour supports the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) movement, a Hamas-inspired initiative that uses various forms of public protest, economic pressure, and court rulings to advance the Hamas agenda of permanently destroying Israel as a Jewish nation-state.

Falsely maintaining that “Palestine existed before the State of Israel,” Sarsour seeks to help “bring back a Palestinian State for the Palestinian people.” To advance this agenda, Sarsour has tweeted images of fraudulent maps claiming to depict the “Palestinian loss of land” that supposedly occurred between 1946 and 2000.

As the head of AAANY, Sarsour has played a central role in pressuring the New York Police Department to terminate its secret surveillance of Muslim mosques and organizations suspected of promoting extremism or terrorism, and to curtail its use of “stop-and-frisk” anti-crime measures. In 2011 she worked in conjunction with Communities United for Police Reform, a coalition to advance the passage of the Community Safety Act (which expanded the definition of bias-based profiling and created an independent inspector general to review police policy in New York City). Sarsour also succeeded in pressuring City Hall to close New York’s public schools for the observance of the Islamic holidays Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha.

The company she keeps: 
Deserves one’s middle finger
Her jihad is of the stealth kind, effective only if politicians accommodate her demands and agenda. But what must stick in her craw is the British government refusing to apologize for the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which is the best news, aside from Brexit, to come out of Britain recently.

The British Foreign Office said on Tuesday that it does not plan to apologize for issuing the Balfour Declaration, as the 100th anniversary of the document, which helped pave the way for the establishment of the State of Israel, nears.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has called on Britain to apologize for issuing the declaration and cancel celebrations of its centenary.
“The Balfour Declaration is an historic statement for which Her Majesty’s Government does not intend to apologize. We are proud of our role in creating the State of Israel. The task now is to encourage moves toward peace,” the British Foreign Office said in a statement on Tuesday.

However, “peace” will not be attained unless Hamas is decimated and Sarsour is compelled to eat worms. Sarsour, a “Palestinian,” hopes with ferver that Israel is eradicated and replaced with “Palestine,” and all Jews the “occupied” lands sent to the ovens. “Peace,” however, in Islamic terms, is when Muslims no longer have to fight Jews (and other non-believers) until they are extinct.

John Guandolo, author of “Raising a Jihadi Generation,” joined Tomi [Lahren] Monday night to discuss the Women’s March on Washington organizer, Linda Sarsour. By her own admission, Sarsour has numerous family members who are in prison in Israel because of their ties to Hamas, which has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States government.

“They celebrate her, they clap for her, she’s the face of a movement, they’re proud of her — they raise her up like she’s some kind of an idol,” Tomi said. “I had a little Twitter exchange with her because I saw she liked a tweet I was mentioned in so I tweeted her back.”

Hey @lsarsour you don't intimidate me. See right through you.

It bothers Tomi that there are women who joined the marches because they truly believed that the marches were about equality for women, when in fact they mainly end up promoting and empowering women like Sarsour.

Sarsour is photogenic once she’s emerged from the beauty salon with her eyebrows plucked, the right eye shadow applied, and her hijab perfectly placed, and is wearing the right colors. And she is photo-hungry. And obsessed with promoting herself. On the Arab American Association of New York site she writes:

Linda Sarsour is a working woman, racial justice and civil rights activist, every Islamophobe’s worst nightmare, and mother of three.  Ambitious, outspoken and independent, Linda shatters stereotypes of Muslim women while also treasuring her religious and ethnic heritage. She is a Palestinian Muslim American and a self-proclaimed “pure New Yorker, born and raised in Brooklyn!” She is the Executive Director of the Arab American Association of New York and co-founder of the first Muslim online organizing platform, MPOWER Change. Linda has been at the forefront of major civil rights campaigns including calling for an end to unwarranted surveillance of New York’s Muslim communities…..

Sarsour came to the national limelight as a co-chair/organizer of the Women’s March in Washington a day after Donald Trump’s inauguration.

A Women’s March on Washington was held on January 21, 2017 in response to the presidential election and inauguration of Donald J. Trump. On Friday, January 20th, Trump was sworn in as the nation’s 45th president in Washington DC.  The Women's March aims to bring people together the following day in the nation's capital to make a strong statement in opposition of Trump’s values.  The rhetoric of the election insulted and threatened women, immigrants, those with diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBT, people with disabilities, and others.  The March is a grassroots event meant to highlight women’s issues and empower all individuals across the nation.

But not in Saudi Arabia or in any other Muslim country in which women are hanged, whipped, beaten, honor-killed by tribalist relatives (as they have been in the U.S.), imprisoned, and enslaved. The Secular Brownie wrote how she is relatively quiet about Islamic outrages:

Linda Sarsour was the head of the Women’s March in the United States.  There is a great irony and contradiction in letting someone who deflects criticism from the misogynistic Saudi Arabia lead the Women’s March.  Let’s examine some tweets: the first one is about how Saudi women get ten weeks of paid maternity leave, and so they shouldn’t be concerned about not being allowed to drive.

In another tweet she writes that the mandatory wearing of head scarves and burqas in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries is the least of women’s worries. However, should Sarsour ever set foot in Saudi Arabia, a trip to the beauty parlor would be futile. If she went there and tried to appear in public as she appears in the U.S., she would be immediately and none to gently collared by the Saudi religious police. It’s doubtful that she has much to say about Saudi caning punishments. The reality of living under Wahhabist or even Sunni norms is not real to her, or is repressed and relegated to the darkest corners of her mind.

Of course, Sarsour shot her mouth off during the Women’s March:

At the Women's March, Sarsour described herself as "unapologetically Muslim American, unapologetically Palestinian American, unapologetically from Brooklyn, New York," and spoke about the need to include communities of color in conversations about justice and change.

"If you have come here today as your first time at a march, I welcome you," Sarsour said in her speech. "I ask you to stand and continue to keep your voices loud for black women, for Native women, for undocumented women, for our LGBTQIA communities, for people with disabilities. You can count on me, your Palestinian Muslim sister, to keep her voice loud, keep her feet on the streets, keep my head held high, because I am not afraid."

She forgot to mention the LGBTQIA community of undocumented Martian transgenders.

Sarsour before her ideological
conversion to the death cult of Islam.
Linda Sarsour is not what Muslim Brotherhood founder had in mind to advance Islam, especially  in America, but she is a symbol of Islamic stealth jihad. As William Kirkpatrick explained in his September 2016 FrontPage article:

The term “stealth jihad” is a bit misleading.  The stealth jihad groups may be stealthy, but they don’t operate underground.  They have offices, spokesmen, PR people, legal teams, and impressive websites.  They present themselves as moderate mainstream groups, and for the most part the media and administration officials accept them as such.

How do they operate?  In general, they advertise themselves as civil rights advocates working to protect the rights of the “Muslim community.”  Using the cover of civil rights activism, the stealth jihadists have been able to score some spectacular successes. 

In 2012, for example, more than 1,000 documents and presentations were purged from counterterror training programs for the FBI and other security agencies.  This was done in response to pressure from Islamic advocacy groups who complained that the training policies were biased and offensive to Muslims.  In effect, these Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups were given veto power over national security policy, and, as a result, investigative agencies were forced to limit themselves to politically correct policing.

America’s commitment to the dogma of political correctness is, in fact, the chief factor that accounts for the success of stealth jihad.  The stealth jihadists are well-versed in the rules of political correctness, and they know how to use them to their own advantage.  And if they can bend the federal government to their will by using these methods, they can certainly do the same to average citizens.

And Linda Sarsour certainly knows how to advertise herself. But there’s not much stealth in her methods.

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

The Teleology of Triggered Minds

Unless you are scheduled to appear on a college campus, that is, for example, at Berkeley, to deliver a culinary-themed lecture on the best way to prepare an egg and ham quiche, Antifa thugs and Social Justice Warriors (thugs-in-training) are not likely to appear to riot, destroy or damage property, and physically assault anyone in protest of your presence. But then who knows what mildewed nihilism, undigested grunge, and ideological sewage pass for thought in the minds of “activists” anymore?

Also, remember that the original “triggered minds” also include Muslim minds, who are the paramount “victims” of micro-aggressions by Western culture, such as freedom of speech, imaginative images of Mohammad, hijab-less women and women in alluring garb, and blasphemous talk about Islam and Allah. Jihadists and Islamic activists are also nihilists, whether they wear $1,000 suits or jeans and T-shirts and flash knives or machetes.
The poster boy victims of micro-aggression:
Triggered Muslims, brothers in
Spirit of Antifa

Heather McDonald of the Manhattan Insitute, in her Wall Street Journal article of April, wrote:

Student thuggery against non-leftist viewpoints is in the news again. Agitators at Claremont McKenna College, Middlebury College, and the University of California’s Berkeley and Los Angeles campuses have used threats, brute force and sometimes criminal violence over the past two months in efforts to prevent Milo Yiannopoulos, Charles Murray, Ann Coulter and me from speaking. As commencement season approaches, expect “traumatized” students to try to disinvite any remotely conservative speaker, an effort already under way at Notre Dame with regard to Vice President Mike Pence.

And then there is Pomana College, whose sociology students are demanding the firing of a white professor who teaches “black communities.” Addressed to the school’s sociology department, the dean, and the college president, it complained – nay – demanded the immediate firing (or not hiring) of Alice Goffman. The brave students ended their demand:

(128 names redacted for individual safety in recognition of the violence inflicted on communities of color by various publications, namely [and apparently solely] by the Claremont Independent) (square brackets mine)

Reviewing her subject of “black communities,” one is at a loss to understand why the students would object to her Pomana appointment. She is of the Left, as “her PhD dissertation on the impact of mass incarceration and policing on low-income African-American urban communities… when she immersed herself in a disadvantaged neighborhood of Philadelphia with African-American young men who were subject to a high level of surveillance and police activity….” She is a product of that bastion of Progressive causes, the University of Wisconsin.

Jonathan Marks agrees with my assessment of Goffman his Commentary article of April 24th, “New Rule: White Women Should Not Study Black Communities.”

Alice Goffman, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Wisconsin, is a controversial scholar. Her book, On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City is based on Goffman’s six year immersion in a black neighborhood in West Philadelphia.

The book was published in 2014 to wide acclaim. But it soon attracted critics, including the estimable Steven Lubet, who thinks that Goffman embellished her experiences, repeated as fact things she had heard from her subjects though they were unlikely to have been true, and, most sensationally, became so caught up in the lives of the people she was writing about that she could have been charged with conspiracy to commit murder under Pennsylvania law. Goffman replies here, and Lubet takes up part of Goffman’s reply here. Suffice it to say that there is enough to the controversy to make it unsurprising that when Goffman’s hire as McConnell Visiting Professor of Sociology at Pomona College was announced, some people were disappointed.

But the “collective of Sociology students, alumni, and allies at Pomona College” who have stepped forward to complain in an open letter were not disappointed about the kinds of issues Lubet raised. They seem troubled mainly by the fact that Professor Goffman is a white researcher who had the effrontery to study a black community. The hire “boasts the framework that white women can theorize about and profit from Black lives while giving no room for Black academics to claim scholarship regarding their own lived experiences.” We are given to understand that one should not boast such a framework.

Let’s be clear: Goffman is not a right winger. Cornel West, who blurbed the book, called it “the best treatment I know of the wretched underside of neo-liberal capitalist America…”

So, one truly does not know anymore what the disintegrated, whirligigish minds of contemporary students will object to and vociferously protest against. Here they object because the subject and the ethnicity of the professor do not match. The fact that she got her degree from the University of Wisconsin, is irrelevant. Go figure.

Heather McDonald writes:

Campus intolerance is at root not a psychological phenomenon but an ideological one. At its center is a worldview that sees Western culture as endemically racist and sexist. The overriding goal of the educational establishment is to teach young people within the ever-growing list of official victim classifications to view themselves as existentially oppressed. One outcome of that teaching is the forceful silencing of contrarian speech. [Italics mine]

Offending “rhetoric” frequently includes the greatest works of Western civilization. In November 2015, a Columbia sophomore announced on Facebook that his “health and life” were threatened by a Core Curriculum course taught by a white professor. The comment thread exploded with sympathetic rage: “The majority of why?te [sic] students taking [Contemporary Civilization] and on this campus never have to be consistently aware of their identities as white ppl while sitting in CC reading racist, patriarchal texts taught by white professors who most likely are unaware of the various forms of impact that CC texts have on people of color.”

And most of the authors of the Core Curriculum are “dead white males.” Automatically all racists, you see.

Another sophomore fulminated: “Many of these texts INSPIRED THE RACISM THAT I’M FORCED TO LIVE WITH DAILY, and to expect, or even suggest, that that doesn’t matter, is [obscenity] belittling, insulting, and WAY OUT OF [obscenity] LINE.” Those “racist” texts include works by Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Rousseau and Mill.

His progressive education has embedded misanthropy, a hatred of men, into his unformed, untested, unexposed mind, in addition to misology, or a hatred or fear of philosophy or reasoning, or the rational discourse of ideas. His mind will never be tested by reason, because he has been told that reason is a product of the Enlightenment (emerging from the Dark Ages, the the Age of Enlightenment promoted a confidence in reason or intellectual enquiry), which was wholly “racist.” He must “live with the” offending texts daily! Does that mean he is reading them daily, and gnashing his teeth over every page and sweating bullets? Doubtful. Somehow Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, Plato and the others all inspired “racism.”

Trigger-free: hermetically sealed
against all bothersome and disturbing ideas
Do the offending texts explicitly say something to the effect, “This is white philosophy, and is intended to be imbibed by white men only”? Sorry, snowflake, regardless of whether or not you agree with the texts and the authors – and the implication is that you would not be able to comprehend a single of them, at all, to even be able to agree or disagree with them, because your animus is so Pavlovian, deep-seated and thoroughgoing – that is not what they say or insinuate, not in the least.

Oxford dons may find themselves hanged in effigy if they ignore the latest triggering offense. Of course, if your professor is of the old school who doesn’t think it is necessary to engage with you facially, you can accuse him of racism.

Staff at Britain’s Oxford University have been told that avoiding eye contact with students could constitute "everyday racism".

The BBC reports, it is included in a list of "racial micro-aggressions" published in a newsletter by Oxford's equality and diversity unit.

The newsletter claims racial micro aggressions might include: "Not making eye contact or speaking directly to people."

And if your professor finds your physiognomy dull or repellent, that is a double offense. If you catch him looking askance while speaking to you, that’s a triple offense of micro-aggression, and it might even suggest “beautyism” or esthetic bias.

Claims of micro-aggression are instances of intolerance.

As McDonald explains, “Campus intolerance is at root not a psychological phenomenon but an ideological one.” A student can claim a micro-aggression over a piddly, or, in reality, the most inconsequential behavior, statement, or thing, especially if he has been raised in a family or pedagogical environment that inculcates fear and loathing of himself and of others and of the culture he inhabits.

Academic intolerance is the product of ideological aggression, not a psychological disorder.

Antifa, colleagues in spirit
with the Muslim Brotherhood
In today’s schools, the “ideological aggression” conforms to a kind of Progressive jihad against the individual’s mind and values.

The chief focus is emotion – “that hurts my feelings, I don’t know why, it just does, don’t ask me to figure it out, that’s asking me to think, to use reason – and we've been taught that thinking and reasoning are tools of a patriarchy, of capitalism, of racism, of transgender oppression, and of a million different bogeymen, so why shouldn’t I hate the American flag and individual responsibility and anyone who disagrees with how I feel about things?” They’ve been taught that there is such as thing as “emotional reasoning” and that it trumps reasoning from facts. “Emotional reasoning is a cognitive process by which a person concludes that his/her emotional reaction proves something is true, regardless of the observed evidence.”

Anyone found guilty of “micro-aggression” may not be intolerant; but the victim can be as intolerant as he pleases.

If one’s teachers continually harp on the “evil” of America and of certain freedom-associated ideas – and if that is all one hears without abeyance, and if one’s cognitive abilities are have been sabotaged, derogated and dismissed by those charged with developing one’s mind to deal with reality – all one can do in response is rely on one’s emotions. That is sure to lead to one’s death.

The “snowflake” generation will not produce a single Sherlock Holmes.

A “trigger-happy” mind is capable of two aggressions: a “micro” verbal assault, or a physical one. They are the only forms of “discourse” such a mind knows. Beware, but speak, write, or act according to your lights and your values.

Monday, April 24, 2017

Groveling in the Dust Before Islam

as Cyrano de Bergerac (film, 1950)
Seek the patronage of some great man,
And like a creeping vine on a tall tree
Crawl upward, where I cannot stand alone?
No thank you!  Dedicate, as others do,
Poems to pawnbrokers?  Be a buffoon
In the vile hope of teasing out a smile
On some cold face? No thank you!  Eat a toad
For breakfast every morning? Make my knees
Callous, and cultivate a supple spine, -- Wear out my belly
Groveling in the dust?...”
No thank you! No, thank you! And again
I thank you!  No!   But ….
To sing, to laugh, to dream,
To walk in my own way and be alone.

Second Act, Cyrano de Bergerac, 1897, the Brian Hooker translation (1923)

Europe is not “groveling in the dust” before any “great men,” but rather retreating from its culture at the noisy and often violent behest and demands of….mere Muslims, and at the insistence of Islam. But the quotation from Cyrano’s “No Thank You!” speech from the Rostand’s play represents the moral antithesis of politically correct thinking, speech, and action. No pride, no white plumes have been evident in Europe for a long time, except for the exceptional individuals who are denigrated and crushed by the elite.

Can you imagine a modern European fighting for European culture with the same verve and skill as Cyrano de Bergerac? And winning?

’s article on Gatestone, “Europe: Making Itself into the New Afghanistan?” underscores and details how even Europe’s culture, in tandem with its politics, defers to Islamic anti-values in pursuit of Islam’s supremacy.

European museums, instead, are rapidly submitting to Islamic correctness. The exhibition "Passion for Freedom," at the Mall Gallery in London, censored the light box tableaux of a family of toy animals living in an enchanted valley. Entitled, "ISIS Threaten Sylvania", it was eliminated after the British police referred to its "inflammatory" content. Previously, the Tate Gallery in London banned a work by John Latham that displayed a Koran embedded in glass….

The Museum of Cultures of the World in Gothenburg, Sweden, opened with an exhibition entitled "AIDS in the Era of Globalization". In it, the artist Louzla Darabi exhibited a work, "Scène d'amour", that depicts a woman having sex with a man whose face cannot be seen. A verse from the Koran is written on it in Arabic. Less than three weeks after the inauguration of the exhibition, the museum removed the painting. The Hergé Museum in Louvain, Belgium, was planning an exhibition to pay tribute to Charlie Hebdo's cartoonists; that event, too, was cancelled.

French President François Hollande eliminated a section of the Louvre Museum dedicated to the Eastern Christians, who in the last two years have been decimated by the Islamic State. "The Louvre will be dedicating a new section to the artistic heritage of Eastern Christians", then President Nicholas Sarkozy announced in 2010. But the project was scrapped by the museum's new management, with the approval of Hollande's culture ministry.

Years ago, I asked a young French exchange student staying in the U.S. with an American family, if he’d ever read Cyrano de Bergerac. What? Had he ever heard of Edmund Rostand? Voltaire? Victor Hugo? Who? The fellow looked perplexed. No, never heard of them. Presumably the student was one of the best and the brightest of French students, which was why he was in an exchange program. Apparently he knows little of his country’s literary history, thanks to his state education, which has embarked on down-playing, if not eradicating, his country’s cultural heritage in schools, lest the latter offend or enrage Muslim students.

Walter Hampden, as Cyrano
 in 1925 (Broadway stage)
That same phenomenon is occurring in Britain and the U.S.   It indicates why France is declining and groveling. If you are afraid of standing up for the good, or are unaware that there is a good to defend and uphold, it will remain undiscovered, or it will simply disappear. All you’ll learn is how important it is for “peace” and “diversity” to defer to and “respect” all things Islam.

Aiding Islam in the groveling is the Left in the West, ever as always to accommodate Islam.

Meotti writes:

The officials of the fair presumably did not want to offend Islam and possible Muslim buyers with Pignatelli's combination of the mat (used by Muslims for prayer) with the woman's face. "We are shocked, this is the first time this has happened and I think it is legitimate to talk about it", Pignatelli said. "If in Rome it can happen that you decide to veil art works to avoid offending foreign visitors, well, I do not agree". The reference is at the Italian government decision to veil the antique Roman statues to avoid offending Iran's visiting President Hassan Rouhani.

If Europe wants a future, it should be less ideological about Maastricht's treaty and more against Maastricht's capitulation to fear. The brave Algerian writer Kamel Daoud said:

"Those (migrants) who come to seek freedom in France must participate in freedom. Migrants did not come to seek asylum in Saudi Arabia, but in Germany. Why? For security, freedom and prosperity. So they must not come to create a new Afghanistan".

Right. But it is the European mainstream that is letting them turn our cultural landscape into another Afghanistan. The Taliban have killed artists and destroyed art works. The West used to be proud of being the land of the free.

The main problem is that that "modern" art is dominated by the "mainstream" Left, which for decades has professed there are no objective measures of what is worth contemplating as art or even as literature (the Frankfurt School introduced this Marxist idea from Germany, and was imported to the U.S.). It is the Left which recognizes acceptable  "art" and rewards it. It is the clueless, timorous wealthy who buy ("invest" in) modern art at spectacular prices. It has been government-subsidized museums that have made room for trash, which they mix with genuine art, so that the trash is elevated with the authentic (the Tate in London is the most notorious practitioner). It is largely the Left with political power which subsidizes modern art via private foundations established over a century ago but which were taken over the Left. The modern cultural landscape is worse than that of Afghanistan; it is a combination sewer, swamp, and mad house.

The best solution is to get the government out of all cultural endeavors, regardless of their venue or audience, just as it should get out of education.

From denigrating Western cultural achievements, the Left has progressed to charging the West with racism and bigotry for having promoted the superiority of Western art (adding the charge of cultural “imperialism”) over the art of primitive cultures and this policy is now rife in academia and is being inculcated in the minds of students.

Nike of Samothrace Sculpture
in the Louvre, Paris, France
There is a sign of hope that President Trump has given the National Endowment of the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities pink slips, but it will take more than a cancelation of funding to counter destruction wrought by the Left. It is the Left that wishes to destroy the West.

In academia, as a result of their exposure to subjectivist esthetics and “cultural diversity,” Stanford University students voted against a renewal of the Core Curriculum. Stanford Students Reject “Racist” Western Civilization Course. Dennis Prager on Townhall wrote:

This month, Stanford University students voted on a campus resolution that would have their college require a course on Western civilization, as it did until the 1980s. Stanford students rejected the proposal 1,992 to 347. A columnist at the Stanford Daily explained why: Teaching Western civilization means “upholding white supremacy, capitalism and colonialism, and all other oppressive systems that flow from Western civilizations.” The vote — and the column — encapsulated the left’s view: In Europe, Latin America and America, it loathes Western civilization).

This month, Stanford University students voted on a campus resolution that would have their college require a course on Western civilization, as it did until the 1980s.

Stanford students rejected the proposal 1,992 to 347. A columnist at the Stanford Daily explained why: Teaching Western civilization means “upholding white supremacy, capitalism and colonialism, and all other oppressive systems that flow from Western civilizations.”

Michelangelo’s David in the
Thus, Michelangelo is no better than any contemporary artist, and Rembrandt is no greater than any non-Western artist. So, too, street graffiti — which is essentially the defacing of public and private property, and thus serves to undermine civilization — is “art.”

Melody-free, harmony-free, atonal sounds are just as good as Beethoven’s music. And Western classical music is no better than the music of any non-Western civilization. Guatemalan poets are every bit as worthy of study as Shakespeare.

When the Nobel Prize-winning American novelist Saul Bellow asked an interviewer, “Who is the Tolstoy of the Zulus? The Proust of the Papuans?” all hell broke loose on the cultural left. Bellow had implied that the greatest writers of fiction were Western.

The left hates standards — moral standards, artistic standards, cultural standards. The West is built on all three, and it has excelled in all three.

Why does the left hate standards? It hates standards because when there are standards, there is judgment. And leftists don’t want to be judged.

The subjectivism and relativism of Marxist “esthetics” is basically nihilistic in nature. Which is why the Left can be in alliance with Islam. Islam stands for nothingness, and it wishes to impose it on the West. Every Western achievement in science, art, and politics is an affront to Islam. The West has been, ever since the end of the Dark Ages, pro-life and living on this earth; Islam has not changed in fourteen centuries and its theology and “practical” advice for living on earth is decidedly anti-life, and anti-value.

Islam will eat you and Europe
and America alive.

The editors of Britannica note that:

….nihilism encompassed a variety of philosophical and aesthetic stances that, in one sense or another, denied the existence of genuine moral truths or values, rejected the possibility of knowledge or communication, and asserted the ultimate meaninglessness or purposelessness of life or of the universe.

This is essentially the Islamic view, with the qualification that if anything has “purpose,” is it for or by Allah. Human values are superfluous. See “A Complete Way of Death” from May 2016, and that should clarify why Islam is nihilistic to the core. Europe is destined to become an arid “nothingness” in which all values are hidden, apologized for, or destroyed.