Terror is just one arm of the jihad, creeping Islamisation and its institutionalised misogyny is the other and it’s probably, in the long term, far more effective. My eldest newphew was in France twenty years ago and he mentioned that ‘no-go’ Muslim areas had already appeared, particularly in the South. How could anyone with any knowledge of Islam and its supremacist history be surprised?
Indeed, this is terrifying, as well as enraging. But that last bit at the end, about unemployment being 20% and idle young men having the run of the area, gives people enough rope to hang the women with—for it isn’t the Muslims’ fault at any measure, it must always and only be systemic French discrimination. And sure, there *are* problems with discrimination, but in this case I don’t believe the ghettoisation is one-sided.
There is little reason for people of a different culture to integrate when they are placed in large numbers in single region, they can simply band together and keep the culture alive in that location thanks to their numbers making them a local majority.
This is the story worldwide, right? Women are resigned – in some cases, it may only be a dirty joke or a leer, then it escalates to grabbing at the water cooler (which, according to Richard Dawkins, isn’t serious enough to worry about). In France, it may be women being kept out of certain areas. Elsewhere? Child brides, forced marriages, FGM, acid thrown in the face, lashes for looking the wrong way, and more…
It’s all part of the same whole – a spectrum of hatred, with severity of action seemingly controlled only by the government’s reaction and the rules of the society.
Would it be too obvious to point out a clear causation chain – that a neighborhood in which cafés refuse business to 50% of all clients, commerce is probably going to tank? Even if we strip out all the sexism and religious bullying… say the neighborhood’s policy were a bizarre “coin-toss based” rule: merchants flip a coin for every potential customer; heads=you may come in, tails=you won’t be served. Who in the hell would consider taking their family to such a neighborhood for a meal?
I wonder how much of a positive-feeback loop is at play here:
higher unemployment => more extreme religious beliefs => greater restrictions of “permissible” customers => less commerce => higher unemployment
Kevin Kirkpatrick, that’s a very interesting observation.
I wonder if the growing “success” of this ideology is paired with the general decline in the availability of energy. In an energy-restricted future, cultures which can totter along on 50% the energy might present a more resilient aspect. I had always thought civil rights gains to be a luxury borne of surplus.
Terror is just one arm of the jihad, creeping Islamisation and its institutionalised misogyny is the other and it’s probably, in the long term, far more effective. My eldest newphew was in France twenty years ago and he mentioned that ‘no-go’ Muslim areas had already appeared, particularly in the South. How could anyone with any knowledge of Islam and its supremacist history be surprised?
Shared on Facebook. Terrifying.
Indeed, this is terrifying, as well as enraging. But that last bit at the end, about unemployment being 20% and idle young men having the run of the area, gives people enough rope to hang the women with—for it isn’t the Muslims’ fault at any measure, it must always and only be systemic French discrimination. And sure, there *are* problems with discrimination, but in this case I don’t believe the ghettoisation is one-sided.
There is little reason for people of a different culture to integrate when they are placed in large numbers in single region, they can simply band together and keep the culture alive in that location thanks to their numbers making them a local majority.
“Women are resigned”
This is the story worldwide, right? Women are resigned – in some cases, it may only be a dirty joke or a leer, then it escalates to grabbing at the water cooler (which, according to Richard Dawkins, isn’t serious enough to worry about). In France, it may be women being kept out of certain areas. Elsewhere? Child brides, forced marriages, FGM, acid thrown in the face, lashes for looking the wrong way, and more…
It’s all part of the same whole – a spectrum of hatred, with severity of action seemingly controlled only by the government’s reaction and the rules of the society.
Would it be too obvious to point out a clear causation chain – that a neighborhood in which cafés refuse business to 50% of all clients, commerce is probably going to tank? Even if we strip out all the sexism and religious bullying… say the neighborhood’s policy were a bizarre “coin-toss based” rule: merchants flip a coin for every potential customer; heads=you may come in, tails=you won’t be served. Who in the hell would consider taking their family to such a neighborhood for a meal?
I wonder how much of a positive-feeback loop is at play here:
higher unemployment => more extreme religious beliefs => greater restrictions of “permissible” customers => less commerce => higher unemployment
Kevin Kirkpatrick, that’s a very interesting observation.
I wonder if the growing “success” of this ideology is paired with the general decline in the availability of energy. In an energy-restricted future, cultures which can totter along on 50% the energy might present a more resilient aspect. I had always thought civil rights gains to be a luxury borne of surplus.
Kevin,
I thought that, too, although my version was about arbitrary decisions rather than a coin toss. Your version is better for illustrating the stupid.