Search This Blog

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

What's the point of whinging?

What's the point of whinging about "liberalism" and its concomitant PC-mind-control, and the damage-unto-destruction these are working upon our nation, if you will not free your mind from the empty and socially-lethal platitudes of it? What's the point of opposing the effects of the lie if you will not oppose the lie itself?

Ilíon said:
It seems to me that one small step we all can do to help fight PCism is to stop using the word ‘Muslims’ to denote the Slaves of (the demon) Allah. We have a perfectly good English word which we have used for centuries: ‘Moslems’

The common use of ‘Muslim’ in English goes back no further than PC-speak.

The Hyacinth Girl replied:
Actually, I think that the term “Muslims” is just fine. Calling a Muslim “Moslem” is like calling an Asian “Oriental.” And I’m definitely not calling anyone a slave to a demon. People have the right to believe whatever they want to believe, and I don’t think that’s a “PC” sentiment. The Founders seemed to think it was the way to go.

"Actually, I think that the term “Muslims” is just fine."

This doesn't address what I said.


"Calling a Muslim “Moslem” is like calling an Asian “Oriental.”"

Really? And calling them "Asians" isn't an insult?

This is just another reflection of PC bullshit; in this instance invented by that infamous apologist for "Arab extremism" (which is to say, for terrorism and murder), Edward Said.

Is it an insult to refer to *us* as "Westerners?" Is it an insult to refer ro us as "Occidentals" (i.e. "Westerners")? No, and no. So, rationally and honestly, how does it become such a gross insult to refer to all the peoples and cultures who live to the East of our cultural historic homeland as "Orientals," which is to say, as "Easterners?"

Only in PC-coocoo-land is this an insult; only in PC-coocoo-land is it an insult when *we* do what *all* persons and cultures do and have always done: refer to other persons and cultures by reference and in relation to oneself or one's own culture.

Conservatives realize that there is no "center of the world" -- which is to say, that *all* cultures and persons are equally the center of the world. "Liberals" believe that there really is a "center of the world" ... just that it never can be "the West" (even as they tend to believe that their own precious snowflake self is at the center of all time and space).


"People have the right to believe whatever they want to believe ..."

This is nowhere near the truth.

People have the freedom to believe any damned fool thing they wish to believe. But they do not have the right to do so; rather, people have the duty to do their best to ensure that their beliefs are true.


"... and I don’t think that’s a “PC” sentiment."

Then you really ought to think more carefully.

If people really had the right to believe any damned fool thing they wished to believe, than *any* attempt to correct their false beliefs, even so mild as to mention that there are other views on the subject, would be a violation of their rights as human beings.

That sounds familiar of late, doesn't it?


"The Founders seemed to think it was the way to go."

The Founders make me look like a cuddly kitty cat.


"And I’m definitely not calling anyone a slave to a demon."

If you will not speak the truth, no matter who pouts and/or throws a tantrum, then the "liberals" -- who are merely inconsistent leftists -- will always be able to roll you. On any matter. And you will be part of the problem which is destroying us.

Islam is all about making oneself -- and, of course, forcing one's neighbor to be -- a Slave of Allah; hell! that's what is at the heart of the words 'Islam' and 'Muslim' -- "surrender (to Allah)," in the sense of "surrender abjectly or we shall kill you!"

And Allah is not God, though he claims to be. And his religion is demonic, whether or not there is a being behind the name.

Why in the hell do you bother with the content of that last link if you are not willing to speak the truth of the matter? Is this just the "conservative" version of the "Free Tibet!" bumper-stickers that "liberals" feels so moral and righteous about when they put them on their Prius (even as they condemn anyone who dares to speak the truth about the regime in China)?

5 comments:

Crude said...

While it wasn't the focus, I will say that I have yet to hear anyone explain to me why "oriental" is offensive. The best that's ever been done is pointing me at one website or another where it's claimed that the word is offensive, with no explanation of why.

Actually, it does seem comparable to "moslem" - who would be offended at that, and why? And again, I want a reason other than 'that word is old and these guys over here claim it's offensive but they won't explain why'.

Hell, in this case I wonder at the opposite. Why is 'muslim' PC-speak, Ilion? I mean this serious. The word is so similar (is it even pronounced different?) that it seems similar to japanese romanization issues. Like 'Sarariman' versus 'Salaryman'.

Ilíon said...

"Why is 'muslim' PC-speak, Ilion?"

The reason that the words 'muslim' and 'qu'ran' are PC-speak is because the leftists (and their "liberal" useful idiots) decided about 20-30 years ago to decree that the perfectly good, and historical, English words 'moslem' and 'koran' were "racist" and "offensive" -- in similar wise to their decree that calling the New World aborigines "Indians" is racially offensive, but calling them/us "Native Americans" isn't, or that calling Eskimos ‘Eskimos’ is offensive. The intent of the locution "Native American" is to subtly delegitimize all Americans; the intent of the words 'muslim' and 'qu'ran' (originally, at least, and the reason for the popularity in newsrooms) is to signal that one is on-board the ever-rolling “liberal” sensitivity bandwagon.


"The word is so similar (is it even pronounced different?) that it seems similar to japanese romanization issues. Like 'Sarariman' versus 'Salaryman'."

If we English-speakers gave our vowels their proper values -- and thus pronounced ‘Muslim’ as it is actually written -- then ‘Muslim’ would be the closest possible English transliteration of the Arabic word that Moslems use to denote themselves. But, we don’t gave our vowels their proper values, and any English-speaker who actually tries to pronounce ‘Muslim’ the way it is written or the way Arabs pronounce it just sounds as though he’s attempting to be pretentious.

The way we speak, our pronunciation of ‘Muslim’ is no closer to what the Slaves of Allah (another word we can’t get right) call themselves than is the historical English word ‘Moslem.’

Same goes for the silly PCism of ‘Qu’ran’ in place of the historical English word ‘Koran;' no matter which spelling is used, we simply cannot pronounce the word as Arabic speakers do, and it's pretentious to make a big show of spelling and pronouncing the word differently than was the commonly accepted spelling and pronunciation a mere 20 or 30 years ago.


"Actually, it does seem comparable to "moslem" - who would be offended at that, and why? And again, I want a reason other than 'that word is old and these guys over here claim it's offensive but they won't explain why'."

One of the Hyacinth Girls’ readers posted this link, which:
1) states that as recently as 1992, the American Heritage Dictionary said that: “Moslem is the form predominantly preferred in journalism and popular usage. Muslim is preferred by scholars and by English-speaking adherents of Islam.
2) states that, in Arabic, ‘muslim’ (pronounced far closer to “moos-leem” that to how any American pronounces it) means an adherent of Islam, but ‘moslem’ (pronounced with a voiced “s,” as we pronounce the word) means “one who is evil and unjust.”

My response to point 2) is:
1) So what? This is an English-speaking land, not an Arabic-speaking land; both words are just sounds here, and the sound we have always used in our language to denote the Slaves of Allah is ‘moslem.’
2) How fitting that ‘muslim’ and ‘moslem’ have the same Arabic root, and that the Arabic meaning of ‘moslem’ so aptly describes the Slaves of Allah.

Ilíon said...

Arabic speakers call Americans 'Amriki,' which isn't even close to the correct pronunciation of our name for ourselves. Should we behave as petulant children and take offense because they don't or can't get it right?

Crude said...

Well, I'm in the middle on this one. I try to be hyper-aware of subtle language changes or abuses of meanings of words (That's easy to tell, I'm sure), and I'm not a fan of the "native american" sort of schtick. And I'm also uninterested in those squabbles that amount to nothing (Qu'ran versus Koran and all that).

I'd like to see a source on this "moslem means one who is evil and unjust" thing, so I'll be looking that up. Not sure why, but somehow it's seeming like nonsense to me.

Incidentally, I saw a headline today about how NASA's first and foremost mission right now is to improve relations with the muslim (pardon me: moslem) world. Now, I have a better opinion of muslims than you do, I admit. Generally I have a good view of everyone but atheists and fake-atheists. But NASA having the primary mission to improve relations with the muslim world is downright loopy to me. It's like hearing PENNDOT's goal for 2010 is in educating drivers about Brahman.

Drew said...

I'm with Crude in that I don't particularly mind the terms that are merely pretentious but otherwise are accurate -- as long as you don't condemn people for using the old-fashioned terms. "Moslem" versus "Muslim" doesn't matter to me. "Native-American" bothers me, though, for the reason you stated. Specifically, it is a leftist term that attacks the citizenship of all Americans. "Indians" or "American Indians" makes far more sense.

I don't particularly like the term "African-American," either, because it could describe an arabic immigrant from Egypt or something. "Black" or "Negro" makes more sense.

Ultimately, we create euphemisms for things we don't like. For that reason, I think people tend to change their names over time because they feel inferior. You can see that tendency in the way numerous leftists have begun to hate being identified with the word "liberal." The new euphemism they have given themselves is "progressive." You cn see the same pattern with various feministic terms; for example, "flight attendant" (literally, one who attends to others while on an airplane) is not any more inherently respectful than "stewardess" (literally, a female who guards over others). Feminists hate being women and want to be men, so they feel inferior and have to give themselves euphemisms.

//Ilion:
This is nowhere near the truth.

People have the freedom to believe any damned fool thing they wish to believe. But they do not have the right to do so; rather, people have the duty to do their best to ensure that their beliefs are true.//

heh, This statement sort of touches on my rambling a week ago about the imprecise usage of the word "right" (http://drewjustice.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/certain-inalienable-privileges-and-immunities/). It's an innocent mistake many people make, but sometimes precision can be useful.

//The Founders make me look like a cuddly kitty cat.//

lol