It’s fascinating to watch the human mind grapple with obstacles of its own design. I mean getting from Austin, Texas to Houston would not seem like an overly taxing trip. That is unless you believe traveling east is witchcraft, in which case the alternate route west presents a substantially more challenging endeavor.
This is very much the obligation of the modern western mind. How to accomplish tasks necessary for prosperity, productivity, and often life itself without breaching our meticulously groomed hedgerows of liberal social piety. The grand amusement for any space-traipsing spectators arrives from the fact that those rigidly enforced mores exist almost entirely in opposition to, rather than in support of, our fundamental goals of a healthy happy society bequeathed to our posterity.
The results of this moral rats’ maze often straddle that fractious DMZ between pitiable desperation and comic lunacy. Take this story, for instance. In it, a Frenchman finds himself adrift in local waters being circled by a hungry and highly aggressive shark.
In moments such as this a certain clarity of purpose descends on the minds of most men. A speargun would be the first natural impulse. Though if that isn’t available, the creation of space and distance becomes a typical top priority.
But in this instance, the stricken seaman is compelled by staunch principles of aquatic indulgence to seek another course. His values preclude removing, repelling, injuring, or even unduly irritating the fiendish fish. Which leaves quite a quandary given his still robust desire to remain outside a digestive tract. So what solution does a terrorized mind conjure while dog-paddling under such duress? That’s obvious: Build marine de-radicalization tanks for the local shark population, of course.
And that’s precisely the proposal by French Prime Minister Manuel Valls.
France to create ‘de-radicalisation’ centres in each region of the country in the wake of terror atrocities carried out by home-grown terrorists.
I think history would support my thesis that de-radicalization centers are most effective when they are called “airports.” Though that’s one of those long liberal hedgerows, and so the French are casting off on the lengthy journey west from Austin. Can’t remove, repel, injure, or irritate. So why not try professional begging? By the way, are we sure de-radicalization isn’t islamaphobic?
And note the obligatory qualifier about “home grown terrorists.” Of course we need to reiterate that these are baguette and beret Frenchmen painting the sidewalks red. Otherwise the natives might get the sense of there being a malignant alien polyp in their midst. So when you hear the rat-a-tat-tat and ululations, always remember they were grown in a home.
And what’s the bill for this little diversity stimulus, chief?
The anti-terror plan, which will cost an additional €40million by 2018 on top of current funding, aims to double existing efforts to try to help people already in jihadist networks or those likely to join such groups.
Meh, 40 million euros is about the least French taxpayers can do to help the people in jihadist networks. It’s just a responsible I kill you/you pay me quid-pro-quo. So get down off your moral high-horse, Francois.
There is also an element of time-sensitivity to France’s, and all of Europe’s, de-radicalization efforts. For eventually the public becomes inured to the un-de-radicalized terrorists grown in homes. And when that happens, they tend to lose interest in the initiative entirely. Take this man, for instance. After being stabbed to death to the strains of allahu akbar on a German train station, he’s been coldly noncommittal as to the prospect of volunteer work at a de-rad facility. Which only emphasizes Europe’s need for far more middle-eastern workers to staff its middle-eastern moderation centers. Immigration must increase to meet the needs of increasing immigration.
Western leaders might also consider the little-discussed flexibility of such terms as “radical.” It is certain that the sentiments so confounding to Mr. Valls are not at all radical at the sources of his immigrant river. It is in fact native European lifestyles that these grown-in-a-home terrorists find extremely unpalatable. Thus French officialdom, and their suffering successors, will be amazed at the seamless transition of these de-radicalization centers under a muslim majority to tribunals for slanders of the prophet Mohamed. Radical is in the eye of the beholder. And when none of those eyes are blue, they will have quite a different perspective.
Of course not all of Europe is yet so constrained by its exquisitely refined morality. Poland, as an example, is taking a different approach to tempering refugee radicalization: bar all refugees.
Seemingly unfazed by the recent European Commission proposal to punish countries which refuse to comply with “fair” refugee allocation quotas with fines as high as €250,000 per asylum seeker, the head of Poland’s ruling Law and Justice party and former PM Jaroslaw Kaczynski said that no refugees will be accepted in Poland “as they pose a threat to security” adding that Poland will oppose any law forcing EU members to pay €250,000 per refused refugee.
“Such a decision would abolish the sovereignty of EU member states – of course, the weaker ones. We don’t agree to that, we have to oppose that, because we are in charge in our own country,”
Well who’s in charge in your own country is largely contingent on who inhabits it. A premise Mr. Kaczynski seems to have grasped far more firmly than his epicene western counterparts.
To whom he is saying:
Not taking “””refugees.”””
Not paying a fine.
Go dive into a paper machine.
And this is how men run countries when their societies don’t view adaptive politics as witchcraft. It’s a brisk trip to Houston.