Let me suggest a new word that could flow from conservatives' lips and perhaps reverse the tide of the all important "no discrimination" rule.Lawrence Auster:
The word: Auschwitzphobia.
To illustrate its use, here is a scene from a family gathering or cocktail party:
Man #1: Isn't it terrible how those intolerant rightists want to stop the building of that mosque?
Man #2: But aren't sharia law and Islam incompatible with Western societies?
Man #1: Oh, so you too discriminate between different peoples. You sir, are part of the problem that prevents world unity and peace.
Man #2: Yes, I DO discriminate. You don't, because you, sir, are an Auschwitzphobian.
Man #1: What in heavens name are you babbling about? What's Auschwitzphobia?
Man #2: It's really quite simple. Auschwitzphobians are people who can not discuss or even think about today's complex issues in a rational way, because they have been so traumatized by the media and so called education, that they equate any hint of discriminatory thinking with the horror of the worst sin imaginable. You are paralyzed by your fear of being part of another Holocaust. You may not be aware of this because it seems so far fetched, but, what makes you shut down mentally, the moment you think you're on any topic that doesn't take for granted the automatic sameness of all humans? What makes you react to me as if I was the incarnation of the devil? It's your Auschwitzphobia!
Extend this to millions of small conversations. Then, imagine that this terminology is used by talk show hosts, newsmen, and interviewees. Pretty soon, it becomes part of the language. Before you know it, we're actually having rational discussions. Sort of like VFR becoming mainstream. We're on our way to a sane civilization once again.
... a principle which, if applied consistently to any institution, society, or culture, would make the existence of that institution, society, or culture impossible. The suicide of the West thus began with the post World War II birth of Auschwitzphobia.File under: the brain-dead projections of ideologues who equate all outgroup-aversion with Nazism and thus, by definition, extinguish the group. (But who strangely only apply this principle to white people).
Here is a video of a journalist suffering from Auschwitzphobia. Whilst Diana West explains the well-founded reasons for the rise of Geert Wilders' Freedom Party, the journalist is fixated on only one issue: how far will the Wilders movement go? Is it a sign of Europe returning to its hateful anti-immigrant "roots"? Yet she is strangely incapable of projecting: how far will Muslim immigration go?
UPDATE: on second thoughts, I think any terms associated with Nazism are not worth using. Even though they may be true, such emotional topics shouldn't be used to win an argument. They are so emotionally charged that you lose the instant that you use them.
No comments:
Post a Comment