Geert Wilder and the Swat Valley follies: Tolerance or cowardice?
Email This Post
-
Print This Post
-
Item: The British government refuses entry to Dutch politician Geert Wilder, because he made a 17 minute agit-prop movie equating the Koran with terrorism.
Item: The Pakistani government surrenders the Swat Valley, a resort area not 100 miles from Islamabad, to the Taliban and sharia law.
Britain will survive, as will Mr. Wilder, though he faces hate crime charges in the Netherlands for doing no more than telling the truth as he sees it. The odd thing is that there has been so little outrage, or even discussion, about either.
The quiet insult to Mr. Wilder and the silence accompanying the introduction of sharia law in Swat—and the bombings, beheadings and girl’s school demolishings that produced that happy outcome—are both attributable to what we liberals like to call tolerance.
Color me cynical, but I’m starting to think we are full of … it. Specifically, the chicken variety.
I think the implacable, unreasoning, bearded Islamist serial-killers have us scared half out of our principles. It’s like we’re in a room with a maniac and we’re afraid to make eye contact; maybe if we ignore him he’ll leave us alone. We liberals can’t accept that there are people so barbaric as to hate us. Us, the light of the world! Who do they think we are, George Bush? We don’t hate them, we’re tolerant!
But I’m beginning to hear the real word behind that pretty sound: Cowardice.
If it walks like a chicken and clucks like a chicken it’s a chicken. We’re a bunch of chickens and the Islamists are Colonel Sanders.
Let’s take a look at what the Taliban is doing in the Swat Valley and Afghanistan, or wherever they make the rules. And let’s not bother ourselves with regulated hairstyles or what they do to petty thieves, let’s get to the heart of the matter: Women.
Actually, women is a western word, a liberal word. The Islamists call them something else.
Slaves. Ignorant, invisible sack of baby breeder.
They keep women as brood mares, unlettered and house bound. And they know how to keep the slaves quiet. They do it the same way we did, back before the Civil War. Make it a crime to teach a slave how to read. The Pakistani government just made a pact with girl’s school blower-uppers.
The Taliban’s definition of the proper role for a woman is one of total subservience. Let me put that in terms that might get a rise out of you. They think women are subhuman. There is, right this moment, in Pakistan, a political movement that has won a major victory over a nuclear-armed state, that believes women are subhuman. Not entitled to show their faces in public, not allowed to go to school, not allowed to question their masters.
We don’t hear so much about that stuff, do we. If we’re outraged, we’re pretty quiet about it. Check the TV news, check the newspapers, check the blogs, check this blog. You’re more likely to read purple-faced rage about the late George Bush, or Rod Blowjobovich, or slimy bankers, sneaky auto execs, juiced-up ballplayers and evil politicians, which 60% of us think means Dick Cheney, and 40% Nancy Pelosi.
I hate to break it to you kids, but that’s small change. The distance, philosophically, between Karl Rove and Ralph Nader is……..that far.
The distance between either of them and your average Taliban Neanderthal is………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….(xⁿ)
But we’re too cowardly to admit it. Instead, we pretend what really chaps our asses is that cheater A-Rod. Him and octo-mom. We argue about a ten-point swing in the tax-cut-to-spending ratio of the stimulus bill like it mattered. Comments fly across the screen, radio hosts foam like hydrophobics, Anderson Cooper promises to “keep them honest.”
Well, folks, honestly. Every day a little more of the earth is being swallowed up by global slaving and the UN is quiet. They would say something, but they’re busy right now. Some Jews built a home on the wrong side of the desert.
That’s the reason these poor, insulted Islamists are so obstreperous. If it wasn’t for the crimes of Israel against the Palestinian people, the Taliban would be hosting the Vagina Monologues right now. Try to understand. Their pride is so hurt they just can’t help themselves. They have to treat their women like heifers to build up their self-esteem.
Above all, be cluck, tolerant, and hey, how about that George Bush, cluck cluck, wiretapping cluck, Guantanamo, cluck cluck, extraordinary rendition, cluck, no cluck war cluck for oil cluck cluck cluck.
Yes, I know those things are wrong. I’m a liberal just like you, let’s stipulate that all our abuses are inexcusable. But I was wondering:
Do female dogs have to cover up in the Swat valley too?
Does sharia law allow for a flap on the burka, or must one hike it up to pee?
Are the plans for the Swat Valley Hooters on hold for now?
Don’t laugh, that could be you someday, or your sister or your mom. As long as we’re too chickenhearted to call a spade a spade and a slave a slave, preferring instead to take shelter behind the feeble walls of cowardice thinly disguised as tolerance. Because it feels safer (it’s not) and seems easier (see above.)
I’m not stumping for yet more wars. My visceral disgust with the middle-passage mentality of the Taliban in particular and radical Islamists in general is not a neo-colonial manifesto or a call to a new crusade. It’s not our war and it’s not a war we can win, even in Afghanistan. It’s their war, and Pakistan just surrendered an important fort. At the very least we ought to let them hear about it.
But, before we do that, we ought to let ourselves hear about it. If we can hear over the squalling of octo-mom’s fourteen kids, her agent and publicist, that is.

Comment by Nicole Jordan on 18 February 2009:
“Feeble walls of cowardice thinly disguised as tolerance” is a damning and unfortunately true condemnation. You are right about the “how-could-they-possibly-hate-us?” line of thinking. Westerners are so used to the conversation being reasonable that I think some don’t even recognize unreason.
Comment by JimmyJusto on 18 February 2009:
The great notion of equality of rights practiced by only very small parts of the world throughout history including today, is one of the greatest ideals we can strive for. For those who turn a blind eye to what is really happening in the larger world, one can only wonder if they have any clue how they embolden and provide tacit support to real injustice and, yes, a gathering storm.
It is bad enough and tragic enough when an authoritarian government ruthlessly rules it’s own people. I need name none of the well known names most of us agree on, but there are so many of them, many are really not well known. They probably comprise the majority of the voting of the UN General Assembly.
This permits a circumstance to exist and grow, which is exponentially worse than any one particular inhumane state. A non state tsunami of radicalism is spreading in the NAME of the worlds largest and probably fastest growing religion and population.
How is it that any faux liberal who would castigate me as a racist, as someone intolerant of those who are different than me, as unaware or just plain politically incorrect, cannot see that they are aiding and abetting one of the world’s great abuses of human rights? Today, on this earth, not just in the dark ages or any other time in human history or where only the Starship Enterprise goes. And Bush did not cause it. Sure, go ahead, craft a clever repetitive argument. What are you doing to advance human rights?
One might wonder how this kind of leadership would look upon the $244 million earned by Madonna in her 2008 “Wet and Sticky” tour. Why, they might do even more than threaten to enact a windfall profits tax; perhaps even revising the content somewhat. Maybe even change the lead role to a male, for a male only audience.
How is it that someone who would agree with me just because they are a member of a religious group or ethnicity with obvious current and historical opposition to the religion whose name is used as a cover for this, yes, that same gathering storm, cannot see that they unintentionally perhaps, but non-the-less certainly, are providing an “enemy” easily stereotyped, and thus easily used to rally the members of the world’s largest religion?
One might wonder why white male superiority is the basis for western religions, business and governments and if we have cleaned up our acts enough to honestly stand up effectively to those who do not even pretend to believe what we inconsistently practice?
Comment by Snark Twain on 19 February 2009:
Right on, Jimmy. Our job is to take back liberalism from the cowards and put some backbone in our beliefs. If we really believe them. If not, we aren’t cowards, we’re hypocrites.
Comment by Proletarian on 19 February 2009:
Mr. Twain, as a centrist I am suprised to hear a liberal promulgate such discourse. However, I am proud of you. I am an active member of Citizen’s Commision on Human Rights, penned by Elenor Roosevelt, and have endeavored for many years to edify those in the civilized world of the atrocities perpetrated around the globe. The Taliban are not the only or largest enslavers of man, but they are by far the preponderant discriminators against women. Kudos to you.