Do Not Connect the Dots!

Duly Noted by  George Handlery

Daily, “Duly Noted” consults about nineteen publications. Not counted are weeklies or the daily “Russian Hour”, when weight lifting (about 85 thousand lbs) and “Russian stuff” are combined. Does that produce an informed person? Also to be questioned is the quality of the evaluation of the data gained. However, if at the end of the day, something stands out as notable, then it might deserve attention.

The bit about the “notable” provoked this piece. It begins with what you do not read about public affairs –or affairs that, like deleted e-mails, become public- without getting lumps of Trump. The heavyweights handle the nomination as a “natural disaster” because Trump is unqualified for the coveted office. VIP confirmation –from the White House and Hollywood- is eagerly repeated. Much is made of Mr. Trump’s alleged mental health.  More about “mental health”  follows in another context.

Often, the Trump news –trumped up as they are- makes one wonder about The Donald’s advisers. Take the case of the Khans. We hold: The sons should not suffer for the sins of their fathers. How about reversing that: Parents are not to be excused for their children’s deed. Rightly, Captain Khan is a hero. The parent’s partisan attack that invokes him, does not deserve immunity due to their offspring’s sacrifice. More: The Captain’s merit does not legitimize the Sharia’s endorsement by Attorney Khan.

The handling of the Trump candidacy, the treatment of migration, creates impressions of consequence. The more so since, Trump’s is not an isolated case. Regardless of whether The Donald can prevent his election, the comparables multiply. In several countries the revolt against the elite’s “politics as usual” unfolds. The number of the cases, tell that there will be multiple successes: Regardless of what happens in the US, the trend will roll on.

Reading much reveals that, conservative publications of repute are shifting to the left. Their own term: “fight populists”. Why do stalwarts of merit, such as, the “Economist” (rated as the best weekly) or Switzerland’s NZZ (one of the world’s best dailies) twitch under the impact of the Brexit, Trump, and the rise of right-of-center parties?

In their terms, the answer is the collapse of nifty consensual politics and of proper demeanor. This translates into a concern, that the conventions converted into commandments of political correctness are ignored. Furthermore, the tenets of politics’ newcomers are more than selling slogans. A contrast: Obama’s assurance to Putin that, after his reelection he will have “more flexibility”. The new forces stand on convictions and not what gets votes. Thus, they mean what they say while they intend to deliver on their promise. How crude!

Therefore, the old establishment fears more than that, its leftist and rightist branches –which think identically about fundamentals-  will be dismissed because they fail the people. Standing for principles in deed, and not only in slogans, seems to imply the end of diplomacy and politics by deals.

The influence of those who stick to the old script while the theater burns, is challenged by new perceptions. These do more than to oppose them; it makes them superfluous. No wonder: As the crisis swells, the old trust shrinks.

Our day’s dominant crisis has a novel trait. It affects all and does so directly. Relabeling the consequences of unopposed and open ended migration does not shrink its impact, nor does it soothe the concern about the ultimate consequences. Relabeling the cause and its effects, does not calm jittery nerves. Re-packaging the results of a failed policy does not, any more, make the problem disappear from the mind of normal people located in diverse countries.

Here the reasons. In control of the media, one can convince subjects that problems that do not hurt them daily are mere rumors. As long as the connection remains remote, re-labeling can serve as a solution. Ditto for suppressing “unfitting news”. Credibility is lost once experience make the real facts undeniable. From then on, the unmasked lie will render the “management” of the problem more difficult.

That generalization is applicable in the migration crisis. Earlier the claim was that there is a moral imperative to take in all the innocent victims of persecution. Upon arrival, the criminal inclination of the innocents, their contempt for the ways of their “unclean” hosts, scores. A growing number of persons conclude that, the “innocents” are not pure because in real life they are acting like fleeing felons. Meanwhile, talk show pundits advise that misdeeds are to be accepted as inevitable and that one is to meet them with heroic stoicism. The volume of incidents makes the preaching sound hollow. It might not be PC, but nonetheless, the average person resents the idea that his suffering is a moral duty in case the torment is comes from ungrateful aliens. Thus, the term that comes to mind is not “heroic” but “stupid”.

Another approach to something that, in PC terms, cannot be, and which is, according to the mantra, to be ignored, is also losing credibility. Even if orders from above demand it, many attacks cannot be covered up. Some stand out because there are too many shocked witnesses.

How to react to inconvenient crimes that express a criminal contempt for the “dirtier than dogs” hosts? Regardless of the virtue of “multiculturalism”, the reaction is to expel those that have lost their “right” to hospitality. To the extent that this makes sense, it is unacceptable to elites. Ergo, a re-wrapping of the problem is attempted.

The good news: Once the concoction is swallowed, the impression of Islam-related crime dissolves in the air. In the course of that, offenses mute into a neutered form.

Suppose that a bombing, a shooting or knifing occurs. Even if the perpetrator invokes Allah, sterilization begins with the initial report. It will be that, “a man” has… . If an APB is placed, the talk will be about “southern complexion”. Upon apprehension, if possible, a formal nationality, such as “a Frenchman did…” will follow. Only as a last resort will the information be completed by a bashful “of … origin”. Oh, yes, be careful about the full name and add that no Islamist or terrorist connection is proven.

The final camouflage is even more ingenious. It sort of plagiarizes the excuse of a refugee rapist’s defense that he had acted in a “sexual emergency”.

The trick begins with what we all know. You or your neighbor do not plan mass murder for the weekend. Normal folks do not do such things. If normal people do not demolish the neighborhood, then those that do so are not normal. If they are not normal, then they are insane. Insanity is an illness. So the deed is not what it seems to be. You have a case of insanity. Any other trait of the offender is accidental. What you see a “singular event” which should not be “generalized” through its “accidental” components. Kindly do not connect the dots.

Now then, sick people with mental health issues, should not be jailed: They need therapy. The publicly financed shrink should enable the “victim” to heal and to join a society whose order he rejects. Meanwhile, be a good Christian, suffer in the manner of revered saints and pray. When appropriate, deposit flowers at the scene of past and future “regrettable events”. At least the florists will be happy.




Comments are closed.