Monk. Islam.

Further reading of the Monk archive allowed me to find this, in his essay ISIS and the Pathology of Islam:

In short, the one God of Islam is not the God of Abraham, of Micah, of Isaiah – or of Jesus. Muhammad’s deity is a God of war and conquest and the Sunna, the example of the Prophet, is one of jihad and the killing of one’s enemies and critics. This fundamental problem Manne does not address.

Islam did not arise or spread by peace or persuasion, nor did Muhammad preach that it should do so. It arose as a religion calling for the violent overthrow of all non-Muslim religions and principalities, in order that the ‘truth’ might prevail. For several centuries, its adherents strove by all means at their disposal to conquer the whole of Europe and Asia. The much criticized crusades were a belated and relatively small scale response to these wars of conquest.

The Ottomans renewed those wars of conquest and took Constantinople, Greece and the Balkans. Modern jihadists, including Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, decades before Sayyid Qutb wrote Milestones, sought to revive this tradition of Muslim militancy. It is very active now in many parts of the Muslim world and by no means confined to that vicious enclave which calls itself the Islamic State.

This is the larger problem. Sayyid Qutb’s master work was In the Shade of the Qur’an (1954). Those who insist that ISIS is an aberrant form of Islam and its rise the fault of the West, must reckon with the fact that ‘the shade of the Qur’an’ is the complacent, but dangerous assumption that Islam is the ‘final revelation’ and that sooner or later the world must and will become Muslim – through jihad and as the ‘will of Allah’. If you are reading Manne’s book closely, you will perceive this between the lines – but it is not directly stated or addressed. It needs to be.

It most certainly does.

And for that to happen, we in the west have to throw out the prevaricating, equivocating, deracinated, craven, worse-than-useless politicians whose avarice has led us to the dangers in which we find ourselves.



Posted in Narrative and Taboo, The Mind & Society, The Suicide of the West | Leave a comment

Critical Thinking – what is it?

Making my way through the library of Paul Monk’s essays that I recently discovered, I came across this passage in the essay Expert Knowledge and Scientific Thinking are Under Siege:

The most important of…intellectual capabilities and the one most under attack in American universities is critical thinking: the ability to examine new information and competing ideas dispassionately, logically and without emotional or personal preconceptions.

This may or may not be true. My own efforts are directed towards improving people’s thinking and decision-making, but only because I think this is a worthy pursuit and that more can be done in this area, not because I think that quality thought is under attack.

But what caught my attention was the definition of critical thinking provided by the author:

the ability to examine new information and competing ideas dispassionately, logically and without emotional or personal preconceptions

Is this critical thinking?

Continue reading

Posted in Critical Thinking, Epistemic Rationality, Instrumental Rationality, Thinking Course | Leave a comment

Well said

From Unz, in a post about the Trump-CNN meme:

Do journalists do anything else these days besides dredge up the worst sewage produced by academics in the Current Year, rub our noses in it, and lead struggle sessions against dissenters big and small?

Well, they also feverishly root out the thoughtcrime in anyone who lampoons them, the little guy who provides ammo to their enemies.

Well written, soundly observed.

Posted in Flotsam and Jetsam | Leave a comment

Winner, Meme Wars


Posted in Flotsam and Jetsam | Leave a comment

Reid – on point

After all the garbage spewed in the media about Trump and his supporters, it’s a pleasant change to hear what to me sounds like the fundamental reality articulated so clearly.

Well done Ms Reid.

Note that this clip is from early 2016. If only people had listened to her then.


Posted in Epistemic Rationality, Narrative and Taboo, The Mind & Society | Leave a comment


As a result of a chain of unexpected events, I’ve discovered a motherlode of Paul Monk’s essays.

I didn’t realise that he’d been blogging for the past few years.

The stash doesn’t contain his older essays, which appeared in the Australian Financial Review between about 1998 and 2003. For them, you’ll have to buy his book of essays. [They used to be available on the Austhink website, but he took them down around the time he published his book.]

Those essays, which usually appeared in the Fin’s Review section on a Friday, were one of the reasons, along with the works of Heuer and Stebbing, for my becoming interested in thought and decision, as well as intelligence and strategy.

Posted in The Mind & Society | Leave a comment

Kudos to orca100

… whoever you are.

The subject matter is tragic, but your writing is absolutely superb, you are clever enough to see through the PC garbage, and courageous enough to write openly against it.

Links here and here and here.

Posted in Epistemic Rationality, Narrative and Taboo, The Suicide of the West | Leave a comment

Paul Gottfried on the Baizuo

From Unz:

Every day I hear exasperated Trump-backers exclaim that the Left has gone crazy. And their complaint seems justified, at least up to a point. The demonstrations against Trump, which now involve such gestures as setting fires, destroying property and beating up suspected Trump backers, look utterly “irrational.” It’s as if the election and subsequent inauguration of Donald Trump released forces of madness that can no longer be contained … Note that I’m not saying that everyone out there making noise or burning property is a model of scientific rationality. Nor am I claiming that the entertainment community makes sense when they scream against the Donald, or that students who recently set fires on the Berkeley campus to protest a speech by Milo Yiannopoulos were engaging in Aristotelian reasoning. What I am asserting is that viewed from the top, this agitation and violence reveal careful thought. In fact, from the vantage point of George Soros and such protest organizers as the Democratic National Committee and the leaders of the grievance culture, noisy demonstrations are a reasonable means toward a predetermined end. Max Weber, Vilfredo Pareto, and other sociologists who understood functional rationality as working systematically toward a desired end would have pointed to these protests as illustrating perfectly rational action, at least on the part of those who organize them.

I was pleased to see this reference to functional, or what I call in my course Action, Rationality. I’ve drawn upon it and put it in my slides.

The useful idiots are all over the place, but that’s exactly what they are, mere stage extras. They are impressionable adolescents, Hollywood airheads, middle-aged women who want to “assert themselves,” perpetually incited racial minorities, and Muslim activists. Many of them can be mobilized at the drop of a pin to “march for tolerance,” however that term is interpreted by those who organize the march and by politicians, like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, who seek to increase their influence through well-prepared displays of “righteous indignation.”

Righteous indignation indeed!

The only question that should be asked in this matter concerns the end game of those who are organizing the insurrectionary masses. What do they expect to gain from the continuing noise and escalating violence? At the very least they may hope to disempower Trump and his administration–perhaps to render them so powerless that they won’t able to do anything that the Left and the Democratic base (to make a perhaps unnecessary distinction) don’t want them to do. The Democrats are also hoping to take advantage of the chaos to which their fans and operatives have contributed by posing as the true party of order. Only the Democrats, the electorate will be impelled to assume, could end the civil unrest by bringing back the glorious days of the Obama administration.

This transfiguration of the bungling leftist Obama into the guarantor of American order may not be as strange an idea as it first seems. Last week I found myself sitting next to a sixty year old black woman on a train going to Philadelphia; and this traveler began telling me how nice it had been under Obama. At first I reminded her of the growing criminality in our cities during the last few years, but then I noticed she wasn’t talking about crime. Things had been nicer under Obama because back then one didn’t witness daily and even hourly eruptions of organized anger, with the media, entertainment industry, and in varying degrees the Democratic Party egging on the mobs. The woman whom I spoke to wasn’t looking for deeper causes. All she knew was that since Trump had taken office, pandemonium was loosed on the country. And it’s not yet clear that this pandemonium will be blamed on those who are causing it, namely the organizers, the media, and the throngs of useful idiots.

Worth reading in full.

Posted in Cult-Marx Inversion, Democracy and freedom of mind, Epistemic Rationality, Instrumental Rationality, Mind-sets and Logic-Bubbles, Narrative and Taboo, The Mind & Society, The Suicide of the West | Leave a comment

Worth reading – Camille Paglia

Camille Paglia discusses the Trump presidency and leftists quietism on islamic terror.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

It’s Scriptural, and Therefore Insoluble


Better late than never, I suppose.

A Bangladeshi-born psychiatrist says the ABC plays a role in radicalising young Muslim teenagers by over emphasising how they are victims of discrimination.

Tanveer Ahmed, a cultural Muslim who moved to Australia when he was six, says the national broadcaster’s obsession with perceived Islamophobia was often counterproductive.

‘Often the voices they reach for reinforce that because their first instinct is to quell so-called Islamophobia,’ he told Daily Mail Australia on Monday.

‘It keeps feeding the message that none of it is their fault, that the West is in fact against them.

‘It’s inaccurate and doesn’t get to the source of the problem. It keeps feeding grievance, it keeps feeding this idea of Muslim grievance so in that respect it’s part of the problem.

‘Terrorism is, at its heart, a conflation of personal resentments with a political ideology of resentment which Islamism is.’

Dr Ahmed is a former SBS journalist who has also previously been a member of the federal government’s Australian Multicultural Council.

The 42-year-old psychiatrist, who has a practice in Sydney’s west and visits prisons, called on the ABC to be wary of airing so-called moderate Muslims who downplayed the link between Islam and terrorism.

‘There has been too much promotion of so called moderate voices of Islam who usually turn out be apologists for terrorism, desperate to dilute any link between terrorism and Islam and promoting a message of Muslim victimhood,’ he said.

‘They use voice after voice of from various religious Muslims, almost all of whom have identical views, that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, Muslims are victims of racism and the real problem is racism and white nationalists.’

In the wake of the United Kingdom’s third terrorist attack in 10 weeks, Dr Ahmed said the mainstream media and politicians also needed to acknowledge terrorists were following the Koran.

‘It’s grounded in scripture. People who commit terrorism, they are actually more devout than many other Muslims. Their actions don’t come out of thin air, they’re following strict instructions,’ he said.

‘It’s important we don’t tarnish all Muslims but people are just so sick of the platitudes and calls for tolerance, for unity and that Muslims are victims when in fact there’s a great deal of sympathy in a significant proportion of the Muslim community for the justification of terrorism be it blaming Western colonialism, blaming racism, discrimination.

‘While terrorism’s origins have many factors, Islamic terrorists, as heinous as their acts are, they are often merely doing what the scriptures are telling them.’

He called on the ABC to air Adelaide Shia imam Mohammad Tawhidi, who calls for a reform of Islam and for Muslims to integrate into Australian society rather than self-segregate.

‘He’s actually very courageous in pointing the truth in Islamic scripture, they’re the kind of voices we need more of,’ he said.

‘There needs to be a stronger focus on Islamic reformers who argue against the Koran being the literal, infallible word of God.’

With the rise of One Nation and far-right groups like Reclaim Australia, which call for a ban on Islamic migration, Dr Ahmed said it was inaccurate to blame far-right political parties for Islamophobia.

‘Phobia refers to irrational fear of Muslims. It’s very difficult to suggest a fear of Muslims and terrorism is irrational in the current climate,’ he said.

‘The rise of white nationalists comes directly in response to Islamism, not the other way around.

‘In no white nationalist text are there calls explicitly to kill their ideological enemies.

‘They’re channeling a legitimate and widely-held anxiety about Islam and mass immigration.’

Dr Ahmed, who is a Liberal Party member, has praised British Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech outside 10 Downing Street which said it was no longer acceptable to unduly focus on unity and preventing Islamophobia to combat radicalisation.

‘There is no longer an appetite for mere tolerance and a facile message of tolerance and unity,’ he said.

He believed Australia’s Muslim population was better integrated than Britain’s however he said local terrorism was still a threat, especially in areas of south-west Sydney where Muslims are concentrated.

‘Where there are pockets of Muslims more prone to resentments there will always be a greater risk of terrorism,’ Dr Ahmed said.

‘The danger remains especially in enclaves where Muslims populations have stronger dependence on welfare, are more prone to crime and struggle to rise up the social ladder.’

His call comes after Sheik Tawhidi said unchecked multiculturalism was to blame for the London terrorist attacks that have killed seven people.

The Adelaide Shia imam posted his call on Twitter following the London Bridge terrorist attack, that has killed seven people.

‘Terrorism in the UK is growing week after week. Having extremists within our societies is not multiculturalism, it’s suicide,’ he tweeted to his 34,200 followers on Sunday.

He also supports One Nation leader Pauline Hanson’s call to ban Islamic migration.

The Iranian-born religious leader, who moved to Australia from Iraq aged 12, later told Daily Mail Australia  ‘unmonitored multiculturalism is to blame’.

‘We need to make sure that those coming into the West really want to be part of the West,’ he said.

His calls comes after police in London shot dead three jihadist terrorists who had killed six people and injured at last another 48 during a van and knife rampage in central London.

The sheikh took to social media as Senator Hanson tweeted: ‘Stop Islamic migration before it is too late.’

Asked about her call, Sheikh Tawhidi said the idea had merit although he stopped short of advocating a ban on all Muslims.

‘I support a temporary ban on Muslims coming from the Middle East,’ he said.

Sheikh Tawhidi said jihadists had a history of attending mosques that promoted sharia law – a hardline Islamic legal system derived from the Koran and the Hadith, covering the life of the Prophet Mohammad.

‘The majority of mosques advocate for sharia law without removing the violent parts,’ he said, adding the imam who preached to the three London terrorists needs to be held responsible.

Tawhidi said he had not had contact with Pauline Hanson but would support any policy that strengthened national security.

‘You need to investigate and shut down the mosque that this terrorist used to attend.’

The 34-year-old imam said the political Left in the United Kingdom had allowed London to turn into Baghdad.

‘The Left wants us to believe that terrorism is the result of unemployment,’ he said.

‘Since when did humans blow themselves up for not having a job?’

Armed police swooped on the London Bridge area of the UK capital after two incidents, which saw six people killed and dozens injured.

It came after three jihadi terrorists killed six people and injured at least another 48 others during a knife rampage.

The men ‘of Mediterranean origin’ had shouted ‘This is for Allah’ after they had mowed down 20 revellers in a white van hurtling across the London Bridge.

Well done for saying so.

But – if the problem is essentially scriptural, and the scriptures were dictated by god, and cannot be changed, what chance does imam Tawhidi’s plan for greater integration have? It’s not going to work, because it can’t work.

There’s really only one end to this. The two groups simply cannot live together peacefully in the same society. Over time, one will either expel or subjugate the other. Given that this is the inevitable result, it’s best, I think, for the situation never to have been created in the first place.

As Steve Sailer says, that’s what separate countries are for.

More good, unapologetic articles on islamic extremism and victim culture, and the Australian responses to it, here.


Posted in Democracy and freedom of mind, Narrative and Taboo, The Mind & Society, The Suicide of the West | Leave a comment