Displaying posts categorized under

BOOKS

Robert Spencer’s Surpassing Study of an Age-Old, Ongoing Threat If the West manages to avoid doom from the forces of Jihad, it will be in large part due to books like this. Hugh Fitzgerald

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270999/robert-spencers-surpassing-study-age-old-ongoing-hugh-fitzgerald

Robert Spencer’s The History of Jihad tells, in magnificent measure, the story of how, over 1400 years, the votaries of Islam have observed the religious duty of holy war, or Jihad, warfare against the Unbelievers. Reviewers sometimes insist that “if you can only read one book on the subject, read this one.” Here such insistence is not hyperbole. Spencer tells in lively fashion a deadly story, of how what started with a few dozen followers in a dusty town in western Arabia became today’s ideological empire of 1.6 billion members of the Islamic community or umma, mostly to be found in 57 Muslim-majority countries, but now also including hundreds of millions of Muslims in Europe, North America, and India.

How did this happen? How did Muhammad manage to survive early setbacks in Mecca to become the ruler of Arabia? Spencer offers overwhelming evidence that along with brute force, deceit and terror were Muhammad’s chief weapons. “War is deceit,” he insisted. He told his followers that “I have been made victorious through terror.” These — brute force, deceit, and terror — have remained the chief weapons of Jihad throughout history.

Spencer takes us through the campaigns that allowed Muhammad to go from near-fatal weakness to strength. Muhammad’s victory over a much larger enemy at the Battle of Badr in 624 signaled a change in his fortunes; he never looked back. Muhammad relied until 628 only on force to defeat his enemies. But in that year, he agreed to the Treaty of Al Hudaibiyya, which would become the first example of victory through guile. Muhammad had signed a truce treaty (hudna), with the Quraysh tribe of Mecca. It was to last ten years. One of its provisions required Muhammad to return to the Quraysh any member of the tribe who came to him. When a woman of the Quraysh came over to the Muslims, Muhammad broke the treaty (after 18 months) by refusing to send her back, claiming — wrongly — that the treaty only required him to send back men, not women. Muhammad was willing to break the treaty because his forces had grown stronger; he was now prepared to take on the Quraysh. The violation of this treaty by Muhammad has been the model for Muslim treaty-making with Unbelievers ever since; it was even mentioned by Yasser Arafat, to signal to his Muslim followers that they need not worry; he had no intention of meeting his commitments under any agreement signed with Israel. It would be salutary if those who today pressure Israel to sign this or that treaty with the “Palestinians” were to learn about the Treaty of Al-Hudaibiyya and, for many Muslims, its enduring significance.

The West’s Defeat – By Its Own Hand How Jihadist ideology is gaining power through the back door — and with our blessing. Anne Marie Waters

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270983/wests-defeat-its-own-hand-anne-marie-waters

Last week I read a shocking statistic. It is not a surprising statistic, but a shocking one nonetheless. Figures now reveal that a staggering 40% of people under age five in Germany come from a migrant background. That is to say, almost half of young children in Germany are not ethnically German.

Some would argue that this doesn’t matter a great deal, people are people, and Germany will still be Germany. But even if we try to persuade ourselves that this is the case, deep down we all know it is not. Germany was German because of the German people. Now, in a couple of generations, it will be something else: the place formerly known as Germany. This will particularly be the case if, as I suspect is likely to be the case, many (if not most) of those under fives come from an Islamic background. That will change the face of Germany forever. Indeed it is already doing so.

In my book, Beyond Terror – Islam’s Slow Erosion of Western Democracy – I argue that it is immigration from Muslim societies that will defeat Western civilization. Terrorism will not. The West will not lose a military war against the Islamists, it only needs to lose the demographic war, and the culture war, and that has already been lost.

The UK, for example, has for decades seen massive immigration from the Muslim world, and this has changed the country beyond recognition. Female genital mutilation is now so widespread in the UK that specialist (taxpayer-funded) clinics have been established across the country to deal with the medical aftermath of this crime. There are eight such clinics in London alone, and a new one opened last year in Wales (attended by a Labour politician, who tweeted how pleased she was to have an FGM clinic in her area). While we build shiny new clini

Thomas Sowell’s ‘Discrimination and Disparities’ Is The Book About Racism That America Needs Sowell’s calm and calculated look at racial disparity in America is a stunning work of brevity and reason. David Marcus

http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/09/thomas-sowells-discrimination-disparities-book-racism-america-needs/

Sometimes the slim volumes are the most deadly. Such is the case with Thomas Sowell’s “Discrimination and Disparities,” which in fewer than 200 pages lays bare the grave faults and assumptions of people on both sides of the political divide about outcomes for racial groups. In a long, storied career, Sowell has been a beacon of reason and evidence-based thinking. In this book, he makes the fruits of his labors accessible to almost anyone. Anyone who wishes to think, speak, or write on race in America would be remiss in not reading it.

Sowell takes aim at two typical explanations for differences in the success of racial groups. One, most associated with the Left, is that discrimination by racial groups in power is the primary force creating bad outcomes for the groups out of power. The other, most associated with the Right, is that racial groups have inherent abilities or disabilities based on factors such as IQ distribution that lead to unequal outcomes.

Not only does Sowell argue that neither of these explanations is sufficient, he also effectively shows that the truth does not lie in some simple combination of the two. In fact, the issue is vastly more complicated than merely finding which balance between these two competing ideas best tells us the truth about why outcomes are what they are.

The Savagery of ISIS By Douglas Murray

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/isis-brutality-nazi-like-cruelty-yazidis/

“They took us to pits on the farm that were supposed to be our graves . . . They threw us down there in shifts. Every fifteen minutes they would lower down about a dozen men . . . and open fire on them. They arranged us into rows, telling us to line up next to each other so it would be easier for them to shoot us. My brother was in the first shift. My other brother was in the second shift. I was in the third. I knew everyone down there with me; they were my neighbours and friends.”

Up to this point, I imagine most readers will assume that the above passage is a quotation from a survivor of the Nazi atrocities. Only the end of this passage identifies that it is a more recent testimony that we are hearing.

“After they shouted Allahu Akbar, the sound of gunfire rang out, and once they had finished shooting us one by one, I was swimming in a pool of blood. They shot at us again, then a third time. I shut my eyes and prepared to die, as one must.”

“How long did you stay like that?”

“I was bleeding there for almost five hours.”

“Where were you shot?”

“In three different places. Once in my foot and twice in my hand.”

“And did everyone else die?”

“All except for one other man, Idrees, a childhood friend of mine. His feet were injured. I tried to drag him out of the pit with me but I couldn’t because half my body — the left side — was bleeding. I couldn’t lift him with just one hand. Idrees, I said to him, climb up on my bank, get on. But he couldn’t move. He was still alive but I wasn’t able to save him. I struggled to get out of the pit and walked away from the school. As I crossed the farm road, I heard the nonstop rattle of gunfire, and I dropped down onto the ground, which is where I stayed, hidden under the wheat and barley until the sun went down.”

The above is the account of a man called Khalid, a resident of the Nineveh plains who like many thousands of others tried to flee ISIS in August 2014 but was captured by them. His testimony is one of many collected in a remarkable new book by the poet and journalist Dunya Mikhail titled “The Beekeeper of Sinjar.”

WHAT’S DEADLIER? JIHAD OR JIHAD DENIAL? (VIDEO)

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/270892/whats-deadlier-jihad-or-jihad-denial-video-daniel-greenfield

To paraphrase, when is Jihad not Jihad, when it prospers. And Jihad is certainly prospering in the multicultural murder cities of the West.

The attacks are often swept under the rug as misunderstandings or mental illness. That’s what happened in Toronto. And Jihad Denial is the subject of Jamie Glazov’s topic on the latest episode of the Glazov Gang.Jihad Denial is all around us and in some ways it’s even deadlier than the terrorist attacks themselves. And part of that phenomenon is also the topic of Jamie’s latest book, Jihadist Psychopath: How He Is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us.

The Switch That Never Happened: How the South Really Went GOP By Dinesh D’Souza

https://amgreatness.com/2018/07/29/the-switch-that-never-

This article is adapted from Dinesh D’Souza’s new book Death of a Nation, out July 31 from St. Martin’s Press. His movie of the same title opens nationwide on Friday, August 3.

An interesting phenomenon in politics is the flip flop. What would cause a politician who takes a stand on an issue to reverse himself and take precisely the opposite stand on the same issue? Even more interesting is the about face or volte face. The volte face goes beyond the flip flop because it represents a total and usually lasting shift of course, as when Reagan abandoned the Democratic Party and became a Republican.

More interesting even than the volte face is when a whole group or party makes this shift. Perhaps the most dramatic example in our lifetime is when the Soviet Communist Party in 1991 abolished itself. It’s one thing for an individual to undergo a wrenching conversion but what would cause a whole party to reverse itself in that way? Could it be a transformation of the collective conscience, or a new perception of group interests, or what?

Our exploration of the subject is deepened by a new possibility introduced by Winston Churchill, who in one of his essays takes up the subject of consistency in politics. Himself accused on more than one occasion of reversing himself and taking inconsistent positions on issues, Churchill defends himself by invoking the apparent volte face, the change of tactics that is not a change of goals or values.

Churchill writes, “A statesman in contact with the moving current of events and anxious to keep the ship on an even keel and steer a steady course may lean all his weight now on one side and now on the other. His arguments in each case, when contrasted, can be shown to be not only very different in character but contradictory in spirit and opposite in direction. Yet his object will throughout have remained the same . . . We cannot call this inconsistency. In fact, it can be claimed to be the truest consistency. The only way a man can remain consistent amid changing circumstances is to change with them while preserving the same dominating purpose.”

Springtime for Snowflakes A professor’s memoir of the closing of the American mind. Mark Tapson

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270828/springtime-snowflakes-mark-tapson

In the fall of 2016, New York University professor Michael Rectenwald created an anonymous Twitter account to critique the alarming spread across campuses of an “anti-education and anti-intellectual” social justice ideology. Before long he was outed as the man behind the controversial @antipcnyuprof account, and despite being a leftist himself, became the target of shunning and harassment from his colleagues and the NYU administration. But instead of caving in to the campus totalitarians as so many academics do, Rectenwald declared himself done with the Left, and though still not a conservative, began appearing often in right-wing media to defend free speech and academic freedom, and to expose the “bilious animosity and unrestrained cruelty” he endured from his former compatriots.

I previously interviewed Prof. Rectenwald for FrontPage Mag here back in January. At the close of that interview he mentioned a book he was working on about the experience, and it is now available in paperback and on Kindle: Springtime for Snowflakes: Social Justice and its Postmodern Parentage. Short but dense with insights about postmodern theory, social justice ideology, and academic conformity, the book is a must-read for understanding the intellectual collapse of the American university under the weight of a totalitarian ideology.

Rectenwald begins the book by relating his experience of “becoming deplorable” and being pushed toward political apostasy, which forced him to reexamine the herd with which he had formerly run. “I didn’t leave the left,” he writes. “The left left me” – echoing Ronald Reagan’s famous declaration, “I didn’t leave the Democratic party. The Democratic Party left me.” “In trying to correct me,” Rectenwald writes about his fellow academics, “they did indeed correct me – but not as they’d hoped. They corrected my vision by forcibly dislodging the scales of their ideology from my eyes.” He realized that the “institutions of North American higher education have taken a hairpin turn, and a wrong turn at that. They have surrendered moral and political authority to some of the most virulent, self-righteous, and authoritarian activists among the contemporary left.”

Wolfgang Kasper The Atavistic Assault on Liberalism

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2018/07/theatavistic-assault-liberalism/

Mario Vargas Llosa’s journey from Castro groupie to steel-eyed critic of both Leftism and populism gives the observations and commentary of his latest book the authority of a long life both lived and examined. To describe it as a joy of the first order would be to engage in understatement.

La llamada de la tribu
by Mario Vargas Llosa
Alfaguara, 2018, 313 pages, €18.90
________________________

When a grandee of literature and liberal philosophy, such as Nobel laureate Mario Vargas Llosa (left), publishes the account of his intellectual odyssey, this is a literary event. The new book was a sensation in the Spanish-speaking world. It is a learned, critical record of the seven liberal authors who converted him—an idealistic communist in his youth—to full-blooded liberalism. The account comes from the pen of a master storyteller, who became a political animal in the same places and during the same decades as I did. This made the book a great delight for me. For now, the book is only available in Spanish, but an English translation seems not far off.

In a recent interview with Mexico’s cultural-political monthly Gatopardo, Vargas Llosa scoffs at his eighty-two years. He is already planning a globe-spanning tour to promote his new book.

JAMIE GLAZOV’S NEW BOOK: “JIHADIST PSYCHOPATH”

http://jamieglazov.com/2018/07/26/jamie-glazovs-new-book-jihadist-psychopath/

Jihadist Psychopath: How He Is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us.

Jihadist Psychopath offers an original and ground-breaking perspective on the terror war. Like no other work, it unveils the world of psychopathy and reveals, step by step, how Islamic Supremacists are duplicating the sinister methodology of psychopaths who routinely charm, seduce, capture, and devour their prey.

Jihadist Psychopath unveils how every element of the formula by which the psychopath subjugates his victim is used by the Islamic Supremacist to ensnare and subjugate non-Muslims. And in the same way that the victim of the psychopath is complicit in his own destruction, so too Western civilization is now embracing and enabling its own conquest and consumption.

President Trump’s National Security Adviser John Bolton says about Jihadist Psychopath:

Hard as it is to believe, many in the West simply will not take the time and trouble to understand the threat posed by radical Islamicist terrorism. James Burnham once wrote of a similar problem with international Communism in his masterful Suicide of the West. Now, Jamie Glazov has written this century’s counterpart to Burnham’s classic work and will doubtless upset those determined not to analyze for themselves the nature of the underlying phenomenon.

With a Foreword written by Michael Ledeen, glowing advance praise also comes from Dennis Prager, Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, Steve Emerson and many other titans and scholars in the international arena. (See Amazon page for many of the blurbs).

Dennis Prager affirms that Jihadist Psychopath is “…one of the most important books of the present time.”

And that’s why you have to pre-order a copy now. Order Jihadist Psychopath Today!

Why Does Facebook Think I’m ‘Political’? The robots won’t let me advertise my book on nationalism.By Yoram Hazony

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-does-facebook-think-im-political-1532559704

The robots at Facebook always urge me to “boost my post.” This sounds kinky, but it’s Zuckerspeak for buying advertising. I’ve avoided these offers because I’m no computer genius. For me, high-tech is writing down my password somewhere.

But then I kept seeing ads for Yossi Klein Halevi’s new book, “Letters to My Palestinian Neighbor.” I have a book coming out called “The Virtue of Nationalism.” Like a knucklehead, I figured if Yossi could boost his post, so could I.

I pressed “Boost Post.” Soon thousands of people were seeing my ad, and I was psychotically checking the click count every four minutes. “Your ad is doing better than most promotions on Facebook,” the robots flattered me. I was like Fast Eddie playing big-time pool. How could I lose?

It lasted two weeks. Then a red announcement appeared: “Your ad was not approved because your Page has not been authorized to run ads with political content.” My boost was now stamped with a verdict in red letters: “Rejected.”

I found a window for submitting appeals. “My book is concerned with the historical development of the nation-state and the case for preferring it to imperialism,” I groveled. I offered to send the robots a copy so they could see for themselves.

Facebook’s sentient programs don’t wear dark glasses or have menacing names like Agent Smith. A response came from “Veronica”: “The text and/or imagery you’re using qualifies as political, based on the definition we’re using for enforcement,” it said. “You must authorize your page to run political ads.”