• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Ralph Peters - Faces of Denial

devil39

Sr. Member
Reaction score
39
Points
330
The latest Ralph Peters article comments that the current war on terror is going to be more harmful to Europe in the long run than it will be to America.   In his opinion this is due in no small part to the failure of European states to assimilate their Muslim populations, and exacerbated by the overt prejudice of Europeans towards their Muslim populations.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/32491.htm



 
Some of Ralph Peters articles for the NY Post can be a little bit over the top at times.   His more academic work at US Army Parameters and the USMC CETO website (appears to be down right now) or a search at AULIMP http://www.dtic.mil/search97bin/aulimp/search will bring up much good stuff.

 
I'm not completely sure of his argument, but I find things like the French anti-headscarf law ridiculous and guaranteed to achieve nothing of any use except to piss people off. Who really cares what anybody wears to school as long as it's not a health hazard? We let kid wear Satanist T-shirts, and young girls come to school dressed like trollops. So why shouldn't a young Muslim girl be alllowed to wear something that proclaims her religious faith? Cheers.
 
Interseting article, but what Peters fails to comment on in his article is the value of integration versus other societal structures.  In what ways have European states failed to intergrate their Muslim cultures. If one were to analyze the current socio-economic status of Muslim immigrants to the United States versus the mainstream, could an arguement not be made that the US has also failed to intergrate its Muslim immigrants to its society.  Furthermore Peters fails to elaborate or diccuss as a counter point to his arguement that the concept of the secular state is far more entrenched in Europe than in the US.  In fact, the banning of the hijab in France was based more on the notion which has existed since the revolution that religion should form no part of a persons public persona than any form of "islamaphobia".  Furthermore Peters fails to realize that "old Europe" has been fighting terrorism as a political phenomna before it had been defined in its modern sense, and whilst the aims may be different the methods are still the same.  Lastly there must be some sort of regognition that the system and rights and freedoms that have developed within the continental political system place far more weight on the rights of the group versus the rights of the individual allowing for much more intrusive forms of monitoring by the states.  All in all it seemed like an overly erudite justification of the present administrations policy dressed in the form of a discussion from a novel viewpoint.
 
pbi said:
I'm not completely sure of his argument, but I find things like the French anti-headscarf law ridiculous and guaranteed to achieve nothing of any use except to piss people off. Who really cares what anybody wears to school as long as it's not a health hazard? We let kid wear Satanist T-shirts, and young girls come to school dressed like trollops. So why shouldn't a young Muslim girl be alllowed to wear something that proclaims her religious faith? Cheers.

Your arguments are a bit mixed up there.  If "we" allow satanist t-shirts and slutty clothes, what does that have to do with the French banning head scarves - or vice versa?

Come to that, there ARE minimal standards in Canadians schools - don't forget the furore over the kirpan decision either...
 
I'm sorry, but I find several of Mr. Peters contentions to be right out to lunch
(hmmm ... I guess I should use more academic prose, lest I be viewed as a Neanderthal ... naaaah).

Firstly, he opines:
EUROPEANS insist that the United States overreacted to 9/11. Condescendingly, they observe that they've been dealing with terrorism successfully for three decades, that it can be managed, that life goes on.

And, how does one "deal with terrorism successfully" ... for three decades?
(i.e. I kinda figure that dealing successfully would mean defeating them ... the sooner the better ... not for three decades)
No - the Europeans with whom I've discussed this have said "Now the US understands how we've been suffering from terrorism."

Secondly, I view Peters as calling the kettle black when he spouts off:
Europe has a crisis of values behind its failure of will. Their anxiety to tell everyone else what to do reflects their own uncertainty. Corrupt, selfish and cowardly, old Europe has fallen to moral lows not seen since 1945.

Certainly, the words "corrupt, seflish and cowardly" sum up MANY national governments
(sadly, it even applies to ours, especially under "Papa Doc Crouton" ...).

The French decision to ban headscarves from their schools was done in the spirit of a division between church and state:
"Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité".
 
Back
Top