Patterico's Pontifications

11/28/2009

“This is Your Brain on Political Correctness”

Filed under: Political Correctness,Terrorism — DRJ @ 3:00 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Mark Steyn is my favorite political columnist. Today he writes about how political correctness enabled the mass murders by Major Nidal Hasan:

“Major Hasan couldn’t have been more straightforward about who and what he was. An army psychiatrist, he put “SoA”—i.e., “Soldier of Allah”—on his business card. At the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, he was reprimanded for trying to persuade patients to convert to Islam and fellow pupils objected to his constant “anti-American propaganda,” but, as the Associated Press reported, “a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal written complaint.”

This is your brain on political correctness.

As the writer Barry Rubin pointed out, Major Hasan was the first mass murderer in U.S. history to give a PowerPoint presentation outlining the rationale for the crime he was about to commit. And he gave the presentation to a roomful of fellow army psychiatrists and doctors. Some of whom glanced queasily at their colleagues, but none of whom actually spoke up. And, when the question of whether then-Captain Hasan was, in fact, “psychotic,” the policy committee at Walter Reed Army Medical Center worried “how would it look if we kick out one of the few Muslim residents.

This is your brain on political correctness.”

There’s more, of course. It seems today’s political correctness is unlimited.

– DRJ

34 Comments

  1. Transsexual LAT reporter suicide?

    Comment by cassandra in MT (9ccc25) — 11/28/2009 @ 3:02 pm

  2. Yeah, that is Steyn at his best.

    Pity he’s given such an easy mark. FBI, US Army, just who are you working for?

    Comment by gary gulrud (75a696) — 11/28/2009 @ 3:31 pm

  3. Americans have a choice, they can learn from the experience of being attacked by jihadis and make sure it doesn’t happen again, or they can be attacked again, and again, and again, until they’re killed or they do finally see the light.

    Intelligence consists of keeping the number of attacks to a minimum, reasonable people catch on after the second or third incident, and the willfully ignorent, or politically correct as they prefer to be called, engage in self delusion, wishful thinking and fairy tales to avoid learning at all. They would rather see their fellow countrymen slaughtered than to acknowledge the poverty of their pet nostrums.

    Comment by ropelight (92a6ea) — 11/28/2009 @ 3:57 pm

  4. He was truly outstanding during his defense in front of the Canadian Human Rights farce against him. I have the highest hopes that Lieberman will not allow the Army and the Pentagon to weasel out of his independent investigation – perhaps McCain will join him in making sure that this atrocity is not repeated. The MSM is trying desperately to ignore this – he cannot allow them to get off the hook.

    Comment by Dmac (a964d5) — 11/28/2009 @ 3:58 pm

  5. reasonable people catch on after the second or third incident,

    I would prefer an adoption of zero tolerance, with the first offense being an actionable event leading to a discharge (after a hearing, I would guess).

    Comment by Dmac (a964d5) — 11/28/2009 @ 4:00 pm

  6. The Army CoS, Casey, did not inspire confidence in his orgy of diversity talk on This Week a couple of weeks ago. Now the CIA is getting castrated again by the Holder DoJ. Maybe we can get the Canadians to protect us.

    Comment by Mike K (addb13) — 11/28/2009 @ 4:06 pm

  7. I would rather be protected by the Mexican Mafia – at least there, you know where you stand, and what is expected of you.

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! (764e2c) — 11/28/2009 @ 4:15 pm

  8. #5, Dmac, my comments failed to convey my thinking. Intelligent people realize the true nature of the attack rather quickly, if not immediately and are willing to respond accordingly.

    “Reasonable” people are inclined defer conclusions and wait for an explanation, they extend the benefit of the doubt, and are thus slower to face facts. Their reluctance to act without confirmation leads to confusion and delay.

    Stupid people, or the PC crowd, resists the obvious conclusions, refuses to name the enemy, blames the victims, and thus assists the enemy to strike again, and again.

    Comment by ropelight (92a6ea) — 11/28/2009 @ 4:33 pm

  9. The Daily Mail reported today on interviews for a book (The Unknown Warriors, Nicholas Pringle) re the older generation of English who fought during WWII and whether they would fight today for Britain. Most would not because most do not even recognize what is today’s Britain.

    It’s unfamiliar and hostile to them.

    Cited were issues that have changed their country not for the better were multiculturalism, Islamification, out of control youth, debt, and of course, at the root of it, political correctness.

    ‘This is not the country I fought for. Political correctness, lack of discipline, compensation madness, uncontrolled immigration – the “do-gooders” have a lot to answer for.

    Undoubtedly, some of the complaints are ‘grumpy old man’ gripes, as the veterans themselves recognise – from chewing gum on pavements and motorists using mobile phones to the march of computerisation (‘why can’t I just go to the station and buy a railway ticket?’) and the dearth of pop music tunes you can hum.

    But it is the fundamental change in society’s values which they find hardest to come to terms with.

    As a group, they feel furious at not being able to speak their minds.

    They see the lack of debate and the damning of dissenters as racists or Little Englanders as deeply upsetting affronts to freedom of speech.

    ‘Our British culture is draining away at an ever increasing pace,’ wrote an ex-Durham Light Infantryman, ‘and we are almost forbidden to make any comment.’

    Call it a cautionary tale for us.

    Comment by Dana (e9ba20) — 11/28/2009 @ 4:38 pm

  10. Oh boy…a lot of brains are really cooking on that thread. One writes early on, and then keeps at it in the same manner:

    “To blame one man’s killing spree on political correctness is an extreme and absurd argument, so reductionist as to invalidate itsself.”

    Reading comprehension seems to have escaped this chap.

    No matter that Mark wasn’t blaming political correctess for Hasan’s killing spree. Mark is unambiguous, as usual, in putting the blame where it belongs. In Hasan’s case, it was Islam.
    Mark’s point is that the military is engulfed in a culture of political correctness that can’t defend its own against the enemy among their midst while the enemy cries out loud “I hate you.”
    The military is criminally guilty of enabling Hasan to carry on with his plans despite the “red flags.” Mark is too generous; I’d say “a load of evidence,” which is coming out day by day.
    I hope the families of the victims sue the hell out of every single idiot in the army hierarchy and the FBI–and beyond–who enabled this overtly America-loathing, militant Islamist to kill our soldiers.

    Comment by Pansy (d3bd2b) — 11/28/2009 @ 4:57 pm

  11. Pity he’s given such an easy mark. FBI, US Army, just who are you working for?

    I’m not sure if I’m interpreting your comment correctly, but if you’re implying that even such hubs of not-liberal thinking (compared with, say, the typical university, the stereotypical left-leaning newsroom or a town like Berkeley—aka Beserk-ly) have been infected with the phoniness and dishonesty of “progressive” political correctness, then, yes, you’re acknowledging just how flaky, corrupt and broken-down our society’s cultural trends have become.

    This is your brain on political correctness.

    The BS of PC has become so pervasive that I believe even Patterico himself several months ago — and, of course, George Bush right after Sept 11, 2001 — implied that Islam wasn’t really a religion deserving of the pro-ruthless, pro-violence image its radical followers — or its anti-Islamic critics — like to equate it with. But a study of the life and history of Mohammed makes it not too much of stretch to say that the 9-11 terrorists (or, for that matter, Nidal Hasan), among various examples, would have made the religion’s founder quite happy and proud.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 11/28/2009 @ 6:24 pm

  12. Steyn is also great on the radio, such as when he subs for Rush.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 11/28/2009 @ 6:25 pm

  13. What if he were being used as a resource?

    Deploy, shadow, watch who gravitates toward him, watch his contacts, …, follow to the cave.

    Almost a good gamble, but tragically, he showed his true allegiance stateside. I refuse to write ‘snapped.’

    Comment by RecoveringDemoholic (50c3e3) — 11/28/2009 @ 6:53 pm

  14. Steyn is also great on the radio, such as when he subs for Rush.

    Is that ever the truth! I never miss a show when he is in for Rush.

    Last year when he was subbing for Rush and another sub named Mark (Davis I think) was scheduled the next day. Steyn made a crack that Mark Foley would also be filling in for Rush – an all Mark sub-schedule. And so many people were calling in about Mark Foley that Steyn had to let people down that Foley was just a joke.

    Comment by MU789 (4e85ea) — 11/28/2009 @ 8:30 pm

  15. Steyn is absolutely brilliant. Plus, he’s pretty cute; right, ladies?

    Comment by Patricia (b05e7f) — 11/29/2009 @ 7:58 am

  16. patricia:

    Ditto at brilliant, but not cute; i’d say darned handsome.

    Comment by Pansy (d3bd2b) — 11/29/2009 @ 8:09 am

  17. I go with Patricia’s “cute”. And yes, I enjoy when he subs for Rush.

    Comment by PatAZ (9d1bb3) — 11/29/2009 @ 9:17 am

  18. Patricia’s cute? Can I see a pic?

    Comment by John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 11/29/2009 @ 9:23 am

  19. MU789,
    I listened to that particular Steyn show, and also to Mark Davis, who was not nearly as entertaining.

    Steyn has a way of making serious, even depressing points in a humorous way that helps them go down better. And having heard his voice, his columns seem even better. I can imagine his intonations while reading them.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 11/29/2009 @ 9:25 am

  20. Patricia, PatAz:

    To go even lower on the scale of shameless but delicious frivolity, I think Mark’s buddy-in-arms, Ezra Levant, is truly cute… remnants of baby fat in his cheeks and lawyerly gravitas…

    DRJ, somebody, please stop me!

    Comment by Pansy (d3bd2b) — 11/29/2009 @ 10:06 am

  21. PatAz,Patricia, Pansy,

    Steyn simply oozes charm with every word he speaks… very smart, witty, self-deprecating, and dashing!

    Comment by Dana (e9ba20) — 11/29/2009 @ 10:25 am

  22. Just wondering: Does the LA Times have some sort of research agreement with the University of East Anglia? Their methods appear so similar.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 11/29/2009 @ 10:33 am

  23. Mister Fikes, I have received documented evidence that you have violated your oath on multiple occasions. I hereby strip you of your secret decoder ring.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 11/29/2009 @ 10:42 am

  24. But . . . but, I took an oath to report the truth without fear of favor, . . . What do you mean, that was just a cover story?

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 11/29/2009 @ 10:44 am

  25. More political correctness, multiculturalism and grievance studies run amok as the University of Minnestoa recommends brainwashing or re-educating our future teachers:

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/11/025047.php

    Comment by daleyrocks (718861) — 11/29/2009 @ 10:52 am

  26. Comment by daleyrocks — 11/29/2009 @ 10:52 am

    I wonder how wedded to this program they will be after FIRE gets through with them.

    If they implement this regimen for teacher training, they are consigning the State of Minnesota to the Third World for generations to come.

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! (27348e) — 11/29/2009 @ 11:03 am

  27. Dana:

    “Dashing…” Wonderful! Spoken in true jane-austian spirit. Should have thought of it, but both the “academy” and pop culture have dulled my vocabulary…but not my insticts.

    (I hope Mark isn’t reading this thread. He’d be embarrased)

    Comment by Pansy (d3bd2b) — 11/29/2009 @ 12:05 pm

  28. Correction to previous comment: “instincts.”

    Comment by Pansy (d3bd2b) — 11/29/2009 @ 12:11 pm

  29. AD – It’s like playing whack-a-mole if you spend some time on the FIRE website. It takes some time for them to publicly humiliate or litigate a university into reversing unconstitutional policies and all of a sudden two more pop up with fresh new policies of the same nature. FIRE has a full plate.

    Comment by daleyrocks (718861) — 11/29/2009 @ 2:32 pm

  30. (I hope Mark isn’t reading this thread. He’d be embarrased)

    Pansy, if he were reading this thread, he might be a tad embarrassed, but it would certainly pale in comparison to his being happily flattered and tickled right down to his Canadian toes! Men are not terribly complicated.

    Comment by Dana (e9ba20) — 11/29/2009 @ 2:42 pm

  31. Dana – Duck! A Timberland is flying your way!

    Comment by daleyrocks (718861) — 11/29/2009 @ 2:49 pm

  32. Of course, the rules don’t apply to the enlightened who habituate the Academe, and teach the teachers.
    Until they get their sorry butts dragged into a court of law to explain why they are violating certain basic human rights, etc.
    If the political process had not been so corrupted by the involvement of public employee unions, we could expect a little fiscal discipline from the Legislature; but, under current conditions extant in most states, that safety-net for the taxpayer has been taken down.
    And they wonder why there is so much anger and frustration out in the unwashed masses.
    They, the elites, probably speak about it over dinner with the same frequency that Louis and Marie Antoinette did, to their extreme discomfort.

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! (27348e) — 11/29/2009 @ 2:55 pm

  33. daley, don’t misunderstand me: it’s definitely a compliment when I say Men are not terribly complicated. That’s the beauty of your gender. Keeping it simple, straightforward, uncomplicated. And, best of all, it doesn’t require endless guesswork to figure out what makes one happy.

    Quite the opposite of that other gender that is forever dealing in multi-layers of guesswork, complications, and mysteries. We’re just exhausting!

    Comment by Dana (e9ba20) — 11/29/2009 @ 3:00 pm

  34. Dana – Can you restrict your comments to the commercial breaks please and stop trying to steal the remote?

    Comment by daleyrocks (718861) — 11/29/2009 @ 7:09 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2525 secs.