Mark Steyn already has a great column up about the attack (here). As he so correctly points out, Poland and Hungary and Slovakia don’t have these attacks. He could have added Japan, which isn’t very fond of immigrants.
But the obvious thing to say is that this attack happened because our elites cling to a theory, the grievance theory. We meddle in their part of the world, so they are going to attack us in our part of the world. The solution, they believe, is obvious: we should stop meddling in their part of the world. Leftist elites try to implement this, but people on the right thwart them, so the attacks keep coming. A different theory, the theory that they are trying to conquer us so they can impose shari’a on us, would entail a completely different set of actions. We would try to stop Muslims from immigrating here, we would teach something different in our schools, we would stop complaining about Islamophobia, etc.
But let me fill out the grievance theory, and then suggest some problems. The theory, I take it, relates to our foreign policy, and that policy has been sponsored by the right. We invaded Iraq and Afghanistan under a Republican president, for example. So, it is basically the right’s fault, and one should naturally expect besieged people to respond with violence against us.
Here are some of the problems:
1. The West has been meddling in the Middle East for a couple centuries, so why are we experiencing terrorism only now?
2. India does not meddle in the Middle East, yet in December of 2001 they suffered a terrorist attack (on their Parliament, no less).
3. The shooting of Malala, herself a Muslim, had nothing to do with America’s foreign policy. Nor did the kidnapping of the Nigerian schoolgirls, or the attack in Orlando, or any number of other incidents.
4. If terrorism is the natural response to grievances, then why haven’t gays banded together to attack mosques, given that Islam is very homophobic? Why haven’t feminists attacked mosques, given that Islam is very sexist? Lots of people in the world have grievances, but most don’t react with terrorism.
5. If grievances are the problem, and if those grievances are basically the result of right-wing politics, then why have terrorists targeted leftists? Couldn’t they find enough right-wingers to attack?
6. Though on occasion, terrorists have made statements agreeing with the grievance theory, on other occasions they have made quite different statements, statements indicating that they want to rule us. The statement by ISIS on the Manchester attack suggested that it was all a religious matter. Why would they say that if they have grievances about our foreign policy?
That’s all for tonight.
Regardless of why they attack us, wouldn't the fact that they attack us be sufficient reason to restrict Muslim immigration? It would be for rational people, but at this point the left is largely not rational.
Posted by: Charles N. Steele | 05/26/2017 at 05:10 PM
To answer your question, yes. And yes, they are not rational.
Posted by: John Pepple | 05/26/2017 at 05:32 PM