German Courts Adopt Sharia Exceptionalism, Is Canada Next

There is a very interesting piece in today's Independent, a British newspaper normally leaning toward multicultural socialist tropes, but it appears that the sensile British are now beginning to understand that things may be getting out of hand on the Continent.

Dr. Sanity has an interesting week-end piece on how compliant Western jurists are allowing barbarous human-rights atrocities to go unpunished because of some sort of Muslim "exceptionalism" in Europe and, if it can be believed, on the way to being adopted in Canada Here is Dr. Sanity's eminently sober and sane take on how the new dispensation of Islamic exceptionalism will fit into the already brokered sociopolitical sacred cows regarded as 'exempt" from normal legal and cultural restraints because of past oppression or victimhood or other factor. When Dr. Sanity uses the term "socialists," she refers to the paramount position of post-modern exigencies in the humanities and "helping-professions" best exemplified in the nannification or Oprahfication of our sociatal norms and mores. With Dr. Phil as the Enforcer of these behavioral paradigms:

Ever wonder how the socialists decide which of their special victims' groups will prevail when there is a conflict between them?

We see a hint of how their food chain is constructed today in this [Independent article linked above] by Johann Hari:

Do you believe in the rights of women, or do you believe in multiculturalism? A series of verdicts in the German courts in the past month, have shown with hot, hard logic that you can't back both. You have to choose....

In Germany today, Muslim women have been reduced to third-class citizens stripped of core legal protections - because of the doctrine of multiculturalism, which says a society should be divided into separate cultures with different norms according to ethnic origin....

Indeed, in the name of this warm, welcoming multiculturalism, the German courts have explicitly compared Muslim women to the brain-damaged. The highest administrative court in North Rhine-Westphalia has agreed that Muslim parents have the "right" to forbid their daughter from going on a school trip unless she was accompanied by a male family member at all times. The judges said the girl was like "a partially mentally impaired person who, because of her disability, can only travel with a companion".As the Iranian author Azar Nafisi puts it: "I very much resent it when people - maybe with good intentions or from a progressive point of view - keep telling me, 'It's their culture' ... It's like saying the culture of Massachusetts is burning witches." She is horrified by the moves in Canada to introduce shariah courts to enforce family law for Muslims.

This application of 21st century socialist "justice" has been on the rise since the socialist remnants from the last century began to stage their comeback from a well-deserved near-extinction. This socialist revival and the strategies they are now using to achieve world domination has many important implications for humanity--not the least of which is described in the above article.

To understand their logic, we must examine the socialist food chain.

Other behaviors of the unrepentantly socialist dictators suggest that, while there are many victim groups, some groups are far more important than others. As the example above shows, the culture or religion's status as "victimized" allows (nay, it demands)the suppression of the various uppity victim classes within it (e.g., Women or Gays) who try to rise above their rightful place in the utopia.

From the perspective of the socialist utopian, what matters more than Women's rights or Gay Righs are the rights of a designated culture. The dogma of multiculturalism trumps the dogma of women's superiority. This is probably because for the socialist utopian, might makes right and the needs of the many always outweigh the needs of the few--and the few better remember that fact, or else. In the socialist utopia, there is no room for individuality or personal preference; or tolerance for differences. You always must subsume yourself to the collective; and the bigger the collective, the more power victimization can be exploited.

For example, we know from experience that blacks, women and gays lose their cherished victim status if they dare to become Republicans; and, to a lesser extent, if they choose to be Christian (except for most Episcopalians, who have seen the secular light).

Being black trumps being a woman or gay (i.e., there is more "social justice" mileage to be squeezed out of the oppression of blacks, i.e., racism, than there is from the oppression of women (sexism) or even gays (homophobia). Just ask Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton.

The oppression of Jews is completely ignored because of the animus the "enlightened" have toward Israel; and anti-semitism, which in past times would have had a ranking up close to the level of dark-skinned people (probably because those who founded the Jewish state were dedicated socialists--unfortunately, they soon realized that in real life, their ideology didn't work too well); but anti-semitism no longer is a compelling issue for the socialists. In fact, they are among its worse practitioners as socialism has spread throughout the Middle East.

So far, we have established that the culture (except for Western culture, which is uniquely evil and oppressive) is very high up on the food chain, and can eat and kill with impunity. Is there any group that trumps the culture?

Again, there are hints of how socialist logic deals with this. The needs of the nation will trump a protected/victim culture for the same reason that being an independent woman, black or gay person loses their victim status: they act independently of the socialist gestalt (i.e., they refuse to stay in their pre-determined place in the food chain and dare to be different).

Thus, Saddam the socialist Ba'athist could rightly gas the Kurds and no one payed much attention to it. Even genocide is acceptable to the socialist logician, who must always take into account the following factors: 1) which group is larger (oppressed nations or religions > cultures > sub-cultures > small groups, e.g., "Democrats", > individuals, e.g., blacks, women, and gays; 2) When there is a conflict among groups at the same level of the chain, then precedence is given to the "purer" victim--i.e., those who know their place in the chain, are willing to remain victims for all eternity, and take no actions to stop being victims.

Thus for example, the Palestinians' as a group (considered an oppressed nation for reasons that elude me) have such a high victimization quotient, they can freely and "justly" oppress or kill any members of their own society that are not considered "good" Palestinians, as well as anyone outside their society with impunity (i.e., Israelis). Because the Israelis have such a low quotient, they are not even permitted to kill in self-defense. The same dynamic occurs when Muslim extremists (the extremely oppressed variety of Muslim) kill other Muslims (just ordinary oppressed Muslims) ; or when they kill Christians; or when they kill just about anyone in their usual indiscriminant manner. But Americans who take extraordinary precautions in war as in peace not to kill innocent people are damned to hell when they attack even the extremist Muslims who repeatedly try to kill them and state their intent at regular intervals.

Islamic fanatics can behead and mutilate non-combatant men and women at will. Americans are prohibited from humiliating Islamic fanatics or even frightening the poor dears (it is called "torture") ; Moderate Islamics can prohibit Westerners living in Islamic societies from owning a Bible; and punish them severely if they do; but Americans are not permitted to show any disrespect, let alone spit on a Koran even in America.

Clearly, if you are NOT one of the designated victimized or oppressed cultures, nations, or groups, then you and your non-victim-designated members are at the bottom of the socialist food chain and anything bad that is done to you by those above you in the food chain must be your own damn fault. This includes those who are Western, American/Israeli, Caucasian, Republican, conservatives, Rich, Capitalist, Christian, male, heterosexual and so on down the chain.

Dr. Sanity has links to a book called "Postmodernism" by Stephen Hicks, which graphically describes the nihilistic attack on western cultural values being waged by professors, psychologists, entertainers and even some ultra-left politicians. Nietzsche called it the "Revolt of the Artistes" and said that the motivation for this "creative destruction" leading to a sort of nihilistic starting point for remaking civilization was "ressentiment."

Anyone who misses the contant refrain that class-warfare advocates insinuate into the US's political dialogue should listen more closely---it's called "ressentiment."

Muslims are the edge of the wedge to further advance the special status of victimized oppressed minorities [or majority, in the case of women] in the acrid political environment our academics, mass media, and cultural gurus are preaching and excoriating with the zeal of Savonarolas or Jonathan Edwards---only in a hyper-secular Anti-Bible indoctrination.

As the Hicks book elucidates, evidence for Socialism's historical failures are everywhere, which appears to motivate the creed's snake-oil salesmen even stronger.