The question has been properly asked, “ Why is there so little outrage concerning the vicious unprovoked attacks on innocent American citizens and soldiers and a global avalanche of screaming, chanting and senseless violence concerning a statement that casts doubt on the virtue of Islam?” If you subscribe to the theory that values are the precursors of emotions it would be easy to conclude the true believers are on the side of the terrorists. It is equally viable to conclude the response of outrage is inappropriate for beliefs that call for passiveness, turning the other cheek and by default, accepting intimidation and fear as preferable to defiance and confrontation. It is easy to see the outcome of these approaches. History is replete with examples where the meek were conquered ( through intimidation ) and lived in the world of bondage until courage erupted and a stance of human stature negated intimidation as a method of conquest.
We have seen riots in America precipitated by war protests ( Kent State ), racial bigotry, (Watts ) and political dissatisfaction ( The Chicago Democratic Convention). By and large the American people have chosen to express their feelings with verbal attacks through talk shows, newspaper editorial pages , petitions and calls to our elected officials. A mob in the street calling for the decimation of a country and it’s people doesn’t play well with the American vision of how the world should be. Ours is a more calculated approach that was recognized by the Japanese after Pearl Harbor. They awoke a “sleeping giant” and paid the price for their fanaticism. The masses of Muslims sympathetic to conquest will discover the same deliberate response if they push the button of aggression over the limit.
A chess-master is a deliberate strategist that knows the way to outmaneuver his opponent and achieve victory. A tantrum thrower is an emotional driven bully hoping intimidation will be sufficient to obtain conquest. Just like the boxer and the slugger have different approaches. so too has those who choose to use their mind and those who rely on emotional intensity to suffice for victory. Which is the strategy that matches the civilized and productive and contrasts with the dependent barbarians. It is the reliance on thinking as contrasted with feeling.
Weapons must be produced, designed and the operation of them taught to trained personnel. All of these steps do not proceed from chanting in the streets or denouncing for the sake of denouncing. It is no accident that rock throwing is the dominant activity where the reasonable activity of verbal communication is not encouraged, sanctioned or permitted. It is the venting of frustration at the tanks produced by the thinkers that is actualized. It is the hatred for those who have taken a stance of working to make this a better world by those who can only live to die and carry a false hope of a world beyond their life. Even their vision of an afterlife is saturated in earthly pleasures which they reject on earth but expect after dying.
These two antagonists have reappeared over and over in history and the result of their clashes is overwhelmingly in favor of the chess-master. The Middle Ages was a temporary triumph of the tantrum thrower but even with the hate and control of that hell on earth, the chess-master arose and outmaneuvered the barbarian. The Middle Ages was a warning to future generations that evil could win but it would not win progress, a greater standard of living and the pursuit of happiness would be only a death wish. Civilized minds recognize and reject this alternative but the tantrum throwers scream they have no time for reason and thinking. They are too “busy” waiting for a leader to take them over the edge. The dictators of history have all appealed to the tantrum throwers utilizing intimidation and fear to overwhelm the populace willing to become victims. These dictators did not promise freedom to produce and trade. They promised the tantrum throwers they would have what the producers had produced. If they couldn’t appeal to the possessions of the producers they turned to the promises of the beyond and relied on intimidating their followers with visions of grandeur for loyalty and vicious everlasting torture for the disloyal. The thinkers were their only barrier and they wiped them out, imprisoned them and forbade their existence. And the world has witnessed that shadow time and again.
Now the tantrum throwers are at it again and they know that they cannot have the impact they want without the technology that only the thinkers could discover. Rocks and suicide bombers will not stop the march of civilization. Only the threat of mass annihilation will be intimidating enough to demand submission. But the chess-master has faced down this threat before from a far more formidable foe with superior technology than the mullahs could ever imagine.
The end game is fast approaching and tipping over the board is all the tantrum throwers can hope for. This will not be a victory for these emotional fanatics but only a temporary pause until the board can be set up again and the moves commenced. Knowing what victory is and how it can be achieved is knowledge enough to realize that our method of outrage is far more subtle and effective than mobs in the street. The outrage awaits for the time to strike. That is the American way.