[I’ve reconsidered my harsh reaction to Mr. Steyn’s column that is the subject and thought that I ought to have more…(insert proper word)…and did not delete this post as anything containing reference to the “Euphemism-meter”, well…I’m wholly biased in the matter.]
I’ve been taking to reading the blog of Mark Steyn and, recently, I went to a website referenced within the site of Mr. Steyn. While at the linked site, I read an entry written by the author whom he had referenced and, when finished, I wondered and asked myself, in particular reference to the final three sentences, am I to evaluate what I read for its entertainment-value, something more or something less? (I realize, now, that “something less” should not be included.)
I have no complaint or dispute with content that aims to entertain; and make no mistake, Mr. Steyn attempts to entertain as a method, as does P. J. O’Rourke, to name an example.
Lately, I have read several entries of Mr. Steyn in which he laments spending as much time and content as he does on the perennial subject of the day, Islam. Today I read: “I’m pretty Islamed out, because I don’t have a lot to say I didn’t say ten years ago.” He followed by citing a few passages from his 10-year-old book—which I have on my shelf—and I inferred, from his implication, that he presaged today’s predicament.
There is much I could write about this strain of thought. (“Strain of thought”: 9.75 out of 10 on the Euphemism-meter.)
I’ve decided on this one sentence: I can’t help thinking—as the thought solidified with each reference to the prescient content—that he failed to have enough of an effect—if he had one at all—in the state of the West as it has unraveled in the past ten years.
Then, I thought of another angle: On what basis would I congratulate the author on the predictive value of a book when he, I and the West may not survive?; If we are both killed in this fight, would he be less dead? Conversely, I know that if I have moved forward and toward improved methods in the fight, but, in the end, died anyway, then I didn’t suffer less of a death than one who never recognized his failed method before being killed.
The solution to his “problem” of having to repeat himself can be found in the mirror in the sense that he must decide whether he wishes to work within the solution or remain within the problem. This can’t be decided until he identifies the proper solution.
I think that Mr. Steyn is brilliant and has great style. Further, I can not in any way match his accomplishment of fighting the legal charges against him in several jurisdictions. I own a great debt of gratitude for his courage.
Prior to the end, if he continues to find the time and space to complain about his personal lack of efficacy in such a manner while civil society is in the middle of a slow flush down the toilet, then I might consider doing the ever-increasing pile of dirty laundry that I’ve been neglecting this week and save the pennies, that I can’t spare, from being spent on a selection of kitty-cat songs.