LIFE AMONG THE ARABS, AN INCESTUOUS PATHOLOGY OF PREY AND PREDITOR

It is not always accurate to make an analogy between the practices of states and those of human beings but this one is close. This analogy is presented so we can understand the behavior of Arab states though our own human experience. Arabs have grown up since the 3,000 BC with a dictator under one guise or another running their tribes or states. It has always been this way and it never changes, no matter what. The "people" have always had a daddy. Like all humans have had one. But their daddies have always been abusive strong men. And their children expect what they grew up with and expect another strong man to lead them. Why is that? Why don't they "do" something? It's like they are looking for it.

They are like the girl who always picks the wrong men. Exactly like that. She is always "getting screwed". She can't, or won't, make the right choices. She has children who are the same. Studies of incest between male family members and their daughters indicate that the activity leaves the victim with certain scars. Incest is usually interpreted by the unconscious as a betrayal of the most sacred trust a child can have. The daughter trusted her father to protect her and care for her and he violated that trust, a trust that is most sacred

The reactions to the violation of trust vary. Two that are visible are grossly overweight women who eat themselves into "safe" unattractiveness to men; a second, but not as common, is sexual excess, usually doing porn films, going into prostitution, or just being total sluts; high risk sexual activities loaded with victimology.

Then there is the most common reaction to the betrayal of the sacred trust. Incest is interpreted by the girl, and later on the woman, as affection. The only affection the child ever knew. Love. She was prey, the father preditor. The grown woman will act out this relationship in most aspects of her life. In seeking love she seeks a preditor because that is what she is used to. These women will involve themselves with men who beat them, steal money from them, abandon them, etc. When the preditor leaves she will find another, and another. She may take lousy jobs, buy things that break, get lots of traffic tickets, etc. That is the pathology. It's the only thing she knows.

Which brings us to the Arab states. Every Arab state or section has a history from the beginning of time that has as its main feature the Strong Man as a leader. The Strong Abusive Man. This leader promises better times, better lives, and tells people he is a kind ruler. He will kill rivals, crush the population, conquer neighbors if he can, and restrict success to a chosen few; those few will keep him in power; he abuses the trust of the people but it's what they expect. He knows that his "friends" are plotting against him just like he plotted against the guy he killed to gain power. Everybody knows this. So he kills his friends and the friends of his friends as a matter of routine. That's the way it is. He is Strong. Ruthless. He violates every trust. This has been going on forever.

Men and women are "victims" of this system. Arabs are expected to do what they are told. Serve the state, the Strong Man, or daddy spank; meaning they will be killed, tortured, beaten. Men in the "system" will never make "correct" choices because they are never presented with choices. They know and expect the Strong Man. Within their own families they are the Strong Man. The women are presented with few rights, cannot participate in the state or business, and must cover their heads (sometimes their entire upper body), and in some tribes be divorced any time the husband simply tells her she has been divorced. Men are strong inside the family. Really strong. All marriages are arranged for the purpose of making both families stronger. It is the job of the female to have sons. To refuse the marriage arrangement by either party who might want to marry for "love" brings shame to the family. The party refusing the arranged marriage will most likely be killed. That's the way it has "always been" and that's the way it is today. Follow the rules or daddy spank.

This is the Arab society and make no mistake, they like it that way. Pay no attention to these stupid American feminists who go to these countries to free the poor Muslim women from their life of slavery. The Arab women like wearing the hadj. They like being Muslim women. They are a part of a family of Muslims. Men like it too. They "like" being told what to do. Being pushed around. Every Arab who writes or speaks out seeks a Strong Man to run things. Of course this Strong Man should be fair, run the country correctly, and improve "things". But what is really xpected is a repeat of the preditor/prey relationship practiced for centuries. They want a government that is unfair; that will violate trust. It's what has been their lives for thousands of years. They have lived under some of the worst tyrants in history and they seek them out.

A government that doesn't betray their trust doesn't love them.

Democracy? Democracy is weak. Shared power is weak. Partnerships and trust must be violated. Preditor and prey is the way of the Middle East. Deal with it. It's going to happen again. Arabs don't want therapy. They don't want to be "cured".

The Magna Carta Changed the West, not The Enlightenment

The "Enlightenment" was just the usual bunch of French psuedo sophisticates lounging around salons and writing smart things, but it was the Magna Carta, stupid. Strong Man government is not desired by we in the West. Any more. But for thousands of years that is what we had and we liked it. The Magna Carta was created in 1215 and forced on King John. It was the first Bill of Rights and started out this way:

First, that we have granted to God, and by this present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs in perpetuity, that the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired. That we wish this so to be observed, appears from the fact that of our own free will, before the outbreak of the present dispute between us and our barons, we granted and confirmed by charter the freedom of the Church's elections - a right reckoned to be of the greatest necessity and importance to it - and caused this to be confirmed by Pope Innocent III. This freedom we shall observe ourselves, and desire to be observed in good faith by our heirs in perpetuity. We have also granted to all free men of our realm, for us and our heirs for ever, all the liberties written out below, to have and to keep for them and their heirs, of us and our heirs:

The document clearly gave to the people 63 rights. Quite a beginning. This document grew into democratic forms over the next 500 years in the West. It took us a long time to grow to the point where we didn't need a daddy. The Magna Carta was created because King John was not following Christian doctrine as spelled out in the Bible; England was a Christian country and when the King was presented with a moral imperative he had no choice but to sign. The Religion demanded it.

The Muslim religion has no such Magna Carta. On the contrary, Mohammed was a strong man. The Koran has a section that describes The Prophet killing 600 men of his own tribe for revenge. He slaughtered people he beat in battle. The Prophet expected obedience. No Magna Carta for them. They want daddy and that is what they are going to get.