Shahid Bolsen | Why You Can't Have Honest Dialogue With the West (Part 1/3)

Yes. It's true. When you're when you're, when you engage with the works of non Muslims, their writings, their books, their articles, what have you, you're basically performing an excavation and a dissection at the same time, Maybe even an autopsy, to be honest. You know, like I was saying in the in the conversation the other day with Sheikh Torabi, you have to approach their work through an extremely critical epistemological lens. It's a lot more work for us to read their stuff.

It's a lot more work for us to engage with their material because we have to disentangle all the lies and all the pathologies and all the obfuscation that's always there, always there. It's woven into whatever they say, whatever they're talking about. You cannot engage casually. If you engage casually, it will definitely be detrimental to your understanding. Now you have to go in, you know, when you when you're going in, you have to know that you are not dealing with an honest actor.

It doesn't matter who they are. It doesn't matter what side of the political spectrum they are on. They are not a reliable narrator. This is unavoidable and inevitable. So as a Muslim, have to know that before you engage.

Know that you are reading pathological dishonesty in which there may be selective facts and information that might be useful to you. But overall, they are always selling some sort of a paradigm. They're always selling a paradigm. They're always pushing a worldview. They're always pushing an agenda.

A whole set of false premises that they want you to accept. That they they want you to endorse. You can never engage any of their material with your guard down. Period. You have to understand this about that culture, about that so called civilization.

You have to understand that they are perpetually on the attack, perpetually on the attack. They're perpetually engaged in a preemptive counterstrike against thinking people to prevent the invalidation of their authority and their control over how they are perceived. You understand? And that's because their authority is invalid, and their control entirely rests upon manipulating perception. In other words, we're talking about a so called civilization that is profoundly insecure, and rightly so.

They are profoundly insecure, and they feel constantly, existentially threatened by anyone and by everyone else who has a genuine and an authentic and an accomplished civilization. And obviously, especially so with regards to the Muslims, obviously. Especially so with regards to us. So everything that they produce intellectually, matter what it is, no matter what field you're talking about, no matter what the subject is, like I say, no matter what side of the political spectrum produces it, you have to understand that its fundamental, if unacknowledged function, is civilizational validation. That's the overarching purpose behind every intellectual endeavor in the West, behind every artistic endeavor and so forth.

To validate and to justify themselves and to invalidate and delegitimize everyone else. You know? It's like a door salesman who's selling some sort of a like a sandwich machine. Right? He's going door to door and he goes house to house.

And at one house, he makes a grilled cheese sandwich to try to demonstrate the device. At another house, he makes a roast beef sandwich. At another one, makes a tofu burger or what have you. See? Because he's not selling you the sandwiches, he's selling you the tools.

So don't mix it up. So whether it's a Naomi Klein or a Nick Fuentes, they are selling you the West. That's what they're selling you. Don't be fooled because one is a vegan sandwich and the other one is a ham and cheese. They're selling you the machine.

They're selling you the tool. They're selling you the device. And the truth is they have literally recruited every single individual in their societies for this defensive validation project. That's why you'll always find them so hostile. That's why you'll always find them so aggressive, so hypersensitive, always so easily triggered.

Because the foundations of their society, the foundations of their culture are so fragile. They're so fragile that yes, every interaction for them is an existential conflict. Objectivity and honesty are dangerous for them. It's absolutely dangerous. So they never practice it.

They never practice it and they never learn to practice it. Their society never taught them that. They do something else that they call object objectivity and honesty, but it has nothing to do with being honest or being objective. Like for example, they'll pretend this whole thing about there's two sides to every story. There's two there are two sides to every every story that are both equally valid.

Obviously, that's not true. But when you say that, it sounds like you're being very fair. It sounds like you're being very balanced, very measured. But that's not what you're doing at all. But when you either do not understand the concept, the actual concept of fairness and balance, or else you are literally threatened by fairness and balance, so then you have to create some sort of a formula, some sort of a format, some sort of a a protocol.

You know, two sides to every story, both equally valid, which of course you'll only ever use, you'll only invoke that when there is in fact only one valid side to the story and the valid side of the story isn't your side of the story. Then suddenly you wanna uphold fairness and balance and get your side of the story in. Right? Like, both sides have committed violations in the Israel Gaza conflict and so forth. This kind of nonsense.

So you invoke fairness for the purpose of unfairness and for the purpose of injustice. I mean, you can literally go on and on and on with this. It's just absolutely endless the ways that they do this. Because like I said, they are exclusively in the business of validating themselves. They're exclusively in the business of validating themselves in their so called civilization, which to them validating their civilization means protecting the myth of their supremacy and the myth of their superiority.

They can't feel validated unless everyone else is invalidated because everyone else is a threat to them, is a threat to their supremacy. This is how they think. You you need to know this. They have they have no real concept of coexistence, respect, tolerance, mutual goodwill and and and mutual regard and so forth. No.

We have to be above and and supreme above everyone else and everyone else has to be beneath and inferior and subordinate and bow to our greatness. This is their requirement. We're the center of the universe. Our superiority is evidenced by your subjugation, by your invalidation, by your delegitimization. That's an existential imperative for our self image.

You understand? This is an unfathomable degree of weakness and it's an unfathomable degree of insecurity that's at the core of so called western civilization, truly. Everything we do, everything we are, everything we produce is just so amazing and so incredible and it's just all of it is just the pinnacle of human evolution and achievement. Honestly, the self praise the self praise and the exaggeration is just embarrassing and it's so completely transparent. I mean, the overcompensating only draws attention to your mediocrity and your inadequacy and your insecurity.

Doesn't matter what it is, doesn't matter who it is from their past, from their history, from their society. They will anoint them as the supreme and the superior to anyone and everything else. You know, Bach, Beethoven, Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Mozart, Shakespeare, whoever else. You know? Your most talented people, the truth is, your most talented people were not objectively better than other talented people from any other civilization.

I'm not saying that you didn't have talented writers, you didn't have, talented artists and composers and so forth. Sure you did. But so does everyone else. You understand? But you take that and so does everyone else as some kind of an insult to you.

It's bizarre. You know? If we do not agree that you are superior in every possible conceivable way, do you take that as an insult? We all are supposed to just concede that no music could ever possibly compare to Mozart. Shakespeare is, the untouchable greatest of all time in terms of writing.

No. Of course not. Obviously not. That's just that's absurd. We're not gonna deify your talented people.

But if we don't, you feel threatened. Why? Because anytime you produce talented people, this is what you do. You peg your whole civilizational validation on those talented people. So if they were just talented people among all the other brilliant and talented people across cultures and all around the world, then that means that your claim of supremacy and your your claim of superiority is in doubt, and that absolutely terrifies you.

It terrifies you, and then it enrages you. And then the real you comes out. Not the Shakespeare, not the Mozart, but the Viking, the pillager, the colonizer, the savage, the genocider. That real you who wears your your Beethoven's and your Shakespeare's like an Instagram filter. And like I said, this has become so ingrained, it's so deep, and it's so pervasive as a as a civilizational pathology to where every individual in your society actually operates from this same position of existential insecurity, existential paranoia and loathing.

Honestly, to where you need to dismiss and you need to invalidate and you need to denigrate and belittle and demonize everyone else. All to try to assert your supremacy and your superiority and your perfection. I mean, every exchange, in every exchange, in every interaction, no matter how insignificant it is, you do this. In so many ways, the hostility and the aggression and the miserable dishonesty is just always present. It is always present, and it's always multilayered.

It's multifaceted. It's quite astonishing, really. SubhanAllah. And frankly, it's exhausting. It's exhausting.

That's the that's the root of the Western and the American character main character syndrome. You see? That's the root of it. Because they think that they can only have validity if they are the main character. They need to be the main character.

This is a a pathology of domination. And of course then, because you are this way, because you are this way, and because you have treated everyone else according to this way that you are, your paranoia and your existential insecurity just goes off the charts if your supremacy gets questioned. You know? If other civilizations, if other peoples, if other nations whom you have oppressed, if they develop their own confidence and they no longer cater to your civilizational ego, then of course you're afraid that they're gonna end up dealing with you the way you dealt with them. This is where this is where the paranoia comes in.

You know that they have stronger foundations than you, civilizationally. You know that they have more substance than you, civilizationally. You know that they're more developed than you. You know that they're better than you. And you absolutely cannot possibly rival them on a civilizational level.

So you think that you're gonna become redundant in this world if other nations have confidence. And like I said, you're afraid that you're gonna end up getting dominated because you cannot conceive of anyone not being driven by that same madness for power and control like you. So you exist in this constant state of dread. And, yes, this literally runs through the whole collective psyche of the West, through through the whole culture. It's pervasive, like I said.

And, yes, it's absolutely exhausting to deal with you, honestly. It truly is exhausting. This is why, you know, okay, yes, we can engage with your works. But honestly, it's almost never gonna be beneficial, to engage with them directly. You know, we'll look at your material, we'll look at your content, your books and whatnot, you know, in our own spaces.

We'll look at all of that in our own spaces. I personally don't see much if any use whatsoever in having a dialogue with you. I have to I I'm sorry to say. I'm telling you frankly. Because you're not honest actors at the end of the day, you don't come with points and thoughts and questions.

You come with tactics, with tricks and techniques, and passive aggressive manipulating and gaslighting and, you know, red herrings and deflection and misdirection and obfuscation. This is how you enter a a dialogue. It's literally not possible to have a dialogue with you because you do not do dialogue. You do civilizational validation, supremacy defense maneuvers, supremacy maintenance procedures. You're only ever interested in attacking and dismissing and denigrating and mischaracterizing and belittling others.

That's all you wanna do. And subverting any sort of good faith communication, any sort of good faith dialogue, all in the service of protecting the myth of your superiority and the myth of your supremacy. I mean, I I can give you an example. I can give you plenty of examples. Muslims get these examples all the time if they're online.

Our comment sections are always littered, with your covert and overt aggression and delusions. It truly is. It's really embarrassing, honestly. I mean, really ought to understand. You ought to try to understand that it's not doing what you think it's doing when you leave those comments.

I know in in the world of your imagination, you might think that you're dropping the mic with your comments. But you're actually just exposing layer upon layer upon layer of venom, of dysfunction, of intellectual corruption, of brainwashing, of insecurity, cultural stunting, lack of development, and existential panic. So for instance, I got a I got a comment on a recent video. A video where I was talking about the moral framework of Islam versus the absence of a moral framework in the West. And the person in the comment said something like, can women speak out in Islam?

Or words to that effect? It's a good example. It's a good example, both because this sort of genre of comment is very common, but also because it contains so many layers of Western dishonesty. I think it's worth it to break it down. Break down the tactics and break down the mentality that's at play here.

I think it might be helpful for Muslims to to break this down. It also might perhaps be help helpful to non Muslims to recognize what they're doing. Because I think many are not even aware of how abnormal their so called civilization has made them. And I don't think that they're necessarily aware of the extent to which they cannot engage honestly or communicate with other people. So, okay.

First of all, the it's an accusation framed as a question. It pretends to be an honest inquiry. But, of course, that's not what it is at all. It's an accusation.