The rise of the terror amnesia industry


2017 might prove to be the year we caved in to terrorism. The year we accepted that the occasional act of Islamist barbarism, the occasional mass stabbing of Saturday-night revellers or blowing apart of girls at an Ariana Grande concert, is just something that happens, like bad weather. It was the year in which our response to terror was not anger, far less ‘Blitz Spirit’, but a collective sad-face emoji. ‘Don’t look back in anger’, we said after the horror in Manchester, perfectly capturing the defeatist, self-silencing, emotion-policing nature of our attitude to terror today.

In 2017 we witnessed the rise of the terror amnesia industry – an informal but effective effort by the political class and opinion-forming set to shush serious discussion about terrorism; to tame strong emotions post-terror; to make people forget, in essence, the latest bloody destruction of their fellow citizens, or at least stop thinking about it. ‘Don’t look back…’

  • I believe that started in 2001.

  • Yaacov ben Moshe

    Sadness, like compassion is one of the many ways that Progressives avoid responsibility and initiative. “Its right to be sad, but understand that if you are only sad, you will be sadder still in times to come.”

    • Watchman

      Trudeau’s actual comment that if you do something that your enemies want, they win. From that follows a strange belief that you always must avoid doing anything your enemies would like, and from that the thought follows that the jihadists want to disrupt our Civilization and so that we must behave as if we were not disrupted or affected.

      Everyone knows we are affected, but ‘experts’ tell us that we must do nothing because the jihadists will be thus fooled and thus frustrated. The prevalence of Diversity Bollards and security lines every time you catch a plane gives lie to the claim that we are in no way affected. Because we are supposed to act as if we are not affected in any way, we are prevented from taking significant real actions that would reduce the actual risk.

      • dance…dancetotheradio

        My complaint is that we somehow stoop to their level defending ourselves.
        Sorry, but if this is what human nature is then I am human.
        If I have to kill to be human then I will.
        Best I can do.

        • Watchman

          If your enemies have no ethics, no rules, no mercy, nor compassion then why are you restricted in your own? To behave in a way that might be causing deaths or serious injuries to allow you just to say, “We held the moral high ground,” seems stupid to me if that is crippling your response to someone not encumbered. It doesn’t mean you can’t behave according to the rules of war with your next enemy, and you shouldn’t be the first person to break the rules.

  • Exile1981

    I think the average person is angry. Its the media and the left covering for their shock troops that forgive barbarism.

  • Liberal Progressive

    The thing we have to fear the most is being Islamophobic!

    I know because the CBC, Toronto Star, New York Times, Washington Post and CNN keep on telling me that is what we have to fear the most is Islamophobic backlash against all those people from The Religion of Peace™ who are the real ultimate victims of these inconvenient cultural conflicts.

  • To pinch a phrase from Dylan Thomas, what we should do is “Rage, rage against the dying of the light”. And mercilessly destroy those who are causing it.