Unlike the Egyptian Copt, the Iranian Bahai, the Kashmiri Hindu, the Kosovo Serb, the moderate Muslim or the Gaza Jew-- the Polar Bear is not an endangered species. Unlike even the native Londoner or Parisian who still speaks his or her native tongue and attends a church rather than a mosque, the Polar Bear isn't even threatened.
The Polar Bear population has actually been on the rise and while theoretical climate change computer models may claim that the Polar Bear will be in trouble-- all told the Polar has it pretty good.
For one thing, unlike the threatened populations mentioned above, the Polar Bear can fairly safely cross from floe to floe without expecting to encounter a suicide bomber, an Iranian missile or some hate imprinted denizen of the Middle East who has been fasting for a month and thinks Polar Bears are an abomination unless draped in black sackcloth.
That is the Polar Bear is fairly safe because unlike the rest of us, it lives far up North and well away from any major Islamic population centers, which are the real threat. While liberals have been vociferously insisting that the "mythical" threat of terrorism cooked up by Karl Rove in an ideological laboratory somewhere with a Bunsen Burner and a team of cooking experts is no match for the "real threat" of Global Warming, the casualty tolls from Islamic Terrorism vs Global Warming would testify otherwise.
I would not pity the Polar Bear myself. For one thing he is better adapted to dealing with the real world than the liberals who would protect him are.
When a Polar Bear is attacked, he does not blame himself for the attack or agonize over whether he has any right to defend himself or not. He does not agonize over whether his species has any right to exist or wonder why his attackers hate him. As such it is likely that Polar Bears will outlive Western liberals, once the latter have succeed in finally decimating the societies they live in and the civil and military elements that protect them from the consequences of their own suicidally willful stupidities-- of which declaring the Polar Bear an endangered species is only a minor footnote.
If Liberals had any sense at all, instead of placing Polar Bears on the endangered species list, they should be placing themselves there. After all the number of countries and places, habitats if you will, where one can be an Atheist, a Homosexual, mock religion, draw cartoons, engage in transgressive performance art or demand that your country surrender to the enemy is rapidly shrinking. It doesn't take a computer model to estimate that the number of places where one can successfully be a liberal will continue going down as countries grow more and more Islamically oriented.
Polar Bears could better survive moving to Pasadena than Liberals could survive under an Islamic regime. But of course Polar Bears deserve protection far more than Western Dhimmitude Liberals do. After all the Polar Bears are not actively destroying their own habitats, attacking the people who are trying to protect them or otherwise ensuring their own destruction.
Ultimately the worst thing about the liberal agenda is that like a virus it is self-destructive, undermining even the conditions for its own existence. In limited doses liberalism can keep a society honest. In unlimited doses it sends the society into toxic shock.
More liberalism only produces the civil pollution that is a case of Liberalism frantically injecting the toxin that will kill it first and foremost. No Polar Bear would ever be that stupid.
Daniel Greenfield is a New York City writer and columnist. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and his articles appears at its Front Page Magazine site.
