“Frontlash” is a play on “backlash” and it refers to a pre-emptive or immediate aggressive response by institutions (media, NGOs, government) to silence or pathologize reaction against a disruptive event.<\/p>\n
Event: A terror attack or spike in crime (e.g., the mall stabbing).<\/p>\n
Natural Reaction: Public concern or anger directed at the group responsible.<\/p>\n
Frontlash: Institutions immediately pivot to “fear of backlash,” prioritizing the protection of the group’s reputation over addressing the original grievance. This serves to invalidate the community’s safety concerns by framing the potential reaction of the natives as more dangerous than the actual violence committed by the newcomers.<\/p>\n
Steve Sailer writes<\/a>: <\/p>\n You can tell the retired professor is a Bad Guy because he\u2019s not standing next to a window looking pensive. Instead, he is sitting in front of a solid wall staring into the lens. <\/p>\n \u201cThe very word \u2018Islamophobia\u2019 is a false narrative,\u201d Mr. Palmer, 70, said. \u201cA phobia is an irrational fear.\u201d Raising his voice, he added, \u201cAn irrational fear! There are many reasons we are not being irrational.\u201d<\/p>\n Don\u2019t expect the New York Times to list them, however.<\/p>\n …a Good Guy because she is standing in front of a window with a thoughtful, somewhat sad expression as she looks away from the camera.<\/p>\n If the New York Times sends a photographer for your profile, don\u2019t listen to what he tells you to do. Just find a window to stand next to, think about something sad, and never, ever look at the lens.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The elite news media, such as the New York Times, usually choose flattering photographs of the lead Democratic candidates and unflattering photos of right-wing Republicans. <\/p>\n The “Bad Guy” Aesthetic: Mr. Palmer (the restrictionist) is photographed “sitting in front of a solid wall staring into the lens.” This composition\u2014flat lighting, direct confrontation with the viewer, lack of depth\u2014is often used to make subjects appear rigid, aggressive, or one-dimensional.<\/p>\n The “Good Guy” Aesthetic: In contrast, the refugee subject is described as “standing in front of a window with a thoughtful, somewhat sad expression as she looks away from the camera.” This technique uses natural light (implying purity or truth) and the “middle-distance gaze” to evoke empathy, introspection, and nobility. It separates the subject from the immediate political squabble, framing them as a human interest story rather than a political actor.<\/p>\n This dichotomy reinforces the text’s narrative: one side is presented as angry and political (irrational), while the other is presented as human and victimized (sympathetic).<\/p>\n Palmer challenges the definition of “Islamophobia”: \u201cA phobia is an irrational fear… There are many reasons we are not being irrational.\u201d<\/p>\n This touches on a core sociological debate regarding the labeling of group conflict. By labeling opposition as a “phobia,” the prevailing narrative categorizes political or cultural disagreement as a psychological disorder or an irrational emotional state, rather than a conflict over resources, culture, or public safety. The counter-argument, represented by Palmer, suggests that if a group observes a tangible increase in crime, social friction, or fiscal cost associated with a demographic change (as detailed in the previous response regarding St. Cloud’s crime rates), their opposition is a “rational” response to negative stimuli, not a “phobia.”<\/p>\n Sailer writes: <\/p>\n \n“Across the state, this network includes conservative radio hosts, think tanks and digital media that focus on anti-refugee news in Minnesota, as well as small community groups like C-Cubed, which repeatedly invite anti-Muslim speakers to town, leading to clashes and protests.”<\/p>\n In other words, Muslims used violence to try to take away the freedom of speech of public speakers.<\/p>\n “C-Cubed supported four candidates for City Council last year, and two won seats, although Mr. Palmer himself lost. Members say they are raising questions about the state\u2019s refugee program in order to determine its total cost. But in interviews, many repeatedly outlined more fundamental fears, including the belief that an influx of people who were nonwhite and non-Christian posed a cultural threat.”<\/p>\n People who have fundamental fears are Bad, while those who inspire fundamental fears are Good.<\/p>\n \u201cI think of America, the great assimilator, as a rubber band, but with this \u2014 we\u2019re at the breaking point,\u201d Ms. Crockett said. \u201cThese aren\u2019t people coming from Norway, let\u2019s put it that way. These people are very visible.\u201d<\/p>\n “They also point to individual instances of crime by Somali-Americans as proof of an innate predisposition to violence, and ignore the repeated studies showing that there is no demonstrated link between immigrants and criminal behavior.”<\/p>\n Kinda depends upon who are the immigrants and who are the immigrees, don\u2019t it?<\/p>\n Why isn\u2019t immigration policy subjected to environmental impact study regulations? California, for example, is still holding hearings for public comment on environmental impact studies of the high speed rail that voters foolishly approved in 2008. Why aren\u2019t massive refugee resettlement programs like this subjected to the same environmental requirements?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 requires federal agencies to assess the environmental effects of their proposed actions prior to making decisions. This generally applies to physical infrastructure (dams, highways, rail).<\/p>\n Proponents argue that population growth is the primary driver of environmental degradation (sprawl, water usage, carbon footprint). Since federal immigration policy is the primary driver of U.S. population growth (accounting for the vast majority of growth since 1990), they argue that raising immigration caps should trigger an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).<\/p>\n Courts and administrative bodies have historically interpreted NEPA as applying to physical projects (building a specific facility) rather than broad demographic policies.<\/p>\n Both major political parties have generally viewed immigration through economic and humanitarian lenses rather than an environmental one. Applying NEPA to immigration would likely halt or drastically slow all admissions due to the lengthy litigation involved in environmental reviews (as seen with the California High-Speed Rail example you mentioned).<\/p>\n There have been attempts to force this. In 2016, there were lawsuits arguing that the Department of Homeland Security was violating NEPA by not conducting environmental reviews for immigration actions, but these have generally been dismissed or failed to gain traction in higher courts.<\/p>\n The comparison to the California High-Speed Rail is apt in terms of process: infrastructure projects are often stalled for years by EIS requirements to save specific habitats, while population policies that necessitate that infrastructure proceed without similar review.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" “Frontlash” is a play on “backlash” and it refers to a pre-emptive or immediate aggressive response by institutions (media, NGOs, government) to silence or pathologize reaction against a disruptive event. Event: A terror attack or spike in crime (e.g., the … Continue reading