Cultural Revolution = SJWs + "Lord of the Flies"

Imagine the current student protests, except that they would happen during a revolution, so instead of getting teachers fired you could simply hang them and no one outside the school would really care. The accounts of Cultural Revolution that I have read were pretty much this.

Cultural revolutionaries had the options that SJWs currently don't have. (Similarly how current neo-Nazis don't put people into gas chambers, because they don't live in an environment where they would be allowed to build the gas chambers. That doesn't make them mentally different.)

This line of defensiveness is even less interesting than the original topic, I wish I could downvote more than once.

Also, two of your recommendations are.

Our top political figures can make powerful, courageous and politically unpopular statements that all Muslims are not to blame for this attack, and that we should not radicalize the rest through unthoughtful policies. We can reach out to Muslim leaders who condemned the Brussels attacks and work together against the radicals.

Of course, this is what western leaders have been doing for the past 15 years, and it doesn't seem to be working. Turns out Muslims are more inclined to get their theology from their own imans then from western politicians, and reaching out to "moderate" Muslim leaders results in Muslim leaders that are moderate in English but radical in Arabic.

As I said, politics is hard mode. I am willing to make a bet that nowhere in the article did I state or implicitly claim that "the primary cause" of radicalization is police presence. Are you willing to take on that bet?

So you wrote an article that starts with a false premise, namely the implicit claim that the primary cause of radicalization is western police presence. It then proceeds to use numbers you appear to have taken from thin air in an argument whose only purposes appears to be signalling "rationality" and diverting attention from said false premise. It final reaches a conclusion that's almost certainly false. This is supposed to promote rationality how?

tries to include at least one "good German".

And do you believe that in Iliad all Trojans are fully bad guys and gals..?

Yes, and look at the implicit morals that the fiction assumes.

Yes, and..?

You didn't have to go that far back. Pretty much most WW2 fiction books assume the peak of morality is to kill as many Germans as possible. So?

If you restrict to the ghetto classes.

Do rednecks qualify? What about white trash? X-) Or let's go global. Do you think Chinese peasants are particularly sophisticated people? India's slum dwellers?

Ok, define "bigotry",

Negative beliefs about a group of people based on weak evidence, and actions that derive from such beliefs, particularly when the group is defined by a characteristic that is difficult or impossible to change.

also explain why "bigotry" as you just defined it is a bad thing.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Claims that are similar to ones that have been proven false in the past and have led to lots of human misery count as extraordinary for these purposes.

There seem to be similarities in behavior to the "Cultural Revolution", such as rebelling at universities, and requiring teachers and classmates to toe the line or publicly apologize and/or get fired, etc. (I don't know if the similarities are sufficient, or if this is more or less a standard pattern for every political movement.)

In that case, you appear to have no idea how most people behave.

I'll take your opinion under consideration.

Well, not really.

the Illiad

Fiction.

Arabian knights

Ain't no such thing.

the bahavior of modern gangs

And what percentage of modern society is a gang member?