The New Sisyphus explains why the LGF's Charles Johnson/Brussels Journal fight makes perfect sense:
From a classically American point of view, Johnson's dislike of Brussels Journal's boosterism of Vlaams Belang and its leader Philip Dewinter makes perfect sense; VB is an ethnically-based nationalist party seeking to form a nation devoted to that sole ethnic group. And, yes, despite the fact that Auster and others have sought to downplay it, the "Odin's Cross" that LGF has complained of is in fact an internationally-recognized symbol of White Nationalism and, yes, it has appeared favorably in VB publications, not to mention Mr. Dewinter's bookshelf. As an American, Johnson is leery of groups that are based on race and who advocate for racial nationalism.On the other hand, from the point of view of the European Right, all of this is unremarkable. The European Right is traditionalist in its outlook and well before Paul Belien came along it took a very dim view of certain aspects of American life. It is entirely unremarkable in the European context for a party to organize on ethnic lines--especially in Belgium--and to speak the language of ethnic/racial nationalism. Simply put, Europe's Right isn't concerned with many of the peculiarities of the American Right, and I don't see any reason why it should be.
All this is beside the point, says Sisyphus. Just as the various and competing strands of the European Left put their feuds aside to stand together against the rising Fascism in a previous era, so too must the traditionalist and classical-liberal right do today to stand united against Islamism:
Auster may be right that Johnson is still a liberal at heart. Johnson may be right that Belien cares more about suppressing homosexuality than preserving individual liberty. Ali may be right that in seeking to impose their own vision of what the good society is on everyone traditional conservatives have much in common with Islamists. And Belien may be right that only a new traditionalist community could possibly give us strength and reason enough to resist Islamism.These are discussions for a later time. Now, our goal is to unite on our common programme and resist the agreed-upon enemy.
Couldn't agree more. And by the way, James Poulos is absolutely right that the suppression by the politically correct European establishment of legitimate and reasonable discussion of immigration and cultural issues is only empowering true racists and neofascists. Here's a somewhat despairing confession the mainstream British journalist Geoffrey Wheatcroft made during the Danish cartoon controversy:
On Tuesday I had a salutary experience of my own when I took part, as I regularly do, in The Breakfast Show, an Irish radio program, and found that one of my interlocutors was Anjem Choudary himself. He may be nasty or crazy, but he is not stupid, and he reminded us of some important truths.There can be no separation of church and state for Muslims, because Islam has never accepted "render unto Caesar," Choudary said. It is a religion that is not confined to the mosque but that informs every aspect of social and political life at all times. Censoring transgressive cartoons and books is only a beginning. Sharia law must rule everywhere; the black flag of Islam must fly over Downing Street.
As a severe critic of the Blair regime, even I don't think that would be an improvement. And that's why the most depressing thing I have seen or heard this past week (which is saying something) was from someone who suggested that there was a fundamental incompatibility between Islam "and our democratic secular values." If that's a view that, as I have more than hinted here, I am close to sharing, why was it so depressing? Because the speaker was a leader of the brutal white-supremacist British National Party.
Leave aside the impudent hypocrisy of a bigot and racist invoking secular democracy, something has gone badly wrong when fascists speak for bemused skeptics. Recently, it has been quite easy to think that many Muslims are fanatics who don't understand our values. Looking back over the past week, it's hard to believe that this is entirely the fault of the liberal west.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
In the USA I would probably be seen as a dope-smoking secular liberal (well, apart from the dope!). I also have mixed-race kids, and want nothing more than a nonracist Britain. However, I'm seriously thinking about voting for the BNP in the next election, as they are the only party prepared to be anti-Islamic.
If I were to suggest Islam-related policies they would run something along these lines:
1. Allow everyone to speak the truth about Islam. When Muslims riot in response, shoot them. When full-blown insurrection occurs, round up all Muslims, load them on ships, and push them out into the Atlantic. Let the Muslims look after their own.
2. Prepare for world war
Rod - I completely agree. I do get a sense that things might be changing a little in the UK though as a fair number of former left liberals are moving 'right-ward' in their opinion, there are still a good number of taboo subjects that must not be discussed:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/05/namis105.xml
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/behmnr/article/4047/
We have problems - we have 5.3 million people on welfare. This means that there is plenty of work for newcomers to do - economically we need immigrants, but societally I am not sure we can cope so well. It brings a host of other problems:
http://ukcommentators.blogspot.com/2007/11/yet-more-vote-fraud.html
I have lived in London for 8 years now (I am from a depressed industrial town in NW England) - I have seen the city change in this time. Others who have lived in London longer tell me just how much things have changed. over 50% of the economy in some of the regions is public sector (ie tax payers cash)
Law and order is poorly enforced across the country - it seems almost weekly we have appalling stories of juvenile crimes (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7086242.stm)http://ukcommentators.blogspot.com/2007/11/what-gets-you-respect-over-there-is.html. Often it appears that the police exist to fulfill a role as keepers of the prevailing orthodoxy rather than protectors of the public 'http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/11/09/do0904.xml', we have high abortion rates and a host of other problems.
The debates around all of these issues are carefully framed so as to be from one perspective only. Civil & polite arguments from another perspective seldom get a voice or are dismissed or smeared as 'extremist' by the mainstream media. The three main parties follow suit and don't consider anything that doesn't appear to be a vote winner. Peter Hitchens sums up well:
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2007/09/what-is-wrong-a.html
We are currently being signed up by our government into a treaty that aligns our country more closely with the undemocratic EU organisations (aparently about 80% of our current legislation originates in the EU comission)- we are effectively sigining away our independence - any of the big 3 parties against this? Only the Tories and only then in the most lukewarm fashion - the will back a referendum on the constitution. This is not a UK vs Johnny Foriegner issue because the average Jean and Jann Public in France and Holland voted against this treaty the last time it was offered.
I do worry that the only vent for people who are feeling marginalised and ignored is increasingly in the far right parties....
"We have problems - we have 5.3 million people on welfare. This means that there is plenty of work for newcomers to do - economically we need immigrants."
Wait, stop right there. You have "plenty of work" that's OK for more "newcomers", but can't be used to employ the 5.3 million already on welfare? Please explain.
Thats my point exactly, and I never said it was ok - we have 5+ million people who have figured out that they are better off without working (ok many live in the 'regions' where the only work is in the public sector - in my home town of about 55,000 we have 9000 welfare claimants since the decline of the ship building industry), and that the state will take care of them. Because of this there is plenty of work to do for anyone who wants to come here and do it. We have abosrbed about a million migrants from all over the EU - because of the EU we are not British anymore but EU citizens & their right to work here is as much as mine (English born and bred). Added to this we have migrants from the subcontinent and beyond (often on student visas to begin with). There is stacks of work in London and the South - poorly paid perhaps, but plentiful. Finally our school system churns out people who cannot add up or spell at the age of 16. So we need people who can do some of the technical jobs that our own school leavers are incabable of doing. (the government are now planning to make kids stay in school until they are 18 - sorry if you don't know anything at 16 what difference will two more years make)
We are killing out of supposed kindness, ruining the stability of our country and blighting the lives of our own people. I never meant to imply that this is ok. Are any of our major parties really going to change this? I have a slight hope for the Tories, but no they wont touch it really...
rombald:
From what little I hear about the BNP in the states, wouldn't voting for a party that wishes your children never existed, um, be a bit against your self-interest?
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.