One Brit's Take On Muslims and Multiculturalism

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,827
1,790
The comments are worth reading at the site:

http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/007824.html

Defending western civilisation
Perry de Havilland (London) Opinions on liberty

A commenter in an earlier article here responded to someone arguing that Muslim immigrants should never have been treated as 'immigrants' in Britain but as 'guest workers' the way the Germany treat Turks in their country, making them much easier to deport when the powers-that-be decide it is time for them to go. His reply was:

...but removal of those guest workers is one hell of a job isn't it?

Quite so. Moreover it seems obvious to me that a significant number of Muslims in Britain have successfully integrated into British society just fine and I see no reason to pretend otherwise. Yet clearly we do have a major problem with an equally significant number of Muslims who have not assimilated, show no sign of doing so and are manifestly a source of recruits for Al Qaeda.

Endlessly blathering on about how "Islam is a religion of peace" or alternatively to call for expelling 'Muslims', simply because they are Muslims, is the sort of wilful blindness and one size fits all collectivism of a sort I would rather leave to socialists of both left and right. Anyone who values western liberal civilisation needs to think a little harder than that, avoiding both atavistic collectivism and a head-in-the-sand refusal to see we have a serious problem that will not go away on its own.

If what we are trying to defend is a pluralistic tolerant society, then we have to make sure that the message is not just "throw the wogs out!" but rather "You are welcome here if you are willing to assimilate to a sufficient degree."

But how does one define what that 'degree' is exactly? I am not talking a Norman Tebbit style "cricket test" but rather a willingness to tolerate 'otherness'. We do not need Muslims to approve of alcohol or women in short skirts or figurative art or bells or pork or pornography or homosexuality or (particularly) apostasy. We have no right to demand that at all and obviously not all Anglicans approve of some of those things, so why require that Muslims must? No, what we do have the right to demand (and that is not too strong a word) is that they tolerate those things, which is to say they will not countenance the use of force to oppose those things even though they disapprove of them. In fact it is not just Muslims from whom we must demand such tolerance.

If we can get them to agree to tolerate those things, then it does not matter if Muslim women wear burquas because as long as they are not subject to force, a woman may elect to say "Sod this for a game of soldiers!" and cast off that symbol of misogynistic repression... and if she does not do so, well that is her choice then... but she must have a choice. They do not have to look like us (I do not hear calls for Chinatown to be razed to the ground), they do not have to share our religion(s), or lack thereof, but they do have to tolerate our varied ways and if by their actions or words they show they do not, we have every right to regard them as our enemies and take action to defend ourselves.

For decades the supporters of multiculturalism have used tax money and government regulations to actively discourage assimilation of immigrants into the broader society, preferring to see communities develop which favour 'identity politics' better suited and more amenable to their own collectivist world views. And now we are paying the price for that. We will not be able to defend ourselves physically or preserve our liberal society unless we stop tolerating intolerance, and that includes not just fundamentalist Islam but also the anti-western bigotry of the multiculturalists.

He then wrote:

http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/007826.html

Does a voice for 'moderate' Islam in Britain actually exist?
Perry de Havilland (London) Middle East & Islamic • UK affairs


Let us listen to what Dr. Azzam Tamimi of the Muslim Association of Britain is saying:

Senior Muslims have warned the Government that it needed to revise British foreign policy if it wants to put an end to the violence. Dr Azzam Tamimi, from the Muslim Association of Britain, said the country was in real danger and that this would continue so long as British forces remained in Iraq. He described the July 7 bombings and the attempted attacks in London on Thursday as "horrifying" but said it was not enough to simply unite in condemnation of the bombers.

People reading this blog may or may not share my enthusiasm for the war in Iraq, but even if you were an 'anti', make no mistake, what these 'senior Muslims' are demanding is nothing less that capitulation to terrorism. Dr. Tamimi is quite unequivocal: change your foreign policy or these people will continue to blow you up.

And when Massoud Shadjareh, chairman the Islamic Human Rights Commission, says:

we know this wasn't a one-off, we need to look at ways of addressing the underlying factors that created it. I feel it's urgent to start addressing these before there is further loss of life.

He had better think deeply before making such statements again or an increasing number of British people may start concluding that the 'underlying factor' that needs the most urgent action is the existence of his community in Britain. I look forward to the large body of 'moderate' Muslim leaders that is allegedly out there to unequivocally damn Al Qaeda and all their works (and that means not a single use of the word 'but...'). It is becoming increasingly urgent that this occurs soon and over a sustained period.

Until that happens, I suspect the majority of British people who do not live in Islington will see people like Azzam Tamimi and Massoud Shadjareh as part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
 
What this fellow doesn't seem to get is that the fine distinctions he makes just aren't made by those he contemplates. They want to kill. He wants to discuss things over tea.

I am hopeful that the more white Western blood is shed, the more the UK and the US will see the folly of open Arab immigration and foreign entanglements with Israel. But I'm not holidng my breath. Today, multiculturalism is so deeply embedded in white folks' brains that they'd rather be blown to bloody bits than admit that it doesn't work.

And so they will. Enjoyed having you around, white people. You used to run the planet, and now you're afraid to even discuss your own genocide. How times have changed.
 
William Joyce said:
What this fellow doesn't seem to get is that the fine distinctions he makes just aren't made by those he contemplates. They want to kill. He wants to discuss things over tea.

I am hopeful that the more white Western blood is shed, the more the UK and the US will see the folly of open Arab immigration and foreign entanglements with Israel. But I'm not holidng my breath. Today, multiculturalism is so deeply embedded in white folks' brains that they'd rather be blown to bloody bits than admit that it doesn't work.

And so they will. Enjoyed having you around, white people. You used to run the planet, and now you're afraid to even discuss your own genocide. How times have changed.

Can't rep ya so :clap: :clap: :clap:
 
You applaud Joyce's racist and anti-Semitic poison dillo? Thoughtful. He takes every opportunity to spew hate speech against Jews, Israel, and many other groups. In the excrementitious drivel above, Joyce blames homicide bomber murders on immigration and foreign entanglement with Israel. In Joyce’s twisted world view, it is not the murderers who are to blame; rather it is the groups that his racism chooses to scapegoat. If the gangrenous philosophies of Joyce held sway, America would have long ago exploded in racial warfare. But fortunately Joyce is on the lunatic fringe with you dillo.
 
Well said onedomino. I suppose it's better to be reminded that some people do have problems with others based on physical characteristics only. The 'bright' amoungst them I guess try to make it 'scientific', as did Hitler. That's been falling back on DNA or someother hitching post.

Problem is, the prejudice game is the same used by some in the 'minorities' to excuse their own bad behaviors rather than taking responsibility for their actions.

Personally my own upbringing and life experiences just don't lead me down these dark roads. Do I have 'issues' right now in 2005, with 'Muslim people?' Yes. Is it rooted in 'facts', as I know them? Yes. Does it include all Muslims? Well my gut tells me honestly, yes. Yet those that I do know, who are only a few, lead me to believe that they are nice people-but I'm taking them one-at-a-time. (Yeah I know, some of my best friends...)
 

Forum List

Back
Top