Hope, Anger and Courage
In a previous post on this subject I argued that if we were going to get serious about fighting the terrorist threat we now face, we needed to start with some form of societal change of attitude. Attitude is a settled way of feeling or thinking about something.
In that same post, I mocked somewhat the Hope Not Hate movement for being little more than a virtue-signalling irrelevance in terms of any serious fight for the survival of our way of life. Hoping rather than hating will not, per se, defeat terrorism.
However, I did refer to Augustine of Hippo’s wise words on the subject of hope. Augustine said, ‘Hope has two beautiful daughters: their names are anger and courage. Anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain as they are.’
Well, the events of recent weeks have certainly made me angry, and I suspect that that applies to you too. Whilst anger, or wrath might be one of the Seven Deadly Sins, anger – properly channelled – can be a positive emotion. Anger can be a motivating force; anger can reduce violence when the other party realises that the situation causing the anger must be resolved (or else); anger vented is a signal that something must happen, something must change.
Whose Attitude Needs to Change?
So, do we need to change our attitude to the threat now posed not only to our lives, but to our way of life?
My contention here is that it’s not millions of ordinary people like you and me who need to change their attitudes to the fight against Islamic terrorism. It’s the British political class, the Establishment and the Fourth Estate (especially the BBC, as always), who need to change their attitudes to the existential threat we now face.
Islamic terrorists are killing us on our streets today. Political-correctness will almost certainly guarantee that Islamic terrorists will kill us on our streets tomorrow, and the day after, and the day after that. Listen to virtually any politician or senior police officer talking in the aftermath of the incidents in Manchester and London (twice); listen to, or read virtually every BBC news report on these incidents. Have the politicians, the senior police officers or the BBC given you any idea who’s behind these ‘terrorist attacks’? The Red Army Faction? Palestinians? The IRA? You’d have little or no idea if you relied on the British Establishment to explain who, or rather what was behind the people slaughtering our citizens lately.
What Sort of Islam Are We Up Against?
Let me tell you what was behind people being mown down, bombed and knifed in the past few weeks – not only in the UK, but in Europe and elsewhere too. The religion of Islam was behind these terror attacks. Not ‘radical Islam’; not ‘Islamic fundamentalism’; not ‘ISIS’ (known as ‘so-called Islamic State’ by the BBC, for fear of offending somebody, somewhere); not ‘Islamic jihad’; not any other form of labelled Islam. It was and remains the religion of Islam which now poses an existential threat to the United Kingdom (and the rest of the world as it happens, but let’s no go there for now).
Labelling Islam is the politically-correct way of avoiding offending people. Personally, I find it offensive that a woman enjoying an evening out in London should have a 10-inch blade plunged into her chest by a bloke shouting, ‘This is for Allah!’. However, to draw a connection between this particular murder and the religion of Islam could offend somebody, somewhere. So, the British Establishment’s strategy for fighting
Islamic terror is, er, not to mention Islam. Try it and see. Over the next few days when you’re listening to a politician or a police officer or some other worthy pontificating about the recent attacks, or when you’re reading, or listening to BBC reports on the matter, see if you can figure out the nature of the terrorist threat we face. I mean, you know what was behind that lady being stabbed to death, but would you know simply by listening to those who are charged with governing us, protecting us, informing and educating us? I watch politicians tying themselves in knots trying to dissociate slaughter on our streets from the religion of Islam.
The Courage to Change
You can see why this is going to give us problems in the coming years and, what could easily be decades into the future as we fight for our lives and our very way of life against Islamic terrorism. If we’re not allowed to refer to the religion that dare not speaks its name, then forget fighting for our way of life; we may as well sign up to the Caliphate now and save a bunch of wretched souls from being blown to smithereens at pop concerts and the like.
I’m not advocating here for the eradication of Islam in our society, nor the persecution of Muslims, nor some other form of pogrom. However, our politicians need to free themselves from this pathological obsession with deferring and kowtowing to a Medieval, politico-religious creed that has absolutely no place in our post-Christian, Enlightened, plural and sophisticated society. Our politicians’ obsession with political-correctness, particularly in the context of the clear and present danger now facing us, must cease; and politicians must desist from protecting an ideology – Islam – which is the root cause of a movement determined to destroy us.
So, the question I would pose to the British political class is this:
‘Do you have the courage to change your attitude to Islam, and in so doing lay the foundations for this country to fight the greatest threat to its existence in generations?’
WHAT WOULD A CHANGE OF ATTITUDE TOWARDS ISLAM MEAN IN PRACTICE?
So, what’s my expectation in imploring politicians and all the associated paraphernalia of the state, as well as the BBC and other mainstream media to change their attitude to Islam, thereby allowing us freely to explore the relationship between Islam and death on our streets? What are the societal implications of reversing our political-correctness towards the religion of Islam?
Well, in practice we must be prepared to dissect Islam in public, without fear or favour and to do so forensically. We must be able to speak freely about Islam and its influence, or not, on nutjobs hell-bent on murdering us. We must be able to criticise Islam. We must be free to offend Muslims and anybody else minded to speak for Islam. We must be prepared to lampoon Islam in the way, for example, Monty Python pilloried Christianity in ‘The Life of Brian’. Let’s hear the BBC’s ‘News Quiz’ cast taking the piss out of Islam in the same way they take the piss out of the Archbishop of Canterbury and Her Majesty The Queen.
We must be able to draw outrageous cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. In short, we must be free to give Islam the same objective and irreverent treatment as we give pretty much anything and everyone else in our free society.
Also, we must be able and willing to monitor and control that which goes on in mosques, certainly for as long as there is any suspicion whatsoever that mosques are breeding grounds for fanatics. In so doing, we must have the legal powers to counter ‘bad’ mosques and, rather like we’d tackle an errant licenced premises, we must be able to close down mosques if that’s deemed to be best for society; bulldoze them to rubble if necessary.
In adopting this change of attitude and approach to Islam, we should be clear about the factions which exist within the religion and, therefore, who is most likely to cooperate in evolving Islam towards an acceptable form of worship in our society. Any new approach to our attitude to Islam in the way that I’m proposing here should be a cooperative approach. We need the Muslim community to buy in to and internalise profound, long-term change. If the Muslim community resists this change of attitude by our society, to its place in our society and the implications for the religion and its followers, then Islam in the UK should be crushed out of existence.
Finally, how would Muslims react to this culture change? Well, as we already know, some Muslims would be apoplectic. Perfect. Those Muslims who react badly or, indeed, openly and violently to having their religion put through the mangle of a free and democratic society will be exposed for what they are: criminals. We arrest those criminals and subject them to the laws of our land. Welcome to the 21st century and the nation which invented freedom.
Thanks for reading. If you think this post is worth sharing and discussing, click on one or more of the relevant buttons below and/or comment as you wish. Perhaps send a link to your elected politicians in local and national government. I have.