Sunday, 13 September 2009

A Lesson For John Denham On The Meaning Of "Fascism"

John Denham, grinning like the idiot he is

You will probably have read by now about communities minister John Denham's outrageous statement that "Right-wing" groups who claim to oppose Islamic extremism are trying to provoke violence on Britain's streets, and are comparable to the fascist followers of Oswald Mosley.

It is telling how Denham assumes that one must be "right-wing" to oppose Islamic jihadists (although it is certainly true that Leftists don't have a great record when it comes to leaning in that direction). But for their part, the English Defense League (EDL), one of the main targets of Denham's statement, have issued an official response, which reads in part:

"The EDL exists precisely because extremist Muslim groups are being allowed to tour the UK unchallenged, corrupting the minds of young and impressionable people, undermining community cohesion and causing gratuitous offence to non Muslims....Your comparison of the situation in Harrow yesterday (to which the EDL were not party) with the Black Shirts of Oswald Moseley is farcical, intended only to legitimise the violent response of Muslim and government sponsored counter demonstrators, and to demonise a group of people who feel that the actions of Anjem Choudary and his ilk must be opposed. Failure to do so will result in further alienation as these extremists are allowed to preach their hatred of the UK, our people and our way of life."

And indeed, Denham's idiotic comparison is symbolic of the tendency of the entire Western political class to get the facts completely backwards.

Let us assume, for a moment, that the movement we dub "Islamic extremism" is a corruption of a peaceful and tolerant faith called Islam, and not (as is actually the case) a mere extension of its mainstream, orthodox teachings. This movement is pushing a powerfully presented ideological and political challenge against the West. In its imagined utopia, non-Muslims and women would face institutionalised discrimination; homosexuals are put to death; freedom of conscience is denied to those who wish to leave the Islamic religion; freedom of speech is denied to those who wish to speak out against the dominant ideology; and wars are declared with the express purpose of imposing all of these conditions on non-Muslim nations by force.

Regardless of whether this jihadist movement represents "true Islam" or not, it is undeniably totalitarian in nature. Of course, a larger issue is that Islam itself is, in its traditional form, fascist, as Ibn Warraq has brilliantly shown.

And what does it mean if you oppose this fascism and advocate resistance to it, along with promotion of Western values of freedom and democracy? Why, in John Denham's world, it means you are a fascist.

In his 1920 Theory and Practise of Bolshevism, philosopher Bertrand Russell openly compared Islam to Soviet Communism:

Bolshevism combines the characteristics of the French Revolution with those of the rise of Islam.

Marx has taught that Communism is fatally predestined to come about; this produces a state of mind not unlike the early successors of Muhammad.

Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of the world.

Almost 90 years later, the moronic John Denham would do well to take note.

No comments:

Post a Comment