Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

Traffic

A recent article of mine had something of a vogue and it was taken-up by the Devil himself in his Kitchen. It was also taken-up by an unofficial BNP blog in Wigan. Hmm… Chris Mounsey is a star of the Libertarian blogging world and the BNP are a bunch of National Socialists who apart from their racism have a large number of very strange and dangerous policies. Well, that’s the ‘net for you and everyone is welcome to read my rants or Cats’ mewlings and frankly, the more the merrier. Because this is not meant as an echo chamber. If possible I would like people to read this and, well, change, as Perry de Havilland of Samizdata (another star of the libertarian blog scene) would put it, their “metacontext”.

The sad truth is that the BNP and the likes of RESPECT are basically the same thing. Their economic policies are both boilerplate socialism and both equate criticism of Islam with racism. I don’t and I frankly find the conflation of race and idealogy to be one of the strangest enduring fallacies of the age. You can see something similar in the current US election campaign. The very idea that a Black American might vote for McCain is seen as staggering.

I am worried about one thing in particular. There are many good anti-jihadi websites out there. Jihadwatch and LGF spring to mind (though least said about LGF’s commentariat soonest mended) but there are also nutters and oportunists such as Gates of Vienna (which sometimes seems to be almost gleefully anticipating a European Christian vs. Muslim Civil War). GoV is based in the USA and I guess it’s bloggers are planning on getting in beer and pretzels and watching the fun unfold on CNN.

And this is the problem. I am anti-jihad. I am appalled at some of the allowances being made to Muslims in this country. I am appalled at the, for want of a better word, Muslim pork-barrels we pay to try and keep them sweet (or unradicalized as the jargon goes). I am dissapointed by the way in which none of our mainstream political parties or the mainstream media is prepared to say the unsayable (for fear of being deemed racist or something*) and at the heart of the problem of terrorism and legal jihad and the hectoring and harrassment indulged in by various Islamists is Islamic all the way back to the Qu’ran and Muhammed.

But I am not prepared to throw the baby out with the bathwater and turn in desperation to the Xenophobia and hatred and poisonous nationalism of the likes of the BNP as the likes of Gates of Vienna sometimes suggests we may have to. If this blogs posts on Islam serve any purpose it is to demonstrate that it is possible to find Islam a nasty and dangerous ideology without having to embrace an equally nasty and dangerous ideology and that being anti-jihad doesn’t automatically make you a racist loon or ultra-nationalist.

*Or indeed suffer the fate of Salman Rushdie or Theo van Gogh.

8 Comments

  1. RAB says:

    If this blogs posts on Islam serve any purpose it is to demonstrate that it is possible to find Islam a nasty and dangerous ideology without having to embrace an equally nasty and dangerous ideology and that being anti-jihad doesn’t automatically make you a racist loon or ultra-nationalist.

    Well that is the money quote for me.
    I completely agree.

    Your friendly Welsh Vagabond.

  2. El Draque says:

    Completely agree too.
    I hate the idea of a people taking sides on the grounds of ideology.
    Didn’t know “Gates of Vienna” was based in USA. I too found it distasteful in leaping on every “difference” between groups to foment a conflict.
    Perhaps libertarianism naturally creates odd alliances. I read the Devil’s Kitchen despite the vehement militant atheism displayed. I think Christians should – I read Dawkins thoroughly, and it’s never challenged my faith. Honestly, he can’t say anything I didn’t already consider as a possibility.

  3. CountingCats says:

    Otherwise, well said.

  4. NickM says:

    GoV totally lost the plot when they had a huge spat with LGF’s Charles Johnson. Basically they were saying that the only alternative to an Islamic take-over of Europe was supporting the likes of the BNP and FN and assorted Nazis. That’s amputating a leg to treat athlete’s foot. Even if they only meant that as a tactical “marriage of convenience” no, no, no!

    Taking the “The Enemy of Your Enemy is Your Friend” line always ends up in tears. And frankly I’m very concerned by the rise of these “extreme right” loons. The whole idea that they are the only significant force against the jihad is abysmal. And that’s why, classical liberal that I am, I’m making a stand.

    Because people without copies of Mein Kampf and swastika tattoos have to.

  5. NickM says:

    A joke Cats. A joke. Seemed funny at the time. And I have used it before.

  6. CountingCats says:

    Yeah, I know, but allow me to pretend outrage, ok?

  7. Sam Duncan says:

    What worries me is that these arseholes (or anyone else, come to that) might think, going by my comment posted late at night, in the heat of outrage at the thought of a single hair on the delightful Ms Minogue’s head being harmed, that I agree with them. Makes me ill, just thinking about it.

    As with the original article, I can’t add anything to what you’ve already said. The idea that you should think a certain way because of where you were born and who your parents were is… well, it’s insane. And yes, anti-Islamism – anti-Jihadism – isn’t racism, and mustn’t be left to the racists.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: