Mark Steyn points out that the more we appease, the more they demand.
Alas, the United Kingdom's descent into dhimmitude is beyond parody. Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (Tory-controlled) has now announced that, following a complaint by a Muslim employee, all work pictures and knick-knacks of novelty pigs and "pig-related items" will be banned. Among the verboten items is one employee's box of tissues, because it features a representation of Winnie the Pooh and Piglet. And, as we know, Muslims regard pigs as "unclean", even an anthropomorphised cartoon pig wearing a scarf and a bright, colourful singlet.Cllr Mahbubur Rahman is in favour of the blanket pig crackdown. "It is a good thing, it is a tolerance and acceptance of their beliefs and understanding," he said. That's all, folks, as Porky Pig used to stammer at the end of Looney Tunes. Just a little helpful proscription in the interests of tolerance and acceptance. ...
Likewise, Piglet is deeply offensive and so's your chocolate ice-cream, but if a West End play opens with a gay Jesus, Christians just need to stop being so doctrinaire and uptight. The Church of England bishops would probably agree with that if, in their own misguided attempt at Islamic outreach, they weren't so busy apologising for toppling Saddam.
When every act that a culture makes communicates weakness and loss of self-belief, eventually you'll be taken at your word. In the long term, these trivial concessions are more significant victories than blowing up infidels on the Tube or in Bali beach restaurants. An act of murder demands at least the pretence of moral seriousness, even from the dopiest appeasers. But small acts of cultural vandalism corrode the fabric of freedom all but unseen.
Is it really a victory for "tolerance" to say that a council worker cannot have a Piglet coffee mug on her desk? And isn't an ability to turn a blind eye to animated piglets the very least the West is entitled to expect from its Muslim citizens? If Islam cannot "co-exist" even with Pooh or the abstract swirl on a Burger King ice-cream, how likely is it that it can co-exist with the more basic principles of a pluralist society?
We can win military battles in the field all day long and still lose the war if we're too cowardly and "tolerant" to fight the cultural battles at home.
The important thing, in fighting the "cultural battles" at home, is picking the right battles to fight.
We're often too quick to cry about a lack of "tolerance"... and equally too quick to cry about "losing the culture war". Consider this from George Will: The Christian Complex
It's been what, 60+ years, since Neville Chamberlain gave into Hitler. You'd think the Left would have learned by now that capitulation doesn't work. In 1938, Chamberlain signed the Munich agreement which left Czechoslovakia open to attack. He stupidly thought signing the agreement would solve "the Nazi problem". But surprise, surprise, Hitler wanted more. Gee, who would have thought?
Like today, the Left think that if we pull out of the Middle East that would somehow result in the terrorst sect of Muslims loving us. But we pull out, then they want us to drop support for Israel so they could wipe them off the face of the planet. And so on and so on.
IC said: "the Left think that if we pull out of the Middle East that would somehow result in the terrorst sect of Muslims loving us."
There's that "Conservative ESP" again.
It's time to start up pig festivals all over the UK.
Thank you Mark.
IC: It wasn't meant as a compliment.
But it was. Thank you.
Having faulty ESP is nothing to be thankful for.
"The Left", as you so broadly put it, doesn't believe that pulling out of the Middle East will result in the Islamic terrorists "loving us". Your exaggeration makes your "Conservative ESP" (accurate insight into what the Left believes) false.
Mark, what Chris describes isn't ESP. It's a summation and slight exaggeration of what the Left actually says. You're only objecting to the exaggeration, which wasn't intended to be taken literally.
Your accusation would be accurate if someone said: "The Left says we'll be safer if we pulled out of Iraq, but they know that's untrue. They really want to destroy this country."
See, that's an assertion that the speaker knows what's really in the hearts of lefties, even though none of them actually say it. Sometimes I wonder if a large segment of them consciously want to destroy the country. But I would never actually claim to know that, because I'm not psychic.
No "lefty" that I've heard of has said that the terrorists would "love us" if we pulled out of the Middle East.
Chris talked about what the Left "thinks". Reading someone's thoughts is definitely ESP.
However, BB, I wouldn't put it past you to say that the Left consciously wants to destroy the country... and then hide behind the "it's not meant to be taken literally" disclaimer.
It isn't that the left wants to destroy the U.S. It is that the left has some serious delusions about the way the world really works that will, if implemented, finish destroying this country. The left has already done enormous damage because of their dominance of the judiciary.
CEC: Stack up the delusions of both the Left and the Right and you'd be amazed at how similar in size and impact the piles are.
If Democrats are impotent in their ability to get back control of their party from the fringes of the Left, the Republicans are equally impotent in their ability to get back control of their party from the fringes of the Right:
- In 8 years of Republican control of both the White House and Congress, the size, power, and cost of the federal government has increased substantially. True conservatives were appalled.
- The President and Republicans who hold the power in Congress saw it fit to rush back to Capitol Hill and take action on the Terri Schiavo situation. True conservatives were appalled.
- President Bush, the head of the Republican party, declared that rebuilding New Orleans and areas affected by Hurricane Katrina will cost whatever it costs. True conservatives were appalled.
- The Dept. of Homeland Security was created (to the credit of the White House, though, the creation of such a department was initially resisted... too bad it changed its mind). Instead of a truly conservative approach... take existing agencies and organizations and make them work better... the DHS is another layer of government bureaucracy and "basically a law enforcement enforcement agency" which also gets to distribute money (and, as always with government spending, plenty of pork). True conservatives were appalled.
That's not a complete list, but it's a few of the highlights.
The singularly most important, to me, among the false delusions of the Right is that free markets can solve everything... and that charitable giving will necessarily rise to meet the need in their dream society, a society with *no* universal welfare system whatsoever.
Err... remove "false" from the phrase "false delusions" in the last paragraph of the above comment.
Mark, I think you need to watch the news a little more. America hater after America hater goes on and on about how if we would just get out of the Middle East and drop our support for Israel then we'd be better off and the terrorist Muslims wouldn't hate us so much. But it's okay, you're a Lefty yourself. You know not what you say.
IC: For the record, I *don't* support getting out of the Middle East and dropping support of Israel.
It takes a person with a particularly craven way of looking at people's ideological affiliations to call fellow citizens with whom you disagree "America haters"... or otherwise doubt their good intentions. I disagree with many aspects of our current foreign policy, but I never questioned the desire of those in power to do what's in the best interests of our country.
Were I to follow your way of thinking, I could call everyone on this site with whom I disagree on any given issue of national importance an "America hater". Never have I done that... and never will I.
While I'd say it's true that our involvement with the leaders in the Middle East over the years... in efforts to secure our interests... has a great deal to do with their zeal to destroy us, that does not necessarily indicate that getting ourselves out of Middle Eastern affairs is the proper remedy. If there's one thing I think we should make ourselves less interested in, though, it's Middle Eastern oil.
Indian Chris:
Hey, watch out! Mark might call you smarmy and then you'll have to forgive him.
As much as I loath trolls, I have to admit that Mark is an interesting one so far. He might be one of the few logical liberals around. I need to keep an eye on this one....
I suppose I could go and post on liberal blogs, but that would be boring.
More than that, though, discussing things with your ideological opposite is very rarely a negative thing. Not only can it lead to reinforcement of your own beliefs, it can also lead to the development of common ground and new ideas.
Do I seriously expect to change the minds of most people who visit and post here, including MW? No, not at all... that's not what I'm here for. I'm here to discuss and occasionally play games with smarmy DeoDuce.
Ha! Now you called me an actual name.
I forgive you.
DD: Yeah, I threw that last part in there for you. I thought you'd like it. :)
Nah... not "thought"... I *knew* you'd like it.
Ah, so now you have the "liberal ESP" I see.
DD: You brought up the whole "smarmy" thing after the conversation had moved beyond it, so what else am I supposed to conclude? I tend to drop issues I grow tired of talking about... but you brought it up again, which says to me that you still like it.
.. or that you liked the game we were playing.
I just think you're funny when you get defensive. Psychological games for my benefit, I suppose.
DD: I enjoy them too... so while they may be for your benefit, they're not costly to me.