The Reformation Of Manners

Some thoughts from Mark Steyn on the Rotherham capitulation:

Now, in the new multiculti Britain, the child sex trade is back, as part of the rich, vibrant tapestry of diversity – along with Jew-hate, and honor killings, and decapitation porn.

…Old-school thugs – Mubarak and even Saddam – felt obliged to lie to the world: no, no torture going on here; we’re civilized men, just like you. But, as in Rotherham, the ISIS lads are “brazen” about it – they’re in your face about offing your head. And it’s worked for them: The more they post decapitated victims on Twitter and Facebook, the more followers they get in the “civilized” world. In an ill advised choice of words, the Prime Minister David Cameron said, “We need to tackle the ideology of Islamist extremism head on” – because trying to do it with your head off doesn’t seem to be working out for those poor fellows in Mosul.

But what does “head on” mean? I was listening to Congressman Peter King on the radio the other day discuss the issue of American and other western Muslims sallying forth to fight for ISIS, and his warnings about jihadists with western passports being able to move freely within Europe and North America made a lot of sense. But I had the uneasy feeling, as with Cameron, that the upshot would be a world in which, in five or ten years’ time, it will be more difficult and burdensome for law-abiding persons to fly from London to New York a two-day business meeting or from Toronto to Athens for a week in the Greek islands. In other words, the political leadership of the western world will attempt to micro-manage the problem through the panopticon security state.

Underneath the watchful eyes of the digital panopticon, however, the Islamization of the west will continue. Not every Muslim wants to chop your head off. Not every Muslim wants to “groom” your 11-year-old daughter. But these pathologies nest within Islam, and thrive at the intersection of Islam and the west. As long as Islam is your biggest source of population growth – to the point where Mohammed is now the most popular boy’s name in Oslo – you’re not “tackling” the issue, and certainly not “head on”.

In a bizarre column even for the post-Conrad National Post, Afsun Qureshi suggests the best thing you could do to lessen the likelihood of being set upon by Muslims is to learn to recite the shahadah, “a testimony to the identity of Allah as the one true God, and Muhammad as his prophet”. She might be right. Wearing a burqa might help, too. Or the shalwar kameez. On the other hand, most of those Syrian men paraded through the desert in their BVDs to their rendezvous with death knew the shahadah, and a fat lot of good it did.

To recite the shahadah when you’re accosted on the streets is to accept the basic premise of your attackers – that Islam now has universal jurisdiction. There’s way too much of that already. In essence, the entire establishment of a South Yorkshire town accepted that the cultural mores of Islam superseded whatever squeamishness they might otherwise have about child rape.

This will not end well.

Plus, “we have to face the truth to deal with the Rotherham hell“>

Facing the truth is something that the multi-culti Leftist, “reality-based” community studiously avoids.

9 thoughts on “The Reformation Of Manners”

  1. “Facing the truth is something that the multi-culti Leftist, “reality-based” community studiously avoids.”

    Reality will not avoid them

  2. Facing the problem head on involves recognizing that profoundly uncivilized people exist, and being prepared to meet their force with whatever force is necessary to stop them. That includes supporting civilized peoples in western nations when they choose to arm themselves for personal defense, and applying the full force of the law against uncivilized persons who violate civilized standards within the bounds of civilized nations. Overlooking criminality for reasons of political correctness is suicidal, as is criminalizing self defense.

    1. “Facing the problem head on involves recognizing that profoundly uncivilized people exist, and being prepared to meet their force with whatever force is necessary to stop them. ”

      And I would add:

      not getting bogged down in trying to sympathiae, empathize, with the killers. Not trying to see if they had troubled childhoods or if they are angry victims of poverty, or cut tthem breaks.

  3. What the authorities did in Rotherham was, ironically enough, quite racist. They were declaring that one group of people are so savage by nature that holding them to a civilized standard is wrong. It’s a throw back of sorts to the old days of the British Empire where non-whites were just wogs who had their wog ways. Non-judgement is actually a way of passing judgement, as in those people are just too barbaric to be judged in the same way as the rest of us.

    1. They were declaring that one group of people are so savage by nature that holding them to a civilized standard is wrong.

      Yep.

  4. Britian sure has fallen a long way from the likes of Charles James Napier, who is famous for saying:

    “Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.”

    If you want to maintain the customs of your birth country, why did you leave? If you want to live under Sharia law, why not move to a country that already imposes it?

  5. At what point do we realize that governments can’t (or just refuse to) solve these problems?

    We need a turning point because it seems the bridge is out on the road ahead.

Comments are closed.