The subjects covered in this blog include, Slavoj Žižek, IQ tests, Chomsky, Tony Blair, Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Islam, Islamism, Marx, Foucault, National/International Socialism, economics, the Frankfurt School, philosophy, anti-racism, etc. - Paul Austin Murphy

This blog once bore the name 'EDL Extra'. I supported the EDL until 2012. As the reader will see, the last post which supports the EDL dates back to 2012. This blog, nonetheless, retains the former web address.

Tuesday, 21 September 2010

Embrace diversity – or else!

[Above: a bit of Diversity introduced and Embraced in Slough.]





Should we ‘respect’ and ‘embrace diversity’? Should we respect and embrace Islam and all Muslims? Is this some kind of ethical or political given?

The buzz word ‘diversity’ is just a trite and fluffy term which is used by select groups and politicians to get what they want from the rest of society. No one respects all diversity. For a start, most Muslims certainly do not respect all examples of diversity. Do they respect the English Defence League or the Witches’ Coven of Hull? Do they truly and genuinely respect Hindus and, yes, Christians? What about militant atheists or just plain ‘liberal’ atheists?

It can easily be seen that ‘diversity’ is just a leftist or liberal-leftist piece of jargon which is sometimes used to defend the indefensible and which, in the end, is very selective when it comes to specifying particular politically-correct examples of diversity – all at the expense of politically-incorrect cases. When InterFaithers say that religious ‘symbols represent human life in all its diversity’, and that therefore they must be ‘respected’, most of us simply ignore such vague statements and the buzz word that is ‘diversity’. (You can imagine council ‘training courses’ in Birmingham in which helpless and hapless people are fed the propaganda of diversity and forced to use that actual word at least five times each day.)

The same goes for the Leftist or Muslim’s ‘respect the sensitivities of others’. All others? Even Nazis? Should I respect the ‘sensitivities’ of those who are over-sensitive about all their beliefs and attitudes? What if some Muslims are too sensitive about too much, which is often the case? What if Muslims are sensitive to any criticism whatsoever of Islam, the Koran or Mohammed? Should we just shut up and leave Islam untouched by criticism? Would that be a good thing to Leftists and Muslims? Are Muslims and Leftists sensitive to the beliefs and desires of ‘Zionists’ and the beliefs and desires of Jews and Israelis? Or does sensitive just mean this? –

Be SENSITIVE to Muslims, or when talking about Islam, the Koran and Mohamed. RESPECT Muslims, Islam, Mohammad and the Koran.

This is the respect and the sensitivity which Muslims and Leftists are really talking about. Indeed when anyone talks about ‘diversity’ and ‘respect’ they have particular communities in mind. They do not respect all diversity – far from it! No one does.

Is every - or any - criticism of Islam, Muslims, the Koran or Muhammad an example of ‘hate-speech’ or an ‘encouragement of hate’? Muslims certainly think so about Geert Wilder’s Fitna. What about the Satanic Verses or the Danish cartoons of Mohammed? Were they examples of hate-speech too? What about saying that ‘sharia law is full of abominations’. Hate-speech? ‘Polygamy is deeply prejudiced against women.’ Hate-speech? ‘Mohamed was a killer, paedophile and a warrior.’ Hate-speech?

Now put the boot on the other foot. Is the ‘Hamas charter’ full of hate-speech? What about parts of the Koran itself? The Koran is full of hate-speech towards Jews, Christians, infidels and all sorts of other groups and peoples.

As with the words or concepts ‘diversity’ and ‘respect’, Leftists and Muslims selectively choose who or what is guilty of propagating hate-speech. As before, all we are really left with is:

Any or every criticism of Islam, Muslims, the Koran or Mohammed is an example of hate-speech.

No comments:

Post a Comment