Thursday, 8 September 2011
Andrew Brown’s (the Guardian) 'paranoid Islamophobes'
In his article Andrew Brown frequently refers to the ‘conspiracists’ of the counter-jihad movement in Europe and the US. He claims that the EDL and Robert Spencer - amongst very many others - are ‘conspiracists’.
That's odd. What is more conspiratorial than the radical Left (which includes Guardianistas)?
For example, it’s mightily hard for a Leftist nowadays to utter a single sentence without including the word ‘Zionist’ or 'Israel' in it. Indeed these people live in a deeply conspiratorial world which is run by ‘Zionists’, ‘the Zionist Lobby’, the 'Jewish neo-cons’ and whatnot; as well as by Big Oil, "neo-Liberals", etc. Zionists also apparently run the media (which media? the Media!) the White House and they've even got around to running the English Defence League. (They have offices in Luton.)
What’s more, this very article is itself deeply conspiratorial in nature. This time, however, instead of 'conspiracies about Muslims' (which Brown claims a host of counter-jihadists suffer from), this article contains clear examples of conspiracy theories about what he would claim are members of the ‘far right’: i.e., every single critic of Islam or Muslim behaviour (no matter what he or she says and no matter how he/she says it). In fact, just criticising Muslims is any way (even Muslim terrorists) makes you a ‘paranoid’.
Andrew Brown’s list of paranoids is comprehensive and would probably include everyone to the right of Pol Pot. Here it is (these are just the ones he names): Bat Ye’or, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Anders Gravers, Fjordman, the EDL, Douglas Murray, Damian Thompson, Geert Wilders, Paul Belien, Daniel Hannan and, of course, ‘Mad’ Melanie Phillips.
As I said: everyone and anyone who dares to criticise Islam and/or Muslim behaviour (as Muslims).
[Image right: conspiracy?]
On the subject of conspiracy theories. Andrew Brown mentions what he takes to be various ‘far right’ conspiracy theories. However, he just states - though doesn’t analyse - them; as if it's self-evident that they are all total conspiracies.
Conspiracy Theory Number One: that "Europe is now as much under threat from a Muslim invasion as it was in 1683, when a Turkish army besieged Vienna" (Gates of Vienna). Not a word of critique follows.
Conspiracy Theory Number Two: that "European elites have conspired against their people to hand the continent over to Muslims" (Bat Ye’or). Not a word of critique follows.
Conspiracy Theory Number Three: that Europe is slowly being turned into "a Eurabian superstate, incorporating Muslim countries of north Africa and the Middle East in the European Union" (Anders Gravers). Not a word of critique from Andrew Brown.
Conspiracy Theory Number Four: that Islam is not "a religion of peace". Not a word of critique.
Conspiracy Theory Number Five: that "the British elite [has] deliberately encouraged immigration in order to break down traditional society" (Melanie Phillips). Again, not a word of critique from Brown.
Not a word of critique occurs anywhere else in Andrew Brown’s article. All we have are Leftist soundbites or clichés; such as ‘hatred’, ‘paranoid’, ‘Islamophobic’, ‘co-conspiracist’ and so on.
Of all the ‘far right’ examples of ‘conspiracies’, you’d have thought that Andrew Brown would have at least spent a tiny bit of time on theories four and five. No. Not a word. It's enough, for him, to simply accuse people of being ‘Islamophobes’ or ‘bigots’. That’s all you get. After all, Andrew Brown is more of a Guardianista than most: he actually works for that gloriously unbiased and objective newspaper.
The News Link: