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... I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Philosophy Now, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here

Tuesday, 30 March 2010

What Do We Represent? [by Technogiant]

- by Technogiant

It is my belief that the following points are vital to the direction of the EDL:

1. It is vital to clarify what we stand for, and present it in a form acceptable to the British public.

2. We analyse what needs to be changed so we can enable what we stand for to come into being.

3. We decide the best course of action to bring about those changes.

Firstly what we stand for and presenting it in an acceptable form. I think it is fantastic what has been done so far to distance the EDL from the racists and fascists as this is essential to gain popular support of the British public who lets face it are probably the most tolerant and fair people on the planet.

In my view it would be possible to take this further. While it is undoubted that the current threat comes from radical Islam the fact that our stated aim is to oppose radical Islam leaves us with the problem firstly of defining what radical Islam is as opposed to moderate Islam and secondly leaves us open to being falsely accused of being Islamophobic or anti Islamic.

I don't think it necessary to name radical Islam as a target in order to achieve our aim and so bring these additional difficulties on ourselves, personally I would no more wish to live under an extremist Christian, Hindu, Buddhist or any other extremist religions rule or for that matter extremist non religious rule.

For me this is the heart of the problem, the fact that any such regime or group could come to power and enforce its beliefs and rules on everyone through rule of law and politics. This is what we have to stop and I believe should be our stated aim, the protection and preservation of British democratic rights.

Would not such a declared aim be embraced and acceptable to all red blooded British people? How could any group then call us racist fascist anti Islamic or whatever and put us immediately on the back foot having to justify our existence?

You might ask how would this help in the fight against the immediate threat which we all agree is radical Islam? I suppose that will bring us to point number 2, what needs to change to bring about our aim?

My view on what needs to change is that democracy has to be strong enough to protect itself from subversion. Why should democracy allow it's freedoms to be used to further the aims of those who would ultimately oppress and remove the freedoms of others?

Religious groups should be prevented by law from forming political parties and the ensconcing of religious dictates into law should also be outlawed. Also groups whether religious or not who's mandates would oppress or remove the rights of others should be outlawed.

This would directly counter radical Islam and outlaw any future UK Islamic state and the implementation of Sharia law. Also Islam as a whole in the UK would have to re assess its position on the rights of women, the burka, homosexuals and any other group that it oppresses in order for it to remain legal in this country.

Finally how do we bring about these changes. I think it important that we continue to be active on the street in opposing those that would seek to remove our democratic rights but as well as just opposing we need to be actively proposing petitioning and lobbying for the changes we need to bring about the end of these groups for good.

As I said I am new here so please don't think I'm trying to teach granny to suck eggs, just throwing my hat into the ring so feel free to flame or whatever.

No comments:

Post a Comment