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

Wednesday, 5 May 2010

The EDL Rooftop Protest by the Birmingham Mail

Why do Birmingham Mail journalists, and others, always say that the EDL ‘claims to oppose Islamic extremism’? They never say that Unite Against Fascism (UAF) ‘claims to oppose fascism’, do they? This is a case of the following:

The EDL claims to oppose Islamic extremism but doesn’t. It is, in fact, only creating inter-racial conflict and attempting to further the cause of fascism.

The Birmingham Mail doesn’t say this about UAF:

UAF claims to oppose fascism and racism but is really attempting to radicalise Muslims and non-Muslims and in so doing help further the socialist/Islamist revolution.

Birmingham Mail
journalists don’t say that because they are far more sympathetic to the far left than they are to what they take to be the far right. But the EDL is not far right in the first place. ‘Far right’ equals ‘fascist’ in their book. But even they are not dishonest enough to say ‘fascist’. UAF, on the other hand, is a far-left organisation. How can it be anything else?

i) It uses violence against it opponents as well as well as against the police.
ii) It proclaims other policies which have nothing to do with fighting fascism and racism. (E.g., their banners and speakers state that more council houses should be built and that the troops should be pulled out of Afghanistan.)
iii) It states that everyone should ‘boycott Israeli goods’.

Not only all that. UAF was formed by the Socialist Workers Party and is still run by that Trotskyist group. Martin Smith, the main speaker for UAF, sits on the SWP’s Central Committee and is its National Secretary. Weyman Bennet, who was arrested at Bolton for organising violence against the police, is also a leader of the SWP. And there are many more UAF-SWP connections.

If anything, the EDL is far less far right than UAF is far left. That is primarily because the EDL is a single-issue group whereas UAF isn’t, as I have just shown. So Birmingham Mail journalists should be fair and also say that UAF ‘claims to oppose only fascism and racism’.

It is strange that even non-Trots and non-far leftists always see the far left as being far less ‘bad’ than the far right. Many think that even though the far left ‘has its heart in the right place’, it admittedly still makes mistakes. Some mistakes! Over 200 million died because of communism and Marxism in the 20th century.

The far right, of course, is seen as being, quite simply, ‘evil’ personified. It is not seen as naïve or even misguided as the far left is often thought to be by journalists and others. That’s why non-far leftists will share a platform with Trots like the SWP, the Stop the War Coalition and UAF.

*) The Birmingham Mail says that there were ‘pitched battles’ between the EDL and the police even though it also says that the only causality was a policeman who was ‘hit by a stone’. However, what might well have been a pitched battle occurred between ‘a group of Asian youths’ and the police. So why was this fact tagged on to the end of this article, unlike the EDL violence? In addition, why does the Birmingham Mail always talk about ‘Asian youths’ when it means ‘Muslim youths’? How many Indians, Chinese, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, etc. were amongst these ‘Asian youths’? Probably none.

*) It was almost funny to hear Chief Inspector Matt Markham saying that the police ‘were given no prior notification’ about the rooftop protest. Of course they didn’t! The police would have then had to let the EDL activists onto the roof themselves if they had already been ‘notified’.

As for the rooftop protest itself. The issue, Islamic extremism and power, is important enough to warrant such an action. Our leaders in the councils and in Parliament all seem to be hard-core Islamophiles who can never bring themselves to criticise Islam or Muslims in any way whatsoever (except, of course, Muslim terrorists, etc.). Thus the meaning of the rooftop protest was the message that we should stand up to the Islamists and deal properly with all potential terrorists and terrorism supporters in the mainstream, not fringe, Muslim organisations.

And the rooftop protest worked. Thousands of people would have seen the protest on the TV, heard it on the radio and read about it in the newspapers. That’s why the EDL did it. It didn’t break the law for the sake of breaking the law (if it did break the law at all). The EDL wanted to tell their fellow Brits that even if the politicians don’t listen to you, the EDL is listening. The negative coverage of the EDL forced its members up onto the rooftop. And if this Government, or the next government, does not get its act together, the EDL will continue to demonstrate and maybe even carry out further acts of direct action.

No comments:

Post a Comment