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, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here.)
This blog used to be called EDL Extra. I was a supporter (neither a member nor a leader) of the EDL until 2012. This blog has retained the old web address.

****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Wednesday, 14 July 2010

Nick Lowles Against the Government... and the EDL (2)




According to Nick Lowles, the EDL is a massive threat. And that’s why he gives the Government a good telling off for its lax and soft attitude towards ‘racists’ and ‘fascists’. Lowles says that the EDL ‘poses one of the greatest threats to social and community cohesion at the moment’. And if that’s true, then why oh why is ‘the Government a mere spectator, hoping, no, praying, that police can contain trouble’? This is strange. Aren’t Islamism, militant Islam and many other things Islamic even a teeny weenie bit of a threat to Community Cohesion? Isn’t the self-ghettoisation of Muslims by Muslims also a threat to Embraced Diversity? Notch all this up one level. Isn’t Islamist supremacism a threat to Diversity and Community Cohesion? Is Community Cohesion really a question of communities, Muslim communities, living separately and at odds with the rest of society, including non-white and non-Christian communities? What many Muslims are doing in Bradford, Blackburn, Tower Hamlets, parts of Birmingham, etc. is not community cohesion (although it may be Community Cohesion). It is community self-rule and separation. Sharia law will be but the next step in this gradual but conscious movement towards separation – towards self-imposed religious apartheid.

So it is strange that Nick Lowles has precisely nothing to say about these real threats to Community Cohesion and Diversity. Who am I kidding? This is not strange at all. Lowles’s championship of Muslim separatism is part of his campaign against Englishness. You know, racism, fascism, imperialism, white-ism, non-leftism and all the other things he hates about the English and England.

As I said earlier, because Nick Lowles is a Trot, or a Communist (the difference doesn’t make a difference), the EDL is not the only object of his leftist displeasure. Yes, the Government is at fault too. The ‘present Governments have shown absolutely no leadership in their attitude towards the EDL’. Is that a roundabout way of saying that Cameron and Clegg haven’t sat in the Cabinet office discussing the Problem of the EDL with His Supremeness, Nick Lowles? Is it also a euphemism for the Government not kicking the EDL’s arse by banning it? Or is it about the Government not imprisoning EDL leaders in much-needed gulags for ‘fascists’, ‘racists’, ‘Islamophobes’ and all non-leftists (except Muslims and perhaps black people)?

The problem is, apparently, that the Government and others ‘play down the EDL threat’. Nick Lowles, UAF/SWP et al don’t of course play up the threat of the EDL, do they? Of course they do! These people live and breathe anti-racism and anti-fascism. It gives meaning to their lives. It focuses the Struggle. It radicalises. It furthers the Revolution. It provides new student recruits. But most importantly of all, for Nick Lowles, it provides a good career and a steady and secure income. And who would begrudge poor Nick Lowles a job? Not only that. Lowles, or one of his mates, has proved beyond any shadow of a leftist doubt that Tommy Robinson has ‘far-right links’. And no one would ever accuse Trotskyist organisations of lying or distorting things in order to further the Cause or to defeat an evil enemy like the EDL.

Lowles ends his missive with a bit of futurology, or at least an un-subtle hint at the bad times which will come if the Government doesn’t follow his wise words. He says that

when serious trouble does occur let us not forget that it is our elected politicians who have allowed the EDL to prosper by their failure to show clear and bold leadership.’

You can’t help but think that Lowles actually yearns for ‘serious trouble’. Trots thrive on serious trouble. He may also hope for the day when he can tell the Government: See! I told you so.

But forget all that. Searchlight and Hope Not Hate are supposed to be 'single-issue protest groups', aren’t they? Yes I know that no one actually believes that. However, this highly politicised ending - to an already politicised article - really places Lowles's Trotskyist cards on the table. This is not just about ‘fighting the EDL’, or even ‘smashing racism and fascism’. It is much more about giving ‘our elected politicians’ a good hiding in the Leftist manner and thus furthering the Revolution. Indeed the fight against racism is just a means the Trots use to further the Revolution, or at least to increase radicalisation.

1 comment:

  1. This ugly little runt is a coward; if there were to be trouble you can bet your life he will be running in the opposite direction.

    I have seen these creeps up close. They joined these lefty orgs. to get sex, as they are so ugly and stupid no one was interested in them. So now they get a hard on making empty threats and jumping up and down. This twat is the classic "useful idiot"!

    ReplyDelete