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, 26 January 2011

Reasons to Bomb and Kill... Part One

Some time back (in 2006) the Fabian Society discussed 'Islamic radicalisation'. It didn't even consider the possibility that the only way to stop many young (and old) Muslims being 'radicalised' would be by firstly assuming that all their grievances are justified and then, secondly, by getting rid of the causes of such grievances. But isn't it at least possible that the Government (and others) could only lessen such grievances by doing the following (amongst many others) things? Take these quite arbitrary and non-extensive examples:

1)Pulling out American and British troops from Iraq (which many radical Muslims believe would result in the subsequent increased Islamification of that country).
2)Extinguishing the state of Israel.
3) Increasing the Islamification of not only Muslim schools, areas and institutions, but also of the larger non-Muslim society.
4) Finally, and on a smaller scale. The banning of short 'un-Islamic' skirts being worn by non-Muslim women. (In response to the grievances of that British bomber whose words were taped by the police. He said that his terrorist group should blow up nightclubs. And by doing so kill the 'tarts' inside.)

Of course we can safely guess that the Fabian Society will simply assume that the grievances of radical British Muslims are simply the result of poverty, unemployment and the alienation they feel from the larger society. Such a view will suit the prior political predispositions and biases of the Fabian Society. But is it always about such things?

How could it be when it is the case that many of the recently questioned 'radical' Muslims were university students from relatively well off backgrounds? And in terms of alienation. Perhaps this is precisely the result of the Islamic views of these radical Muslims and how such views, by definition, alienate them from the larger non-Muslim society.

Simply because a group has grievances, it doesn't follow that we should sympathise or agree with them and be critical of their purported causes. Terrorists throughout history have always had grievances – some undersandable, some not.

I know that such possible interpretations of the radicalisation of many British Muslims may offend or potentially (politically) disable the interested parties, but shouldn't they at least consider their possible truth? Shouldn't everyone consider them?

1 comment:

  1. The Fabians and the UK left absolutely love a CAUSE, with VICTIMS, so they can patronise them and show off their "socialist" credentials. There is a painting of two Fabians from the early 20th century and the look of smug righteousness on their faces is insufferable!
    The fascist left use their Groups of victims to help them gain and retain power, without them getting their hands dirty! Only this time they have picked something that will bite them back!!

    ReplyDelete