It was the second major jihad attack on France inside of a year. This one was far bloodier than the last, but it was otherwise near-identical. The slaughter of cartoonists in January was an attack on the democratic notion of free speech. This time the strike was an assault on concert-goers and restaurant diners, on people enjoying the leisure and pleasure of a free society.
Both events denote an onslaught on Western civilisation, and both drew the same response from world leaders – the reinforcement and the propagation of The Big Lie. Here is the President of the United States:
“It’s an attack not just on the people of France. But this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share.”
What universal values? There are no “universal values”, certainly not politically. Saudi Arabia’s most senior religious body insisted that terrorism can only be defeated through a concerted effort and a “unified moral stance”.
What unified moral stance? Western nations do not share a moral stance with Saudi Arabia. Our morals are vastly different.
The similarity in the sentiment of statements from these two countries, who have enormously different value structures, are attributable to the most nefarious lie being voiced on the world stage today: “universal values” are supreme, we are fundamentally alike, and we all aspire to the same notions of justice and humanity.
We do not.
The Big Lie serves to advance the cause of internationalism and open borders and to eventually bring about the demise of the nation-state and accountable government. This is not a great conspiracy, but a powerful ideological and political aim. And it’s working.
To assist in the proliferation of The Big Lie, leaders have made a virtue out of commitment to the “common ground”. But it isn’t common ground that ought to concern us, it is our differences that really matter, and it is on difference that we urgently need to focus.
The difference between democrats and theocrats can no better be demonstrated than on the issue of free speech. Death for blasphemy and the right to criticise religion cannot co-exist. Of course human beings, across cultures and nations, share some common traits, but the gulf in belief in how we ought to organise our societies is not only different, but often entirely irreconcilable.
In such cases, co-existence is only possible when one side gives way to the other, and for several decades now, it is the democracies that have been doing all of the giving.
The United Nations has insulated The Big Lie because it too pretends that global cooperation, on fundamental matters, has been achieved. In reality however, the UN has torn up its own Declaration on Human Rights by seating the medieval tyranny of Saudi Arabia atop some of its human rights bodies. Democratic values have thus submitted to theocratic ones.
When the characteristics of The Big Lie become so apparent that they cannot be ignored, and the truth starts to seep through, our leaders respond with “multiculturalism”. The notion that we are all alike begins to fade away and is replaced by yet another untruth – “yes, we are culturally different, but it doesn’t matter, because all cultures are equally committed to liberty and are equally benign”.
But they’re not, and we all know it.
When Paris was attacked with the weapons of death, another far more perilous war was taking place. Its peril lies in the fact that it is what happens when we are busy focusing on bombings and shootings. The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) has begun demanding the right to legally persecute people who tell the truth about Islam.
The Sharia-endorsing MCB “and the UK’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation” have both called for change, and a crackdown on dissent from the “religion-of-peace” hypothesis. Criticising Islam should effectively be constrained, and all opinions should be sanctioned by the likes of the MCB. We all know where this is going.
Nigel Farage, the UKIP leader, has said that we need a “rethink”. As usual, he is right. But if I may, let me put forward my suggestions as to what really needs to change as far as Brits are concerned:
1) Leave the EU and reclaim national borders. It is utterly ridiculous to claim that Islamic terrorists are not streaming through our borders, but equally ridiculous to claim that cultures with mass differences can peacefully co-exist in the long term.
2) Disband the United Nations. This body has proven that its words mean nothing, and its principles mean nothing, when it allowed the brutal theocracy of Saudi Arabia anywhere near its human rights board.
3) Non-British citizens who are known as a threat to our safety, by the relevant services, should be deported from the UK. Their home countries don’t want to take them? Withdraw aid.
Let’s start using our power, and standing up for our values. The West is failing to defend its values because this would mean an assertion that our values are superior to other values, and this is akin to colonialism. It’s the same reason we don’t prosecute horrible cultural practices which amount to crimes in Britain, because that would be imposing British-made laws on to non-British groups, and that might amount to colonialism, they’ll say.
The calls for “solidarity” are now spreading all over the internet, but my question is: solidarity with whom? With France? That is a given. But I will not stand in solidarity with the Muslim Council of Britain, or Saudi Arabia, or Muslim Brotherhood linked groups, or the OIC bullies at the UN, because I recognise that they are all committed to values that represent a danger to my own, and are a real threat to the free and democratic world.