Tags
Blog, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, Extremism, Islamic Extremism, Islamism, Legislation, Pamela Geller, Political Islam, Queen's Speech, State Opening of Parliament, Teresa May, Theresa May
Last week saw the reading of the 2015 Queen’s Speech (a ceremony in which Her Majesty reads the governments program for the coming parliamentary year) as well as the traditional (and psychedelically theatrical) State Opening of Parliament. Among the bills read by HRH was a draft proposal by Home Secretary Theresa May designed to combat political and religious extremism; specifically it would provide the state with powers to shut down media organs espousing ‘hateful’ or ‘inciteful’ material, with the deciding voice being wholly exercised by the cabinet.
While I’m sure the bill will prove popular with the dull masses (who may stupidly interpret the words ‘crackdown’ and ‘extremism’ as only having relevance to Muslims) more informed and educated observers sense a potentially grave threat to freedom of speech.
For example, am I an extremist? Do my words incite hatred? Am I dividing the population of the country with my political views? You could probably make a case for saying ‘yes’ to all of those questions. As they relate to Islam, my views are certainly to one end of the political spectrum. My words are certainly intended to elicit an emotional surge of some kind in my readership. And it’s perfectly true that I write for a section of society divided from a specific group of people. So there I am… extreme, inciteful and divisive.
But this is the purest nonsense of course. When rational people talk of political ‘extremism’, they surely intend to describe those who incite random violence, civil conflict, religious revolution, common thuggery and genocide. I recommend none of those things. Indeed, I have argued (and will continue to argue) against racism, law-breaking and religious fanaticism of all kinds. I am in all cases an anti-extremist and I will tolerate no other description of me.
It is a vital truth that when someone says something that offends you, it isn’t necessarily against the spirit of democratic society. When Muslims describe our soldiers as the ‘butchers of Baghdad’, that is entirely within their right to do so (as long as they remain citizens of the UK). Similarly, when right-wing activists reply that “Muslims shouldn’t even be in this country!”, they too are not breaking any law worth enforcing. But when someone calls for the death of homosexuals, or Jews or Leftists, or Poles, or Muslims or conservatives, then a line has clearly been crossed.
All this is very easy to understand. The distinction marks the boundary of the liberal and the totalitarian.
D, LDN.
Defend the Modern World 
Well, that is the danger of political correctness in general, and especially of laws having to do with offensive language…you never know when you might turn out to be the offensive and extreme one….
LikeLike
Indeed. It’s very deceptive. If you read the bill, it comes across as an anti-terror measure, but the legal precedents it will set can be used to punish everyone who disagrees with the government.
LikeLike
These laws could be used to try and silence critics of Islam. They could be used to call Tommy Robinson an extremist for example
LikeLike
As I’m sure was intended all along.
LikeLike
I suggest all UK readers should lobby their own MP to urge them to vote against this legislation. It will have a chilling effect on freedom of speech. Everyone writing an opinion that differs from the Government’s will be tempted to think twice before expressing a view. These are some of the UK people who could fall foul of these “orders”:
Douglas Murray, Canon Gavin Ashenden, Tommy Robinson, Pat Condell, Paul Weston
I am sure there are more but still there are precious few daring to tell the truth even now, don’t let them risk their liberty alone. Another thing we can do is start our own blogs, the more of us there are the more impossible it will be for Ms May’s Orwellian thought police to control.
Even the law against incitement to violence is questionable when we allow the preaching of religious texts that contain incitements to violence. When we have so many people ready to get violently angry at any criticism of their religion, then even criticising that religion can seem to the authorities like an attempt to stir up trouble. These extremist banning and disruption orders are a huge threat to freedom of speech. Democracy will be the next casualty. We need a First Amendment in the UK, that is the only way forward.
LikeLike
If the worst comes to the worst, we will simply have to use more careful language. Tommy Robinson often uses the wrong kind of language and this is to our common detriment.
LikeLike
I agree with the petition idea.
LikeLike