Townhall...
So,
I Guess We’re All Terrorists Now
By Rachel Marsden
8/2/2011
Lone
Nordic nutbar Anders Behring
Breivik kills nearly 80 people in a terrorist attack linked to his
frustration
with growing multiculturalism. Suddenly, media reports around the world
are
mistakenly calling it an alarming trend and a sign of far-right
extremism
sweeping Europe.
Meanwhile,
in America, a 21-year-old
U.S. soldier of Muslim Palestinian origin, Naser Abdo, is arrested for
planning
a terrorist attack on Texas’ Fort Hood military base, with police
finding
enough material in his hotel room to make at least two bombs. Had he
succeeded,
he would have been the second American military member of Muslim origin
in as
many years to attack the same base -- the first being Nidal Hasan, who
murdered
13 people there in 2009.
If
one incident is enough to
constitute a “trend” of violent far-right extremism, then why aren’t we
hearing
the same concern about attacks on military bases and elsewhere by
people of a
certain common cultural and religious background?
Despite
what the media says, far-right
extremism isn’t significantly on the rise in Europe. People can be
legitimately
frustrated with imposed societal re-engineering by leftists, and want
to conserve
the social and cultural cohesion that has traditionally made Europe a
nice
place to live, without being considered extreme. To suggest that
increased
support for legitimate political parties is dangerous is nothing more
than an
attempt to stigmatize real and valid concerns.
For
example, about 25 percent of the
French at any given time over the past several years could be
considered
“far-right,” and French President Nicolas Sarkozy was able to win the
2007
election by tweaking his policies to specifically target these voters.
And as
with other European nations, if center-right leaders like Sarkozy
appear to be
suffering from waning popularity, it isn’t because their right-leaning
policies
have failed -- it’s because they haven’t been implemented as promised.
Leftist
policy and thinking has so
horribly permeated every aspect of society and daily life that the
results of a
rightward correction are feared for the mayhem they might cause, from
strikes
to riots. So Europeans end up looking for a bolder, more fearless
option in the
form of a leader or party that will make the necessary reforms without
fearing
the fallout. Is this phenomenon violent or radical? Not in the least.
If
anything, it’s just a sign of rejection of leftist extremism.
When
French Socialist Party leader
Martine Aubry announced last week that if elected to the presidency
she’d blow
a billion Euros on “French culture” at a time when cash flow is running
pretty
dry, why wasn’t it decried as “fiscal terrorism”? When Greeks riot in
the streets
to protest necessary budget cuts, why is that not considered “violent
extremism”? And when a group such as the European Network Against
Racism (ENAR)
issues a statement tying right-wing politics to the acts of a single,
isolated
loon, why does no one consider that logic an example of racist
extremism in
itself?
According
to ENAR: “Indeed, most of
the people from the European majority community have remained
relatively
insensitive to the numerous victims of extreme-right movements that
often
stemmed from minority communities: Jews, Blacks, Muslims, Roma, gays
and
lesbians, among others. However, the Oslo killings dreadfully
demonstrate that
extreme-right ideologies are a danger for the whole society and not
only for
minorities. Anyone can become victim to the violence of extreme-right
fanatics,
intent on wiping out diversity from our societies.”
ENAR
would have us believe that it’s a
steep, slippery slope indeed from, say, controlling illegal immigration
of Roma
gypsies to literally “wiping out diversity.
I
have a question for ENAR: How many
violent acts by people of an ideology or origin must be committed
before it’s
considered a disturbing trend? Because it would seem from this
statement that
it only takes one. Why isn’t the group at least equally concerned by
the
rampant violent acts committed by people from the same minority groups
it
lists?
As
a peaceful white conservative, I
find ENAR’s statement strongly implies that I’m at best a quisling
vis-à-vis
humanity, and at worst a mere frustration away from going postal. I
reject this
stereotype foisted upon me by the bigots in the anti-racist company,
and feel
the group is trying to hurt my feelings, marginalize me and turn me
into a
social pariah. I’d start my own victim industry around this traumatic
development,
but I’m kind of busy right now.
Read
it at Townhall
|