Category Archives: Bakunin, Mikhail

Multiculturalism breeds terrorists

Screen Shot 2016-03-22 at 21.32.25And patriotism is left to the savages

In Britain, writes Dalrymple,

patriotism has been left to the brutes: the kind of ignorant savages who tattoo a bulldog on their biceps and Made in England round their nipples, and who in equal measure revolt and terrorise the cheaper resorts of the Mediterranean.

The intellectual’s

equation of patriotism with xenophobia, and pride in past achievement with an arrogant superiority complex, has left a population demoralised and without any belief in its own nation. Orwell saw this happening. It has created a vacuum for the English Defence League to fill.

Many of Britain’s homebred terrorists

are not culturally isolated and alienated figures, cut off from mainstream British life by ghettoes and the multicultural nonsense that leaves them unable to speak English. Nor do they derive their suicidal-utopian fantasies from an unalloyed Islamic tradition. Their utopianism is at least as much secular as it is religious, though their religion is one that lends itself well to political violence.

Many of them are educated,

if attendance at a modern British university counts as an education; they have jobs and prospects. No, they have seen British values and culture close up, or at least what British values and culture have become, and they don’t like them.

They are quite right not to do so.

The fact that their response is grotesquely disproportionate and even more stupid than the culture they despise does not alter the correctness of their apprehension. Better a live slut than a dead pedestrian, say I; that does not make me pro-slut. It means only that I detest terrorism and its works as among the worst of evils.

In reacting as terrorists,

the young Muslims are following Bakunin and the Baader-Meinhof gang as much as the Koran. It is not for nothing that they go to Western universities.

Just because multiculturalism is not a major direct contributor to home-grown terrorism

does not make it right. On the contrary, it is a sentimental and harmful doctrine that turns the mind to mush, is evidence of an underlying indifference to real lives, and is a provider of pseudo-work for lots of people such as community organisers.

Multiculturalists, with their doctrinal sentimentalism,

are seldom interested in the culture of others. Very few of them read books in foreign languages, for example, let alone immerse themselves in the Pali scriptures or the writings of the Sufi. I don’t blame them: it is the work of a lifetime to be able to do so, and we each have only one lifetime, to say nothing of limitations of ability and inclination. But let us at least not pretend that our interest in other cultures extends much beyond their cuisine.

Multiculturalists rejoice at mass, and indiscriminate, immigration,

not because they are admirers of, say, Somali political philosophy, but because they want the culture of their own country to be diluted as much as possible, for only by rejecting what they have inherited do they think they can show their independence of mind and generosity of spirit. Let the heavens fall, so long as I am thought (by my peers) to be a free thinker.

The multicultural mindset or emotionset, characterised as it is by extreme sentimentality,

seems to destroy the critical faculties, if not the brain itself.

Almost by definition, multiculturalists

are not interested in the national interest. The world is their oyster, and they demand that we all swallow it.

What the jeune-de-banlieue wants

Screen Shot 2016-01-01 at 21.53.30He desires, writes Dalrymple,

a good time.

Bakunin’s aphorism about the destructive urge being a constructive one

would have been nearer the mark if he had mentioned that it was, above all, a highly enjoyable one.

Destruction

is fun; but to destroy in the name of a supposed cause, that is bliss. Impunity helps, of course.

Insofar as the jeune-de-banlieue

has a discernible if unexpressed demand, it is for extraterritorial status. He wants to be left alone. He does not want the State to interfere in his affairs — theft, drug-dealing, the abuse of women — in any way.

Postcards from Southwark

Screen Shot 2015-09-08 at 08.51.34On one of his London perambulations close to the river, Dalrymple wanders near Blackfriars Bridge (not too far from the site of the Globe Theatre), finding himself in Hopton Street. Here he happens upon

a little building [67 Hopton Street] of the first half of the 18th century, not an architectural masterpiece by any means (as it was never meant to be), but charming and graceful, of human scale but not entirely without grandeur, well-mannered.

Immediately behind it has been built

a modern office block [71 Hopton Street] obviously inspired in style by the Centre Pompidou in Paris, though with bright yellow rather than red as the deliberately garish color.

Screen Shot 2015-09-08 at 09.01.51It overwhelms its neighbour,

as if setting out deliberately to humiliate it, to demonstrate to every passerby how much progress we have made in our power and structural engineering—to demonstrate that builders in the 18th century lived in the architectural equivalent of jahiliyya.

Thought has been given

Screen Shot 2015-09-08 at 08.55.03to the question of compatibility of the two buildings, and the decision taken to make the new building as incompatible as possible, to make a virtue of such incompatibility.

The constructive urge, says Dalrymple, reversing Bakunin’s dictum,

is also a destructive one.

Screen Shot 2015-09-08 at 09.08.14Screen Shot 2015-09-08 at 09.06.45Screen Shot 2015-09-08 at 09.23.01

Hopton Street, S.E.

Another view of Hopton Street