mckenzied.com In defence of politics & some politicians, in loyal support of Labour and in appreciation of decent political journalism.

The steady advance of theocratic fascism with its multiple unspeakable acts of violence in scores of venues all around the world in an attempt to create a global caliphate forcing the rest of us to live under the Sharia is really, really bad.

Most people agree with this but there are lots of people who find a way to qualify it with a “but”. Let us count the ways.

Theocratic terrorism is very bad…

1. But America has a foreign policy of which we should disapprove
2. But lots of Muslims consider cartoons of the prophet insulting.
3. But religion is important and we need to respect people’s faith.
4. But would we want to see negative representations of black and gay people?
5. But religion is the same as race.
6. But Israel kills a lot of people too.
7. But we shouldn’t gratuitously insult people.
8. But these terrorists are just petty criminals.
9. But these terrorists should be ridiculed.
10. But we invaded Iraq.
11. But they are trying to provoke us so, if we allow ourselves to be provoked, they’ve won.
12. But we should consider whether we would publish these cartoons as part of our normal editorial policy.
13. But there is no threat to us.
14. But it is important not to over-react to acts of pure barbarism.
15. …

I must have missed some. Anyone seen any others?

The red bit is controlled by theocratic fascists. Not much to laugh about.

I like Dan Hannan. I rarely agree with him, many of his views are politically toxic, but I respect him. He’s a right-wing Conservative, self-described as coming from the Whig tradition, and he’s an MEP. He was a high profile supporter of the People’s Pledge, the campaign for an In-Out referendum on the EU, and I was its Director. We used to do a little double act banter at fund-raising dinners: he would do the highbrow politics and the Euroscepticism; I would do the lowbrow campaigning and the Europhilia. He wants the UK to leave the EU; I want us to stay a member.

Dan is extremely good company and the most dangerous sort of political opponent there is: he understands your position better than you do and he respects it. He is well read, well prepared and unfailingly polite. If the Trots had done their Trotskyism Dan Hannan style, they’d be running the Labour Party by now.

Because I take Dan seriously, it was with some sadness that I read his reaction to the Charlie Hebdo murders, and I scribble this blog post with considerable trepidation.

He introduces several dichotomies: we are asked to believe that the Charlie massacre was not an act of holy war but merely a crime; the perpetrators concerned not soldiers, but common criminals, not religious zealots but pathetic figures. And then, rather strangely, he suggests the public policy response to Islamism should be to ignore its stated rationale as mere self-description, and subject it to ridicule. Seriousness or ridicule are his choices.

(more…)