Mind your own business, Donald

I try very hard to like President Trump. But he makes it difficult.

Liking many of his policies is easier, even though some of them have no chance of clearing Congress. But even when Trump is politically on the side of the angels, personally he resembles their less appealing antipodes.

That’s no trivial matter. For the wisest of policies and the best of intentions can be undone by their champion’s crudeness, ignorance, effrontery, insensitivity and inability to perceive nuances of thought and feeling.

These are all traits Trump has in abundance and, when they come to the fore, he can damage the very causes he wishes to advance. Such as the cause of checking Islamic expansion in the West.

In addition to his personal failings, Trump shares a characteristic American ignorance of European affairs and indeed of the European civilisation shaping the affairs. If it were otherwise, he wouldn’t have retweeted the messages first posted by the fascisoid, Islamophobic group Britain First.

I hope you realise that my definition of ‘Islamophobic’ is different from the likes of the BBC’s, Merkel’s or Blair’s.

To them, an Islamophobe is anyone who a) minds the creeping Islamisation of Europe, b) has problems with Europe turning into a caliphate and c) realises that this is indeed a real problem and not a figment of somebody’s febrile imagination.

By that standard, an Islamophobe is anyone possessing common sense and a modicum of affection for our civilisation – and no affection at all for the likes of the BBC, Merkel and Blair.

My definition of Islamophobia is simple: it’s hating Islam more than necessary – and using this hatred as the presumed axis around which the whole complexity of life revolves. Add to this a certain amount of radicalism, and fascism beckons.

Alas, when nice, tweedy conservatism refuses to acknowledge the gravity of the situation and respond appropriately, anorak-clad fascism emerges as seemingly the only available alternative to disaster.

Recent history provides ample examples of that. Thus the danger of communism was as imminent in the Weimar Republic as the danger of Islam is in today’s Britain (or for that matter Europe). Yet, when the German answers to tweedy gentlemen cocked a snook at the communists while sipping their clarets, the Nazis took to the streets.

They picked up the banner of anti-communism and… well, you know what happened next. By the time the tweedy gentlemen realised what was going on, it was too late. The anoraks or rather, as it happened, the brown shirts were running the show.

Britain First is a fascist group trying to ride to legitimacy the horse of resisting Islamisation. There isn’t much wrong with the horse; the problem is that it’s Britain First (and similar groups) riding it.

By picking up their messages and images, Trump has done untold damage to the important cause. He’s a savage who smashes a Stradivarius trying to extract beautiful sounds from it.

Criticism of his monumentally vulgar stupidity has focused on irrelevant incidentals, such as that the abusive Dutch Muslim shown in one picture was actually not a migrant but a native of Holland, or that the pictures of Islamic violence had been taken not in Europe but in the Middle East.

The distinction between native-born and immigrant Muslims is these days so slight as to make no difference. For example, the Muslim chaps who blew up London buses in 2005 were British born and bred.

And surely perfectly genuine photographs of terrorist acts committed by Muslims in London, Paris or Boston would be easy to find. The problem with Trump’s tweets wasn’t their dubious authenticity but their indubitable provenance in the fascist ranks.

The best way for Mrs May to respond to those inane tweets would have been to ignore them publicly, while privately advising Donald to do what I suggest in the title above. Instead she foolishly responded, using the word ‘Islamophobia’ not in my definition but in the BBC’s. Predictably she got back a retort:

“Don’t focus on me, focus on the destructive Radical Islamic Terrorism that is taking place within the United Kingdom”.

I’m always amazed to see how little imprint Trump’s expensive education has left on his culture and personality. Of the three words he capitalised in the middle of his sentence, only ‘Islamic’ calls for such distinction. Don’t they teach English syntax at Wharton?

Well, The Cause of Destructive Islamic Terrorism Has Got A Boost From Trump’s Opposition To It. I for one would be hard-pressed to choose between living in a Britain run by the mullahs or in one run by Britain First. No form of fascism appeals to me.

By chance, I ran across an impassioned defence of Trump by a Britain First moron, who, to provide unwitting proof for the validity of this designation, posted this on Facebook: “Edward VIII and Lady Wallis would be staunch supporters of Britain First if they were alive today. Recent polls show that 47% of Britons want to ban ALL Islamic migration.”

Edward VIII and Lady Wallis (wrong title, by the way, but hey, it’s morons we’re dealing with) were also ‘staunch supporters’ of Hitler. I wouldn’t want to be in their company – even though my view of Islamic migration is close to the 47 per cent.

12 thoughts on “Mind your own business, Donald”

  1. ” Instead she foolishly responded, using the word ‘Islamophobia’ not in my definition but in the BBC’s. ”

    And May knows that Don is right. But because we must walk on egg shells around Muslims she felt obligated to respond even knowing her inner sentiments might have well agreed with Don.

  2. While I agree, by and large, with your comments, one, I reckon that English fascists are preferable to Muslim fascists and, two, the biggest problem has been alerting the British to what is happening. Most English people have never heard of Tommy Robinson, LibertyGB or Britain First, so Trump is at least giving them the publicity denied to them by the mainstream media. Further, I find no evidence whatsoever that any of these groups are any more fascist than the government itself, who have lied consistently and use the CPS to curtail free speech. Paul Weston is more honest, principled and patriotic than that horrible creature driving the UK to destruction.

    1. Preference for a particular brand of fascism is a matter of taste, about which, as we know, there’s no arguing. I’d rather not have to choose. However, being ‘honest, principled and patriotic’ doesn’t necessarily preclude fascism – Hitler and Mussolini, for example, were all those lovely things. I agree with the rest of it though: the country (and the West in general) is being driven to destruction, and Robinson, Weston et al do highlight an aspect of the problem. It’s only one aspect though, and I think that, by stressing it at the expense of many others, they distort the picture. Fascism, like all heresies, is a matter of style and emphasis more than anything else. In general, I tend to be weary of political movements hazy on what it is they love, but dead certain on what it is they hate. That to me is un-Christian and therefore un-Western — and therefore un-British.

  3. A debate initiated by the US President about Islam in Europe and the threats it presents, aimed primarily at the US voting base, has been ill-received by the UK and European political elite which refuses either to acknowledge the existential problem it now presents to European civilisation, greater in my judgement than the threat from the Russian mafia.
    Instead that political elite has chosen to hide its pusillanimity and incompetence by an ad hominem attack on the POTUS for using information which whilst accurate, was not from an acceptable source. Further non-germane accusations include bad manners and a link to facist groups, the source but not the originator of the unpalatably true and consequently unacceptable videos.
    Both the arguments of manners and facism fall like the pins in a bowling alley to the true delivery of free and truthful (albeit slightly non grammatical but not murderous) speech.
    Murders by Islam to date in 2017 are 7280.
    http://storymaps.esri.com/stories/terrorist-attacks/?year=2017
    Total murders by UK based fascist individuals like Paul Weston, Tommy Robinson and Jayden Fransen and their associations remain zero.
    Those who live in France and the genteel area and thus are insulated from the daily life in the multicultural hell that is much of Britain should be careful of making accusations of facism against those who courageously speak out about it, lest they be also be falsely accused, of ignorance and complacency at worst, patronising dilettantism at best.

    1. I suggest you tap the word ‘Islam’ into the search feature of my blog and see how complacent I am about the Islamic threat. I still repeat my regret though that the only viable counterweight to this threat comes not from conservatives, as it should, but from fascisoid types. But thank you for informing me of the comparative body count produced by both groups – learn something new every day. Anyway, I do think your ad hominems are misdirected, but it’s good to see such passion about a vital issue.

      1. Britons treat the word ‘facist’ with a certain disdain and only the British left, following the traditions of its old Soviet mentors and paymasters, uses it to smear liberally anyone with whom it disagrees with Brown shirt excreta.
        Paul Weston writes regularly in The Salisbury Gazette, the journal of conservative thought founded by philosopher Roger Scruton. Tommy Robinson’s books portray him to be a instinctive libertarian. Of Jayda Franson I know little, other than that she, like many others I have met in electoral canvassing,, has direct experience of living in the socialist multi-cultural experiment that the political class, both Labour and Conservative has unleashed upon a once united and cohesive British populace.
        If, in the unlikely event that a real national socialism ever emerges from the grassroots of British society it will because its seeds were planted there by the existing political class.

    2. David Copeland murdered three people in the name of national socialism, admittedly that is a much smaller number than what the Jihadists achieve but it does happen. It’s reasonable to say that the assorted neo-Nazis and neo-fascists are not much of a threat in this country, I mean, the National Front, at the height of it’s power in 1979 still failed to attain a single seat in parliament.

      The lack of success of these parties however, does not make their ideology any less evil, in theory, they are the very worst, if not in practice. But then I suppose if one has been on the receiving end of a terrorist attack, bringing up the numbers game would probably seem quite callous.

      1. Copeland was an introverted, mentally ill loner. He was neither a nazi, that organisation having been obliterated in 1945 nor an Islamic jihadist. He did serve a useful purpose for the homosexual movement but ultimately he was a serial murderer and not a terrorist.

      2. “…they are the very worst…”. Really? Worse than communism? I think the body count may prove you mistaken there…

        …and yet the paraphernalia, not to mention the politics, of international socialism is still tolerated in our societies, whereas national socialism is not.

        You have been manipulated – but don’t worry, you are by no means alone.

        1. I can’t for the life of me find the words “they are the very worst…” in my piece. But I’m sure you’re right: I’m a crypto-communist who has been manipulated by someone, not sure whom. How did you find out? Surely not from anything I’ve written on the subject.

          1. That was a reply to Isaac Thompson, Mr B.

            I can plead guilty to being manipulated, and even allowing it, on occasion – especially when further education highlights it…

            …but I would never think it of you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *