The End Of Appeasement Is Not Yet

So President Bush crafted a forward strategy to combat the Islamicist movement’s threat to advance Islam by the Prophet’s method, by fire and the sword.

Only, of course, because Islam is politically, militarily, and economically weak, its strategy is a strategy of terror, the chosen strategy of movements without an army, without a country, and without an economic base.

It ought to be easy to isolate and eliminate the terrorists. But the problem is that appeasement is alive and well. The cultural elite of the West is not willing to sign up for a war on terror. It prefers to appease.

So we have the “quagmire” in Afghanistan, the opposition to the Iraq adventure, the hyping of every setback, the validation of the Muslims-are-victims strategy of western Muslim organizations, and now the piling-on over the alleged Haditha massacre.

You can see how appeasement worked in the 1930s. There were always people—educated, sophisticated people—available to argue against the hawks like Winston Churchill. And not surprisingly, people listened to both sides and took the easy way out.

So it is today, with sophisticated opinion relentlessly dripping scorn upon the forward strategy of George W. Bush, and characterizing the inevitable setbacks of his noble endeavor as incompetence and criminality.

In her book Londonistan excerpted in the London Times Melanie Phillips shows how the new appeasement works in London.

It started in the 1990s with the

“gentlemen’s agreement” that if [Islamic radicals] were left alone, they would not turn on the country that was so generously nurturing them.

Well, so much for that. The attacks of 7/7 showed up that little error. But the problem goes into the very attitude of the cultural elite in Britain, “its intelligentsia, its media, its politicians, its judiciary, its Church and even its police.”

The problem lies in a refusal to acknowledge that Islamist extremism is rooted in religion. Instead, ministers and security officials prefer to think of it as a protest movement against grievances such as Iraq or Palestine, or “Islamophobia”. They simply ignore the statements and signs that show unequivocally that the aim is to Islamicise the West.

They don’t want to face up to this because it requires admitting that we are in a real war, with real costs, and real uncertainty. But it requires admitting something even more difficult. It means admitting that we are in a religious war. Religious wars, remember, went out with the Enlightenment and the end of religious superstition. How can we be in a religious war if we are sophisticated elites who are beyond religion?

So the elites choose the easy way out: appeasement.

And it doesn’t help that the Muslims have learned how to exploit the “victim culture” by which militant minorities can mau-mau the majority culture with the support of the leftist elite.

Britain effectively allowed itself to be taken hostage by militant gays, feminists or “anti-racists” who used weapons such as public vilification, moral blackmail and threats to people’s livelihoods to force the majority to give in to their demands. So when radical Islamists refused to accept minority status and insisted instead that their values must trump those of the majority, Britain had no answer.

If we step back and think clearly about this we can see that the West will not stop its appeasment until the “invasion of Poland” moment. We know what that will be. It will be an appalling outrage involving a use of nuclear materials.

Only then will the West be able to end its appeasement and go onto a true war footing. The elites will have to end appeasement. The people will demand it.

Conservatives should understand that there is a huge opportunity in this. We have said, from 9/11 onwards, that we are in a war, a long war, a World War IV. Our lefty friends have equivocated. The extreme left is in bed with the Islamists; the moderate left just doesn’t like America, and believes that violence never solves anything. They are caught because their secular religion tells them that nothing is worth dying for.

And if that is not enough, their culture of abortion and selfish creativity means that nothing is really worth living for either.

The coming conflagration will discredit the secular religion of Marxism/socialism/postmodernism once and for all. We conservatives will say that the left was wrong. It had always been wrong, and always will be wrong.

Because our Judeo-Christian-Anglo-Saxon democratic capitalism at which they sneer is worth dying for. And it is also worth living for.

Sphere: Related Content |

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com. His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

TAGS

Civil Society

“Civil Society”—a complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churches—builds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust

What Liberals Think About Conservatives

[W]hen I asked a liberal longtime editor I know with a mainstream [publishing] house for a candid, shorthand version of the assumptions she and her colleagues make about conservatives, she didn't hesitate. “Racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-choice fascists,” she offered, smiling but meaning it.
Harry Stein, I Can't Believe I'm Sitting Next to a Republican

Liberal Coercion

[T]he Liberal, and still more the subspecies Radical... more than any other in these latter days seems under the impression that so long as he has a good end in view he is warranted in exercising over men all the coercion he is able[.]
Herbert Spencer, The Man Versus the State

Moral Imperatives of Modern Culture

These emerge out of long-standing moral notions of freedom, benevolence, and the affirmation of ordinary life... I have been sketching a schematic map... [of] the moral sources [of these notions]... the original theistic grounding for these standards... a naturalism of disengaged reason, which in our day takes scientistic forms, and a third family of views which finds its sources in Romantic expressivism, or in one of the modernist successor visions.
Charles Taylor, Sources of the Self

US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism

Society and State

For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008

Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006

Never Trust Experts

No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, “Letter to Lord Lytton”

Conservatism's Holy Grail

What distinguishes true Conservatism from the rest, and from the Blair project, is the belief in more personal freedom and more market freedom, along with less state intervention... The true Third Way is the Holy Grail of Tory politics today - compassion and community without compulsion.
Minette Marrin, The Daily Telegraph

Class War

In England there were always two sharply opposed middle classes, the academic middle class and the commercial middle class. In the nineteenth century, the academic middle class won the battle for power and status... Then came the triumph of Margaret Thatcher... The academics lost their power and prestige and... have been gloomy ever since.
Freeman Dyson, “The Scientist as Rebel”

Government Expenditure

The Union publishes an exact return of the amount of its taxes; I can get copies of the budgets of the four and twenty component states; but who can tell me what the citizens spend in the administration of county and township?
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity

mysql close 0