LAST week’s report that more than 1,000 girls were groomed (i.e. raped) in Telford over 30 years while police and the authorities looked the other way confirms that political correctness is not only annoying — it’s deadly. This must be a turning point, Brendan O’Neill said on Sky.
He is right. We can’t go on like this, except that we always do. Telford and Rotherham, where 1,600 girls were raped, are just two examples. There have been similar occurrences in Oxford, Newcastle, Oldham – the list is long, adding up to victims almost certainly numbering in the tens of thousands. Some, like Victoria Agoglia, have been murdered. What is deeply ominous is that there are to date few reports from the large Metropolitan areas – London, Birmingham, Manchester – which statistically would seem to suggest that the total number of cases could be orders of magnitude bigger.
Again and again, the authorities refer to the rape gangs as being an ‘Asian’ problem, a profoundly offensive and deeply racist slur when the problem seems overwhelmingly to stem from a relatively small geographical area of Asia (i.e. specific regions within Pakistan) and are culturally and religiously, not racially, based. Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Sikhs, Asian or otherwise, do not seem to be disproportionately involved in rape gangs, but Muslims are. It’s the same story again and again, on issue after issue: the rise of intolerance, terrorism, anti-Semitism, homophobic murders. One always has to add the caveat that does not mean that most people of Pakistani or Muslim heritage support such abominations, but it is nonetheless a problem that disproportionately stems from cultures heavily influenced by fundamentalist Islam.
Now, compare and contrast with our experiences with many other cultural groups, for example the Hong Kong Chinese, currently immigrating into Britain in large numbers to escape Chinese communist oppression. Industrious and grateful to be here, brought up in a hybrid Chinese and Anglo-Saxon culture, no one expects them to do anything other than quickly integrate into our society and make a positive contribution to it. The same, of course, could be said for many other cultures, European, Asian or African.
Though the sheer scale of immigration into this country is a serious problem in terms of numbers, most groups are not a long-term cultural threat, whereas immigration – tied with high birth rates – of groups from fundamentalist Islamic cultures is actively destroying the basis of Western society. Much of the damage is already irreversible: the horrible truth is that many of our cities already have no-go areas as far as law enforcement is concerned. There are now wards in Blackburn, Birmingham, Burnley and Bradford with between 70 per cent and 85 per cent Muslim populations. In the course of the Casey Review, the team visited one school where the pupils estimated that 50 to 90 per cent of the UK’s population was Asian, such was the segregation of their area. So much for diversity. The problems Casey describes, sharia ‘courts’, forced marriage, FGM, child rape gangs operating with impunity, would have been unimaginable to previous generations. But parallel lives are turning into parallel civilisations with entirely separate social, educational, religious, moral and political mores.
The almost universal silence in the media and the commentariat, particularly the BBC, whenever these mass grooming and rapes are reported, does not help. Already the Telford atrocities have disappeared from our TV screens, as did every atrocity linked to Islamic fundamentalism before it, despite the ‘identities’ of the victims being ‘identities’ the Left usually obsess about, viz women (though not girls) and homosexuals. Confronting the reality strikes at the core of what might be called ‘liberal determinism’: namely that all humanity is inevitably progressing along railway tracks to a more enlightened, liberal future, a pattern into which any example that doesn’t fit is conveniently ignored.
The problem with that naïve thesis is that fundamentalist Islam is heavily armoured against liberal thought in a way that religions such as Christianity are not. It is highly fatalistic with a severely attenuated concept of free will (and therefore of freedom of speech or choice). The grimly sectarian Quran forbids Muslims even from socialising or living with the Kuffar (unbeliever), limiting these communities from any exposure to different ideas. Contemporary immigration from Pakistan to the UK is characterised by marriage migration: substantial numbers of British men and women of Pakistani ethnicity marry partners from Pakistan. Of course, a great many Muslims choose not to live their lives this way, but there is no reason to think that the more closed and fundamentalist of these communities will soon be jumping on board the liberal train.
Variations of these same problems play out throughout Western Europe, and no liberal democracy has found a way to incorporate fundamentalist Islam into its society. That doesn’t mean there is nothing we can do. An immigration policy that is overtly culturally (but not racially) discriminatory and severely curtails all types of immigration, especially family chain migration, from areas where fundamentalist Islam is practised (and, for that matter, from some of the brutalised cultures which have contributed to so much of London’s gang violence and other criminality) should be top of the list.
Guardianistas would be horrified, but intellectually this is a battle they cannot win. How many more thousands of vulnerable girls must be sacrificed on the altar of their vanity? How many more gay people must be subject to grisly murder and mutilation? It might cause alienation amongst some of the Muslim community, but equally it might be welcomed by many in or associated with those communities, where fundamentalist Islam is feared by many.
To pursue such a policy would take not only considerable courage and persistence but an aggressive assertion of Western values and their superiority. It is nothing less than a battle for its survival.