Lots of people have asked me what I think about the Geert Wilders controversy. I will leave the rights and wrongs of him being banned from the House of Lords for another day. Instead, I want to write about the man himself.
Wilders has called for a ban on The Koran. Billions of people have read that holy book for thousands of years and used what they have read only for joyful good. Yes, the free and civilized world is facing a gigantic threat from Islamism, but talk of banning the Koran is both hideous in itself, and does nothing but harm to the cause of those trying to draw attention to threat of Islamism. Wilders’ argument also implicitly excuses those who promote and commit evil in the book’s name: not their fault, your honour, they just read a bad book.
And heck, surely banning books is always wrong? I thought that was what the bad guys did? Wilders’ call for such a ban is breathtakingly hypocritical, coming as it does from a man who is the first to bleat when he feels his own freedom of speech is under threat. He is skilled at such political gymnastics: he claims to be pro-Israel but is considering an alliance with an antisemitic party in Belgium. Classy.
So many brilliant people work so hard and write so eloquently about the dangers of Islamism. These people want to bring light where there is darkness. They want progress. They want peace. I don’t think peace or progress is what Wilders is primarily seeking. Rather, he appears to crave controversy, conflict, increased division and – above all – his martyred position centre-stage.
I shed no tears for this man. I will save my admiration for the likes of brave Muslims like Ed Hussain, Irshad Manji and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. They are the heroes of the hour and put Wilders’ preening agenda in perspective.
In fact, the more I read about this divisive egotist, the more he reminds me of someone else.
Mike Chivers
Good post, Chas. Judging people on the content of ancient religious books is never a good idea. For a start, it ignores centuries of interpretation and imposes uniformity on highly divergent traditions. Islamism has as much to do with European totalitarian movements of the 1930s than it does with the Quran.
Alleged support for Israel from the Far-Right is nothing but opportunism. What they really mean is that they will deal with the Muslims first and then come back to mop up the Jews. Even that odious Holocaust-denier Nick Griffin has been playing this game recently. It’s about as convincing as Galloway’s claim that he isn’t anti-Semitic. Expose the lot of them!
12 February 2009 at 8:57 PM
Jonathan Hoffman
Good article. Supporting the ban on Qaradawi but not that on Wilders is entirely inconsistent.
12 February 2009 at 9:49 PM
Matty
I thought that Wilders’ position was to say that if Mein Kampf is banned in the Netherlands why not ban the Quran also?
20 February 2009 at 5:28 PM
The Wilders/Moussawi hypocrisy | Oy Va Goy! (Chas Newkey-Burden)
[...] a ban on the Koran and is considering forming an alliance with antisemitic party in Belgium. So I shed no tears when he was prevented from bringing his preening, divisive circus to [...]
11 March 2009 at 9:03 AM
Bob Martin
Chas – I think I understand your position a little better now, but am still puzzled by your stance on Wilders.
It’s generally true that we should be wary of those who urge the banning and/or burning of books. Yet, if we’re tolerant of those who have no tolerance for anybody who disagrees with them, what will result?
The Third Jihad has been underway for much longer than most people realize. The percentage of Muslims who aren’t intolerant fanatics (or who don’t encourage and facilitate jihadis) is statistically insignificant. They have absolutely no power in the Islamic world.
We’re facing growing Islamic “militant enthusiasm” (Konrad Lorenz’ term) that can’t be stopped by reasoned argument or sentimental utopianism.
The NSDAP was exactly the same – and Islam has incorporated ALL of the NSDAP ideology and methods. No accident that the Mufti of Jerusalem was an acolyte of Hitler.
Anwar Sadat wrote glowingly about Hitler after the NSDAP “defeat” in 1945 – saying that another Hitler would rise up and finish off the Jews. Every significant Muslim leader since then has echoed this support for Hitlerian ideology, although many of them have gone to great lengths to obscure their beliefs.
We often hear nice words from Muslims about “mutual respect” and so forth. But the Islamic concept of taqiyya is rarely considered by Islamic apologists who seize on these nice words and try to present them as representative of normative Islam.
It’s easy to imagine that Muslims share our humanistic values. 10 years ago, I believed they did. But they don’t. The few historical and individual exceptions aren’t the issue here – although these exceptions are always made the focus when facts about Islamic intolerance and oppression are discussed.
I live next to a Muslim man and often have coffee with him. He’s a pleasant fellow. He has three wives, and I don’t know how many children (more than 10 for sure). But even he admits that, under Islam, I wouldn’t live very long. I think he might be one of the exceptions, and might even do what he could to protect me and other Jews who’ve known him for many years. But I can’t count on this.
I don’t hate Muslims. Far from it. They have exactly the same Holy Spark that Hashem put in every human being. Plus, at least half of them here in Israel are actually Jews. A few articles about this have appeared in recent years.
One day they’ll change and will help us build the Beit Hamikdash. But I don’t see any evidence that they’ll change by pretty words and wishful thinking.
9 November 2009 at 9:15 AM
Alexander Voronin
You are totally wrong! It is not the danger of islamism!! It is the danger of islam! As it was said by Erdogan “There is no moderate islam. There is only one islam!”
This book called the qoran is just as dangerous as “Mein Kampf”. I myself think it is more dangerous, because “Mein Kampf” was not read by many people. The qoran is read by so many people and many think it is right to kill unbelievers as it is said in the qoran!
Geert Wilders is right!
9 November 2009 at 11:38 AM
Chas Newkey-Burden
So you think we should ban books? How would you go about this? Remove them at gunpoint from the homes of peaceful Muslims? Burn the books in public squares?
9 November 2009 at 11:42 AM
All Quiet on the Wilders front - www.site11.com - deepWeb
[...] last year; one by Mark Mardell actually puts his case in a reasonably evenhanded manner.Many people distance themselves from Geert Wilderss campaign, but there is considerable and undeniable logic in what he is saying, which should be [...]
5 February 2010 at 10:34 PM
The Weekly Wilders Round-Up « Defend Geert Wilders
[...] Oy Va Goy – Why I shed no tears for Geert Wilders [...]
7 February 2010 at 8:02 PM