Also, for every hateful and b'flecked email I get from the Diversity Bullies Brown Shirts - I get 20 thanking me. I also know that you can often judge yourself by those who call you enemy; by that measure I am happy as well.
I also know that there is a larger battle going on - one that I am on the winning side of.
Totally outside the USA DOD centric ecosystem, something very interesting happening over in the UK and Europe mostly, but a bit here as well. Something everyone should take note of. Until recently, the debate was dominated by the Diversity Industry and the pro-multi-culti crew. If you weren't with them - you were outside the mainstream and worthy of banishment.
That is changing. The multi-culti's still rely on their standard response to counter options - name calling - but that is losing its effectiveness. The more they call names without reason, the more desperate they become and the less valid their sectarianism looks to those in the middle.
Labour frontbencher Sadiq Khan should be thoroughly ashamed of his despicable, though utterly predictable, attack on David Cameron.Daniel Foster sees it too,
Far from bolstering the Far Right, the Prime Minister has commendably reclaimed the debate about state-sponsored multiculturalism. His speech was measured and not in the slightest way inflammatory.
For too long, anyone who has questioned this pernicious doctrine has been smeared as ‘racist’. Labour spent a decade and a half trashing those who expressed concerns about unlimited immigration and the refusal of some ethnic groups to integrate into British society.
Falsely accusing someone of racism is as repellent as racism itself. But Khan will keep his job.
You can hurl the most vile smears at anyone these days, provided you insert the word ‘Tory’.
Take the case of the Conservative MP Paul Maynard, who suffers from cerebral palsy and was cruelly mocked by Labour members in the Commons.
Can you begin to imagine the reaction if some Conservatives had abused a disabled Labour MP?
Most of the real hatred and bitterness in Britain comes from those who noisily proclaim their own ‘tolerance’ and are quickest to take offence at any real or perceived slight. After ‘homophobe’, ‘Islamophobe’, ‘sexist’ and ‘racist’, ‘Tory’ is their favourite slur.
Last week a moderate students’ union leader in Leeds was subjected to a barrage of abuse from demonstrators who called him ‘Tory Jew scum’ — despite him being neither Jewish nor a Conservative.
But like ‘Tory’, ‘Jew’ is now an acceptable insult on the Left. So virulent is their hatred of Israel that all Jews are considered fair game.
As I exposed in a TV documentary a couple of years ago, the worrying rise in anti-semitism in Britain stems from an unholy alliance between the fascist Left and militant Islam.
If these protesters had been screaming ‘Muslim scum’ there would have been a whole host of arrests, questions in the House and a Panorama special on the BBC.
You might expect the Labour leader to have a view on this. Yet Ed Miliband, who is himself Jewish, has stayed silent. His energies are employed in denouncing the wicked ‘Tory cuts’. There’s an entire industry devoted to seeking out offence and persecuting people for inoffensive remarks.
We live in an age when all language is monitored as closely as it was in Communist East Germany and careers are ruined at the drop of a so-called ‘offensive’ remark. Yet the self-appointed moral guardians of the Left believe they have a divine right to hurl whatever slanders they like provided they simultaneously proclaim their own goodness.
The edifice of multiculturalism in the West is crumbling, but quick. It seems like only yesterday all good Europeans held as uncontroversial that national self-esteem was racist and imperialist per se, and that even illiberal ideologies were owed liberal deference.So, the battle against the multi-culti cancer and its foam-flecked running mate Diversity is being joined more and more. Perhaps Europe is a bit ahead of us on this? Perhaps. They are in more danger though as they had an even more pernicious version of that cancer than we do.
Among the English-speaking peoples, Mark Steyn and John O’Sullivan have been arguing for years — in these pages and elsewhere — the foolishness and dangerousness of this course. Now others are joining the party. In France it’s the disillusioned Marxist nouveaux philosophes like Bernard-Henri Lévy and especially Pascal Bruckner, whose recent The Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism. Among elected officials, the first and most vocal was of course the Netherlands’ Geert Wilders.
But now it’s going mainstream. First, German chancellor Angela Merkel admitted that multiculturalism had “failed utterly”; now, British prime minister David Cameron has given an important, if tendentious, speech in Munich, on the ways in which British state-sponsored multiculturalism fills the vacuum left by British patriotism with extremist — Islamist — ideologies.
Cameron’s speech is the subject of our editorial today:Cameron’s argument was that the terrorism threatening the West, both in Afghanistan and at home, had its origins in the underlying “extremist ideology” of Islamism. Young Muslim men in Britain often begin their journey to violent jihad by picking up this ideology from institutions, organizations, and leaders in receipt of government money and official favors. This ideology is further promoted by multiculturalism, which “encouraged different cultures to live separate lives” and so delivered impressionable young people into the hands of state-funded extremists. It would have to be confronted both ideologically — insisting on support for human rights as a condition for entry into public debate — and organizationally — denying funds to bodies that preach hatred and separatism.You can read the whole thing here.
UPDATE: Even the French are starting to figure it out.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy declared Thursday that multiculturalism had failed, joining a growing number of world leaders or ex-leaders who have condemned it.
"My answer is clearly yes, it is a failure," he said in a television interview when asked about the policy which advocates that host societies welcome and foster distinct cultural and religious immigrant groups.
"Of course we must all respect differences, but we do not want... a society where communities coexist side by side.
"If you come to France, you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community, and if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France,"Oui!