Truth and diplomacy

A topic which pervades many others

Truth and diplomacy

Postby Gavin » 03 Jun 2013, 19:29

I earlier posted on the topic of telling the truth because I think it would be outrageous for any of us to be accused of the modern day witchcraft sin of "racism". I am sure each of us judges everyone as we find them, but we also look at trends, and it is only reasonable to do so.

In this post, though, I want to play devil's advocate again and consider matters from our leaders' point of view. Let us take the premise that Boris Johnson has not in fact changed his mind about Islam and that David Cameron, despite being a liberal, would, given the choice, actually rather have no Islam in the UK. These assumptions seem to me likely to be true.

It's all very well for bloggers to speak the truth, they will say. The same about blacks and crime. But they're the ones in the hot seat. They see all the information, the projections about rioting, the economic forecasts, how a civil war might unfold. They don't want to be responsible for WWIII, or even for "destabilising society". Good does not always come from telling the truth, they would argue - possibly persuasively. TD has written of how there would be bedlam if everybody could read each other's minds.

There is such a thing as diplomacy, they would say. You don't just come out and say that halal is cruel and unacceptable and you're going to ban it. You try to get people on side. You don't say that Islam is incompatible with civilised society and simply not British either. You hope people will become secular. You know Islam cannot be reformed without it no longer being Islam so you just try to draw Muslims towards the few relatively harmless parts and stop them following it properly (i.e. becoming "radicalised").

You follow the path of least resistance in each and every case, maybe because you're a self seeking coward but maybe because you just don't want oil shortages, civilian deaths and a possible WWIII.

I think this is what's going on. But in all these cases of diplomacy (even on a microscopic scale with friends and family) you make a call about when the time has come to tell the truth. When the price of not telling the truth is worse. On the evidence we have, that time has passed.




This post is about dealing with a present situation as best as possible, but it remains true that decisions were made earlier on which would change the UK forever with no mandate from the people, and the politicians who took it upon themselves to make those decisions were under no obligation to do so (in fact under the opposite obligation at the time) and they remain culpable, I think.
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Truth and diplomacy

Postby Gavin » 18 Dec 2014, 08:31

I believe our leaders surely know that Islam is not a religion of peace - this is perfectly obvious. We know for certain what Boris Johnson really thinks and the others surely also know what they are dealing with.

What Paul Weston is saying is of course true. David Cameron is a liberal who really seems to invite Islam into the UK (think of Turkey), but many other politicians probably think along the following lines:

  • They know that there are so many Muslims here now that if they come out and state what Islam is, there will be rioting and war and they will feel that they were the names that will go down in history as having triggered it.
  • They are playing a game of real-politik and utilitarianism, which is not about truth but about outcome. (They think) if they can try to make Muslims (many of whom will not even have read the Qur'an) think that Islam is a ROP then they might get the desired outcome (lack of bombing and massacres) but if they tell the truth then they will definitely get these things.
  • Islam has its tentacles right throughout British society not only via the massive Muslim juvenile underclass and criminal element, but also at the other extreme through finance and oil supply. Our leaders will have a view on this and the possible considerable economic, and therefore social, effects of a declaration of war on Islam.
  • An outlawing of Islam will effectively be a declaration of war not only on the Muslims living in our country but also on Islamic countries, thus triggering increased international hostility and possibly even WWIII.

I do not deny that many of our politicians are deluded and many on the left cynically wish to attract the Muslim vote without a thought that they are feeding the crocodile and assisting in the Islamification of the UK. But for the others, a charitable interpretation is that they view themselves first and foremost as guarantors of our safety. Their number one priority is to prevent all-out war on their watch. If the Muslims mobilise and wage war en masse on us, as they may well once numbers reach 40%, then perhaps there would be a response along the lines Paul Weston would like to see. But until then there won't be. So this is mere strategy.

I still think the fight back for our own country and culture could be done more subtly, though - currently they are not even trying. Regular mosque planning application denials, banning of ritual slaughter, banning of "face coverings" in time. They're not even trying at the moment, but hopefully - hopefully - UKIP would and will.
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain


Return to Political Correctness

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

User Menu

Login Form

This site costs £100 per year to run and makes no money.

If you would like to make a small contribution to help pay for the web hosting, you can do so here.

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 175 on 12 Jan 2015, 18:23

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
Copyright © Western Defence. All Rights Reserved.