Another brave and acutely observed article by Anthony Browne in the Spectator about the turmoil in the Netherlands following the murder allegedly by Islamists of the radical film-maker Theo van Gogh. In the Times, Browne has been doggedly chronicling the dramatic fall-out from this murder, as the Dutch recall also the slaying two years ago of Pim Fortuyn, the flamboyant homosexual and 'far right'politician who warned of the danger to progressive Dutch society from aggressive Islamist cultural imperialism. Now Van Gogh's murder has been followed by the discovery of an alleged Islamist terror cell in the Netherlands, an Islamist spy in the Dutch secret service, attacks on mosques and churches, and death threats to various Dutch politicians who have spoken out against Islamist extremism. The result is a convulsion as the liberal Dutch grapple with the implosion of the multiculturalism they so unthinkingly embraced and about whose effects they were in denial -- until now.

But as Browne says, the Dutch may have had their eyes opened at last but that is certainly not true for others in Europe, where political correctness has its thumbs on the windpipe of public debate. (He might have added that it's not true in Britain, where he is almost the only journalist to be reporting on what is happening in the Netherlands, whose experiences have such resonance for the UK). Browne reports:

'In a sickening essay, Rohan Jayasekera, the associate director of Index on Censorship, a group which supposedly defends freedom of speech, blamed van Gogh for his own murder. He wrote that the film-maker was guilty of ‘an abuse of his right to free speech’, his ritual slaughter was ‘his very own martyrdom operation’ and we should ‘applaud Theo van Gogh’s death as the marvellous piece of theatre it was’. Unable to make the moral distinction between offending someone and murdering them, Index on Censorship has forsaken liberal democracy in the clash of values that faces us; but it is not alone. In Britain, the government wants to introduce laws supposedly to ban ‘incitement to religious hatred’ but which will inevitably be used by Islamic activists to silence criticism of their religion and culture.'

This is what the left has descended to, extolling murder as a 'marvellous piece of theatre' and blaming the victim for his own slaughter. Vile, wicked stuff. But it seems to me that the Dutch response is more ambiguous than Browne suggests. For they are also considering reviving the law against blasphemy to 'calm sectarian tensions'. This actually means attempting to appease terror, since Van Gogh's own film Submission, which attacked Islam's treatment of women and apparently provoked his murder, would probably have been banned under this law. Similarly, Browne points out that Belgium, by banning its largest party, the Vlaams Blok, for being racist, is responding to the unrest caused by multiculturalism by attacking democracy:

'By curbing free speech and political parties, and demonising those who fight for gay rights and against domestic violence, the Left is telling the world that multiculturalism is incompatible with liberal democracy. The Left’s loss of faith in liberal democracy is a result of its naive belief in human nature. The creators of multicultural societies believe they can abolish tribal feelings of belonging based on shared values, history and culture. Just as communism could only be upheld by totalitarianism, so multiculturalism is being upheld by curbs on free speech and democracy. The lesson of the Netherlands is that there is only so much you can do to change human nature, and the more you shut off the valves of debate and democracy, the more human nature — in all its ugliness — will assert itself, often violently.'

Will Britain wake up to this before it is too late?

Posted by melanie at November 19, 2004