Democracy and Multiculturalism – A reply to David Cameron…

If there was a prize for a speech that contained the most examples of blatant two-faced hypocrisy then David Cameron’s would surely take that prize.  It simply beggars belief that a Prime Minister who presides over a foreign policy which supports the oppression of the vast majority of the known Arab word and which has failed to do anything of consequence to loosen the death-grasp of the Mubarak regime can lecture anybody in such a high-minded manner about ‘British values’.

It is this double-standard, this hypocrisy that fuels extremism. People aren’t stupid – they see the contradiction between what politicians like Cameron say and what they do and they don’t believe him. On the streets of Egypt it is hardly surprising people see the West as being their enemy and when demagogues like the Muslim Brotherhood provide an explanation that fits its hardly surprising people listen. When it comes to the Wahhabi fundamentalism of the House of Saud, the West has bankrolled this for years as it has Osama Bin Laden himself before he spectacularly decided to bite the hand that fed him.

If he is looking for an explanation for ‘Islamic extremism’ then Mr Cameron would be advised to look much closer to home. Furthermore, on a day the English Defence League marches it beggars belief that Cameron has the temerity to lecture the Muslim community for its ‘silent tolerance of extremism’. Many Muslims will rightly ignore the Prime Minister and dismiss his outrageous remarks for the rubbish they are. Despite him using the same speech to ‘support’ the Egyptian Revolution one cannot avoid the suspicion his remarks are a covert attempt to undermine that movement.

Mr Cameron says:

“We need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and much more active, muscular liberalism.”

You mean we need to be more ‘muscular’ than when we barged into Iraq and killed 100,000s of thousands of innocents in a failed experiment in ‘regime change’? Clearly, Mr Cameron’s tenuous grasp of reality has led him to some, frankly barking, conclusions. Democratic deficits do exist in the multicultural project as practised by the state – positive discrimination, for example, is the wrong solution to real problems because it tackles one source of of disadvantage and leaves those deeply rooted ones created by capitalist social relations untouched.

However, democratic integration from below is more than possible while respecting the multicultural ethic of tolerance of difference. In Egypt, Christians and Muslims have respected and protected each others right to pray and practise religion differently but still they have come together, united by their common cause and within the pro-democracy movement. This is a model of what is possible – we do not have to choose between a multicultural society where differences and the right to be different is protected and an integrated one where society comes together; united in common cause and purpose.

It is only disgraceful charlatans like David Cameron that insist we do. Consistent democrats and socialist however say different and provide a brave model of a society where it is the likes of David Cameron and his EDL friends who are on the margins.

Advertisements

Tags: , ,

About darrellgoodliffe

n.a

13 responses to “Democracy and Multiculturalism – A reply to David Cameron…”

  1. John Reid says :

    I was Agianst Iraq , But then agian so was the BNP, so that doens’t stand for muvh as, FOr cpmparing the EDL who have Middle class members ,Jewish ones Black and Asain one Sikh’s lesbians who knowsthey may even have forrmer Lib Dem supproters or Etonians, So I can’t see much comparison with Cameron ,but Why do you think the EDl’S suspision of Sharia Law islamic extremism be it anti out Army, homophobic , pro wife beating ,as on the Margins

    Like

  2. darrellgoodliffe says :

    @John,

    Well from my point of view it stands for democracy and internationalism but for them it stands for heaven knows what. They certainly agree on alot of things, indeed I doubt the EDL could have put it better than Cameron today. Nobody is pro those things but homophobia and sexism and sexual abuse is rampant in Christian churches so I have no idea why your saying this is an especial it an especially Islamic problem

    Like

  3. Gillig says :

    I can’t see Cameron ever being taken seriously as a statesman, he can’t even fake sincerity.
    If you can accept that the groups of people demonstrating on our streets do not trust, or believe, Liblabcon, any more than the Arabs trust their own and the West’s leaders; they start to look more sensible.
    Liblabcon do not respect and vigorously defend freedom of speech. They don’t make sensible contributions to British law from all communities, and welcome their help in enforcing it. E.D.L. feel they are a persecuted racial minority in Luton, betrayed by Liblabcon, that is how they feel and that is what they are.
    The divide between politicians and the people is widening. Radical changes will come in this country; I hope that here it is through the ballot box. My personal view is that we first have to remove the top layer of corruption, by leaving the EU.
    I want Blair pursued to the grave for Iraq. I have no idea why we are fighting in Afghanistan, Liblabcon didn’t ask me. It’s increasingly important for politicians, and their critics! to use clear and understandable language.
    I join you in condemning Cameron’s motives and actions. His should leave it to a professional to fuck up foreign affairs. The very expensive Baroness Ashton.

    Like

  4. andyj says :

    Think Cameron’s just saying what most people think here. Come on, it doesn’t take the brains of an archbishop to work out there is something seriously wrong with our society. Personally, I hate the Tories but there are issues here which are blatantly obvious, we can’t even deport people who are hell bent on destroying our country, and a lot would have us as a Muslim country if we let them.

    Sorry but this is England and things need to change. The alternative is fare worse.

    Like

  5. John Reid says :

    Even if homophobia r wife berating are rampant in christian society, its’ not condomed it’s ignored,Suppose stoning of Women was accetable in christian society and we had a call for us to become a sort of Christian society where those things were soically acceptable, and Fundanemtnal chistians were callign for that, they’red be loads of left wingers protesting agiasnt that, and tey might be throwing Snooker balls poles etc, the way those htat infultrated the student protests did.

    Like

  6. Robert says :

    John mate your getting to hate the left mate, what happened to being a socialist, then again your always been closer to the Tories or was it New labour.

    Like

  7. darrellgoodliffe says :

    John,

    I am sorry but to say its not condoned is rubbish, homophobia and sexism is legitimised in many quarters by reference to the Bible so come on, pull the other one. And hang on, are you saying ignoring it is any better? Ignorance is bliss, hey. I defy you to try and sell this line to somebody who has been sexually abused, for example. ‘There there, you have been traumatised for life but don’t worry at least you were ignored and the perpetrators got away with scot-free’. Come on, even you are better than that. I am sorry but your position on this is deeply, deeply flawed…..

    Like

  8. John Reid says :

    the opposite i’m not asying turning a blind eye is right, but the Fact thatthe bible is Homophobic, isn’t something htat the majority of Christians agree with, But those the EDL etc oppsoe wanty sharia law and the stoning of women, 2wrongs don’t make a right, are you saying its wrong to be weary of militant fundementalism as we have in places fundemental christian, homohpboia, sexism etc.

    Like

  9. Robert says :

    John the bible is a Jewish book of religious stories, most of the book is about laws and regulation within a time period of well six thousand years, when we had Adam and eve having incest. The bible was written at a time when laws in the UK were barbaric it’s self.

    So the bible is a book a story book which has basic human laws the ten commandments which Cristian’s try to live up to like thou shall not kill, something Blair has asked the Pope to forgive.

    Sharia court well they should have been civil, sadly the British police started handing over youths who should have gone through the British Criminal courts, but that’s labour for you, if it gets a vote do not bother about it.

    Most Muslim women came here to get away from this type of law, I’ve no problem in giving people mediation within Sharia but when it comes to crime, or if a person does not wish to have the sharia laws, they must be allowed to have British law.

    One law in this country it has to be British, even if labour loses a few votes.

    Like

  10. John Reid says :

    Robert I didn’t aggree with everything Labour did,

    Like

  11. Robert says :

    Twas not Labour John it was new labour and after the Libya mess I do not think most of the country will be bothering to quick to let them back in…..

    Like

  12. Anon says :

    For me this is just the most recent in a long line of disappointments. I mean, have the conservatives (and lib dems) actually stuck to any of their campaign promises?

    Like

  13. darrellgoodliffe says :

    @Anon,

    It’s possible…its simply a struggle to remember which ones these would be. Mostly the ones to hammer the poor, I guess 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: