Medworth.org.uk

Just days after the Kilroy-Silk scandal comes another case of a well-known personality being accused of racism. However, the two cases could hardly be more different.

This time, the man in the firing line of the PC police is John Rhys-Davies, the actor who played the dwarf Gimli in the recent film adaptation of Tolkien’s The Lord Of The Rings. The remarks in question were made to American journalists for World magazine. Here is a sample:

There is a demographic catastrophe happening in Europe that nobody wants to talk about, that we daren’t bring up because we are so cagey about not offending people racially. And rightly we should be. But there is a cultural thing as well.

By 2020, 50 per cent of the children in Holland under the age of 18 will be of Muslim descent.

I think that Tolkien says that some generations will be challenged. And if they do not rise to meet that challenge, they will lose their civilisation. That does have a real resonance with me.

…

I am for dead, (traditional) white male culture…

Many do not understand how precarious Western civilisation is and what a joy it is.

From it, we get real democracy. From it, we get the sort of intellectual tolerance that allows me to propound something that may be completely alien to you.

I’m burying my career so substantially in these interviews that it’s painful. But I think there are some questions that demand honest answers.

Of course, the usual suspects started the seething and whining which always takes place whenever anyone criticizes or questions Islam. I don’t have the stomach to quote them fully here, but you can get the idea by reading this news story about the incident. The people condemning Rhys-Davies’ remarks included Adam Price, the local MP for Rhys-Davies’ former home town of Ammanford, Mohammed Javed, chairman of the Muslim Society for Wales, and Naz Malik, Chief executive of the All Wales Ethnic Minority Association (Awema).

I suppose it was inevitable that Rhys-Davies’ remarks would be criticised, given that the British Nationalist Party (BNP), in their unbounded stupidity, quoted some of them in one of their foul propaganda leaflets, to Rhys-Davies’ own dismay and horror. We cannot blame Rhys-Davies for this however: no-one can be held responsible for the irrational reactions of mindless idiots to one’s actions or remarks. The interview in question is not incitement or anything remotely near it: for me, incitement is where violence is explicitly (or obviously implicitly) advocated. Nowhere does Rhys-Davies do this: to suggest otherwise is to insult the listener’s intelligence.

The BNP’s decision to use Rhys-Davies’ words in their literature is stupid even on their own twisted terms: in fact, any thinking person can see that they actually refute a substantial part of the BNP’s programme. The BNP’s socialist and racist policies, if implemented, would completely destroy the Western civilisation Rhys-Davies so admires. However, I suppose that the BNP counts for its support on those who stubbornly refuse to exercise what limited thinking ability they possess.

Let us do for Rhys-Davies what we did for Kilroy-Silk a couple of posts ago and cut through the hysteria, analysing his comments against my standard definition of racism, which I will repeat here. Quoting Ayn Rand:

Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man’s genetic lineage — the notion that a man’s intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the character and actions of a collective of ancestors.

This time, a little thought shows that our conclusion should be the opposite of that drawn in the Kilroy-Silk case. Notice that at no point in the quotations above does Rhys-Davies even mention a racial group. He only talks about Muslims and Islam. This is so obvious it hardly needs saying, but Islam is not a racial group: it is a religion! Thus Rhys-Davies’ comments fail the definition of racism at the very first hurdle: by not mentioning race!

The real reason so many people have condemned Rhys-Davies’ remarks is because of multiculturalism: the abominable notion that all cultures are equal and none may be criticized (except, of course, Western civilisation and capitalism). Ironically, however, multiculturalism is actually racist, because it expects different values and different standards of morality and civilisation from people according to their race and ethnic background.

The fact which refutes multiculturalism is that a person’s culture is a matter of choice (unlike their race), and our choices are open for moral evaluation and judgement. This means that, contrary to the multiculturalists, we must judge all cultures, including our own, praising what is good and condemning what is bad.

Rhys-Davies raises serious questions about whether Muslim culture, as practiced by Muslims immigrating to Europe, is compatible with liberal Western civilisation, which he rightly praises. His remarks are not founded in ignorance: far from it. Many scholars of Islam, such as Robert Spencer and Daniel Pipes have raised similar questions.

For my part, the more I learn about Islam and its more extreme manifestations in the Middle East and closer to home, the more concerned I am about it. Sharia law, which Islam claims is handed down by God, is completely incompatible with ours in terms of its unequal treatment of women, its cruel punishments of criminals, and the way it forces all non-Muslims to exist as humiliated, subservient second-class citizens in a state of dhimmitude, amongst other things. I worry that, as Europe’s Muslim population grows, the demand for Sharia will grow and that the rights, protections and values our ancestors fought for and we take for granted will be lost.

Mainstream Muslim groups, such as the one criticising Rhys-Davies, have done little to assuage our fears on this topic, preferring instead to accuse us of racism and ignorance. “Islamophobic” is a label they like to use against Islam’s critics, which (while perhaps deserved in certain cases) is highly disingenuous when one considers both the careful reasoning behind much of the criticism, and the fact that a phobia is usually an inexplicable, illogical fear. The mainstream media also proudly uphold the multiculturalist line: witness the fact that a correspondent from al-Jazeera, a Middle-Eastern TV channel which broadcasts jihadist propaganda, was hired by the BBC the same week they fired Kilroy-Silk. All around us we see the willful blindness of multiculturalism. Because this generation has never known genuine strife, we believe ourselves and our values to be invulnerable. We are not.

If Rhys-Davies is wrong, why don’t “moderate” Muslims repudiate the views of the extremists who want to see the world forced to live under Islamic rule and educate us as to what Islam truly teaches? There is nothing I would like more than to see proof that my fears are unjustified; all the signs, however, point the other way.

I welcome anybody who shares my love for liberty and individual rights, regardless of their race, and I condemn anyone who tries to undermine these values (such as the BNP), regardless of their race. I strongly oppose any kind of violence, oppression, or abrogation of individual rights against Muslim immigrants.

The war I want to see fought is the war of ideas, demonstrating that reason and capitalism are superior to faith and tyranny (although this is useless without a physical battle against terrorist groups and the states who sponsor them). I, like Rhys-Davies, am simply asking questions about Islamic culture and faith that need to be answered if Muslims and non-Muslims are to live side by side in peace, which is what we all want.

I also know that a great many Muslims love this country and its values: neither my remarks nor Rhys-Davies’ should be taken as a criticism of all Muslims. I am simply saying that there are also a great many who want the world to be forced (through violent jihad or otherwise) under Islamic law — something I cannot tolerate — and that these people seem to have some kind of basis within Islamic tradition and writing for their beliefs. (This is not to say that Muslims who believe in religious tolerance, secular government et cetera do not also have a basis in Islam for their beliefs.)

John Rhys-Davies’ comments are brave, honest and intelligent, and I salute him for his courage. I can hardly defend him better, however, than he does himself. Here is what he said, when challenged:

I believe in racial equality not racial discrimination. All I was commenting on was that there are cultural changes taking place in Europe that I consider to be unacceptable.

The fact that a minister of the French government has to fly to Cairo to talk with one of the religious heads in one of the mosques to get his approval for a ban on headscarves can be seen in two ways.

One, is how wonderfully culturally sensitive. The other, it seems to give an authority to a wholly unelected figure well outside Europe’s jurisdiction.

I am really proud to be living in a society that accepts women as our equals, that accepts civilised discourse that allows people to hold different opinions without coming to any act of violence.

Here in America when that earthquake happened in Iran the reaction of everyone I knew was horror and dismay, the reaction of everyone when they heard that the old woman had been brought out alive long after they thought there was anyone there was absolute awe at the extraordinary capacity of the human spirit to survive. Contrast that with people jumping up and down and clapping at the 9/11 disaster in certain countries.

I don’t think that Western society is opposed to Islamic society at all. I think a very important part of Islamic society is opposed to Western society.

It is time that ordinary Muslims stood up to be counted.

Most societies can benefit from a good stirring of genes, but most cultures are tolerant of each other. I do not see Buddhists throwing bombs into Christian churches, I do not see Christians blowing up Hindu temples, I do not see those sorts of challenges.

When we are prepared to overlook certain things because we don’t want to rock the boat, this is wrong.

The greatest act of racism is to expect that other people will not behave according to your values and standards.

Yes, I am for dead, (traditional) white male culture. It’s pretty damn good, pretty damn marvellous, pretty wonderful. That’s not to exclude other cultures, but it’s not to diminish mine.

I’m sorry that might be perceived as infringing some sort of racial taboo, it’s certainly not intended to be a racial remark.

We are losing the ability to sit down and be able to have a tolerable argument.

I do not want to see a society where, should I ever have any, my granddaughters have their fingernails pulled out because they are wearing nail varnish.

I hope that my friends and relatives in Wales are not going to be shocked by what they are going to read about.

Do not brand me a racist because I am most certainly not.

But I will stand by this: Western Christianised Europe has values and experience that is worth defending.

One can quibble about minor points here, but I am 100% behind Rhys-Davies’ central message. I admire him very much for having the guts to think for himself and to speak his mind.

Update: This post by Robert Spencer is essential reading on this situation. Loosely related is this article by the same author in the Washington Times.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.