Remember my post about the Pseudo-Liberal Complex with respect to private members of society? I'm now going to talk about a similar phenomenon, but which has far more wide-reaching and dangerous consequences, at the level of government.
A new wave of fascism has begun, with most of us having been taken in and not realizing it. (Fascism may not appear to be the best word to describe it, but for practical purposes, it will do.) The governments of a lot of powerful countries and their judicial systems are already full of them. These entities are characterized by a frenzy for “political convenience(correctness)” and superficial appearances that there is no problem whatsoever. All of them want to come across as welcoming anyone who is “different”, and going to the extent of, in plain language, hating yourself so that the other person or group feels welcomed or good about it.
In the developed world, this has come to imply that ethnic/religious/visible minorities have a right to be conservative/fundamentalist, but anyone who is traditionalist about Christian or white culture is branded a racist, fascist, and so on. Whatever happened to when in Rome, do as the Romans do?
Maintaining a certain lifestyle is a personal choice and private individuals should have the right to follow whatever culture they like as long as it does not cross the borders of civic sense, but no-one and the bad points about no religion or culture should be immune from scrutiny. I came across a guy on a social networking site who claims to be a PhD student in political science from a reputed university in Europe, an atheist, and politically left-wing. The guy goes on and on about how bad Christianity is and how good it would be if Christians were exterminated from Europe, blah blah. But when someone mentioned the film 'Fitna', which was intended to serve as a list of the bad points of Islam, the same guy called Geert Wilders, the film-maker, far-right and a racist. If this guy had said that about any other community, he would be in jail, so how can he get away with this?
You would probably come across how 'equality' means its acceptable to bash the majority and/or pamper minorities. Its just a consequence that most of the examples I'm going to present happened in the United Kingdom.
Some weeks back, a Sikh girl in the UK was allowed by a court to wear a religious ornament, even though the rules of the school prohibited religious accessories, including crucifixes. The court said that the school did not “do enough to promote equality”. I can't think of a bigger joke than that. Unfortunately, it is on the law-abiding majority.
Just read that a Pakistani-born citizen of the UK who stabbed his neighbour to death got away with manslaughter and only eight years in jail. It helped that the victim was white and a member of the right-wing British National Party, so the guy could play the racism card. If it were the other way round, not only would the white guy have been convicted of murder but also of a hate crime. Racism cuts both ways, unfortunately it does not suit some politicians to recognize this.
There was a big uproar over the alleged racist/fascist actions of Max Mosley, the President of the FIA and Amy Winehouse, which had happened IN THE PRIVACY OF THEIR HOMES. The videos in question were never intended for public consumption and pulling them up for that is a gross violation of privacy. This just goes to show that the media too has been penetrated by these pseudo-liberals.
The list of examples of how some groups get preferential treatment could get very long, but when applied to states and where terrorism is involved, it gets worse. We saw that when Serbs were being aggressive during the Balkan conflicts, they were demonized by the Western leaders and media. But if Kosovo Albanians do the same, the same people say that they are acting within their rights.
A lot of governments, even of countries that have been the victims of terrorism, want to come across as not harassing any community, even at the cost of not protecting their society from terrorism. It doesn't matter that the very communities they are pampering respond by rioting and burning cars in France, Denmark, the UK, and the Netherlands at the slightest opportunity. Israel does whatever it needs to do to defend itself (though, in my opinion, they ought to be a tad more flexible), and yet a lot of European left-liberals I know, hate them for doing just that.
The consequences of actions like these on the part of the pseudo-liberals will lead to less tolerant and less open-minded communities becoming more influential. Perhaps the PLs are too naïve to see that, because I don't see their ideologies evolving like that of the Republican party (which was in fact started in the North of the USA, to oppose slavery).
To me, governments like this are no different from explicitly fascist ones. And the solution is not the right-wing parties of today, no sir. And as for terrorism, the solution is not what Israel or India are doing right now, it is flexibility, logic, rationality, and mutual respect shown by both sides. The bottom line is that, in the public domain, there can't be separate sets of rules.
----------------------------------------------
Almost forgot.. some exaples of PL political parties: all parties whose names have the words liberal, socialist, social democratic, etc, Indian National Congress and the Left front in India.
