Glenn Beck: Out of His Depth on This One.

A good deal -- though not nearly enough -- has recently been written (here, here and here) regarding comments by Glenn Beck and Charles Krauthammer regarding growing opposition to Islam in Europe. In particular their mischaracterization of Geert Wilders as fascist and extremist. Regarding Dr. Krauthammer I will only mention that he is often wrong, always elitist and occasionally brilliant. In my view he -- like so many other (1) conservative pundits -- did not escape entirely the multicultural memes of the 60's. As for Beck, I believe his remarks grew out of simple ignorance -- a gap in his accumulated knowledge. While Krauthammer may be wanting in the humility to alter his position, I expect that Beck will set himself to the task of remedial learning. Still, as I indicated in my earlier essay on Beck, my reservations about him center on his penchant for creating sweeping narratives on inadequate foundations of fact; sometimes bordering on the superficial.

All this leads me to the underlying matter of Geert Wilders. Since old media in the US have not given him much coverage, it is unsurprising to find how few Americans are informed about him and his courageous fight against the multicultural cancer that has led Europeans passively to await -- even hasten -- their own social, political and fiscal death.

Wilders is a Dutch politician who, in 2004, founded a new political party, the PVV (Party for Freedom). He made this move in response to the growing attacks on civil society in Europe by immigrants, who, rather than assimilate, oppose their host countries by the practice (2) of political Islam. In particular he was alarmed by the consideration of admitting Turkey into the EU.

Wilders came to the world's attention following the publication of a movie which made carefully drawn comparisons of the Koran with Mein Kampf. When the politically correct (3) Dutch government tried and failed to have the movie banned from publication, they resorted to charging him in the courts with incitement (hate-speech); and that is where things now stand.

When Muslims (as practitioners of political Islam) are criticized in any way they routinely resort to violence and threats of violence, so that they successfully intimidate individuals, groups and government itself. Persons (such as Wilders) who speak as politicians against Islamic practices -- honor killings, wife beatings, failure to complete their (free) education and support themselves and their families, for instance, receive death threats, attacks on their homes and relatives, and are forced to hire body guards and often can no longer safely live in their homes. (4)

That political Islam (there is no separation of church and state) and democratic self-governance are not -- and will never be -- compatible. The native polities, but not their governments, have come to realize this fact, and there is growing popular sentiment against Muslim immigration. For that reason Wilders' fledgling PVV has emerged as a powerful political force in Holland. To characterize Geert Wilders as as an extremist, racist, far-right radical and bigot (as European media and politicians reflexively do) points to the extensive abandonment of intellect and principle among the once-proud heritors of the Western Tradition. Mark Steyn succinctly describes the state of  affairs:

 The Continental political class does not want to debate the question of its ever more assertive Muslim populations, and so has decided to criminalize that debate. Geert Wilders lives under 24/7 security because Muslims (including the killer of Theo van Gogh) have pledged to murder him. Yet he's the one on trial for incitement? The issue is not Wilders or his views, but the Dutch state and their ever more "extreme, radical, and wrong" views on core Western liberties.

For Charles Krauthammer and Glenn Beck uncritically to accept Europe's leftist orthodoxy regarding Wilders and political Islam suggests either ignorance or fear -- perhaps both.

While I admire much about Beck and Krauthammer, it is my opinion that neither man compares to advantage with Geert Wilders. (4)

--------
1. In this group I include, Newt Gingrich, Wm. Bennett, Michael Medved, and many others. Rush Limbaugh seems to have emerged virtually unscathed, and I remain uncertain about Glenn Beck.

2. How bad things really are in Western Europe would take several essays to describe. But unassimilated (by choice) Muslim (especially the young) immigrants are almost entirely responsible for rising crime rates -- rape, theft, beatings, destruction of property, murder -- throughout Europe. To boot, most live on public assistance and exploit the excessive tolerance of political correctness at every turn. Worst, perhaps, is that non-judgmental multiculturalism in EU leadership has brought about the enactment of various, broadly written hate-speech laws which are enforced with strict liability, so that truth is not a defense. And this is at the heart of the on-going trial of Geert Wilders in which he is accused of hate-speech for the publication of his anti-political Islam movie, Fitna.

3. Political correctness, as I have said in other essays, is essentially cowardice (the fear of calling a thing by its name, of judging behaviors as evil or good) masquerading as comity. It is the leading threat to free speech in the West, since if the truth might offend a person or group, it cannot be spoken.

4.  Actually (not to be unnecessarily harsh), I think Beck shares some of Wilders' virtues.  Like Wilders he is an astute reader of popular sentiment and is able to galvanize it into political action.  Beck is similarly strong on principle.  All of which makes the more regrettable his uninformed flippancy.
♠