The dilemma of Dutch Party for Freedom leader Geert Wilders going off the deep end

There's no coming back from being in bed with a hard-core, no-bones-about-it neo-fascist party. You can't do that as a credible adult in the 21st Century and say you didn't really know how bad fascism is.

Amazingly, Marxists and other contemporary communists get away with it, and they shouldn't. As ideologies in theory and practice, both  are political manifestations of pure evil. Suppression of the free exchange of ideas and the repression of any individual or groups that conflict with the will of the rulers are inherent features of these totalitarian movements. Though they use the language of liberty and justice, they do so only as empty words to manipulate the gullible; and as tools to reach the power they plan to clutch without ever intending to release it.

That's why among many, there were high hopes for what was represented by Geert Wilders' Dutch Party for Freedom. Despite being characterized as "far-right" by the media, his platform that favored women's rights, including pro-choice policies as well as gay rights and free speech, were actually reflective of classic liberalism. The "far-right" appellation came from a culturally relativist media that was enraged by Wilders' extreme criticisms of Islam. But were those criticisms justified?

Ancient kings claimed divine power so their authority could not be challenged by the inferior reasoning of mortal men. Similarly, in our time political Islam, with its Imams and leaders claiming divine authority as the temporal interpreters of Allah and Mohammed, brooks no real dissent. And woe to those who would dare try. In the Netherlands, Theo Van Gogh tried and he was stabbed to death on the street. Ayyan Hirsi Ali tried, and has spent the life under threat of death, with the unending need for security precautions.

There are critics of Catholicism who are just as harsh as those who criticize Islam. But Catholicism's critics do not have to live in constant fear of being murdered, while Islam's do not enjoy that privilege.

So while it seems Willders has not changed his Party for Freedom's platforms, his willingness to form an alliance with France's crypto-fascist National Front has plunged him into an abyss from which he will probably never emerge.  The National Front's current leader, Marine Le Pen, has tried to rehabilitate the image of the party she inherited from its founder, her Nazi-sympathising father, Jean-Marie.  But the National Front remains what it is, a genuinely far-right party, using thoughtless demonization of all Muslims and fervent opposition to gay marriage as a means to achieving their ends.

Wilders is first and foremost a politician, and seeing the increased popularity of Europe's far-right political parties, he must have seen an opportunity worth exploiting by allying with them for the upcoming European parliamentary elections.  Even if he does achieve a temporary measure of success by that alliance, the irrevocable long-term damage it will inflict on his and his party's credibility show that he is someone who lacks the wisdom to lead a nation.

The one silver lining to this sad development is the rift this has caused between Wilders' party and Britain's United Kingdom Independence Party and its firebrand leader Nigel Farage. Despite uninformed claims by Wilders that UKIP would join the alliance of the far-right, Farage has made it abundantly clear the Dutchman is talking out of his hat.

Farage has made it plain that he would have nothing to do with any multi-party union that involved the National Front, leading Marine Le Pen to lash out at him this week, like a spurned lover.

I can't say that I know Farage, but did meet him briefly and chatted with him while we were ordering drinks at the bar at an event where he spoke. It was a speech in which his firm commitment to human rights, liberty and individual freedom was passionately and abundantly clear.  His rejection of any cooperation with France's National Front, despite the immediate political gain that could come with it, reiterate Farage's commitment to those principles.

It is a very sad development for the Netherlands and Europe that Geert Wilders capitulation to expediency shows he lacks that same wisdom.

Conrad Black, Mark Steyn, John Crosbie and Nigel Farage walk into a bar...

A meeting room at swanky, newly-built towering Shangri-La Hotel in downtown Toronto held about a hundred expensively-tailored middle aged men, a handful of poised,elegant women and a few oddball stragglers (like me)  for the inaugural night of the Byron Talks speakers series. The Byron in question not being the late English poet and adventurer but a Canadian capital markets firm.

The unusual assembly of notable speakers who came together last week were Conrad Black, Mark Steyn, John Crosbie and Nigel Farage  for what was billed as a discussion about Canada's Place in the World. For many in the audience, it turned out to be a very surprising evening.

I was fortunate to have been invited through a business associate of Mark Steyn's, but the presence of a plebeian like me at a soiree for the upper crust usually raises a few eyebrows. Canadian media innovator Moses Znaimer, who clearly forgotten having been introduced to me at a business meeting a while back, looked like he was contemplating whether to call security to have me ejected when I said a brief hello to him. You know you're among the haut monde when the closest thing to the "common man" was the National Post's erudite Managing Editor Jonathan Kay.

Sun TV's stunning Faith Goldy was standing around in a colorful, wildly patterned dress that was a vision of what you'd see if you walked into a florist while peaking on LSD. She explained she was wearing it because she came from work. I assumed work was being an extra in a time-travel segment of a new Austin Powers movie, but it was unimportant as Faith was beautiful enough to carry it off.

All of the evenings featured speakers milled about in the bar area before the talk. United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) leader Nigel Farage and I had a jovial chat at the bar while waiting for an overwhelmed bartender to take our orders. He is as witty and affable in private as his public persona suggests, and expressed tremendous optimism about his party's chance to do better in the next British elections than current governing coalition partner, the Liberal Democrats.

To many, if not most, at the gathering who came to hear media stars Black and Steyn, Farage was unknown, but there is a considered sense that will change soon. But first to the other speakers.

Currently promoting his memoirs (and getting into public arguments in the process), the venue and the subject matter was an ideal reminder that Conrad Black is a remarkably eloquent and brilliant, if somewhat garrulous speaker. Acting as host from the dais, his remarks were salient reminders of the state of current affairs and as a thoughtful and serious historian, he provided critical context. Despite his recent difficulties in the United States, he observed that not only is it the most important country in the world, but it is the beneficiary, through its own virtues, of two unprecedented historical features. Those being the only peaceful transition of dominant power from one empire to another (British-to-American following World War 2) and that America's rise was the fastest ever, having taken place over the course of what amounts to just three lifetimes.

Black also had cogent and non-partisan praise for Canadian governance, saying that over the last dozen years, through both Liberal and Conservative administrations, Canada has been the best governed nation in the world.

At 81, former federal Progressive Conservative Finance Minister and current Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland John Crosbie has lost none of his humour and wit. About Black's profundities, he quipped, "Conrad's had three and a half years to think about what he's going to say." Most of Crosbie's talk recounted  amusing anecdotes from his many years in politics, such as the time a feminist researcher asked for a list of federal judges broken down by sex. Crosbie's reply was that he didn't know how many judges had been broken down by sex, but he did know some who had drinking problems. He also spent quite a bit of time telling Newfie jokes to the gathering, my favorite of which is the following:

A Newfie who just moved to Toronto are driving down the Don Valley Parkway with their empty U-Haul they just unloaded. A guy at the side of the road waves them down and the Newfie pulls over next to his broken down truck. The guy tells him, "My truck conked out and I have a truckload of penguins I have to get to the zoo, but now with the time I lost I won't be able to see my girlfriend tonight. You look like honest; I'l give you five hundred dollars if you take the penguins to the zoo for me." The Newfie  agreed, loaded the dozen penguins into the U-Haul and drove off with them.   

That night the truck driver is out with his girlfriend walking down Yonge Street when he sees the Newfie herding the dozen penguins down the street ahead of him. He runs up to them and shouts, "what's going on!? You said you were going to take these penguins to the zoo for me! I gave you five hundred bucks !" 

The Newfie responded, "I know. I took 'em to the zoo and I had three hundred bucks left over, so now I'm takin'  'em to the movies."

Popular author and radio host Mark Steyn spoke about subjects he addresses frequently, America's decline and the potentially devastating consequences of the astronomical national debt.  With his usual wit and command of terrifying data, Steyn delivered a message that would make the most optimistic believer in western democracy shrink in gloom.  He railed against an American government that is "looting the future to pay for the present" and  "can spend everything and do nothing." He exprssed outrage that while spending 41% of the entire world's military budget, America has a Commander-in Chief unwilling to use it when it's needed, like the terrorist attack on the US Mission in Bengazi.

One of the absurd ironies that Steyn pointed out is that the while the United States pays enough in interest on its debt to them to finance the entire Chinese armed forces, America's government continues to donate foreign aid to China, to improve their factories. All this while American jobs continue to be lost to those American subsidized factories in The People's Republic.

Steyn's famous humour and perspective, Black's gravitas and knowledge, and Crosbie's wisdom and insight into government were the reasons just about everyone attended the Byron Talk. Virtually no one there had heard of Nigel Farage. He was the last speaker and as someone who has seen him (on video) perform in the European parliament, it was a pleasure to see the other people discover Britain's most exciting, witty, acerbic, and forthright politician since Winston Churchill.

He had Black wiping away tears of laughter when recounting his hilarious conflicts with European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, whom Farage refers to as "Rumpy-pumpy." The danger of the current European Union structure is that it is undermining democracy. Indeed, leaders of the European Parliament has been livid in their condemnation of those countries who dared to hold elections to validate (or refute) their adherence to Euro-policies. Farage recounted how former European Council President Martin Schulz had said, on the possibility of Ireland's rejection of a European fiscal treaty that "we will not bow to populism." When Europe`s leaders define populism is the democratic will of a nation and they stand ready to oppose it, Farage`s fears are certainly justified. Particularly so when, as he noted, current British Prime Minister Cameron showed his willingness to defy populism by reneging on his promise to hold a similar referendum in England.

Farage`s excited, eloquent speech was punctuated with hilarious personal observations, such as that `the achievement gap opened up between Germany and France was made worse by the election of a total idiot as France`s President` and that Germany`s Chancellor `Angela Merkel in private is even more miserable than Angela Merkel looks in public.`

One of the solutions to the current crisis faced by western nations that Farage offered is that the Commonwealth countries, India, Canada, Australia, and so on, put a concerted effort to re-engage with each other but under a different name and structure than the old Commonwealth.

There was a lot to digest that night in the way of ideas and what was said portends of times ahead that if not managed properly, could lead to a decline from the greatest heights of human achievement. And if anyone says that decline is impossible, they should consider that the Romans at the height of their empire said the same thing.

Multiculturalism has failed in Britain, PM Cameron says

Will Canada's officialdom wake up to the failure of multiculturalism before it turns into a mirror of the European catastrophe?

From the Globe and Mail:

State multiculturalism has failed and left young Muslims vulnerable to radicalization, British Prime Minister David Cameron will say on Saturday, arguing for a more active policy to heal divisions and promote Western values. 

Mr. Cameron, in a speech to a security conference in Munich, will argue that Britain and other European nations need to “wake up to what is happening in our countries” as well as tackling terrorism through military operations overseas.

“It is time to turn the page on the failed policies of the past,” he will say, according to extracts from his speech released by his office.  

“So first, instead of ignoring this extremist ideology, we – as governments and societies – have got to confront it, in all its forms.”   

His comments echo those made by German leader Angela Merkel last year and reflect a push by European governments to better integrate immigrants, given persistent domestic tensions between different cultures.

The intolerance of the tolerant in Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden

A very interesting column in Open Democracy argues that contemporary intolerance of Islam in certain European countries is paradoxically, but actually a measure of those countries' overall tolerance. The reason being that Islam, as practiced by the new wave of immigrants, is incompatible with western liberal values and democracy:

..findings indicate that the “former” bastions of tolerance in fact are still tolerant - just not toward Muslims. Moreover, in this particular intolerance toward a religious group they outdo generally less tolerant other European countries. Why?

A possible explanation, counterintuitive as it might seem, is that it is because of their overall social tolerance - rather than despite it - that these countries have become among the most openly Islamophobic.

The logic of the argument is threefold: relating to nationalism, conformism, and tolerance itself.

First, in all three countries tolerance was closely associated with a negative attitude toward ethnic nationalism and a self-perception of being that unique thing, a “non-nationalist nation”. In part because of the particular way the countries dealt with their experience of the second world war, nationalism was linked almost intrinsically with Nazism and the Holocaust. Hence, ethnic-national discourses (let alone racial ones) were suspect, and shunned by all but the ostracised extreme right. So, whereas radical-right parties in countries such as Austria, Belgium, or France could relate their anti-immigrant struggle to more broadly shared national narratives, this option was not available in Denmark, the Netherlands, or Sweden.

Second, most everyday citizens in these countries self-identified as tolerant, and would in any case self-censor where this was felt necessary; but in addition, their elite had a special weapon in its struggle to keep politics “politically correct” - conformity. After all, northern Europe is as well known for its conformity (which traditionally includes a high trust in state actors and institutions) as for its tolerance. The often genuinely pro-multicultural elites were able to keep the immigration issue off the agenda, because the most intolerant people were also the most conformist (this is shown in the case of the Netherlands by Paul Sniderman & Louk Hagendoorn, When Ways of Life Collide: Multiculturalism and Its Discontents in the Netherlands (2007).

Third, the countries under scrutiny (Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden) and their close neighbours have traditionally been - and still are - among the most tolerant in Europe, particularly regarding issues such as women’s rights and gay rights. In addition, they are now among Europe’s least religious societies, with a dominant secular majority and formerly influential religious interests now politically marginalised. In this context, it is easy to construct Islam both as a threat to the national way of life, and to liberal democracy as it is understood in these countries.

read the entire article here at Open Democracy