Monday, July 25, 2005

The Limits to Tolerance

Writing in The Australian, Mark Steyn agrees with certain earlier observations that multi-culti + Radical Islam = . . . well, listen to Steyn:
That's the great thing about multiculturalism: it doesn't involve knowing anything about other cultures - like, say, the capital of Bhutan or the principal exports of Malaysia, the sort of stuff the old imperialist wallahs used to be well up on. Instead, it just involves feeling warm and fluffy, making bliss out of ignorance. And one notices a subtle evolution in multicultural pieties since the Islamists came along. It was most explicitly addressed by the eminent British lawyer Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws, QC, who thought that it was too easy to disparage "Islamic fundamentalists". "We as western liberals too often are fundamentalist ourselves. We don't look at our own fundamentalisms."

And what exactly would those western liberal fundamentalisms be? "One of the things that we are too ready to insist upon is that we are the tolerant people and that the intolerance is something that belongs to other countries like Islam. And I'm not sure that's true."

Hmm. Kennedy appears to be arguing that our tolerance of our own tolerance is making us intolerant of other people's intolerance, which is intolerable. Thus the lop-sided valse macabre of our times: the more the Islamists step on our toes, the more we waltz them gaily round the room. I would like to think that the newly fortified Age columnists are representative of the culture's mood, but, if I had to bet, I'd put my money on Kennedy: anyone can be tolerant of the tolerant, but tolerance of intolerance gives an even more intense frisson of pleasure to the multiculti masochists. Australia's old cultural cringe had a certain market rationality; the new multicultural cringe is pure nihilism.

1 comment:

MaxedOutMama said...

The old phrase about tying yourself into knots comes to mind.

Look, here we have an epidrama about one Supreme Court justice going on. Is anyone going to claim that what he believes about the law is unimportant? Not by a long shot. The people who talk about multiculturalism are the first people to have hysterics if they think their ideas of right and wrong are being violated.

It's a crock and these people are hypocrites.

Hey, did you catch the LA Time's article about Roberts' religion being a problem?