| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| Muslims are right about Britain |
| 2005-08-05 |
| Many moderate Muslims believe that much of Britain is decadent. They are right. Mr Blair says that the fanatics who want to blow us up despise us, but he won’t admit that their decent co-religionists — who are the best hope of undermining the extremists at source — despair of us. They despair of the moral decline and the ugly brutishness that characterise much of urban Britain. They despair of the metropolitan mix of gay rights and lager louts. And they despair of the liberal establishment’s unwillingness to face the facts and fight the battle for manners and morals. They are not alone. The Windrush generation of Caribbeans came to Britain with the most traditional of values — proud Christians with dignity and a sense of duty — the kind of people so steeped in our history that they gave their children names like Winston, Milton and Gladstone. As vice-chairman of the British Caribbean Association, I recently had the chance to ask such people why so many young British blacks had got into trouble with the law. They unequivocally blamed the licence they encountered almost as soon as they arrived here, which made it so hard to inculcate their standards in the next generation. The alienation felt by young blacks and Asians is not a result of any intolerance shown towards them, but of the endless tolerance of those who would allow everything and stand up for nothing. It is the excesses permitted by a culture spawned by the liberal Left that have produced a generation that feels rootless and hopeless. The young crave noble purposes as children need discipline; neither get much of them in modern Britain and the void is filled by disrespect, fecklessness, mindless nihilism or, worse, wicked militancy. It is unreasonable to expect Muslim leaders to put right what’s wrong in their communities if we are not going to be honest about what’s wrong with ours. Some of rural Britain (including the area in which I live and represent) still has strong communities. There, many of the old-fashioned values lost elsewhere prevail. Beyond these heartlands, much else is ailing. A sickening decadence has taken hold. People’s sense of identity has been eroded as our traditions and the institutions that safeguard them have been derided for years. People’s sense of history has been weakened by an education system that too often emphasises the themes in history rather than its chronology, and which indoctrinates a guilt-ridden interpretation of Britain’s contribution to the world. People’s sense of responsibility has been undermined by a commercial and media preoccupation with the immediate gratification of material needs, regardless of consequences — we want everything and we want it now, so we spend and borrow, cheat and hurt. People’s self-regard has diminished as, robbed of any sense of worth beyond their capacity to consume and fornicate, they feel purposeless. We have forgotten that pleasure is a mere proxy for the true happiness which flows from commitment and the gentle acceptance that it is what we give, not what we take, that really matters. The vulnerable are the chief victims of decadence. Children suffer when families break down. The old suffer as their needs are seen as inconvenient and their wisdom is no longer valued. For the rich, decadence is either a lifestyle choice or something you can buy your way out of. But for the less well off — stripped of the dignities which stem from a shared sense of belonging and pride — the horror of a greedy society in which they can’t compete is stark. The civilised urban life that was available to my working-class parents is now the preserve of those whose wealth shields them from lawlessness and frees them from the inadequate public services that their less fortunate contemporaries are forced to endure. Safely gated, the liberal elite do not merely turn a blind eye — though that would be bad enough. They voyeuristically feed the masses with Big Brother and legislate to allow 24-hour drunkenness. In answer to the desperate call for much-needed restraint, we hear from those with power only the shrill cry for ever more unbridled liberty. Politicians who should know better fear debates about values, preferring to retreat to morally neutral, utilitarian politics, as uninspiring as it is unimaginative. It is the kind of discourse which leaves those who aspire to govern reduced — in the heat of a general election campaign — to debating how efficiently their respective parties can disinfect hospitals. Most Church leaders have also given up the fight. Many have convinced themselves that to be fashionable is to be relevant and that being relevant is more important than being right. Is it any wonder that the family-minded, morally upright moderate Muslims despair? So, with little understanding of the past, little thought for the future, little respect for others and virtually no guidance from those appointed or elected to give it, many modern Britons — each with their wonderful, unique God-given potential — are condemned to be selfish, lonely creatures in a soulless society where little is worshipped beyond money and sex. The roots of this brutal hedonism are in soulless liberalism. Against all the evidence, the liberal elite — who run much of Britain’s politically correct new establishment — continue to preach their creed of freedom without duty, and rights without obligations. Pope John Paul II — perhaps the greatest figure of our age — said ‘only the freedom which submits to the truth leads the human person to his true good’. Freedom without purpose is the seed corn of social decay. It is through the constraints on self-interest and the restraint that good Muslims revere that we can rebuild civil society. The most fitting response to the terrorist outrages would be the kind of moral and cultural renaissance that would make Britons of all backgrounds feel more proud of their country. John Hayes is Conservative MP for South Holland and The Deepings. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #11 I don't think, .com, that you are reading the article right: The moderate muslim, if he/she exists, would be mainly concerned with the Moral, rather than the political, aspects of Islam. The muslims this guy is talking about may not believe in militant Islam enough to physically attack the patently decadent society around him, but doesn't see any point in coming to the defense of a society today that yesterday derided, ridiculed, and cursed them for being religious bigots and busybodies, and worked to undermine the morals they were trying to instill in their youth the day before that. This guy is NOT justifying Jihadist behavior, which is inherently unjustifiable: he is explaining moderate Muslim inaction to help a system that they view works against them in the moral arena. I would never attack a liberal or an ACLU lawyer, but I wouldn't feel obligated to cross the street to lend a hand if I saw them getting mugged by the guys they sprang from jail or blown to shreds by terrorists that they sprung from Gitmo. While I would not hurt any man, there are some people I would refuse to help because they would use that help to get into a position to destroy what I hold dear: Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, warned against throwing your pearls before swine who would respond by attacking you despite your generosity. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2005-08-05 23:16 |
| #10 .com is the bomb... |
| Posted by: Kent Mccord 2005-08-05 14:44 |
| #9 I'll second Dot's comments and add one thing. I don't think our moral decadence is the cause of these attacks (if that is the case then are not jihadis employing an uber-tough-love "this bomb hurts me more than it hurts you" discipline to call us to our senses?), but it is surely our greatest impediment in mustering the courage to deal with them. |
| Posted by: Dreadnought 2005-08-05 11:54 |
| #8 ok, fair enough. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-08-05 09:20 |
| #7 'Tis true, RC. And, I somewhat agree with you 2b. We should follow the example of Christ. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't speak out against issues that His Holy Word speaks to as sin. So many people are looking for the mythical 100% "loving" God, that they fail to see that His judgement will one day come a knockin'. It's the whole "love the sinner/hate the sin" issue. Yes, Christ was very compassionate/loving to the person who was sinning, but would also rebuke them firmly to "go and sin no more." |
| Posted by: BA 2005-08-05 09:18 |
| #6 BA, one difference is that Christians opposed to those things won't be out at the nudie bars the night before their "protest". |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-08-05 09:12 |
| #5 jeese, BA, when I go to church I can only hope I hear more about faith, hope, charity, forgiveness and why it is important for me to take the high road. Somehow I don't recall Christ screeching about the evils of gays, stem cell research and abortion. IMHO, that's the problem with Christianity today - the abuse of the pupit to achieve political, not spiritual goals. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-08-05 09:10 |
| #4 Or Dubya's fault, TW. I'm like .com on this one. The one area I agree with Muslims is the decadence and unbridled debauchary that takes place in the U.S. As a Christian, I stand with them (Muslims) any time they want to fight against abortion, gay "rights/marriage", the worship of the almighty dollar, heck, even stem cell research! BUT, we must do it within the confines of "the system" and with common sense. Going out and killing as many infidels as possible will not solve any of these issues. |
| Posted by: BA 2005-08-05 08:49 |
| #3 It is the Spectator, after all. I'm surprised the writer didn't slip in something about how all this decadence is somehow America's fault. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-08-05 07:24 |
| #2 Didn't someone say the same thing about the US just after 9/11? I didn't hear the No.2 Al Qaeda guy mention anything about decadence in his recent DVD release. Is this what Mr Hayes is talking about? |
| Posted by: Rafael 2005-08-05 02:26 |
| #1 Sigh. Though much of this rocks, his decadence argument as reason (and subtle justification) of jihadism is specious. Believing Britain to be decadent is a reason to leave, perhaps, but not to kill innocent people (the "fanatics") or despair (the "co-religionists") and either do nothing or play the resource pool part of the jihadi scenario. If you want to undo some of the ultra-liberal stupidity, that would be a welcome thing, please do. If you want to blame the ills of your society on this "moral decline" and "ugly brutishness", go for it, knock yourself out. BUT, just as a thug or thief or murderer is responsible for his or her own actions, social inanity notwithstanding, so are jihadis and splodeydopes responsible for their actions... as are those who help them in any way - they are accessories to a crime without any means or hope of redemption. Deal with your football hooligans if you must, but deal with the hate-spewing imams and their followers, who send toolfools off to become trained jihadis and create support networks of "neutral" Muzzies to facilitate them, NOW. Just my unhappy take. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-08-05 02:03 |