Resistance—life—stirs in Britain

The people of Luton, England, where Muslims heckled and insulted a parade of homecoming troops in March, have had enough.

Protesters in Luton’s city centre

From the Mail:

Masked mob on the march against Muslim extremists turns violent
By Claire Ellicott, 25th May 2009

The streets of Luton descended into violence yesterday as hundreds of anti-Islamist protesters clashed with police.

The crowds in the town centre hid their faces behind balaclavas, brandished England flags and chanted at officers.

Some wore masks with the horned face of Sayful Islam, a hardline Muslim activist in Luton who took part in an anti-war rally in March which disrupted a homecoming parade for troops.

Masked: A depiction of Sayful Islam

The mob, which included teenagers and women, also held banners with slogans such as ‘No Sharia Law in the UK’ and ‘Respect our Troops’.

There were reports of violence, with onlookers claiming that an Asian man was hit across the face with a banner and left with a bloody nose.

A group called March for England was said to have organised the rally as a peaceful protest against Muslim extremists. They were joined by a local group United People of Luton.

The chaos broke out when a crowd of around 500 ran away from police who had been escorting the protest along its route, and ran down side streets towards the town centre.

Officers on horseback and police dogs were deployed, and policemen drew batons to defend themselves.

A spokesman for United People of Luton, Wayne King, said: ‘We decided enough was enough after the soldiers got heckled as they marched through the town centre by the Muslim extremists. We want laws brought in to stop preachers of hate operating here.’

- end of initial entry -

May 25

Ken Hechtman writes:

The white polo shirts with the “No surrender to Al Qaeda” patches in the photo are from the England First Party.

They’re a breakaway from the BNP and unlike the BNP, they still use some “dog-whistle” racist code words and symbols (David Lane’s 14 words, the Klan crosswheel).

LA replies:

Here is the brief manifesto of the England First Party. Most of it seems pretty reasonable to me. They want to undo the transformation of Britain by mass immigration and multiculturalism. I note just one anti-Jewish note: they want to outlaw kosher slaughter practices, which they call barbaric.

Are they low thugs? I don’t know. But I have to say that when I saw those hoods on their heads, my first thought was, “Here are people who are willing to fight for their country.” And the hoods are a symbol of that, as well as perhaps a necessity to avoid reprisals and punishment, as was the case with the Ku Klux Klan. In the novel Birth of a Nation, the Klan was portrayed as a heroic group striking back at unbearable oppression. The movie of Birth of a Nation was a big hit in 1915 and, as I remember, was screened at the White House by President Woodrow Wilson and guests. That was when Americans, including the elite, still took it for granted that America was basically a white country, to be led politically and culturally by white people.

But are the English First Party low thugs? If they are, that is bad, and I would not support them. But perhaps it is the case, when an entire nation is paralyzed with pacific good manners under a radical government openly pursuing their destruction, only people who don’t have good manners, only people who are low and disgusting in some ways, will have the guts to break through and liberate the patriotism of the non-thuggish majority.

George in Bangkok writes:

From a news report:

“Nearly half of the predominantly Iraqi refugees residing in Vannas in northern Sweden have decided to permanently move out of the area after being terrorized by what police called “a lynch mob” in early May.”

It is interesting that the majority of those taking part in Luton appeared to be under 30. Also those protesting in Sweden are described as “a group of 30 to 50 young people”. It may be too early to generalise based on two incidents, but these have occurred in two of the societies where the destructive horror of multi-culturalism has been most pronounced and the rejection is specifically by those who have suffered the most intense educational indoctrination.

Ed L. writes:

In his quoted remark, Wayne King made what we recognize as a universalist slip. He said: “We want laws brought in to stop preachers of hate operating here.”

Of course, that leaves him vulnerable to liberals slapping back at him: “That’s right, and that means primarily YOU!”. He should have been more specific: “We want laws brought in that specifically and explicitly stop Muslim agitators from operating here.”

George R. writes:

You write,

“But perhaps it is the case, when an entire nation is paralyzed with pacific good manners under a radical government openly pursuing their destruction, only people who don’t have good manners, only people who are low and disgusting in some ways, will have the guts to break through and liberate the patriotism of the non-thuggish majority.”

This is a change for you. You used to have no patience the “low and disgusting.” (I recall you denunciations of Michael Savage.) But now your starting to see them as useful and necessary.

LA replies:

I was speaking in the abstract. I don’t know for a fact that this particular group is low and disgusting. If I learned of specific behavior that was wrong, that would be different. Also, the fact that there may be situations in which the only people who will defend a society are people we consider low, does not mean that low behavior is a good thing in itself and ought to be endorsed in principle. It all depends. You have to look at the specifics.

On your other point, I don’t want to be attacking someone like Savage. Yes, his hyper aggressive style is not to my taste, and I think he is deceptive in sounding so hard-line on immigration but in reality only opposing illegal immigration. But a lot of conservatives like him and get value from him, and there’s no reason for me to make a issue of whatever it is I don’t like about him. Also, I don’t listen to talk radio in any case, so Savage is not ordinarily on my radar screen.

Paul K. writes:

You wrote: “But perhaps it is the case, when an entire nation is paralyzed with pacific good manners under a radical government openly pursuing their destruction, only people who don’t have good manners, only people who are low and disgusting in some ways, will have the guts to break through and liberate the patriotism of the non-thuggish majority.”

I had this reaction recently when I was in Columbia, South Carolina, visiting my sister and her husband. My brother-in-law, a Limbaugh-type Republican, pointed out with some disgust the Confederate flag flying in front of the capitol building. I told him I rather liked it, which shocked him. “The people who like that flag are not people you’d want as neighbors,” he told me. “They’re rednecks. The kind of people who throw beer cans out the windows of their pickup trucks.”

I realized that if I tried to explain my opinion of rednecks he would think I’m crazy: that whatever their faults, they’re the only people I can imagine actually standing up against the liberal elites if it comes to a fight.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at May 25, 2009 02:36 AM | Send