Former Disk Jockey, Mark Steyn argues against multiculturalism to a friendly crowd, he calls it an “illusive enemy” and a “denial of reality.” Its really the foundation of his incredibly twisted world view.
(In advance, I’d like to thank those extreme right wing conservative bloggers who link to my blog and ask people to post negative comments, it increases my readership and rating on Google, thanks guys!)
Since there are so many hateful things that former DJ, now Macleans writer, has said over the years, I’ll keep it one article per post to try to keep these manageable in size. Lets begin with “The future belongs to Islam” by Mark Steyn in Macleans Magazine. Steyn attempts to argue that Muslims are trying to take over world, leaving the “solution” open ended as if we don’t already know based on history what this type of argument and hate leads to. Here are some quotes from the article:
“The Muslim world has youth, numbers and global ambitions. The West is growing old and enfeebled, and lacks the will to rebuff those who would supplant it. It’s the end of the world as we’ve known it. An excerpt from ‘America Alone’.” (America Aline is a book written by Mark Steyn, don’t bother buying it, those who read it said that the whole conspiracy theory is featured in his Macleans articles)
“There is a correlation between the structural weaknesses of the social democratic state and the rise of a globalized Islam.”
“The basic demography explains, for example, the critical difference between the “war on terror” for Americans and Europeans: in the U.S., the war is something to be fought in the treacherous sands of the Sunni Triangle and the caves of the Hindu Kush; you go to faraway places and kill foreigners. But, in Europe, it’s a civil war.”
“By “geopolitical,” I mean that, if you think the United Nations and other international organizations are antipathetic to America now, wait a few years and see what kind of support you get from a semi-Islamified Europe.”
“If most of the available manpower’s Muslim, it’s actually a disadvantage.”
“The question for today’s Europe is whether the primary identity of their fastest-growing demographic is Muslim or Belgian, Muslim or Dutch, Muslim or French.”
In the quote above, Mark Steyn tries to create a distinction between being Belgian, Dutch and French and being Muslim, as if its not possible for people to be Belgian, Dutch, French and practice Islam. I don’t know a single Canadian who practices Islam that has an issue with that, although according to Steyn’s logic, he might have trouble accepting that concept.
In the quote bellow, Mark Steyn argues against tolerance, telling his readers that their “Islamic compatriots” are “experts” at “exploiting the “tolerance” of pluralist societies.” Mark Steyn clearly can’t stand multiculturalism, an idea based on tolerance because he thinks its being exploited by minorities. Here is the direct quote:
“In a few years, as millions of Muslim teenagers are entering their voting booths, some European countries will not be living formally under sharia, but — as much as parts of Nigeria, they will have reached an accommodation with their radicalized Islamic compatriots, who like many intolerant types are expert at exploiting the “tolerance” of pluralist societies.“
One of the more troubling statements is where he states that its only matter of “how bloody the transfer or real estate will be,” Mark Steyn falls short of calling for violence in return against this so called takeover but of coarse we know exactly where this type of thinking leads to. Here is the quote:
“But the difference is that on the Continent the successor population is already in place and the only question is how bloody the transfer of real estate will be.”
To finish making his argument, Mark Steyn uses the same old tactic used by anyone who wants to smear minorities, he finds one bad Muslim, Mullah Krekar, and quotes him here:
“Just look at the development within Europe, where the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes.” - Mullah Krekar
A couple of right wing bloggers wrote and wrote about how outraged they were that people would quote that part of Mark Steyn’s article, while those same bloggers seem to be in perfect agreement with the whole article that tries to make that same point, although in a more sophisticated way. I guess thats what blind loyalty gets you.
Btw, there are many bloggers who have been standing up against all hate propaganda such as Warren Kinsella, I encourage others to speak up as well and let me know so I can link to your blog.
Lets gets some facts out there. So called “Imam Mullah Krekar” who is quoted as if he represents Islam and Muslims and backs up Mark Steyn’s argument, is not only condemned by Muslims but is also being deported.
The fact is that Mullah Krekar is facing deportation from Norway and is suspected of being a founder of a group in Iraq that is accused of using tactics such as suicide bombers. This guy is clearly a bad apple and other Muslims in Norway agree.
In fact, fellow Muslim Tasawer Sharif called Mullah Krekar “a pest for all Muslims in Norway.” - source
Clearly Mullah Krakar does not speak for all Muslims, but by reading Mark Steyn’s article and his tiny cult-like following, you would never know that. They are happy to take one person’s comments and try to smear all Muslims with it, after all, according them most Muslims are essentially the same radical thinking future terrorists about to attack them. Perhaps these people need to get out more and meet real life Muslims.
After reading Mark Steyn’s comments I can’t help but think that his view of the world is the opposite of Canada. Canada is a multi-cultural society that preaches tolerance and respect towards other cultures and religions protected by our rights and freedoms. That’s what makes our country one of the best places in the world to live in and majority of Canadians agree. That is the reason why I am proud to be Canadian and thats is exactly why I speak up against this type of attack, there is something fundamentally wrong with what Steyn says.
Mark Steyn is certainly free to express his views within his constitutional rights, just as I am free to speak up against his views. I also don’t think Mark Steyn has crossed the legal line (although I think he is getting close) like Ernst Zundel (holocaust denier) of Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code, read more here, although I could be wrong. However, I think the danger in Mark Steyn’s ideology is that it begs the question, what if the majority of the population actually agreed with what Mark Steyn preaches? What is the “solution” to the demographics that Mark Steyn describes as the biggest problem? There was an interview done here where Steyn has suggested that there may be “darker forces” that would react in the form of deportation and banning religious symbols, leaving the entire question open ended. Unfortunately profiling, deportation, banning certain religions, hate, violence, etc. is exactly where this type of philosophy leads to, a world of intolerance and discrimination, I wonder if Steyn’s few supporters realize that.
You seriously going to rub it in his face…. This is like the third or perhaps fourth post I saw against Steyn’s beliefs :-)