I went to school and my teachers taught me to listen to other people’s views and be nice to girls. They told me that using violence was no way to solve problems. That was fine with me because I’m not that good at violence. I suppose this is because, at conception, my DNA was pulled from a gene pool that had already had many of the wild, criminally-inclined genes culled from it by centuries of a justice system that executed outlaws. This whole wheedling out process was aided by the more informal tendency of cooperative societies to ostracise the cheats in their midst. Thus criminals and cheats left fewer offspring than the law-abiding.
With my average European intelligence and law-abiding nature I am a reasonable fit for today’s western societies. I am basically the human equivalent of a Labrador dog: averagely bright and docile. There seem to be neither rogue wild genes in me that make me want to kill someone, nor rogue ideas in my head that might induce me to deviate from the liberal path set out for me by my educators in the 1960’s and 1970’s.
I think it is useful to be socialised in this way so that all of us are on the same page when it comes to our assumptions and morals. The alternative would be a land where everyone believed different things, had different values and were pleased and antagonised by different things. This sounds interesting to me but less harmonious than the society I now live in.
Yet there is something I don’t quite get about all this. Why, even as my teachers were moulding me into a boy with nice modern liberal views, were they simultaneously importing hundreds of thousands of people from countries where neither law and order, nor selection for intelligence, had prepared the people for life in a modern secular democracy? Many of these people came from agrarian societies in which being intelligent was no real advantage.
Of course Britain has plenty of its own own lawless louts who have slipped through the gene-culture coevolution net since law and order and ostracism are not perfect remedies to crime and violence. Even so, these wild British natives were manageable in number and since we are not allowed to simply ship them out and dump them on some rock in mid-Atlantic we are stuck with them.
What I don’t understand is why our elites didn’t imagine that some of the new arrivals from Pakistan and Somalia might be a little like our own knuckle-dragging thickoes. Might they not bring their archaic genomes and archaic beliefs with them? Did our elites believe that culture was everything and our liberal teachers and broadcasters were so convincing that not even the most fundamentalist Muslim could withstand their persuasive power?
If this was indeed their belief they have since been proven horribly wrong. Many Muslims, especially second and third generation, still prefer their barbarous 7th century Middle eastern desert morality to our own shiny modern one. Even worse, some of these Muslims are more than happy to give their archaic, testosterone-laden genomes free rein and resort to violence, just to show us how right they are and how wrong we are.
In the current situation I rather wish I was less of a Labrador and more of a wolf. All those centuries of selecting European men for urbanity and office work rather than brute force now appear more of a curse than a blessing. Still, things are as they are and we moderns tremble when confronted by any kind of danger, including angry Muslims. We react to being attacked with candlelit vigils and speeches from our leaders, claiming that being bombed makes us stronger and that terrorists will never divide us. They say that the main danger comes not from Muslims but from ourselves, from those among us who might take it into their foolish heads to do something other than link arms and change our Facebook avatars. In short, they might do something to anger the moderate Muslim community which is apparently always just an insult away from siding with the bombers and knife-wielding maniacs in their midst. And fighting back allegedly means the terrorists would have won or something.
The extreme cowards among us side with the Muslim bullies, hoping to ingratiate themselves and ensure their own personal safety at the expense of the society that raised them. The rest of us are lining up behind men who might have some idea of how to fix this mess that our elites have got us into but have no idea of how to get us out. Christ, they still don’t even see the connection between their policy of unselective mass immigration from the Third World, which the majority of British people was always against, and the presence of perhaps 23,000 potential Muslim terrorists in our midst that are overwhelming our security forces.
The men I am now pinning my hopes on are civilised yet have some of the toughness and bravery of our wilder ancestors. While Tommy Robinson might do poorly in a society full of Gender Studies graduates and canting racial equity consultants, history may nevertheless be moving in his direction. It has dawned on some of us that while we can safely do without another Will Self or Tracey Emin, men like Tommy Robinson, Gavin McInnes, Mark Steyn and Douglas Murray are indispensable.
So while most of us, for one reason or another, don’t or can’t personally confront the permanently aggrieved Muslim cuckoos and their progeny, nor their dimwitted bleeding-heart white liberal apologists, the least we can do is support rather than vilify these men who still possess a backbone.