We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Some things are objectively evil

Islamic culture gets bashed quite enough in the blogosphere without me sticking my oar in, but I wonder what the kumbayah singing disciples of multiculturalism think of this?

A strict Kurdish Muslim who slit his daughter’s throat after she started seeing a Christian boy has been jailed for life. Abdalla Yones, 48, tried to commit suicide after murdering 16-year-old Heshu and pleaded with the Old Bailey to pass a death sentence on him. Heshu was beaten for months before the “honour killing” and had planned to run away from home, begging her father to leave her alone.

The court heard Yones was “disgusted and distressed” by her relationship with an 18-year-old Lebanese student and launched a frenzied attack at their family home in Acton, west London. Heshu was stabbed 11 times and bled to death from her throat being cut.

Sentencing Yones, Judge Neil Denison said: “This is, on any view, a tragic story arising out of irreconcilable cultural differences between traditional Kurdish values and the values of western society.”

Or more correctly, a tragic story arising out of an Islamic Kurdish culture with no real notion of objective moral truth beyond what they have been told is written in some book and a Western one which at least imperfectly aspires to find such a thing.

All cultures have problems, flaws and idiocies but that does not therefore mean all cultures are equal. When Islamic culture is not tempered by secular influences, it is particularly prone to produce monstrous crimes like this one. Not that irrational secular creeds cannot produce evils aplenty (such as fascism and other forms of socialism), but at least most strains of Western Christianity and Judaism have had their more demented fundamentalist edges worn off by centuries of secularism.

Brave individuals can use reason to transcend the confines of their culture, but all cultures are not the same and I do so wish some people would stop pretending otherwise.

57 comments to Some things are objectively evil

  • George Peery

    Perry, this isn’t just a matter or “Islamic Kurdish culture“. This honour-killing business appears to be deeply ingrained, not only throughout Islamic countries, but even in Islamic families living in the West.

    For all but a few dogmatic multicultural Westerners, honour-killing is outrageous and unfathomable. But I have little confidence that “our” sensibilities will have much effect, in the near-term, on Muslims families living in the West.

    What we in the West must do, at the very least, is to insist that the liberal regard for human life be absolutely respected within our borders. There can be no exceptions. Murder is murder.

  • Dan McWiggins

    Just recently I had a chance to spend several hours with a very intelligent young lady from the UAE who had, quite literally, escaped from there to marry an American professor. They’ve been married several years now. As far as she is concerned, she never wants to see the Arabian Peninsula again. While she definitely sees problems with the way women live in the West, she felt that the freedom of Western women to make their own mistakes far outweighed any benefits provided by the supposed protections granted to women by Muslim cultures.

  • Guy Herbert

    “Islamic” is just an excuse here.

    Ignorant people from Islamic countries don’t separate Islamic injunctions from their own brutal traditions, and so Islam gets the blame unfairly sometimes. It can be fairly blamed for some things, but not this. It does have the misfortune to coincide geographically with some of the world’s nastiest extant cultures, on which it has historicaly been a moderating, positive influence.

  • Eamon Brennan

    Well said Guy

    I am sure you are all aware of the charming Irish habit of, up until recently, selling young women into slavery for getting pregnant or just being “difficult”.

    Those Catholics, eh.

    Eamon

  • cj

    Not to be flippant, but one wonders what would have been the UK response if she’d defended herself with a gun.

    Perhaps she’d be viewed as a “potential threat to Islamic fundamentalists bent on honor killing?” and face trial and a prison sentence?

    Ah, moral relativism.

    Well, thank goodness THIS case is cut and dry (at least for the time being).

  • Jonathan L

    This seems to be an instance of immigrants being more “traditional” than their compatriots back home. Such honour killings happen fairly regularly in the East of Turkey, but much less regularly amongst the same Kurdish people who have moved to the cities.

    Immigrants in a totally alien culture seem to cling more strongly to the more extreme parts of their culture than if they are assimilated into a more modern form of their own culture in cities back home.

    Guy says:
    Ignorant people from Islamic countries don’t separate Islamic injunctions from their own brutal traditions

    Their religion is just part of what they do, who they are. Without any thinking on their part about what being a muslim means to them, they can and do behave in ways that are strictly forbidden by their own religion.

    One of the biggest benefits of secularism is that it has forced believers to question their beliefs, leading to a decline in unthinking adherence to rules. As thinking people are more difficult to control, this means greater liberty and less tyranny of the religious and political elite.

  • Mike James

    I don’t believe in using a double standard, which seems to be the heart and soul of multiculturalism.

    In the instance of a father being upset at his daughter’s choice of boyfriend, I use my standard. If the vicious brute simply must dictate whom his child may love, and doesn’t like her choice, and feels like hurting someone over it, I am at a loss to see the honor in committing violence against a woman or girl.

    How impressive is that? An honest-to-God man would tell the kid if he came around his daughter any more, he would kick his ass, and back up his words with action, if necessary. Only an utter coward takes the safe route, and seeks out a woman or girl to get rough with. And this sort of deplorable behavior seems to be commonly accepted in quite an extensive part of a certain culture. What a thundering herd of impotent bullies.

    I might as well note here that I would never consider violence to be an acceptable means of expressing my displeasure with this sort of thing. Had I a daughter, the worst she would conceivably have to endure would be a flat statement that I didn’t like him, didn’t think she made a wise choice, and to not bring the little bastard around my house. That’s all.

    A man fights other men, not women.

  • Carole

    Apparently, he beat up and kicked his 16 year old daughter on many occasions for dating a Christian. She wrote him a note saying something along the lines of “Hey, dad, for an older man you pack quite a punch and a good kick.”

    What on earth was he doing living in our society, with his rigid disapproval of it? And how come he gets to disapprove of us and our values, but we’re not supposed to disapprove of him and his “values”? Too bad his little girl didn’t go to the police or a native British neighbour or teacher and report this bigoted, primitive bastard. She probably had too much of a sense of family “honour”. I hope he finds the means to off himself in the klink, or that some kindly co-inmate lends him a helping hand.

  • JayN

    “irreconcilable cultural differences”, is not a strong statement in my view.

    This guy, in order to maintain the honour of his family slit his daughters throat and stabbed her repeatedly, hard enough that the blade entered through the front and exited at the rear “something like eleven times” according to the policeman they interviewed on the news last night.

    I think the Judge should have said “This is a tragic story, caused by adherence to a Kurdish tradition, which can be allowed no place in British society .”

    Then they should have found a way to publicly humiliate him, destroy his ‘honour’ in front of the world.

  • Kodiak

    Perry,

    “Honour killing” which should be renamed “dishonour killing” as it is unmistakably & cowardly targeted against the physically weakest ones & the precious ones who bear lives within their bosoms –ie: the women, was rightly claimed to be traditional Kurdish values by Judge Denison. Although those contemptible values are by no means the privilege of the Kurds (you can find such horrifying instances of “human” backwardness within the Arabomuslim galaxy), it is not extolled nor recommended by the coran.

    When Islamic culture is not tempered by secular influences, it is particularly prone to produce monstrous crimes like this one.
    I may be wrong, but I suspect some secular influences of a different sort than ours to cause family “fathers” (aided by “sons” & “uncles”) to deny humaneness to their female offspring. Such failing “fathers” grant themselves the right to deal with Human lives like they would with camel lives. I have the feeling this is more typical of an archetypal male bond or of some ancient patriarchate which are illustrated & preceded by the irascible & castigating god of the bible -a pre-Muslim book, or by the father-son dichotomy including Noah, Abraham & tutti quanti. In other words, their secularism is more a relic from a primitive past than something truly coined by Islam.

    It goes without saying that Muslim, Mosque-going young ladies are the very ones that could tell the difference between their faith & this appalling, enraging mentality emblematic of those who absolutely deserve to be denied to be called “men”.

  • Kodiak

    And I agree with George Peery: What we in the West must do, at the very least, is to insist that the liberal regard for human life be absolutely respected within our borders. There can be no exceptions. Murder is murder.

    This filthy coward should be sentenced to life imprisonment with NO possibility of sentence reducing. He should also be immediately deprived of civic rights, property rights & family rights: justice should claim he wasn’t the father of anyone.

  • The most telling comment above is Carole’s “What on earth was he doing living in our society, with his rigid disapproval of it?” He was here, I suppose, because he wanted a share of our wealth. The liberties and laws that underpin that wealth, however, he rejected in toto because they are anathema to his cultural and religious traditions.

    This is a wider question than one man whose bestiality is so shocking. The cultural and religious traditions of the non-Christian, non-Jewish middle east – and Pakistan – cannot be melded with western values. The liberal expectation is otherwise, namely that second generation immigrants from these areas will reject the most rigid aspects of their heritage. I would like to see some research on this. But I suspect it is a very mixed picture indeed.

    In any case, there are other questions about Islaam and its role in multiculturalism in Britain. Extremism is one, as seen in the degree of sympathy for AQ, the shoe bomber, the Guantanamo captives, the Imam recently jailed for hate speech, suicide bombers in Israel etc. Racial tension is another, as evinced most recently by the 2001 riots in the north. Our tendency is to ignore these issue in the hope that everything will smooth itself out and be OK. On this I am deeply sceptical.

  • Kodiak

    And sorry for reposting. That ain’t enough. Far from it. The more I think about that son of a stinking dog, the more I get angry against myself. That this rotten ordure could have thought he could trample underfoot IN OUR COUNTRIES AND WITH TOTAL IMPUNITY
    1/ what we cherish most –that is, not only the absolute equality between women & men but also the self-explaining, imperative, invaluable, most sophisticated privilege AND duty we, the men, have towards the women, ie: respecting, considering & protecting our girl-friends, wives, daughters & mothers,
    and
    2/ what is our common feature regardless our countries, faiths, politics, wealth etc,
    makes me feel hugely responsible for the dreadful fate of this innocent poor young girl.

    As Carole, I think this primitive monkey should be thrown in the most fearsome prison of the UK (with all the rapists, paedophiles & children-beaters) & should get his daily beating-up by the most dangerous thugs of your kingdom.

    This is still too lenient. One should also the cut the balls of this shitty coward & drop them to a bunch of dogs. Then he -& his demented would-be emulators- would at last realise they’d bring systematic ban from manhood upon themselves, without being granted the privilege to be a woman either.

    Even animals don’t kill their little ones!

  • Jonathan L

    Guessedworker says:

    The liberal expectation is otherwise, namely that second generation immigrants from these areas will reject the most rigid aspects of their heritage. I would like to see some research on this. But I suspect it is a very mixed picture indeed.

    I think you are very right in this respect. The liberal view is sometimes right. It was this poor girls wish to assimilate herself into the western culture that her father disapproved of. At the same time there are many examples of immigrants whose response to a new culture is the opposite.

    Its sad that so many mouth platitudes about multiculturalism whilst ignoring those facets of other cultures that are totally unacceptable. The only point of multiculturalism is this, respect for the individual, freedom for everyone to live their lives the way that they choose. Within such a framework it is possible to be strongly critical of elements of different cultures without disrespect or racism.

    The multiculturalists make the grave mistake of thinking that there is something intrinsically good in all cultures so to try to change them is wrong. Even if true this is irrelevant. As long as someone’s beliefs and actions do not impinge on the freedom of another they can do what they like. All other actions are not acceptable, whether they represent some obscure or “other” culture or not, they are simply immoral.

  • Well no, some animals do eat their young.

    Which is what this male person is, an animal. He is not a human, he is an animal with a voicebox.

  • Joe

    Its rare that I agree with Kodiak – but in this case he has said something that I do agree with…

    This was a crime was cowardly.

    This coward was someone who couldn’t stand to see someone he “owned” behaving outside of his control.

    That happens in all cultures… its just that some cultures make it acceptable in different forms.

    It doesn’t matter what culture you come from – the belief that someone can have TOTAL control of someone elses actions is the idea that this man was acting on… He didn’t give a damn about his daughter- what he was concerned about was his standing among his friends and family.

    Islam is just the excuse he used to commit his crime.

    With regards to assimilation…
    This cowards lack of assimilation isn’t down to any problem of inability to assimilate… its down to the lack of requirement to assimilate into western culture and accept western cultures mores.

    Current politically correct thinking here tries to break up our own western culture by forcing us to accept foreign cultures as pre-eminent within our western society. His culture is alive and well and being promoted here as a minority superculture within our own culture …forcing western culture(s) to take second or third place if western culture even bothers to show its face at all!

  • Rob Read

    Yet another example of the only thing the god of Diversity brings us.

    The diversity of Quality.

  • Tregagle

    There seem to be quite a number of these murders executed in the name of family honour in the UK.

    There is also extensive female genital mutilation of babies, widely associated with the Islamic world but now widely practiced in this country. Both crimes are more associated with custom among middle Eastern nations, rather than the Koran, although the Koran is extremely violent and inhuman.

    My concern is less with these mentally deranged criminals than with UK authorities that seem so enlightened and multicultural in their approach to these crimes in our country. Where is the much trumpeted minister for women, and legislation regarding these customs. Where is Lord Phillips and the CRE and their views on screening out immigrants with these criminal habits? Why are these immigrants not required to undergo reeducation and to swear loyalty and obedience to the law. Why was a Kurd with these views not reported by his Immam or co-religionists? What plans do social services have to monitor susceptible immigrant populations in the UK ?
    I am uneasy also about the remarks of the judge in this case whose only observations seem to have been that this murder was down to cultural differences. So is cannibalism. Some expression of horror might have been in order.
    These are questions which should be asked.

  • Carole

    Tregagle – Right on!

    The Beeb http://www.bbc.co.uk/news reports today that last year there were 12 “honour” murders in Britain, six of them in London, according to Scotland Yard. An Asian spokesman with his head screwed on said the figure is really higher, but that many of the victims are taken abroad to be murdered. He also said it is often a crime undertaken with the complicity of the entire family.

    The Beeb says it is estimated that there are 13 “honour” murders throughout the world every single day. That the socialist multiculturalists have caused some of this seep into Britain is deeply repulsive.

  • Charles Copeland

    Why all this bullshit about honor killings being such an evil and cowardly crime? After all, in executing his profligate daughter Abdalla Yones was just following the dictates of a pious Muslim’s conscience. As far as most Muslims are concerned, he is no doubt a hero of our time — a kind of anti-Rushdie of the 21st century.

    Read all about it in the Koran, Sura 5.033:
    The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter… “.

    Moderate Islam – a contradiction in terms.

  • A_t

    Charles Copeland, you are a hatemonger. I can find no other word suitable. Where does this great anti-muslim hatred of yours come from? Why generalise from one man from a backwards country to a worldwide diverse group of people? And if a moderate Muslim is a contradiction in terms, how come I’ve had several friends who would describe themselves as such, & got on with them fine?

    And all you idiots going “it’s the socialist multiculturalists’ fault”… umm… i don’t think many of them are in favour of honour killings. If anything, it’s more likely to be “socialist multiculturalists” who, as members of Amnesty etc., will have been protesting about such things for years while governments complacently looked on, provided commercial interests weren’t interfered with. Just because you think it’s cool to live with several cultures side by side doesn’t mean you drop your absolute moral standards.

    Plus, it’s shouldn’t be about rejecting someone’s entire culture; just *damn* firmly saying “these things are NOT acceptable here”, which condemning the man to a lengthy (& hopefully f**ing unpleasant) prison sentance does. It doesn’t mean we have to “indoctrinate” people into living like “proper” brits or Westerners, whatever the hell that means… just make it very clear what is & is not acceptable. I think you’d find once you got rid of the unsavoury elements of most cultures, you’d still be left with a lot of distinctive things; why ask people to give them up? Plus, if you tell someone their entire culture is bankrupt, you’re probably heading straight for conflict, as you’re basically condemning a core part of them; then what chances do you have of convincing them to change? On the other hand, if you explain which aspects are unacceptable to you and why, there’s room for change without conflict.

    That’s just my view, & you’re welcome to disagree (as plenty of you doubtless will… and before you even go there, yes, i’ve read Ann Coulter’s ridiculous “religion of peace” rants, & no, you won’t convince me).

  • This is a vile and gruesome crime committed by a person who was quite obviously motivated by the hateful dogmas of social conservatism. Our ‘socially conservative’ friends here should admit that this crime was committed by one of their number. It is their dogmas that this man has traduced, not those of the socially liberal.

  • Carole

    A_T – I cannot speak for Mr Copeland, but regarding my own post, I wittingly used the term ‘socialist multiculturalists’ in a perjorative sense because these are the people who think we have to accept primitive behaviour in all its wondrous diversity and who wouldn’t dream of imposing Western values on immigrants because that would mean we were putting a superior value on our own culture. Yes, condemning this bigot to prison will teach him that we will not tolerate this behaviour, but it’s too late. A 16 year old girl has died in horrific circumstances by her own father’s hand. He should have been forced to understand the limitations of British tolerance before, regardless of the exquisite sensibilities of the socialist multiculturalists.

  • Charles Copeland

    A_t writes:
    Charles Copeland, you are a hatemonger. I can find no other word suitable. Where does this great anti-muslim hatred of yours come from?“.

    Let’s add a few more variants:

    Where does this great anti-Communist hatred of yours come from?“.

    Where does this great anti-Nazi hatred of yours come from?“.

    Well, the ‘hatred’ comes from the mass murder committed, in the not so distant past, by Muslims, Commies, and Nazis. Besides, it is not a question of hating individual Muslims, Nazis and Commies, but of detesting the ideology that inspires their crimes.

    No doubt there are ‘moderate Muslims’ galore, but they certainly have been keeping a low profile, perhaps out of fear of what happens to moderates in the Muslim community — they get the Rushdie treatment. Anybody know of a ‘Moderate Muslim’ website?

    BTW, I agree that Ann Coulter is somewhat on the low-life side — but she certainly is spot on in ridiculing the garbage about Islam being a ‘religion of peace’. Anyone who believes that will believe anything — even that George Bush has not been lobotomised.

  • Harry Powell

    Tregagle, I can’t help thinking that you are overstating your case there. Mr. Yones was arrested, tried, and convicted for his crime. What is more he received the highest sentence available to the courts – life. Where is the official approval there? As Carole notes many of the victims of this crime are taken abroad, presumably to countries where there truly is tacit support from the authorities and a studied blindness by the police for such horrific acts. The pity of this case is that Heshu Yones’s coreligionists did not speak up for her, and that the media have conspired in that silence for fear of being thought racist.

  • Cydonia

    Carole:

    “He should have been forced to understand the limitations of British tolerance before, regardless of the exquisite sensibilities of the socialist multiculturalists.”

    How precisely?

  • Johnathan

    Another point which strikes me on this awful affair is the assumption on the part of the father that his daughter was his own personal property. In many ways this is a common way of thinking in many different cultures, including the West. The libertarian idea of children’s rights is still regarded as eccentric by many folk, even among those who think of themselves as enlightened.

    I kind of agree wth A_T. I don’t think moral relativism is the preserve of socialism. It is much wider than that.

  • Far be it for me to join the Kumbayah chorus but what’s going on here is conflation.

    “Honour” killing is despicable and wrong and the standard of law in any country should be “culture-blind” i.e. it should never be possible to excuse any crime on grounds of cultural background. But it is a huge stretch to denigrate Islam per se on these grounds. Honour killing is a despicable tradition from backward peasant/serf/tribal societies and most likely predates Islam. If their ancestors had been converted to some other religion instead of Islam you’d probably still see the same phenomenon.

    I don’t mean this as a blanket argument against any criticism of Islam. There are valid critiques of the political nature of Islam as interpreted by many but “Honour” killing is a red herring. It is the “honour” of the tribe which “demands” this action not the Koran.

    A more relevant conslusion to draw from this is the range of reactions to those who would flout their relevant ethnic community norms. The lesson here is not necessarily for the “social multiculturalists” but the extent to which ethnic communities police conformism from within and the dangers of too much “ethnic pride”. In some “communities” there is disapproval for individuals who don’t act the way their community demands. The mild end of the scale is the derision heaped on ‘Oreos’ (black outside, white inside) or Jews who “marry out”. “Honour” killing represents the extreme end of the scale – the dark side of “ethnic pride”.

  • Joe

    Paul Coulam, Wow – you really nurture a hatred of this demon you call “social conservatism”.

    Have you put any limits on it?

    I’m asking because I cannot imagine how any person who lives within a social environment can avoid being socially conservative – without destroying it or themselves… It kind of comes with the territory.

    I don’t understand how anyone can avoid being a social conservative…surely they would have to change their ideals everyday, and continuously change cultures and families to avoid becoming part of the “conserve” of one or other?

  • A_t

    pheew… good to know some people round here think beyond “hah! muslim! bad!”.

    Carole, you imply that “socialist multiculturalists” would condone this killing…. show me ONE such person please. I think you’re working off images of lefty bogeymen you have in your head, rather than any kind of recognisable reality.

    The recent posts are so much more on the money; multiculturalism has nowt to do with this; it’s a combination of racial/tribal pride & social conservatism that fuelled this idiot father. ‘Socialists’, ‘lefties’ etc. are only responsable for allowing him to enter the country, & thus for allowing his daughter to be “corrupted”. I suppose you could argue that, had he never been allowed to come here, his daughter would still be alive, but only because she would probably never have questioned her role as a chattel; a posession like a goat or a bale of hay. I can guarantee you that for every young woman murdered by her family, there are hundreds, probably thousands, who’ve escaped the servitude that their ‘mother’ cultures would have imposed upon them. What’s more, if they’re still in touch with their families back home, the meme will spread. That’s a product of “lefty multiculturalism” too; would you deny these women their freedoms?

    Furthermore, how else do you propose to spread our more enlightened way of life if not by the mingling of cultures? By adopting isolationist policies & announcing that peoples’ religions are wrong & their cultures sick perhaps? Good luck.

  • Paul Coulam,

    Much as I am champing at the bit to chop the hands and feet off a few unbelievers (or believers or anybody, really) I think you might have gone a bit overboard about us social conservatives. Do you by any chance belong to some threatened minority? Are you an Islaamic swinger, for instance? I can see that might cause a degree of anxiety about the weapons concealed about the person of Ann Widdecombe, for example. Well, if it helps I can assure you that Ann hasn’t committed any honour killings since that nasty business with Michael Howard. I think you’re fairly safe.

  • Carole

    Cydonia, That is a fair question.

    First, very basic and thin end of the wedge, we shouldn’t have allowed our principles regarding methods of slaughtering animals to have been massaged by political correctness in the name of “religion”. The law is the law, and this surrender was a clear signal that that is not necessarily so. One law for the British and another law to accommodate the immigrants. So already, they saw themselves as a special case.

    The excuses constantly trundled out by the multiculturalists for primitive behaviour should have been dismissed out of hand. (For one thing, doesn’t the left realise how patronising it is to treat people like irresponsible minors? That is true racism.) There should be a language requirement. As it is, unexposed to the national culture except as observers rather than participants, they remain in little pockets of ignorance.

    It should have been explained with great clarity that they are not a class apart and that they will be expected to fit in to the society they have chosen to spend money and ingenuity getting into. As it is, people like this foul daughter murderer have been encouraged by the left to think they get a free pass because they’re helpless victims of their “culture”.

    That old saying, “When in Rome …” promotes peace and easy social relations all round. We should make it clear that we require assimilation from people we allow in. The left’s “multiculturalism” has held people back. I have no figures to back me, but my instinct tells me that people who have assimilated are far happier, lead more balanced lives and are more confident and achieving than people stuck in giant pockets of victimhood. Certainly, no one would dream of trying to prevent people keeping their own culture alive, but that should be alongside the host culture. The host culture must be the dominant one.

  • Kodiak

    A_t + Frank McGahon,

    100% with you.

    Dishonour killing has more to do with the deep-rooted primitiveness typical of some loathsome, ball-less cowards than anything close to a culture or a fortiori any ideology conveniently designed as “multiculturalist socialism”.

    True Muslims have nothing to do with dishonour killings. Neither have socialists, communists or lefties.

    The only ones who are responsible of this atrocity, which is well beyond a “simple” murder, are each of us. We should lobby to get a propper, terrifying law AT ONCE that would bring fear from girls’ side back to those unmanly, coward, despicable wastes.

  • Joe,

    Your argument does not make sense. Perhaps you should think about what you have written. You have turned ‘social conservatism’ into a tautology.

  • Charles Copeland

    Keeping up with the Yones’s

    Frank McGahon writes:
    In some “communities” there is disapproval for individuals who don’t act the way their community demands.“.

    Not in some communities — rather, in all communities. Inter alia, socialisation is about putting pressure on people to comply with the values of their community. Compliance with specific values is what communities are about.

    From a libertarian perspective, all this is strictly speaking nobody else’s business as long as physical coercion does not play a role. For example, if Orthodox Jewish parents have a “sitting shivah” session when their daughter marries a gentile, well that’s their business, even if it’s not my cup of tea. Ditto for private racial or facial preferences; ditto for whether my community worships Allah or recommends shunning the company of homosexuals or whatever. From the political angle there is no dark side to ‘ethnic pride’ or any other pride at all as long as it merely involves exercising the freedom to mind one’s own business.

    At any rate, Yones-bashing is a bit if a turkey shoot — we’re all merely labouring the obvious and demonstrating how enlightened we are by comparison with the savages and barbarians whose favourite pastime is genital mutilation. What is more insidious than the occasional Kurd world crime committed by a devout and sincere Moslem is the erosion of negative rights on the part of the liberal establishment — and in particular the right to discriminate as much as one chooses in the private domain. That is a true libertarian issue — as regards Yones, I presume that left and right in our society see more or less eye to eye anyhow.

  • Guessedworker,

    I see that you and Joe, the Hinge and Bracket of the ‘social conservative’ apologists, do not want to take responsibility for the murders of the innocent commited in the name of your dogma. Ann Widdecombe and her fellow travellers provide the ideological mood music for thousands of gay bashings and racially motivated attacks that occur every year. Her moral (if not legal) culpability for these persecutions of the innocent are very great indeed.

  • A_t

    Carole, if the animal slaughtering thing’s the best you can come up with, you’re on pretty shaky ground. I’d hazard a guess that many libertarians rue the UK’s current rules about the slaughter of animals anyway (in theory, as far as i understand it, a farmer is no longer allowed to just slaughter a cow/pig on their own farm, which seems ridiculous). But if you really want a justification of this particular exception, well… seeing as most ethnic Europeans couldn’t give a damn how their animals are slaughtered, well… might as well make it as safe (& humane? maybe, tho’ you’d suspect a cow killed suddenly in familiar circumstances is probably less disturbed than one transported to an unfamiliar blood-stinking slaughterhouse in an overcrowded truck) as possible. On the other hand, there are sound (within the context of their belief system) philosophical reasons behind the manner in which animals are slaughtered for Muslims, which make sense even to this cynical atheist; it’s certainly not a clear-cut case of “this is more wrong than that”, *unlike* murdering daughters or keeping them in servitude.

    As for your prescriptive “host culture” social ideas, perhaps you’d like to impose them on the sons & daughters of everyone in the country too? What if a young person becomes a punk or an anarchist, rejecting much of the “host culture”… would you attempt to prevent them from doing so? I live quite happily around people who are culturally “assimilated” to various degrees, & have no trouble with that; for a start, even if i thought the cultural uniformity you suggest was desirable, I have no idea how you’d go about imposing it, aside from by force.

    Anyway, I strongly believe that the valuable aspects of our culture get adopted anyway, as they’re dominant memes, so I don’t worry too much about pushing people into it; decisions are only really valid if made voluntarily, and most immigrants, or their children, end up taking the best aspects of UK life to heart.

  • steph

    There is a relevant story about the British suppression of the Hindu practice of widow burning under the Raj. Supposedly when the governor issued his edict that widow burning would no longer be tolerated, a groop of Indians came to him and complained that he was suppressing their religious liberty and that burning widows on funeral pires was their national tradition. The general in question supposedly reply, “We to have a national custom, when men burn women to death we hang them. So you can build your funeral pire, beside it my men will build a gallows. You can carry out your national custom and then we shall carry out ours.”

  • A-t

    I’ll go most of the way with you there. A choice between multi-culturalism and full assimilation is no choice for peoples who naturally cleave to their cultural and religious heritage and racial identity. However, the essentially passive role that you assign to host culture, whereby “the valuable aspects … get adapted anyway”, is evidently far from foolproof. Mr Yones surely proves that, and is scarcely alone. As I stated earlier, I would like to see some serious research done in this area of Islaamic assimability. Without it I have the feeling that we are all shhoting at straw men.

    Paul,

    I don’t have any UK figures to hand on homosexual beatings or racial attacks. However, there is quite a bit of factual evidence on inter-racial strife available from American sources. For example, 98% of inter-racial rapes are black male on white female. Analysis of US Victimisation Studies show a massive weighting towards black violence.

    I am sorry, but you do not know what you are talking about.

  • Joe

    Paul – Sorry but, much as you want me too – I just can’t accept responsibility for this girl’s murder… mainly because her father did it muderously with a knife.

    Nor can I accept responsibility for other peoples ideologies – for the same reason – their ideologies are their responsibility – not mine.

    If your conscience weighs heavy for not doing something – then sort out what you can do personally- dont pass the buck.

    Its no use trying to give it to me – Buck carrying is against my religion :)

  • linden

    Yes, honor killing most probably predates Islam. And was most likely common in many cultures several centuries ago; however, the Islamic world is the last holdout of this practice. Pointing this out is not racism. Pointing out that honor killings are common as well as cultural norms in many Islamic countries is not racism. Pointing out that they use the Koran to justify their behavior is not racism as as well. It’s being honest. Being worried about the ability of Muslims to assimilate is not racism either. This case and others in Western countries show how difficult it is and that it is a real problem.

    It doesn’t matter what your religion is, or what your skin color is, or how you dress and the food you eat, what matters is what you believe. Do you believe in equality, democracy, freedom of expression and speech, the separation of Church and State, human rights? These are Western values. If you have no intention of taking these values to heart, don’t come here.

    A_t, this is what I believe is meant by “”host culture” social ideas” because these ARE the ideas of the host culture. You’re more than welcome to be a punk or an anarchist, just don’t murder or mutilate your daughters’ genitals or attempt to undermine those values.

  • Carole

    No, A_T, animal slaughter is not the best I can come up with, but it’s better than you credit. It was the first slippage in British law to accommodate immigrants who had fought tooth and nail and money to get into the country. We should not have started manipulating our laws, which have been discussed and voted for in Parliament by individuals voted in by the electorate, to accommodate people from less civilised societies – or any other foreigners. It’s the manipulation of the law, I object to, as I’m sure you realise.

    I couldn’t care less if some kid wants to be a punk, an anarchist, a Raelian, or a surfer or anything else – and that includes a British Muslim kid who wants to dye her hair green and get her nose, ears, lips and whatever else pierced with crescent moon metalware. They understand the culture they’re rebelling against and good luck to them and I hope they have fun.

    Muslim immigrants spent a lot of money and energy getting in. We offered them refuge. They owe us the duty of guest to host. Respect our house. They must expect to give up something in order to get something. They must understand that we gain nothing from offering our hospitality. They get our laws and our liberties. They must learn our language and our ways and make an effort to fit in. The multicultural socialist strain encourages separatism, dependency and resentment.

  • I think that most of you have missed the point of Perry’s article. Although Yones committed a terrible crime what Perry was writing about was the circumstances that made it possible. The culprit is the multiculturalist agenda – it was possible for him to live in the UK for 10 years without having to learn to speak English.

    If assimilation is regarded as imperialism, can we really be surprised when people from a primitive culture in our midst act in a primitive fashion?

    Looking at the situation from his perspective, isolated and confused, his primitive mind could not handle his world as he knew it falling apart in the shape of his own daughter consorting with the ‘enemy’ of his culture and religion.

  • Kodiak

    Gabriel Syme,

    No no no no no no no no no no no no no & no again!

    Nobody has missed any point.

    Being a murderer, being worse than a paedophile has nothing to do with speaking English, assimilation & even less with the multiculturalist agenda.

    You are putting ideology when it’s all about Human dignity & self-ownership. You don’t need a guru to behave like a father. You can be totally unassimilated & be an stalwart, loving father.

  • Carole

    Dammit, Gabriel, *I* didn’t miss Perry’s point and have been defending it almost single handed over the life of this thread! I’ve had rotten tomatoes thrown at me for saying the “multicultural” agenda is destructive – both to the host society and the people who have arrived into it.

  • linden

    Being a ‘stalwart, loving father’ has nothing to do with ‘human dignity and self-ownership’. You can still love your daughter and consider her your property. People who come from a society that teaches that women are property and have no voice in their own fate need to be assimilated. There is no getting around this. We’ve seen what happens otherwise: death and misery.

  • linden

    It is not about the act itself. Anyone can murder someone else. The problem is what motivated his behavior. This motivation was that his property was not obeying him. Envisioning your daughter as a slave is completely antithetical to any notion of human rights or dignity. It has taken the West hundreds of years to purge such standards of conduct from its midst. We should not be tolerating it.

  • Kodiak

    linden,

    No, it’s too easy.

    OK they may be viewing their daughters as properties. But do you burn your house because you lost the keys?

  • linden

    “OK they may be viewing their daughters as properties. But do you burn your house because you lost the keys?”

    On what planet is this statement supposed to make any sense? I need a little more help. Of course you shouldn’t burn down your house if you lose the keys. Of course, in their culture, it is shameful if you don’t burn down a house you don’t even own. I am uncomfortable being asked to equate women with houses.

  • Kodiak

    linden,

    Sorry, my statement wasn’t clear.

    I am uncomfortable being asked to equate women with houses >>> so am I, linden!

    But you said: You can still love your daughter and consider her your property.

    If you lost the key to your daughter’s heart (you won’t have her happiness), are you entitled to kill her even if she belongs to you as your house does?

  • Carole: Apologies, indeed you got the point and did get some sh** thrown your way. Thanks for keeping the front open. :-)

  • linden

    “If you lost the key to your daughter’s heart (you won’t have her happiness), are you entitled to kill her even if she belongs to you as your house does?”
    This still makes no sense.

    If you asked that man whether he loved his daughter, I don’t doubt he’d say yes. He loved her and his actions reveal that he believed her to be his property at the same time.

  • Ryan Waxx

    Gabriel touches upon a point that bears repeating:

    Its not enough to say “look, Islam (radical or not)did not invent honor killings, so you may not blame radical Islam for them.”

    The question is, did radical Islam pick up those beliefs, and does it now spread them?

    One test of the question might be if states setting up Islamic Law farily consistantly excuse honor killings. Another test might be if British honor killing is just as common (or rare) among non-Islamic Kurds as Islamic ones.

    Radical Islam may be a carrier of that disease, and the isolation multiculturalism encourages (no, enshrines!) may protect radical populations from the infux of new, liberal (in the original sense) ideas.

    As for the english language? We won’t and can’t require somone to be open to new ideas. But we CAN demand they develop the ability to hear them, and to demand they not seal their children off liguistically from the rest of the society they are a part of.

  • Contra Positive

    He should be forced to copulate with a syphilitic pig. And then buried for all eternity in the spoon position with that very same pig. But before that, he should be rendered incontinent by the music of Metallica. Just kidding. The real culprit here is the US support for Saddam. Now I’m really just kidding.

  • Johnathan Pearce

    As I said above, the real problem is that in many cultures, including our own, the notion that children have rights of self-ownership has still not taken as deep a hold is it ought. What this case has done has been to shed light on that fact to a gruesome degree.

    A lot of the heat comes from the fact that radical Islam seems to be one of the prime examples of tribalist/social conservative behaviours in this regard. If it offends those with delicate sensibilities to point that fact out, too bad.

    I see Kodiak used the expression “self ownership”in an above comment. Good grief, he is learning!

  • A_t

    ” Do you believe in equality, democracy, freedom of expression and speech, the separation of Church and State, human rights? These are Western values. If you have no intention of taking these values to heart, don’t come here.”

    …so we have the right to demand things of foreigners which many of our own people don’t believe in? (particularly the church/state thing, in the context of modern-day USA)… you’re asking these immigrants to live up to a utopian *ideal* of what our society’s about. That’s not to say that no-one believes in these things, or even that less than a majority believe them… just that it seems a tad hypocritical, & these beliefs are not necessary for full integration into Western societies.

    The essential things, in this case are “your children are not your property”, and “women are equal to men”, & to be honest, it’s not necessary to *believe* these things; plenty westerners don’t… just to understand that these are the rules of the land, & you must not fuck around with them.

  • Johnathan,

    I am very sorry to see that you’re no better informed about social conservatism than your hyper-sensitive book-seller friend.

    This sad business is about the murder of a girl by the one man who, above all others, should have been her protector. Social conservatism in a western culture is centred first and foremost on investing in our children’s care. Social liberalism is not. A high investment in childcare, as I have said before, accords with our evolutionary biology and psychology. Social liberalism does not.

    Is perfectly obvious that you haven’t thought this through because the reductionism is your argument is currently quite breathtaking. Do give it a try.