A Temporary Political Grouping

The next installment in the theme I launched in my previous post has been handily provided by Bewick, an English reader who left a comment on Pat Condell’s latest video.

I’ve edited his text slightly for punctuation and clarity:

If I had the skill I would send this to every UK and European MP.

Perhaps more practically —

Public opponents of Islamism are appearing in many European Countries. Wilders , ESW, Marine Le Pen, Tommy Robinson, the German banker [Thilo Sarrazin], Lars Hedegaard, Susanne Winter. That covers just six of the countries of the EU.

Below the parapet I would guess that there are many more who are simply too scared to say what they think.

So far every grouping is following its own agenda. They will, apart from this one issue, differ on many fronts.

Attempts have been made to form a single group, but so far with little success.

As the unions so often say: “United we stand, divided we fall.” It is high time that a temporary political grouping on the single issue of Islamisation is formed to defeat this cancer. All groups can return to their own wider agendas once the main danger has been dealt with — that is with the restoration of the right to free speech and the danger of Islam with which we are all threatened. Wilders looks to have started something, but so did the EDL, whose stance has now been copied in some countries.

All should now combine on the one issue. If polls are to be believed there will be a majority, Europe-wide, public support. The politicians will have no choice but to respond or be deposed.

Am I proposing popular revolution? Perhaps, but it needn’t come to that.

Bewick is highlighting the essential problems that any action-oriented movement must confront:

• How big a tent do we construct?
  
• How many side-issues can we compromise on without eroding our common objectives?
  
• How do we decide which groups are tolerable as temporary allies?

Those who restrict their activities to research, analysis, and writing labor under a different set of constraints. This is not to downplay the contributions of theorists like Fjordman and El Inglés — whose efforts are more important than my own — but simply a reminder that theory is ill-suited to address in any direct way the dilemmas posed by the imperative for effective action.

I’ll have more to say on this topic tomorrow.