Mr. Kamm called for a “secularist and liberal defense of the principles of a pluralist society.”
That’s not the solution to the problem, but one of the causes. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for liberalism and pluralism and whatnot. And, in the hands of a combative old bruiser like Christopher Hitchens, they’re powerful weapons. But most people are not like Mr. Hitchens. (…)
I’ve sat around many a table in many a pub with “secularist, pluralist, liberal” men. They all rightly express admiration for the Christopher Hitchens who tears down Nazi posters in Syria and is promptly beaten — but ultimately unbowed.
However, they refuse to accept the fact that the spread of atheism such as Hitchens espouses has itself given Islam a vacuum to fill. No, not in Syria, obviously — but in Europe, definitely.
How many of his secularist, pluralist, liberal commrades have torn down pro-Islam posters in the much safer, law abiding (and I hesitate to use that term) Western cities in which they live?
In any event, I’m never quite sure how these men propose to battle threats to our secular etc society, other than applaud when other people do so. (Unless the “wrong sort” of fellow does so…)
Perhaps they hope to pelt invaders with copies of The Fountainhead, or whip them with hydroponicly grown stalks of pot.
Unless there’s a highly classified “smug bomb” in the works, I fear we will have to look elsewhere for our salvation.