The Nature of Tyranny

The following essay by Nick of The Frozen North about the disappearance of liberty in Modern Multicultural Britain was originally published at Patriot’s Corner in a slightly different form.

A Chinese cage

The Nature of Tyranny
by Nick McAvelly

The philosopher Isaiah Berlin gave a lecture at the University of Oxford in 1958 which has appeared in print several times since. In that lecture, Berlin discussed two concepts of liberty, and argued that a form of tyranny exists which claims the name of freedom, but which has fuelled some of humanity’s darkest excesses. I argue here that we are on a slippery slope towards that same tyranny today.

Playing devil’s advocate here, it might be asserted that no such tyranny could arise in a democratic society. But as Berlin, and John Stuart Mill before him, have pointed out, this is indeed logically possible. To believe otherwise is to indulge in wishful thinking.

In Britain today, a country where elections still take place, the political class are wedded to the doctrine of multiculturalism, but this doctrine is barely discussed by the majority of British voters.

In his lecture, Berlin defined “negative freedom” as the range of actions open to an individual and argued that this could be extended, and your liberty increased, by either overcoming and defeating obstacles in your way, or by taking steps to reduce your desires and aims. The latter course of action would result in a condition being reached where you no longer wanted what you couldn’t have and, having no frustrated desires, you could therefore be said to be more “free” than someone who did.

This process of eliminating your desires was likened by Berlin to retreating into a citadel. In Britain today people are more concerned with watching The X Factor in their free time than they are with discussing the doctrines of Islam, or of considering the long-term consequences of uncontrolled immigration. And that is the way mainstream British politicians like it.

Any British citizen who speaks openly about the fundamental tenets of Islam, or the character of Islam’s prophet, or the policies of shariah law, will find himself in for a rough ride. As more and more British citizens are finding out, speaking about Islam in our country today means your character will be assassinated, your livelihood will be in jeopardy, and you may very well lose your liberty. Your life may even be at risk. This state of affairs serves two purposes. It reinforces the citadel which the political class are happy to see British citizens live inside, and it lets everyone know what will happen to those who venture beyond the walls.

In Britain today, under Section 4A and Section 5 of the Public Order Act, it is a criminal offence to use insulting words. The negative freedom of British citizens has been reduced by this legislation, and this has happened in a democratic society.

The political class don’t want working class British citizens to question the doctrine of multiculturalism. And they will sacrifice your liberty and mine in order to implement their solution to the problem of how we all ought to live. In one of the most well known passages in philosophy, Berlin said:

“One belief, more than any other, is responsible for the slaughter of individuals on the altars of the great historical ideals – justice or progress or the happiness of future generations, or the sacred mission or emancipation of a nation or race or class, or even liberty itself, which demands the sacrifice of individuals for the freedom of society. This is the belief that somewhere, in the past or in the future, in divine revelation or in the mind of an individual thinker, in the pronouncements of history or science, or in the simple heart of an uncorrupted good man, there is a final solution. This ancient faith rests on the conviction that all the positive values in which men have believed must, in the end, be compatible, and perhaps even entail one another.” (Isaiah Berlin)

We are told that all cultures and values are compatible and that our own British culture will be “enriched” because of uncontrolled immigration, which will apparently cause “diversity”; that multiculturalism provides the final solution of how mankind ought to live, and the freedom of British citizens to think or say otherwise can, and indeed must, be sacrificed in its name.

But if it cannot be logically demonstrated that different values (from one culture, never mind different cultures) are compatible with one another, and our experience shows us that different cultural values are not in fact reconcilable with each other then as Berlin argues, the very notion of a final solution to the question of how we are to live is “a formal contradiction, a metaphysical chimera”.

The fundamental tenets of Islamic doctrine contradict absolutely those of Christianity, for the religion founded by Mahomet denies the crucifixion, denies that Jesus was the Son of God, and denies the Trinity. Therefore the religion of Islam cannot be reconciled with Christianity. Experience shows us that the demands made by Islam upon those who submit fully to it cause people to act in ways that are directly contrary to our most cherished cultural values. And as societies becomes shariah-compliant, the negative liberty of women, children (who are brought up to think of themselves as Muslims) and non-Muslims is significantly reduced, a fact which clearly demonstrates that Islamic doctrines are logically incompatible with human freedom.

It follows that we are as likely to see a beast walk the earth with the head of a lion, the tail of a serpent, and the body of a goat as we are to see multiculturalism actually work.

That will not prevent those politicians entranced by multiculturalism from striving to implement their final solution to the question of how we should live our lives. We have seen tyrannies arise throughout history, and some of the worst began by restricting the negative freedom of their own citizens, and silencing political opposition. In the landmark television series The World At War, Christabel Bielenberg, who was married to a German at the time, said that the Nazis inflicted their tyranny upon German society “drip by drip, rather like an anaesthetic, one could almost say, and it was only when a specific thing that he did hit you personally that you actually realised what was going on.”

No one living in Britain today can seriously believe that our politicians are infallible. To paraphrase John Stuart Mill, British politicians do not have the authority to decide how we ought to live our lives. But to refuse a hearing to an opinion which contradicts theirs because they are sure it is false is to assume that their certainty is the same thing as absolute certainty. The political class in Britain today believe that, in the doctrine of multiculturalism, they have the final solution to the question of how humanity should live.

So we have fallible people chasing a logical impossibility, a “metaphysical chimera”, and slowly restricting the negative liberty of British citizens so that any dissenting voices who might speak out against that fabulous project cannot be heard. History teaches us that when these conditions obtain a society is heading down the slippery slope to tyranny.

There is no final solution to the question of how we should all live our lives. That is precisely what makes our freedom so important. Knowing that the claims of the religion founded by Mahomet absolutely contradict both our own British cultural values and our own religious beliefs, we are free to reject it, lock, stock and barrel.

That is what it means to be free. If anyone doesn’t understand that, of doesn’t like it, then quite frankly, I just don’t care.

12 thoughts on “The Nature of Tyranny

  1. there is a silver lining to this. muslims allways overstep the bounds. they always get hungry for more. they may very well topple a european country and they may very well demand a country within a country.

    the death of a european nation at the hands of leftists and muslims will serve notice to the failure utterly and completely of the concept of multiculturalism with regards to islam and western civilization to live and inhabit the same space.

    ive noticed the neo nazi political party has gained some power in greece, since their are virtually no jews in greece they will tilt at non existing windmills quoting from the fakery protocals of zion and hating a people (the jews) who have done nothing but advance western civilization in medicine and science and the long slow march into collapse continues unabated. with the real barbarian goblins the muslims not only at the gate but within the gates.

  2. Britain, the home of Tyndale, Manton, and the Puritans has most likely been without God’s presence, or at least Jesus’ that no one any longer really knows right form wrong apart from some indistinct idea of right and wrong should be. The liberty there truly is in Britain, America, or anywhere else on this planet, is found in the heart of the person who has received Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and is no longer under the Law but lives in the Grace of God as the loving child of a loving Father Who is enthroned in heaven. Islam did not conquer Christ or Christianity even though it has slaughtered and enslaved millions just as the Law will never conquer Grace. If you wish to be truly at liberty, then love your neighbor, burka and all. Don’t rail against them or the twisted doctrine of lies that has enslaved them. Instead, love them, in deed and then in word. Against the law of love there is no law. Regard them in Christ as better than yourself. After all, Jesus saved you the trouble and expense of goingto them with the Gospel by bringing them here to hear the Gospel of Grace ministered in Truth and Love. Such a deal, No?

  3. Excellent post. Kudos.

    The welfare state instituted in Britain and the U.S. has served to dull the people to threat around them and make them besotted simpletons. It’s hard to get upset when you have a full belly, lots of pot, a warm flat and the telly.

    Should the welfare state cease the torpor will end and be replaced by lots of angry people who won’t like what they see. You will see the BNP and other parties get popular real fast.

    As for Greece, the Golden Dawn is providing security and aid to Greek natives, something the government has failed at. Nature abhors a vacuum.

    And every time the EU and IMF steps on Greece’s collective neck, it gives them even more recruits. Blame Merkel and the Bankers for Golden Dawn.

    As to being anti-semitic, almost anyone can be labeled that for merely supporting the withdraw of nations from the EU or not supporting circumcision. It’s become a verbal club used by globalists and Socialists to shut up people they don’t like. Geert Wilder was labeled a Nazi and a anti-Semite for merely for supporting a animal rights bill.

    The Jews of Europe ought to be more worried that those many millions of Muslims around them.
    In case people haven’t noticed, it’s been the Muzzies who have been actively beating and killing Jews in Europe. Somehow though it has escaped the attention of all the anti-semitic watchdog groups. Amazing isn’t it? Selective morality at play. It’s okay under Leftist logic for Muzzies to beat and kill Jews and Gays.

    The wonders of the Leftist mind never cease to amaze me.

  4. Love your yourself and your children BEFORE you love your neighbor.

    Otherwise, your Muslim neighbor will torture and murder you, and steal your children to make them Muslims and sex slaves – moral for them as based on the example of their model man Mohammed.

    Christianity is NOT a suicide pact.

    OR, as Tina Turner sang, “What’s love got to do with it?”

    But, in any case, YOU first.


  5. ChristianInfidel says:

    Good point about loving Muslims, Anonymous 11/05/2012 at 12:03 AM. A few other points are worth noting.

    There may be a lower percentage of self-identified Christians in Britain, but they are there as a powerful presence, and they do know right from wrong as well as any of us do, and maybe better than some of us because of their struggle. A good friend of mine is a pastor there. Christianity’s light in Britain, including, it appears, within the Queen’s heart, is not extinguished.

    I don’t think “rail against” is an accurate description of the Gates of Vienna’s stand against Islam.

    Also, while “railing” against Muslims may be incompatible with loving them, speaking out (or perhaps even “railing”) against Islam as an ideology, pointing out the terrible truths of its evil nature, is not only compatible with loving Mulims but is in fact an important element of loving both Muslims and non-Muslims. The truth must be spoken in love, but it must be spoken.

    Finally, to love Muslims in deed as well as word can and, it appears to me, should include the maintenance of a free world which, in spite of its flaws, serves as a living witness to Muslims of that which Islam has extinguished in those areas it dominates. Erecting and maintaining boundaries against an ideology which seeks to destroy freedom and basic human rights– as well as most forms of Christian witness– can be an act of love. Bullies need to be restrained for their own good as well as for others’ good; destructive ideologies need to be restrained for the good of those who are trapped within them as well as for the good of those who risk being crushed by them.

    I’m sure those of us Christians who are active in counter-jihad often fail to love some or even all Muslims, and I’m sure we miss opportunities to be be witnesses of Christ living within us. I’m sorry for that. Thank you for your reminder which has convicted me on that score.

    On the other hand, Christians who fail to admit and address the horrible truth of Islam’s ideological evil (in word and deed) are also failing to witness to Muslims in important ways. I hope you will take your prophetic call to them as well. Perhaps you speak from a place from which they will be able or willing to listen. I have tried but I seem to get nowhere.

    While you are at it, I hope you will ask them what Christ calls them to do on behalf of their oppressed Christian brothers and sisters suffering under Islam’s horrible persecution– a group which includes those ex-Muslims who pay the price for converting. I shudder when I think of the choice they face. They are heroes of faith. What does it mean to love Muslims and stand for our weeping and screaming brothers and sisters in Christ at the same time?

    Thanks, too, for reminding us of the opportunity that Muslims’ presence in the West offers us. Here we can do that which Christians in the Islam-dominated world cannot do: witness. And here Muslims can do that which Muslims in the Islam-dominated world cannot do: convert without as serious a risk of economic and social devastation, imprisonment, injury, or death.

  6. The solution to the problem of crrreeping Sharia is simple; the actual action will be hard on the selected individuals who take it on. The pain to be suffered can be greatly reduced by spreading it amongst all the Sharia opponants, or as many as possible.
    Oppositon to Muzzie must be PRINTED (thus un-distortable by The gov’t press) and absolutely factual (quotes alone will work very nicely). Cartoons for some reason are excellent(Muzzie illiteracy?).
    One man or a dozen can easily be thrown in jail. Howsabout a few million? Howsabout nursing mothers? The old? The unemployed? The infirm? Overwhelm the unjust enforcement system; think MLK here in the USA and the highly-publicized ‘civil rights’ of the ’60’s. Quite literally, they can’t arrest everybody. Just how much jail space have they got?
    Work on the Police–undermine their will to enforce Sharia and also their unit morale (it can’t be that good already). Whose side are they on? MAKE THE ‘PIGS’ CHOOSE!
    Mass action by those Britons left will force changes in both the law and popular opinion in the end. This process may become a little bloody, especially in the very beginning. Believe me, that will be nothing compared to the horrors to come if nothing is done.


  7. Dear Anonymous,
    I am afraid that the problem here is too much religion, not too little.

    This idea that you have all the answers to what is right and wrong – not because you have actually taken the trouble to consider it rationally – but because it days so in some book, is exactly what is wrong with islam.

    If he doesn’t hurt anyone else – it is ok.
    If it hurts someone else – it is wrong.
    Burkas are BAD because they hurt unborn children – they cause rickets!

    Consenting adults enjoy sex is good.
    Raping little girls after a ‘religious’ ceremony is bad.
    See, no need for any gods or prophets or messiahs.

  8. “The fundamental tenets of Islamic doctrine contradict absolutely those of Christianity, for the religion founded by Mahomet denies the crucifixion, denies that Jesus was the Son of God, and denies the Trinity.”

    Here we get to the heart of the matter: one God, three Persons. Islam admits: one Islam, four Schools(madhaa7ib).

    And a reminder: Hell is eternal. Don’t make mistakes.

  9. “The latter course of action would result in a condition being reached where you no longer wanted what you couldn’t have and, having no frustrated desires, you could therefore be said to be more “free” than someone who did.”

    The citadel of freedom is in fact the fortress of liberty and ultimately serves as the last bridgehead for the assault on tyranny.

    In the U.K. GoV readers will know that citadel of freedom by its derogatory pseudo scientific label – WELFARE DEPENDENCY.

    Have U.K. GoV readers ever wondered why the conservative and socialist ultraliberals hate those liberated indigenous working/underclass welfare recipients?

    The weight of the chains of ultraliberal aspiration and conditioning are heavier than the chains of poverty for the libertarian.

    With welfare reform the thirty year siege will soon be broken the war will commence. The only uncertainty during the long stand-off, have the inherently libertarian working/underclass forgotten the art of war?

    Jolie Rouge

  10. @ Jolie Rouge,

    Do check out Isaiah Berlin’s essay for yourself, you should find it interesting. In it, Berlin argues that your negative freedom (the number of doors open to you) can be restricted, and this can be done in the name of (positive) freedom!

    Berlin’s argument is (nutshell version): if the question of how to live is a rational question then it must have an answer. One answer. Some people think they have that answer (a “final solution”) and believe that if you or I disagree with that answer, then we are not being rational. We are being enslaved by our desires, by our irrational selves. So in order to free us from those irrational forces, you and I would be “educated” or even coerced into accepting that “final solution” to the question of how we all should live.

    We would be forced to recognise our true rational natures (so the argument goes), and by “freeing” us from our irrational natures, we are made more “free”.

    Of course if you and I weren’t such thickos and understood the correct way of thinking, then we wouldn’t need to be “educated” or coerced, but since those who believe they have the final solution think they’re cleverer than everyone else, they think they can implement it without consulting us, and force us to go along …

    Really, it’s an interesting essay. Well worth a read ..

  11. @Anonymous 11/06/2012 4:41 PM

    The Berlin paragraphs from Nick’s essay resonated … have now downloaded the Isaiah Berlin essay.

    Thank you for the navigation aid – the nutshell version.

    Kind regards

    Jolie Rouge

Comments are closed.