Almost as an introduction to the English Defence League’s march today, David Cameron spoke in Munich about how best to deal with Islamic extremism. In Mr Cameron’s estimation it is not the UK’s foreign policy that is the cause, but rather our failed multiculturalism. If you ask me it is more than a mere delusion to assume that because someone can’t speak your language they are quite happy to commit acts of terrorism against your country. No, it is an issue of foreign policy and politics. Isn’t that why our soldiers and Afghan civilians are dying after all?

Ignorance from a Tory is understandable. What is harder to understand is the lack of consideration the EDL march was given. Surely someone would have mentioned to the Prime Minister that he was making a ‘provocative’ (in Nick Griffin’s view!) speech on the same day as a far right group were holding their largest anti-Islamist march to date. In fact he did know about this coincidence, but did not alter what he would say. Reckless to say the least.

Even worse however is that our PM seems to have no idea how extremism develops. He assumes that a lack of ‘Britishness’ is a precursor to extremism, but, as pointed out by journalist Mehdi Hasan, he forgets that the 7/7 bombers were seen as ‘British’ by their friends and colleagues; not the socially confused, west hating, intolerance preachers that he would assume they are. At least not in any overt way. Instead they were angry young men who’s anger was utilised by people who fit David Cameron’s description much more closely.

Mr Cameron also made the mistake of assuming the following:

So when a white person holds objectionable views – racism, for example – we rightly condemn them.

But when equally unacceptable views or practices have come from someone who isn’t white, we’ve been too cautious, frankly even fearful, to stand up to them.

This may be true in some instance, but it certainly hasn’t always been true in the way the media speaks about Islam. It has been possible for newspapers to report stories about Muslims in a way that they would certainly not dream to do with any other religion. I also refute the claim that we have been too cautious about dealing with racism from anyone who isn’t white, to say so is to over simplify the issue in a dangerous way.

Neither is it wise to say “We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values.” I’m not sure which set of values he is referring to here. Are these values that we share with the whole of Europe? I doubt it as we find enough ground to disagree upon at home without getting into the issue of a collective European value system. So perhaps he is speaking of Conservative values or a hybrid set of Conservative-Liberal Democrat values that we should all strive for. I for one will not be the first in line to learn these values as I see little to gain from those that would abandon the needs of the poor in favour of pleasing a group of elites. Values are a very subjective thing and to speak of them in such a way severely compromises David Cameron’s position.

In his speech he went to great pains to balance condemnation of Islamic extremism with the ‘its not all Muslims’ rhetoric, but this is all stuff we’ve heard before. The world doesn’t need David Cameron telling them that the far right’s view on Islamic extremists won’t get us anywhere. Nor does it appreciate a muddled explanation as to how state multiculturalism has failed without any real explanation. What it needed was someone to highlight the real issue: there are some people very angry over our politics that have now declared war on us – this is the strategy to deal with it. This was a security conference, the issue should have been framed as such without ridiculous phrases such as “muscular liberalism”.

Simply put, the speech has only served to confuse myself and many others. I can only assume that Mr Cameron’s office was just as confused when writing it.

~Wail