Richard, a reader and contributor to Vlad posted a comment to the site that I thought was worthy of the best answer I could come up with after a hard day’s blogging. I thought I would make it, and my answer to it, into a post. Hopefully it will stimulate more discussion as I think in some ways, these ideas get to the heart of the matter.
Armed clashes are coming, they are the only way for the Jews and Europeans to defend themselves against the Moslems, the problem is how are the Courts in Europe going to react to the armed citizens fighting back?
Courts have always been tougher on people who take the law into their own hands and as a rule, rightfully so. However, when the government, more accurately in this case, the state disenfranchises the public, when the state no longer represents the culture or the people it is likely that they will have to selectively enforce only where they can.
We already see this with Islam. The courts are finding some people guilty of a crime when they are not afraid of what group that person or people represent, while not even charging people clearly and publicly visible of the exact same crimes if the state is afraid of that group.
So it begins. But where does it go? Chances are, the nature of jurisprudence will become more and more arbitrary and irrational especially in nations where the law abiding citizens have been disarmed while certain ethnic groups and organized crime is well armed. We have seen clearly that the police unions in some nations, most notably England, have made sure that the police look after their own safety now, way before saving the indigenous people of Europe (story on Vlad). This of course, all without so much as a pay cut. So the public, now disarmed, seeing themselves forced to pay high taxes to pay for police who actively work against them overall, while ignoring the often illegal immigrant violent crime against them, will seek alternatives like the EDL. The state will flex its muscle in every way it can from disinformation campaigns through state mouth pieces like the BBC and in a more detached way, the CBC (The CBC is very much not representing the current conservative government in Canada) and through selective enforcement against them.
Most governments would rather see an orderly surrender than a violent defence. We saw that in WW2 and we are seeing it now. If people like you and me, manage to convince the people to stand up and fight back and if those people manage to get governments or form governments that fight back and eventually win, the left after a short time will claim it was the far right who caused this problem with Islam and immigration, and it was the left who rose up and won the day. Eventually, we will call Choudery and others of his ilk. “far Right Wing” and it will all start again.
I don’t know if this spoke to your comment or not, but it sure felt good to write it.