I fully expect the Irish Anti-War Move-ment to denounce the killing of Osama bin Laden. After all, its friends in Hamas have already condemned the action by US Special Forces: and is the primary purpose of the IAWM not to deplore the deeds of the US and Israel, while never saying a word about the ongoing wars between various Arab peoples and their tyrannical governments?
Some journalists still lazily refer to the "Arab Spring", as if there's a comparison with Prague in 1968. Frankly I'd prefer an horological metaphor, in which the Czechs are to the Arabs what a wristwatch is to a sundial. But since we're using meteorological imagery, we might as well get our seasons right. For the Arab countries are undergoing not a spring but an autumn, with an Islamic winter to follow. The world is changing radically, even more than in the 20th Century. The democratic struggles against communism and Nazism were against evanescent secular movements, locked into their time; what is occurring today is a return to the historical clash between militant Islam and secular Christianity.
Future historians will wonder at the suicidal, self-hating pathology of western behaviour in the second half of the 20th Century. Europe, Australasia and North America decided that they should accept immigrants from all over the world. No one else did this. The Chinese, Japanese, South Americans, Indians and Africans didn't think that they needed multi-racial, multicultural mass immigration. So you won't see hundreds of thousands of white or African or Indian faces in Peking or Tokyo, or similar numbers of African or European faces in Bombay or Cairo, or Indian or white faces in Lagos. Twentieth-Century multi-racialism was for whities only.
Possibly such 'policies' result from guilt over colonialism. Well, there's a difference to the outcome. Colonialism comes to an end, but large-scale immigration produces ethnic and cultural changes that are not merely irreversible, but self-replicating. For, as the British, Dutch and French have disc-overed, it's almost impossible to prevent marriage and family loyalty being used to reinforce the original demographic bridgehead. Just go to the East End of London -- to Stepney, Mile End, Limehouse and Whitechapel -- and you'll feel that you're not in a European capital, but an Islamic Asian one.
The cultural values that allow this mass movement in population also refused to demand that it be two-way. If it is good for Chinese people to settle in Ireland -- and as a keen supporter of controlled immigration, I certainly think it is -- then it is equally good for thousands of Irish people to settle permanently in China. Not merely would this never be allowed by the Chinese government, but the Multi-Culturalist Liberal Left of Ireland would not even dream of demanding it.
Similarly, the MCLL got into a righteous frenzy about apartheid, which discri-minated wickedly against black Africans, but said nothing about the murder and expulsion of thousands of white farmers in South Africa and neighbouring Zimbabwe. The MCLL waxed furious over the military tactics of Israel in Gaza and the West Bank, but stayed silent at the oppression of Arabs by corrupt and infinitely more violent Arab despotisms, as in Iraq.
Such Arab despotisms are now coming to an end, as a new purity emerges across the region: Islamic purity, to be followed by shariah or quasi-shariah law. Yet western opinion is so deranged that NATO is even supplying air power to support what history will show is actually an Islamist insurrection in Libya. In post-Mubarak Egypt, nearly 60pc of the population want to end the peace treaty with Israel, and the vast majority want a legal system based on the Koran. Yet which country do the MCLL instinctively favour, Israel or Egypt? And which country is more or less likely to embody the pro-gay, pro-feminist values of the MCLL?
It's an interesting conundrum, is it not? The only country with western liberal values in the entire Middle East is the only one that western liberals hate. Of course, this is part of an entire western mindset, which is so splendidly represented in Ireland by the multicultural quangos which a couple of years ago tried to get me imprisoned, and which are of course silent about the near-racist hatred of Israel.
Indeed, by these perverse norms, new mosques may be built in Christian countries, but not new Christian churches in Muslim countries. The only Christian in the Pakistani cabinet was murdered, and -- as 'The Daily Telegraph' noted grimly -- with virtually no condemnation from Britain's Muslim leaders. In Jakarta, a bomb plot targeting a Catholic Church packed with 3,000 worshippers during Good Friday services got just a one-line mention in the western press. But what sort of shrieking headlines would a plot to kill even a dozen Muslims in Europe have been given in the Muslim world?
Throughout history, people have traditionally sided with their own kind -- religiously, racially, culturally or politically. To side with one's potential enemies, is, to say the least, unusual. This makes these interesting times with interesting values; whether those values will assist in the long-term survival of our Christian-secular culture is of course a different question.