Many unassimilated Muslims in the West assume that they can ignore Western jurisprudence and yet rely on it in extremis. Today’s Pakistani new arrival in London might wish to follow sharia law as he knew it in Punjab. But implicit are two unmentionable constants: The migrant most certainly does not wish to return to face sharia law in Pakistan. Second, if he had his way, institutionalizing his native culture into that of his newly adopted land, he would eventually flee the results — and once again likely go somewhere else, for the same reasons that he left home in the first place.
Invaders from Punjab are not escaping from Sharia. Hanson admits as much but he misses the essential motivation of the invader. Far from wanting to escape intolerance these (predominantly)young men are bent on enforcing their cultural intolerance on tolerant cultures. They come to rape and pillage. That is the better life they seek, more opportunity to satisfy their domination.
Hanson is enough of an elitist to be unscathed by and unafraid of the brutality of invading Muslim hoards. We are experiencing the sacking of Rome and the pillaging of Spain. Surely the great historian, VDH, can see the parallels with Paris and GB today.
Well said. I would also say, that as is the case with almost every political revolution of every kind, that these invaders have no problem with the sharia under which they lived in their countries of origin. It’s just that they want to be the enforcers instead of the ones being enforced.
I wonder if people realise just how unique the American Revolution was in that the people who were revolting against the power, did not want, in their turn, to be the new power.