The dangers of encouraging an overly politically correct society. What could possibly go wrong?

Plenty, unfortunately.


In Central Europe, we have long been accustomed to regular insults from the self-defined ‘more enlightened’ members of society to be found further west. These societies developed on, at some levels, a vastly different tangent to that ours followed through the second half of the 20th century. From the end of WWII onwards, the paths our societies followed began to diverge.

This is something that we, at one point, lamented. The other side had all the goodies. This side had none.

The capitalist economies of the West sought to enrich their societies. The communist economies of the East sought to maintain general poverty. The communists’ plan of enforcing discipline through artificial levels of poverty for the vast majority of citizens was, however, always doomed to fail. Aware of what they were being denied, when push inevitably came to shove, the walls came down and the capitalists were invited in with open arms.

Of course, this was also the time when capitalism’s true face was revealed for the masses. Seen from communist surroundings, capitalism was a truly blinding idea. When the capitalists came to Hungary, however, people realised that capitalism is only ever out to ensure self-preservation. As untrustworthy as a shark, any benefits which are accrued from the introduction of capitalism happen as a fortunate, unintentional side-effect.

Even though decades have passed since various countries of Central and Eastern Europe – ruled for so long by Soviet logic – re-established their economies on capitalist principles, the differences between the societies to be found in the two halves of Europe remain striking. Scratch the surface of these societies and beneath the veneer of sameness lie staggering differences.

The development of societies in the West and in the East was wildly different. We have long become accustomed to being looked down on by the West for not possessing less homogenous societies. Further, we are derided as relics from the past for not having wholeheartedly clasped the idea of political correctness to our bosoms as did the West. In the West, the wanton encouraging of immigration with which to power the capitalist rebuilding of war economies led to the introduction of newer and newer waves of immigrants. In the East, sealed away by borders that the West agreed upon, there was no immigration.

The West became addicted to immigration, hoping to assuage the historical guilt that stemmed from centuries of colonial oppression, presumably. The addiction to immigration has, however, changed western societies for good. Where once a common religion could be found within the natives and the newcomers, that is now long gone, and repeated waves of migrants, aggressively dedicated to a rival God have settled down in the West, determined to take over the lands which offered them the peace and security they could never find in their native homes.

And that’s what happened in the UK on 22 May 2017.

22 people were killed and 264 people were seriously injured when Salman Abedi detonated a homemade bomb in the foyer of Manchester Arena. The report from the inquiry into the terror attack was released in June and listed several systematic failings that contributed to the attack.

Forrás: AFP

Some of the failings are indeed shocking: the police force responsible for patrolling the area failed to “give adequate consideration to the threat of terrorism” despite the fact that the UK was facing a ‘severe’ threat at the time. Additionally, two police officers took an “inappropriate” two-hour nine-minute dinner break to get a kebab at a fast food restaurant located 5 miles from the area where they were on duty. As a result of taking a substantially longer break than they were supposed to (50 minutes), the police missed a golden opportunity. Minutes before the police returned to their patrols, the bomber was caught on CCTV arriving at Manchester Victoria station ‘bent over’ and ‘struggling to walk’ with the weight of his rucksack, tucking a wire from his bomb under his clothing as he went. The police missed Abedi walking towards his target by seven minutes. PC Jessica Bullough, the most senior officer on duty has since admitted that had she not taken such a long dinner break she most likely would have spotted Abedi, stopped him, and asked what was in his rucksack.

Sadly, that was not how the evening played out.

Although it appears clear that the tragedy of a young man intent on blowing himself up with as many people as he could take with him could have been prevented by the police not neglecting their duties, there were other chances to stop Abedi which, for other reasons, deeply disturbing reasons, were missed.

Salman Abedi initially first came to the attention of the British security services seven years prior to his suicide bomb attack. MI5 was alerted to Abedi no less than 18 times before his 2017 terror attack.

MI5 initially received their first alert about him in 2010. In 2014 he was made a ‘subject of interest’, but after four months the file was dropped. He was identified as associating with six separate MI5 ‘subjects of interest’, visited a convicted terrorist in jail twice, and regularly travelled to war-torn Libya. His father continued to engage in plots to overthrow Gaddafi and took his sons to the frontline of the conflict, posting photos of Salman’s15-year-old brother Hashem holding a machine gun in “training”.

Frighteningly, the brothers’ obvious radicalisation appears to have not been noticed. In 2017, as they continued to travel to and from Libya, the brothers began putting their bomb together. To finance the construction of the bomb, they used a taxpayer-funded student loan. So, the sons of Libyan refugees, raised in Manchester, used a taxpayer-funded student loan to kill and maim the very people who had made their lives liveable. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Incidentally, the Arabic e-mail address that the brothers used in constructing the bomb translated to “we have come to slaughter”.

The security services in the UK have approximately 3,000 subjects of interest whom they are required to monitor at any given time. This obviously makes it extremely difficult for them to prevent atrocities such as the Manchester bombing. It also underlines why any state not already swamped by unidentified, potentially radical waves of immigrants from the African continent would do well to heed the lessons that the West has paid as a result of their open-armed, confused desire for immigrants.

That said, to have decided that there was no need to keep a close eye on someone who visited convicted terrorists in jail, was identified (albeit briefly) as a person of interest, regularly met with other persons of interest and also regularly travelled to war zones, seems to be a huge error by the British security services.

Sadly, today it might well be considered that anything western societies enact in terms of legislation is a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. Cast your eye over western Europe and you will be faced with no-go zones, where the fire brigade, having been used as target practice for years by the immigrant communities, justifiably refuse to respond to emergencies without riot squad protection.

These are the offspring of the immigrants who sought and were granted sanctuary by western governments unable or unwilling to predict exactly where the development of parallel societies and a lack of integration would lead. Now, of course, it’s as clear as day. The original migrants might well have appreciated the chance they were given, but their surly, selfish offspring have decided to cherry-pick what they want, a process which has led to fractured societies with radical Muslim warriors extolling the virtues of a legal system of the dark ages on social media, wholly failing to notice the elephant in the room that is irony. Obviously irony as a concept developed after the dark ages of which they are so proud.

The final disturbing element of the Manchester bomb attack which raises many questions about the supposed inherent wisdom of the West is that western societies have not only allowed themselves to be hobbled but have actively, through the careless, unthinking promotion of political correctness, sought to hobble themselves.

Ignoring the mistakes that were made, ignoring the fact that the British security services are trying to contain an ever-greater problem requiring more manpower than can be feasibly imagined. This problem, of course, is exacerbated by the fact that Britons don’t have identity cards, but that’s another issue.

Potentially the most salient point that should be made about the mess which resulted in the Manchester bombing is that decades of teaching people to walk on eggshells has changed western society. A young security guard was alerted to the presence of a young man with a hugely-heavy rucksack.

This rucksack was stuffed with 3,000 nuts and bolts, a bomb designed to injure, maim, and inspire terror. In the security guard’s own words, Salman Abedi was “fidgety and sweating.” But he didn’t act on his suspicions because:

“I did not want people to think I am stereotyping him because of his race. ... I was scared of being wrong and being branded a racist if I got it wrong and would have got into trouble. It made me hesitant.”

That, more than anything provides ample evidence for the eastern half of Europe to learn from the mistakes of the West.

We’ve seen how things have worked out for you, and it’s our inviolable right to choose a different path for ourselves. We learn from our own mistakes, but it would be beyond foolish not to additionally learn from the mistakes of others.