Workers lose out
From Mr Steve Olson Sir: Melanie Phillips's article (How the West was lost', 11 May) correctly addresses the problem of using labels from the 1930s to describe the new political movements of the 21st century. Labelling is mostly a tool used to write off those with whom we disagree by associating them with something we all fear. What has not been discussed is the popularity of the anti-immigration message among those adversely affected by open borders, specifically the existing working classes in the country of destination.
The Left once claimed to side with the interests of working people. While this was always a ploy for votes, the mask is completely off now. Open borders benefit the economic interests of the upper classes at the expense of workers who are trying to gain a foothold on the first rung. Cheap food, clothing and services benefit the wealthy at their expense because of simple supply-and-demand considerations. Anyone who sides with these workers is dismissed as a racist.
Steve Olson
Wisconsin, USA
From Mr Robert Greenland Sir: I feel that Melanie Phillips is too intelligent a writer to make such aggressive assertions about Islam without checking her facts more carefully. Far from feeling 'a duty to Islamicise the values of the surrounding culture', as Ms Phillips claims, the UK's Muslim community has proved less vocal and influential than our Jewish and Afro-Caribbean communities.
However, it is with Phillips's conclusions that I take the greatest exception. She is keen to stress the 'Judaeo-Christian' roots of liberalism as a force with which to 'defend' ourselves from Islam, but is unable to admit that it was liberalism that humiliated and thus destroyed Christianity as our defining faith. Its demise left us with a rudderless West, whose values and morality are expressed through a corporate culture which trickles its message down to us through the media. Ethical behaviour is now learnt not from the pulpit and the kitchen table but from a kaleidoscope of visual and auditory sensations according to the requirements of the balance-sheet. To believe that such an inherently flawed moral system can be divorced from libertinism and rebuilt into 'true liberal values' is ridiculous.
Phillips is right to say that Islam has never been through a Reformation, or, by implication, an Enlightenment. Christianity did, which means that today there is never any lack of a rent-a-mouth ready to show how clever hc is by deriding it. I often shud
der at the prejudiced ridicule of the Church's past which is accepted by the public as proven fact. One can hardly blame Islam for wishing to avoid Christianity's mistakes in this matter. It would much rather go about its business quietly, and only make a noise at times when it feels itself under attack. such as now.
Why could not Phillips have the courage to develop the part of her essay where she says that Muslims are often allies' of hers? If she were to spend some time living and working with Muslims in this country or abroad, then she would realise that they are the allies of anyone who cares about right or wrong, regardless of their faith. It could even be possible that the islands of Islamic calm in the fractured jungle of our inner cities represent this country's best chance since the arrival of Christianity 2,000 years ago. Who will now predict our values, at the start of the 22nd century?
Robert Greenland
rgreeniand@hotmail.com
From Mr Mark Glanville Sir: Reading Melanie Phillips's article, I was struck by some alarming parallels with the fate of another great civilisation: the Roman empire. There, too, a decadent and immoral society that had long since forsworn its Augustan family values became permeated by the descendants of peoples it had once ruled. The story ends with its military defeat at the hands of those peoples and the ascent of a modified form of an ancient monotheistic religion.
Mark Glanville
London W5
Previous page
