For years the left has maintained a curious double discourse in religious matters: it promotes hatred of Christianity, calling it retrograde and machista, but it is friendly to Islam.
The incoherent fascination of the left with Islam
With the same lightness with which they accuse you of a crime of “micromachismo” if you dedicate a compliment to a woman, the left defends the use of the Islamic veil and does not dare to criticize the atrocious discrimination suffered by women in the countries with Muslim majority. And while here in the West it does everything possible to uproot our Christian roots, the left considers respectable that there are countries that have Islam as their official religion and that treat religious minorities as second-class citizens, or even subject them to persecution. Likewise, the left calls “freedom of speech” any gratuitous offense against Christians, even the most beastly, and at the same time it calls “Islamophobia” the mere fact of criticizing Islam.
Judicial process against a Vox leader for opposing Islamism
The last example of this double yardstick we have had in Spain these days. A Muslim organization denounced Javier Ortega Smith, general secretary of Vox party, accusing him of “a hate crime” for having uttered these words in a meeting:
“Our common enemy, the enemy of Europe, the enemy of freedom, the enemy of progress, the enemy of democracy, the enemy of the family, the enemy of life, the enemy of the future is called the invasion , it’s called the Islamist invasion.”
Note that Ortega spoke of “Islamist,” an adjective used to refer to Islamic extremism. Apparently, now they do not just want us to shut up all criticism of Islam: they do not want us to oppose their more extreme version either. Yesterday, many media published that the Prosecutor’s Office will investigate Ortega to see if there is such a “hate crime”. That is to say, that public resources will be used to investigate whether a person committed the audacity to meddle with Islam. Is this still Spain or are we in Iran? The question is very appropriate if we bear in mind that the founder of that Muslim association was a candidate of the far-leftist party Podemos and has made Christianophobic statements on social media.
The left defended the assault on a Catholic chapel …
It was within the foreseeable time that some Muslims try to transfer to Spain an environment of intolerance to any criticism of Islam like that which exists in most Islamic countries. What is striking about this case is the absence of criticism from the left to this attempt to censor ideas. Recall that when the councilor of Podemos Rita Maestre was judged for assaulting a Catholic chapel, left-wing politicians and media were shocked that these facts went to trial and even justified the assault with the most crude arguments. Finally, she was acquitted in a controversial sentence that gave open bar to assault any church. Recall, in addition, that last October left parties supported decriminalize the vexations of believers, outrages on Spain and insults to the Armed Forces. Related media to those parties referred to that vote as an advance in freedom of speech.
… but now they are silent about this attack against freedom of speech
However, the thing changes if the offended one is Islamic radicalism. When a Muslim association tries to censor a critique of Islamism, the leftist politicians and media remains silent as a grave. It is more: yesterday the progressive media loaded their inks not against the denunciating association, but against the denounced politician. Every time that the Association of Christian Lawyers makes a denunciation against acts of Christianophobia, the leftist media speak of “ultracatolic group”. Yesterday, no progressive media called “ultraislamic group” to which it tries to impede the right to criticize Islamism. Rather, the news seemed designed to imply that the mere fact of being investigated by the Prosecutor’s Office already makes Ortega guilty. No presumption of innocence, no freedom of speech or tolerance. When it comes to Islam, the left changes the relativist “anything goes” for an authoritarian “shut your mouth”.