You’d think that more than six decades after Neville Chamberlain infamously declared that appeasing Hitler would mean “peace for our time” the British would have learned a little something about the practice of appeasement.
Apparently they have.
They’ve learned how to make it worse.
Evan Maloney of Brain Terminal describes an attempt by the British government to limit charges brought against radical Islamic extremists. They don’t mind enforcing a ban on Michael Savage – he is not allowed to enter the country – because of allegedly inflammatory rhetoric on his part, but they want to prevent charges from being brought against Islamic extremists for crimes such as “inciting hatred” or “viewing extremist material”.
They know Michael Savage and his listeners aren’t actually going to do anything violent, so they have no problems clamping down. But since radical extremists occasionally blow up subways and buses in England they get preferential treatment. They are rewarding the behavior that they claim to want to prevent. This is flagrant appeasement.
What makes this new appeasement even worse than the old is that the selectively-applied charges – “viewing extremist material” and so on – are thought-crimes. It’s not a good idea to have laws like this at all. If you’re going to have them, at least don’t compound the problem by failing to apply them to the very people that are actually inciting real-world, lethal mayhem.