Radical Islam Must Be Stopped and Here’s How
Central Europe has become the centre of staggering mass liberalism ever since the refugee crisis flooded our nations. Where approximately 150,000 Syrians have declared asylum in the European Union, the UK received 117,234 refugees which have not just travelled from Syria alone.
A lot of countries, that have now decided that their citizens are in need of refuge, (not including Syria) consist of Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, Albania, Pakistan, Eritrea, Nigeria, Iran, and Ukraine. The mass migration of more than 1 million refugees, which may or may also not strictly consist of only refugees, has given Europe and the EU a large stream of social and economic consequences.
The core social difficulties, which a lot of the inhabitants of European countries are afraid of, are the mass cultural changes which exhibit religious beliefs. Whereas Islam is only the second largest religious group on earth, making up to 22% of the world’s population, a rather large percentage of refugees are in fact Muslim.
The cumulative spiral of sexual assaults across Europe, in mainly Sweden and Germany, have also generated an uproar on whether or not Brussel’s idea to take on more refugees than the population can handle, really was a good idea. Despite knowing that a lot of the refugees being taken in are not thoroughly checked due to inadequate identification forms (which were “lost” at sea or just flushed down the next portaloo), the increased terrorist attacks which have been acted out by potential refugees are just given a blind eye.
So who are we really letting in? Are we letting in a family whose country was destroyed and are in desperation of safety, or are we letting in hordes of single men who may or may not be potential ISIS members?
Radical Islam is a topic that has only increased since the attacks of 9/11 and the refugee crisis. Where terrorist attacks committed by Islamic extremists are no longer a matter of shock, but just a weekly normality, where do we draw the line to say enough is enough?
Any problem can be backtracked to find a solution; the backtracking method finds a root cause or ideology. This ideology is something we know all too well as Islam. So why exactly does one ignore the strong correlation between the increased migration of Muslim refugees and increasing terrorist attacks across Europe? Why do we fear being called racist more than another attack?
It is rather easy to establish that Islam itself is the core of our problem. It is however rather difficult to find out who exactly is practising the religion peacefully, and who isn’t. The UK have been taking extra measures to help people identify extremists. Examples of these include education in schools and videos to help students recognise possible extremism and to report such issues. I as a matter of a fact have been given two of these assemblies, and they aren’t as helpful as members of the government convince the public to be.
Understanding extremism is having to understand the way someone thinks. The human brain is so complex; thus it is impossible to figure out what exactly is going on in the mind of an extremist. In fact, once someone does become an extremist, it is quite difficult to pull them out of this mind set. Certain pull factors include the belonging to a group, financial incentives and being given the opportunity to “serve” a god which may or may not even exist.
A post note created by the houses of parliament in May 2016 list these as counter-radicalisation strategies:
- Living in areas of social cohesion where people feel safe
- Having educational and employment opportunities
- Having access to democratic methods of voicing opinion and having trust in institutions
- Having access to religious leadership that can inform and moderate religious perspectives.
But do all of these not seem like something any person should have the right to anyway? And doesn’t a radicalised religion stop these from happening completely? In a sense, attempting to solve a problem with peaceful approaches can lead to more harm being done than good. How is it possible to produce a safe area for people to live in, when a large population density of Islamic preachers statistically produces higher crime rates? How is it possible to give educational opportunities, when some if not many Islamic preachers demand religious schools? The same can also apply to employment opportunities, if an employer would rather hire someone who fits better to a job, speaks the country’s language and does not flare a religious outlook which can be unpleasant for clients, then this shouldn’t be an issue.
Too much religious leadership exceeds a comfort zone for people who should indeed be attempting to fit into the country itself. When my parents moved to the UK from Germany, we tried as much as possible to fit in and to speak the language as much as possible. Despite us not having religious beliefs as such, we did not complain about the church down the road, or that I was required to sing hymns in assemblies or attend church with the school for religious celebrations. The main reason for this is that Britain is a Christian country, and we wanted to respect that. We never decided to say to anyone that it conformed our beliefs against a god, we accepted the way of the land.
Stopping religious extremism is a matter of stopping the religion itself. Despite the fact that it may “offend” certain groups and the race flag might be pulled out of the mystery box of leftist responses once again, putting down a foot is something that will actually work.
One may argue about peace and free will. However, the freedom of our children in the future is something we must take pride in. This freedom does not begin with Islam.