Thought Police, Take 2

I received word today from Kris Dikeman that historian and science fiction editor, Farah Mendelsohn, is calling for stories for an up-coming anthology inspired by the British government's attempt to pass a bill that will outlaw "the glorification of terrorism." Contact me if you want the skinny and get scribbling.The House of Commons, in an attempt to revive Tony Blair's pointless and over-reaching anti-terror bill, recently passed "the glorification of terrorism" provision and it's now up to the Parliament to weigh in.According to the language of the proposed bill, a statement would be illegal if it glorifies terrorism "whether in the past, in the future or generally" and if "the public could reasonably be expected to infer that what is being glorified is being glorified as conduct that should be emulated in existing circumstances."Now before I shred this logic for you, let me remind everyone of an important fact. Recently a handful of enraged Muslims in London protested the Danish cartoons by holding placards calling for the beheading of the editors who published them. They were not arrested. Despite directly inciting people to violence (which is illegal under British law) no action was taken. Why? Maybe because arresting them would have martyred them and expanded the scope of the protest.So my question is this: if British authorities won't even use existing (and quite sensible) law to prosecute Muslim troublemakers, what makes anyone think they're going to start arresting Muslim troublemakers with an even vaguer law?They won't. This is theater. Like so much of what the US and British governments have done since 9/11, the anti-terror bill has nothing to do with making Brits safer. It is showmanship pure and simple. It creates opportunities for Tony Blair to paint his political opponents as "soft on terror." But this kind of theater does actually enlarge the scope government and, as Milton Friedman so intelligently points out, politicians rarely shrink the scope of their power once it is enlarged. So, if you support this law, I hope you like a big slice of Big Brother because that's what you've got.Now let's discuss the infantalizing nonsense of the particulars of this law.Glorifying terrorism "in the past": Does this make Victor Hugo's French Revolution story Les Miserables a banned book? Does it mean we can not celebrate the the Boston Tea Party or glorify the American Revolutionaries, whom the British would have undoubtedly considered terrorists?Glorifying terrorism "in the future:" Well there goes my science fiction novel, The Mind of the Highway, which features a terrorist who frequently glorifies his own actions. I guess one of my favorite authors, Dan Simmons, will have to be arrested now for justifying the slaughter of millions in a techno-apocalypse in his Hyperion series.History and fiction are full of anti-heroes and violent actions which in the minds of many are justified and even glorious. Which brings us to the following language:"the public could reasonably be expected to infer that what is being glorified is being glorified as conduct that should be emulated in existing circumstances."I love the idea that "the public" can all be expected to infer the same thing. I was a producer on the movie American Psycho, which writer/director Mary Harron intended as a satire of materialist machismo. But I can tell you first hand that "the public" did not uniformly infer this from her movie. In fact, a disconcertingly large segment of the public inferred that the protagonist, Patrick Bateman, was a hero to be emulated. Bateman only murdered individual people so I guess I don't have to report Mary Harron or Brett Easton Ellis to the British thought police just yet, but let it serve as a warning to both of them to keep their murders one on one.Do I think the British government will use the anti-terror bill to arrest authors and historians? No. Is it possible that with the law on the books a future British government will? Yes. Does the security provided by the law justify that risk? No. Here's why:In a free society where individual rights are paramount, we can not eliminate the threat of terrorism. There, I said it. Thankfully, I'm not running for office, so I can afford to speak the truth bluntly. We can not eliminate terrorism.Terrorism works by exploiting freedom. It exploits open borders. It exploits freedom of movement. It exploits racial tolerance. It is an effective means of jabbing at free societies. It is an effective means of causing pain. But it is only capable of undermining free societies when those societies cooperate. That's what Tony Blair is doing. That's what George Bush is doing. Why? Because, like the glorifiers of terrorism, Blair and Bush know that fear is the best motivator. Fear wins hearts and minds. We in the West are bigging up the terrorists by unraveling the fabric of our freedom in a fruitless display of make-believe defense.Even worse, we are glorifying Islam by painting it in the bold colors of a Clash of Civilizations (cue evil Darth Vader music). But Islam is not glorious. Like all religions, it is pathetic. It is a backwards, lamebrained memeplex of infantalism and stupidity. Just like Christianity. Just like Judaism. Just like every religious cult of social control that tries to tell us what to eat, who to fuck, when to rest, where to think spiritual thoughts, and how to delude ourselves that death isn't the end. The big and important difference between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other is that Islam is still dragging its people into the dark ages whereas Christianity and Judaism have loosened their grip just enough to allow its practitioners to prosper.And that critical difference is the reason why Judeo-Christian societies, which are basically secular, rule the world. It will always be that way. You can not topple scientifically advanced societies with the instruments of medieval religiosity. All you can do is give them a black eye once in a while. Now if you really want to give Islamic terrorists a leg-up in this Clash of Civilizations, here are some things you can do:1) Turn Islamic Fundamentalists into free-speech martyrs thus luring would-be moderates over to their side2) Expand the role of religion within your own secular society thus exaggerating the cultural differences within your own population3) Threaten your technological superiority by watering down science education with religious pseudo-science4) Wittle away at individual freedom so that your own population is as infantalized as your enemy'sWe in the West are making a good start on these four provisions. Let's see how far we can take it.