[Ombrageux]

I figure I might as well get the ball rolling for the Blogo-subforum.

Salon.com: The right's non-reaction to the London riots

When terrible riots hit France in 2005 the right-wing anglo-chauvinist/neocon commentariat was seized by glee and Schadenfreude. One example:

The rioting by Muslim youth that began October 27 in France to calls of "Allahu Akbar" may be a turning point in European history…The French can respond in three ways. They can feel guilty and appease the rioters with prerogatives and the "massive investment plan" some are demanding. Or they can heave a sigh of relief when it ends and, as they did after earlier crises, return to business as usual. Or they can understand this as the opening salvo in a would-be revolution and take the difficult steps to undo the negligence and indulgence of past decades.

The riots were a sign of Islamism's gradual conquest of Europe, the bankruptcy of "multiculturalism" (which does not exist in France), and proof of the French Nation's decadence and decline. This time... The shrill are largely quiet. Is it because the majority of the rioters are not Muslim? That it isn't France? An expression of Anglo-solidarity with a struggling conservative government?

[cathartic moment]

It sounds like American conservatives don't have much to say.

The British right wing (along with almost everyone else in Britain) has plenty to say about the riots.

American's certainly could say something if they wanted to. They could easily use this opportunity to attack welfare dependency, immigration, multiculturalism etc.. The riots don't challenge any of their core assumptions.

So why do you think the American right is silent?

My personal guess, as an outsider, is that they are worried about similar riots occurring in the US. They are trying to play the whole thing down, hoping to stop this culture of civil unrest from spreading.

An alternative is that they are trying to paint a largely pro-American regime (the British government) in a positive light.

[QatzelOk]

The riots were a sign of Islamism's gradual conquest of Europe, the bankruptcy of "multiculturalism" (which does not exist in France),

So the riots in France were a sign of a bankruptcy of multiculturalism in a place where this multiculturalism doesn't exist?

When a church burns down, is it because God isn't happy about not existing?