Geert Wilders has been a subject of modern political discourse. Curiosity drove me to see what he actually has to say. I have posted a video of his.
I do agree with his point that softening a message is pointless. All that is written or spoken on a political subject will offend some people. One cannot express views and simultaneously care if people are offended. If I cared more about getting along than about expressing views, then free media productions never would have been created. I agree with his anti-elitism too. Powerful capitalist leaders do not serve national interests. I agree that infidels should not “play dumb” to Islam and should be assertive and firm in combating Sharia style extremism. In my opinion, Bush/Obama and their neo-con/neo-liberal supporters have made it more difficult to intelligently critique Islam without being written off as part of the establishment.
My only criticism is that he did not truly show the other side of the argument, which is that ideological opposition to imperialism drives Muslims into extremism. In other words, Islamic fundamentalism can be a symptom of an alienated persona which originally fights a just cause. On the other hand, many fundamentalists are in fact motivated by visionary and cultural tendencies rather than rebellion against the West. Reducing all fundamentalism to resistance against imperialism is oversimplification.
I support those who resist imperialism, even if they do it under the banner of Islam. But to the extent they become imperialists themselves (immigration, forcing sharia on non-Muslims), I do not continue to support Muslims.