Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Thought police muscle up in Britain

I came across this excellent article today. Excerpt:

"BRITAIN appears to be evolving into the first modern soft totalitarian state. As a sometime teacher of political science and international law, I do not use the term totalitarian loosely.

There are no concentration camps or gulags but there are thought police with unprecedented powers to dictate ways of thinking and sniff out heresy, and there can be harsh punishments for dissent.

Nikolai Bukharin claimed one of the Bolshevik Revolution's principal tasks was "to alter people's actual psychology". Britain is not Bolshevik, but a campaign to alter people's psychology and create a new Homo britannicus is under way without even a fig leaf of disguise.

The Government is pushing ahead with legislation that will criminalise politically incorrect jokes, with a maximum punishment of up to seven years' prison. The House of Lords tried to insert a free-speech amendment, but Justice Secretary Jack Straw knocked it out. It was Straw who previously called for a redefinition of Englishness and suggested the "global baggage of empire" was linked to soccer violence by "racist and xenophobic white males".

In the past 10 years I have collected reports of many instances of draconian punishments, including the arrest and criminal prosecution of children, for thought-crimes and offences against political correctness."

8 comments:

SteveUK said...

It may be government that are commented upon, but they are just doing what the root cause want/allow them to do.

The root? women.

MiguelPT said...

I have another hipothesys:

The root cause is an entire generation(s) of people in which were taught the basics regarding society and political correctness:

Discremination against race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, etc.

These people that were taught with such basics didn't got enough "education" regarding what extremes such measures to protect minorities are actually harmfull to society as a whole and hadn't grasped individualist values enough to think for themselves, to criticize what they were taught.

I believe that/those generations are now in power/in charge and as such we have a giant homogenous voice with a tremendous influence and lack of comun sense.

Although I can agree that women in general are more prone to colective thinking and over-conscious regarding political correctness but I don't think that women ALONE are a root factor regarding this.

Please share your thoughts. I don't want a heated discussion, what I really want is discern what are our differences.

BrusselsLout said...

The politics and character of the UK took a horrendous turn, slowly and incidiously, over an uncertain number of years.

Totalitarianism of some flavour it certainly is. Libertarian commentators no longer hold back from calling Britain's government authoritarian.

The government is seeking greater and greater control over people's lives, and is introducing more and more draconian measures to achieve it.

But the real problem is this. They have achieved it with the country's blessing. How? By creating a mass mentality of fear and distrust, through the media. This prevents solidarity amongst the citizens, making control far easier.

New tough laws are disguised as protective measures. This makes such laws popular. (And, as Steve above rightly points out, it's women who are more easily frightened and who demand more protection.)

I'm glad another country has made this observation. We now need more big international players to make similar assessments.

Anonymous said...

Jack Straw is not a woman, Gordon Brown is not a woman, most of the people in the ring of power in your country that are destroying your personal freedoms and national identity are not women. Don't blame women for the fact your people have become cowards and your leaders are taking advantage of it

Joker's Wild said...

I can't believe this is real. It's all like a bad dream.


The liberals in the U.S. are trying to pass hate crime legislation which would make transgendered and homosexuals protected groups like women currently are with the Violence Against Women Act.

All of these laws clearly violate the 14th amendment's equal protection clause.

What makes their life's worth more than a heterosexual male's?

Heretic said...

Dear Anonymous,
Read this: The real goal of feminism

SteveUK said...

Anonymous said...

Don't blame women for the fact your people have become cowards and your leaders are taking advantage of it
'My' people (read: men) have become cowards exactly because women wanted it that way.

Women thought that they could only achieve 'freedom' by creating kaos in their environment.

Thats why political correctness has been such an effective tool for them.

EVERYONE IS EQUAL!

EQUAL RIGHTS FOR BLACKS! EQUAL RIGHTS FOR MINORITYS!
EQUAL RIGHTS FOR THE DISABLED!
EQUAL RIGHTS FOR WOMEN!

All this PC stuff was designed to say to men, "There are too many of us to stop, so dont even try."

and in predictable fashion, men saw all this (along with the other tools to de-stabilize men), and instead went to the golf course, allowing women to do whatever they wanted, at the expense of society.

In Britain, their has been a sustained attack on men.

One of these other tools that has been used to destabilize men is the pedophile hysteria, particularly in the late 90's, which was created by various groups, the trash media, womens and even childrens charities (headed by women, ofcourse).

All these groups had their own agendas, but its the female agenda which I see as most dispicable. I believe that the concern shown by women for children was secondary to their true aim, which was to destabilize men.

(There are reasons for this, including a certain amount of shining light on the rare and occasional criminal behaviour of men, to defect the attention away from what is now starting to come to light: the psycho-sexual power games between women and children, which we are only know starting to talk about, thanks to the internet.)

So women on the street knew what was happening at the time of the pedophilia hysteria in the late 90's, and yet went along with it, and said nothing in defence of men, the vast majority of whom are good people. But again, and another reason not to stand up for men, because it would mean women sacrificing their 'freedom'. Women knew that this was a golden opportunity to cow men into silence. To prove it, you only to look at the small number of male primary school teachers to see that men have been scared away from involvement with children, even in education. This lack of male involvement in childrens lives is disastrous for children and society as a whole.

So yes, I do blame ordinary, everyday women for the situation 'my' country finds itself in, because women have at best been complicit, and at worst they have actively tried to destabilize and demonize men, for their own gain, at the expense of men, children and society.

BrusselsLout said...

Anon:

The mindset of powerful men like Gordon Brown and Jack Straw is 2-pronged. First of all men, with their passion and love for women, are naturally chivalrous. (Erin Pizzey called it the "chivalry gene".) Meeting the demands of feminists helps such men as Brown and Straw live that chivalry.

But secondly, feminists, with their immature hatred of men, are the useful idiots that powerful men need in their propaganda efforts to create the public fear needed to successfully pass draconian laws that are ultimately to the individual's deteriment. (Which they want for greater and greater control.)

And idiots these women are. Look at Harriet Herperson and Squeequi Smith to name but two. Could these two ever have been promoted to such senior positions on merit alone?

I firmly believe that New Labour are operating an internal policy of positive discrimination. This is an illegal practice, but who is going to prove that manipulative word-merchants like politicians, many of whom have top degrees in law, broke the law behind closed doors?

Moreover, the two factors of chivalry and useful stupidity feed off each other. Chivalry gets incompetent women in. And the usefulness of these women calls for the promotion of more of them.

In short, powerful men use feminists, and feminists use powerful men.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with women in general. It's FEMINISTS who are the real danger, as much as the MEN who use them and who are used by them.

The two awful groups might deserve each other, but we don't deserve them!