Witch-burning is out of fashion in the West these days. Fortunately. But the intolerance that caused it is still with us, and it’s getting more strident. The Internet has given voice to some whose opinions, frankly, are odious, and ‘multiculturalism’ that shameful abrogation of the moral values of our secular society, makes it increasingly difficult for anyone to express legitimate criticism of some of the nastiest ideas put forward by what is, frankly, a thoroughly poisonous group of people.
Today, the victims of the intolerance are not witches or pagans or dissident Protestants, Catholics or Jews. They are ordinary decent people who have been brought up to believe that they have a right to speak freely. After all, the US has a Constitution that enshrines it, and through all those long years of the Cold War, the one thing we in Europe held most dear was that in our culture, freedom of speech was assured, for without it, there would be no freedom at all. If we were to be ‘better dead than Red’ and we would have been, it was in the name of Freedom of Speech that we should have faced our nuclear Calvary.
And then, almost three decades ago, the shadow lifted. The Soviet Union, the Evil Empire of our nightmares, collapsed with the image of an unlikely, boozy saviour, Boris Yeltsin, facing down the tanks sent by the Communists to seize him and snuff out freedom.
And that was that. What on earth were we going to do with all that freedom? Alas, the forces that created the Evil Empire were still at work, their minions following blindly the words of their dead prophet, Karl Marx.
We reckoned without the vicious footsoldiers who today are the front for Communism; the so-called ‘Social Justice Warriors’. Oh we were warned. in the 80s, the anti-freedom cult of ‘Political Correctness’ first raised its ugly head. Many people were destroyed by it, like the English comedian Bernard Manning. Now I never really thought Bernard was all that funny, but the whole premise was that it was humour, and humour is meant to be fair game. Distasteful jokes are part of it. It is FREE SPEECH.
Perhaps I was preoccupied or perhaps things really did quieten down, but in fact all that happened was that the evil spread silently. Today it is re-emergent, now trumpeting its shiny new buzz-words of of ‘Postmodernism’ and ‘Identity Politics’ with emphasis on ‘Diversity’ and ‘Affirmative Action’ — nu-speak for ‘discrimination’.
Don’t be fooled; these are just the enemy’s new clothes. These are the same
old Communists we fought in the Cold War but now, far from being behind some distant Iron Curtain, they are right here in our midst, controlling what we say and how we say it. And if you control speech, you are nine tenths of the way to controlling thought.
And to make matters worse, the rest of us are paying their wages.
Hate Speech doesn’t exist.
There is no such thing as ‘hate speech’. Even if speech does express that sentiment, it is still free speech. All civilised cultures have laws against incitement — that is, it is illegal to attempt to persuade or encourage another to commit a crime. So screaming that a particular individual should be harmed is actually a criminal offence and so it should be; calling the same individual a nasty name or word, or even a perfectly reasonable word that that person does not wish to be called, is not a crime. It might be rude and it might even be provocative, but neither of these is a crime.
The Holocaust is a stain on history and it certainly did happen; saying it did not is unsupportable, but legitimate free speech. Calling black people ‘niggers’ or for that matter, Scottish people ‘Jocks’ is highly offensive — but not a crime.
It is not ‘an act of violence’ to observe that a man in a frock is a funny kind of woman. Nor is it such an act to say that women are deserving of sex-based protections because they are different from men, and that middle-aged bruisers in frocks should stay the hell out of them.
A handy guide to toilet use
Here is a handy guide, by the way: if you are trans and you are confident that you can use a women’s facility without anyone being any the wiser, go ahead. Nobody will ever know. This whole problem has been caused by men in frocks who could not pass as women on a dark, moonless night, during a power-cut, insisting that they are ‘real women’. Well, you’re not, and stay the hell out of women’s spaces.
Here’s another thing: in years of researching this I have never — not once — heard of a transwoman being assaulted in a male toilet. In fact I did a couple of hours of specific research today and guess what? Not. One. Example. Plenty of cases of non-passing autogynephilic ‘transgenders’ being assaulted in WOMEN’S spaces. Not one in men’s. Could it be that men don’t give a fuck what you’re wearing, cause they are only in there to take a piss? Maybe?
Or would the common-sense there be too triggering? Face it: Kevin Balot could walk into any female faculty on the planet and no fucker would ever know. Are you seriously so blind/stupid/royally fucked in the head that you do not realise that 1) Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner needs more than a power-cut to pass and that therefore 2) He should NOT BE IN A WOMEN’S SPACE?
This is not hate speech; this is just expressing truths that some people don’t want to be expressed. But they have no counter to the common sense, so what they try to do is rule the whole subject off limits. This is where tolerating Political Correctness got us. Bernard was bloody right.
What about this? The UK has had five major terrorist attacks so far in 2017, with significant loss of life. That is roughly one every fifty days. That is far more than ever was the case on the UK mainland during the Northern Irish Troubles and comparable to or worse than Belfast during that period. Every single one of the attacks this year was carried out by Muslims who believe the core message of the Koran, which is to conquer the world by any means necessary and establish a global Caliphate. (Please; don’t take my word for it, download the texts and read them for yourselves. ]
Is it ‘hate speech’
So is it ‘hate speech’ for my kinsman Douglas Murray to suggest we could do with a little less Islam? NO IT IS NOT. It is a perfectly reasonable observation. We did not have Islamic-inspired terrorism prior to allowing Muslims immigration in the first place and in the second, standing by and allowing Saudi Arabia to fund mosques where they are radicalised. We absolutely do need a lot less Islam and we should be assiduously converting people away from that creed, which is not in any way compatible with secular democracy and its core of Free Speech.
Now, perhaps Christianity does contain some of the intolerance that we recognise within radical Islam. But the fact is that Christians are not blowing children up with nail bombs or ploughing into crowds of innocent people in speeding trucks. Christianity is not the enemy of peace, or of Free Speech, or of democracy. To find those you need to look at the modern Left, the SJWs and behind them, of course, the radical feminists, who are just Communists in new panties.
Despite that, I do recognise that not all Muslims are suicide bombers: the problem is, it is rare to find a Muslim actually condemning those who are. Perhaps we might be more forgiving were that to be the case. But I fear we shall wait till the cows come home.
The powers of evil
The twentieth century taught us that the powers of evil will manifest and grow when people tolerate them, and it is long since time, I fear, to decide which side of the fence we stand on. I have always tried to be as tolerant of others as I could be, and have only asked that they be as tolerant of my lack of it. But when I see when I see Leftist ‘educators’ propose to stuff my children’s heads full of absolute nonsense on the grounds that it will not challenge a fictional Dark Age text, made up on the fly by a conniving would-be warlord, I know that this is a one-sided bargain.
In the secular haven that was Europe, and in particular in the United Kingdom, we have allowed ourselves to be lulled into a false sense of security. Even the rise of militant Islam has not, it seems, provoked us to take matters seriously, and, apparently because of some politically-correct taboo against challenging issues of faith, horrific cruelties like the circumcision of both male and female infants go unchallenged.
We abrogate these children’s human rights when we allow their parents to mutilate them in this way. We would never under any circumstances permit such a practice for say, political reasons, irrespective of the desires of the parents: the children would be taken into protective care and the parents locked up. And this is exactly what should be happening, but it is not, because we are afraid of upsetting ‘people of faith’. But why should we be afraid of that? These practices are abominable no matter who does the cutting of innocent flesh, which fictional deity they follow, or what their ‘culture’ is. There is no possible moral or logical argument that could excuse these abuses of the innocent; and, that being the case, the Enemy has decided that we should not be allowed to discuss the matter at all.
The menace is not some faraway evil empire, armed with enough weaponry to completely obliterate us, but an empire of evil that is being preached from colleges, schools, universities and mosques in our very own towns and cities. Its prophets and imams hold ‘academic tenure’ which gives them carte blanche to foment sedition — at the taxpayers’ expense.
Do we identify this menace for what it is? Do we unambiguously condemn imams who make their women cover their faces in public, or who threaten death to those who mock their ‘prophet’? Do we condemn the neck-bearded not-men who claim that there is no such thing as biological sex? No indeed, and instead, we even seek to stifle those who would condemn them and their appalling ideas and behaviour.
We are not allowed even to challenge those who challenge us, the debate is ended before it is begun, because it would be ‘hate speech’.
This must change. Witch-burning must not return
Religion, no matter whose, is a legitimate target for criticism, mockery and satire. All forms of politics are subject to challenge. There is no ‘white privilege’ and ‘equality’ in the lexicon of the not-so-new Left, is just Communism. And that has been tried, and failed, many times, with unmeasurable suffering and hundreds of millions killed in the experiment.
If the witch-burnings, false imprisonments and the other contemptible abuses of humanity that are ever the sanction of cult belief, be it religious or materialistic, against its critics are to be prevented from consuming Europe, then we must speak out loud and clear: and that means reclaiming the language we need to do it.
And the bonfire of Leftist vanity begins here: there is no such thing as ‘hate speech’.