It’s not because he’s a Jew it’s because he’s a dork

Can we agree at least on this: today’s Sun front page, featuring Ed Miliband eating a bacon sandwich, is cruel, abusive and puerile. We should also be able to agree that savage satire of politicians is inevitable and even desirable in a free press.

But there’s another question where no agreement is going to be possible: was the front page of the Sun surreptitiously antisemitic?

It’s fair game to use an unflattering picture of Miliband – and the picture certainly is unflattering – but why this one? And why use it again, a year after its first use? After all, Miliband’s geekiness provides an embarrassment of riches to those seeking his ridicule. And why point out that this is a bacon sandwich? And then emphasise it with jibes about “pig’s ears”, “porkies” and “saving our bacon”?

It’s hard to avoid sensing a whiff of antisemitism here. Miliband, after all, could be the first Jewish-born prime minister since Disraeli.

Or if you’d prefer it another way, the man’s something between a schlemiel and a nebbish. Possibly even both.

100 comments on “It’s not because he’s a Jew it’s because he’s a dork

  1. It hadn’t occurred to me it could be playing off the Jewish thing until Labourites started kicking up a fuss, and it’s possible they’re, sort of, correct. But if it is, it’s nowhere near as blatant or as over the top as the Howard/Letwin flying pigs poster they ran in 2005.

  2. I thought Ed had pretty much proved that he no longer follows the Jewish faith. So how can it be anti-semitic. Or is it the usual leftie victimhood seeking diatribe?

  3. I never did get the thing about the sandwich.
    Yeah. OK. Everyone knows you can’t keep yer Yid from his bacon. Saturday morning in my kitchen used to show that. But they’re not supposed to make a thing of it. Especially if their the flavour of Yid Militwat is. And yes I have met the family. Guests at a wedding I went to.
    They’re publicly non observing Jews.
    Follow me?

  4. MatthewL

    I’d echo that – the default position of the Guardian on any issue related to Israel is pro-Muslim and anti-semitic so it ill behoves them to raise a complaint of anti-semitism I’d think – they also threw their backing behind arguably the two most famous anti-semites in Britain – Ken Livingstone and George Galloway – as the late Peter Cook said ‘mote and beam, Sir – mote and beam’

  5. Exactly, Van_Patten. I’d have thought they’d be doing everything they could to try and keep Ed’s Jewish heritage out of the minds of their readers.

  6. How can you all say such nasty things? Surely there aren’t any groups of anti-semites left in modern, equalitised Britain.

    Are there?

  7. Best not remind us Jews that Miliband us supposedly one of us. Bet the last time he saw the inside of a synagogue was for his Bris.

    I doubt many Jews would vote Labour because a “Jew” is their leader. If anything, we know a put when we see one.

  8. Dork or not, (I prefer Noel Gallagher’s “fucking communist) he is probably going to be our Prime Minister.
    And the polls show quite clearly it will be because.of the Ukip vote. Well done folks!

  9. Presumably those who regard themselves as enlightened progressives see EdM as an example of ‘the Good Jew’.

  10. That Sun headline about saving our bacon was rather good, though.

    It comes to something when we are accused on being anti-semite for laughing at the way a Jew eats a bacon sandwich, truly the genuine problems of racism have solved.

  11. Ironman, I appreciate that you’re messing your underwear at the thought of another five years of the Tory flavour of “social justice” and State authoritarianism, but some of us have more sense than to keep voting against our own interests.

  12. OK genius, how are our interests served today? Gone on, tell us how putting that Marxist bastard into Downing Street is in our interests. How are you going to do us all a big favour today?

  13. Which marxist bastard are you talking about, Man of Steel? They’re indistinguishable.

  14. Ironman – “Gone on, tell us how putting that Marxist bastard into Downing Street is in our interests. How are you going to do us all a big favour today?”

    Miliband is not his father. He is not a Marxist. He is just another Lib-Dem weirdo. In that he is no different from Clegg or from Cameron. We have no choice here. Just three different badges on the same Social Justice Warriors.

    At this stage the worse things are, the better. Things that can’t go on, won’t. So let’s move forward to the crisis as fast as possible so that we can hang all of them and start again. A Miliband victory is, at least, a victory for honesty.

  15. I’m voting for the bastard who isn’t going to criminalise ‘Islamophobia’.

  16. “He’s not a Marxist” ???
    They’re all platforming on how many jobs they’ll save. How many jobs they’ll create. Using tax money.
    It’s straight Labor Theory of Value.
    They’re all bloody Marxists.

  17. “the Howard/Letwin flying pigs poster they ran in 2005”: I was very struck at the time by Labour’s anti-semitism against Howard, presumably motivated by the desire to ensure that every Muslim voter learn that Howard was Jewish. Did either of the Miliboys protest, do you think? Either at the anti-semitism, or at the quasi-racist assumption about Pakistani and Bangladeshi voters?

  18. That’s right they’re all the same aren’t they.

    Funny, go to the Tax Research UK blog and find that they don’t think they’re all the same.

    “All the same” is a cop-out. “All the same” is a perfect vehicle for always being right no matter which outcome occurs. Tories do something: they’re just socialists like the other lot; told you. Labour gets in: the tories would have done the same; told you. Nothing you say can be disproved; perfect. Also bollocks, just infantile bollocks.

    We have a choice today. We know the results of our choice.

  19. The Guardian. The fucking Guardian. Home of Steve Bell. Welcoming hearth to any Islamist nutter on Comment is Verboten. THE GUARDIAN. Cynical fucks.

    SATIRE IS DEAD.

  20. “We know the results of our choice.”

    Pre-cognition now is it?

    Why, instead of God-like foreknowledge, why don’t you regale us with some reasons as to why BlueRinse is more “deserving” than Millitwat. Let us know “your mind at full” as the Bard put it.

  21. Ironman – Bear in mind that, for most of us, it will not impact one jot on the (probably safe) seat we are in. It will simply be a message in terms of total number (%) of votes cast…

    So, don’t worry about it, you can quite happily pop out today and vote for UKIP quite safely..:)

  22. My seat will almost certainly be held by Lady Hermon with a giant unassailable majority. I like her — the wife knows her through work, and she’s a genuine and decent constituency MP, who can be seen climbing ladders to tie her own posters to lampposts — and I like that a vote for her is still a vote against the pompous old boys’ club of Northern Irish Unionist politics, and a sign that our bit of NI is different — plus she was innocent of expenses abuse. But there’s one big thing counting against her, and that is that no-one in Conservative Party Central Office will ever say, “Oh, no, another vote for Hermon: we’re in trouble.” So I voted UKIP.

    I don’t agree that there’s no difference between Labour and the Tories these days. The trouble is the direction of travel: the differences are vanishing. I think Labour still have a lot of principles — misguided principles, but principles — but Cameron doesn’t. And a Tory party that would keep Cameron as leader, even after his dismal performance against Brown, has no principles, or no belief in them worth speaking of. The British Right is in a dreadful state, and needs to be reformed. UKIP, for all their faults, are the start of that. They might replace the Tories; they might themselves be replaced by something else that ends up replacing the Tories; or they might simply scare the Tories into self-reform. Whatever: they’re the first big step. And if they get a significant number of votes even somewhere like North Down, that sends a hell of a message to Central Office.

    As I get older, my view gets longer and longer-term. I don’t give much of a damn about making the next five years incrementally less bad than they could be. I want the next fifty years to be a lot better. For that, we need a proper, strong, principled right-wing party. And not just because I’m right-wing: as Tony Benn was always pointing out, you need real choice in a democracy, and it is the electorate who suffer from lack of choice.

    So, yes, Miliband as PM will be bloody awful. But you need a good dose of 1977 before you get a Thatcher.

  23. I’m with Ironman on this one. There is a difference between the two choices, it might be one of degree, but it exists nonetheless. There seems to be this notion that at some point things will reach a nadir, and then sense will prevail and we will magically rebound upwards. The evidence suggests that once societies reach the bottom they stay there, so be very careful what you wish for.

  24. Ian Reid: If the Tories were heading us away from disaster your idea might be sound. In reality ZaNu is the front half of the sunken Titanic crash-diving for the ocean floor. Whereas BlueLabour is the arse end of that once great vessel lazily turning circles as it sinks inexorably to the seabed. Yeah ZaNu will plunge us into the Stygian dark quicker but BlueLab will take us to the same Deep–just in a slightly more paced manner.

  25. If you vote Conservative in the belief that you are supporting a party of smaller government, and individual liberty, you are deluded.

    They are the people – for starters – who have ruined the criminal justice system in this country. When Ironman is eventually arrested for spewing hatred against ‘muzzies’, which he undoubtedly will be, he’ll have to sell his squalid little home just to pay for his own defence. At least he’ll have the satisfaction of knowing that he supported the authoritarians who destroyed legal aid at the same time as making all of us, at any given time, liable to prosecution!

    No, as S2 says, the British right needs reforming and UKIP – batshit crazy as many of them are – is the only way that will happen. It will take time, but the facts of life really are conservative and we need to take the same long view that the left does.

    Meanwhile, vote Labour – let Milliband get in and finally own the mess that his beliefs have created. The biggest political tragedy of my lifetime is that Gordon Brown didn’t get in last time round.

  26. Oh, and my MP claimed for her daughter’s rent on expenses, my vote can’t send her to prison but I’ll settle for it kicking her out of politics.

    And yes, my vote might let Labour in. But as others have pointed out above, so what?

  27. Pot of water. Frog.

    Ted – Puts the gas up to maximum.

    Dave – Quietly puts the gas on low.

    With politicians like Dave, pretending to be Conservative, the frog will get cooked but it will never realise.

    With Ted, if the gas is up high enough, the frog might just realise and try and escape.

  28. Can we agree at least on this: today’s Sun front page, featuring Ed Miliband eating a bacon sandwich, is cruel, abusive and puerile.

    Yes. If you’re gonna play in the man’s game, you’re gonna get some stick.

    was the front page of the Sun surreptitiously antisemitic?

    No.

    It’s fair game to use an unflattering picture of Miliband – and the picture certainly is unflattering – but why this one?

    Because, like the picture of his brother gurning with a banana, or Kinnock falling on the beach, it makes him look like a twat.

    And why point out that this is a bacon sandwich?

    Because it’s a bacon sandwich.

    And then emphasise it with jibes about “pig’s ears”, “porkies” and “saving our bacon”?

    Because it’s The Sun.

    It’s hard to avoid sensing a whiff of antisemitism here.

    It is hard to avoid believing what you so desperately want to believe, yes.

    Damning Miliband with porcine satire seems – like the Daily Mail’s exposé of his “Britain-hating” Jewish émigré father – to radiate some nasty connotations.

    Militwat senior did hate Britain and wanted to chain her people into communist tyranny. Fuck him.

    although perhaps the fact that Rupert Murdoch and the neoconservative right he represents purport to be philosemitic these days

    If weasels could type…

    Look, on what planet were neocons ever anti-Semitic? Given that so many leading neoconservatives are, y’know, Jewish?

    However, that doesn’t mean unintentional, unconscious antisemitism isn’t possible

    Maybe they should unconsciously, unintentionally apologise.

    if Miliband becomes prime minister the prevalence of this sort of image will need to be tracked

    First, they came for the bacon sarnie chortlers…

  29. I’m not disputing what anyone says about the current motley bunch of faux conservatives that masquerade as the Conservative party. What I’m saying is that with Milliband the direction of travel will be further faster. He’s also likely to engage in some form of gerrymandering that will make it difficult for them to ever not be elected again, think client state with lots of state jobs, immigrants etc. as Blair did. There is more chance that a real Conservative will emerge from within the ranks of a Conservative Government, remember Dave is not going to do a third term, than there is of finding a way back from a Labour Government. It’s a small chance, but it’s the only chance.

  30. Labour voting migrants are already arriving under BlueLab. Millidick would have to go some to bring in more than they already are.

    State bribes?–increasingly not possible for a bankrupt state that survives on borrowing from mugs who can’t grasp they will never be paid back (or are too frit to stop in case the whole cardhouse falls) and counterfeiting funny money.

    The whole system is going down sooner or later. ZaNu will–I believe–make it sooner.

  31. Steve,

    > Look, on what planet were neocons ever anti-Semitic? Given that so many leading neoconservatives are, y’know, Jewish?

    To be fair, the Labour Party’s full of antisemitic Jews.

    More to the point, no-one on the Left actually knows what a Neocon is. They think it’s a conservative with a scary-sounding prefix, which is why they idiotically misuse it to describe people like Murdoch. They also of course have a well established history of using it to mean “fucking Jew”.

  32. S2 – To be fair, the Labour Party’s full of antisemitic Jews.

    I already had a low opinion of Ed Miliband, but his proposal to criminalise “Islamophobia” boggled my mind.

    He wants to make it a criminal offence to criticise people who would gleefully chop his head off for being a Jew.

    Things have taken a strange turn indeed when the Labour Party is more dangerous to the future prospects of British Jews than the BNP is.

  33. I do love the “Everything will come crashing down. People will realise. Let’s get on with that” line.
    The people of Cuba haven’t yet all realised. The people of Russia think their president is great and will continue to think that if he gives them nationalist eat to eat. The people of Wales are convinced Labour has made their world better; only those who have left and never go home know better.

    No, sorry, the is no such thing as a good election to lose. Just more puerile drivel.

  34. > Squander Two convinced me to vote UKIP.

    Ha! I’ll tell my mum that. She’ll probably kill herself just so’s she can spin in her grave.

  35. > The people of Cuba haven’t yet all realised.

    Er, the people of Cuba are willing to risk crossing shark-infested waters in inner tubes to get away.

  36. Ironman – I don’t want to set the world on fire. I have children and a mortgage and a pension.

    I was seriously conflicted about who to vote for in this election, but reading S2’s reasoning above, the killer line being no-one in Conservative Party Central Office will ever say, “Oh, no, another vote for Hermon: we’re in trouble.” So I voted UKIP. persuaded me to do the same.

    If it’s any consolation, my Tory MP will get back in. So my vote was just a small token of protest. If I lived in a marginal constituency, I’d probably have grudgingly voted Conservative again. I’d rather have a crappy Conservative government than a Labour one.

    But as Dave said, we can’t go on like this.

    Ted S. – how very courageous of you, Minister!

  37. Ironman: Things will crash regardless of which arse-cheek gets in. Cuba is not a democracy –and neither –arguably–is Putin’s Russia. As for Wales and other Labour voting areas–well mental illness better covers that than tribalism. To me it seems that lots of the ~”my Dad voted Labour” crowd actually act as if they are voting for the Ghost of Harold Wilson rather than the middle-class Marxist pukes that ZaNu actually consists of these days. They just can’t not.

  38. Mr Ecks – I’ve been to Wales. As soon as you cross the border, the mobile phone stops working. Then you half-glimpse the natives, spying you from among the trees at the side of the motorway. They look part-Ewok and part-hobbit.

    You’re not allowed to take pictures of them, because they believe it will steal their soul. They point at aeroplanes. They worship Aled Jones as some sort of god.

  39. @S2
    >> There is more chance that a real Conservative will emerge from within the ranks of a Conservative Government

    > Why?

    Well because they are most likely to be a pragmatist, and realise the best way to achieve their aims is from within an already established party, that still purports to represent their values, than starting their own party from scratch, or “rescuing” a fatally tarnished brand like UKIP. But I might be wrong.

  40. @Ironman

    ‘Describing an entire nation as mentally ill just about sums you up.’

    That’s exactly how you described the Russians. Consistency, it’s hard, eh, my old Saffa mate?

  41. Ian,

    That’s a reason why they would emerge from an established party, not from within a government. I think a strong leader is far more likely to emerge from opposition, and history is on my side.

  42. Ironbrain: “Describing an entire nation as mentally ill just about sums you up.”

    Yeah–as someone with a far greater connection to reality than you.

    If anyone supports socialism there are only 3 choices as far as I am concerned–deep, deep stupidity attended by equally deep sanctimony, mental illness or you are fucking evil.

    Where did I say ALL Welsh people supported socialism? I described Wales as a Labour voting area–which it is. Common sense should tell anyone not you that that does not mean that everyone in Wales supports ZaNu. Especially stupid to claim I did say that when you said the same thing yourself over on the “vote UKIP” thread :

    Bloke in Wales: “Doesn’t matter how I vote here, the Labour twat will get elected”

    You: “Bloke in Wales

    I lived in Bridgend for 6 years. Yep, you can vote for whoever you want, won’t make any difference”

    Strive harder lad to make the breakthro’ to sense– or at least coherence.

  43. No, you explained ‘only’ the 40% Labour voters as being mentally ill. And then.Steve described “the natives” as being part-Ewok and part – hobbit.

    I do indeed believe I am just better than you – and this is why. People like you vote Ukip. Your statements today are no better than that woman on ‘Meet the Ukippers’ who couldn’t sit next to a black person at dinner.

    Vote Ukip? Are you joking?

  44. Squander Two – He did walk in the air. Beat that, Jesus of Nazareth.

    Ironman – And then.Steve described “the natives” as being part-Ewok and part – hobbit.

    Some of my best friends are Welsh.

    Obviously I wouldn’t let them in my house, because it’s hard to get rid of the smell of daffodils and slate cavern aged cheddar, and they’re frightened of my magic lamps, but still.

    What have you got against hobbitses and ewoks, ya daft racist?

  45. I will say it again. If “they”–regardless of the origin, ethnicity or anything else are supporters of a death cult that has murdered 150 million people in the last 100 years and ruined the lives of hundreds of millions more, then they are:

    1-Deeply stupid/sanctimonious–or
    2-mentally ill–or
    3-evil

    Of course the supporters of such a creed don’t see themselves as such but neither do any evildoers. They are always fighting for good–that’s how they live with themselves.

    I am increasingly tired of your bizarre habit of assigning beliefs etc to people for which you have not the slightest evidence. Presumably because the boiling pot of poisonous leftist cant inside your head needs some way to release a dangerous level of pressure. If you wish to argue please at least do so on the basis of what has been said rather than by projecting your own Shadow side (c/f Jung) onto others.

  46. Mr Ecks – I was taken aback to learn that Mr Ironman thinks being compared to Samwise Gamgee is an insult.

    Wicked! Tricksy! False!

    He’s probably a cave troll, or some type of balrog.

  47. > that woman on ‘Meet the Ukippers’ who couldn’t sit next to a black person at dinner.

    If you think any party has a monopoly on such people, you’re deluded.

    Labour like to claim they’re the anti-sexist party, too. My mother — four times Labour candidate — finds that idea laughable. People are people. Most are bastards, in one way or another, some in lots of ways. Parties are made up of them, so every party is full of bastards. If voting the same way as a bastard puts you off, vote for no-one.

  48. S2 – indeed, it’s only the type of knobgobblery that varies between parties.

    Labour – peevish public sector workers who read the Guardian, Jeremy Kyle guests, guys called Mohammed who vote on behalf of the 423 people registered to their address

    Tories – curtain-twitching Neighbourhood Watch members, thick posh folks, red-eared farmers

    Liberals – cyclists, weedy-looking men with watery eyes, guys with little grey beards and sandals

    Greens – filthy hippies

    UKIP – golf club bores, people who collect the golliwogs from marmalade jars, folks who write letters to the Daily Mail and use phrases like “political correctness gone mad”

    SNP – vile, heroin-addicted junkies from the slums of Leith, drunk ginger bastards with a mouth full of rotten teeth. Russ Abbott. The black guy from Porridge.

    Plaid Cymru – dark-haired, sunken-eyed midgets from the valleys, male voice choirs, Shirley Bassey.

    Most people are cunts, which is why I’m amazed I’ve put up with them all for so long.

  49. I categorise socialists into two groups: they are all either cretins, or cunts. Or in a very few cases, such as Gordon Brown, both.

    The ones that can’t relate the history of the 20th century to socialism’s body count are the cretins. The ones that can, and still call themselves socialists, are the cunts.

  50. Steve, your last line put me in mind of a friend who said “when I was young I thought most people were bastards. Now I’m older I realize the error of my ways. They all are.”

  51. The Tories are bed-blockers against the emergence of a sincere, principled pro-liberty, small government mass political movement. I doubt they can be changed since their fundamental preoccupation is with winning elections. So they must be destroyed or taught that they cannot hope for a majority without that change. I, too, am taking a longer view than five years. As problematic as MT was for libertarians, the last time I felt any optimism for this country was three decades ago. My entire adult life has been one of political despondency. The Tories rely on people settling for them. Well, I wont do it. I demand better and I’m prepared to wait for it.

    Now I’m off to vote. For UKIP.

  52. Ed wants to kill the goose that lays golden eggs.

    Dave wants to carry on stealing the eggs for as long as he can.

    Neither is a good option for the goose.

  53. Just a general point, the point of voting Kipper is not to prop up the Tory Party. It is to hasten its destruction. This is why short-termist wallet-predicated voting misses the point.

    Peter Hitchens is very good on this. The Tory party is now a zombie party that stands in the way of any useful change. Its woeful combination of social justice leftist policies and unproductive nastiness is the major reason that we are being dragged over the abyss.

    Of course, there are some people- naming no names- who want a Cultural Marxism With Slightly Lower Direct Taxation party. But those of us looking to get Britain back on course are playing a longer game.

  54. @steve “He’s probably a cave troll, or some type of balrog.” – not a balrog, that would be too much – from wiki

    “but are instead Maiar, lesser Ainur like Gandalf or Sauron, spirits of fire whom Melkor had corrupted before the creation of the World”

  55. “The Welshman’s dishonest, he cheats when he can
    He’s little and dark more like monkey than man
    He works underground with a lamp on his hat
    And sings far too loud, far too often and flat”

  56. Bloke In Wales-

    The enemy these days isn’t socialism. It’s Progressivism. Part of the problem in my view with both Libertarians and Right Wingers is most seem to think it’s still the 1950s in political terms, and are most comfortable fighting a socialist/communist threat rather than the actual problem, the Proggies.

    Which is why all this overheated rhetoric about if Miliband wins he’ll have us all in Mao Suits completely misses the point.

  57. The enemy these days isn’t socialism. It’s Progressivism.

    Yes.

    Part of the problem in my view with both Libertarians and Right Wingers is most seem to think it’s still the 1950s in political terms, and are most comfortable fighting a socialist/communist threat rather than the actual problem, the Proggies.

    It used to be that the Labour Party had two distinct strains, the Communists and the moralists. The latter was, effectively, a secularised form of Methodism. It’s why Harold Wilson could say to his party conference, ‘This party is a moral crusade or it is nothing.’

    The two factions were in tension throughout Labour’s history, until the death of Communism in the early ’90’s. Yes, there are still are a few unrepentant Reds around, but for the most part it is the moralising, or ‘Progressive’, wing that has triumphed. Try googling on the phrase, ‘More Methodist than Marxist.’

    That old saying about how the Right see their opponents as mistaken, but the Left see their opponents as evil, has more than a grain of truth to it. The Progressive strain of Leftism has for years wrapped itself in the cloak of moral righteousness. And while the Right has been tilting at Marxists windmills they have allowed the Left to paint them as morally bankrupt. We need a solid, coherent moral philosophy that explains why it is that it’s the Left who are immoral.

  58. @ Ian B
    You are talking utter bollocks; longer game? What do *you* know about a longer game? We have an electoral system designed to give IngSoc a majority in the House of Commons if they get one-third of the votes and right wing parties get less than 60%. Voting UKIP will help Ed Millionaireband to set this (but not his election promises) in stone.
    There is no chance whatsoever of UKIP winning a majority so your target of destroying the Conservatives to enable UKIP to win is delusional.

  59. “Right wing”, Spode, is where you make your bloomer. To those of us of a small government mind, “right wing” is irrelevant.

    Honestly, Milliband holds no terrors. Imagine that, and you’re imagining the end game.

  60. John77-

    It’s not about getting a UKIP majority. At this stage, it’s about preventing a Tory one. Like I said, it’s a longer game.

  61. Philip Scott Thomas-

    Yes I agree with all of that and it’s pretty much what I’ve been saying for ages. Hence my “puritans” thingy.

    Progressivism (or neo-progressivism, whatever) though should be noted as a syncretism between the “methodist” moral socialists, and post-marxist class analysis, hence its high toxicity.

    I’m not sure that the problem is so much a lack of a moral philosophy, but the woeful organisational and propagandising of everyone else compared to the Proggies; they are excellent at both those things. Libertarians and Conservatives are fucking awful at it. While the Left are coming out with “bedroom tax” and “rape epidemic”, our side are either trying to deliver a two hour lecture about the merits of the gold standard, or something about The Good Old Days.

  62. Ian B –

    I agree. I’ve often wondered why libertarians/classical liberals haven’t taken Saul Alinsky’s principles and applied them to themselves. Or why they haven’t attempted their own long march through the institutions. Or engaged in their own form of lawfare. You know, like, punch back twice as hard.

  63. Arnald–“I like you–I kill you last” The Real Arnuld

    The Black Book of Capitalism–Bwaahhhhhhhhh. Have you even perused the shite?

    “Andreani Caroline is a historian. She wrote about the migrations of the 19th and 20th centuries and how they contribute to the history of capitalism.”

    And the torture/murder starts when?

    “Francis Arzalier, is a historian, and a professor, teacher training institutes in Beauvais, head of Africa Today magazine, wrote the chapter titled “African Independence and ‘Communism'”.

    Well socialism accounts for lots of dead Africans. Still waiting for a zinging reposte to the free market.

    “Maurice Buttin, lawyer and President of the France-Palestine Association. He wrote the chapter titled Imperialism, Zionism and Palestine.”

    Yawn (Maurice Butt-in?–is this a wind-up?)

    “François Chesnais is an economist, and the author of numerous books including The Globalization of Capital, Syros Editions, Paris, 1997. He wrote the chapter titled “The Globalization of Capital and the Threats of Barbarism.”

    The Return of Conan Arnald?

    “Maurice Cury is a poet, novelist, essayist, screenwriter and television writer. Cury is President of the Writer’s Council and Vice-President of the National Union of Authors and Composers. He wrote the chapter titled “Totalitarian Liberalism”.

    Another Maurice–Another deadly indictment of the market–not.

    “Francois Delpla is a historian with specialization received in World War II. He wrote the chapter “World War II”.

    So he is keen on WW2. Not on the bit about the crimes of socialists Uncle Joe and Adolf I bet. No doubt it was the right to produce, buy, sell and trade freely that caused it all.

    “François Derivery is a painter (Group PR) secretary of the journal Aesthetic Papers, deputy editor of the journal Speech. He wrote two chapters: “War and Punishment: The Massacre of Vietnam”, and “Massacres and Repression in Iran”.

    Jesus, these intellectual heavyweights are too much for little old me. Vietnam and Iran are both of course famous for their long histories of free marketing. Wait!– could this article be an anti-Uncle Sam piece ?. Well the Federal tyranny is 100% all about free markets–give or take 99% corporate socialism or so.

    “Durand Pierre is President of the Alumni Committee of Buchenwald-Dora, a journalist and historian specializing in World War II. Pierre wrote two chapters: “Counter-Revolution and Foreign Interventions in Russia (1917–1921)” and “The Origin of Wars and a Paroxysmal Form of Capitalism.”

    Another French mental heavyweight wielding theories heavier than a Blackpool boarding house dinner. Bit light on the meat tho’–as in evidence of millions of fucking murders.

    “Jean-Pierre Fléchard is a historian, wrote the chapter titled “First World War: 11,500 dead and 13,000 wounded in 3 and a half years”

    This fuckwit can’t even count–wish WW1 only had 11500 deaths. If he can’t get the numbers right on a slaughter conducted in public and in the open air I don’t think we need to worry about any “damning evidence” he might be peddling

    “Yves Fremion is a journalist and writer, vice-president of the Voltaire Network. He wrote the chapter titled “A Pub is Worth a Thousand Bombs … (Advertising Crimes in Modern Warfare)”

    Oh Dear God–millions advertised to death and I never knew.

    “Yves Grenet is an economist. He wrote the chapter titled “Capitalist Assault on Asia”.

    Yawn 2: The sequel

    “Jacques Jurquet is a writer, anti-colonial activist from the Communist Resistance. He wrote two chapters, one about the genocide in Indonesia, and the other chapter is titled “Fascist annexation of East Timor”.

    Which political antics have what, exactly, to do with free markets?

    “Jean Laille is a reporter for Humanité. He wrote the chapter titled “The Re-Concentration of Weiler: A Century of Genocide in Cuba”.

    Again fuck all to do with free markets and personal liberty. But the had entire population of Cuba been killed by non-govt forces –which it wasn’t–that would be a tiny drop of blood on the shore of gore that is socialism.

    “Robert Pac, journalist, started reporting in the civil rights movement over 25 years ago in the fight alongside African Americans, Indigenous people of the Americas, and members of other ethnic minorities in the Americas. He wrote about the Indigenous American Genocide, and the chapter titled “The Long March of African Americans in the United States: The Unfinished Dream.”

    Pac-man needs to emerge from his own dream. The poor treatment of Indians was a US govt sideshow. There weren’t too many free marketers wearing a yellow ribbon in the US cavalry.

    “Philippe Paraire is a writer, he wrote books for children, published by Hachette Jeunesse. He wrote the chapter titled “A Slave Economy and Capitalism: A Quantifiable Assessment”, and the chapter titled “The Living Dead of Globalization.”

    Bet that gave the kids nightmares. Good fiction often does.

    “Paco Peña is a teacher and journalist in Chile. He wrote the chapter titled “North American Interventions in Latin America”.

    Dear Paco Penis–please change your title to “Nord American Government interventions in Latin America”.
    Thank you–signed The Truth

    “Gilles Perrault wrote the introduction, “Why a Book on Capitalism”.

    Because we are a pack of lying leftist shites who want to muddy the waters of socialist evil?

    “Andre Prenant is a geographer, he wrote about the events in Algeria from 1830–1998.2

    French Government show–start to finish

    “Jean Suret-Canale is a veteran volunteer of the Resistance, the underground militant Communist Youth League from 1939 to 1944, former central committee member of the French Communist Party, an honorary lecturer at the University of Paris VII, geographer and historian, and is the author of ten books about Africa and the third world. He wrote about the origins of capitalism and Africa under French imperialism and colonial rule.”

    And–as a good socialist a friend and supporter of Adolf until he fell out with his little pal Joey. Mr Canale is all wet.

    “Tomas Subhi is a sociologist, of Iraqi origin, exiled in France since 1971. Co-founder of the International Coordination Against Embargoes, he led several missions in Iraq since the 1991 war. He wrote about “Iraqi Oil Victims”.

    They tried to swim in it?

    “Monique and Roland Weyl, lawyers, wrote the chapter titled “When the Abolition of Capitalism is not Enough”.

    Another sequel for them then ” When the lies of socialism aren’t enough”.

    “Jean Ziegler is a member of parliament in Geneva, Switzerland. He also teaches sociology at the University of Geneva. His contribution to the book is entitled “Swiss Bankers Kill Without Guns”.[9]

    I used to do karate too. Didn’t help Patrick Malahyde when he played a Swiss banker in that Bond movie. Bond still whacked him.

    The Black Book of (mostly) French leftist Bullshiters would be more like it.

    Please forgive this overlong fisk but its Election Day and Arnald has it coming.

  64. For those thinking that the Conservatives are capable of changing just look at whose favourite to replace Cameron either in the short term if they get hammered or longer term if he somehow clings on: Boris Johnson.

    Ad to sociocials, well it’s simple, it’s just never been tried properly, doncha know.

  65. PST, I’m a lawyer, and particularly interested in the point you make about ‘lawfare’. I’ve seen it done once, in front of a London (ie. Progressive) jury, no less. To my surprise, it worked.

    But in this sphere, I think the basic problem is twofold. First, the dynamic of dispossessed fits more easily with human rights appeals to shallow sympathy. Second, as tempted as I have been in defending drug sellers to go off on a libertarian slant about how it’s nobody’s business what consenting adults sell each other, I cant see it washing. For one, HHJ would tell the jury to disregard any such remark – assuming the jury hadn’t already done so. For another thing, it would sound like I’ve got no other decent jury points to make.

    Easy to assume I’m being a chicken here, fair enough. But I have a responsibility to my clients. I’m unwilling to play fast and loose with it.

  66. M’lud Lud,

    I think I understand what you’re saying. And I realise there’s no easy resolution.

    English society (or maybe English group-think) is shot through with the idea of “morality”. That which is societally-morally acceptable is good and desirable, while that which is not societally-morally acceptable is very bad indeed. And drug pushers are most definitely in the latter category.

    I don’t have an immediate answer to the problem. But it seems that somehow the focus of the discourse has to change.

    How do we convince an entire population that their innate emotional response to good and bad, everything that they’ve absorbed since childhood, is wrong, and that they should re-direct their moral compass 180-degrees round?

    That solution evades even me.

  67. It’s just organisation. People wildly underestimate the amount of effort the Left put in. The problem with Libertarians is we are mostly happy just taking turns giving each other talks on the gold standard, etc. We do the theory but nothing more. Most libertarians so far as I can tell have this wild, crazy belief in the power of Reason, and that Reasoned Argument will win the day. It doesn’t. We are the equivalent of those marxists sitting in huddles discussing Das Kapital and Hegel.

    The difference is that the Left do someting else; the theorists attract a circle of “doers”. Take one of my favourites: the Feminists. Yes, they start with half a dozen crazy women with a crazy idea sitting around a kitchen table. But then they form a consciousness raising group and attract other women, who are more followers than leaders. These are then actively encouraged to be activists; to go out and start, say, rape crisis centres.

    Running the rape crisis centres is enormously hard work, dealing with suffering women, etc. But the result of those thousands of thankless hours of toil is that when somebody comes looking for the rape experts, they go to the crisis centres; and there they meet a feminist explanation of the phenomenon and suggested policies, which are feminist. And that is one way that the ideology spread so rapidly.

    Libertarians, it seems to me, are quite happy with being the six crazy women around the kitchen table, and never bother with the rest of it. 40 years later it’s the same six, now elderly, people sitting there with a perfectly honed theory and sense of bafflement that nobody takes any notice of it.

  68. Ian B –

    Quite so. And so I repeat my previous point:

    I’ve often wondered why libertarians/classical liberals haven’t taken Saul Alinsky’s principles and applied them to themselves. Or why they haven’t attempted their own long march through the institutions. Or engaged in their own form of lawfare. You know, like, punch back twice as hard.

  69. I thought I just answered that (according to my own opinion). Did I miss something Philip?

  70. No, mate. You din’t miss anything.

    I was endorsing what you’d said.

  71. The explanation you give, Ian, which is perfectly plausible, interestingly illuminates the willingness of statists, collectivists, progressives, to use free labour. To exploit those less, er, gifted, or whatever.

    Libertarians cannot do that.at least not to any extent.

    I have no idea what is the answer.

  72. Ian B –

    Libertarians, it seems to me, are quite happy with being the six crazy women around the kitchen table, and never bother with the rest of it.

    Yes. What is Samizdata or CountingCats other than a cozy echo chamber?

    How do we libertarians/classical liberals take the message of liberty to the proletariat?

    Most importantly of all, how do we convince them that liberty is more important than security? That is, how do we convince them that being a morally bankrupt bastard, according to the Left’s word-view, is actually a positive according to our world-view?

  73. Most libertarians so far as I can tell have this wild, crazy belief in the power of Reason, and that Reasoned Argument will win the day. It doesn’t. We are the equivalent of those marxists sitting in huddles discussing Das Kapital and Hegel.

    OK, this is really a fairly astute point.

    Let’s imagine what what we could do with this, if we were activists.

    “Socialism is the modern equivalent of slavery.”

    “If you’re in favour of socialism, then you are no better than the Bristol and Liverpool slavers of the nineteenth-century.”

    Like I said above, punch back twice as hard.

  74. PST-

    Short pithy answer (I’m in over-excited election night mode). Why are you negative campaigning? Why against “socialism”? Have you nothing positive to say about this “libertarianism”?

    Also, don’t mean to be rude but any chance you could use the <blockquote/> tag?

  75. “Most libertarians so far as I can tell have this wild, crazy belief in the power of Reason, and that Reasoned Argument will win the day. It doesn’t.”

    Reason vs lockstep groupthink backed up by the media and ferocious denunciation of any deviation. only one winner there.

  76. Ian B –

    Yes, OK, I totally fecked up the tags in my previous comment. Soz.

    But thinking about how we take the libertarian message to the proletariat, we have to find a way to combat the moral righteousness of the Left.
    Look, who wants to be a Bond villain or Dirk Dastardly? I

    If I can prove my goodness, for all the world to see and admire,
    by screwing the rich and the banksters, well, that make makes me a good person, right? I’m a good person, then, right? And I can wear that righteousness on my sleeve, for everyone to admire.

    This is little short of not wearing the scarlet letter.

  77. PST-

    The thing is, I think our discussion here about Methodists etc, comes down to the basic problem with Classical Libertarianism (haha, by which I mean the 20th century version). My own belief is that most of Libs really don’t get it in the gut that they’re fighting for the moral high ground. Once people grasp that, you can start producing messages. It’s still mired in the 20th century and a battle against Marxism on economic determinism grounds; the battle in that view is simply an argument about who should own the means of production, and everything else is superstructural to economics (an exasperating view I first recognised at Samizdata).

    This has been part of my view for a long time. There are (at least) two ways to fight moralists. Either you can try to snatch the moral high ground by showing you are more moral. The other way- which I think might have more merit- is to attack moralism itself. Bearing in mind that The Enemy flatter themselves that they are “liberal” and that it’s “conservatives” who are the moralists, I think this may be more fertile ground.

    The problem with trying to be Holier-than-they is that you’re fighting uphill. Demonstrating that the “liberals” (American meaning) are a bunch of black-hatter puritans from an evangelical religious heritage might seriously undermine their appeal to kids who want to think they’re hip-swingin’ non-conformists.

    Sorry if I’m not entirely coherent, I’m watching the election on me other screen and keep half typing things Dimbleby is saying now turning to Robert Peston

  78. Arnald: That’s all you got numbnuts? A million pages of French Leftist bullshit demolished and that’s it.

    Not to mention the Waycist angle–Black Book of Capitalism indeed.

  79. ecksy

    you’ve got no idea. The 100m deaths comes from a fucking french book: Courtois.The Black Book Of Communism.

    You thick twat.

  80. As viz pointed out once; convince your neighbours you’re ready for the apocalypse by hiding in your garden eating nuts and berries.

    Maybe not viz, but true.

    You thick twat.

  81. Events getting to you are they chum? Why don’t you go have a little lie-down until you feel better–and brighter.

    “you’ve got no idea. The 100m deaths comes from a fucking french book: Courtois.The Black Book Of Communism.”

    So your little black book of Capitalism is not a counter weight to the millions of murders committed by your gang but is a lot of intellectual wank-whining about the evil of advertising and small scale murders conducted by crappy banana regimes run by your corporate socialist cousins. Who are fuck-all to do with the free market anyway. Thanks for the admission.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.