Anti-extremism always does degenerate into anti-what we don’t approve of

A teenage boy was left ‘feeling like a terrorist’ after anti-extremism police questioned him for looking at Ukip’s website at school.
Joe Taylor, 15, was reported to officers by teachers who also discovered he had looked at BBC footage of a march by the English Defence League.
Staff at Wildern School in Hedge End, Hampshire, acted on the Government’s counter-terror Prevent scheme that obliges schools to monitor children and report signs of extremism.

Sigh.

69 comments on “Anti-extremism always does degenerate into anti-what we don’t approve of

  1. So. What does Rusty do for a living again? Mr Taylor is clearly a fick.racist.pork isn’t he?

    It couldn’t have been BiG. He is in Asia somewhere.

  2. Respectable, centre ground, “non extremist” folk always have been a bunch of nasty hypocritical pricks.

    The “extremist” and racist Labour and Tory parties took part in the slaughter of a million Muslims in Iraq for no good reason. In contrast UKIP and the BNP opposed that war from day one.

    Unless you’re as thick as David Cameron or George Osborne you should be able to work out who the real extremists (and racists) are.

  3. Excellent news; schools and the police are still obviously overstaffed, so we can can cut their budgets further.

  4. Alex11,

    This doesn’t tell us that they’re overstaffed; merely that they’re pursuing the wrong goals.

    Given the number of teachers leaving the profession, and the difficulty in recruiting new teachers (hence all those TV ads for teaching), it’s hard to claim that schools are overstaffed.

    The police on the other hand aren’t struggling to find new recruits; nor are quailfied and experienced police officers leaving the force.

    Same goes for medics: there’s no shortage of triple-A school-leavers applying to study medecine. There are recruitment & retention problems in some specific areas (e.g. General Practice); but overall we aren’t struggling to keep medics.

    It’s surprisingly easy to spot problems by observing the ebb and flow of recruitment and retention.

  5. Given that the EDL is some kind of gay-kink version of Fight Club, isn’t it actually homophobic to report the kid for looking at frotage, sorry, typo, footage of them touching each other up?

  6. So you are anti-waycist Davy-boy and anti-sodomy as well.

    Now that won’t make you very popular in the CM circles you seemingly aspire to advance in.

    Although you are doubtless already a big wheel with self-hating middle-class nutters everywhere.

  7. Semi-literate as well Dave?

    I comment on the oddity that a PC white-hating prick such as yourself doesn’t share the additional pro-homo bias of his PC buddies. Suggesting the EDL are all gayboys indicates you find little merit in sodomy Davy–or you are picking and choosing your vices-turned-virtues in a very non-CM approved manner.

  8. What the fuck are you drivelling about? Any homophobia you perceive is purely projection. I do not pass judgement on the EDL _because_ it is a gay kink thing rather than actually political.

  9. All coppers (and headteachers now apparently) are complete and utter fucking bastards with knobs on. I’ve never believed the filth are my friends or that they act in my best interest. Is there anyone else left who believes other than that they first look after each other, then after the interests of the ruling pollies and that any benefit to joe public is purely an unintended consequence of the former two priorities?

  10. “I do not pass judgement on the EDL _because_ it is a gay kink thing rather than actually political.”

    So why make such an allegation if you are all in favour of homosexuality Dave–why make such claims on this blog?
    Not only are you semi-literate you seem to think everybody but you came up the lock in a bubble.

    Your suggestion about the EDL was clearly intended to disparage them by claiming that they are sexual deviants. You don’t try to insult those you dislike by claiming they are members of a group you profess to like ie the gheys. Ergo the only meaning to be derived from your statement is that:

    a) you like the EDL as you suggest they are members of a group you also claim to like–Gays.

    Or:

    b)you dislike the EDL and are attempting to insult them by claiming they are really members of a group you also dislike–homosexuals.

    QED.

  11. Doc>

    I’m not sure if I credit the police with that much competence. They’re primarily just people showing up to work every day, who don’t see their job as any more of a vocation than any other employment. As a result, most are thick and lazy because that’s the default.

    A handful – and I’ve met one or two – are actually good at their job and take it seriously. A slightly larger handful are actively bad at it, whether because of political leanings, or out of a desire for personal enrichment, or whatever other reason they find, or simply because they’re bastards.

    The vast, vast majority of police are just ill-led, poorly trained jobsworths. They’re not (IMO) capable of behaving the way you said because that would require them to a) pay attention (to the bigger picture) and b) be capable of making the correct decisions having done so.

  12. Mr Ecks>

    Is this really so hard to understand? The EDL are a gay kink group, not an extremist political group. As such, it is homophobic to ban people from being interested in them, rather than anti-political-extremism.

    “Your suggestion about the EDL was clearly intended to disparage them by claiming that they are sexual deviants”

    No, that’s all in your head. There is nothing sexually deviant about kink, or about being gay.

    I won’t even start in on your ‘logic’. GIGO.

  13. Dave,

    Don’t you mean incorrect decisions?

    Personally, I seriously question the character of anyone who chooses to be a copper. To our families eternal shame, we have three of them, in my opinion the black sheep of the family. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would choose to join the filth.

  14. Doc>

    Correct, incorrect, doesn’t it just depend on your perspective?

    “It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would choose to join the filth.”

    As I said, because it’s a well-paid job for thickos. Do you ever watch the police ‘documentaries’ on TV? It’s an interesting lesson. First up you have to get over the fact that the featured officers are quite happy to be filmed in unlawful, even illegal behaviour – because they know nothing will ever be done about it. Then, after you let that go, you can sit there and marvel at the collection of dross we’ve found to fill those jobs.

  15. “Is this really so hard to understand? ”

    Apparently it is for you Dave.

    The EDL are anti-Islamic. The only credible reason that a white-hater like yourself would mention them is to attack them.

    Yet you claim that you are saying that they should not be persecuted because they are a group of gays that you thus approve of.

    Unless you are actually attempting to claim that is a matter of actual fact (–in which case the nature and source of your facts is?) you are clearly trying to take the piss out of anyone reading your duplicitous statements.

    All your weaselling aside you have claimed that the EDL are a group of homosexuals. That a group you hate is really composed of those you love. If it were true it amounts to you endorsing the EDL. Is that your aim here Davy–to endorse the EDL? As a group of your gay friends?

    No you hate the non-PC views of the EDL and you sought to denigrate them by suggesting they are all gay. So what if they were? You approve of gays so why mention the matter at all? Since they are a homosexual group and not political as you aver why bring them into a thread about extremists in the first place?

    You are piss poor con artist Dave and it is likely your CM buddies will find little use for you in their ranks.

  16. This is the fundamental flaw with “hate speech” laws. Government should not be deciding what speech is good and what speech is bad.

  17. Fucking hell. A thread dominated by Ecksy and Dave.

    High tea at the sanitorium.

    But verging on the Dave, Britain First are far, far gayer.

  18. Ecks

    Do people really believe that there’s a thing as “Cultural Marxism”?

    Yeah, yeah I know what it’s supposed to be, but Marx? It’s lazy “let’s attribute everything to something ‘left wing'”.

    We’re back to Stormfront on this one, Eckso. It’s like the Nazis never happened.

    When the revolution happens, young man, where will you be?

    “She’s in the attic”

  19. Ecks>

    You really seem to be having trouble with the fact that there’s no hidden meaning or implication in what I said: the EDL are not what they say on the tin, and are in fact a gay kink group rather than anything political. Frankly, the only people who can’t spot that right away are repressing their own urges of that nature – which is hardly news, in your case.

  20. Cultural Marxism is a useful term for the marxist theoretical basis for left wing cultural campaign movements since the 1960s. Or are we all supposed to pretend not to know where the theories of class struggle between races, sexes, sexualities etc came from?

  21. Cultural Marxism is an acknowledged name for the Frankfurt schools agenda.

    Its only leftist apologists who play this stupid game.

  22. Ian>

    Your argument rather falls down given that those ‘struggles’ for equality have merely been piggy-backed-on/hijacked-by the leftist movements you complain about. As should be perfectly obvious given that the campaigns have been largely successful, there is nothing (or next-to-nothing) of the left about them.

    Really, it’s rather odd that you’re so invested in railing against a set of campaigns that are totally ineffective.

  23. Campaigns which are simultaneously “largely successful” and “totally ineffective”. Hmm.

    I’m not “railing” against anything. I’m on record all over the place including here arguing that the Marxism just provided a new theoretical basis for campaigns with an origin in evangelical protestantism, and that it was the Progressives who took over the Communist groups (e.g. CPGB) not the reverse.

    But part of understanding what we are up against is understanding all of it, including the class struggle rhetoric which provided that new justification after religiously derived authority ceased to be effective.

    Hence for example my own interest in feminist anti-sexualism, which replaced moral corruption arguments with oppression by the patriarchy arguments, reviving a censoriousness that was, around 1970, dead in the water. “The Patriarchy” is a marxist idea, replacing the bourgeoisie/proletariat with patriarchy/women in the power relations which are fundamental to Marxist theory. The same goes for race, gheys, etc.

  24. “Campaigns which are simultaneously “largely successful” and “totally ineffective”.”

    Er, that was perhaps clumsily written, but surely the meaning was obvious? The campaigns for social equality are nothing to do with the left and have been successful. The stuff you’re always banging on about piggybacks on the successful campaigns and has no significant effect.

    “Hence for example my own interest in feminist anti-sexualism”

    What you appear to miss is that you and a couple of beardie-weirdies somewhere are the only people who even know what that claptrap means. Whatever campaign is built on that nonsense has been entirely ineffective, clearly, because no-one’s stopped having sex as a result of it.

    It’s undoubtedly true that Marxist-leaning types have attempted to rephrase everything into the terms of Marxism, but you and they are the only people paying any attention to that attempt.

  25. Dave,

    Your denialism does you no favours. Every significant feminist group, womens’ studies department and feminist writer use the same theoretical basis and terminology, which is openly derived from marxism.

    “Stopped having sex” is of course a straw man. Even the Mediaeval Catholic Church couldn’t stop that. Come to that, gays carried on fucking each other even when it was illegal. We’re talking here about the campaigns about porn, glamour modelling and prostitution, the characterisation of (hetero-) sex as abusive and women as victims of it, the rape and paedo hysteria, portrayal of male sexuality as deviant and oppressive etc. As I said, the basic censoriousness behind this runs deep and has ultimately religious origins, but the theory that has justified and empowered it since around 1970 is Second Wave Feminism, which is marxist.

    Your “oh, one or two crazies on the fringes might have been a bit marxist” doesn’t work. I’ll give my usual example, Catharine Mackinnon, who literally wrote the book on sexual harrassment and feminist legal frameworks. Marxist.

  26. Also, like I said, I’m not much concerned with the Marxism. But it is a thing, and claiming that it isn’t is just silly.

  27. I am no great fan of UKIP, but how any rational person could see the party as ‘extremist’ is beyond me. IIRC, UKIP has been as careful as practically possible to prevent infiltration by groups like the BNP and EDL. UKIP is an established, mainstream political party: any headteacher who thinks otherwise needs to face a disciplinary procedure.

    Dave

    The EDL, who may be a bunch of thugs, have an LGBT section. This is unsurprising, given islamic attitudes to gays etc; and it does not mean that EDL is a gay kink.

    Also, ‘cultural marxism’ is a pretty well established explanatory term for the origin of political correctness, multi-culturalism, etc.

  28. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would choose to join the filth.

    Well, I considered it when I was a student because I wanted to catch criminals. A short visit to a Manchester Met recruitment office showed me they weren’t interested very much in that.

  29. Ian>

    “Every significant feminist group, womens’ studies department and feminist writer”

    There aren’t any. Nobody of any importance gives the slightest thought to the wibblings of such types – at least beyond how to pay them whatever degree of lip service will ensure no hubbub from the gullible.

    “We’re talking here about the campaigns about porn, glamour modelling and prostitution, the characterisation of (hetero-) sex as abusive and women as victims of it, the rape and paedo hysteria, portrayal of male sexuality as deviant and oppressive etc”

    You’re talking about it, they’re talking about it, no-one else pays it the slightest attention. Those ‘campaigns’ unquestionably exist, but equally unquestionably have had absolutely zero effect outside the bubble that spawned them.

    “Your “oh, one or two crazies on the fringes might have been a bit marxist” doesn’t work. I’ll give my usual example, Catharine Mackinnon, who literally wrote the book on sexual harrassment and feminist legal frameworks. Marxist.”

    Eh? She’s a complete nonentity – and you’re correct in citing her as a leading example. She may have written a book, but no-one’s paid it any attention. She has had zero effect on anything other than the bubble she inhabits.

    “Also, like I said, I’m not much concerned with the Marxism”

    Well, you sure do bang on about it an awful lot for someone who isn’t concerned.

  30. Theophrastus>

    The EDL doesn’t have an LGBT ‘section’, it has an LGBT _membership_. Everyone from Tommy on down is there to touch each other.

    Fer chrissakes, Tommy Robinson named himself after a gay rights activist.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Robinson

    The simple fact is that the EDL is a continuation of eighties skinhead culture, and no-one in their right mind still argues that that wasn’t a weird/kinky gay subculture.

  31. @Tim Newman

    It’s one of those jobs I’d never do, but am glad other people will. Like sewerage workers.

  32. Theo-

    The focus on “far right extremism” has been in this “anti-extremism” strategy and narrative since day one, as some of us “far right extremists” pointed out when it all got started. Your loyalty to the Conservative Party is charming but, in this day and age, self-defeating.

    Dave-

    The Mackinnon Doctrine is now incorporated into most Western legal systems. Our DPP is a follower of it. Not bad for somebody who has, according to you, been completely ignored.

  33. Well, you sure do bang on about it an awful lot for someone who isn’t concerned.

    No, I’m the Puritans Guy. Ask Theo or SMFS if you don’t believe me.

    As to the non-influence of the feminists, the Fawcett Society front group “End Demand” are currently “researching implementation” of the Nordic Model on behalf of the Commons Misandry Committee as a prelude to making it illegal to buy (but not sell) sex either here, or abroad.

    Not bad going for people that nobody listens to and have no influence.

  34. Ian>

    [Citation needed] as the kids say these days.

    (Incidentally, I googled ‘mackinnon doctrine’, and thought I had some credible results – then I discovered they were _all_ comments in various places by one ‘Ian B’…)

  35. Ian>

    As for the Nordic Model, that’s clearly puritanism, not marxism. Which is something I’d have thought _you_ would spot if no-one else.

  36. Which by the way they’ve already implemented in Canada after the whores had the effrontery to win a High Court battle over brothels.

  37. Dave,

    It’s nice to know my comments are getting around. Yes, it’s my own term. Feel free to use it.

    As I have said numerous times, Puritan beliefs justified after the 1960s by Marxist theory. Do keep up.

  38. Dave

    Wikipedia says: “In 2010, the EDL’s LGBT division had 115 members.”

    IanB
    But UKIP can’t reasonably be described as far-right extremists; so Tim’s headline is accurate. And you aren’t a far-right extremist, you are a closet socialist.

  39. No, I’m not a socialist. I’m a free marketeer. All I said was that Britain felt more free in the 1970s than it does now, since while we have less nationalisation we have economic controls implemented differently and less social freedom. Although we had nationalisation, the State overall does far more than it did in, say, 1975.

    UKIP are far-right extremists, as am I, and you, by current hegemonic definitions.

  40. Ian>

    I am keeping up. You haven’t presented any reason to think that people have stopped being puritanical, bar a few nonentities who have attempted to paint their own slogans on the side of the puritan bandwagon. I assure you, the world still has plenty of joyless fucks who hate anyone else having fun.

  41. Ian>

    You see quite confused by all the terminology here.

    “UKIP are far-right extremists, as am I, and you, by current hegemonic definitions.”

    UKIP is hard-right by that set of definitions, not far right.

  42. I’ve presented the fact that the academic justifications for the puritanism these days are derived from Marxist theory. I don’t know what else I can present.

    I could use the well-worn “there are no such thing as races” fallacy which comes from Richard Lewontin, an avowed marxist who proudly applied marxist theory to biology.

    I could point out that current approaches to sex/gender are Critical Theory used to deconstruct reality by “proving” that gender is socially constructed class oppression.

    And so on.

    The point is that contrary to what most people choose to believe, values trump facts. People mostly start with their values, then seek a theory to justify them which can make those values seem to be the product of reason. Since the 1960s, that theoretical justification for “PC” social campaigning has been marxist (to be pendantic, post-marxist). It’s just a fact.

    The really baffling thing here is that you seem to be claiming that feminism has been entirely without effect. I don’t know how you can assert such a bizarre thing.

  43. Ian>

    “I could use the well-worn “there are no such thing as races” fallacy”

    In what world is that possibly a fallacy? The whole idea of ‘race’ is purest nonsense.

    (Ironically, in this context, it’s a good example of people coming up with pseudoscientific waffle to justify their prejudices.)

    ” People mostly start with their values, then seek a theory to justify them which can make those values seem to be the product of reason.”

    I quite agree. And so I can’t understand why you pay attention to a few academic types who have decided to use Marxist waffle to justify their puritanism, when there’s a massive puritan bandwagon rolling along. It’s the mass of puritanical bastards who matter, not the thin veneer of Marxism some puritanical bastards attempt to spread over the top.

    “The really baffling thing here is that you seem to be claiming that feminism has been entirely without effect.”

    Where have I said anything of the sort? Obviously real feminism is a good thing, a fine expression of old-fashioned liberal principles to which we all subscribe. That has flourished despite the attempts of the Dworkins and Mackinnons to hijack the movement for their own ends by perverting it with Marxist terminology. The absurdly-named ‘radical’ feminists* are nothing more than grit in the bearings of the wagon wheels.

    *They never have the faintest idea what Radicalism is, they just think it means ‘extreme’.

  44. Go missing for a few minutes and the dickheads double.

    Arnald and Dave.FFS.

    Arnald–lets start with that mentally corpulent scallywag.

    “It’s lazy “let’s attribute everything to something ‘left wing’”.

    “We’re back to Stormfront on this one, Eckso. It’s like the Nazis never happened.”

    So it is lazy to call pukes like you out for what you are but you can call up the “Stormfront” meme for the two millionth time and this shows the intellectual vitality of the left.An Alka-Seltzer has more fizzing intellectual vitality than you.

    You are not worth any more words Arnald– fuck off back to your job or wherever you have been hiding for the past few weeks.

    Dave–Dear two-faced Dave.

    “the EDL are not what they say on the tin, and are in fact a gay kink group rather than anything political.”

    So you really are stupid enough (or a big enough liar ) to actually suggest–for real– that the entire membership of the EDL are gay. All of them. And your evidence?

    “The simple fact is that the EDL is a continuation of eighties skinhead culture, and no-one in their right mind still argues that that wasn’t a weird/kinky gay subculture.”

    So “everybody in their right mind” knows that all skinheads were also gay. Proof indeed.

    “Fer chrissakes, Tommy Robinson named himself after a gay rights activist. ”

    So if–somewhere out there there is a gayboy called Dave that means you are homosexual also?

    It’s a piece of piss this logic caper isn’t it? Mr Spock?–Dave has shit ‘im ten times over.

    “Frankly, the only people who can’t spot that right away are repressing their own urges of that nature – which is hardly news, in your case.”

    Ah –at last . If you don’t support Dave’s bullshit then you are a gayboy yourself. But were it true wouldn’t that make me your pal Davey? Christ forbid. You are the bloke claiming that there is nothing wrong with rectums so why mention it. Especially when you use it in the form of an implied insult. As it would have been used back in the bad old days that you are so far evolved beyond.

    You go back to exactly the point I made to begin with.

    Here we have Mr Gay-friendly Dave–who picks out a bunch of people that a white-hater like himself clearly despises because they don’t accept his anti-white shite and suggests– without any subtlety at all– that they are gay. Well if you like gays Dave–so what ? Why mention this characteristic of the EDL Mr Gay Friendly? You could have said that they all have BO or bad breath or whatever other childish shit your damaged brain pan could come up with.

    But you chose to claim they were all something that we are supposed to believe you like Dave.

    So again you are either saying that the EDL are just a harmless group of your eccentric gay friends–which I think any reasonable person would take to an endorsement of some sort.

    Or you are a supreme hypocrite who peddles CM rhetoric about the ok-ness of same-sexery except when you want to use the old tropes of animosity towards sodomy to attack your political enemies. If you really don’t have those old tropes in you Davey-boy why even mention the EDL in that context at all. Because those who support your “beliefs” are lovely cuddly gays and those who don’t are disgusting unmanly fags who deserve contempt.

    You are a supreme hypocrite.

  45. Wikipedia says: “In 2010, the EDL’s LGBT division had 115 members.”

    That’s not a division, more a company.

  46. Christ on a bike, I always thought the ‘deep cover liberal’ thing was fucking stupid, but this Ecks chap must be a DCL, right?

  47. As always Dave–everyone of my points totally refuted by your stunning logic. And all without writing a single word.

    You are still a supreme hypocrite. And terminally mixed up to boot.

  48. IanB

    “No, I’m not a socialist. I’m a free marketeer.”

    Socialism and free markets are not mutually exclusive, as socialism is about ownership and markets about exchange. Similarly, you can have capitalism without free markets. You may be a free marketeer, but much of your outlook is ‘Old Labour’ and pre-feminist socialist.

  49. Theo, I don’t know what you’re talking about and I’m not sure you do either.

    Out here in the rest of the world, socialism and free markets are generally considered mutually exclusive. Ownership is a key part of what makes a market free.

    I mean, feel free to invent your own definitions, but don’t expect to be understood if you do. But then considering you keep voting for a progressive-left party just because it says “Conservative” over the door, I suspect you’re not much interested in reality so much as labels.

    I think possibly what you’ve misconstrued about my position is that I advocate dismantling the State from the top down rather than the bottom up, and blame the State for the massive welfare situation rather than the feckless lower orders, the vast majority of whom just want a job that pays them enough to live on.

  50. IanB

    The distinction between socialism or capitalism and free markets is one that is frequently made by Chris Dillow (@ Stumbling & Mumbling) – a Marxist who believes in a market economy. And our host here has echoed the distinction many times. But I suspect that you are so insulated from reality by your ‘theories’ and fixed ideas that you haven’t noticed.

  51. Wildern happens to be our local comp and is the only secondary school in Hedge End. The chances of Junior Pants attending that school have just shot out of the door and fucked off over the hill. There’s no way on earth I’m letting my heir go to an institution that seeks to shut down an enquiring mind in such a high handed manner. Statist scumbags.

  52. We used to live in Alresford – beautiful part of the world. There are few places better on a sunny warm day than the beer garden of the Globe!

  53. Theo, you might do well if you stop reading and believing in “a marxist who believes in a market economy”. It’s like an atheist Christian or something, oxymoronic.

    Anyway, this is getting stupid. I believe in private ownership and free exchange of goods and services without State interference or provision.So whether your fanciful “free market socialism” exists or not, it isn’t me. I hope this settles the matter.

  54. You know, usually I like to compete with Mr Ecks for the Most Incoherent Spluttering Right Wing Rage Award. But I have to admit, Dave brings a whole ‘nother level to the competition.

    Just with a lot less Right Wingness. He makes Arnald look sensible.

    Extremism is one of those irregular verbs. I have strong views. He is on the fringe. They are sectioned under the Mental Health Act.

  55. IanB

    You are a closet socialist. The evidence is strong:

    1.You prefer the period 1945-79, over post-1979.
    2. You express sympathy with moral relativism and subjectivism, which are classic leftist doctrines
    3. You sympathise with the rights of trade unions when their behaviour often infringes the liberty of others to go about their business
    4. You often see things purely in class terms, using the revealing marxian term ‘bourgeois’ and making implausible claims about the virtue of the working classes and the vices of the middle classes
    5. You excuse the parasitism of the underclass, much as guardianistas do.

  56. Theo: The evidence is slight.

    1-As IanB has said several times–and you ignore each time–the period in question felt freer to him because the state’s meddling was confined –largely–to economic matters. The twats weren’t trying to invade homes and bedrooms with their CM shite. You could watch Benny Hill or even “Love thy Neighbour” (even tho’ that show actually poked fun at the white bloke’s attitudes) without sanctimonious middle/upper class pricks trying to dictate what “should” be in your head. And what you should eat, drink etc. Add to that nostalgia for a vanished youth and…

    There is little logic in saying that the holding of a such an opinion about a time one has lived thro = support for socialism.

    2–You will have to clarify that a bit with some actual examples.

    3-The idea that people have the right to join in associations and withdraw their labour if they have a complaint is not inherently socialist. The idea that no one should be able to–by law– do anything that even slightly upsets your lifestyle Theo IS an inherently dictatorial one . And your endorsement of such a concept does you no credit. Also the idea that every trade dispute= an attempt to advance the cause of socialism is on a par with Dave’s EDL=gay nonsense.

    There are lots of nasty scummers out there Theo. And some of them are bosses (esp in the public sector which draws idiots like turds draw flies). They sometimes do bad things. Things that would have you hooping and hollering with outrage if they were trying to do them to you. But that is different because little people should just get on with ensuring that others have a nice life and not be concerned with their own well-being. Just like you Theo

    4- Know your enemies. Class is a reality of sorts –altho Marxian bullshit makes far too much of it. But it would be equally stupid to pretend it does not exist–esp as it often needs refuting to destroy leftist arguments. Using the word “bourgeois”=support for socialism is really a Dave-like level of demented Theo. Von Mises uses the word a number of times. Does that make him a socialist? After all he did write a book called Socialism –so there is supporting evidence.

    As for working/ middle class values. The light side of such values was the building of the greatest society the world has ever seen (or ever will see at the rate we are going).
    Middle class values of thrift, diligence, success, etc joined with the chief value of the working class which was working. And being “respectable”–ie a good person Sans those two the underclass beckoned the former workers And middle-class values have their dark side also. A dark side you have often ably represented Theo. Snobbery, a smug complacency about your own rightness , the world being rigidly what you think it is,etc.

    5-Less difficult (still not –I’m not saying that) to be full of enterprise with a lifetime of attitudes and success and a good education, decent like-minded friends etc. Try being dragged up by scum, going to shite state schools , mixing with assorted crimmos and scumbags all your life. In a festering atmosphere of worthless state/socialistic promises that all know are a joke. Once the work ethic and “respectable” values have been fucked up by perverse state “incentives” –the underclass follows on naturally. And once a swamp is created it isn’t going away without being drained from the outside. But of course it is ALL their own fault Theo.

    And ALL the EDL are gay. Every one of them. Nothing to do with migrants. Its a gay club. That’s what it is.

  57. 2. I’m interested in reality, which means accepting nature as it is. And part of reality is that morals are simply shared group values which are variable and subjective. The weird thing is the claim that the Left are relativist and subjectivist, when they are demonstrably moral objectivists and absolutists. Try disagreeing with any leftist moral position and see how relativist they are; they will denounce you and cast you into the outer darkness. The fact that they have different moral values to you doesn’t make them relativists, Theo.

    Observing that morals are subjective doesn’t make all values equal. It simply is recognising that you can’t prove somebody else’s values are wrong. It does mean that people with significantly different value systems are unlikely to get along well.

    It’s a fundamental of human nature. No amount of complaining and denouncing me is going to change reality.

  58. …usually I like to compete with Mr Ecks for the Most Incoherent Spluttering Right Wing Rage Award…

    Nah, it’s X who has to wipe his spittle off his screen before he can read anything there. Your screen is unreadable anyway, ever since your mum changed the display settings for you to white text on a white background.

  59. And leftist shite have to wipe the blood off your screens .

    Do those 150 million murdered by your fellow scum give you any sleepless nights Dickwad or was it all worth it?

    No my mistake–you don’t have the balls to be a killer. You just tell the lies that do the set ups for the killers. And you are not even much good at that.

  60. Social Justice Warrior – “Nah, it’s X who has to wipe his spittle off his screen before he can read anything there. Your screen is unreadable anyway, ever since your mum changed the display settings for you to white text on a white background.”

    Cool story brah.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.