My word

No, really, I do understand why the Guardian has moderators. Libel issues and so on.

But is this really a comment that should be deleted?

14 thoughts on “My word”

  1. Brian, follower of Deornoth

    Of course it should be deleted. It is intended to subvert the current orthodoxy. In a vibrant and diverse nation we can’t allow that.

  2. Comment is free, don’t you know?

    All my comments trying to correct Polly “Final Solution” Toynbee were deleted. Pointing out that she’s wrong is (according to uncensored Guardianista apologists) calling in to disrepute the Guardian, which isn’t allowed. The fact that the Guardian calls itself in to disrepute by not fact-checking the notoriously unreliable old hag appears to be irrelevant.

    CiF is a pointless forum, its only value as a monitoring service to see what moonbattery the Left is up to.

  3. Hmm. Is Peter North really too stupid to understand the difference between black Americans reclaiming “nigger” and, erm, white British people using racial slurs against Africans?

    I’d’ve left the comment up, if I were an evil Guardian mod – it does far more to discredit the Norths than a dozen right-on comments could’ve done…

  4. John B: Bullshit.

    I for one, have issues with only one minority: leftist scum who think they can tell me what I can and can’t say in a country where many thousands of good people have given their lives for the right to speak freely.

    Free Speech means exactly that–not free unless it upsets some leftist twat (or anyone else for that matter–anyone one at all).

    Monbiots anti-freedom, anti-human, anti-reason, hate-filled green garbage is as poisonious as any “racism”.

    The rest of us live every day hearing horseshit about morality from leftists who support a creed that has so far murdered about 150 million human beings.

  5. Mr Ecks: oh, FFS. If anyone tries to arrest either North for saying stupid shit, I’ll be right next to you on the free speech march.

    That isn’t the same as the Grauniad exercising its right to publish or not publish whatever comments it sees fit, or as me exercising my right to call North a prat.

    (and I’m well aware I have no right to call North a prat on Tim’s blog, but enjoy Tim’s tolerance of such things…)

    The rest of us live every day hearing horseshit about morality from leftists who support a creed that has so far murdered about 150 million human beings.

    Probably best if you avoid pro-Hitler, pro-Stalin and pro-Mao commentators in future, since it was those three lunatic creeds, blending various existing nationalist ideologies and the mania of the individual in charge, which led to said deaths. Socialism didn’t. See: lack of mass genocide camps in Scandinavia.

  6. I agree with John B, oddly enough. The Guardian has no obligation to publish comments with the word “nigger” in them, particularly when used in an arguably offensive context.

    North’s repeated use of the phrase “jungle bunnies” is just tone-deaf stupidity. For someone who continually attacks other right-wing blogs for talking only to themselves and their sycophantic supporters, rather than trying to break stories and influence debate, he seems to have no understanding of the bridges he burns when he uses such language.

    He’s giving the likes of LC and LFF, not to mention Monbiot, a perfect excuse to play the man instead of the ball, and he’s turning off the undecideds and the curious who venture to his blog trying to get the balance on AGW stories that the MSM won’t provide.

    It’s stupid and counter-productive and, in my mind, vindicates some of the criticisms I’ve made of him down the years.

  7. “If anyone tries to arrest either North for saying stupid shit, I’ll be right next to you on the free speech march.”

    Provided you can get in to the UK. We’re closed, don’t yer know? Snow.

  8. Now-now, Mr E, you know perfectly well that there’s a difference between weather and climate ;0)

    I think the moral of this story is that racial epithets are best avoided if you’re too stupid and ignorant to use them intelligently and in an appropriate context.

  9. So Much For Subtlety

    john b – “Probably best if you avoid pro-Hitler, pro-Stalin and pro-Mao commentators in future, since it was those three lunatic creeds, blending various existing nationalist ideologies and the mania of the individual in charge, which led to said deaths.”

    There was nothing remotely nationalistic about Stalin or Mao. This is just the Left’s way of trying to change the subject. In reality neither had any time for the nationalism of their supposed nation. As for the mania of the individual in charge, it is ironic that Marxists should be arguing the individual counts in history – indeed, that History is made by Great Men. But in reality, genocide is an inherent part of the Marxist creed which is why it tends to occur regardless of which individual is in power in whatever country.

    ” Socialism didn’t. See: lack of mass genocide camps in Scandinavia.”

    But they did have labour camps and a forced sterilisation aimed, in part, at Lapps and Gypsies. Looks a little dubious to me.

  10. So Much For Subtlety

    john b – “Stalin had no time for Russian nationalist mythology? FFS, read Montefiore’s biography and stop wasting my time.”

    I did not realise that Montefiore has suddenly become infallible. How pleasant for the guy.

    I also think you misunderstand him. Until WW2 made it politically expedient, the Soviet Communist Party hated Russian nationalism, and indeed much of Russian culture. It was, after all, a Party dominated by non-Russians. Stalin spent virtually his entire life fighting against Russian nationalism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *