So what else is to become verboeten then?

Racism is not a valid opinion on which an “impartial” stance can or should be maintained;

What other subjects has the truth been declared upon, what other points are now simply WrongThink?

22 thoughts on “So what else is to become verboeten then?”

  1. Brexit is only step one. It must be general war on the scum of the left as they long ago declared war.

    Support for and endorsement of socialist cockrot must now become a set of beliefs just as life-destroying as declarations of admiration for Hitler would be.

    Or the bowl of cold insects is waiting for all of us–even slugcrawling submitters like the Facepainter. Evil is without mercy –even to the shite-stained who think they are its friends.

  2. Climate change denial.
    Conservative / Republican political thoughts.
    Not supporting same sex marriage.
    Any criticism of Islam.
    Stating that leaving the EUSSR is a good thing.

  3. “Racism is not a valid opinion on which an “impartial” stance can or should be maintained”

    The statement in and of itself is not that controversial, I think we can all agree that declaring one race to be superior to another is not something one can take a middle position on. The issue is beyond that – what else comes under ‘racism’? And who gets to define it? Its the classic leftist argument:

    ‘X is wrong’

    ‘Yes we agree X is wrong’

    ‘By the way I get to define what X is’.

  4. 1) Anti-abortion sentiment has been basically shadowbanned IRL in the United Kingdom for decades. Officially it’s not verboten, but try getting fair media coverage, or hosting a pro-life event on a university campus, or being an elected official and trying to restrict abortion.

    This summer it was reported that the medicalised killing of the unborn reached an all-time high of 200,000 in England and Wales. Yet – unlike insitutional class obsessions such as fox hunting or plastic straws – this received little attention in the mainstream media and zero attention from Parliament.

    And it’s related to

    2) Respecting wamen.

    As recently as the 80’s, older comics were still telling wife and mother-in-law jokes, and audiences still laughed. The Two Ronnies had an amusing recurring sketch about militant feminists, and it got aired on the BBC at prime time. Benny Hill was still hosting sexy parties.

    This has been retrospectively explained as part of the nightmarish sexistracisthomophobia of the bad old days. But of course, it wasn’t like that at all. People were just more comfortable in their own skin in them days, and felt freer to talk and laugh and celebrate la différence.

    In 1985, men were generally expected to be real men. Women were real women. Outrageously flamboyant homosexuals like Freddie Mercury or Kenny Everett were real outrageously flamboyant homosexuals, and we loved them for it.

    Now, a lot of blokes seem to be terrified of women, and the culture is amazingly deferential to ‘er indoors in ways that aren’t funny.

    The attempted rhetorical castration of the Prime Minister the other day by a monstrous regiment of wailing wimmins was a case in point: not too long ago, it was unthinkable for a lady MP to feign crying as a political tactic. It would have ended her career. Now, they feel empowered enough to behave like manipulative toddlers in public, safe in the knowledge that the mass media daren’t criticise their weaponised feels.

  5. There was an evil period, mercifully past, when folk with their 405-line valve tellies would say to one another “Oooh look! The B&W Minstrel Show is coming on next. Let’s sit down for a lovely half hour of racism”.

  6. “I think we can all agree that declaring one race to be superior to another is not something one can take a middle position on.”

    I thought Lud made a perfectly valid point on this yesterday, by breaking it down.

    One of his examples: Which race – on average – is more likely to produce the faster 100m sprinter, (and hence might be “superior” in this context). Etc.

  7. Believing someone with a beard and a penis is a man when he / she / xe or whatever identifies as a woman is definitely verboten, even for radical feminists.

  8. Not at all, PJF. First tactic is to ignore any misogyny or homophobia in Islam. Second tactic is to denounce as racist anyone who raises the contradictions. Finally, if the issues have to be addressed, roll out the cultural defence.

  9. “I think we can all agree that declaring one race to be superior to another is not something one can take a middle position on.”

    Why not? If true or even partly true, it might be relevant. If it’s false, suppressing it’s expression won’t make it go away.

    The devotees of the Religion of Equality want to suppress all talk of inferiority and superiority of people, cultures and the (two!) sexes while celebrating difference. But some differences entail superiority or inferiority – such as the greater genetic predisposition to violence in blacks, or the fact that c.80% of people with an IQ over 140 are male…

  10. On the subject of verboten opinions I can’t recall if this site has mentioned the recent epic trolling in Boston USA by someone fly-posting signs saying “Islam was right about women”.

    After tearing down said signs the usual suspects were unable to express in words the exact reason for their opposition to the concept.

  11. There was an evil period, mercifully past, when folk with their 405-line valve tellies would say to one another “Oooh look! The B&W Minstrel Show is coming on next. Let’s sit down for a lovely half hour of racism”.

    The problem with The Black and White Minstrel Show was not that it was racist, but that it was shite.

  12. “The problem with The Black and White Minstrel Show was not that it was racist, but that it was shite.”
    By the standards of the time? A lot of the audience of the 50s into the 60s had been brought up on Music Hall Variety shows. And it’s really just a broadcast version of that. Music halls were still going well into the post war era. Palladium still is, isn’t it? It’s TV that killed them. The B&WMS was a UK version of a popular US vaudeville act.

  13. John Galt: The problem with The Black and White Minstrel Show was not that it was racist, but that it was shite.

    Let’s agree that it wasn’t racist, anyhow.

    However, the whole Justin Trudeau (socks be upon him) blackface business has caused a fresh eruption of virtuous bile some of which targeted the show.

    It’s worth bearing in mind that an innocent entertainment of yesteryear necessarily wilts under the censorious gaze of today’s tribunes of the woke.

  14. So what else is to become verboeten then?

    Patriotism
    Anti: RoP, Migrant, LGBTxyz…
    GWPF and not blaming humans
    Nigel Lawson, David Bellamy, Johnny Ball, Katie Hopkins, Tommy Robinson, Milo Y, Jim Davidson…
    Drag Acts soon?

    Rod Liddle

    Rod Liddle: There is only one law: there must be no Brexit
    The weight of the state is being used to crush the aspirations of the electorate
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/there-is-only-one-law-there-must-be-no-brexit/

    If paywalled tell me and I will post full

    .
    BBC upholds complaint against Emily Maitlis over ‘sneering’ Newsnight Brexit debate with Rod Liddle
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7499983/BBC-upholds-complaint-against-Emily-Maitlis-sneering-Newsnight-Brexit-debate-Rod-Liddle.html
    telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/27/whatever-happened-impartial-journalists/

  15. “The attempted rhetorical castration of the Prime Minister the other day by a monstrous regiment of wailing wimmins was a case in point: not too long ago, it was unthinkable for a lady MP to feign crying as a political tactic. It would have ended her career. Now, they feel empowered enough to behave like manipulative toddlers in public, safe in the knowledge that the mass media daren’t criticise their weaponised feels.”

    True, but the people do. And the people won’t generally make too much noise about it.

    No-one likes suppliers that are supposed to be delivering for them being pathetic or self-indulgent. You want to know that an MP is fighting for you, and can stand up to it. If they’re going to crumble at “humbug” you’re going to think less of them.

Leave a Reply

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