Page edited by Ms Polly Sexual
All-Female Networks And Spaces: A Step Back For Equality? Posted February 19th 2020
According to a 2018 survey, over 70 percent of women aged 16–64 are employed, this percentage has increased from slightly over half (53 percent) in 1971. Women represent just under half (46.5 percent in 2017) of the total labor force in the UK. The majority of mothers work. In 2014, almost as many women with children (74.1 percent) participated in the labor force as women with no children (75 percent). In terms of leadership, women’s board representation in FTSE100 companies increased from 11 percent in 2007 to 28 percent in 2017. Not exactly half, is it? And, when we look at the percentage of women in senior leadership roles, this has remained even lower at 22 percent in 2018. A report by Catalyst says that women in the Fortune 500 now make up 14.6 percent of executive officers, only 8.1 percent of the highest paid and under five percent of CEOs.
Lack of women leadership means that women can often face more bullying in the workplace, the workforces is less diverse at the top, and that the mental well-being of female employees can suffer too as they feel discriminated against and do not have the same opportunities to progress. The lack of women leaders also creates a paucity of role models that can inspire other women to enter and stay in the workforce.
Studies have shown that unconscious bias is rife in the workplace. Gender stereotypes, in particular, are
No matter what we say about equality, we are not quite there.
Why do we need women-only ne
Language studies have shown that men interrupt more than women. A study from George Washington University found that men interrupted 33 percent more often when they spoke with women than when they spoke with other men. According to the researchers, over the course of a three-minute conversation, men interrupted women 2.1 times. In contrast, during conversations of the same duration, men interrupted other men only 1.8 times—and women on average interrupted men only once. An analysis of 43 studies by two researchers at the University of California at Santa Cruz from 1998 found that men were more likely to interrupt women with the intent to assert dominance in the conversation, meaning men were interrupting to take over the conversation floor.
Julia Baird in New York Times says “The prevalence of the manologue is deeply rooted in the fact that men take, and are allocated, more time to talk in almost every professional setting. Women self-censor, edit, apologize for speaking. Men expound.”
A study by researchers at Bingham State and Princeton University showed that when women are outnumbered, they speak for up to a quarter of time less than men. Women deliberate; they do not often speak until they are 100% confident. Research has also shown that more men have a propensity to “mansplain” and as they become more powerful, they become more voluble. Women, on the other hand, become more concerned of backlash as they reach leadership positions, so female leaders are likely to speak less often than men in spaces even with equal representation of men and women. There is also research showing that women take longer to process thoughts before they feel comfortable to say them out loud than men do.
In another New York Times article, Sheryl Sandberg and Adam Grant mentioned studies showing that women are often ignored in workplaces when they speak up, or they are termed very aggressive. This double bind bias affects women in mixed-network situations too. Often when a man expresses the same opinion, he is more likely to be taken seriously.
This effect has also been shown in studies carried out in the classroom, where men are seen to be more outspoken than women. In a Harvard study, Women and Men in the Classroom: Inequality and Its Remedies, Catherine G. Krupnick researched gender’s influence on participation within various classroom settings at Harvard College. Across different settings, male students spoke more often than female students. But this effect was minimized when there was a female instructor. Women felt more confident and were shown to be more outspoken when there was a woman leading the group. The gender balance matters.
Before anyone shoots me down for stereotyping and generalizing, two things that I am completely opposed to, I would like to reiterate that much of this is backed by evidence and scientific experiments. Yes, exceptions occur everywhere. There are men who do not interrupt and are respectful of others’ opinions, no matter what their gender, and there are women who are as outspoken as men, if not more, no matter what the context or situation might be. What these studies and data show is that diversity does not necessarily equate to equality.
Men still hold the balance of power in the real world. And, yes, women-only spaces and networks do not reflect the real world. However, it is not about keeping men out. Rather, what women-only networks do is to give a safe space for women to voice their opinions without being interrupted. They create support mechanisms for women to share ideas, experiences, and stories and mutually benefit from it. They provide support mechanisms for women to be themselves without fear of being judged. And, they create opportunities for younger women to learn from the experience of others, of how to navigate the workplace s a woman, how to speak out confidently and how to manage and tackle gender biases.
However, it is also crucial that women step outside their comfort zones. And, so women should be encouraged to be part of mixed networks and actively engage with them. How these mixed spaces can become more gender equitable, where men and women have an equal opportunity to speak and be heard, and where women do not have to conform to a particular way of behaving, is something that needs much more discussion and consideration.
Editorial Comment Tell all of this to Ms Nancy Pelosi, she doesn’t seem to have a problem talking a lot, interrupting or dealing with interruptions. State and daddies are a big influence in feminism and politics. The rest is about stirring up fear and diversions among the lower orders.
In my situation, I do not know whether I am being bullied and humiliated as a woman or as a transsesual. The trick and important thing to do is be neither, be yourself, enjoy your clothes make up and sexuality, but don’t be duped or diverted by capitalist crap that all white men are wife beaters, misogynists and rapists. Most peope in Britain have had a crap education, live in shit and are wide open to PC wide open to brain washing.
The British are mainly morionic clutching at the Boris Johnson straws of having left the EU and having their country back. Caroline Flack is just another victim of the female disempowerment cultural shift – where women’s options are actually being deliberatley narrowed. I know the truth and only have to flash a little of my satin and lace full length slip to mesmerise men.
Hey are not being empowered, they turned into a client class of slaves. Her career when it is over is not going to come and visit her in the retirement home. Polly Sexual
The Equality Act 2010: A woman’s right to single-sex spaces and services
4th January 2018 by FPFW
The Equality Act 2010 legally protects people in the UK from discrimination and is often used by trans-activists to claim that trans-identifying males must always be treated as, or allowed into spaces exclusively for, women. It is also often used as a reason by companies when women complain. They say their hands are tied and that it’s illegal to exclude transgender people. They are simply wrong. They are either shamefully ignorant of the law or deliberately deciding not to use the legal options available to them.
This article will set out the exemptions in law that are designed to protect single-sex provision for women. The Equality Act 2010 is available on-line for anyone to read and it is accompanied by official explanatory notes.
There is also official guidance published by the Equality and Human Rights commission. The EHRC is an independent statutory body with the responsibility of overseeing and enforcing the Equality Act. Some of its guidance is in the form of statutory code. This code has been approved by parliament and is designed to assist courts and tribunals when interpreting the law and to help lawyers, advisers, trade union representatives, human resources departments and others who need to apply the law.
Some guidance is in the form of non-statutory technical guidance. While technical guidance is not a statutory Code of Practice, it can be used as evidence in legal proceedings. The courts have said that a body subject to the equality duty that does not follow non-statutory guidance such as this will need to justify why it has not done so. However, such guidance does not in itself impose further duties to those set out in the statute.
Dressed to Kill or Dressed to Thrill ? Posted February 19th 2020
According to a senior Labour MP Caroline Flack, transexuals are a danger to women, their man free spaces and their rights. Extreme pro Trump Minister Rick Wiles says it is worse than that. Transexuals are being controlled by powerful Jews who are using them to change the world as we know it.
Come to think about it, back in the 1990s a glamorous transexual won the Eurovision song contest for Israel. That must have been the start of it all. look out Middle East, especially neihbour Palestine – you could get the worst of it.
Those Israelites have something in the ARSEnal more dangerous than a nuclear bomb and God is going to leave you to it. keep running and jumping around the Israel border like Thunderbird puppets, setting tyres on fire, that should ward off the evil spirits and God will love you all the more for it. Polly Sexual.
Jewish Dana International Won the Eurovision song Contest in 1998 Was this where the transsexual takeover started ? Posted February 19th 2020 ? Just who’s side is God on ?
Sharon Cohen (Hebrew: שרון כהן; born February 2, 1969), professionally known as Dana International (Hebrew: דנה אינטרנשיונל), is an Israeli pop singer. She has released eight albums and three additional compilation albums. She is best known as the winner of the Eurovision Song Contest 1998 in Birmingham with the song “Diva“.
1990–1993: Dana International
At 18 years of age, Cohen (still legally male at the time) earned a living as Israel’s first drag queen, parodying many famous female singers. During one of her performances, she was discovered by Offer Nissim, a well-known Israeli DJ, who produced her debut single “Saida Sultana” (“The Great Saida”), a satirical version of Whitney Houston‘s song “My Name Is Not Susan“. The song received considerable exposure and helped launch her career as a professional singer.
In 1993, Dana International flew to London for male-to-female sex reassignment surgery and legally changed her name to Sharon Cohen. Returning home with her new name, that same year Cohen released her first album, titled Danna International, in Israel. Soon after, the album was also released in several other countries including Greece, Jordan, and Egypt (In Jordan and Egypt the album sold illegally). Sharon’s stage name Dana International comes from the title track of the album, and was originally spelled with two n’s. Danna International soon became a gold record in Israel.
1994–1995 Umpatampa and Eurovision Song Contest
In 1994, Dana released her second, Trance-influenced album Umpatampa, which built on the success of her debut and provided further hit singles. The album went platinum in Israel and has sold more than 50,000 copies to date. Because of her popularity and the success of this album, she won the award for Best Female Artist of the Year in Israel.
In 1995, Dana attempted to fulfill her childhood dream of performing in the Eurovision Song Contest. She entered the Eurovision qualifying contest in Israel with a song entitled “Layla Tov, Eropa” (“Good Night Europe”) which finished second in the pre-selections, but became another hit single.
In late 1995, Dana released an E.P. called E.P. Tampa with three new songs and four remixes and special versions of her earlier song.
Dana was chosen to represent Israel in the Eurovision Song Contest 1998 in Birmingham with the song “Diva“. Orthodox Jews and others with conservative views were opposed to the choice and attempted to void her participation in the contest. In May 1998, Dana performed “Diva” at the Eurovision final and won the contest with 172 points. She became known internationally, and was interviewed by CNN, BBC, Sky News, and MTV among others mostly focusing on her life as a transsexual person before winning the contest. Dana’s own words “the message of reconciliation” were; “My victory proves God is on my side. I want to send my critics a message of forgiveness and say to them: try to accept me and the kind of life I lead. I am what I am and this does not mean I don’t believe in God, and I am part of the Jewish Nation.”
Dana released “Diva” as a single in Europe and it became a hit, reaching number 11 in the UK charts and the top ten in Sweden, Belgium, Finland, Ireland, and the Netherlands.
Transgender is a Jewish Plot Claims Pro Trump Minister Posted February 18th 2020
A right-wing minister Rick Wiles has claimed that being trans is a “Zionist plot” that will destroy humanity as we know it.
Uh, sure, Jan.
This is the latest anti-LGBT+ salvos by evangelical Wiles after he said that the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak is somehow caused by trans children.
Right Wing Watch reported on last Wednesday’s edition of the program TruNews.
Messianic Jewish folk Steve and Jana Ben-Nun of Israeli News Live trafficked in similar anti-LGBT+ attitudes to Riles on the show; Jana and Wiles discussed the conspiracy that trans folk are “putting specific things” in food and water to make the world “androgynous”.
Franklin Graham believes the people of the UK are ‘truthophobic’ and ‘free-speech-ophobic.’ Posted February 18th 2020
He continued: “Anyone who knows me or has heard me speak knows that this really isn’t true – but, I DO preach the TRUTH of the Gospel. Could it be, rather, that these folks are truthophobic or free-speech-ophobic?”
He added: “This is really a fight for truth, and the Gospel is what is really being ‘banned’ from these venues. It really boils down to the fact that they disagree with the message.”
Could it be, rather, that these folks are truthophobic or free-speech-ophobic?
Graham’s tour,which was scheduled to feature a series of messages form the Bible and concerts that impart biblical principles, was set to begin in May.
But convention centres dotting the UK pulled out the evangelist’s from its calendars, with many of the events set to overlap with the nation’s Pride Month celebrations.
One venue cited the Christian’s views as “incompatible” in a statement.
Editorial Comment I like Rev Franklin because he is unwittingly funny and sounds rather desperate to get his message across. I am not going to argue with him about trans women being sis women because if that were the case then there would be no need for the differentiation.
Since consciousness cannot yet be quantified, it is impossible to assert gender brain differences. However, it is clear that hormones present in the womb, through the mother’s blood, influence brain and physical development beyond the genital- the latter dependent on the male sperm type contribution.
Unfortunately, empty vessels make the most sound. Thus religious and feminist scare mongereing bigots, ignorant, lazy and poorly educated as they are, and all the more stupid thanks to ‘uni’ indoctrination., will assert themselves brooking no opposition.
These people are so up their own vaginas, that some of them came up with a successful production called ‘The Vagina Monologues’. The fact that it was successfull tells us a lot about weird little Britain. No man would ever get away with a production ridiculing feminists, called ‘The Anus Monologues.’
So, it also occurs to me as another logical point, that religious fanatics are truth phobic in the pursuit of dogma and intent to impose their small minds on others.
There is no doubt that as collectives humans have achieved amazing things, always with inspired and often brilliant leadership through science, engineering and courage. Sadly the moronic bask in these acheievents to assert that it is all God’s will, as per the Bible and Koran.
The vanity of these idiots, hypocrits and religious war mongers knows no limits. Asserting that God created us little bugs in his own image, is a high point of vanity, insecurity and stupidity. It is the zenith of truth phobia. Polly Sexual
Labour MP Caroline Flint has suggested that women-only refuges should take a stricter stance on transgender women.
In an interview published on the Transgender Day of Remembrance yesterday, the Member of Parliament for Don Valley suggested that women’s voices of “concern” about transgender issues haven’t been heard enough.
Speaking to the Evening Standard, she said: “We need to think through how to support those from the trans community but not in such a way that compromises women’s and girls’ rights.”
The Labour politician went on to question whether transgender women who “look and sound like a man” should be allowed to access domestic violence facilities.
Ms Flint, a prominent critic of party leader Jeremy Corbyn, added: “It’s important that women feel safe there. It’s difficult to judge if someone says they define themselves as a trans woman but for all intents and purposes they look and sound like a man.”
She continued: “We need to make sure we don’t end up undoing the work to give women the space they need to be safe. There is some concern that a wider group of voices wasn’t heard on the women and equalities committee.”
The Women and Equalities Committee inquiry she referred to published a report last year that called for improvements to the Gender Recognition Act, reducing the number of medical and bureaucratic hurdles that transgender people need to jump through in order to change legal gender.
Comment to follow later today
Transphobes Should be expelled from Labour Party February 18th 2020
It demands the expulsion of anyone putting forward “bigoted transphobic views” – and names Woman’s Place UK and the LGB Alliance as “transphobic organisations” that must be resisted.
Woman’s Place, a group of Labour members campaigning for women-only spaces, said it “absolutely” denied that it was transphobic and called the accusation “defamatory”.
“We call on the Labour Party to demonstrate its opposition to this misogynistic abuse of women. Defend us or expel us,” it said in a statement.
Harry Miller: Police probe into ‘transphobic’ tweets unlawful Posted February 15th 2020
- 5 hours ago
The police response to an ex-officer’s allegedly transphobic tweets was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.
Harry Miller was visited by Humberside Police at work in January last year after a complaint about his tweets.
He was told he had not committed a crime, but it would be recorded as a non-crime “hate incident”.
The court found the force’s actions were a “disproportionate interference” with his right to freedom of expression.
Officers visited Mr Miller’s workplace and then spoke with him on the phone, and he was left with the impression “that he might be prosecuted if he continued to tweet”, according to a judge.
Speaking after the ruling, Mr Miller, from Lincolnshire, said: “This is a watershed moment for liberty – the police were wrong to visit my workplace, wrong to ‘check my thinking’.”
His solicitor Paul Conrathe added: “It is a strong warning to local police forces not to interfere with people’s free speech rights on matters of significant controversy.”
Mr Justice Julian Knowles said the effect of police turning up at Mr Miller’s place of work “because of his political opinions must not be underestimated”.
He added: “To do so would be to undervalue a cardinal democratic freedom.
“In this country we have never had a Cheka, a Gestapo or a Stasi. We have never lived in an Orwellian society.”
Responding to the ruling, Helen Belcher, who co-founded Trans Media Watch, said: “I think trans people will be worried it could become open season on us because the court didn’t really define what the threshold for acceptable speech was.
“I think it will reinforce an opinion that courts don’t understand trans lives and aren’t there to protect trans people.”
Mr Miller, 54, also launched a wider challenge against the lawfulness of College of Policing guidelines on hate crimes, which was rejected.
Mr Justice Knowles ruled they “serve legitimate purposes and [are] not disproportionate”.
The guidelines define a hate incident as “any non-crime incident which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender”.
Mr Miller posted a number of tweets between November 2018 and January 2019 about transgender issues as part of the debate about reforming the Gender Recognition Act 2004.
In one tweet Mr Miller wrote: “I was assigned mammal at birth, but my orientation is fish. Don’t mis-species me.”
This tweet was among several others which were reported to Humberside Police as being allegedly transphobic.
Mr Miller’s barrister, Ian Wise QC, argued the force’s response had sought to “dissuade him from expressing himself on such issues in the future” and had a “substantial chilling effect” on his right to free speech.
Mr Justice Knowles said Mr Miller “strongly denies being prejudiced against transgender people” and had regarded himself as a participant in a public debate.
He said only one person, known in court as Mrs B, had complained about the tweets and they had been recorded as a hate incident “without any critical scrutiny…or any assessment of whether what she was saying was accurate”.
The judge said: “The claimants’ tweets were lawful and there was not the slightest risk that he would commit a criminal offence by continuing to tweet.
“I find the combination of the police visiting the claimant’s place of work, and their subsequent statements in relation to the possibility of prosecution, were a disproportionate interference with the claimant’s right to freedom of expression because of their potential chilling effect.”
By Clive Coleman, BBC’s Legal Affairs Correspondent
The police guidance on non-crime hate incidents was developed after the murder of the black teenager Stephen Lawrence in a racist attack in 1993.
Its aim is to deal with hate incidents before they escalate into serious hate crimes.
Each year more than 25,000 such non-crime hate incidents are logged by UK police. The bulk relate to race and disability.
Today’s ruling will make the job of policing such incidents increasingly challenging for the police. Where does a comment or statement leave the boundaries of free speech and become a hate incident short of a crime?
That can be as much a linguistic and ethical judgment as a policing decision.
Humberside Police said it accepted the court’s decision, adding: “The mere recording of the incident by Humberside Police as a hate incident has been ruled as not unlawful and in accordance with the College of Policing (CoP) guidance.
“Our actions in handling the incident were carried out in good faith but we note the comments of the judge and we will take learning from this incident moving forward.”
Deputy Chief Constable Bernie O’Reilly, of the College of Policing, said: “Policing’s position is clear – we want everyone to feel able to express opinions as passionately as they wish without breaking the law.”
He added: “Hate incidents can be a precursor to these types of crimes and without recording them the police will begin to lose sight of what is happening in their communities – and potentially lose their confidence.”
He said the advice to forces was currently being revised.
Trans Media Watch said: “Whilst we appreciate that the police must take care not to overreact to incidents, we feel that it is vital to a democratic society that everyone enjoys the same level of police protection.
“We are sure that it was not the judge’s intention to suggest that trans people deserve less protection at present than they did in 2016, before the present media interest in the gender recognition process began.
“We hope that his words today will not have the result of putting other minority groups which may become the subject of intense media attention in a position where hatred displayed towards them is less likely to be treated seriously.”
Mr Miller has appealed against the ruling about the College of Policing guidance and permission has been granted for the case to go straight to the Supreme Court.
Transgender hate crimes, which are different and more serious than non-crime hate incidents, are rising in England and Wales, according to police records.
In the 12 months to 31 March 2019, the police recorded 2,333 transgender hate crime incidents. That was 37% higher than the previous year. In percentage terms, transgender hate crimes saw the biggest increase compared with other hate crime categories (race, religion, sexual orientation and disability).
Transgender hate crimes recorded by police
England and Wales onlySource: Home Office
The Home Office says that some of this rise could be down to improvements in the way the police identify and record transgender hate crimes. However, the Home Office adds that genuine increases cannot be ruled out.
In total, the police recorded 103,379 hate crimes in 2018-19. The majority were race hate crimes, accounting for around three quarters of the total.
Why Calling Senator Elizabeth Warren “Pocahontas” Is Definitely a Racial Slur Posted January 14th 2020
Corrina Allen Nov 28, 2017
Donald Trump’s White House Press staff are frequently called on to defend the indefensible. This week? Same.
On Monday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders had to stand up in front of a roomful of people and explain to them why it was totally cool for the President to use a racial slur during an official event recognizing the WWII-era service of three Navajo Code Talkers. Spoiler alert: It didn’t go well.
Bilingual Code Talkers played an incredibly important role during the Second World War. Around 500 Indigenous people worked with the US Marines to transmit strategic information, using coded versions of their native languages to keep the messages secret. Three of the 13 surviving Navajo Code Talkers, Thomas Begay, Fleming Begay, and Peter MacDonald, were meant to have been honored by President Trump in the Oval Office yesterday. But instead of a non-partisan speech that paid tribute to the contributions these men made, the President used his platform to aim a confusing yet unmistakably racist comment at Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren.
Trump said the following during his off-the-cuff speech:
“I said to General Kelly… I said, how good were these Code Talkers? What was it? He said, ‘Sir, you have no idea. You have no idea how great they were — what they’ve done for this country, and the strength and the bravery and the love that they had for the country and that you have for the country.’ So that was the ultimate statement from General Kelly, the importance. And I just want to thank you because you’re very, very special people. You were here long before any of us were here, although we have a representative in Congress who, they say, was here a long time ago. They call her ‘Pocahontas.’ But you know what, I like you because you are special. You are special people.”
If you can wade through the strange and seemingly self-congratulatory remarks that Trump attributes to General John F. Kelly, sift out the repetitious and weirdly paternalistic “special people” comments, and get to the part about “Pocahontas,” your brain might be able to retrieve the connection between that name and Warren’s. Trump has used it before, and not in reference to the Disney movie (though that’s probably where he learned it).
In 2012, Warren publicly self-identified as having Cherokee ancestors, a claim she has no documents to support. She’s since explained that her knowledge of her heritage is based on family lore. Warren’s statements (now nearly six years old) show bad judgment and a lack of cultural sensitivity. But Trump’s use of the name (approximately 24 hours ago) is way more problematic.
That’s because the president is using the name Pocahontas as an insult. In doing so, he’s degrading both the people and cultures he was supposed to be honoring. Warren herself has labeled the comment a racial slur and her sentiments have been echoed by people like Shonda Rhimes and Ava DuVernay.
Pocahontas’ real story, which writer Mary Kathryn Nagle retells in a Thanksgiving post on Shondaland, isn’t the same as the cartoon version you might be more familiar with. In reality, it’s about colonization, genocide, abuse, and rape. To diminish that true history by using “Pocahontas” as a derogatory nickname for Warren (or anyone else) is hateful, racist, and (we’d argue) sexist too. It’s also, like DuVernay says, a distraction from the other terrifying things that Trump’s White House is maneuvering toward (see: dismantling net neutrality, expanding gun rights, attempting to ban transgender military service, and a scary-careless handling of diplomatic relationships around the world).
Playing defence after a major Trump offence, Huckabee Sanders said, “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for him to make a racial slur. I don’t think that [Pocahontas] is [a slur] and… that it was certainly not the President’s intent.” The thing is, this isn’t the first or even the second time Trump has used the nickname, and after a while, repetition looks a lot like intent.
Stop Taxpayer Money from Funding U.S. Islamist Vigilantes Posted January 14th 2020
by David M. Swindle
The Daily Wire
January 3, 2020
Originally published under the title “Stop Taxpayer Money from Funding Islamist-Tied Security Agencies.”
|The Muslim Community Patrol (MCP) in Brooklyn, NY, which has been widely criticized for instigating conflict around the mosques it “protects,” would benefit from a Senate bill that proposes $75 million towards faith-based and nonprofit security.|
… [C]hurches, synagogues, and mosques are under siege in America, from Pittsburgh to Charleston, and from Los Angeles to Minnesota. However, under the pretense of protecting places of worship and faith-based nonprofits, Congress stands poised to spend millions of taxpayer dollars effectively providing pro-jihadist Islamist groups – with documented ties to overseas terrorist organizations – with their own private armed militias.
Senator Rob Portman (R-OH) and co-sponsor Senator Gary Peters (D-MI) have put forth a new bill, the Protecting Faith-Based and Nonprofit Organizations From Terrorism Act, which provides $75 million annually over the next five years for security to religious groups.
Orthodox Jews seen open carrying firearms in New York after spate of anti-Semitic attacks Leon Wolf The Blaze Posted January 2nd 2020
Orthodox Jews continued to be a target of violence in New York City over the New Year’s holiday, as two teenagers were subjected to attacks in the last 24 hours.
In the first incident, witnesses reported that an Orthodox Jewish teen was threatened on a city bus over his wireless headphones. Witnesses said an Orthodox Jewish teen was threatened with a knife by two other teens who reportedly said, “Shalom! We’re going to beat the s*** out of you,” according to the New York Daily News.
The assailants — who have not yet been identified — then returned the items to the 15-year-old Jewish teen when they realized that many other people on the bus were watching.
In the second incident, an Orthodox Jewish male was allegedly threatened by two women, ages 24 and 34, who shouted, “F*** you, Jew! I will kill you Jew!” before chasing him and hitting him in the face with a phone. After hitting the man in the face, the attackers then allegedly took his phone and smashed it into the ground, according to the Daily News.
The news broke shortly after disturbing video was released of two Orthodox Jewish men being brutally beaten (in separate incidents only moments apart) by the same group of teenagers. This footage was filmed only four days before a man attacked a Hannukah service with a machete in Monsey, New Jersey.
In this video, the as-yet-unidentified victim can be seen attempting to avoid the path of a group of teenage assailants, who nonetheless confront him and throw a chair at him. The teens then surround the man and take turns punching him, and end the confrontation by throwing the chair at him again.
In the first incident, witnesses reported that an Orthodox Jewish teen was threatened on a city bus over his wireless headphones. Witnesses said an Orthodox Jewish teen was threatened with a knife by two other teens who reportedly said, “Shalom! We’re going to beat the s*** out of you,” according to the New York Daily News.
The assailants — who have not yet been identified — then returned the items to the 15-year-old Jewish teen when they realized that many other people on the bus were watching.
In the second incident, an Orthodox Jewish male was allegedly threatened by two women, ages 24 and 34, who shouted, “F*** you, Jew! I will kill you Jew!” before chasing him and hitting him in the face with a phone. After hitting the man in the face, the attackers then allegedly took his phone and smashed it into the ground, according to the Daily News.
The news broke shortly after disturbing video was released of two Orthodox Jewish men being brutally beaten (in separate incidents only moments apart) by the same group of teenagers. This footage was filmed only four days before a man attacked a Hannukah service with a machete in Monsey, New Jersey.
In this video, the as-yet-unidentified victim can be seen attempting to avoid the path of a group of teenage assailants, who nonetheless confront him and throw a chair at him. The teens then surround the man and take turns punching him, and end the confrontation by throwing the chair at him again.
Following a recent string of anti-Semitic attacks in New York, including a recent deadly stabbing attack in Monsey, a group of Orthodox Jews were spotted recently openly carrying firearms in possible defiance of New York State Law.
Attacks against Orthodox Jews have been on the rise in New York, and a spokesman for the Department of Justice told TheBlaze earlier this year that anti-Semitic attacks have been the fastest growing group of hate crimes in America. Last week alone there were at least six separate anti-Semitic hate crimes reported in New York City.
Generally speaking, open carry is not legal in New York. New Yorkers are generally only allowed to open carry when hunting or at a shooting range. The willingness these Orthodox Jews have to open carry may speak to the frustration felt by many in the New York Orthodox community about the ineffectual response from both city and state government.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo responded to the Monsey attack by saying that he was directing the New York Hate Crimes Task Force to investigate, and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has promised to increase police presence in some predominantly Jewish Brooklyn neighborhoods, but it appears that some in New York would rather take matters in their own hands, especially after a firearm-wielding citizen took down an attacker in a Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas on Sunday.
For-show female empowerment & gender fluidity are simply the latest instruments of corporate capitalism (By Slavoj Zizek) Posted December 26th 2019
Slavoj Zizek is a cultural philosopher. He’s a senior researcher at the Institute for Sociology and Philosophy at the University of Ljubljana and Global Distinguished Professor of German at New York University.
Should women unashamedly wear mustaches? Should men abandon their masculinity because it’s ‘toxic’? This is all just a smoke screen capitalist overlords use to hide real issues and stay in power, philosopher Slavoj Zizek believes.
Step towards de-sexualization?
I think this is a part of a larger phenomenon, which follows this logic: if women try to be beautiful or to obey the models of beauty in a traditional sense they objectify themselves for men. So women should re-appropriate their bodies in the sense of admitting them in their everyday ugliness – hair, fat, whatever – to de-mystify their bodies, to show that a woman’s body, especially sex organs, is not what they are for the gaze of men but has its own positive function that should be appropriated by women because women cannot be reduced to being objects for men.
One the one hand, I agree with the women’s feeling of oppression but I see a problem with this logic. Let’s face it: sexuality as such involves a certain degree of self-objectification. For example, when I engaged in sexual activity, when I embrace a naked person that I love, I abstract (and that is the imminent logic of sexuality) from all the nasty things that are part of the human body – bad odors, remains of dirt etc. I minimally idealize, in a way, the other’s body. Without this, we approach de-sexualization.
In spite of all the talk about free sexuality liberated from binary heterosexual restraints, what we are basically dealing with here is an attack on sexuality as such.
Push for imaginary sexual freedom will only lead to worse oppression
We all know that human sexuality is not just something biologically predetermined – as the traumatic experiences of transgender people prove. In your psychological identity, you can be a woman trapped in a masculine body, and you are ready to suffer quite a lot to change your body so that it fits your inner psychological identity. All this happens. There is no direct biological determination here.
Yet, to make a big jump from here to a claim that sexual difference is just one among the oppressive constructs of those in power and that we should playfully engage in multiple sexual identities, that it is just a game, and that everything is open and that if we just get rid of the binary heterosexual oppression we will enjoy full free sexuality, is a great mistake. It obliterates the basic lesson of Freudian psychoanalysis, which is that sexuality in itself is something pretty dark.
It is not a happy domain. It is a domain of deep traumas, masochist reversals and so on. That is why it is not enough to claim that if we get rid of this big masculine-feminine gender duality and, to paraphrase Mao Zedong, who said that thousands of flowers should blossom in us, to say that thousands of identities should blossom and all will be happy and live a satisfied sexual life. No, human sexuality, again, is inherently traumatic. It is a big mess, there is no simple formula here.
As experience with political correctness demonstrates, if you try to liberate sexuality in this simplistic sense and get rid of this heterosexual normativity and let all the different forms proliferate, you end up in an even worse oppression.
Everyone should be free to objectify themselves
What many people do not accept is that the problem is not objectification as such – it is not the whole game of sexual seduction, flirting of men and women – it’s that, in some sense, you precisely objectify yourself as you want to present yourself as seductive. The problem is not that there should be no objectification – the problem is that each sexual agent should have the right to control his/her/their objectification.
Let’s not forget that with all the feminist protests against objectifying women what bothers fundamentalists, for example, in Muslim countries is precisely when a woman plays with her own objectification… For example, imitating fellatio, playing with a banana in their mouth. What bothers men is that a woman, in this situation, is not objectified by men, but objectifies herself playfully enacting her objectification for her own pleasure.
Instrument of capitalism
As it is usual with such events, we should not underestimate the degree to which this is a relatively marginal phenomenon. Be sure, most women will not want to grow a mustache and if they want to – let them do what they want. I often detect in these transgender new identities something that I do not like. It is that as once heterosexual standards were imposed oppressing other identities, now, if you read all these texts, in some of them you find the idea that if you are still within the traditional heterosexual sexuality you are somehow retarded. To be truly free, you have to play with your identity and blur all the lines.
I do not agree with this. This idea of freely rearranging, changing your body and playing with identities is something that perfectly fits today’s consumerist capitalism with its infinite dynamics. There is a chance that big companies are already playing these games. Probably some of our readers remember a Gillette ad from about a half a year ago, where a father helps his ex-daughter, who is now a boy, to shave herself for the first time with Gillette. There is absolutely nothing subversive in this ‘play with different identities, experiment with yourself’ attitude. It is simply a perfect form of sexuality for the late consumerist capitalism.
A lesson that we should take from all of this, not just from commercials, which are then sold to us with a progressive twist, but also the fact that – remember two or three years ago transgender movement exploded in the US with this big campaign for toilets that should be open to all sexual identities, not just masculine/feminine – how the entire big corporate US – all the big names like Tim Cook or Zuckerberg – all passionately followed this path and supported it. Unfortunately, this type of struggle for free sexual identities is something that can easily be used as a part of capitalist machinery to oppress more dangerous popular demands, even and especially the authentic feminist protests.
Elites seek to divert female emancipation drive away from changing political status quo
On the one hand, (and I wholeheartedly celebrate and support this) there is some kind of awakening of women. There are forms of feminine subordination, which are part of our tradition from even before class societies, from tribal societies – like woman is passive, subordinated to men. As it is always the case, the establishment tries to redirect this awakening in such a direction that it will not really change power relations. We will get a quota for women, women will be presented in the media more respectfully. But the same power relations will persist in our society. That is what all these fighters against patriarchy do not often get.
In the developed West, the ruling ideology is no longer a patriarchy. It is a kind of false openness which also functions as a way to avoid radical mobilization and radical solutions. When we are focused on whether a woman can wear a beard or a man can put on lipstick, no one wants to talk about the continuing terrifying oppression of women, of the exploding rape culture in Mexico and South Africa. Let’s focus on the struggles in which the real freedom of people will be decided.
Harry Potter author JK Rowling gets burned by own fans as she steams into latest UK gender scandal on the wrong side Posted December 26th 2019
Damian Wilson is a UK journalist, ex-Fleet Street editor, financial industry consultant and political communications special advisor in the UK and EU. 20 Dec, 2019 16:43
A UK employment tribunal judge has insulted women and given the green light to sack millions of employees nationwide who believe that trans-women who were born as men should not be identified as biological women.
Employment tribunal judge James Tayler made it clear that the right-on wing of the judiciary has swallowed the whole self-identifying gender guff hook, line and sinker after ruling against tax expert Maya Forstater who had claimed she was wrongly sacked by the Centre for Global Development, a think tank based in London and Washington that campaigns against poverty.
Miss Forstater, 45, claimed she had been discriminated against for her beliefs. Read more Emma Watson is dating herself or just ashamed to say the s word?
And what might those beliefs have been? Was she an advocate of paedophilia? Decried motherhood? Didn’t believe in Santa Claus? Or worse, in the UK, dared to criticise the NHS?
No, she had the temerity to suggest that trans-women were not actually biological women because they were born male.
She fell foul of Twitter, naturally, after tweeting several posts (nothing to do with her work as a tax expert) related to proposals to change Gender Recognition Certificates, one of which read clearly and simply: “There are two sexes, male and female. Men and boys are male. Women and girls are female. It is impossible to change sex. These were until very recently understood as basic facts of life by almost everyone.”
The judge then declared Miss Forstater’s beliefs “not worthy of respect in a democratic society” and “incompatible with the human rights of others.” Canceling the basic birds and bees stuff that parents used to teach their three-year-olds, he ruled:
“If a person has transitioned from male to female and has a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), that person is legally a woman,” he ruled.
Miss Forstater has won support, including, surprisingly enough, from JK Rowling, who has previously been known to jump on liberal bandwagons, including by ret-conning her iconic characters as gay to appease kinky fans.
And that is the point. Despite what it says on any Gender Recognition Certificate, human beings are born belonging to either one of two real biological sexes, not some imaginary in-between. Read more US Catholic school bans Harry Potter books after consulting exorcists
To deny that is to deny science. You might as well start to believe in Quidditch, griffins and Lord Voldemort.
And so Rowling triggered her followers and fans – reactions ranged from “I’m not angry, I’m just disappointed” through “Let me educate you about trans rights” to “Why did you have to do this? Why? WHY?!”
Talk about insulting women, denying freedom of speech and giving every sack-happy boss the right to bin loose-tongued employees after a boozy Christmas bash! Without realising it, Judge Tayler has handed identity-obsessed British liberals more rein to troll, bully and harass anyone who won’t play ball with their biology-defying worldview.
When safely tucked into his bed at night, Tayler must clutch his blankets in white-knuckled fear, lest his boggart chooses to appear. Adapted by Rowling from English myth, the shapeshifting creature lurks in dark spaces appearing only to take the shape of that which is most feared by the person who encounters it.
And if recent rulings by the good judge are any indication, then his boggart is a loony, swivel-eyed British liberal obsessed with identity politics and specifically gender issues who will tolerate absolutely no dissent. Because an irrational fear of upsetting this boggart is the only understandable explanation for the ruling.
Miss Forstater is considering an appeal against the tribunal ruling which has seen her discriminated against for simply holding on to beliefs that many people share.
Editorial Comment I think the explosion in transexual cases is a cause for concern. As Polly Sexual observed on here, the Gender Identity Clinic asks why a patients want to be women, not why they don’t want to be men.
I suspect that feminist J K Rowling doesn’t like the transexual phenomena because being a woman was her first claim to fame. It is, of course, so hard to be a woman ( sic ). No man could claim to be one. The notion of a woman trapped in a man’s body is a twist on Descarte’s Dualism and dubious inductive logic.
I have no pity for the backlash against Rowling because feminists have done more than any other group since the Puritans to foster intolerance in the name of truth. It is just so absurd that they also vaunt the lie of diversity. If they favour diversity then they should abide by their intolerant rules, keeping their mouths shut and keyboards still.
At great risk to my well being, I will proclaim that a transexual is obviously not a biological woman. To say otherwise is to impose even more limits on the use of language and , therefore, freedom of thought. So Rowling deserves this backlash. Robert Cook
Looking Three Ways, not Freeways Posted December 22nd 2019
A homophobe has been jailed for 16 years for stealing and burning a Church’s LGBTQ pride flag. Adolfo Martinez, 30, was sent to jail in Des Moines, Iowa, on Wednesday, over the incident at Ames United Church on June 11. He snatched the banner from outside the place of worship – whose pastor Eileen Gebbie is hereself gay – then torched it outside a lapdancing club called Dangerous Curves.
His long sentence after being convicted of a felony hate crime, third-degree harassment, and reckless use of fire. Adolfo was totally unrepentant about his behavior when interviewed by TV station KCCI in June, claiming his hate was God’s work. Report extracted from The Metro December 19th 2019
Editorial Comment This sentence can be regarded in at least three ways. It might be seen as rather harsh. It could be seen as an indictment of the destabilising effects of elite promoted diversity, or it could be viewed as a religious maniac at work. Whatever, it is certainly an outcome of the confused and conflicted world that modern masses are obliged to inhabit.
We have reached a very dangerous stage beyond fighting discrimantion. One risks jail for questioning anything about LGBTQI. This is the third stage sexual revolution where sexuality rather than our birth sex is all defining and all consuming. This movement, including feminism, will not allow non believers any space from them. This is not freedom. Robert Cook
Beyond Belief Posted December 18th 2019
When retired footballer turned sports commentator David Ike claimed to be Jesus reborn, it was no surprise people thought he was mad. He lost his job and lucky to have avoided the looney bin. The same thing happened to the England manager who said paraplegics were being punished for sins in a former life.
However, we are supposed to believe that some vaguely defined God- if you are Muslim God is not defined at all- created us. He is with us, talking to us, listening, inspiring and guiding us. This God expects us to hear and believe this inner voice.
Without wishing to offend the faithful, if anyone claimed to hear any other sort of voice they would be judged as mentally ill. Science was supposed to begin a more rational age, with an open ended journey toward truth.
However, that would not solve the problem of scaring and distracting poor ignorant frightened people all over the world, including Britain. Even here, politicians are supposed to foster belief in God, with the Queen as Head of State and Church.
Britain’s elite con trick of a wonderfully tolerant ( sic ) diverse multi cultural society has thrown something of a spanner in these works. So we come to Christmas and school nativity plays. Britain wants mothers out working, for their liberty and wage restraint. So we now have schools for the pre school years. If you want to brain wash them, then get them young. As the sexist Jesuit teachers proclaimed, ‘Give me the boy until he is seven and I will give you the man.’
In a multi cultural society where a growing Muslim population have no intention of accepting other religious viewpoints, the do gooders in politics, media and education see no alternative but to water down the previously dominant Christian viewpoint. So we have the Whitehall Pre School in Southern England, re writing the nativity play to appease Muslim parents because too many stayed away last year.
It is all rather beyond belief. The whole matter of explaining away human origins as a matter of belief. But this is the age where we can, apparently be whatever we think we are. Logically- though logic is not to be encouraged- this means that a prisoner can free himself simply by believing he is free. This sort of thing used to guarantee a trip to the mental hospital. It reminds me of the man who went to the doctor. He said ‘Doctor, I have a problem. I keep thinking a I am a telephone.’ ‘Oh’ said the doctor ponderously, then he said : ‘Go home and if the condition persists, give me a ring.’ Robert Cook
Author. Thinker. Life Enthusiast.
What’s the Problem with Feminism? Posted December 13yh 2019
Note: This is the second article in a series about gender and equality. The first one is called What’s the Problem with Men? In it, I discuss a lot of the unhealthy cultural forces that lead men to oppress women (as well as damage themselves). In this piece, I look at the feminist movement and question some of its strategies for implementing greater equality in society. Obviously, I’m a straight white male and don’t deal with the shit women deal with on the regular. But please take this as a critical look at the methods of feminism, rather than cause of equality itself.
In 1919, thousands of women stood outside the White House and demanded that they be allowed to vote. In the next presidential election, they would. And this massive demographic shift paved the way to laws in the 1920s that would promote women’s health and education (as well as prohibition, but we’ll just pretend that never happened).
In the 1960s and 70s, feminist protests resulted in a series of laws that guaranteed, under the law, equal rights in the workplace, in universities and colleges, in health care, and in the home.
The feminist movement is usually broken up into three “waves.” The first wave in the late 19th and early 20th centuries pushed for political equality. The second wave, in the 1960s and 70s, pushed for legal and professional equality. And the third wave, in the past couple decades, has pushed for social equality.
But whereas legal and political equality are clearly defined and measurable, social equality is murky and complicated. The current feminist movement is not a protest against unjust laws or sexist institutions as much as it is the protest against people’s unconscious biases as well as centuries-worth of cultural norms and heritage that disadvantage women. Women still get screwed over in myriad ways. It’s just that whereas before it was an open and accepted part of society, today much of it is non-obvious and even unconscious.
This is a tricky business because you’re no longer dealing with institutions—you’re dealing with people’s perceptions and people’s brains. You have to confront belief systems and irrational assumptions and force people to unlearn things that they’ve “known” for decades. It’s a really, really hard thing to face.
And the hardest part about it is that there’s no easy metric in the social arena for what is equal and what is not. If I fire three employees and two of them are women, is that equality? Or is that sexism? You can’t say unless you know why I fired them. And you can’t know why I fired them unless you can get inside my brain and understand my beliefs and motivations.
Thus, today feminism has a measurement problem. It’s easy to measure whether boys and girls are receiving the same funding in schools. It’s easy to see whether a man and woman are being paid appropriately for the same work. You just pull out your calculator and go to work.
But how do you measure social justice? If people like a brother more than their sister, is it because she’s a woman? Or is she just a shitty person? Or, more aptly, if a few women think a college mascot is scary and intimidating, is that legitimate ‘oppression’? What about overused adverbs? How the fuck did we get here? Can I ask any more rhetorical questions in this paragraph? Bueller? Bueller?
3 Ideas That Could Change Your Life
To learn about three ideas that could change how you see the world, put your email in below.
Philosophical Feminism vs Tribal Feminism
I don’t think it’s controversial to say that philosophically, feminism got it right: All people, regardless of gender, should be afforded the same rights and respect. This strikes me as a no-brainer for pretty much any decent human being alive today.
Feminism also got it right that women have been oppressed throughout pretty much all of civilized human history, in pretty much every culture and society, and there’s a lot of baggage and residue of that oppression that carries on in various forms today.
Feminism also got it right that, despite their biological differences, men grow up in a culture of toxic masculinity that is not only unhealthy for women, but also unhealthy for men as well.
All of this is correct. Let’s call this loose group of ideas “philosophical feminism.”
The problem is that feminism is more than a philosophy or a group of beliefs. It is, now, also a political movement, a social identity, as well as a set of institutions.
See, there’s this thing that happens to groups of people. They always start out with an idea. And often it’s a pretty good idea. Then they come together and organize on that idea, because organizing large groups of people and building structures to act in concert is the way you get shit done in a society.
But the problem is, once you’ve got a group of people together, organized for a single purpose, achieving political leverage and adopting power, building institutions and careers for themselves, all sorts of bad human tendencies start to take over.
As humans, we are tribal by nature. Our natural default is to see ourselves as part of some group that’s struggling against some other group(s) at all times. And once we’re part of our little group, our little tribe, we adopt all sorts of biases and preferences. We construct belief systems that justify our group’s power and superiority. We create tests of whether other people are “true” and “pure” members of our group, and we either shame any “non-believers” into conformity or simply expel them from the tribe.
As the comedian George Carlin once put it:
“I love individuals. I hate groups of people. I hate a group of people with a ‘common purpose’. Because pretty soon they have little hats. And armbands. And fight songs. And a list of people they’re going to visit at 3am. So, I dislike and despise groups of people. But I love individuals.”
Once a philosophy goes tribal, its beliefs no longer exist to serve some moral principle, but rather they exist to serve the promotion of the group. 1
In the past few decades, sexual violence has halved,2 and domestic violence has dropped by an astounding two-thirds.3 Women recently surpassed men in the workforce in the US4 and earn almost 60% of all bachelor’s degrees. And despite the constant drumming of 77 cents women earn on the dollar compared to men, when you factor in the fact that men work longer hours, more dangerous jobs, and retire later, the wage gap today is actually only something like 93 to 95 cents for every dollar a man earns.5
The point here is: a shitload of progress has been made since feminism’s second wave in the 60s and 70s. So much progress has been made that some people (feminists, even!) are becoming concerned that men are actually going to be left behind soon.6
But the problem is that, like I said, feminism, in the process of enacting all of the progress of the last 50 years, became more than a philosophy—it became an institution. And institutions are always primarily interested in sustaining themselves first and engaging with the world as it is second.
Those stalwart feminist activists of the 60s and 70s who were at protests and burning their bras or whatever, many of them moved into academia. They got graduate degrees and wrote books and founded departments and held conferences and created political organizations and had fundraisers and started magazines. And pretty soon, feminism was no longer a cause for these people, it was their career. Their paychecks depended on there being patriarchy and oppression everywhere they looked. Their departments depended on it. Their professional careers and speaking fees depended on it. And so they found it.
And thus, philosophical feminism became tribal feminism.7
Tribal feminism laid out a specific set of beliefs — that everywhere you look there is constant oppression from the patriarchy, that masculinity is inherently violent, and that the only differences between men and women are figments of our cultural imagination, not based on biology or science. That knowledge itself is a form of patriarchy and oppression.8 Anyone who contradicted or questioned these beliefs soon found themselves kicked out of the tribe. They became one of the oppressors. And the people who pushed these beliefs to their furthest conclusions — that penises were a cultural construction of oppression, that school mascots encourage rape and sexual violence, that cereal boxes can be offensive — were rewarded with greater status within the tribe.9
“That’s the Trench You’re Willing to Die In?”
Sam Harris, the famous atheist author as well as a bona fide far-left progressive and severe critic of women’s oppression worldwide, found himself in the crosshairs of tribal feminists recently.
His crime? When asked why his readership was predominantly male, he commented that criticism of religion tends to be angry and that men generally identify more with angry rhetoric than women do.
What ensued was an imbroglio of criticism, to the point where women came up to him at events to let him know how sexist he was.
Now, I love Sam Harris, but he’s kind of got thin skin. And a really bad habit of unpacking every criticism he ever receives and spending way too much time trying to explain why it’s unfair or misrepresentative of his ideas. But on his podcast response to this particular situation, he made a comment about tribal feminists that struck me (and I’m paraphrasing here because I’m too lazy to go find it): “Is this really the cause of your generation? Safe spaces and trigger warnings and microaggressions? That’s the trench you’re willing to die in?”
Previous generations of feminists were willing to die in the trenches of getting women the right to vote, to go to college, to have an equal education, for protection from domestic violence, and workplace discrimination, and equal pay, and fair divorce laws.
This generation’s tribal feminists’ trenches are that of The Feelings Police — protecting everyone’s feelings so that they never feel oppressed or marginalized in any way.
There’s that overused Gandhi quote: “Be the change you wish to see in the world.”
Previous generations of feminists were the change they desired. They got out and protested and voted. They went to the schools and got the degrees and took the jobs.
Yet, today, tribal feminists are more interested in enforcing thoughts and perceptions about women, rather than actually becoming the women they wish others to see.
The way you destroy stereotypes is by being the contradiction of the stereotype. The way you change minds is you demonstrate how people are wrong through your actions. Women now make up almost 60% of college graduates, yet they still only constitute 20% of STEM professions (which make much more money, it so happens). You want more women in math and science? Be a woman who pursues math and science. You want more women as CEOs and winning at business? Start a business. You want more women in politics? Run for office. These are the real activists. This is where real progress happens.
Yes, women still face stereotypes and harassment in these industries. But this is the trench today’s feminists should be fighting in. This is where they should be making their push — and not by talking about it online, but by actually being there.
Yet the data and the tweet storms suggest that they’re not.
It’s easy to picket a college campus, or post angry comments on Facebook. It’s hard to be a woman in tech or in politics. But it’s the latter who are the unsung heroes of today’s movement.
For centuries, women were marginalized and discounted by men. One of the many stereotypes that men ascribed to women when doing this was that women were overly concerned with their feelings and the ways others perceived them. Yet, this is the same cliched behavior that tribal feminists have fallen back into.
And thus, as with many philosophies taken to their political extreme, tribal feminism has come to contradict many of the very premises philosophical feminism was built upon. Tribal feminists, in the name of fighting shame and oppression, shame and oppress views that contradict their own.
And once your philosophy has inverted upon itself, it becomes corrupt. Just like the old communist societies of the 20th century, once you set out to provide perfect equality for everybody, you achieve the exact opposite. What was once progressive becomes regressive. You become so busy policing people’s thoughts and opinions that you lose track of what actually matters.
Note: I’ve recorded a 20-minute audio commentary where I respond to criticisms and reactions this article received on social media. Site members can listen to it by clicking the Commentary button above. To become a site member, click here.
HEY FUCKFACE, THIS EBOOK WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE IN LIKE 12 SECONDS OR SOMETHING
I’ve written a 21-page ebook about three ideas that heavily influenced my life, and that I believe can influence your life too. Put your email in the form and I’ll send it to you.
- This is why modern democracy is so brilliant. The Framers understood that humans, once their careers and livelihoods depend on certain institutions, start behaving this way. So they constructed democracy in such a way that these institutions will have to naturally struggle and compromise with one another to get anything done. And it worked great… until Trump happened.↵
- Scope of the Problem: Statistics | RAINN. (2015)↵
- Since ’94 law, domestic violence down two-thirds in U.S., Democratic Rep. Gwen Moore says | PolitiFact Wisconsin. (2013).↵
- Mulligan, C. B. (2010). In a First, Women Surpass Men on U.S. Payrolls.↵
- PolitiFact Sheet: The Gender Pay Gap | PolitiFact.↵
- There are sane/rational people concerned about this, and then there are insane/irrational people. It’s important to note the difference. A lot of feminist writers such as Hanna Rosin, Susan Faludi, and Christina Hoff Sommers have written about the worrying statistics about men (and specifically boys). And then there are also a lot of insane, alt-right, Red Pill-type communities who think women belong in the kitchen and everything would be great if we could just go back to the 1950s. The latter are not to be taken seriously.↵
- For an excellent book about this transition, see Who Stole Feminism?: How Women Have Betrayed Women.↵
- Bowling, J., & Martin, B. (1985). Science: a masculine disorder? Science and Public Policy, 12(6), 308–316.↵
- For a particularly harrowing account of a young woman who confronted all of this, read What I Learned from My Women’s Studies Classes.↵
Subscribe to the Site and Get Access to More Amazing Shit
Hi there. This is the part of the website where I put a big toothy grin on my face and scream “BUT WAIT! THERE’S MORE!” at you in hopes to hold your attention for more than 30 milliseconds.
Because wait, there actually is more. If you’d like to check out some online courses I’ve put together, if you’d like to get special subscribers-only articles and responses from me, and if you’re interested in hearing me answer reader questions like I’m Anne fucking Landers and talk a bit more about my own experiences, my business ventures, and what I eat for breakfast on Sundays, well, then there actually is more. A lot more.
Become a subscriber to the site and get all that extra cool stuff. Just click the pretty, pretty button below to get started.
Click Me © 2019 Infinity Squared Media LLC
‘Titanic’ Clue to Real Diversity in Britain Posted December 10th 2019
Britain is run by big business, including mainstream media, the political elite, their elitist civil service and state broadcasters- Channel 4 and BBC. BBC and Channel 4 are busy promoting tactical voting in order to avoid a pro Brexit Tory majority. Of course there is no reason to suppose that Brexit will benefit the masses or that the Tories really care about those people.
The ‘Titanic’ sailed from Southampton with a fire raging in coal bunker 4. The ships owners, White Star Line, knew it was seriously on fire before passengers boarded in Ireland. Their problem was competition from Cunard.
White Star’s Chairman of the Board, Sir Bruce Ismay, was on board. He and Captain Brown were reading warning telegraphs of ice fields as they raced to get to New York before they ran out of coal because it was burning in the bunkers.
The first photograph shows a circled area where the fire was heating up the low grade sheet steel used to build the ship, to save costs. The fire warped the inadequate bulkheads which buckled and sped up the ship sinking.
Allegedly as unsinkable as the British Empire it stood for, it sank in the ice cold North Atlantic. So White Star cut the number of lifeboats, but who cared, the first class passengers had the most elegant quarters, best of food, entertainments and state rooms. While it was sinking, Ismay dressed as a woman to get himself a place on a lifeboat.
The lower classes, mainly Irish escaping from the hopelessness of their homeland, were locked in as the ship flooded before nosediving 9 miles to the sea bed. It was the British class system afloat. Cheapskate capitalism, pampered elites in a world of ostentation, deluded that their world was unsinkable, while the seething masses sweltered in the bowels of the ship.
The ruling mentality and the obsequious in fighting of the masses has not changed. Lord Mersey, an arrogant toff would hear nothing of the importance of the fire. His inquiry, like Hillsborough, was a cover up, dismissing the fire that caused the hurry through the ice field, where the side of the ship weakened by fire smashed against the massive iceberg.
Britain’s elite stokes up racism, and encourages the confusion of gender fluidity etc. In the name of fake liberalism, the elite- who have had their own way here since the Normans. exporting it to theIr colonies including what became the U.S – are having a laugh, but the masses just can’t see the joke at their expense.
Money First, Forget Freedom, British elite experts in helping police states. Posted December 4th 2019.
Spacewomen and alien life forms Posted November 28th 2019
POLICE are investigating a brutal brawl between transgender activists and a radical feminist faction in Hyde Park, which left a 60-year-old woman ‘shaken’ after she was bashed to the floor.
Fists were flying in Speakers’ Corner, London, when the Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs) and their enemies Trans Activists clashed in the bust-up at 7pm on Wednesday.
Footage taken before the police arrived shows activists charging at each other, throwing punches and smashing cameras on the concrete.
Mother-of-two Maria MacLachlan, a member of TERF who describes herself as a ‘gender critical feminist’, was hit to the floor when things turned violent.
She had joined around 50 TERF members who came together for a talk entitled What is Gender? The Gender Recognition Act and Beyond.
The group, who advocate women-only spaces and oppose some campaigning by transgender women, had originally scheduled to meet at a community centre in New Cross, South-East London, but changed the location last-minute after warnings of a protest from Trans Activists.
Sisters Uncut, an LGBTQ+ Society from Goldsmiths University, and Action For Trans Health London were among the groups who threatened to protest the talk.
Speaking to The Mail on Sunday, Ms MacLachlan, 60, said: “I was chatting to one of the speakers, Miranda Yardley, and people started to come who looked different to the rest of us. There was quite a generation thing.
As things escalated, Ms MacLachlan’s Lumix camera was smashed and the memory card stolen. She fell to the floor an suffered a bruise on her face, grazed knees and red marks on her neck.
She added: “I didn’t go to hospital but it has really shaken me up,” according to the Mail Online.
Three police cars rushed to the scene after receiving 999 calls from members of the feminist group.
Goldsmiths University said in a statement: “Goldsmiths prides itself on its diverse and inclusive community. We uphold the right to peaceful protest but cannot condone violence.”
A statement from Action for Trans Health read: “We condemn violence against women in all forms. We’re proud that many self-originating activists, allies and supporters stood against hatred, misogyny and intimidation.”
A Scotland Yard spokesman confirmed video evidence is being used as part of their ongoing investigating.
“These studenty-looking types were turning up and some arguments started to take place but I kept well out of it.”
Ms Yardley was speaking alongside Dr Julia Long, a self described ‘lesbian feminist activist’.
The shaken 60-year-old continued: “Julia said she was going to sing a song she had written. She took a megaphone and as soon as she put it to her lips, these kids started shouting, ‘When the TERFs attack, we fight back’.
“I thought, ‘I can film this, it will be interesting.’ They were getting louder and louder. Then suddenly someone tried to grab my camera.
“It was scary. Someone kept trying to get my camera. I think it was a girl, but I couldn’t tell because they had a hoodie over their eyes.”
As if? Posted November 26th 2019
The media played down the fatal stabbing of an innocent young girl scout in Essex because of racial tension fears. The same seems true of the black gang violence in the Birmingham Vue Cinema. These outrages are portrayed by upper middle class media vultures as a youth problem.
Mix it up with religious mania and you get this:
A man who launched a frenzied knife attack on police and commuters at Manchester Victoria train station last New Year’s Eve has pleaded guilty to three counts of attempted murder.
Mahdi Mohamud shouted “Allahu Akbar!” and “long live the caliphate!” as he stabbed and slashed at a couple in their 50s who were walking to a tram platform.
James Knox suffered 13 injuries, including a fractured, after being knifed in the back, shoulders and head with a fillet knife. More to come, as the media folk say.
Sex Mad Posted November 26th 2019
Back in the mid 1970s, while working for the Inland Revenue in Havant Tax Office, Vernon Church became a restraining influence on my rather critical attitude to the tax system for which we were working. I was also a rather wild child.
My father died when I was 11, after a two year illness resulting from an accident as a truck driver. By this time, he had taught me a lot about the world, mechanics, electronics and woodwork.
He had a dream of building a workshop for both of us. Back in the 1950s and 60s fathers were the stallwarts holding the family together.
He kept his massive tool collection in the little back bedroom, showing it to me one Sunday night, arm around me saying ‘One day son this will all be yours.’
I could write much more about my father, but for now I just want to say that his sort of role model isn’t there for most if any working class boys. He had been a regular soldier, transfered to the Royal Military Police after being wounded at Dunkirk.
He taught himself French and German during those terrible years. Had his parents has any surplus money he would have taken up the opporunity of a scholarshiop to grammar school. My mother’s circumstances were similar. Poverty, however, did not stop them being wonderful inspiring caring parents.
Their attitudes were very British. My friend Vernon and his late wife Sylvia were no different. When I was young I used to tell him he was more British than me.
Now ‘Diversity’ has changed everything and there is more to come:
Anti-LGBT equality teaching protesters have reacted with claims of “white” bias after a judge permanently banned noisy demonstrations from outside Anderton Park primary school in Birmingham. The protestors are Muslim and are angry by this afront to their faith, upon which their world, or maybe other world is built.
A court granted Birmingham City Council an ordER temporarily banning protesters over safety fears about repeated large-scale demonstrations, often involving people with no direct connection to the school.
There is an irony about these conflicting groups. The LGBTQ group belive science is on their side. They have the truth about sex and sexuality. They are mad with those who oppress and ridicule them. Teaching thier views in schools to the very young is what they demand.
The Muslims have thier belief in God. It is their truth. They do not need science. God is bigger than science, God made everything and scientists are just trying to understand it. If they don’t buy into God theywill never know the truth until they arrive in hell. To these believers, the LGBTQ people are going to hell.
All along the way, Muslims and LGBTQ are so mad about sex, sex mad if you like. it is everything to them in this conflict. Sad how sex causes and reveals so much upset, anxiety, misery, brainwashing, guilt and hypocrisy. Sigmund Freud saw sex as the basis of a lot of mental illness . I agree with him.
Whatever I may think of Islam, teaching gender fluidity to infants seems insane. It is blatant social engineering, as is all diversity preaching. All it begets is conflict, pain and even war. Robert Cook
Top 20 Most Brutal and Ruthless Dictators in Africa
Let’s face it; African leaders can do better.
Coup d’Etats, violence characterize leadership in Africa, and dictatorship and some scholars have argued that democracy is not an African ideology. Historically, leadership in Africa was based on conquest and monarchy and then colonialism.
Following colonialism, dictatorship continued in many parts of Africa.
Top 20 Dictators in Africa
Regardless of how they came to power, these people are regarded as the worst dictators in Africa.
The regime of most of these African dictators was marked by horror, terror, chaos, and bloodshed. Some of these dictators were notorious leaders, and some have led their country towards economic prosperity while others started on the right path and lost their way.
20. Paul Kagame (Rwanda: 1994-present)
Paul Kagame became the President of Rwanda in the year 2000. He rose to power through his guerrilla movement that ended the 1994 Rwandan Genocide.
Years in power: 23 years +
Highs: Kagame has led Rwanda towards the path of economic prosperity, his government has been described by the UN and several international leaders as the model of good governance in Africa.
Lows: Kagame’s regime been marked by accusations of human right abuse, oppression of political opponents and the press.
19. Zine El Abidine Ben Ali (Tunisia: 1987–2011)
Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was the President of Tunisia from 1987 to 2011. Ben Ali, he assumed the Presidency in a bloodless coup, a month after he was appointed the prime minister. He led Tunisia for 23 years before stepping down in January 2011 due to a massive protests demanding his exit.
Years in power: 24 years
Highs: Tunisia witnessed stability and economic prosperity under Ben Ali
Lows: In 2012, in abstention, he was sentenced to a life imprisonment for his role in the murders of protesters in the 2011 revolution that led to his exit from power. Embezzlement, misuse of public funds, suppressing political opponents are some of the sins of one of Africa’s longest-serving dictators.
18. Gnassingbé Eyadéma (Togo: 1967–2005)
Gnassingbé Eyadema remains one of Africa’s longest-serving dictator. Eyadema became the president of Togo in 1967 after he led a military coup against the incumbent President, a man he helped bring to power in a bloody military coup. He died of a heart attack in 2005, and his son Faure was named the President of Togo in controversial circumstances.
Years in power: 38 years
Lows: Eyadema is the pioneer of Africa’s first military coup d’etat, an act that soon became the political trend in Africa. He organized a presidential election in 1998 and canceled “in the interests of national security” when he was losing. He was accused of several cases of human right abuses.
17. Hastings Kamuzu Banda (Malawi: 1963–1994)
Banda, one of Africa’s greatest dictator, he led Malawi from 1961 till 1994. Banda lost effective control of Malawi during his absence from Malawi in 1993 when he was flown to South Africa for an emergency brain surgery. Bakili Muluzi, his former political protégé, became president in 1994, after the general elections Banda had earlier postponed was conducted in 1994.
Years in power: 31 years
Highs: He was fought against colonialism and led of Nyasaland (now Malawi) to independence as Malawi in 1964.
Lows: His reign left Malawi as one of the World’s poorest country. One in three children under five died of starvation, he regularly tortured and murdered political opponents. Human rights groups estimate that at least 6,000 people were killed, tortured and jailed without trial under Banda.
16. Gaafar Nimeiry (Sudan: 1969–1985)
Gaafar Nimeiry came to power in a 1969 coup that put an end to five years of corrupt civilian rule. He was ousted from power in 1985 and went into exile in Egypt until he was allowed to return in 1999. He contested in the 2000 Sudanese elections; he got just 7% of the votes. He died in may, 2009 at the age 79.
Years in power: 16 years
Highs: He signed the Addis Ababa Agreement, which ended the First Sudanese Civil War and brought a decade of peace and stability to the region.
Lows: His indiscriminate borrowing left the Sudanese economy in ruins, the Sudanese currency lost almost 90% of its value against the major international currencies. He imposed Islamic sharia law in 1983; this led to a two-decade-long war religious war between the Muslim north and the mainly Christian south.
15. Siad Barre (Somalia: 1969-1991)
Siad Barre took power in a Coup d’état in 1969, and he ruled Somalia for over 20 years before he was overthrown in 1991. He passed away in January 1995, in exile in Lagos Nigeria. General Siad Barre’s exit left Somalia without a central authority, and this resulted in a civil war that left the country without a leader for over two decades.
Years in power: 22 years
Highs: Siyad Barre served as chairperson of the Organization of African Unity (African Union). During his early years, he successfully created model agricultural factories that boosted the country’s economy.
Lows: General Siad Barre’s regime, like many dictators in Africa, was marked by human right abuses, The UN Development program asserts “the regime of Siad Barre had one of the worst human rights records in Africa.”
14. Charles Taylor (Liberia: 1997-2003)
Charles Taylor once described as the “tyrant of death” was the President of Liberia from August 1997 until 2003 when international pressure forced him to resign and go into exile in Nigeria. He remains one of the most brutal dictators in Africa till date.
Years in power: 6 years
Lows: Charles Taylor is currently serving a 50-year sentence for his involvement in what the judge described as “some of the most heinous and brutal crimes recorded in human history.” He was found guilty of the following charges: Acts of terrorism, Unlawful killings, Murder, Violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons,
13. Yahya Jammeh (Gambia: 1994-2017)
Yahya Jammeh took power in a bloodless military coup in 1994. Jammeh got re-elected as the 2016 general elections to Adama Barrow, and surprisingly, he conceded defeat. Only to reject the results few weeks after, he finally left Gambia in exile to Equatorial Guinea after sustained pressure by the African Union, Ecowas, and UN.
Years in power: 23 years
Lows: Strong human rights abuses have marked Yahya Jammeh’s regime, he also claims to have a cure for HIV Aids and his hate for homosexuality is well documented, recently, he threatened to slit the throats of any homosexual in Gambia.
12. Idriss Deby (Chad: 1990-Present)
In December 1990, Idriss Deby and his Patriotic Salvation Movement, an insurgent group, backed by Libya and Sudan sacked the incumbent government, and Déby became the President of Chad.
Years in power: 27 years +
Highs: Sacked the barbaric Chadian dictator Hissene Habre from power.
Lows: Deby has used oil proceeds and funds that could have been used to develop Chad to purchase weapons and strengthen his Army. Forbes named Chad the world’s most corrupt nations in 2006. It described Deby’s decision to buy weapons with the funds supposedly intended to counter famine as “what may turn out to be the single most piggish use of philanthropic funds.”
11. Obiang Mbasogo (Equatorial Guinea: 1979-Present)
Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo has been President of Equatorial Guinea since 1979 when he ousted his uncle, Francisco Macías Nguema, in a bloody military coup and sentenced him to death by firing squad. President Obiang is one of the oldest and longest-serving dictators in Africa.
Years in power: 38 years +
Highs: Equatorial Guinea’s has emerged as a significant oil producer under Obiang. He also served as the Chairperson of the African Union from 31 January 2011 to 29 January 2012.
Lows: State-operated radio declared President Obiang “the country’s god” with “all power over men and things,” and thereby he “can decide to kill without anyone calling him to account and without going to hell.” Unlawful killings, government-sanctioned kidnappings; torture of prisoners by security forces, and even accusations of cannibalism has trailed President Obiang’s regime. Forbes estimates his wealth to be around $600 million; he has used an oil boom to enrich his family at the expense of the citizens of Equatorial Guinea.
10. Paul Biya (Cameroon: 1982-Present)
Paul Biya has been the President of Cameroon since 6 November 1982. He consolidated power in a 1983–1984 power struggle with his predecessor and he remains a powerhouse in Africa and the president of Cameroon till date.
Years in power: 35 years +
Highs: Cameroon has enjoyed peace and stability for the past 30 years. Paul Biya’s regime has also overseen one of the strongest diplomatic relations in Africa.
Lows: Paul Biya has kept himself in power by organizing sham elections and paying international observers to certify them free of irregularities, the top African leader, and dictator who has been accused of constant human right abuse, was ranked 19th in Parade Magazine’s Top 20 list of “The World’s Worst Dictators.”
9. Jose Eduardo Dos Santos (Angola: 1979-Present)
Jose Eduardo Dos Santos, the father of Africa’s richest woman Isabel Dos Santos, is Africa’s second longest-serving head of state, behind Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo. He has been in power since 1979, and in 2017, he announced that he would finally step down and end his dictatorship over Angola.
Years in power: 38 years +
Highs: The Angolan economy has grown to become thethird-largest economy in sub-Saharan Africa, after South Africa and Nigeria.
Lows: Strong allegations of corruption, misuse, and diversion of public funds for personal gain, human rights abuses, and political oppression. 70% of the population of Angola, lives on less than $2 a day and yet the Dos Santos family have amassed a massive sum of personal wealth with Angola’s oil proceeds.
8. Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe: 1987-November 21, 2017)
Robert Gabriel Mugabe, Ex-President of Zimbabwe, and one of the oldest dictators in Africa was in power from 1980, when he was prime minister of Zimbabwe. He consolidated his power to become president on 31st December 1987. After thirty years in power, following what seemed like a coup, smelled like a coup but was officially “not-a-coup,” he resigned from office.
Years in power: 30 years
Highs: Zimbabwe boasts of one of the most impressive education systems in Africa.
Lows: The United Nations estimates Unemployment in Zimbabwe to be as high as 80%, the economy of Zimbabwe is in ruins, and life expectancy for both male and females is a little above 50 years. Massive hyperinflation has made the local currency of Zimbabwe worthless, the exchange rate of Zimbabwe dollar is 35 quadrillion to US$1. The local currency has been retired and replaced with the US dollar and South African rand, and this has led to the near collapse of the manufacturing industry in Zimbabwe.
7. Francisco Macías Nguema (Equatorial Guinea: 1968-1979)
Francisco Nguema was the first President of Equatorial Guinea; he ruled Equatorial Guinea before his nephew in 1979 overthrew him and sentenced to death by Firing squad for genocide and other crimes he committed. He was brutal and apparently deranged, and he is one of the worst dictators in modern African history.
Years in power: 11 years
Lows: During his regime, he granted himself “all direct powers of Government and Institutions.” He ordered the death of entire families and villages; he executed members of his family, One-third of the population fled the country, he ordered every boat in the nation sold or destroyed and banned all citizens from the shoreline to prevent more people from escaping his terror.
6. Hissene Habre (Chad: 1982-1990)
Hissene Habre seized power in 1982 from Goukouni Oueddei, who had just been elected President, he lost power to his former military commander officer Idriss Deby in December 1990. Habre fled to Senegal when Deby’s Libya backed insurgents marched into the capital, N’Djaména. In May 2016, he was convicted of crimes against humanity.
Years in power: 8 years
Lows: Hissene Habre’s government carried out a frightening 40,000 politically motivated murders, and there are documented cases of at least 200,000 tortures in Habre’s brutal eight-year rule of Niger.
5. Omar Al-Bashir (Sudan: 1989-Present)
Sudanese President, Omar al-Bashir has been the leader of Sudan since 1989 when he took power in a military coup. Al-Bashir is one of the most brutal dictators in Africa and despite ICC’s warrant against him; he remains the president of Sudan.
Years in power: 28 years +
Lows: The International Criminal Court wants Omar al-Bashir for genocide, war crimes, murder, rape, torture, and other crimes against humanity for his crimes in Darfur.
4. Sekou Toure (Guinea: 1958-1984)
Ahmed Sékou Touré was elected as the first President of Guinea in 1958, a position he held until to his death in 1984. Toure like many other dictators in Africa, survived several assignation attempts and coups while he was in power, he died of heart failure in 1984.
Years in power: 26 years
Lows: Toure banned all opposition parties and declared his party the only legal party in the country. Toure ruled Guinea as a ruthless dictator with no tolerance for opposition. He was accused of several cases of human right abuse and extrajudicial killings.
3. General Sani Abacha (Nigeria: 1993-1998)
Sani Abacha became the head of state of Nigeria in 1993 after he sacked the interim president appointed after the annulment of the 1993 elections. The exact details of the dictator’s death in the presidential palace in 1998 remains unclear, but it was met by wide celebration and soon after Nigeria returned to a democratic path.
Years in power: 5 years
Highs: Abacha’s regime was a massive economic success for Nigeria. Foreign exchange reserves rose from $494 million in 1993 to $9.6 billion by the middle of 1997. External debt was reduced from $36 billion in 1993 to $27 billion by 1997; inflation rate went down from the 54% he inherited to 8.5% between 1993 and 1998, and global oil price was priced at an average of $15 per barrel.’
Lows: General Sani Abacha’s regime was characterized by massive looting and human right abuses such as the public hanging of political activist Ken Saro-Wiwa and jailing several political opponents.
2. Colonel Muammar Gaddafi (Libya: 1969-2011)
Gaddafi seized power in a bloodless military coup in 1969. The charismatic leader of Libya and one of the greatest dictators in African history met his end during the Libyan revolution in 2011 after rebels in Sirte, his city of birth, killed him.
Years in power: 42 years
Highs: Under Gaddafi, Libya became the first developing country to own a majority share of the revenues from its oil production. Gaddafi provided access to free healthcare, safe houses, food and clean drinking water, free education to university level which led to the dramatic rise in literacy rates
Lows: He led oil-rich Libya as an absolute dictator, for close to 42 years, he quashed anyone that opposed him, and was responsible for the death of thousands of his people.
1. Idi Amin Dada (Uganda: 1971-1979)
Idi Amin seized power in the military coup in January 1971, sacking Milton Obote. Idi Amin fled Uganda in the heat of the Uganda-Tanzania war and went into exile in Libya and then Saudi Arabia where he lived until his death on 16 August 2003.
Years in power: 8 years
Lows: Amin’s rule was characterized by rumors of cannibalism, frightening human rights abuses, political repression, several extrajudicial killings, corruption, and gross economic mismanagement. International observers and human rights groups estimate the death toll of his regime to be around 500,000.
Africa has come a long way, and it continues to overcome setbacks and rewrite its history. These dictators represent the worst moments in post-colonial African history. Categories Resources Post navigation Siad Barre Quotes: Exiled Absolute Leader of Somalia50 Top Universities in Africa and their Notable Alumni
- 17 Most Developed Countries In Africa
- The Richest Black Women in the World (Nigerian, American & Angolan)
- Top 20 Oil Producing Countries in Africa
- Top 50 Richest People In Africa
- President Till Date: 10 Longest Serving African Presidents
U can B what you like Posted November 21st 2019
There is a lot or prejudice in this world. The State and media tells us so, as if they are high above such mindsets. One wonders how the world would work without prejudice.
In Britain the majority of what we used to call crimes goes unsolved. If the police do arrest anyone it will be based on their prejudice and ‘the usual suspects’ will get arrested convicted and jailed.
Converesly, upper and upper middle class criminals are never even suspects. Prince Andrew would not stand a chance if he was one of the lower orders.
On a more general level the world would make no sense at all if we were not allowed to judge people and situations on the basis of what we see. However, the reality is- if the term reality is still legal and using it won’t get me jailed- is that without prejudice we would not be able to make snap decisions about anything.
Of course the upper and ruling classes, with police lackeys are allowed as much prejudice as they can eat. The war on prejudice and promotion of diversity is all about protecting their interests. Divide and rule the lower orders and they have it made. Allow whites to identify as black, men as women, women as men and the masses won’t know where to turn to hdie their fears and confusions.
It is all very well telling society that transexuals are not mentally ill, but the converse of this is that a self appointed elite are the arbiters of mental illness across the board.
By today’s so called liberal criteria, I assume that me considering coming out as a Pineapple is not a sign of mental illness. I have very sound reasons- derived from police feminist criteria that it is my perceptions that count– so I have to consider my own reality.
I think it is time Pineapples had their right to be taken seriously taken seriously. I admire them. I want to be one. I demand that the government provides the appropriate cool temperature and accommodation to ensure us pineapples are protected in life preserving refrigerators, safe from all predators, especially human.
Our tough exterior belies our soft smooth delicious centre. We are rather like women really and should be admired, protected, preserved for our inner goodness and innocence of all forms of violence. We Pineapples should serve as an example to humans on how to live a wholesome sweet sweet life, doing no harm to anyone one, and utterly inspirational.
Art for Woman, especially of colour’s sake. Posted November 20th 2019
Whites can be black if they wish, says lecturers’ union Posted November 19th 2019
18 November 2019 • 6:34am
People should be allowed to identify as black no matter what colour they are born, a lecturers’ union has said.
The University and College Union (UCU), which represents more than 100,000 university lecturers and staff, set out its position on whether people should be able to self-identify as different races or genders.
In the paper “UCU Position on Trans Inclusion”, it stated: “The UCU has a long history of enabling members to self-identify, whether that is being black, disabled, LGBT or women.”
The union’s stance was criticised by some of its own members as “nonsensical”. Kathleen Stock, a professor of philosophy at the University of Sussex, wrote on Twitter: “I’m still [a] member of UCU but Christ they make it hard when [they] publish this nonsensical, anti-intellectual propaganda.”
The debate over racial self-identification has become heated in recent years. Last November, Anthony Lennon, a white theatre director who describes himself as an “African born again”, drew criticism for securing public funding intended to help ethnic minorities develop their stage careers.
Mr Lennon, 53, who was born in London and whose parents are Irish, won a place on a two-year Arts Council-funded scheme, after a leading black theatre company accepted his claim to be of “mixed heritage”.
Trevor Phillips, the former chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, said allowing people to self-identify their race meant members of ethnic minority communities “lost out”.
The UCU’s paper also reaffirmed that it supported a “social, rather than medical, model of gender recognition”.
A spokesman for the UCU said: “Self-identification is a standard practice in many organisations and the Office for National Statistics says ‘there is no consensus on what constitutes an ethnic group and membership is something that is selfdefined’.”
A Simple Mind Posted November 7th 2019
Having to study Marxism during my first year at university seemed rather boring. Images of Marx depicted a bearded old man from a long gone irrelevant past.
Age and experience have taught me that I was wrong to take such little interest, but I did read the books. At last I see the value of a Marxist perspective, though I see no way of verifying the nature of true consciousness.
However, it appears to me that Marx’s lumpenproletariat is now on a global scale. The elite’s enthusiasm for freedom of worshipping an imaginary God, in man’s image, is their way of rebooting the old Marxist ‘opium of the masses’.
The same goes for all the other diversity stuff. Careers and job opportunities before relationships and stable communities is just about generating a particular consciousness for the sake of the elite who get richer everyday,
The risk of their mentality leading to super power global conflict does not bother them. They will have the fallout shelters and fantasy homes in the sky to go to. Meanwhile even black people can fly the jet fighters and lead the armies into what Tennyson called ‘The Valley of Death’. That’s how equal it is in Britain.
So to my simple mind there is only one truth about diversity, the division between the haves and have nots. The reasons for mass migration into Europe are simple and explained elsewhere.
It has meant even more desperate people on British streets, with false consciousness and scapegoating the elite’s primary defence. Calling for more police is not a solution, it is an indicator of how bad and serious the problems are.
Diversity Is A Money-Grubbing Con Posted November 6th 2019
Colorado College doesn’t have enough “Diversity.” They want it; they need it; they pine for it. They lust and fantasize about it the way a teenage boy does about girls.
So keen are they on Diversity, that starting next year the college will begin a test-optional admission policy. Students will no longer be required to submit SAT or ACT scores. They claim eliminating this evidence of performance will “increase the diversity of its student body.”
The tacit argument, nowhere explicitly stated in their press release, is that blacks score worse than Asians and other groups. If the college used a merit-based selection process, not enough blacks to achieve DIVERSITY would make it, or are making it. The nirvana of DIVERSITY is when nary a of-no-color face is seen or even thought of.
Colorado College is forbidden to use race in an outright open manner. If it could, it could solve its diversity problem by handling Asians and other groups with this simple question: “Are you Asian or of-no-color (Y or N)? If Y, please apply elsewhere.”
But, no. They would never go that far. Not because an All-Diverse student body wouldn’t make them shiver in delight. If they reached the acme of Diversity, CC administrators would black their faces, hop on planes, and brag to all the other campus leeches at leeching conferences about how Diverse they are.
They’d have to fly coach, though.
If colleges only accepted the diverse and ignored Asians and of-no-colors, the lovely flow of green would cease.
Colleges and universities want blacks and other of-colors because these folks have color, yes. But their lovely dark shades are not the primary reason why administrators want more of them.
For the love of money is the root of all evil.
Colleges and universities are running out of of-colors and Asians. There are too many colleges and not enough bodies to fill them. If there aren’t enough bodies, there isn’t enough cash in the form of government-backed loans coming in. And if there isn’t enough cash coming in, there’s no way to pay all those administrators.
Sure, they can and will fire some professors, hire adjuncts, and skimp in other ways, like stop buying books. But this will only get them so far.
There are only two solutions: fire administrators, or increase the number of students.
The first is no solution at all and is anathema. Firings administrators goes against the very purpose of universities, which is to hire administrators. After all, where else besides government could these fine people find employment?
More students are needed. Hence all the pools, climbing walls, carpeted playrooms and the like. Bigger universities speculate by placing ads for students in foreign countries. This works. Unfortunately, it works best in places like China and Korea. You don’t see Cornell putting up billboards in Zimbabwe (motto: True Diversity). More Asians. At least they’re rich Asians. They pay higher tuition rates, and many even pay cash. Lucrative!
Not-so-rich colleges have to make do with the native population where Asians and of-no-colors who want to go and can are running out. Solution? Increase diversity. Calls for increasing diversity are thus calls to increase the cash flow.
This is why colleges have not one, but a dozen, or even more, offices and departments and deans and administrators of diversity. They are all devoted to bumping up the number of students, and to keep the gold from departing.
It’s not enough to get the blacks in the door. Universities have to keep them the full four (or four-plus) years. It’s not efficient to have a student come for just one year. The marketing costs of bringing them in are barely covered, if at all. Those diversity officers don’t come cheap (which is why tuition soars).
Colorado College discovered a way to reduce recruitment costs. Admissions are now basically two-tired. Of-no-colors and Asians will still submit test scores, and be judged by them, but the “strengths beyond their test scores [will be] considered” for of-colors. In other words, as long as their loans come through, they’re in.
This approach must necessarily spread.
Diversity, then, is largely a scam, a ruse. It relies on idiot true believers who screech so loud that few can find the silence to think through the problem. Administrators think they can contain the fire they started, and maybe they can. Fires have a way of jumping fences, though, as happened at Evergreen.
To support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal (in any amount) click here
March 9, 2015
September 5, 2018
With 7 comments
June 10, 2019
With 7 comments Posted in Culture
Published by Briggs
- DG September 11, 2019 at 7:33 am Fine with me if the college doesn’t regard the act and sat standard tests. But not for diversity reasons, but rather because those tests are pointless and a waste of time and don’t hardly tell anything what a person knows and how they will do in college.
- DG September 11, 2019 at 7:45 am * hardly tell anything * what a person knows..etc. Yeh
- McChuck September 11, 2019 at 7:56 am DG – Passing the ACT is a test of basic knowledge and comprehension of the English language. These things must not be assumed to be present in most high school graduates in current year America. There’s a reason why the kids call it Clown World.
- Tym Onz September 11, 2019 at 12:01 pm Many HBUC’s have been in on the MONAY con for decades. At the opening convocation for 1989, the freshman students were told, factually, that by end of the first term, half of them would be gone and, by the end of the second term, half of that half would be gone. Well, dur! They recruited from every major inner-city in the country…fixed them up with the Federal money, brought them in, washed them out, kept the money, Rinse/Repeat. Oh, and, the admins were ALWAYS quick to tell all the illiterate washouts that THEY threw away their chance for a college opportunity by not trying hard enough. Dang, that was cold! But, the washouts DID get to say that they “went to college at so-and-so university” for the rest of their lives.
- Ray September 11, 2019 at 12:19 pm Stanford is starting diversity courses in physics. It’s about time. I had some physics courses and they were not the least bit inclusive. Instead, they threw people out. When I had analytical mechanics, a senior course, we started the course with 36 people in class and ended it with 6 people in class. I was so unPC I bragged about surviving analytical mechanics. https://news.stanford.edu/2019/08/14/making-physics-inclusive/
September 11, 2019 at 4:53 pm
“Administrators think they can contain the fire they started, …” – Briggs
Never the “law of untended consequences” do they consider.
September 11, 2019 at 6:05 pm
Am sending this on to our daughter….a bonafide PhD who taught at
university for ten years and then went on to research as the “theys” at
the university and much of elsewhere, did not want the students to be
educated, but to become parrots!!
God bless, C-Marie
- C-Marie September 11, 2019 at 6:15 pm P.S. Aren’t people who are identified as “white”, actually people “of all color” and not of “no color”?? We, who are “whites”, Caucasians, ….which name actually belongs to the people of the Caucasus Mountains……have more color shades and variants than others…..and in light, white is all colors combined. Perhaps there is the exception of those of “pure” Scandinavian descent. Plus, one day when a Mom was talking with her little girl of three, that their skin color was white, the little girl very indignantly poked her finger into her arm and fiercely declared, “No, mommy! I’m pink!!” And that was that!! God bless, C-Marie
September 11, 2019 at 10:21 pm
“GI – W = EGood Intentions (GI) minus Wisdom (W) leads to Evil (E).” – Dennis Prager
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/the-equation-that-explains-evil/ H.T. – John Ray
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com/2019/09/the-example-of-zimbabwe-refutes-both.htmlt Despite their pretensions, Leftists have no more good intentions than than Conservatives, but their lack of wisdom invariably leads them, and everyone they can cajole or coerce into following them, to fail. I don’t see how one can say it any more clearly than Evan Sayet (from where it starts thru 2:52, though the entire talk is worth listening to).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ljt7GyjMGU&feature=youtu.be&t=163 From what I’ve read by this crowd so far, I wouldn’t be surprised if you’ve already heard that, but if you haven’t I thought you might want to.
- Gail Finke September 12, 2019 at 7:55 am Who was that kid who got into Stanford, or a similar university, by writing one phrase (I think it was “Black Lives Matter”) over and over again for his entrance essay? A pretty awful essay, which should have angered every other kid ever accepted there, but it was also a brilliant reading of what the school is REALLY looking for.
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
- Gary on Scientists On Average Growing Dumber: 11,000 Scientists Want You To Die To SAVE THE PLANET
- John B() on Scientists On Average Growing Dumber: 11,000 Scientists Want You To Die To SAVE THE PLANET
- C-Marie on We Have -12 Months To SAVE THE PLANET
- Amateur Brain Surgeon on We Have -12 Months To SAVE THE PLANET
- Frederich on We Have -12 Months To SAVE THE PLANET
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 493 other subscribers
Search for: Sort by
- Gary on Scientists On Average Growing Dumber: 11,000 Scientists Want You To Die To SAVE THE PLANET
- John B() on Scientists On Average Growing Dumber: 11,000 Scientists Want You To Die To SAVE THE PLANET
- C-Marie on We Have -12 Months To SAVE THE PLANET
Diversity is a Weakness, Not a Strength Posted November 6th 2019
John Hawkins | Posted: Oct 21, 2017 12:01 AM The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
- Ben Shapiro Is Elizabeth Warren Set to Fall?
- Walter E. Williams Disproportionalities: Whose Fault?
- Byron York Trump, The Phone Call and Consciousness of Guilt
“Diversity is a strength” is one of those Orwellian maxims that’s just generally accepted as truth by most Americans despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Granted, if you’re talking about a DIVERSITY OF IDEAS, you can certainly come up with some situations where it’s a strength. For example, in the movie World War Z, Israel is saved (at least temporarily) by having a “tenth man” whose job is to forcefully argue for the alternative viewpoint to a situation where everyone agrees. So instead of laughing off the idea that Israel might face a zombie invasion, Israelis realized there was merit to it and were prepared in time to protect the country. Back in the real world, the NFL certainly could have used someone pointing out the potential long-term downsides of allowing players to disrespect the flag when just Colin Kaepernick was doing it. Donald Trump might benefit from a diversity of opinions when he’s about to tweet about Rosie O’Donnell or Mark Cuban at 4 AM. The Democrat Party could certainly use the input of a few random white factory workers from flyover country about the latest rhetoric and proposals it’s about to pitch.
On the other hand, even when diversity of thought is useful, it’s only in limited doses. The New York Yankees don’t want players who think the Boston Red Sox should win the pennant. A Republican President doesn’t want a Democrat in his Cabinet who will undermine him at every opportunity. Our military doesn’t want soldiers hoping the other side will defeat us in a war.CARTOONS | Gary Varvel View Cartoon
All that being said, when most people talk about “diversity,” they don’t mean a diversity of ideas. They believe a Hispanic guy, a black guy, a transsexual and a woman bring something to the table just by virtue of their race or gender.
This is seldom true.
For example, it is true that a group of white economists working on tax policy could benefit from having Thomas Sowell come out of retirement to join their ranks, but that’s because he’s Thomas freakin’ Sowell, not because he’s black. An all-Hispanic baseball team would benefit from adding Mike Trout to its roster, but it’s because he can play, not because of his white perspective. An all-female start-up would be lucky to get Bill Gates on board, not because he can mansplain things to them, but because he has lots of friends with infinite amounts of money who might invest if he’s on board.
In fact, diversity is often a huge minus. The new black employee may claim you discriminated against him, even if he’s fired for legitimate reasons. The woman may sue for sexual harassment after seeing a swimsuit calendar on some random guy’s wall. The Satanist you hire may call it religious discrimination if you don’t offer him a goat to sacrifice to Lucifer on Halloween.
Diversity can work just fine, but only if there’s strong pressure on people to assimilate to the existing culture. That’s why our very diverse military functions so well. However, we don’t have those conditions in America as a whole. Instead, we have liberals promoting tribalism and grievance mongering non-stop. In other words, every racial, sexual and religious difference is used as a way to split people further apart. Many of the same people who claim diversity is a strength will also tell you white people can’t understand the concerns of black Americans, men are oppressing women and women who don’t want to share a bathroom with a transsexual man are bigots.
It’s worth noting that America’s increasing diversity is largely a product of a change to our immigration system implemented in the sixties. European-born immigrants made up 75% of American immigrants in 1960, but that percentage dropped to only 11 percent in 2014. Combine that with the cultural degradation and rise of tribalism that has occurred during the last couple of decades and we have seen a much more radical change in this country than most people realize. Furthermore, as Robert Putnam noted, all of this diversity in America has a lot of negative consequences,
IT HAS BECOME increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger. But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam — famous for “Bowling Alone,” his 2000 book on declining civic engagement — has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings. “The extent of the effect is shocking,” says Scott Page, a University of Michigan political scientist.
Actually, it’s not all that shocking. We make this assumption that as people from different groups get to know each other, they’ll grow to like each other. Unfortunately, this can only occur where people have shared values and goals. For many Americans, if your neighbors are waving a Mexican flag and saying America sucks, say you’re part of rape culture, want America to live under Sharia law or accuse you of having privilege because you’re white, the more you get to know them, the LESS you are going to like them. Additionally, if they believe those things, chances are they don’t like you either.
We see this same pattern all over the planet. Look at the conflicts going on in Afghanistan, Libya, Israel and Iraq. How’s that diversity working out for them? How is diversity playing out for Russia and Chechnya? What about the Hutu and Tutsi in Rwanda? How about Bosnia and Herzegovina? Even the Western part of the Roman Empire eventually fell because it became too corrupt and weak to assimilate the tribes it allowed inside its border. In the end, diversity cost the Romans their empire.
The only thing that ever allowed Americans to believe that diversity is a strength was our uniting culture. Without the now-destroyed Melting Pot to keep us together, diversity is one of our nation’s great weaknesses.
Recommended from Townhall
- Is Elizabeth Warren Set to Fall?
- WATCH: Rand Paul Brings Up Valid Points About the Whistleblower’s Identity
- Disproportionalities: Whose Fault?
- Kentucky AG Election Ends in Historic Win for Republicans
- Trump, The Phone Call and Consciousness of Guilt
- Hypocrisy Alert: Schumer Believes It’s ‘Despicable’ to Release Whistleblower’s Identity But There’s One Exception
Trending on Townhall Media
Townhall.com is the leading source for conservative news and political commentary and analysis.
Copyright © Townhall.com/Salem Media. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you
Catalonians Separtist war rages on, but there are very strict limits as to what sort of diversity is permitted in the EU posted October 20th 2019
Britain First leader and deputy jailed for religiously-aggravated harassment over ‘hostility’ towards Muslims Posted October 29th 2019
7 March 2018 • 3:52pm
The leader and deputy leader of far-right group Britain First have been jailed after being found guilty of religiously-aggravated harassment.
Paul Golding, 36, and Jayda Fransen, 32, both of Penge, south-east London, stood trial in January at Folkestone Magistrates’ Court charged with three and four counts respectively of the hate crime.
They were arrested in May last year as part of an investigation into the distribution of leaflets and online videos which were posted during a trial at Canterbury Crown Court in the same month, after which three Muslim men and a teenager were convicted of rape and jailed.
Judge Justin Barron said their words and actions “demonstrated hostility” towards Muslims and the Muslim faith.
He found Fransen guilty of three charges and Golding guilty of one charge, but dismissed the other counts against them.
The judge said: “I have no doubt it was their joint intention to use the facts of the case (in Canterbury) for their own political ends.
“It was a campaign to draw attention to the race, religion and immigrant background of the defendants.”
Sentencing Fransen to 36 weeks and Golding for 18 weeks in jail, Judge Barron said the crimes were “deliberately planned against targeted victims”.
Hijacking Black History to Bash Israel Posted October 16th 2019
by David M. Swindle
The American Spectator
August 8, 2019
Academics today are widely known for letting ideology and politics drive their research and teaching, but nowhere is this more evident than in the determination of Middle East studies scholars to situate rejection of Israel’s right to exist within the social justice pantheon of the mainstream Left. And perhaps nowhere is this determination more evident than in Randolph-Macon College history professor Michael R. Fischbach’s new book, Black Power and Palestine: Transnational Countries of Color. I eagerly attended his recent talk at UCLA’s Center for Near Eastern Studies to hear him out.
The social sciences today are dominated by intersectional theory, which, in a nutshell, holds that systems of minority oppression — racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, gender, class, and so forth — are overlapping; that oppressed groups share a commonality of interests; and that tapping into that solidarity is essential to bringing about change. In recent years, anti-Israel activists have used intersectionalism as a rallying cry to pressure social justice movements ranging from Occupy Wall Street to the Women’s March to adopt anti-Israel platforms.
David M. Swindle wrote this article for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum. He is the Southern California associate of the Counter-Islamist Grid and the Director of Research for The Israel Group. Follow him on Twitter
A Fellow Black ! October 15th 2019
Back in the late 1970s I used to rent a flat from London Weekend Television’s Comedy boss, Cambridge graduate Humphrey Barclay. The flat was in his basement with an excellent view of the garden. At the end of the garden was a miniature version of Rodin’s statue of ‘The Thinker.’ The flat was in SW3 London.
These were the early days of VCRs and obviously Humphrey had to have one. My ex wife and I used to hear the theme tunes from his new comedies coming through the ceiling.
Humphrey lived with his upper class Oxford Graduate and bit part actor friend wealthy African Christopher Asante. Chris inevitably got a part in Humphrey’s ‘Mind Your Language.’ The funniest thing was seeing posh Chris cast as a black gangster in ‘Hazell.’ One eveing while Humphrey and Chris were holidaying in Africa, I took the opportunity to play my stereo a little louder than usual.
My Bob Dylan record hadn’t been ‘Blowin’ in the Wind’ very long before there was a knock at the side door. I opened the door to see a very expensively Muriel Odunton. I hadn’t been informed that she was staying at Humphrey’s above while he was away.
She wore glittering jewelery. I hatdly recognised her from Humphrey’s popular series called ‘Mixed Blessings.’ In this Muriel played the young working class black wife of a hapless posh white boy. The idea was to promote good race relations as it was called in those days.
Performers like Muriel were called actresses back then. She wasn’t acting that night when rather angrily and condescendingly in a cut glass English accent, she complained about my music, calling it ‘Rather penetrating. I am trying to write an important article and your awful music is so distracting ‘ I was then a post graduate student at Goldsmiths’s College, University of East Anglia. A few years earlier I had been working for the Inland Revenue near Portsmouth.
My best male friend there was a Trinidadian. I never really thought about racism until it became all too obvious that my friend’s promotion was being blocked by District Tax Inspector Fred Eavis. I hadn’t even heard of The National Front until queing for a cricket match, along with Vernon, at Lords in 1976. A coach load of them had come to protest and hurl abuse at black people.
There was no doubt about Eavis’s racism, albeit benign patronising and protective of Vernon. Vernon had purloined a damning record from his personnel file while the boss was looking and rummaging in a cupboard for something else.
He gave me a copy of the letter, basically saying that he was good at his job but colleagues and taxpayers would not like it if he had a supervisory position.
Amusingly, given my reputation with and attitude to the corrupt British police, my friend went on to be a Southampton Magistrate, with me as a principal referee.
On learning of my intention to expose police corruption, he became alarmed, warning me of the dangers and that I would do myself more harm than good. We have fallen out over the matter. He is over 80 now and I suspect he has his fears. Like the boss who did not want to expose Vernon to racism in the tax office, Vernon does not want me to be exposed to more police abuse and lies. It is understandable, but some of us have to face the music and get to the truth, whether or not a coward like me.
I have mentioned, elsewhere on this site, how my friend Vernon enlighetned me on the subject of racism, giving me all of James Baldwin’s work to read. A headmaster’s son and with so much loyalty to what he jokingly called ‘the mother country’. I used to mock him for being more British than myself. When he returned recently from his retirement to Trinidad, I asked him : ‘In your experience as a magistrate did the police ever lie.? ‘ He laughed knowingly, replying ‘All the time.’
Humphrey Barclay hired a painter and decorator for his three storey mansion near Stockwell tube station. Often I used to cycle from here to Goldsmiths’ College in New Cross and back home again. One day I returned to find my ex wife and Chris Asante standing in the paved front garden area. Chris looked upset and my ex wife rather concerned.
I asked what the problem was. Fur coat wearing Chris explained that he had offered the painter man a cup of Earl Grey tea only to receive an insolent response. Chris looked bewildered when he said : ‘ I don’t understand it because he ( the painter ) is a fellow black. That, I am afraid, is like me calling Prince Charles a fellow white, while also expecting the Prince to share tea and biscuits with me. Class, perceptions and snobbery are the essence of the social world.
Defining ‘True Islam’
by Sam Westrop
The American Spectator
October 8, 2019
|Washington Corrections Center “religious coordinator” Malik Shakoor mentors a group of inmates.|
When the Washington Corrections Center in Shelton, Washington, last week decided to hire its first Muslim chaplain — referred to obliquely as a “religious coordinator” — it also published an “infographic” that explains “true Islam.”
“Jihad,” we are told, “does not mean ‘holy war.’ Often mistranslated in Westernized media, the term simply means ‘to struggle’ or ‘to strive.'” Moreover, “Islam in its true form grants women man rights, and any Muslim man who oppresses women is not following the true words of Allah.”
Based on the cited source for this text, “man rights” is supposed to be “many rights.” In fact, the text for the infographic was not copied and pasted, but edited and condensed. It seems that a state government official saw fit to review and alter the text before publishing. Should a state governmental body be dictating what “true Islam” is?
Islam Needs Reformers, not Publicists Posted October 13th 2019
by A.J. Caschetta
The New English Review
Some excerpts of the original article, entitled “Islamic Reform: Craig Considine’s Bridge to Nowhere,” have been excluded.
|A crack publicist wouldn’t have done the Soviet Union much good.|
In the years since 9/11, the Islamic reform movement has advanced sufficiently that two distinct camps have emerged: reformers and bridge-builders. Genuine reformers seek to transform how Islam is practiced, while bridge-builders seek to improve how Islam is perceived, mainly by non-Muslims.
Reformers tend to be Muslims who fault their co-religionists from previous centuries for writing counterfeit stories about the prophet of Islam, and those alive today for believing those stories. Reformers denounce Koranic literalism.
A.J. Caschetta is a Ginsberg-Ingerman fellow at the Middle East Forum and a principal lecturer in the English Department of the Rochester Institute of Technology.
Religion Today October 10th 2019
A prominent German Jewish group has accused police of “negligence” after a gunman killed two people during an attack on an east German synagogue.
The Central Council of Jews in Germany said it was “scandalous” that police were not protecting the synagogue in Halle on the Jewish Yom Kippur holiday.
The German police union (GdP) said police were too thinly spread for 24-hour protection of places of worship.
A 27-year-old man was arrested after the shooting, which was live-streamed.
About 2,200 people watched the live stream on the internet gaming platform Twitch.
“If police had been stationed outside the synagogue, then this man could have been disarmed before he could attack the others,” said the council’s president Josef Schuster on Deutschlandfunk public radio.
In a tweet, Mr Schuster added that it was “a miracle that there were no further casualties” during the incident in Halle, a city of over 230,000 people. About 60 worshippers were at a Yom Kippur service at the time.
German authorities have named the suspect only as Stephan B, a German national. Source BBC News
On Whitewashing Islamism, Some K-12 Programs Advance Jihad Posted October 6th 2019
by Mitchell Bard
The Daily Wire
September 30, 2019
You may have read about the proposed ethnic studies curriculum developed for California public high schools, which caused an uproar because of its biased treatment of Jews and Israel, support for the BDS movement, and fear that it fomented anti-Semitism. That is one of many battles over curricula as Islamists attempt to rewrite history and erase any mention of Islamic extremism.
The “Islamophobia” industry is engaged in a nationwide effort to whitewash the history and practice of Islam and perpetuate the myth that Islam has always been a religion of peace. These propagandists seek to silence their critics and smear anyone who exposes the truth as “Islamophobic.”
We have seen this effort on college campuses, which have received nearly $3 billion since 2012 from Arab/Muslim states and individuals who hope to influence the next generation of Americans to adopt their view of the Middle East. These investments have paid off in the hiring of apologists for Islamist terror who teach, write textbooks, and serve as sources for the media.
|Islamists are seeking to whitewash the history and practice of Islam in American public schools.|
Equally disturbing, as I wrote in The Arab Lobby, is an increasing effort to shape the views of children in K-12. The terror attacks on 9/11 provoked fear and misunderstanding about Muslims and Islam while political correctness allowed the lobby to present its sanitized version of events aimed at downplaying Arab/Muslim distinctions, ignoring differences in values and interests, and dismissing links between Islam and terror.
U.S. taxpayers underwrite some of these efforts through government-funded Title VI Middle East studies centers at major universities. Today’s “Islamophobia” lobby can have an exponential impact through these centers, whose mandate is to educate teachers about the region.
|U.S. taxpayers underwrite some of these efforts through Title VI grants to Middle East studies centers|
As I’ve documented, as part of their obligation to engage in outreach, Title VI centers often produce materials reflecting the lobby’s views that teachers pass on to students.
Advancing the same politicized agenda that rules academe, Islamist organizations have allied with leftwing interest groups and pressured publishers to revise textbooks to better reflect multicultural ideologies. The result is a reluctance to discuss negative aspects of Islam such as the discriminatory treatment of non-believers, women, and gays, the role of radical Muslims in terrorism, and the Islamist animus toward the United States, Israel, and the West. A 2008 study by Gary Tobin and Dennis Ybarra concluded:
Discovering in our schools a pervasive set of erroneous beliefs about such a vital topic should alarm every taxpayer, every parent, and every school official. To allow biased textbooks and outright propaganda in supplemental materials into the schools is to pervert the very purpose of public education and a misuse of our democratic system.
One such battle occurring in Virginia’s Loudoun County centers around the misrepresentation of the meaning of jihad. Loudoun’s presentation of jihad and Islamic terrorism were criticized for bias.
While it is understandable that American Muslims would not want their religion associated with radicalism, teaching that jihad is a wholly benign concept related to a believer’s internal struggle distorts the term’s meaning by ignoring its relationship to extremism even as terrorists – such as Palestine Islamic Jihad – use the word to convey their malignant mission.
|The Mountain Ridge Middle School in West Virginia taught students to write the shahada, the Muslim profession of faith, in Arabic.|
Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis explained that “Conventionally translated ‘holy war,’ [jihad] has the literal meaning of … ‘striving in the path of God’ (fi sabil Allah). Some Muslim theologians … have interpreted the duty of ‘striving in the path of God’ in a spiritual and moral sense. The overwhelming majority of early authorities … discuss jihad in military terms.”
The “Islamophobia” lobby might veto citing Lewis, a Jew smeared by critics as a Western-oriented propagandist, but textbook authors can also cite the medieval Muslim historian Ibn Khaldun, who wrote “In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.”
|According to the medieval Muslim historian Ibn Khaldun, “holy war is a religious duty” for those who practice the Islamic faith.|
Students can find a more contemporary definition in the Encyclopaedia of Islam, where Emile Tyan wrote “Jihad consists of military action with the object of the expansion of Islam.”
Learning the meaning of jihad is also key for students to understand the Middle East today, where the commitment to jihad by terrorist organizations such as Palestine Islamic Jihad and Hamas perpetuates the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Students should learn, for example, that Palestine Islamic Jihad considers jihad the only way to liberate Palestine. A Tel Aviv University analysis explains the group believes a “Muslim victory and the elimination of Israel are foreordained by God’s words in the Quran.”
By reading primary documents, students can see for themselves the true meaning of jihad. To understand the ideology of Hamas, teachers can direct them to the group’s charter, which states “There is no solution for the Palestine question except through jihad” and calls on Muslims to “raise the banner of jihad” to “rid the land and the people of their uncleanliness, vileness and evils.”
American public schools could also use material taught about Islam in Muslim schools. A study of Saudi textbooks, for example, found they “encourage both violent and non-violent jihad against non-believers.”
|American students should learn more about Islam, but not from apologists for Islamism.|
A Palestinian textbook for eleventh graders offered a definition of jihad very different from the one proposed for Loudoun school children: “Jihad is an Islamic term that equates to the term war in other nations. The difference is that jihad has noble goals and lofty aims and is carried out only for the sake of Allah and for His glory . . . .”
Unquestionably, students should learn more about Islam. But they should learn it from unbiased sources, not from apologists for Islamism. It is a disservice, and intellectually dishonest, to teach them a sanitized version of history that whitewashes the extremist elements of the religion. If the “Islamophobia” lobby has its way, the next generation will grow up unaware and unprepared to face the danger from Islamists who threaten American lives, values, and interests.
Mitchell Bard is a fellow at Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum. He is the author or editor of 22 books, including the 2017 edition of Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict, The Arab Lobby, and the novel After Anatevka: Tevye in Palestine.
Did I Get James Baldwin Wrong? Posted August 20th 2019
Preface by Robert Cook
I heard on BBC Radio 4 today that a white female professor of literature in the U.S.A has been cleared of racism after several months of anxiety and uncertainty. Her crime was to correct a quote from writer James Baldwin who allegedly, according to the politically correct, said ‘I am not your negro. Outraging two white female students in her seminar by stating, ‘What James Baldwin actually said was ” I am not your nigger.” One of the students filed a complaint after the seminar and the professor was suspended, even though what she said was true.
I got to know Baldwin’s work via my best male friend and colleague at the Havant office of HM Inspector of Taxes near Portsmouth. His name was and still was, when I saw him a few months ago, Vernon Church.
Vernon is from Trinidad. I had never thought about racism before knowing him. There were no black people like him in the small country town where I came from.
Vernon knew I had ambitions to be a writer and musician and encouaged me, introducing me to Baldwin and letting me play his paino. We lived one road a way from each other on Havant’s infamous large Portsmouth overspill council estate, built in the grounds of the once great Leigh Park, home to one of the local aristocracy. Class was the only social divide that I knew of, and as it turned out, James Baldwin took the same view.
Vernon had all of Baldwin’s books. I read them eagerly. He also did his best to make me forget my lost love and local girl Helen Thurston from nearby Lovedean. My songs and musical aspirations were inspired by that lost love, but that is another story. Helen has always been my Muad Gonne.
The following was originally published February 5, 20176:04 PM ET
Writer James Baldwin at home in Saint Paul de Vence, South of France, in 1985. Ulf Andersen/Getty Images
In 1983, I was studying abroad in Nice, France, and while other exchange students were flitting from city to city, checking off items on their bucket lists, I craved only one European cultural experience:
I wanted to meet James Baldwin, the mandarin prophet and former boy preacher; the African-American expatriate writer who once used his European exile to explore, defy, and decry the delusional fiction of race that has organized our minds, our possibilities, our world, and now leads us toward the precipice of self-annihilation.
Baldwin changed the way I saw the world and who I thought I was as an African-American within it. He was the first writer to help me see clearly that race was a sickness that devoured both the racist and racism’s victims.
That must have been why, on a spring day in 1983, I jumped into a little red convertible MG, top down, driven by an insane Corsican friend; a good-timing lady’s man who proceeded to burn rubber around the kind of narrow, twisted, South-of-France mountain roads that had just killed Princess Grace of Monaco. We were headed to Saint-Paul de Vence, where I’d heard Baldwin lived.
My mind reeled back to that trip and that moment of hopeful youth as I watched Haitian filmmaker Raoul Peck’s documentary, I Am Not Your Negro, which was released for wide distribution on Friday.
In June, 1979, at the age of 55, Baldwin started work on what the filmmaker called a portrait of America as seen through the stories of three of his friends, Medgar Evers, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Malcolm X. That work, other famous Baldwin passages, and mesmerizing videotaped interviews provide the soundtrack against stunning images that move the documentary from the recent riots near my home in St. Louis, Mo., to footage and photographs taken during the Civil Rights era.
‘I Am Not Your Negro’ Gives James Baldwin’s Words New Relevance
The effect of the film on me was staggering. The despairing James Baldwin on the screen was so different from the hopeful figure I thought I understood.
“To look around the United States today,” Baldwin says at one point, “is enough to make prophets and angels weep.”
In the film, I deeply felt Baldwin’s despair that followed the murders of his friends. But I felt none of the hope that I read in his writings; hope that somehow the struggle against racism could be won.
As I watched the film, I feared that the title of Peck’s documentary spoke directly to me, though I had read and reread (almost memorizing) many of the passages from Baldwin’s work that actor Samuel L. Jackson incants in a deep, gravely voice that is definitely not my own, and definitely not that of the writer.
I felt implicated when Baldwin said in the film, “I was in some way in those years, without entirely realizing it, the Great Black Hope of the great white father.” In my reverent memory of him, had I, too, made him into the “Negro,” the “Great Black Hope,” who would save America from itself? Had I, too, leaned too heavily for optimism on the man loving friends called “Jimmy”?
The Baldwin of my father’s books
I first became aware of Baldwin during my junior year abroad, years after his urgent usefulness as a civil rights figure had passed. My family never understood why I wanted to go to France, though there was a history of African-American intellectuals expatriating there during the Jim Crow years. I was raised middle class and comfortable in a white St. Louis suburb. Jim Crow was a bad American memory by then, and there was overtly nothing to flee. Still, before I left for Europe, my father, who taught African-American literature at a community college, linked me forever to the exiled writer. The night before I boarded my flight, he handed me a stack of books.
Over the coming months, as I read Notes of a Native Son, The Fire Next Time, the anthology Black Voices, and the short stories gathered in Going to Meet the Man, Baldwin’s voice and thinking transformed even the way I used language. It was magical.
In a eulogy after Baldwin’s death in 1987, poet Amiri Baraka defined this magic.
“Jimmy Baldwin was the creator of contemporary American speech even before Americans could dig that,” Baraka wrote. “He created it so we could speak to each other at unimaginable intensities of feeling, so we could make sense to each other at higher and higher tempos.”
Baldwin had given voice to my submerged thoughts about what it meant to be a black person, indissolubly and meaningfully connected to the larger world. Somehow, I felt that meeting him would also give meaning to my stay in France and help me understand the unfinished business of race relations that still haunted the American imagination.
So when my Corsican friend stepped into the French café where I was peacefully sipping a stream of bitter espressos and asked if anyone wanted to help him test-drive the used car he’d just bought, I was game.
“Let’s go to Saint-Paul de Vence,” I said, though I had no idea where Baldwin actually lived, or even if he was home.
Thirty years before I decided to risk my life on that trip, Baldwin left the United States for France to save his own life; not from the evils of Jim Crow, but from the ever-more threatening, fixed notions of an identity that he witnessed slowly killing his father and his friends and transforming him into just another unseen and expendable black boy.
In 1984, he told an interviewer for the Paris Review that he “knew what it meant to be white and I knew what it meant to be a nigger, and I knew what was going to happen to me. My luck was running out. I was going to go to jail, I was going to kill somebody or be killed. My best friend had committed suicide two years earlier, jumping off the George Washington Bridge.”
“I don’t know how it will come about,” Baldwin said of America’s racial reconciliation. “But no matter how it comes about it will be bloody. It will be hard.”
I wanted to meet the man with such a singular take on what it meant to live abroad. In one of the books my father gave me, Baldwin described the roots of his identity as a unique, roving figure. With no trace of shame, he told the poet Dan Georgakas: “I’m a black, funky, raggedy-ass shoeshine boy. If I forget that, it’s the end of me.”
As the red MG sped toward Saint-Paul de Vence, I closed my eyes to the distant azure sea and idyllic countryside flashing by and imagined meeting the brilliant consciousness that was Baldwin. I dreamt of the meeting the way jazz musicians dream of sitting in a jam session with the master who influenced their style, hoping to sound out crudely formed thoughts and hear them echo back, perfectly honed and now riding the air forever
I never shined shoes. I was raised in a precariously middle class home. But I recognized the shoeshine boy deep in myself. My Mississippi-born mother knocked into me and my five siblings the hard lesson that we were no better than anyone else. Learning French and earning a doctorate wouldn’t change that. Nor would literally buying into the racial and class roles of a society deeply organized around what Baldwin called “black-white madness.”
So, for me, Baldwin, the self-described “slave in exile,” was the most impossible, volatile and dangerous of all figures. Because of him, I rejected the easy comfort, the endlessly shopping, touristic gaze of superior identity that the other exchange students embraced. He widely critiqued all forms of oppression, forging, perhaps, the foundation of a new order, a new identity, a new consciousness. This was the hope I saw in Jimmy Baldwin.
But James Baldwin, the man I saw on the screen as I watched I Am Not Your Negro, had little of that hope.
He was like the original “slave in exile”
The rear wheels of the English sports car suddenly skidded toward the edge of a cliff and I closed my eyes rather than witness my own death. With athletic reflexes sharpened on even narrower roads in Corsica, my friend recovered. I struggled to find an acceptable, macho way of asking him to slow down.
Still, I could appreciate the beauty that surrounded me. The man I was going to see saw something else. Baldwin shared a view with the original slave in exile, Frederick Douglass. Both lodged themselves firmly in the role of the underdog and spoke on behalf of the oppressed.
Douglass relentlessly identified with – and refused to position himself above – the lowliest of the earth, les misérables, who had been discarded and sacrificed for the sake of European patriarchal identity.
When he traveled to Europe toward the end of his life, Douglass visited more than the great monuments. He chose to tour sites of oppression, narrating an alternative history of the West through the eyes of its victims. Like Baldwin, he went to France and saw more than beauty at the papal palace in Avignon. There, he said it “required no effort of the imagination to create visions of the Inquisition, to see the terror-stricken faces, the tottering forms, and pleading tears of the accused, and the saintly satisfaction of the inquisitors.”
Through his imagination and writing, the beaten slave and the murdered heretic melded into one.
Baldwin used his European experience to craft in 1953 one of his most powerful essays, “Stranger in the Village.” His visit to the cathedral at Chartres and the crypt beneath helped him to define the parasitic nature of racial identity in a way that came to organize my thinking – and perhaps that of everyone who read and understood him.
“… I am terrified by the slippery bottomless well to be found in the crypt, down which heretics were hurled to death, and by the obscene, inescapable gargoyles jutting out of the stone and seeming to say that God and the devil can never be divorced. I doubt that the villagers think of the devil when they face a cathedral because they have never been identified with the devil. But I must accept the status which myth, if nothing else, gives me in the West before I can hope to change the myth.”
This was the Jimmy Baldwin I thought I knew. This was the man who exposed with surgical clarity the devastating myth of racial identity while clinging to the gospel that the truth would set us free. He had set me free. Before I read Baldwin, for example, Black History Month seemed like a kindly gesture of inclusion made by the larger society. It had not yet occurred to me that omitting African-Americans from the teaching of history in the first place did as much damage to the oppressed as to the oppressor, because it gave them a warped and fictitious sense of reality and of themselves. Baldwin made that point in the 1964 interview with Dan Georgakas.
“I want American history taught,” he told the poet. “Unless I’m in that book, you’re not in it either.”
At the heart of his thought, I surmised, was the skinny, black shoeshine boy, popping and snapping his rag as he looked up knowingly into the clouded eyes of a customer who didn’t see him back, whose world deliberately and perilously didn’t include him. Baldwin helped me realize that such a customer (who almost believes his shoes shine themselves) is as unreal to himself as the invisible shoeshine boy is to him.
Like Jimmy, I thought the dawning of this realization in white people would be our salvation, that somehow, if we could understand it, if we put the right words to it, if it is stated clearly, we could come to see the error of our ways. Getting people to realize this about themselves embodied the hopefulness I read in in his work.
But after I watched I’m Not Your Negro, I wondered if my image of Baldwin – of Jimmy – was inaccurate. In the film, he invokes the shoeshine boy when he explains that he rejected membership in the NAACP because of its “black class distinctions that repelled a shoeshine boy like me.” But in this latest rendering of Baldwin, there is little of the Christian humanist hope; the Great Black Hope of reconciliation through mental emancipation. Instead, the film moves James Baldwin and Martin Luther King Jr. much closer to the militant ideas of Malcolm X; the notion that change could only come through violent confrontation.
“Malcolm was one of the people Martin saw on the mountaintop,” Baldwin says cryptically in the unfinished essay about his friends. He acknowledges that he and Malcolm X “were simply trapped in the same situation.”
The James Baldwin of this film doesn’t seem to believe in reconciliation triggered by the exploding of myths.
“Well, I am tired,” Baldwin says in the film. “I don’t know how it will come about. But no matter how it comes about it will be bloody. It will be hard.”
He asked me to call him “Jimmy”
The medieval, hilltop village of Saint-Paul de Vence, was a beautiful, walled hamlet, and as the red MG slowed to match the scenery, I wondered what it must be like to be a writer living in such a place. My friend seemed unmoved. No village outside of Corsica held any beauty for him.
We stopped the car, and I accosted shoppers at a flower market and disturbed men as they played leisurely games of pétanque on the hardened dirt. I asked if they could tell me where James Baldwin lived. They seemed puzzled. They thought I was asking about James Bond, who maybe lived around there, too, and drove a red sports car.
Baldwin with friend and civil rights leader Medgar Evers. Courtesy of the Mississippi Department of Archives and History.
The trip was a sad (and terrifying) failure. And while I did not die that day, I didn’t meet Baldwin, either. That would come four years later, when I was a graduate student at the University of Chicago, and he was invited to speak during Black History Month. A student had been asked to drive Baldwin around and invited me to go along. This ride was calm, slower, on wider streets.
Baldwin looked like his pictures, though he was dressed in a surprising, cutting-edge, tailored suit. He was kind and smiling, and like most writers, shy and reticent. We drove him to dinner and then to give his talk, after which he fielded questions about Alice Walker, The Color Purple and African-American women writers who air black America’s dirty laundry. “What’s wrong with airing dirty laundry?” he characteristically asked. “Besides, I think it’s healthy.”
Later that night, I finally had my chance to jam with Baldwin. I sat next to him in a rundown lounge on the south side of Chicago. He listened distantly as the jukebox played Billie Holiday, a friend he would join in the hereafter just a few months later. Regretfully, I did too much talking, and my words simply dissipated into the air. Who could compete with Lady Day?
When I stiffly called him “Mr. Baldwin,” he asked me to call him “Jimmy.”
“Jimmy,” Amiri Baraka says in the film, “always made us feel good. He always made us know we were dangerously intelligent and as courageous as the will to be free.”
He could do that while surgically dissecting the malignancies of racism in his homeland. At 29, Baldwin shook the American consciousness with the prescient “Stranger in the Village,” where he spelled out the dangers of what is now called American exceptionalism:
“I do not think … that it is too much to suggest that the American vision of the world — which allows so little reality, generally speaking, for any of the darker forces in human life, which tends until today to paint moral issues in glaring black and white– owes a great deal to the battle waged by Americans to maintain between themselves and black men a human separation which could not be bridged. It is only now beginning to be borne in on us — very faintly, it must be admitted, very slowly, and very much against our will — that this vision of the world is dangerously inaccurate, and perfectly useless. For it protects our moral high-mindedness at the terrible expense of weakening our grasp of reality. People who shut their eyes to reality simply invite their own destruction, and anyone who insists on remaining in a state of innocence long after that innocence is dead turns himself into a monster.”
It was a call to consciousness. Now, those warnings, coming from the James Baldwin of I Am Not Your Negro, sound more like the fulfillment of a despairing prophecy.
The film resounds with this sense of imminent catastrophe, pronounced in Samuel L. Jackson’s ponderous reading, with little of the mannerisms or hopeful affect of Baldwin’s younger persona — or of the withdrawn, 62-year-old man I met in Chicago. The cumulative effect of the film and its arrangement of sound and image is the emergence of a figure defined by such potent words as “trapped,” “bitter,” “enemy,” “vengeance,” and “helpless rage.”
There seems little escape for Americans.
“These people,” Baldwin says, “have deluded themselves so long, they really don’t think I’m human. I base this on their conduct, not on what they say. And this means … they have become moral monsters.”
It’s a sobering conclusion. With the specter of police shootings, violent protests, nativism, and the resurgence of white supremacy following the November election, I fear he was right.
Stephen Casmier is an associate professor in the Department of English at Saint Louis University.
You can’t preach the Bible here, this is a Muslim area
(What a community policeman told two Christians)
Readings from the Koran: Naeem Naguthney
Two Christian preachers were stopped from handing out Bible extracts by police because they were in a Muslim area, it was claimed yesterday.
They say they were told by a Muslim police community support officer that they could not preach there and that attempting to convert Muslims to Christianity was a hate crime.
The community officer is also said to have told the two men: ‘You have been warned. If you come back here and get beat up, well, you have been warned.’
A police constable who was present during the incident in the Alum Rock area of Birmingham is also alleged to have told the preachers not to return to the district.
It comes amid growing concern over the development of Islamic ‘no-go areas’.
The preachers, Americans Arthur Cunningham and Joseph Abraham, are demanding an apology and compensation from West Midlands Police.
They say their treatment breaks the Human Rights Act, which guarantees freedom of religious expression.
The preachers, who have the backing of the Christian Institute pressure group, say they will take the force to court for breaching their human rights if they don’t receive an apology.
They have accused the officer, PCSO Naeem Naguthney, of behaving in an ‘aggressive and threatening’ manner. A complaint by their lawyers said he interrupted as they spoke to Muslim youths about their beliefs.
Mr Abraham, 65, who was born a Muslim in Egypt and is a convert to Christianity, said: ‘He told us we were trying to convert Muslims to Christianity and that that was a hate crime.
‘He was very intimidating and it concerns me that somebody holding his views can become a police officer, albeit at PCSO level.’
Mr Cunningham, 48, a fellow American Baptist missionary, said: ‘He realised we were Americans and then started ranting at us about George Bush and American foreign policy.
‘He said we were in a Muslim area and were not allowed to spread our Christian message. He said he was going to take us to the police station.’
Mr Cunningham added: ‘I am dumfounded that the police seem so nonchalant. They seem content not to make it clear that what we were doing was perfectly legal. This is a free country and to suggest we were guilty of a hate crime for spreading God’s word is outrageous.’
History August 15th 2019
My firebrand young Welsh A level history teacher was an inspiration to me. Before him I had the rather dull and condescending brother of composer Benjamin Brittain to uninspire me- Robert Brittain.
Up until this young Welshman John Skinner’s appearance in my life, I found the subject rather dull. Having said that, my mother and Aunt Flo brought local history alive, with all the gossip, glories and tragedies of war, but that is another story.
One of John Skinner’s favourite phrases on the subject of the Britain we were living in during the late 1960s, was ‘The colonial pidgeons are coming home to roost. Everything he said was with drama , perfect timing , expression and pause.
Indeed those pidgeons are still coming, and our elite are still meddling with the old Imperial remains, ensuring an apparently unending wave of them because of the wars they still promote in places like Syria and Yemen- alon with all the emoty promises to be paid for by Britain’s lower classes now.
Yemen brings back memories of the retreat from Aden. I well remember ‘Mad Mitch’ CO of the famous Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. They don’t make armies like his any more.
At the time of Britain’s retreat from Aden, Kennedy Trevaskis was the British Adviser for the Western Aden Protetorate (WAP). All sorts of tricks were being used to manage the situation.
‘As the renowned journalist and coloniser Randolph Churchill (Sir Winston’s son ) once told Ken Trevaskis on a visit to Aden, what made Britain great was “not brute strength, but men who had the ingenuity to get results on the cheap.” ‘ ( Source ‘Mad Mitch’s Tribal Law , Aden And The End Of Empire.’ Aaron Edwards. )
Consensus August 15th 2019
A re run of black director Reggie Yates 2015 ‘Angry White Men last Wednesday night, implied that white men needed to calm down and accept the new consensus. Anyone who didn’t was suffering from paranoia- which in psychiatric jargon means they hear voices, can’t cooperate and are abnormally suspicious.
The Muslim Council of Britain today urge UK government to demand a halt to the inflammatory actions by India as they continue to lay siege on Kashmir and curtail further the rights of its people. Hundreds of thousands of Indian troops occupy the region, its political leaders are under house arrest and communication has been all but cut off. August 11th 2019
Many British Muslims have family ties to the region and are naturally anxious about the deteriorating situation there.
In recent days the Indian government has illegally revoked Article 370 of its constitution which had ensured the protected status of the Indian-controlled state of Jammu and Kashmir. The decision is being challenged in the country’s Supreme Court. India’s action also contravenes a series of international resolutions and obligations, including UN Security Council Resolution 47, which required India to establish a coalition government to work with the ‘Plebiscite Administrator’ nominated by the United Nations, to work towards ‘a free and impartial plebiscite’.
Harun Khan, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain said: “As a member of the UN Security Council, with a stated desire to uphold the rules-based international system, it is imperative that our government make its voice heard. British Muslims, many of whom have family ties to the region, expect our government to uphold our values, the rule of law and human rights. India’s latest action turns further this Muslim-majority region’s status into effectively an Indian colony. And with rising extremism and mob-violence orchestrated against Muslims in the rest of the country, there is a deep concern about the fate of Muslims in Kashmir.
We echo the calls of British Members of Parliament calling for action on the matter. We do not want to see yet another senseless conflict over Kashmir, which will have repercussions elsewhere. We urge all parties to play their part in pursuing peace. The UK has a historic role and duty to press for peace in Kashmir.”
Editorial Comment British media, especially the BBC have shown clear bias in favour of the Muslim cause. Britain has a large and growing Muslim population. They will be listened to by vote hungry politicians as a General Election approaches. The British Ruling classes have never forgotten that India was the ‘Jewel in Queen Victoria’s Crown.’ They can’t help meddling.
British Muslims should not feel forced to assimilate, says top counter terrorism officer August 7th 2019
- Martin Evans, CRIME CORRESPONDENT
6 August 2019 • 9:16pm
British Muslims should not be forced to “assimilate”, the country’s most senior counter terrorism officer has said, as he called for greater understanding of marginalised communities.
Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, who is the country’s highest ranking Asian officer, said that in a successful, integrated society, people should be free to practise their religion and culture openly rather than having to hide away.
He also said more needed to be done to eradicate poverty, improve education and increase social mobility if community cohesion was to be improved.
Editorial Comment : This all sounds very sensible and non discrimiantory, though I am loathe to trust a British police officer, let alone a senior one. Former Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddick, who struggled to improve community relations in South London- where once upon a time lived and know well- wrote in his memoirs: ‘It wasn’t my homosexuaity that caused me problems in the police, it was my honesty.’
The police are a culture apart. Terrorism has facilitated a lot of empire building in the police. Its causes are political as is the devastation of the Muslim world further afield, along with impovershing and breaking communities within Britain.
Serving police officers involving themselves, being courted by mainstream media, to pass comment on these issues is a reminder just how politicised the police are, and of our British police state. Feigning concern for the freedom of contradictory worlds like LGBTGQ and Islam is a smokescreen.
Images from diverse Britain- few of my pictures taken as I ramble around the country.
Cheletenham Boy’s School
14-year old rape victim lashed to death in Bangladesh under Islamic sharia law on charges of “Adultery” (her rapist was married) August 5th 2019
Under Shari’a laws in Islamic countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia, a woman is considered half of a man.
In Shari’a courts a woman should bring at least 2 male witnesses who support her testimony, without two men witnessing the imam completely ignoring her testimony.
14-year old rape victim lashed in Bangladesh under Islamic sharia law on charges of “Adultery”.
She was sentenced to 100 flogs but she endured 80 and then collapsed, at which time they discontinued lashing her, according to The Daily Star, a Bangladeshi newspaper.
Her family took her to a hospital, where she died days later from internal bleeding.
ISIS = Al Qaeda = Hamas = Boko Haram = Taliban = Sharia.
All the terrorist organizations share the same ideology of radical Islam, they seek to establish Islamic caliphate (empire) and impose Sharia everywhere.
Sharia law has no place in the West.
Tommy Robinson is not the problem, but a convenient scapegoat July 28th 2019
To express any understanding of what the comfortable media call far right political activists is to risk being called a racist, The English Defence League and its leader Tommy Robinson must be seen as evil and deranged,
Mainstream media and politcians are, in most cases, drawn from very comfortbale backgrounds by very comfortable people in power. They are a self perpetuating judgemental elite.
We are supposed to watch crap like ‘Love Island’ or the ‘Jeremy Kyle Show’ and believe that the battle is between men and women- and that a big part of the answer is to give posh patronising hard done by BBC women another half million of licence payer’s money a year. Forget about social class, never even talk about it. Class has no skin colour, sexuality or gender.
I cannot go along with the smug self righteous herd. My father was a regular soldier from the slums of North London, born in the year, 1919, when the victors of World War One created a peace settlement guaranteed to cause a second world war- see ‘The Economic Consequences of the Peace’ by John Maynard Keynes.
The ‘know all’ elitists in power need the masses to be ignorant, pulling their strings as if they are puppets. The masses are not expected to see the string pullers. The sex and thought police will be there if they do.
My mother was also born in a North London Slum, in 1924. Her mother died of mastitis two weeks after mother was born. There was no National Service, Her Irish father, an out of work groom looking for a chance in the Capital, sent her up to snob ridden Winslow and relatives because he had four other children to look after.
The Irish were treated like scum in those days. One of his sons, aged 24, was killed by a sniper, while fighting Germans alongside his regiment, the London Rifles- fighting for the myth of freedom and justice. He was trying to rescue his wounded friend at the time.
My parents moved to Winslow in 1949. Dad got a job driving a brick lorry. He bicycled to the brick yard which was ten miles away, every day, all weathers. He was paid a pittance. He had fought for a myth and nearly died. Driving the brick lorry, he topped up his money helping unload the lorry- no pallets then.
So one day, a stack of bricks fell on him, crushing his chest. The snobby ex naval officer doctor did not realise dad, then aged 39, had a broken rib, which over time ripped into his lung. He was two years dying, with us living on National Assistance. I will never forget the sound of his death rattle. I was 11 years old and he had been in hospital for nine months before his painfull end. As paupers we were always insecure and patronised.
It was no fun being a pauper in those days. Nowadays technology has boosted productivity and profits which are not shared with the masses, who’s wages have fallen and costs risen. Some like Tommy Robinson still believe the myth that this country was ever great for them.
The elite have never been richer and moralising against racism is just such a wonderful lovely way of virtue signalling. We should all be very concerned as to the reasons why the Attorney General overturned the Court of Appeal’s decision to free Tommy- and the reasons why he is in jail.
Father and mother died because the NHS were incompetent and did not care. My parents were just numbers andt more working class scum- what the Yanks call ‘Trailer Trash’ and people who offer no electoral advantage or benefit to the eilte.
Robert Cook July 2019
Jesus Was Not a Palestinian
by Seth Frantzman
The Jerusalem Post
July 8, 2019
|The idea that Jesus was a Palestinian has gone from literary conceit to literal truth in the eyes of hardline anti-Zionists.|
Activist Linda Sarsour asserted that “Jesus was Palestinian of Nazareth” over the weekend, claiming that he “is described in the Quran as being brown-copper skinned with woolly hair.” She was excoriated for her tweet, and for her subsequent attempts to double-down on it, mostly by commentators pointing out that Jesus was born in Judea and he was Jewish.
This isn’t the first “Jesus was Palestinian” controversy. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar fanned the flames of this claim in April when she promoted an article with the same assertion.
The latest attempt to push the “Jesus was Palestinian” claim is not as innocent as it appears. It is a negation of Jewish history and a modern day attempt at replacement theology: to replace historical Jewish connections to the land 2,000 years ago, recreating an imagined history of Palestinians in place of Jews.
- Belief Systems
- Atheism and Agnosticism Logic
- Key Figures in Atheism
- Atheism Myths and Misconceptions
According to Science, God Does Not Exist July 25th 2019
by Austin Cline Updated June 25, 2019
In the debate over whether God exists, we have theists on the one side, atheists on the other, and, in the middle, science. Atheists claim there is scientific proof that God is not real. Theists, on the other hand, insist that science, in fact, has been unable to prove that God does not exist. According to atheists, however, this position depends upon a mistaken understanding of the nature of science and how science operates. Therefore, it is possible to say that, scientifically, God does not exist—just as science discounts the existence of a myriad of other alleged beings.
What Science Can and Cannot Prove
To understand why “God does not exist” is a legitimate scientific statement, it’s important to understand what the statement means in the context of science. When scientist say, “God does not exist,” they mean something similar to when they say “aether does not exist,” “psychic powers do not exist,” or “life does on the moon does not exist.”
All such statements are shorthand for a more elaborate and technical explanation, which is that this alleged entity (or God) has no place in any scientific equations, plays no role in any scientific explanations, cannot be used to predict any events, does not describe anything or force that has yet been detected, and there are no models of the universe in which its presence is either required, productive, or useful.
What should be most obvious about the more technically accurate statement is that it isn’t absolute. It does not deny for all time any possible existence of the entity or force in question; instead, it’s a provisional statement denying the existence of any relevance or reality to the entity or force based on what we currently know. Religious theists may be quick to seize upon this and insist that it demonstrates that science cannot “prove” that God does not exist, but that requires far too strict of a standard for what it means to “prove” something scientifically.
Scientific Proof Against God
In “God: The Failed Hypothesis—How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist,” Victor J. Stenger offers this scientific argument against the existence of God:
- Hypothesize a God who plays an important role in the universe.
- Assume that God has specific attributes that should provide objective evidence for his existence.
- Look for such evidence with an open mind.
- If such evidence is found, conclude that God may exist.
- If such objective evidence is not found, conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that a God with these properties does not exist.
This is basically how science would disprove the existence of any alleged entity. If God existed, there should be concrete evidence of His existence—not faith, but tangible, measurable, consistent evidence that can be predicted and tested using the scientific method. If we fail to find that evidence, then God cannot exist as defined.
Certainty and Doubt in Science
Of course, nothing in science is proven or disproven beyond a shadow of any possible doubt. In science, everything is provisional. Being provisional is not a weakness or a sign that a conclusion is weak. Being provisional is a smart, pragmatic tactic because we can never be sure what we’ll come across when we round the next corner. This lack of absolute certainty is a window through which many religious theists try to slip their god, but that’s not a valid move.
In theory, it may be possible that someday we will come across new information that will lead us to further explore the God hypothesis. If the evidence described in the above argument were found, for example, that would justify a rational belief in the existence of the sort of god under consideration. It wouldn’t prove the existence of such a god beyond all doubt, though, because belief would still have to be provisional.
It may also be possible that the same could be true of an infinite number of other hypothetical beings and supernatural forces. Zeus or Odin, Christian or Hindu—every possibility of a God or gods is up for exploration.
What Does it Mean to “Exist”?
Finally, for such a proposition as “God exists” to have meaning to science, we need to define what “existence” in this case means. When it comes to God or a series of gods, their existence is dependent on evidence that they have had or continue to have an impact on the universe. In order to prove impact on the universe, there must be measurable and testable events that could best or only be explained by whatever this “God” is we are hypothesizing. Believers must be able to present a model of the universe in which some god is “either required, productive, or useful.”
This is obviously not the case. Many believers work hard trying to find a way to introduce their god into scientific explanations, but none have succeeded. No believer has been able to demonstrate, or even strongly suggest, that there are any events in the universe that require a supernatural being to explain.
Instead, these constantly failing attempts end up reinforcing the impression that there is no “there” there—nothing for “gods” to do, no role for them to play, and no reason to give them a second thought.
So far, everyone who has tried to scientifically prove that God exists has failed. While it’s technically true that this doesn’t mean that no one ever will succeed, it is also true that in every other situation where such failures are so consistent, we don’t acknowledge rational or even serious reasons to bother believing.
Learn Religions is part of the Dotdash publishing family.
The Syrian Sideshow
by Jonathan Spyer
The Jerusalem Post
July 18, 2019
The international news focus has long moved on from the Syrian conflict. Behind the oft-stated clichés of the conflict “winding down” and of regime survival or victory, however, a complex and often deadly reality remains.
The most violent part of Syria today is the northwest, where regime and Russian forces are clashing with Turkish-supported Sunni jihadis. But the regime-controlled and Kurdish/US-controlled areas are periodically also rocked by internecine violence, most of it committed by Sunni Arab elements, including the Islamic State group.
Far from entering a phase of post-conflict reconstruction and renewed centralized governance, Syria today is a patchwork of different areas of control. It is also thoroughly penetrated by a variety of regional and global players. Indeed, Syria today forms a fascinating microcosm of the larger regional cold war under way. It is a space in which all the main players in this contest – the Iran-led bloc, Russia, the US and its allies, and the Turkey-Qatar Sunni Islamist axis – have a stake.
Jonathan Spyer is director of the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis, and is a research fellow at the Middle East Forum and at the Jerusalem Institute for Security and Strategy.
Sky Islamic channel Peace TV faces ban in Britain for saying gay people are worse than pigs and magicians should be executed July 23rd 2019
- Peace TV found to have shown four programmes which breached Ofcom’s code
- Included an imam saying homosexuality was ‘rampant’ and threatened families
- Channel, broadcast on Sky, said programmes were based on Islamic teachings
An Islamic TV station that said gay people are worse than pigs and magicians should be executed faces being stripped of its UK broadcasting licence.
Peace TV, based in Dubai, was found to have shown four programmes which breached Ofcom regulations on inciting crime, hate speech and abuse.
The channel, which is broadcast on Sky and also airs in the US, said the programmes were based on Islamic teachings. Imam Qasim Khan rants about ‘evil’ of homosexuality on Peace TV Loaded: 0%Progress: 0%0:00PreviousPlaySkipLIVEMute00:00Current Time 0:00/Duration Time 0:44FullscreenNeed TextVideo Quality576p540p360p270pForegroundBackgroundWindowFont SizeText Edge StyleFont Family
Peace TV, based in Dubai, featured a long rant about the ‘evils’ of homosexuality by Imam Qasim Khan
The regulator said one show – called Strengthening Your Family – The Valley of the Homosexuals – made reference to homosexual people dying ‘from a disease they contracted because they are homosexual’ and said homosexuality was ‘a very unnatural type of love that is energised by the influence of (Satan)’.
According to the Ofcom report, presenter Imam Qasim Khan said: ‘Then they make laws now, the newest and most brash and insane laws, laws that protect homosexuals and even make it legal for them to marry each other.
‘Men marrying men. Being on television in front of our children, kissing each other in the mouth, walking down the street, hugging and kissing – this society has gone insane.
‘Even an animal that is defiled by Islam, the pig – as nasty and corrupted and contaminated as a pig is – you never see two male pigs that are trying to have sex together. That’s insanity.
‘These are animals. Human beings are supposed to be dignified, they’re thinking beings, a human being is supposed to be the thinking being.’
Lord Production, who hold the licence for Peace TV, said the March 2018 show was ‘an expression of Imam Qasim Khan’s views on male homosexuality, reflecting the teachings of Islam’.
Khan referred to homosexual people dying ‘from a disease they contracted because they are homosexual’ and said homosexuality was ‘a very unnatural type of love that is energised by the influence of (Satan)’
Peace TV was founded in 2006 and has since been banned in India and Bangladesh.
Hasanul Haq Inu, Bangladesh’s Information Minister, said of the channel: ‘Is not consistent with Muslim society, the Quran, Sunnah, Hadith, Bangladesh’s Constitution, our culture, customs and rituals.’
Ofcom rules on inciting crime, hate and abuse
Under section three of its code, Ofcom reserves the right to ban any TV or radio broadcast that promotes ‘crime, disorder, hatred and abuse’.
The code includes an exception that allows journalists to interview people with ‘extreme or challenging views’ if it is in the public interest to do so.
In judging whether the code has been broken, Ofcom will examine whether the programme has sufficiently challenged the views, or if it actively promoted them.
Its founder, Zaskir Naik, was barred from UK by Theresa May in 2010 for his ‘unacceptable behaviour’.
The 44-year-old had been due to give a series of lectures in London and Sheffield, but was told by Mrs May that visiting the UK was ‘a privilege, not a right’.
The home secretary can prevent people from entering Britain if they believe there is a threat to national security, public order or the safety of citizens.
Ms May said: ‘Numerous comments made by Dr Naik are evidence to me of his unacceptable behaviour.
‘Coming to the UK is a privilege, not a right and I am not willing to allow those who might not be conducive to the public good to enter the UK.
‘Exclusion powers are very serious and no decision is taken lightly or as a method of stopping open debate on issues.’
Peace TV was founded by Zaskir Naik, who was barred from UK by Theresa May in 2010 for his ‘unacceptable behaviour’
Peace TV disagreed with Ofcom’s suggestion that the Imam’s views were hate speech as, according to the report, he did not ‘call for violence or punishment of homosexuals’ and that his aim was to ‘outlaw the practice of homosexuality itself’.
ISIS supporter murdered Rochdale imam for practising ‘black magic’
A British ISIS supporter was jailed for life in 2016 for stalking and murdering an imam because he practiced a form of healing which the terror group consider ‘black magic’, in a case referred to in the Ofcom ruling.
Mohammed Syeedy, 21, was consumed by hatred of Jalal Uddin, 71, so acted as a getaway driver for another man, Mohammed Kadir, 24, who bludgeoned Mr Uddin to death in a children’s play area.
Mohammed Syeedy was convicted of murdering an imam who he and friend believed practised ‘black magic’
The pair despised Mr Uddin because he used a form of healing involving amulets, known as taweez, which are said to bring good fortune.
They stalked Mr Uddin for six months and called him ‘Voldemort’,the evil wizard in Harry Potter, because they saw his faith healing as ‘black magic’, the trial heard.
It also broadcast a programme in November 2017 with a scholar discussing execution for those who practice magic, or sahir.
‘The correct reliable and majority opinion is that the punishment for a Sahir is that the person should be killed,’ said scholar Shaikh Ashfaque Salafi, according to the Ofcom report.
‘I want to make it clear that the magician’s art or the practice of magic cannot be forgiven by way of repentance.
‘To save his life he may seek repentance and get away with it, but at the first opportunity when he has a dispute with someone he will use his magic skills.
‘For that reason, for the benefit of all it is better to cut it out from its roots.’
The producers said magic, or sahir, in this case was not about ‘Harry Houdini, Paul Daniels, David Blaine or other entertainers performing magic tricks for money or fun’ but rather witchcraft and sorcery.
Ofcom recorded two further breaches: one where a programme said those who left Islam should be punished by death and a second where it was said women under 18 getting married was ‘no problem at all’, even if local laws forbid it.
A fifth programme which was investigated was found not to be in breach.
According to Ofcom, Lord Production said its programmes were ‘derived from a particular religious viewpoint, of which its viewers would be aware, and that such programming includes advice to those viewers as to how to lead their lives. It should therefore not be surprising if, at times, such advice causes offence to different sections of the public’.
This page looks at the history and motives for what the elite political consensus, dominant classes, religious and LGBT groups call diversity, with all of their contradictions.
A Labour MP has urged Conservative Party leadership hopefuls to honour their pledge to hold a review into Islamophobia in the party, after almost half of party members said they did not want a Muslim prime minister.
A YouGov study carried out by anti-racism charity Hope Not Hate found that just 8 per cent of the party’s members ‘would be proud of Britain, if we were to elect a Muslim as our prime minister’. However, 43 per cent agreed that they ‘would prefer to not have the country led by a Muslim’. The survey also revealed that 67 per cent of Tory members believe ‘there are areas in Britain that operate under Sharia law’. In addition, 45 per cent believe there are ‘areas in Britain in which non-Muslims are not able to enter.’
Baroness Sayeeda Hussain Warsi Byline Festival, Pippingford Park, UK – 25 Aug 2018 Baroness Sayeeda Warsi has previously called on the party to hold an independent inquiry on Islamophobia (Picture: Rex Features) Forty percent of those surveyed said Britain should lower the number of Muslims entering the country, compared to just five percent who said the same for Christians or Jewish people. Wes Streeting, Co-Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims, and whose definition of Islamophobia was rejected by the government, has urged whoever replaces Theresa May to tackle the rising ‘hatred within the party’. Mr Streeting told Metro.co.uk: ‘These findings reveal the shocking extent that racist, Islamophobic views are held among members of the Conservative Party.
Editorial Comment by Charles Close.
There is a big difference between having a PM who happens to be a Muslim and a PM who defines themselves as a Muslim, as the base point for their actions. I have no doubt that Theresa May was a Christian, but she had a job to do.
Some of us do not want to hear the strange moralisngs of Judaic/Christian/Islamists who seem preoccupied with the after life dream which makes them so dangerous on this earth.
We would not expect our bus drivers to be so preoccupied, taking us to some deluded notion of heaven rather than the local Sainsbury or Tesco shop. We expect them to keep that destination for their own final holidays to themselves. I am sick of hearing that Islam is a race. It is a religion, OK? Islam is not about multi culture. Islamists don’t like it.
Can anyone tell me the name of any Christian or atheist Prime Minsiters of Egypt or Turkey? I don’t think so. However, Labour desperately needs the Muslim vote which is why it has such a problem with anti semitism in its own self righterous moralising ranks.
Christians are so ‘tolerated’ in Egypt that they need guards outside their churches. Why should the non Muslim majority have to bend to accommodate Islam? The son of a Muslim refugee carried out the Manchester arena bombings during the La Grande concert.
The Islamic world is not about multi culture. They do not wish to go beyond their mono culture and shout very loudly when they feel it threatened, as the LGBT school protests demonstrated. Where are the Muslim marchers for peace, tolerance and religious reform?
ISTHA, Germany – A man arrested over the killing of a senior German politician earlier this month is believed to have links to the far right, prosecutors said Monday.
Walter Lübcke, who was president of the Kassel regional council in central Germany, was shot in the head at close range on the terrace of his home in the small village of Istha, in the early hours of June 2.
Sixty-five-year-old Lübcke was a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s ruling Christian Democrats and an outspoken supporter of the government’s pro-migrant policies in the wake of the 2015 refugee crisis.
The 45-year-old suspect was arrested on Saturday in Kassel based on traces of DNA evidence from the crime scene, according to the Hesse state office of criminal investigation and Kassel’s public prosecutor. The suspect has a long criminal record, police said.
The past life and the “openly expressed opinions and public views” of the suspect linked him with the far right, Michael Schmidt, a spokesman for the federal prosecutor’s office, told a news conference Monday.
“Based on the current state of investigations, we assume that there is a right-wing extremist background to this act,” Schmidt said, before adding there was no evidence that the suspect was involved in a right-wing terrorist group.
Investigations are ongoing and officials confiscated computer equipment from the suspect, said Schmidt.
Pro-migrant policies attract death threats and attacks
According to police, Lübcke previously received death threats after a YouTube video emerged of him defending the country’s immigration policies at a public meeting in Kassel in October 2015. The meeting was also attended by members of Pegida, a far-right anti-Islam movement.
In the video, Lübcke says: ”You have to stand up for your values. If you don’t share those values, then anyone is free to leave this country if they don’t agree.” Some members of the crowd could be heard shouting “get out, get out” in response.
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier condemned hate posts toward the pro-migrant politician. ”The way some individuals on social media are attacking his death, taking satisfaction from it and applauding it is cynical, tasteless, revolting and offensive in every way,” he said in comments at a German town association event.
Interior minister Horst Seehofer also told the daily newspaper Tagesspiegel that “if someone is so hated, just because he had liberal views, that is the decline of human morality.”
The killing of Lübcke is not the first attack on a pro-migrant German politician in recent years.
In 2016 a man — referred to as Frank S. — who also reportedly opposed Germany’s open-door refugee policies was sentenced to 14 years in prison for stabbing Cologne mayoral candidate Henriette Reker, according to the New York Times.
Another German politician well-known for his pro-refugee policies, Altena town mayor Andreas Hollstein, was stabbed in the neck at a kebab shop in 2017 by an assailant who reportedly said: “You are leaving me die of thirst while you bring 200 refugees to Altena.”
Merkel opened Germany’s doors to more than a million migrants in 2015. But her policy, hailed by humanitarians, also attracted fierce criticism from the right, particularly following a number of terrorist attacks across the country in summer 2016.
Riding the wave of public discontent was the anti-immigration, anti-Islam AfD. In the 2017 federal election, it became the third largest party in the Bundestag and the first far-right party to enter the country’s parliament in almost 60 years.
Now, the tide appears to be shifting again, with the environmentally focused and left-wing Greens surging to second place in May’s European parliamentary elections, pushing the AfD into fourth.
CNN’s Nadine Schmidt reported from Berlin, Sheena McKenzie wrote from London.
Editorial Comment PC Moral outrage is no answer to this problem. Elite media and politicians don’t live down with the underclass. Seems no lessons have been learned from two World Wars and the political failures of the inter war years. Too many Europeans habe nothing to lose, nothing to believe in, lost identity which LGBT cannot cure, matched against the religious certainty and counter morality of Islamic newcomers. Media career folk, feminists and other censors just don’t want to know.
Religious Revival June 19th 2019
The reason religion has made a come back is because of diversity politics.
Diversity may benefit the LGBT community, but governments are primarily concerned about accommodating Islamic needs and sensitivities.
These needs are quite rigid with Islamists themselves kept strongly in check by their leaders or face the consequences.
Our government and wider political elite do not tolerate criticism of Islam for economic and social control reasons.
Consequently, they offer the rest of us the right to ‘worship’ God in whatever way we like as long as we do not offend others- which means there have to be lots of laws to punish non believers or critics of any religion, but especially Islam, as ‘hate criminals.’
That is why the media elite are hot on the heels of Boris Johnson and any other Tory who might be construed and presented as an Islamaphobe.
All of this means God is back big time, laughing his, it or her socks off I suspect,
Religion Should have had its’ Day, but makes a comeback for control:
A new book-
The World of the Crusades: An Illustrated History Christopher Tyerman
Yale, pp.517, £25
makes Christian Crusaders look silly because we must kow tow to cheap labour Mulsim Immigrants who need religion to endure, Please, why can they not see the con. God does not exist in that way. God does not fit with scence. Read on:
The crusades are part of everyone’s mental image of the Middle Ages. They extended, in one form or another, from the 11th to the 16th century. Those which reached the Holy Land were fought by men on horseback wearing metal armour and carrying lances and swords, as in the pictures. The onset of gunpowder had not yet spoiled the fun. They were truly international, in their own way emblematic of the myth of a single Christian European polity. They embodied everything that people associate with medieval warfare: reckless courage, murder, loot, adventure and romance.
Christopher Tyerman has been writing about the crusades for nearly 40 years. His work includes the only full-scale study of English crusaders and God’s War, which for my money is the best one-volume history in print. This is quite an achievement, for there is a finite body of material, which is unlikely to expand significantly, and consists mainly of published chronicles. Many people picking up Tyerman’s latest volume may be tempted to think that it simply recycles the material in his last one. They would be mistaken. The World of the Crusades has a mass of new insights, many little-known anecdotes and a fresh approach to the subject which fully justifies its bulk.
Two features of the book are particularly striking. First, instead of just treating the crusades in the standard way as a European Christian movement, Tyerman has placed them in their proper geographical setting, as incidents in the history of the Islamic Middle East. By a fortunate accident, the early crusaders hit the Levant at a time of ferment and instability in the Islamic world. The Abbasid caliphate, essentially a Persian regime based in what is now Iraq, had been in terminal decline for two centuries when the first crusade arrived. The rival Fatimid caliphate of Cairo, which was the dominant power in the Arabs’ lands and among the Berbers of North Africa, had passed its apogee and been supplanted in much of its territory by unstable local dynasties.
The moral panic over homophobia
It simply isn’t true that gay people face huge levels of harassment and violence.
Editor 12th June 2019
Once, there were moral panics over homosexuality. Now there’s a moral panic over homophobia. Consider the way in which the grotesque attack on a lesbian couple on a London bus has been used to promote the idea that LGBT people live in a state of existential danger. It comes straight from the moral-panic and crime-panic playbook: one nasty, shocking crime is used to depict society as a hotbed of rough, unenlightened beasts whose backward attitudes – in this case on homosexuality – threaten to tear apart the social fabric itself. A horrible incident carried out by five people becomes elevated into a symbol of evil that society as a whole must organise itself against. This is not a good way to treat any crime, including this one.
Everyone was horrified by the assault on Melania Geymonat and her partner Chris on a bus travelling towards Camden Town. It took place last month but was only publicised last week. The photo of the two victims, their faces bloodied and bruised, caused revulsion around the world. The crime made international headlines. That’s understandable. What’s less understandable, or rather less justifiable, is the swiftness with which the assault was turned into an advert for gay vulnerability. There is something nauseating about the way in which gay-rights groups and political observers held up this crime as typical, as an ordinary event in a society like ours that is apparently riddled with homophobia. As one campaigner said, ‘there wasn’t any element of surprise’ in relation to this attack. In short, anti-gay brutalism happens all the time.
But this isn’t true. And it’s important to say that it isn’t true. Some of the claims made following the revelation of this attack and the publication of the shocking photo have bordered on hysterical. ‘Homophobic violence more common than people realise’, said a headline in the Independent next to the photo of the two battered women. This kind of ‘harassment and violence is a daily struggle [for gay people]’, its report said. This is something people ‘face every day’, said Kim Sanders of Stonewall. Lesbians, in London, face vicious assaults every day? Really? A spokesperson for the LGBT Foundation said ‘there wasn’t any element of surprise’ for gay people when they heard about this attack. A Guardian writer wonders if this assault means same-sex couples will have to ‘hide our relationships’. Apparently, ‘we live in a society that finds the idea of two men or two women kissing to be…. worthy of a violent reprisal’.
Here, commentary on one particular crime crosses the line into outright crime panic. The idea that Britain in 2019 is a society that sees same-sex kissing as deserving of violent punishment doesn’t stack up on any level whatsoever. Commentators will point to statistics that apparently demonstrate that the UK is unsafe for gay people, but such stats are alarmingly unreliable. In 2017, a news headline declared that ‘attacks on LGBT people’ have ‘surged’ by almost 80 per cent over the past four years. Ask yourself if this seems like a reasonable claim. If it is feasible that in a society where acceptance of homosexuality is at all-time high, where gay people are widely celebrated in popular culture, where discrimination on the basis of sexuality is illegal and where same-sex marriage has recently been legalised, there has been a massive surge in violent hatred against gay people. I’m calling BS on this.
And indeed, if one looks at the stats in more depth it becomes clear that violence and discrimination against gay people hasn’t increased – rather, the definition of what constitutes an ‘attack’ on a gay person has changed, and changed in a dramatic, very cynical way. So the vast majority of that alleged 80 per cent surge in ‘attacks’ on gay people – which comes from a Stonewall / YouGov survey of 5,000 LGBT people in Britain – were instances of being ‘insulted, pestered, intimidated or harassed’. Nobody deserves to experience such rude behaviour, but let’s be honest about what such a broad, verbal-based category of ‘attack’ could include – everything from being called a name on Twitter to being pestered for a snog by some drunken idiot in a bar. Eighty-seven per cent of respondents said they had been pestered or insulted, while 11 per cent said they had been physically assaulted. Even this, however, is contradicted by a far larger survey of LGBT people carried out by the government, which involved 108,000 people, not just 5,000. The results were published in February. They suggest that two per cent had experienced physical violence, while 26 per cent had experienced verbal harassment, including ‘hurtful comments’.
Every act of violence or discrimination against someone on the basis of their sexuality needs to be taken seriously. But the conflation of hurtful comments with physical violence is not helpful at all. Everyone receives hurtful comments for one reason or another. And given that opposition to same-sex marriage is now considered bigotry, and saying that men cannot become women has been rebranded as transphobia, it is very likely that many of these hurtful comments or insults involved people merely expressing a particular political, moral or religious opinion about gay lifestyles or transgender issues. It is the redefinition of the meaning of homophobic abuse, and the trawling for evidence of homophobic abuse, that leads to hysterical claims about Britain experiencing a historically unprecedented surge in violent hatred for gay people. Indeed, as Stonewall’s 2017 survey admits: ‘Greater awareness of hate crime and efforts to improve recording of hate crime are thought to have played a role in the increase in recorded hate crimes in recent years.’
This is a fancy, PC way of saying that what we are witnessing is a classical example of ‘crime construction’ – the inflation of statistics to give the impression that a particular kind of crime is out of control. It used to be people on the right who did this, with their carefully constructed moral and crime panics about football hooligans or black muggers. Now it is increasingly done by people who are ostensibly on the left, who see hate crime everywhere, who think homophobia is rampant, who think speech is bigotry and sometimes even criminal, and who think Brexit has unleashed unprecedented levels of anti-social violence. In all these instances, crime has been overblown in order to construct an elitist, moralistic message about the vulnerability of certain identity groups and the wickedness of the uneducated, un-PC, dangerous throng. Identitarian groups might benefit from inflating their claims to victimhood – because that is increasingly the way in which people win moral recognition and social resources – but the broader social impact of this new, left-leaning crime construction is likely to be dire.
The spectre of the homosexual was a key figure in nasty 1950s moral panics. This warped man will corrupt your children and maybe even use violence against them, people were warned. Now it is the spectre of the homophobe that exercises the middle class’s fearful, moralistic imagination. They see this hateful figure everywhere, in every street, on every bus, on every discussion thread. It’s an inaccurate and even unstable view of the world. All it does is foster even more identitarian division and make gay people feel unnecessarily fearful. Let’s be honest: gay people have never had it so good, and that’s a good thing.
Listen to the latest episode of The Brendan O’Neill
Editor’s Comment : I spend a lot of time in London, was there today and will be working there four nights next week, It is a violent dangerous and anomic place unless you are rich, living in exclusive areas. As for the Spiked article above, I have to say the following:
Actually young white men are the most likely group to be attacked, but it is not PC to say that. Spiked website also say that Jo Brand is not inciting violence against persons of certain political outlook. I disagree. It is also a fact that ethnic persons are more likely to commit street crime, as in this incident, while whites are more likely to commit burglary.
But I am not Jo Brand, an unpleasant self adoring BBC Labour luvvie, so the cops will be here soon, just as soon as one of you lovely lefties report me. Jo Brand whines in her nasal mocking affected superior voice that she was only joking about throwing acid over Nigel Farage, and comedy is important.
Well Jo, this is your best yet. meanwhile we have to believe that the number of rapes is millions of times higher than the reported figures and too many men are getting away with it.
No wonder more men are going gay as well as grey- or gray if you are from the mad war driven land of the deep state that worships Jesus but is going to crucify Julian Assange, with the British conniving government’s blessing.
Sadly I can also understand why this sick badly governed society produces homophobes- a lot of it down to sacred feminism which Britain invented as its best weapon yet- it is blowing society apart.
Political Correctness and diversity has to be approved by members of the self styled liberal elite who must never be threatened, and are judged only by the pampered upper middle class BBC/ posh media, elite, so Jo Brand, social worker turned feminist comic won’t get the sack.
ACID attack victims have blasted Jo Brand and the BBC as “disgusting” and called for her ARREST after the comedian joked about throwing battery acid on politicians.
Brand sparked outrage on BBC Radio 4’s Heresy programme after saying a string of milkshake attacks on politicians such as Nigel Farage should have been carried out with acid instead.
Danny Baker treated very differently for an anti Royal joke that was labelled racist. He was sacked. Why the difference?
After a ‘gag’ on Twitter saw him accused of racism and insensitivity, Radio 5 Live presenter Danny Baker was sacked by the BBC on Thursday 9 May. Now, other celebrities have taken to Twitter to react to his firing.
As the world looked forward to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry introducing their son and the latest royal baby, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, on Wednesday, Baker took to social media to share an image of a man, woman and a chimpanzee dressed as a human. Alongside it, he wrote: “Royal baby leaves hospital.”
Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, pose with their newborn son during a photocall in St George’s Hall at Windsor Castle on 8 May 2019 (Dominic Lipinski – WPA Pool/Getty Images)
“This was a serious error of judgement and goes against the values we as a station aim to embody,” a BBC spokesperson explained. “Danny’s a brilliant broadcaster but will no longer be presenting a weekly show with us.”
Comedian and former Celebs Go Dating contestant London Hughes was glad the network ditched him, detailing how she’d worked with Baker in the past and claimed there’s no way he wouldn’t have known what his ‘racist’ tweet was insinuating.
“No comedian in their right mind could overlook that,” she argued. “That’s not how our brains work. We see a joke from every angle. He knew it was racist, thought it was funny and posted it anyway.”
ITV News anchor Charlene White posted an insightful Twitter thread, saying: “Meghan has been subject to horrific/veiled racist abuse & prejudice online and in print since the start of their relationship. Of which we are ALL aware.
“To post a pic picturing a 3-day old baby of mixed heritage as a monkey, then claim it was a joke? That’s old-school prejudice and racism at its peak.
“And for a trusted broadcaster working at a public service broadcaster to feed that prejudice? It’s unacceptable.
“Those who live in privilege must be held to account.”
British Soldiers calling themselves patriotic are racist.
Army officers are warned soldiers calling themselves ‘patriots’ or who make ‘inaccurate generalisations about the Left’ could be right-wing extremists in their ranks
- A guide to help British Army officers spot extreme right-wingers was leaked
- The leaflet is titled ‘Extreme Right Wing (XRW) Indicators & Warnings’
- Signs to look for include describing oneself as a ‘patriot’, seeing opponents as ‘traitors’ and ‘referring to political correctness as some left-wing plot’
- An MoD spokesperson confirmed the leaflet is genuine and added: ‘The card does not suggest that all patriots are extremists’
Published: 16:56, 29 May 2019 | Updated: 18:14, 29 May 2019
3.3k shares 705 View comments
A guide to help high-ranking British officers spot right-wing extremists in their ranks has been leaked – and the signs include people calling themselves ‘patriots’ and making ‘inaccurate generalisations about the Left’.
The leaflet, made in 2017, is titled ‘Extreme Right Wing (XRW) Indicators & Warnings’ – and advises senior army staff to look out for people who ‘use the term Islamofacism’ [sic] and call people who challenge their ‘XRW’ views ‘indoctrinated’.
The document, which an MoD spokesperson confirmed to MailOnline is genuine, was leaked online, sparking threads on several social media platforms such as Reddit.
Editor’s Comment: So you must be desperate for a job or nuts to risk life and limb for this country. Soldier, you will get the blame for war crimes, not the likes of upper middle class public school/Oxford boy Tony Blair- who was party to lies to get British troops into the ongoing insanity of war in the Middle East. You will be dead before they stop chasing you. So you really belive Britain is a democracy. I don’t think so.
Labour Hypocrisy over PC LGBT issue
The MP for a primary school facing protests over LGBT teaching has been reported to the chief whip after telling campaigners “you’re right”.
In a video circulated on social media, Birmingham Hall Green MP Roger Godsiff told the Anderton Park Primary School protesters they had a “just cause”.
Shadow education secretary Angela Rayner said she had reported the comments to the chief whip.
Mr Godsiff previously said the equality lessons were not “age appropriate”.
A High Court injunction is in place banning protests, which have been going on for months, outside the school.
Parents started to gather at the gates over concerns children were “too young” to learn about LGBT relationships. They also said the lessons contradicted Islam.
In the video, Mr Godsiff, who is seen with Shakeel Afsar, the lead organiser of the protests, said: “If I had the opportunity of rolling the clock back I would do exactly the same thing again.
“Because I think you have a just cause and I regret the fact that it hasn’t been reciprocated by the head teacher.”
Editor’s comment : This MP is obviously more interested in keeping his Muslim voters on side . Multi culture is highly selective and top down. The issue here is not the rights and wrongs of LGBT teaching, it is about pandering to one section of society. Islamic countries have a bad record on human rights where they think it conflicts with their religion. In Britain, there is strong movement to accommodate Islam against the wider and varied aspirations, values and hopes of the wider population. There is no easy answer to this prolematic situation. There is also the issue of Labour’s new MP for Peterborough backing anti Jewish internet comments. Labour is very dependent on the Muslim vote in its city strongholds. Muslims have a very definite culture based on Islam. They are not and cannot be multi culturalist, but the rest of us face the weight of the law and wrath of the liberal elite if we do not go along with the project.
Obviously to anyone with a brain, multi culutre equals fragmentation, fragmented people and the resurgence of wonderfully diverse and conflicting religious bigotry, which the ruling money grabbing elite- helped by upper middle class hand wringing do gooder liberals- expect to keep them in the manner to which they re accustomed.
Obviously, meantime, the aspergic nerds will go on churning out the big brother and war winning technology. Very simple. Problems arise when the likes of Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, and Julian Assange mess it up. As I wrote im my book ‘Man, Maid, Woman’. ‘God Laughed Nastily.’
Ann Widdicombe. She plays the part of the true Christian Catholic, terribly naive, but so comfortable in her beliefs. She suugests that science might provide an answer to homosexuality. This is an interesting contradiction from a woman so devout because Catholicism has a history of opposing science, as does its sister religion of Islam. They seem to favour bigotry, distorting Jesus’s teaching, and loving war in God’s name. This still goes on, in spite of science.
I suggest to Ms Widdicombe that there is a simple answer to her question about homsexuality. If she wants more men to desire and reproduce with women, then women need to stop hiding the fact that they have the Freudian penis envy- oh shock horror freedom of speech does not allow me to say that.
I have written a book on transgender- ‘Man, Maid, Woman’- and know why men find transexuals more attarctive than aggressive butch so called females. It harbours a barren and hopeless outcome. It is why we have record school exclusions, Islamic paranoia and rising youth suicide. It is not a problem that money and elite denial can solve.
Meanwhile Ann, if you want your Brexit Party to succeed and help us reform Europe- rather than get a fake leave, shut up about religion and keep God to yourself.
P.S : Widecombe Fair“, also called Tom Pearce (sometimes spelt “Tam Pierce”), is a well-known Devon folk song about a man called Tom Pearce, whose horse dies after someone borrows it to travel to the fair in Widecombe with his friends. Its chorus ends with a long list of the people travelling to the fair: “Bill Brewer, Jan Stewer, Peter Gurney, Peter Davy, Dan’l Whiddon, Harry Hawke, Old Uncle Tom Cobley and all.” Some research suggests that the names originally referred to real people.
In 1970, when black students occupied the dean’s office at Harvard Divinity School to protest against the absence of African-American scholars on the school’s faculty, the white administration was forced to respond and interview black candidates. It asked James Cone, the greatest theologian of his generation, to come to Cambridge, Mass., for a meeting. But the white power structure had no intention of offering Cone a job. To be black, in its eyes, was bad enough. To be black, brilliant and fiercely independent was unpalatable. And so the job was given to a pliable African-American candidate who had never written a book, a condition that would remain unchanged for the more than three decades he taught at Harvard.
Harvard got what it wanted. Mediocrity in the name of diversity. It was a classic example of how the white power structure plays people of color. It decides whom to promote and whom to silence. When then-Maj. Colin Powell helped cover up the 1968 massacre of some 500 civilians at My Lai in Vietnam he was assured a glittering career in the Army. When Barack Obama proved obedient to the Chicago political machine, Wall Street and the Democratic Party establishment he was promoted to the U.S. Senate and the presidency.
Diversity in the hands of the white power elites—political and corporate—is an advertising gimmick. A new face, a brand, gets pushed out front, accompanied by the lavish financial rewards that come with serving the white power structure, as long as the game is played. There is no shortage of women (Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Donna Brazile), Latinos (Tom Perez and Marco Rubio) or blacks (Vernon Jordan, Clarence Thomas and Ben Carson) who sell their souls for a taste of power.
Ta-Nehisi Coates in his book “We Were Eight Years in Power: An American Tragedy” writes that “Barack Obama is directly responsible for the rise of a crop of black writers and journalists who achieved prominence during his two terms.” But this was true only for those black writers like Coates and Michael Eric Dyson who were obsequious cheerleaders for Obama. If, like Cornel West, you were black and criticized Obama you were isolated and attacked by Obama surrogates as a race traitor.
“For those who didn’t support Obama it was the lonely time,” said Glen Ford, the executive editor of the Black Agenda Report, when we spoke recently. “It’s like A.D. and B.C. Before Obama time, my politics reflected that of a black commentator, probably within a respectable black political spectrum. I’m looking at a fax, ‘NAACP September 8, 2007. NAACP regional leader.’ I got this after giving a keynote speech in Little Rock, Ark., in commemoration of the events in Little Rock in ’57. You see what I’m saying? I could do that, even as late as 2007. Then Obama happened. It was a wonderful time for people who endorsed Obama. If you didn’t endorse Obama, you were verboten in the community. All of a sudden you were ostracized.”
The absence of genuine political content in our national discourse has degraded it to one between racists and people who don’t want to be identified as racists. The only winners in this self-destructive cat fight are corporations such as Goldman Sachs, whose interests no American can vote against, along with elite institutions dedicated to perpetuating the plutocracy. Drew G. Faust, the first woman president of Harvard University, whose appointment represented a triumph for diversity, upon her retirement was appointed to the board of Goldman Sachs, a role for which she will receive compensation totaling over half a million dollars a year. A new and “diverse” group of Democratic Party candidates, over half of whom have been recruited from the military, the CIA, the National Security Council and the State Department, is hoping to rise to political power based on the old con.
“It’s an insult to the organized movements of people these institutions claim to want to include,” Ford said. “These institutions write the script. It’s their drama. They choose the actors, whatever black, brown, yellow, red faces they want.”
“I don’t think a black left should be investing any political capital or energy into getting Barack Obamas into a Harvard,” Ford said, “or believing it can transform Harvard or any of these ruling-class universities from the inside out, any more than it can transform the Democratic Party from the inside out.”
Ford points out that “diversity” has been substituted by the white power elites for “affirmative action.” And, he argues, diversity and affirmative action are radically different. The replacement of affirmative action with diversity, he says, effectively “negates African-American history as a legal basis for redress.”
Once the Supreme Court in its 1978 Bakke decision outlawed “quotas” for racial minorities, ruling institutions were freed from having to establish affirmative action programs that would have guaranteed a space for those traditionally excluded. The Trump administration’s recent reversal of an Obama-era policy that called on universities to consider race as a factor in admissions is an attempt to eradicate even diversity. President Trump and his racist enablers, including Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, are resegregating America.
“You do not take a man who for years has been hobbled by chains, liberate him, bring him to the starting line of a race, saying, ‘You are free to compete with all the others,’ and still justly believe you have been completely fair … ,” President Lyndon Johnson said in 1965 to the graduating class of Howard University. “This is the next and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity—not just legal equity but human ability—not just equality as a right and a theory, but equality as a fact and as a result.”
Johnson’s call, along with that of Martin Luther King Jr., was swiftly sabotaged by white, liberal elites, who divorced racial justice from economic justice. White liberals could live with laws prohibiting segregation but not with giving up some of their financial and social privilege.
“White liberals are not seeking justice,” Ford said. “They’re seeking absolution. Anything that absolves them of responsibility for what this society has done, they welcome it. They’re hungry for it.”
“The legal, as well as moral, basis for affirmative action lay in the culpability of the United States and all of its layers of government in the enslavement and Jim Crow ‘hobbling’ of African-Americans—a unique history of oppression of a specific people that requires institutional redress,” Ford has written. “Otherwise, the legacies of these crimes will reproduce themselves, in mutating forms, into infinity. Once the specificity of the Black American grievance was abandoned, affirmative action became a general catch-all of various historical wrongs. Stripped of its core, affirmative action morphed into ‘diversity,’ a vessel for various aggrieved groups that was politically versatile (and especially useful to the emerging Black deal makers of electoral and corporate politics), but no longer rooted in Black realities. The affirmative action of Dr. King and President Johnson was a species of reparations, a form of redress for specific and eminently documentable harms done to African Americans, as a people. It was understood as a social debt owed to a defined class.”
“ ‘Diversity,’ ” Ford wrote, “recognizes no such debt to a particular people, or to any people at all. Rather, its legal basis is the ‘compelling interest’ of public institutions in a diversified student body (or faculty).”
Diversity does not force the white power structure to address racial injustice or produce results within the black underclass. This feint to diversity was abetted, Ford points out, by black elitists who found positions for themselves in the power structure in exchange for walking away from the poor and marginalized.
Ford calls these black elitists “representationalists” who “want to see some black people represented in all sectors of leadership, in all sectors of society. They want black scientists. They want black movie stars. They want black scholars at Harvard. They want blacks on Wall Street. But it’s just representation. That’s it.”
The plague of diversity lies at the core of our political dysfunction. The Democratic Party embraces it. Donald Trump’s Republican Party repudiates it. But as a policy it is a diversion. Diversity has done little to ameliorate the suffering of the black underclass. Most blacks are worse off than when King marched in Selma. African-Americans have lost over half of their wealth since the financial collapse of 2008 because of falling homeownership rates and job loss. They have the highest rate of poverty at 27.4 percent, followed by Hispanics at 26.6 percent and whites at 9.9 percent. And 45.8 percent of black children under 6 live in poverty, compared with 14.5 percent of white children in that age group. Forty percent of the nation’s homeless are African-Americans although blacks make up only 13 percent of our population. African-Americans are incarcerated at more than five times the rate of whites.
Diversity does not halt the stripping away of our civil liberties, the assault on our ecosystem or the punishing effects of mandated austerity and deindustrialization. It does not confront imperialism. Diversity is part of the mechanics of colonialism. A genuine revolutionary, Patrice Lumumba, was replaced with the pliant and corrupt Mobutu Sese Seko. Both were black. But one fought the colonial tyrants and the other served them. A political agenda built solely around “diversity” is a smokescreen for injustice.
The victory by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez over the powerful Democratic Rep. Joe Crowley in a Democratic primary in Brooklyn last month is not a victory for diversity, although Ocasio-Cortez is a woman of color. It is a victory of political substance over the empty rhetoric of the Democratic Party. Ocasio-Cortez defied the party establishment as an avowed member of the Democratic Socialists of America. She could not even get a pre-election endorsement from Bernie Sanders, her mentor, who is playing Faust to Chuck Schumer’s Mephistopheles. She calls for Medicare for all, the abolishment of ICE, a federal jobs program and an end to the wars in the Middle East and has denounced Israel’s massacre of unarmed Palestinians. She stands for something. And it is only when we stand for something, including reparations for African-Americans, that we have a chance to dismantle corporate tyranny.
“I’ve always felt, in the early ’60s when I was just a kid, that the silent partner, sometimes reluctant although still a partner, in the civil rights movement were the corporations who wanted a unified market,” Ford said. “Jim Crow was a big anomaly in terms of creating a more unified market in the United States. You can’t have an Atlanta skyline, with its magnificent elevators, with Jim Crow. Not only would Atlanta not be an international city, it couldn’t be a national city with Jim Crow. The corporate forces wanted to break down Jim Crow and explicit color discrimination. It standardized the market. This is what capitalists do. The Democratic Party is not behaving any differently than the corporations over the past 50 years.”
“I’m not worried by the Trump phenomenon,” Ford said. “That doesn’t scare me. It’s disconcerting. But it doesn’t scare me. I’m far more afraid of the space that it gives to the corporatists. It’s to their advantage. Trump defines the white man’s party’s space. It’s big. It’s no joke. It can win presidential elections. It can win again. It needs money from corporate Republicans, but it doesn’t need anything else from them. The white man’s party more clearly defines the space the Democrats claim. It’s everybody who is not an overt racist.”
“I don’t think Trump will ever beat Obama’s records in terms of deportation,” Ford went on. “We should be fighting U.S. immigration policy. But that isn’t Trump. We should be organizing against Amazon taking over a whole city. But that isn’t Trump. Will Trump’s next pick for the Supreme Court be different from any pick that a Republican would make? In fact, because he’s crazy, he might fuck up and make a bad pick for himself. He ain’t deep enough to pick the worst guy. He hasn’t read the Federalist Papers.”
Columnist Chris Hedges is a Truthdig columnist, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, a New York Times best-selling author, a professor in the college degree program offered to New Jersey state prisoners by Rutgers…
In this article:
“representationalists”1957 little rock integration1970 protest over faculty1978 bakke decisionaffirmative actionalexandria ocasio-cortezbarack obamabernie sandersbetsy devosblack agenda reportcolin powellcongresscornel westdemocratsdeportationdiversitydonald trumpdrew g. faustglen fordgoldman sachsgovernmentharvard divinity schooljames conejim crowlyndon johnsonmartin luther king jrmichael eric dysonmobutu sese sekomy lai massacrenationalpatrice lumumbapoliticspresidentracial quotasracismreparationsrepublicansta nehisi coatestd originals comments
Like what you’re reading?
Signup for Truthdig’s Newsletter.
Local N.Y. Media Wrongly Pushes for Gang Databases
The New York Post defends (6/16/18) NYPD’s gang database.
When President Donald Trump rails against alleged immigrant gang members as “animals,” as he did last month, he’s reducing complex (and highly political) issues—like the presence of MS-13 in the United States—to a fearsome cartoon of snarling packs of subhuman marauders. Vintage Trump, right? But local media, nowadays lionized as a check on Trump, resort to the same strategy, playing fast and loose with the inflammatory term “gang” and deferring time and time again to questionable police tactics.
As FAIR’s Adam Johnson wrote two years ago (“Media Convict Scores of ‘Gang Members’ on NYPD’s Say-So—No Trials Necessary,” 5/2/16), local dailies in New York City were instrumental in convicting alleged gang members in the court of public opinion before anyone had ever even seen a judge. Most other local media outlets took the same approach, never bothering to ask if the scores of people arrested and perp-walked by police as violent gang members could actually be innocent, or unfairly swept up by a police department (in)famous for its dragnet approach to public safety.
On the gang sweeps, the New York Daily News led the way with its 2015 “Gangs of New York—and How Close You Live to Them” special feature (12/13/15), which included a map purporting to show “where gangs and crews operate,” based on data provided by the NYPD. It’s little surprise, then, that after community legal advocates criticized large-scale gang raids, leading to public hearings questioning the tactics, the News’ editorial board quickly sided with police on a key tool: so-called gang databases.
The Daily News (6/15/18) asks critics to quit picking on the New York Police Department.
Editorializing in favor of a database kept by the NYPD that no one knows they’re on—and therefore cannot challenge their inclusion in—the News (6/15/18) shrugged off community concerns as “alarmism,” and called the collection of people on the database (some as young as 13 when added to it) “good police work.” The editorial headline “Ganging Up on Police: The NYPD’s Gang Database Is a Solid Investigative Tool” told readers it was the police who were under attack, and conferred legitimacy on a shadowy database that the News‘ own reporting (6/12/18) suggests can negatively impact people for years.
Local police gang databases can present serious legal implications for those marked as gang members, such as increased bail, harsher sentencing, erosion of presumption of innocence and even increased chances of deportation.
Lawyers and activists have suspected local gang database information is shared with federal agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), sometimes even putting people trying to avoid gangs on the deportation block (New Yorker, 1/1/18). In fact, a new report released on the same day that Trump made his “animals” comment says that gang designations have led to increased deportations of young immigrants in New York. The report also points to “media coverage in certain outlets” that have “exacerbated the view of MS-13 as a dangerous, invading army of foreigners,” thus “sowing fear around the country.” Are these concerns alarmist? Or, as the New York Post‘s editorial board headlined, “utterly ridiculous” (6/16/18)?
For News and Post readers, the editorial board positions must have sounded awfully familiar: They were almost indistinguishable from the police department’s position, which was published by the News (6/12/18) the day before key hearings by the New York City Council.
Despite a later apology, the Daily News doesn’t seem to have learned from this editorial mistake (8/13/13).
Not just the editorials but the whole scenario should feel familiar, since we’ve been here before. Nearly five years ago, as the NYPD was being criticized by community and legal groups over its Stop and Frisk program, the News‘ editorial board (8/13/13) sided with the police department, predicting “the ravages of lawlessness and bloodshed” if police efforts were curtailed. That didn’t happen, and the News, three years later, apologized on its pages (“We Were Wrong: Ending Stop and Frisk Did Not End Stopping Crime,” 8/8/16).
You’d think after being so spectacularly wrong on Stop and Frisk, the News would take the lesson to be more skeptical and wary about police practices. Alas, no, the editorial instinct is the same: support the police department to the point of echoing its talking points.
The News and Post couldn’t even bring themselves to follow even the most basic journalistic practice of asking for more information. There are still essential questions around the database and the actual impact of gangs left unanswered. The NYPD and the News, for example, claim the database currently has only about 17,500 New Yorkers listed. However, a Freedom of Information request by CUNY Law School’s Babe Howell suggests over 42,000 names, based on information she received from the police department itself.
The NYPD and the News say that about half of all shootings in the city are “gang-related”—which would include suspected shooters and victims that the police allege to be gang members. However, seen in the broader context of New York City, which is experiencing record low crime, “gang-related” crime accounts for 1.7 percent of overall crime. The numbers get even lower for “gang-motivated” crime—crime done in the interests of a gang, according to police—which is at less than 0.1 percent (The Intercept, 6/11/18).
Then there is the key argument over whether the NYPD should have arbitrary power over designating who, in fact, is in a gang. The criteria police use is remarkably loose: simply “associating” with gang members, living in certain neighborhoods, having certain tattoos and even wearing certain colors. With criteria like these, which scream guilt by association, it’s hardly surprising that 99 percent of people added to the list are non-white.
With remarkable disparities over how far-reaching the database really is, the extent to which gang violence actually affects the city, as well as the central question of who is actually in a gang, the editorial position of two of the city’s major newspapers would seem, at the very least, premature.
There is, of course, nothing to lose for members of the News‘ editorial board. As I wrote earlier this year in Injustice Today (now The Appeal), there are no measures of accountability for media when they support destructive police policies. While some media outlets may apologize years after the policies have upended people’s lives, they are free to continually support more potentially destructive policies in the future.
I have been one of many organizers pushing back against the database and the NYPD’s gang sweeps. And, in fairness, the News did publish my opinion piece (6/13/18) on the gang database. But that doesn’t amount to balance in their pages when both the reporting and editorial weight is thrown behind the police, time and time again.
For the New York Post (6/26/18), a killing that happened while the NYPD had a gang database proves the need for a gang database.
A recent, horrendous killing of a 15-year-old Bronx boy by alleged gang members could make media coverage worse.
The Post (6/26/18) has already jumped on the story to make the point that his death “proves we need an NYPD gang database.” Three years ago, the Post (5/31/15) similarly spotlighted fatal shooting cases to make the case that New York City should bring back Stop and Frisk. What the Post wanted then, as it does now, is to unleash the police—who it says has been “handcuffed” by the advocacy of “radicals” and “cop-haters”—to do whatever it wants.
While the teen’s killing has rightly stirred outrage on social media and in the community, is the answer to ramp up aggressive police enforcement? The Post presents the false choice that in order to prevent violence, the police must be enabled in a way that could lead to further injustices. In the 2007 report “Gang Wars: The Failure of Enforcement Tactics and the Need for Effective Public Safety Strategies,” Judith Greene and Kevin Pranis wrote about the failures of gang suppression efforts across the country to actually reduce gang violence.
The way media might further intensify police gang tactics could impact a growing national conversation and empower the most dangerous elements of the Trump administration. Last year, after a string of brutal killings in Long Island, reportedly by MS-13, it was Trump’s Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions who arrived to declare war on gangs.
Much of this is happening as activists are making some headway in challenging anti-gang tactics. Activists in Chicago, where a Guatemalan immigrant was arrested by ICE last year after being incorrectly identified as a gang member, recently filed a class action lawsuit challenging the Chicago police department’s gang database for being inaccurate and discriminatory. In Los Angeles, where California’s gang database was found to have 1-year old babies listed, activists and lawyers recently won a federal ruling barring police from imposing damaging gang injunctions, a civil court-ordered restraining order that restricts where certain residents can go, who they can be seen with and even what they can wear.
Locally, the Daily News and New York Post want their readers to simply trust law enforcement. History may be repeating itself, with many people’s lives likely to be impacted. Either way, New York City’s editorial boards are happy to go along for the ride.
In this article:
Let us work harder.
Iran: Trump’s Tweets Have Added $10 a Barrel to Cost of Oil
Iran’s official for the Organization of Petroleum Countries, Governor Hossein Kazempour Ardebili, was quoted by the Iranian Press last week as directly taking aim at President Trump for roiling the oil markets with his Twitter activity: “Your tweets have increased the prices by at least $10. Please stop this method.”
Investors and buyers are jittery, worried about what prices per barrel will be like six months out. Lots of imponderables go into the price. The world produces about 99 million barrels a day. If even a million barrels a day goes off the market because of political turmoil (like in Libya and Venezuela), it has a disproportionate impact on prices. This year, world demand is likely to be up by over a million barrels a day. And, political turmoil and other factors could reduce supply.
Iran exports about 2.5 million barrels a day. Take that off the market, or any substantial part of it, and demand is higher than supply, equaling rising prices.
Hence Trump’s tweets can put up the price up.
Moreover, Trump’s brinkmanship with Iran has led the hardliners in Iran to threaten to close the Straits of Hormuz to shipping if Iran is crushed. They can’t actually do this, I have been assured by U.S. Navy officers, but as I said, oil markets are jittery and often put up prices for reasons that seem to me silly.
The episode is full of ironies. Trump has a thing about gasoline prices, probably remembering how everyone hated Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s during the oil price spike. But he can’t help wanting to strong-arm Iran and undo the 2015 nuclear deal, just because it was a signature achievement of Barack Obama. If Obama had jumped in a river to save children from drowning, Trump would hire hit men to track them down and shoot them now.
So he is, as usual, his own worst enemy, producing the opposite of what he is aiming for.
In fact, Trump is a one-man inflation-machine. The trade wars he is picking will cause consumers to have to pay more for automobiles and lots of other commodities. His own voting base will suffer most because they probably shop in Walmart, the chief marketing agent in the U.S. for the goods produced by the Chinese Communist Party.
In this article:
Electric Car Sales Promise Shock for Big Oil
Oil and gas companies have underestimated probable electric vehicle sales and the effect they will have on their own businesses and profits, a new report says.
If the car manufacturers’ projections of future sales of electric cars are correct, then demand for oil will have peaked by 2027 or even earlier, sending the price of oil in a downward spiral as supply exceeds demand, says Carbon Tracker (CT), an independent financial think-tank carrying out in-depth analysis on the impact of the energy transition on capital markets.
It says fossil fuel companies have taken into account some engine fuel efficiencies and the effect they would have on oil demand, but not the expected increase in electric vehicles themselves. There is a big mismatch between forecasts of EV market penetration from vehicle manufacturers and from oil majors, says Laurence Watson, a CT data scientist.
“The oil industry is underestimating the disruptive potential of electric vehicles, which could reduce oil demand by millions of barrels a day. Increases in fuel efficiency will also eat into oil demand and the industry’s profits. The oil majors’ myopic position presents a serious investor risk,” he told the Climate News Network.
Expectations Far Lower
The report looks at all the projections of the major oil companies, including Exxon and BP, and says their figures for electric vehicle growth in the 2020s are 75 percent to 250 percent smaller than those expected by the global car manufacturers that have announced targets.
Electric vehicle sales in China alone, a figure bolstered by government intervention, are expected to be seven million a year by 2025. These, plus the three million a year aim of Volkswagen by the same date, would exceed oil industry estimates for sales for the whole world.
There are immense variables taken into account in the report. These include the number of miles driven by the average electric vehicle and the sort of car it replaces.
These variables depend on the influence of various governments’ policies to reduce oil in transportation in order to keep global temperature rise below 2°C beyond pre-industrial levels. The need to reduce air pollution also strongly favors the introduction of electric vehicles in cities.
More Demand Reduction
Another of the imponderables is the increasing efficiency of the internal combustion engine, which in itself also reduces demand for oil. It follows a growing trend already well-established in several countries, including Sweden, which from 2019 will produce no more vehicles powered by internal combustion alone.
The take-up of electric vehicles is crucial to the future of the oil industry because transportation takes up 50 percent of total oil demand. About half of the demand from transport is from light passenger vehicles, those that are most likely in the short term to switch to electricity.
Heavy-duty transport, aviation and shipping are also beginning to switch, but it is cars that will make the early difference.
The report argues that it is not total oil demand that matters but the difference between supply and demand. The 2014 crash in the oil price was caused by a surplus of 2 million barrels of oil a day, mainly because of a boom in US shale production.
To get the price back up to improve oil company profits took the combined efforts of the OPEC oil countries and the Russian government in cutting production, a process that needed three years.
According to the CT report, demand for oil will fall by 8 million barrels of oil a day by 2030 because of the expected deployment of electric vehicles, meaning that the oil-producing countries will have to constantly reduce their production in order to keep prices up.
The report argues that although oil demand will continue to be very large, the peak demand will have been reached around 2025. Demand displacement by electric vehicles “will significantly disrupt oil and gas company business models. Furthermore, we believe that when global oil demand peaks this will fundamentally alter investors’ approach to the industry.”