The regressive left must think all of its Christmases have come at once. How tedious it would have been had Britain voted to remain in the EU and Hillary Clinton had won the keys to the White House. There was precious little opportunity to raise a placard and embark upon a march when Martin Luther Mandela-Obama was President. Mr Charming could slaughter as many innocents as he liked with the odd drone, promise to close Guantanamo Bay without doing so, and bar citizens of certain Islamic nations from entering the US; but all of that could slip under the left’s radar because he was cool – a finger-snapping Jazz Dude President. Plenty of style on the surface and plenty of unpleasantness beneath it that goes with the office, whoever holds it; as long as the latter is carefully obscured by celebrity sheen, all is well with the world – though wasn’t that kind of superficial salesman-like take on politics the very thing we wanted an end to?
Twitterati who know no better (and plenty others who should) have been proclaiming the Apocalypse for the past seven days, having the time of their lives whilst doing so. Helium-inhaler Laurie Penny Dreadful blamed the resumption of her menstrual cycle on Trump’s inauguration; another woman claimed she was going to abort the baby she discovered she was carrying on the very same day because associations with the Donald would damn the child forevermore – though with a potential mother of that mentality, the unborn baby was at least spared a lifetime of being saddled with a new twist on the old Original Sin concept.
In case you missed it, Donald Trump isn’t merely a charmless, boorish bruiser who views his country as a failing business he intends to turn around and make a handsome profit from; no, he’s Hitler, Stalin, Genghis Khan, Lex Luthor, Ming the Merciless and Doctor Doom all rolled into one unappetising package – and he must be exterminated! Posing as those who care for their fellow-man, some openly advocate his assassination while a cowardly punch delivered by a masked thug to the head of an admittedly repugnant white supremacist on the streets of Washington is apparently something we are supposed to admire. Not for the weekend anarchist the Christopher Hitchens approach of destroying your enemies by destroying their argument, of course; that would require brains rather than brawn. Lest we forget, however, Black Panther H. Rap Brown once said ‘Violence is as American as cherry pie’, so I guess the current method of dealing with the problem makes sense.
‘We will repel bullies!’ cried actor David Harbour (who he?) at the Screen Actors Guild awards, the latest in the ongoing round of ceremonial self-indulgent back-slapping Hollywood vomit-fests leading up to the ultimate golden bucket of puke, the Oscars. ‘We will punch some people in the face!’ he screamed with characteristic humanity as the rest of his rant was submerged by a tsunami of rapturous applause. Peace ‘n’ love, eh? Violence is okay as long as it’s directed towards individuals the consensus has decreed worthy targets. Funnily enough, ISIS regards anyone who doesn’t subscribe to its nihilistic dogma in similar terms. There used to be a word for that, along with imposing views upon a populace and silencing dissenting voices. Oh, yeah – Fascism.
On this side of the pond, double-barrelled activists have been creaming their jeans at the prospect of a state visit by the Donald; it goes without saying there’s already a petition. Minor invites of the same nature to the leaders of Saudi Arabia or China don’t quite provoke the storm this one has, despite their abysmal human rights records surpassing America’s; and who was our PM cosying-up to after holding (little) hands with Trump? President Erdogan of Turkey, a man who has overseen a ruthless purge of anybody brave enough to question his regime; I haven’t heard many protests about that summit meeting from the usual suspects.
UKIP’s Raheem Kassam isn’t exactly the shy retiring type; his regular Twitter pronouncements appear to delight in provoking a vociferous response, yet his gleeful rejection of the perceived wisdom on Trump has inadvertently laid bare one important aspect of the regressive left’s attitude to multiculturalism. Yesterday he was accused of ‘betraying his culture’ by not frothing at the mouth over the news of Mr President’s ban on selected Islamic nationals entering the US; a lapsed Muslim, Kassam is a brown gentleman who refuses to submit to the nice little stereotype of a British Asian, and this upsets the multicultural model somewhat.
By spurning a Holy Book that, as with many, condemns the kind of personal practices the regressive left demands as a right, Raheem Kassam is a Bad Man rather than a mildly entertaining, attention-seeking contrarian. The left may imagine white guilt over our colonial history is eased by advertising its tolerance towards Islam whilst simultaneously overlooking hardline Islamic countries’ far-from tolerant suppression of women, gays and dissidents; but the toe-curling and patronising approach to Muslims who adhere to the victimised minority mindset, unable to defend themselves and therefore in need of kindly middle-class white Brits to come to their rescue and speak up on their behalf (their mastery of the English language is quite basic, you understand), is a head-patting exercise of a kind even our imperial forefathers would find appallingly condescending.
The marches and protests we’ve already been treated to, and will continue to be for the next few months, are the regressive left’s World Cup; they love ‘em, that’s why they’re so quick to take to the streets and chant as though they were in a stadium, announcing to a global TV audience that the referee likes playing with himself. It’s a wonder the whole spectacle isn’t presented live on BBC1 by Gary Lineker, ably assisted by Simon Schama and Lily Allen as pundits.
It’s time to get a grip and put things in perspective; and look at it this way – if Hillary had been elected, we’d have more U2 albums to endure. As it is, Saint Bono has threatened to release no new material until Trump is out of office. Here’s to two full terms, then. I say that not because I especially want it, but because the entertainment quota is virtually guaranteed from both camps on account of them being as unpleasant as each other.
© The Editor
19 thoughts on “THE HYPOCRITICAL OATH”
Some of what you said is true.
But, when you have the likes of Carl Bernstein reporting that senior Republicans are expressing doubts about the mental health of their Blessed Iconoclast, with reports like this surfacing – and, yes, I do realise that it’s the New York Daily News! – it does make one hesitate a little bit more than one might normally do when scanning the routine nonsense that politicians produce as ‘business as usual’.
And if the American Diplomatic Corps, in situ round the world, are prepared to go for a well supported ‘dissent’ communication, those being overly sanguine about the how ‘the boy done good’, just because they hate those who don’t like him, might not prove to be the most clever stance they’ll ever take.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I admit I’d be surprised if a man of Trump’s advanced years and evident mental disorders would be in a fit enough state to run for a second term; but I still think many of the reactions to him have been wildly over-the-top when, in all reality, Hillary herself probably wouldn’t have been a much more safer pair of hands. The choice was a lousy one last year and I suppose whatever the outcome, we were destined to feel uneasy.
Yes, I’ve read before that the NY Daily News (basically a populist tabloid, which usually takes relatively right wing stances) is very anti-Trump. It’s interesting. Like or loathe the Daily News, It does have its finger on the pulse of the average Joe Sixpack in New York, in much the same way as the Daily Mail has its finger on the pulse of a large section of middle England. Basically, Trump is extremely unpopular in his native city. And even less popular in the city where he is now required to spend most of his time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“It’s time to get a grip and put things in perspective; and look at it this way – if Hillary had been elected, we’d have more U2 albums to endure. As it is, Saint Bono has threatened to release no new material until Trump is out of office. Here’s to two full terms, then. I say that not because I especially want it, but because the entertainment quota is virtually guaranteed from both camps on account of them being as unpleasant as each other.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
U2 recently announced a new tour focussing on the Joshua Tree to coincide with the 30th anniversary of that album. Fair enough. It’s a fine album.
But there’s no need to put the spin on it that they are doing, particularly as not so long ago Bono had no problem cosying up to GWB and even figures to the right of GWB (such as the very right wing congressman Jesse Helms) in order to lobby for third world debt relief. Fine – a worthwhile endeavour, at least in terms of the end goal.
The reason they haven’t released new material since 2014 or whenever is that they just don’t have any more in the tank. (and even the most ‘devout’ U2 fan wouldn’t try to claim the 2014 album, or anything they’ve done in the last 15 years, is up there with the Joshua Tree or Achtung.) The well of creativity has dried up, at least for the time being. The muse has left the building. They haven’t released the new songs because they just aren’t good enough.
I’m picturing Bono at his therapy session being told the shocking truth (“to be honest, some of those songs really are very bad”). 🙂
A little more openness, and little less disingenuous spinning, might be appreciated from the U2 camp at this point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Some bands split at the right moment, some split when they’re long past their best, and others just keep going on and on and on, oblivious to the fact that even the most devoted fan will only probably listen to their new album on the day they buy it. When that happens, they virtually become their own tribute bands.
Incidentally, this article states, I think correctly, that “Irish authorities have no legal powers to intervene in the decisions made by US immigration authorities, even if they are made in Irish airports.”
Basically if you are booked on a flight to the US from an Irish airport, once you pass a certain point within the airport, you are considered to be within the ‘dominion’ of the US government! Bizarre but true. Does anyone know if the same applies in UK airports for travellers to the US?
It’s quite interesting, Eire has never been a NATO member and is officially militarily non-aligned (which is a slightly thing different to ‘neutral’, incidentally. Media articles and even politicians often talk about Ireland being ‘neutral’, but they are not quite correct.)
Apologies if this is a repeat – I tried to post a comment before but it seems it has not gone up.
I find the degree of fury and latent and not so latent violence about Trump both psychologically interesting and also disturbing – and I am not a Trump supporter. Anyway, take this as a test post – a small essay may follow later in the day.
G the M
LikeLiked by 1 person
I understand that the petition against Trump’s state visit now has about 1.3 million signatures. I think that is to be expected. Others, wiser and more learned than myself, have pointed out that there is a cadre or constituency of around 1 – 3 million people in the country who belong to what one would call the “hard” left, or who what is called by some “progressive liberals”. “Progressive” they may be, but liberal, in any classic sense, they most certainly are not.
You will find in this cadre a large number of members of the Labour party, which is why Corbin will remain as leader, and Labour will die.
The characteristics of these people are extreme activism, extreme energy, and vicious intolerance of anyone or anything that challenges their own particular ideology. They are, I think, in psychological terms the New Puritans, and they act with the same messianic zealotry (nay, bigotry).
One of the Orwellian techniques of this group is to establish control of language and thought by fear and guilt. Thus, anyone who may disagree with their views on, for example, open door immigration 9which is as far as I can tell about 70% of the population) is referred to as “racist” or, more simply “Nazis”.
I noted that there was an article this week by a Guardian journalist called Godfey Elfwick. It is headed (I kid you not):
“I’d rather punch 300 innocent people and 1 genuine Nazi than punch no Nazis at all.”
I shit you not. I find this not only disturbing, but rather ironic. Because in his pursuit of “hope not hate” or “diversity” or “inclusion” or “tolerance” or whatever, Mr Elwick is clearly not above using a bit of what, when properly thought through, is actually terrorism, plain and simple. What I also found ironic is that in his zealous anti Nazi pogrom, Mr Elwick would be clearly adopting a tenet of Nazism (and Bolshevism), namely tjhat the end justifies the means.
Perhaps also ironically, judging from his photo, Mr Elwick does not look like a man who would last very long in a confrontation with a real Nazi – as my father had to endure on D Day and after.
1 of 2.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Uhm, mate, Godfrey Elfwick is a satirist who spoofs the social justice warrior element of the left. It sounds as though the Guardian have been spoofed.
“Saint Bono has threatened to release no new material until Trump is out of office.”
Haha, I don’t like Trump but now you’ve convinced me! 😉
The protests against Trump strike me as a bit self-indulgent, as if there’s an element of “look at me being a protester, read my sign”, unlike the protests in South Korea last year about their president. Judging from media coverage, appearing to show huge and sustained turnout, it looked as if people were serious and not playing games.
I’m wondering if the stress of the presidency will affect Trump sooner rather than later. Bill Clinton and Obama aged visibly while in office and they were a good bit younger and slimmer than Trump. Perhaps his presidency will be relatively brief.
LikeLiked by 1 person
To resume. The use of language, and the control of thought at a very fundamental level is very, very important to these people. To take one tiny but significant example, I heard the Baroness Chakrabati CBE being interviewed about Trump last week. That’s the Baroness Chakrabati that cleared the Labour Party of institutional anti Semitism a little while ago, as you will remember, shortly before receiving her reward in the form of a peerage. What I noticed was that at no point did she ever refer to Trump as President; it was always “Mr Trump” (when we could get past the tears of anger and rage). I notices the same from other leaders of the vitriol; one being the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, who, my Twitter feed tells me, attended a very cordial dinner last night with guests that included representatives of 11 countries that have an outright and permanent ban on accepting entry of Israeli citizens. But I digress.
The interesting aspect of the phenomenon is the ferocity of the attack and the inversion of values which is a by product.
I understand that if you compare the signatories to the “Petition against Brexit” and the “Petition against Trump” you will find quite a close correlation of signatories – something like 90%. It’s basically the same cadre of people. You can also do a geographic representation of signatories, and what it shows is a huge over representation from London with back up from some of the other metropolitan centres. In short, it’s a particular class of metropolitans. Again, highly active, highly loquacious and – and I think this is the key point – contemptuous of anyone who does not do what they consider Politically Correct. That is a clumsy shorthand phrase, but I can’t really sum it up in any other way.
And when I say the “inversion of values” I mean this. If you want to go and have a march, great. But it strikes me as deeply repugnant to dress your children up as vaginas in the course of doing so. In the mythical Olde Days, that would have got you, or should have got you, locked up for child abuse. And in Washington this was all lead by a woman who extols the virtues of Sharia Law, and (I am told) another who has a conviction for the murder of a gay man. I find all of this…problematic. And when I see it I wonder witch part of the diversity and peaceful coexistence enjoyed by the women of Saudi Arabia these people want to actually experience. Is it the stoning to death bit, or the ritual beatings? I find the doublethink quite startling.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Oh dear, Gildas – I fear you have let down your namesake. He would have surely checked sources and ap[plied logic to his arguments.
“I understand that if you compare the signatories to the “Petition against Brexit” and the “Petition against Trump” you will find quite a close correlation of signatories – something like 90%. It’s basically the same cadre of people. You can also do a geographic representation of signatories, and what it shows is a huge over representation from London with back up from some of the other metropolitan centres. In short, it’s a particular class of metropolitans. Again, highly active, highly loquacious and – and I think this is the key point – contemptuous of anyone who does not do what they consider Politically Correct. ”
All signatories to petitions of the UK petitions site have to supply their postcode. Since people have a tendency to congregate in metropolitan areas, so do their accompanying postcodes. Also I struggle to see how a persons’ political views and degree of loquaciousness can be deduced merely from their postcode; perhaps you could explain your method?
“But it strikes me as deeply repugnant to dress your children up as vaginas in the course of doing so….. And in Washington this was all lead by a woman who extols the virtues of Sharia Law, and (I am told) another who has a conviction for the murder of a gay man.”
I’ll take these three allegations in reverse order. First up: Donna Hylton, the convicted murderer. Hylton wasn’t a leader of the Womens’ March, just one of the speakers. In 1986, she was one of a seven-person gang who abducted and killed Thomas Vigliarolo. Vigliaro was a conman who had cheated a partner out of a large sum of money and the kidnapping was an attempt to get this money back. Police, prosecutors and her fellow gang members all agreed she was a minor player in the crime and didn’t take part in the torture. She served 27 years and is now a community worker – wouldn’t your namesake agree that she had been rehabilitated? Oh, and there was no evidence that Vigliaro was gay – according to one report, he had been fooled into thinking that the three women gang members were prostitutes who would be having sex with him.
Second up: Linda Sarsour, one of the organisers of the March. She’s Muslim, Palestinian-American and very vocal in defence of Palestinian rights. Rather than spend several hundred words explaining the rather complex facts, I will refer you to this link: http://www.snopes.com/2017/01/25/womens-march-organizer-linda-sarsour/ As Lady Windermere observes: “The truth is rarely pure and never simple.”
Third up children dressed as vaginas. Now this one defeated my google-fu. First of all, I looked through page after page of photos of the Womens March; I found photos of a single group of women dressed in quite splendid pink satin vagina costumes (evidently the Feminist Cabal has failed to entirely suppress the womanly craft of sewing) but no children so costumes. I even,with great trepidation, tried googling “children dressed as vaginas” (note to self – clear your computer history before you go go bed); again my search was fruitless.
So, dear Gildas, in conclusion my verdict: must try harder.
So you oppose lefties stating their opinion?
It’s not like I’ve ever seen you write that Nigel Farage or Arron Banks should STFU.
As a regular reader, you should know I try my best to present as much balance as I can. Past posts have been very critical of Farage and Trump, so it only seems fair the ‘other side’ gets it as well. The last sentence attempts to point this out.
Hmmm. OK. But in stating that Trump is “a charmless, boorish bruiser”, don’t you think that people are right to stand up to him and his policies… and in this age of media overload, it’s only the most outlandish of demonstrations that get the attention?
Of course people are entitled to protest or air their grievances, but I just feel whatever Trump does – even if he’s essentially repeating some of Obama’s policies that are conveniently overlooked – there’s a readymade clique of professional protesters on permanent standby, and certain media members do really grate with me. As you yourself said during the US Election, though, Hillary would probably have been a disaster as well, even though the same people who are so incensed with Trump would have let her get away with murder.
I can’t disagree with your last sentence there. And I agree about the hypocrisy over Obama… But what do you do when your hero lets you down? Which Democrat stood against Obama for Democrat nomination in 2012? Anybody? Or would one have voted for Romney? Wasn’t it Dylan (Bob, not Thomas) who said “Don’t follow leaders”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Quite – watch-a-pawkin’ meters!
Comments are closed.