Wednesday, 29 June 2011
Thursday, 26 May 2011
I don't know Mehdi, are you as fed up as I am with critics of mass immigration/ extremist mosques/ Muslim extremists/ the Qu'ran/ of Hamas/ of Multi-Culturalism/ of Forced Marriages/ of Islamic attitudes towards gays/ the Burqa/ and generally any opinion a Muslim holds, being smeared as racist?
Thursday, 12 May 2011
Apparently the No to AV success does not rule out the possibility that there is a progressive majority in Britain! I'd agree it doesn't rule this out, plain fact devoid of utter delusion provides us with this painfully obvious analysis. While the Labour party has increasingly come to represent trendy University Class causes on issues like feminism and race far more than traditional class issues, the majority of its vote still originates from the working class. Despite having little to do with class anymore, the Labour Party presents a clear alternative to the Liberal Democrats and has consistently acquired more votes on a clearly non-progressive platform. What's more, the support base of the Liberal Democrats appears now shattered, with so-called 'progressives' who were voting for the LD's having little difficulty in transferring over to Labour. Further still since Labour's final defeat in 2010, a rise in the philosophy of 'Blue Labour' under Maurice Glassman has arisen in attempt to win back the voters that they lost to the BNP, hardly something that most 'progressives' are likely to slip into doing. If the majority of the country were progressive, why do all polls show consistently high concerns with immigration and dissatisfaction over multiculturalism? Do these idiots know what most polls show your average working class voter's views are on capital punishment? Or gay marriage? Seeing cretins like Mehdi Hasan (I know, I know, I shouldn't be surprised at new levels of stupidity from this man) refer to this so-called 'progressive majority' that Labour backbenchers apparently blocked (see here: http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/mehdi-hasan) shows just how completely and utterly out of touch these Ivory Tower liberals are that so dominant our discourse and media and not our population.
|You too Toynbee|
Since bin Laden's death there have been many on the American left that have criticised the Republican right for offering little to no support to Obama for finally getting the man that evaded George Bush for so long. There is a lot of truth in this. But there is another issue that the American and European left are also not willing to acknowledge. In the aftermath of bin Laden's death there were some brief celebrations in the streets in America devoid of any hint of racism, discrimination or God forbid 'Islamophobia', which have been exaggerated beyond all measure to give the liberals a means of diverting the story to another masochistic attack on America and the west in general. Amusingly, a part of this 'anti-celebratory' narrative, has been the idea that bin Laden's death is not very significant due to the enormous and entrenched network of terrorism that exists without him. This does slightly contradict the narrative though that Terrorism is an exaggerated if not outright non-existent threat cooked up by hawkish neocons in the White House, and that the war in Afghanistan is essentially a war about nothing. The American right should make their mind up as to whether they are going to offer praise to Obama for getting bin Laden (which they should have instantly decided in the positive) and the broader Western and American left should make up it's damn mind about whether it supports the United States' efforts in the War on Terror and simply disagrees with the means, or if it believes that such a thing does not exist in the first place. Clearly it now appears to be deciding that there is a threat. About time.
Saturday, 7 May 2011
On the latest edition of Bill Maher's show Real Time in the US, he referred to the Bush doctrine as the assertion, that states that harboured terrorists would be legitimate targets for intervention. With 'gay free zones', rallies for Hezbollah and Hamas, honour killings and the exporting of terrorists around the globe, one can't help but wonder with the latest revelations from Wikileaks about al-Qaeda's recruitment from London, how long it will be before we require Liberal Interventionism in London itself.
Monday, 2 May 2011
The instant that Osama bin Laden's death had been made public, a wave of pre-emptive videos and articles flushed their way onto the internet to mock those silly Yanks again who had been seen in the street celebrating the death of their most wanted man. This boring generation can produce so little beyond inanely attacking the status quo that they'll even do it before that status quo has had time to wake up and read the news and process itself. In fact the death of bin Laden plays quite nicely into the hands of those who think that they know better than everyone else about the 'real' motives behind the War on Terror and how we 'really' should be fighting it. Not only does the sight of patriotism and celebration provide the ultimate fish in a barrel to produce a trendy 'intellectual' attack on such silly behaviour, it also allows the idiots to juxtapose this jubilation with a solemn message about the 'futile' wars abroad remaining without change. Because you see these people know better.
They know that even in spite of the images broadcast across the world of Afghans attacking UN workers and other innocents that played no role in the, and I hesitate to call it this, 'provocation' only a few weeks ago. In spite of the fact that our main 'ally' in the region Pakistan which guzzles up huge quantities of aid from the West in the spirit of fighting terrorism had allowed bin Laden's presence to go unnoticed, not in a cave somewhere on their border, but only 60 miles from their capital in a mansion. They just know that in fact Afghan society is developed enough to be self-sufficient and share a border with nuclear Pakistan, without posing a threat to the West. They just know that Obama is no different to Bush, sucked into these wars by the irresistible Military Industrial Complex instead of any legitimate concerns of national security. And they certainly know a lot better than to celebrate or appreciate the significance of adding the man that provoked the War on Terror to the enormous list of terrorists and jihadists that have been killed, combined with the destruction of much of al-Qaeda's infrastructure and ability to commit acts of terror.
Thursday, 21 April 2011
One of the things that I have noticed since the Wikileaks scandal emerged is how quick the left, as well as the right, are to display small-government instincts and a Machiavellian skepticism to human affairs. It seems that what may broadly be described as 'the right' are quick to notice the corruption, bureaucracy, unscrupulous activity and unforeseen consequences of 'big government' at home on domestic issues, but will often turn a blind eye or see such occurrences as inevitable in regards to foreign policy. And similarly the left which increasingly in America expects the government to take responsibility for so many important facets of American life displays that exact same scepticism and fear when it relates to the government's trustworthiness and reliability in foreign affairs.
It's strange that according to liberals humanity can always be expected, with wide-eyed utopianism to simply 'work things out' and enjoy the benefit of the doubt, on issues of mass immigration, crime and government control of our lives and yet all that naivety is thrown out of the door as soon as it comes to foreign policy.
One day they'll learn.