Why is Britain Dishing out Honours to Low Grade Twitter trolls?

Historians will never cease arguing about when it was that Western Civilization began – Sumer? Salamis? After the Fall of Rome?

But not one of them will be in the slightest doubt from this week onwards as to when it was that Western Civilization ended.

Indeed, they will be able to pinpoint its demise down not just to the day but to the very hour the announcement was made. I refer, of course, to the extraordinary Gavrilo-Princip-style moment when some very dangerous and out-of-control mad person somehow got their shaking, sweating hands on the controls and decided it would be a good idea to award an OBE to someone called Caroline Criado Perez.

To help future historians I thought I’d provide a contemporary record of this momentous event using the traditional early 21st century medium of an internet Q & A.

Q: So we’re all very clear now, we historians here in your future, that Western Civilization definitely ended when Caroline Criado Perez was awarded an OBE. But though we’ve searched our extensive archives, which includes every article written or published, and every tweet ever tweeted – including the deleted ones by Johann Hari claiming to have personally transcribed all Shakespeare’s plays as they were dictated to him by the author – we seem quite unable to find anyone by that name of any significance. The only Caroline Criado Perez in our records appears to be some kind of desperate, attention-seeking, political activist cum low-rent blogger.

A: Yes. That’s the one.

Q: Then we can only assume that her OBE wasn’t the OBE but some similarly-named bauble of no significance.

A: Er, no. It’s the OBE. As in Order of the British Empire.

Q: Quite impossible! We’ve studied the history of the British Empire and it was kind of a big deal. We’ve read about Queen Victoria and Clive of India and the Charge of the Light Brigade and Scott of the Antarctic and Rorke’s Drift and the White Man’s Burden and all the incredible economic and scientific and intellectual advances that were made as a result of the money, power and influence which accrued from the Empire where the sun never set. So when you award one of your Queen’s subjects a medal named the Order of the British Empire that’s got to be a pretty big deal right? You’re not going to just hand it over willy nilly, to some hysterical, twittering, publicity-grubbing nobody?

A: So the more old-fashioned among us would have hoped, certainly.

Q: No. No! You have GOT TO BE JOKING. We know our history, we historians of the future, and one of things we know is that the Beatles – who are, only, like, the most famous pop band in the history of the universe – when they got their awards they weren’t even OBEs. They were MBEs. Which is one notch below. You’re not seriously telling us that between 1965 – when John, Paul, George and Ringo got their MBEs – and 2015, when Caroline Criado Perez got her OBE, that your culture became so grotesquely debased that some jumped up feminist troll was deemed superior in value and achievement to the creators of Eleanor Rigby, Strawberry Fields Forever, Helter Skelter and (our personal favourite in the future) Octopus’s Garden? Really?

A: Now you’re beginning to grasp this End of Western Civilization thing.

Q: OK. OK. Just to recap, so that we’re SURE we’re talking about the same woman. This Caroline Criado Perez’s most memorable achievement was launching a campaign to get the head of Jane Austen on a banknote. Not because Jane Austen was maybe the greatest novelist in the English language – which we could understand – but just to make the cheapshot feminist point that Jane Austen had a vagina whereas Dickens and Trollope didn’t?

A: You do sound refreshing un-PC in the future, I must say.

Q: Yeah well. We had to change. It was the only way we could start trying to recreate Western Civilization once this Caroline Criado Perez person had killed it. But look, we’re asking the questions here. We’re future historians. We NEED TO KNOW because there’s something about this whole banknote think that has been troubling us. Are we right in thinking that the person on the other side of the banknote was also female?

A: Yes. The Queen.

Q: But this Caroline Criado Perez felt, what, that was “sexist” or something? That only total domination of your banknotes by the female sex would do?

A: “Gender”. She would have preferred the term “gender.”

Q: Crikey, she sounds tiresome.

A: I think she would have considered that kind of language patriarchal, phallocentric and dismissive.

Q: I bet she would, the minx.

A: Wow! I’m loving this future of ours already.

Q: You say that. But you have no idea the horror the planet has to go through in order to get where we are. Fireships off the shoulder of Orion, my arse. We are talking ugly, ugly, ugly. Mind you, having said that, nothing quite as ugly as the awarding of the OBE to this annoying uber-talentless rabblerousing flibbertigibbet. Which is why I’ve got one more important question for you.

A: Go on.

Q: Well, it’s like this. Our records show that when the Beatles got their MBEs many earlier recipients of the award were so disgusted that they handed their gongs back in protest. Yet, we seem to have no evidence that Caroline Criado Perez’s OBE provoked a similar outbreak of high principle.

A: So your question is what exactly?

Q: Well it’s more of a rhetorical one, really. What can have happened to your culture that it became so vapid, spineless and worthless so quickly? Since when did you become so obsessed with this “equality” crap that it was allowed to trump all the things that once made Western Civilization great: your history, your traditions, your values, your heroic achievements, your quest for truth, beauty, wisdom, excellence?

Read at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Prison sentences for Twitter trolls will only encourage the professional victim class’s sense of grievance and entitlement
  2. Offensive remarks on Twitter should not be punishable by prison, let alone death
  3. Honours quotas: why all mustn’t have prizes
  4. Separating myth from reality in a history of the Battle of Britain

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

In Which Finally I Discuss the Hell of Being Born Trans Class

“Trans Race” victim Rachel Dolezal has attracted much mockery from some quarters for claiming to be a black woman trapped in a white woman’s body.

All I can say is: she should be so lucky. I personally have spent my entire miserable life suffering from a far more painful, emotionally draining, and tragically irreversible handicap. It has ruined my career, it has blighted my children’s future, it is a constant source of disappointment to my wife and could well one day lead to a very ugly divorce. I’ve had difficulty talking about it before because it’s such a sore topic. But now, thanks to the brave example of Rachel Dolezal I have been shown the way.

Today, finally, I have plucked up the courage to speak out in the hope that fellow sufferers of this awful disability might finally be able to talk openly about the misery this tragic condition has brought upon them. Perhaps we could even form a campaign group and demand government compensation.

The problem is this: I was born Trans Class.

Imagine how it feels to stare into your bathroom mirror every day and to see, reflected back, not the extravagantly be-sideburned, gimlet-eyed, red-cheeked aristocrat you know you really are, but just the pallid, gaunt features of a middle-middle-class nobody struggling to make a living, just like all the “little people”.

Imagine waking up, not in the four-poster-bed that has been in the family for generations and which its rumoured Anne Boleyn once slept in, but just a fairly ordinary pocket-sprung number you picked up ten years ago from a boring high street chain with some name like SlumberWorld or DreamLand or Bed-U-Like.

Imagine the stabbing agony you experience every day when you realise that nothing you ever do – NOTHING – is ever going to alter the fact that you will never have a foxhunt bearing your name (like the Duke of Beaufort does), that neither you nor in all likelihood your children, will ever inherit a 52 bedroom Baroque palace with 5,000 acres of parkland landscaped by Capability Brown and swarming with unusual-looking sheep, rare-breed cattle and exotic deer which your ancestor brought back from the Forbidden City in Peking.

Imagine the horror of knowing that instead of having your every whim catered for by a retinue of liveried servants – as is your natural birthright – you instead actually have to put your leaves into your teapot yourself, then pour boiling water on it from an electric kettle, then wait for it to brew for four minutes, then pour it out into a cup which isn’t made from antique finebone china but has Mr Silly on it and came from some unspeakable supermarket like Tesco, not to mention all the other crap that ordinary people have to do because they know no better and weren’t born Trans Class like you and are therefore more dumbly accepting of their lot…stuff like putting out the rubbish once a week for the binmen, and having to floss your teeth rather than getting your cheeky chambermaid Moll to do it and having to watch television rather than having your staff watch it for you and then give you a written summary in copperplate.

Imagine sticking both arms out every morning then remembering, with a shudder, that there is no valet to slip on your frock coat and that in fact all you’ve got is a bunch of Charles Tyrwhitt shirts and the same old pair of jeans which you’re going to have to put on yourself.

Imagine….well there’s really no point because you can’t bloody imagine. Unlike me – unless of course you are a fellow Trans Class victim – you won’t have sufficient intellectual refinement or imagination to imagine, because your proletarian brain won’t let you.

So since you lack the inability to imagine, I’ll just have to tell you.

I was born an 18th century Duke with a vast estate, a stable of two dozen hunters, a bevy of mistresses, a summer “nooky house”, more estates in the West Indies (where I can assure you that the workers are all very happy with their lot and address me cheerfully as “Massa Duke, Sir”), a beautiful if slightly remote wife who is related to the King, lots of paintings (especially of me) by Gainsborough and Reynolds, yet I am trapped in the body of a middle-class, middle-aged journalist in ugly, pointless, 21st century Britain.

And it is HELL, I tell you, hell.

That is why from now on, to help my cope with my disability, I shall expect to be addressed as “Your Grace”, be given the place of honour at those of your miserable dinner parties I deign to attend, and be treated at all times with deference bordering on worship.

Thank you, Rachel Dolezal for showing me the way. You may be a horrid wretched oik from the Colonies (job going on my West Indies estates, if you’re interested) but you have enabled me to become who I really am.

After all, it’s not the body you were born into that defines you. That’s just an oppressive social construct.

What truly defines you is how you feel so I’m going to say it proud and I’m going to say it loud:

I. AM. A. DUKE.

From Breitbart

Related posts:

  1. We know war is hell. But it doesn’t stop us wanting to do it.
  2. If class IS a problem for David Cameron he has only himself to blame
  3. Richard Madeley reveals that the green blight has finally sunk Cornwall
  4. Finally BBC asks: are we maybe a bit biased on ‘climate change’?

2 thoughts on “In which finally I discuss the hell of being born Trans Class”

  1. Sackerson says:14th June 2015 at 7:01 pmAn excellent post, Your Grace.
  2. dnobrien says:28th June 2015 at 11:37 amThere are many other sufferers James:
    https://dnobrienpoetry.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/identification-parade/

Comments are closed.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Jonathan Chait Talks Chait on Climate Change

There’s a long article in the grown-up Australian magazine Quadrant which I wouldn’t expect columnist Jonathan Chait to be capable of finishing, let alone comprehending.

But since it’s quite germane to a silly piece he has published in New York magazine entitled “Scientists Drop Science Bomb on Climate Skeptics,” I thought I might kindly help the afflicted by offering a precis.

The piece is by science writer Matt Ridley (well known to readers of London’s Times, The Wall Street Journal, and of books including Genome and The Rational Optimist) and it’s called”What The Climate Wars Have Done to Science.”

Ridley, formerly a believer in Catastrophic Man Made Warming (CAGW), describes how the scales fell from his eyes and he came to realise that climate change alarmism was a massive fraud akin to Stalin-era Lysenkoism or the persistent myth (invented in the 1950s by Ancel Keys) that dietary fat is the main cause of heart disease.

He reached this conclusion using the traditional scientific method of “looking at the evidence.”

From Michael Mann’s utterly discredited “Hockey Stick” to the similarly bankrupt nonsense that there is a “97 per cent” consensus on CAGW, Ridley demonstrates that almost all the evidence climate alarmists have marshalled in order to support their extravagant claims about man-made climate doom is in one way or another doctored, dishonest or corrupt.

The problem has got so bad, Ridley argues, that “it is at risk of damaging the whole reputation of science”.

Sure, we occasionally take a swipe at pseudo-science – homeopathy, astrology, claims that genetically modified food causes cancer, and so on. But the great thing about science is that it’s self-correcting. The good drives out the bad, because experiments get replicated and hypotheses put to the test. So a really bad idea cannot survive long in science.

Or so I used to think. Now, thanks largely to climate science, I have changed my mind. It turns out bad ideas can persist in science for decades, and surrounded by myrmidons of furious defenders they can turn into intolerant dogmas.

One of these dogmas, just like Lysenkoism, just like Ancel Keys’s now discredited theories on dietary fat, is Catastrophic Man Made Global Warming theory.

Ridley goes on to provide lots of examples of this establishment-endorsed junk science in action – many taken from an excellent book which I highly recommend (not least because it features me) called Climate Change: The Facts (which you can buy here at Mark Steyn’s place).

He tells the tale of Camille Parmesan who produced a paper on the Edith checkerspot butterfly which, though subsequently proved to be utter nonsense by an ecologist, nevertheless earned her 500 citations, an invitation to the White House and a slot contributing to the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report. Why? Just because her paper conformed to the Establishment’s approved narrative that almost everything going wrong in the natural world can be blamed on “climate change.”

Read the article. There’s plenty, plenty more where this came from. So much, indeed, that you can’t help wondering: how do these shysters get away with it? How can so many scientists have been bent from the true path? How come their work gets such unquestioning coverage from science correspondents whose job ought to be to sniff out dishonesty and fraud? Why are these scientists not held to account by the supposedly distinguished institutions where they work or by the government bodies which fund them?

The answer, Ridley explains, is that the truth has fallen victim to a greedy and out of control green industry.

“…inch by inch, the huge green pressure groups have grown fat on a diet of constant but ever-changing alarm about the future. That these alarms – over population growth, pesticides, rain forests, acid rain, ozone holes, sperm counts, genetically modified crops – have often proved wildly exaggerated does not matter: the organisations that did the most exaggeration trousered the most money.

In the case of climate, the alarm is always in the distant future, so can never be debunked. These huge green multinationals with budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars, have now systematically infiltrated science, as well as industry and the media, with the result that many high-profile climate scientists and the journalists who cover them have become one-sided cheerleaders for alarm, while a hit squad of increasingly vicious bloggers polices the debate to ensure that anybody who steps out of line is punished. They insist on stamping out all mention of the heresy that climate change might not be lethally dangerous.”

So when Jonathan Chait pompously invokes the name of “Science” to support his cause – and accuses “skeptics” of being anti-science – what he in fact means by “Science” in nothing that Newton or Einstein would have understood by the word.

Chait is not a scientist. Neither am I. But that’s not the problem. The problem is that Chait – presumably – considers himself to be a journalist and something of a master of snark.

You can tell from the sarcastic relish of his concluding paragraph:

So now that we know there is no pause, or even a slowdown, science-loving conservatives can rest assured that the conclusions of the climate-science field are correct, and the release of heat-trapping gasses into the atmosphere does in fact trap heat. Obviously, right? Conservatives placed so much weight on the apparent existence of this pause that there’s no way they would just immediately switch over to some other justification for their same skepticism, like some kind of reflexive ideologues.

Well all I’ll say, as a fellow snark practictioner, is that if you’re going to adopt a tone as lofty and sneery as that, then you’d better be damned sure of your facts.

You’d better be aware, for example, as Chait so clearly isn’t, that there is a very effective counterargument to this “Science” paper he has set so much store by, which shows it up for the dishonest, incompetent, politically motivated artefact it really is.

If not, there’s a severe danger that you’ll end up being accused by the better-informed of having churned out an article which we in England are fond of dismissing with a phrase not unakin to, “This is a load of complete and utter Chait!”

Read more at Breitbart

Related posts:

  1. Why conservatives shouldn’t ‘believe’ in climate change
  2. Why conservatives shouldn’t believe in man made climate change
  3. What the liberal elite feel you should know about ‘Climate Change’
  4. This government simply hasn’t a clue about ‘Climate Change’

2 thoughts on “Jonathan Chait talks Chait on climate change”

  1. Sackerson says:6th June 2015 at 3:12 pmAwfully vulgar title, old chap.
  2. james says:7th June 2015 at 1:05 pmYes, you’re quite right. I have now changed it.

Comments are closed.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

‘Hide the Pause’: The Latest Great Global Warming Cover Up

June 6, 2015

What’s the most embarrassing and inconvenient truth for the cause of climate alarmism?

Probably the fact that there has now been no “global warming” for 18 years and six months. Not only does this contradict all the doomladen climate models cited in the IPCC’s various reports – none of them predicted the so-called “Pause” – but it also means that not one of the kids in school being fed climate propaganda by their on-message teachers has ever personally lived during a time of global warming.

So it’s quite understandable that – just as they tried to do with the “Medieval Warming Period” and also “the decline” (which proved so troubling to Michael Mann and his pals) – the alarmists are doing their damnedest to write the “Pause” (or, if you will, “hiatus”) out of scientific history.

And now they’ve done it!

Or so the journal Science tells us in a new paper being greeted with a predictably rapturous reception by the usual suspects at the Guardian, the BBC and the New York Times.

Here, for example, is Pravda’s take:

The so-called hiatus has been touted by non-scientists who reject mainstream climate science. Those claims have resonated; two years ago, the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change felt the need to explain why the Earth was not heating up as expected, listing such reasons as volcanic eruptions, reduced solar radiation and the oceans absorbing more heat.

“The reality is that there is no hiatus,” said Tom Karl, director of the National Centers for Environmental Information in Asheville, North Carolina. He is the lead author of a study published Thursday in the peer-reviewed journal Science

So that’s it then, is it? Game over for the deniers, now dramatically disarmed of their most powerful weapon by “the Science”?

Er, not quite, no, as this exquisitely damning rebuttal from the Global Warming Policy Forum makes clear.

The thrust of Karl’s paper is this: that far from staying flat since 1998, global temperatures have carried on rising. It’s just that scientists haven’t noticed before because they’ve been looking in the wrong place – on land, rather than in the sea where all the real heat action is happening.

And how did Karl et al notice what everyone else has missed until now? Well, by using a specialised scientific technique called “getting your excuses in early before the Paris climate conference in December.”

Essentially, this technique involves making adjustments to the raw temperature data (sound familiar?) and discovering – lo! – that the sceptics were wrong and the alarmists were right all along.

Karl’s paper makes much of the fact that the methods used for gathering sea temperature data have changed over the years: in the old days it used to involve buckets; more recently, engine intake thermometers. Hence his excuse for these magical “adjustments”. Apparently (amazingly, conveniently), the measurements used since 1998 have been “running cold” and therefore needed correcting in a (handy) upward direction in order to show what has really been happening to global warming. Once you realise this – global warming turns out to be as real and present and dangerous as ever it was.

As the GWPF reports there are several glaring problems with Karl’s paper, starting with the fact that it contradicts all the other surface temperature data sets and also satellite data (which clearly shows no warming post 1998). Also, without any plausible explanation, Karl also chooses not to use the data from the Argo array “that is our best coherent data set on ocean temperatures.” The suspicion naturally arises that this is because if Karl had used the Argo findings, they would have made his paper look ridiculous.

But, of course, accuracy and scientific integrity was never the point of this exercise.

Rather, it’s sole point was to garner quotations like the ones amassed by the Guardian (et al) and relayed to the faithful who will now unquestionably accept it as evidence that their cause is just.

Here below is the rationale for Karl’s paper. The actual science is a sublime irrelevance for, as ever, this is all about politics.

Prof Michael Mann, whose analysis of the global temperature in the 1990s revolutionised the field, said the work underlined the conclusions of his own recent research.

“They’ve sort of just confirmed what we already knew, there is no true ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus’ in warming,” he said. “To the extent that the study further drives home the fact … that global warming continues unabated as we continue to burn fossil fuels and warm the planet, it is nonetheless a useful contribution to the literature.”

Bob Ward, policy and communications director at London’s Grantham Research Institute, said the news that warming had been greater than previously thought should cause governments currently meeting in Bonn to act with renewed urgency and lay foundations for a strong agreement at the pivotal climate conference in Paris this December.

“The myth of the global warming pause has been heavily promoted by climate change sceptics seeking to undermine the case for strong and urgent cuts in greenhouse gas emissions,” said Ward.

Since scientists began to report a slower than expected rate of warming during the last decade, climate sceptics have latched on to the apparent dip in order to question the validity of climate models.

Last February, US Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) told CNN: “The last 15 years, there has been no recorded warming. Contrary to all the theories that – that they are expounding, there should have been warming over the last 15 years. It hasn’t happened.”

Cruz’s rival for the Republican nomination, Jeb Bush, was using the pause to argue for inaction as early as 2009.

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Global warming is dead. Long live, er, ‘Global climate disruption’!
  2. What do America’s kittens think about global warming? We need to know!
  3. Happy 18th Birthday No Global Warming!
  4. Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’?

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Terrible News for Climate Catastrophists: The Sahara Is Getting Greener

June 2, 2015

Terrible news for climate catastrophists: the Sahara is getting greener

Good news: the Sahara desert is getting greener because of “climate change.”

Climate change has achieved what Bob Geldof and Live Aid failed to do by ending the drought in the Sahel region of Africa that killed more than 100,000 people in the 1980s, a study has found. Rising greenhouse gases caused rains to return to the region south of the Sahara, from Senegal to Sudan, boosting crop yields since the 1990s and helping the population to feed itself without relying on foreign donations. The study, in the journal Nature Climate Change, found that Sahel summer rainfall was about 10 per cent, or 0.3mm, higher per day in 1996-2011 than in the drought period of 1964-93.

Well, I say “good news”, which obviously it is for the starving Africans scraping a marginal and precarious living on the edge of the desert, and, indeed, for those of us who prefer to see Africa as an economic success story waiting to happen rather than a looming demographic threat.

But I predict that there will some people who are going to take this news very amiss. The sphincter-poppingly furious crew of greenie activists at the George-Soros-funded website DeSmog blog, for example. As Bishop Hill notes, when, a few years back, the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s Phillip Mueller produced a paper predicting this very thing, the red-faced greenies of DeSmog rushed angrily to poo-poo it:

It is wild speculation to assert that any recovery in the Sahel is a result of global warming and to dangle the prospect of a future green Sahara is the exact opposite of the message provided by Mueller’s reference on the matter. However welcome the re-greening of parts of the Sahel, it cannot be relied on.

This is how the left rolls, as a very astute Times article once noted in a different but parallel context, when describing how apologists for the European Union enable it to enlarge its powers first by ridiculing their opponents, then by slily – but not apologetically – conceding that they were right all along.

It is at first denied that any radical new plan exists; it is then conceded that it exists but ministers swear blind that it is not even on the political agenda; it is then noted that it might well be on the agenda but is not a serious proposition; it is later conceded that it is a serious proposition but that it will never be implemented; after that it is acknowledged that it will be implemented but in such diluted form that it will make no difference to the lives of ordinary people; at some point it is finally recognised that it has made such a difference, but it was always known that it would and voters were told so from the outset.

I’m very much looking forward to the bit where the greenies get to the final stage of historical revisionism. “But, of course, we knew that global cooling was the real problem and that we were heading towards a new ice age,” all the usual suspects – from the once-distinguished heights of NASA and the Royal Society to the stygian depths of DeSmog – will all chorus. “Why we were all predicting as much as long ago as the 1970s…”

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Bad news for climate alarmists: the ‘missing heat hiding in the deep ocean’ excuse is toast
  2. Global warming is dead. Long live, er, ‘Global climate disruption’!
  3. Climate Change: an emetic fallacy
  4. Why conservatives shouldn’t ‘believe’ in climate change

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Rod Liddle Does His Anti-Foxhunting Dad Dance Again. Oh, Puh-lease

Rod Liddle – the thinking man’s Ricky Gervais – has been doing his Dad Dance routine again. You know the one. It’s where he shows how down-with-the-kids and still-in-touch-with-his-radical-leftist-working-class-roots he is by telling you how utterly he loathes foxhunting and how, instead of giving parliament a free vote on the issue, David Cameron should be making it even more illegal than ever because, like, it’s barbaric.

Rad, Rod. Rad!

You can almost smell the oestrogen and plait-haired armpit sweat of all the hot PETA chicks swarming to kneel in appreciation of Rod’s bunny hugging caringness, can’t you?

But I have to say that as both a longstanding friend of Rod’s and a huge admirer of his writing, I find this particular Dad Dance of his embarrassing and demeaning and I really wish he wouldn’t do it.

When he writes crap like this it’s a bit like Led Zeppelin reforming to do a three month stint at Caesars Palace. (“Stairway to Heaven guaranteed Every Nite!!!“). You just think: “No, Rod. Really. You’re better than that.”

It’s crap because it’s airheaded and fluffy and mawkish and horribly redolent of the kind of Guardianista Liberalthink that, as a rule, Rod rightly professes to despise.

Saying foxhunting should be banned because you think it’s cruel and barbaric is as insightful and thought-through and original as venturing, say, that “The true mark of a civilised country is how well it treats its old/disabled/ethnic minorities/prisoners/delete as appropriate” or that you believe in “social justice” and that everyone should have a “living wage” and that for the sake of “future generations” we should learn to live more “sustainably” and that the “problem with Communism is that has never been really tried”. Or even “today is the first day of the rest of your life”. Or “you don’t have to be mad to work here. But it helps!!!”

It’s crap because it’s such a pathetically obvious piece of virtue-signalling. Next time, Rod, just save yourself the bother and write: “I hate the Daily Mail.” That’ll do you.

It’s crap because it’s so nauseatingly illiberal – in the old-fashioned sense of the world.

Now I’m perfectly aware, having had discussions with Rod on this point that he doesn’t want to belong to any kind of liberal tradition – Classical liberal or Guardianista – because he thinks of himself more as Old School authoritarian left.

So all I’ll say on this point is that I find it a bit disappointing that a man who at periods in his life has not exactly been unburdened with personal vices himself should be so indecently keen to cast the first stone at the weaknesses of others.

If, that is, you consider a desire to go foxhunting a weakness. I personally don’t. I think that wanting to go hunting is the most natural thing in the world because it answers the call of one of our most strongly inbuilt atavistic instincts: without the hunting urge we would never have survived, let alone evolved to the point where people were able to invent football and go to Millwall matches and shout clever obscenities at one another, like some people do for their harmless fun, naming no names, eh, Rod?

And frankly, only someone of the Whiggish perversion would be smug enough to imagine that this instinct is something we have all since evolved out of. Yeah, right. You might as well look at the current goings on in Syria and Iraq and pronounce sagely that human beings are no longer drawn to violence.

But that’s by the by. My biggest objection to the arguments of Rod and people like Rod who think they are being civilised and sophisticated and decent in their opposition to hunting is very simply this: that they are miserable, puritanical kill-joys.

I’m not asking the Rod Liddles of this world to be persuaded by all the sub-arguments for the continued existence of hunting – the ones about conservation and tradition and pest control and so forth – because I know, given their class-resentment-inspired bias and their ooh-I-care-about-furry-animals-me moral preening, they’ll always find counterarguments and because in any case they’re just a distraction from the only argument that really matters.

Hunting is a good and desirable thing because it makes those who do it very, very happy without harming in any way whatsoever those miserable sods who disapprove of it.

If you believe in liberty, if you believe in the primacy and the good of mankind, you could never seriously be opposed to hunting. And yes, it really is that simple.

Read more at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. The meaning of life is foxhunting
  2. O’Bama? Oh puh-lease!
  3. Ayn Rand’s books are deliciously anti-statist, but her philosophy is borderline Nazi
  4. Memo to the FT: Neda Agha Soltan did not die in order to foment anti-Israeli propaganda

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Green Activists Explain How to Brainwash Kids with Climate Porn

As the Jesuits almost said: “Give a child until he is seven and I will show you the fully indoctrinated, yogurt-weaving, polar-bear hugging eco loon.”

Such, at any rate, has been the message at one of the panel discussions at this year’s luvvie-fest of impeccably correct thinking, the Hay Literary Festival, where a group of “CliFi” authors have been singing the praises of brainwashing the impressionable young through the medium of kiddie-friendly climate pornography.

Climate activists are targeting children through a new range of ‘cli-fi’ – climate fiction – novels which seek to highlight the dangers of global warming.

David Thorpe, author of the book Stormteller, said that children were more open minded and claimed that writers could ‘infect’ their minds with ‘seriously subversive viral ideas’.

He was speaking at the Hay Festival alongside ‘cli-fi’ authors George Marshall and Saci Lloyd.

“I like writing for children because their minds are still forming,” said Mr Thorpe whose novel is set in a coastal Wales ravaged by climate change and rising sea levels.

“They are asking all sorts of questions about how the world is working. Their minds haven’t been tainted by ideological bias, they are still open minded about it.

“You can try to be seriously subversive and try to infect their minds with these viral ideas that they can explore on their own to make it exciting. When I was that age I loved having my mind boggled.”

Saci Lloyd, author of the children’s book, The Carbon Diaries, said it was important to write engaging stories for children while keeping climate change as an underlying theme, so it was not obvious that it was a central topic.

Interesting use of the word “subversive” there in the novel sense of “achingly conventional”. I don’t know how many classes you’ve visited, David Thorpe – quite a few, I would imagine, given my understanding of how assiduously children’s authors court schools in order to have their jottings whacked willy-nilly onto parents’ bills – but what you might have noticed had you been paying any attention is that “global warming” is taught these days as assiduously as the Sermon on the Mount, the parables and the Ten Commandments used to be in the past.

Also on the panel was a chap called George Marshall, author of a book called Don’t Even Think About It: Why our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change.

“We need to get climate change out of the rational side of our brain and into the emotional part because that is where attitudes are formed on the basis of our values,” he said.

So if the facts don’t suit you, make stuff up. Yeah, I get it.

Read more at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. ‘Germany’s George Monbiot’ turns climate sceptic
  2. Build-a-bear: the sinister green plot to turn our kids into eco-fascist Manchurian candidates
  3. ‘Climate change sceptics have smaller members, uglier wives, dumber kids’ says new study made up by warmists
  4. Splattergate II: green graphic novel celebrates eco-terrorist shopping mall killing spree

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

From IRA Murders to ISIS Atrocities: Why Gay Marriage Makes It All OK

May 28, 2015

Which is worse:

a) opposing gay marriage

or

b) abducting a mother of ten in front of her weeping children, suffocating her with a plastic bag, shooting her in the head and burying her in an unmarked grave?

Well, obviously we know the answer is a) because we can see it in the above heartwarming picture, taken during the recent Irish referendum on same sex marriage.

It shows gay rights activist Rory O’Neill (aka drag queen Panti Bliss) sharing a lovely group hug with David Norris (an Irish Senator who lobbied for the 1993 decriminalisation of gay sex) and, of course, with the unmistakably vulpine figure of Gerry Adams, the sinister Sinn Fein president who continues to deny he was ever a member of the IRA.

Aaaahhh. Doesn’t it make you feel all warm and gooey inside?

Well it doesn’t have that effect on me, I’m afraid. In fact, if I’d voted “yes” in the Irish referendum and someone had subsequently showed me that photo, I’m pretty sure I’d want to stick an orange in my mouth, tie a noose around my neck and top myself for the very shame of it.

For, if a picture is worth a thousand words, that particular one is worth more like a hundred-thousand-word book entitled “Absolutely Everything That Is Wrong With The Modern World.”

It refutes, far more articulately and unanswerably than any member of the hapless “No” campaign managed, every one of the arguments advanced by the “Yes” campaign simply by setting them cruelly in the context of the real world.

In this real world, an army of beheading, crucifying, rapist terrorists who slaughter women and children and chuck gay men off high buildings has taken control of another major Iraqi city and of one of the world’s greatest ancient sites (which it will soon no doubt strive to erase from the earth); the global economy succumbs to ever more burdensome regulatory capture by a self-serving cabal of lawyers, technocrats, corporatists and politicians over whom we have less and less democratic control; a mendacious, aggressive and supremely well-funded and well-connected green movement is trying to destroy free markets, drive up energy prices and impose on us one world government in the guise of a nebulous concept called “sustainability”; uncontrolled immigration is rendering many of our countries increasingly unrecognisable; the elderly (and not-so-elderly) are dying, parched, and neglected in their own blood and faeces in a healthcare system no longer fit for purpose; Muslim rape gangs continue to prey on vulnerable white girls with near impunity in towns all over Britain; the Mediterranean is fast reverting to the era of Barbary piracy; Putin is hotting up the Cold War; China doesn’t give a damn; across most of the “free West” defence spending is being cut to the bone is if there were no longer any more causes worth fighting for; in the wake of Prince Charles’s visit to Ireland we learn the happy news that the people who blew up his godfather may have been granted permanent immunity from prosecution. Oh, and the same is almost certainly true of the senior IRA commander who ordered the killing of Jean McConville (the mother of ten mentioned at the beginning) and who – if we are to believe this investigation by the New Yorker – may not be unconnected with the beaming grey-bearded fellow who posed for selfies with Panti Bliss and others at the recent “Ireland goes gay” bullying smug-fest.

Obviously my list of things that are seriously wrong with the world is by no means comprehensive. But it does, I hope, give an indication of just how many serious issues are being swept under the carpet today by a culture which would rather buoy itself up with feel-good gesture politics like the (technically entirely unnecessary) Irish referendum than grapple with the problems that really matter.

Read more at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. I don’t need my ice cream to ‘educate’ me about the glories of gay marriage or wind farms
  2. Watching the Climategate scandal explode makes me feel like a proud parent
  3. If we’re going to rage against cultural atrocities, let’s make sure we target the right ones
  4. The Spectator’s editor agrees: the only way out of this ghastly Euro fudge is OUT

One thought on “From IRA murders to ISIS atrocities: why gay marriage makes it all OK”

  1. Sackerson says:29th May 2015 at 7:44 amIgnore the knockers, it’s a piece of cake. Funny, though, to have IRA welcoming PC, they used to shoot them.

Comments are closed.

Post navigation

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

I Totally Take Back Everything I’ve Ever Said about Queen’s Brian May…

Just a quick one: was anyone else as surprised and delighted as I was by Brian May’s performance on BBC Question Time last night?

I’ve been quite rude about him in the past. Yes, that distinctively shimmery, echoey, almost Venusian guitar of his did provide part of the soundtrack to my youth – I seem to remember getting to third base for the first time to the accompaniment of Night At The Opera – but what I’ve never quite forgiven are his politics.

As a countryman and nature lover, for example, I feel every bit as passionately about wildlife as he does. Which is one of the reasons I’m so much in very favour of the badger cull, as I argue in more detail here.

Apart from the Ford Mondeo the badger has no natural predator, so since in the early 1980s legislation made it illegal to kill badgers, their population has rocketed to unsustainable levels. The consequences have been disastrous: TB in both badgers and cattle has soared; hedgehog and ground-nesting bird populations have been devastated; farmers’ livelihoods have been destroyed; vast sums of taxpayers’ money — the figure last year was £100 million — have been squandered; and Britain is now at risk of having an EU ban on all its beef and dairy exports, at a cost to the economy of more than £2 billion a year.

May, on the other hand, has positioned himself at the forefront of the shrill and self-righteous anti-badger cull movement, which unfortunately has attracted the very worst elements of the animal rights movement, and appears to be motivated more by sentiment and cherry-picked data than it does by hard evidence.

But while I haven’t changed my views on badgers, I’ve definitely shifted my stance on May.

Last night, as the panel’s licensed jester – the token celebrity who can ride whatever hobby horses he wishes – he could all too easily have spouted the sub-Russell-Brand drivel we’ve come to expect on Question Time. Instead, he was a model of decency and sweet reasonableness.

This was especially noticeable in his behaviour towards fellow panelist Nigel Farage.

It really ought to have been a very tough evening for Farage. And it certainly began that way. Every question he had from the audience was hostile, starting of course with one about him being “snarling, thin-skinned, aggressive”. Even if you’re not a fan – which I still am – I think it would be hard to deny how well Farage acquitted himself – never showing signs of umbrage taken, cheerfully getting his political points in a way that, ever so slowly, began to win the audience round and earn him some actual claps.

None of this would have been possible, though, without the unlikely support he got from his fellow panelists. Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt – most definitely not rhyming slang, on last night’s showing – led the way with some generous remarks. But what really clinched it was Brian May, who absolutely refused to pick on an easy target and instead took the opportunity to deplore the nastiness of politics in general and, by implication, the treatment of Farage in particular.

This, in turn, gave the audience the permission they needed to stop poking the chained up bear with their sticks.

If you haven’t watched it, you should. Question Time at its best. Almost restores your faith in human decency.

Almost.

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Climategate 2.0: Lawson squishes Huhne
  2. Free Speech is dead in Britain. I learned this on a BBC programme called Free Speech
  3. Sarah Palin totally gets it
  4. Most gay men have realised that the Oppressed Victimhood party is totally over

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

General Election: What Your Voting Choice Ssays about YOU

Here is a quick reference guide to the political types voting in the general election

LABOUR

You are: a millionaire thespian/stand-up comic/generic luvvie; a social worker; an NHS administrator; a Quangocrat; a civil servant; an Islamist entryist; a school teacher; an activist; Owen Jones

You believe in: the NHS; social justice; hard-working families; Keynesian economics; the tooth fairy; the NHS; that the problem with socialism is that it’s never been tried properly yet; the NHS; equality; even if we taxed the rich at 100 per cent it still wouldn’t be enough; did I mention the NHS?

Favourite books: The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists; JK Rowling’s The Casual Vacancy

Favourite albums: oh, God, something by The Clash, I expect; or maybe D:Ream

You shop at: Tesco

PLAID CYMRU

You are: a Welsh social worker; a Welsh NHS administrator; a Welsh quangocrat;  a Welsh civil servant; a Welsh Islamist entryist; a Welsh school teacher (who teaches Welsh – so important for helping Welsh children get on in the world, knowing for example that gwasanaethau means motorway service station, which could come in amazingly handy if say they’re out of petrol on an Autobahn and they chance upon a Welsh speaking German); a Bard; a member of a male voice choir; something to do with Doctor bloody Who which every other employed person in Wales is these days.

You believe in:  “welshing” should be banned because it’s pejorative; the red dragon; the unalienable right of every Welshman, Welshwoman or Welshchild to enjoy – and take pride in – the worst healthcare anywhere in the British Isles or quite possibly the world; wind turbines; pylons.

Favourite books: The Mabinogion; Ivor the Engine; the collected works of Dylan Thomas; Red Dragon by Thomas Harris (Hannibal Lecter was Welsh, look you: played by our Anthony)

Favourite albums: The Best of Shirley Bassey; An Evening with Max Boyce; Treorchy Choir Vol. 3; Barafundle by Gorky’s Zygotic Mynci.

You shop at: Co Op.

CONSERVATIVE

You are: a hedge funder; something in the City; the head of a multi-national corporation; a lawyer; a head-hunter; an offshore wind investor; your job is to find imaginative ways to spend Britain’s eye-wateringly insane foreign aid budget; a Daily Mail reader; just scared, no terrified, of what will happen if Ed Miliband forms a coalition with the SNP and Nick Clegg.

You believe in: better the devil you know; that believing in stuff is all very well but we’re past all that nonsense, don’t you think, these days?

Favourite books: oh, you know, whatever is currently on the bestseller lists

Favourite film: Titanic

Favourite albums: something by the Beatles or the Stones, probably, it has to be really doesn’t it?

You shop at: Waitrose; Sainsbury’s

SNP

You are: Scottish; angry; Scottish; a Scottish Islamist entryist

You believe/ believe in: the Saltire; caltrops; persistent spiders; woad; appalling beer; that the problem with fascism – sorry slip of the tongue there, meant communism – is that it has never properly been tried; that by destroying the landscape with wind farms you’ll drive last of the English settlers out; free further education and free healthcare all paid for by the English; using the phrase “Westminster government” and “privatised NHS” at every opportunity, as a substitute for coherent argument; keeping sterling after (inevitable) independence and using it much as the Greeks did the Euro; that an economy almost entirely dependent on London-funded welfare and wind farm subsidies will suddenly thrive after independence; the cheque’s in the post; deep fried pizza.

Favourite books: Mein Kampf; Trainspotting;

Favourite albums: Big Country; Texas; Arab Strap; Mogwai; Bay City Rollers; Rod Stewart

Favourite films: Trainspotting; Braveheart; Ring of Bright Water (especially when the honest, exploited Scottish labourer bludgeons the wee Sassenach otter)

You shop at: the nearest food bank

Liberal Democrats

You are: a teacher; a jellyfish; something in diversity/equality/[“dis”]-ability; professor of gender studies; a therapist; in therapy; in a mental institution; an Islamist entryist.

You believe: depends where you’re campaigning – if it’s a traditional Tory constituency, then obviously, roast beef, warm beer, lengthening shadows on the village green; if it’s a traditional Labour constituency, then the red flag, collective farms, bullets in the back of the neck for class traitors; and if it’s neither of the above, then sorting out that really nasty pothole on Fore Street, free milk and bananas for the primary school and more, subsidised equality and diversity and baking workshops at the village hall.

Favourite books: The Very Hungry Caterpillar; Arundhati Roy’s The God Of Small Things.

Favourite albums: Whatever the latest in the NOW series is – got to move with the times.

Favourite films: Love Actually; The Girl in the Cafe; The Boat That Rocked

Green Party

You are: an activist; a yoga teacher; an aromatherapist; you run an organic cafe/wholefood store/bicycle repair shop; a poi instructor; a festival caterer; you work for Greenpeace/Friends of the Earth; something in the “sustainability” industry;  currently working at McDonalds waiting to find a more suitable use for your much in-demand Environmental Sciences degree from the University of East Anglia; Dale Vince

You believe: The Earth has a cancer and the cancer is man; Paul Ehrlich’s predictions weren’t wrong, just his timescales; at this rate, all species will be dead by yesterday at the latest; meat is murder; climate change is the worst thing ever and people who deny it should be strung up with piano wire; Wir mussen die Juden aussrotten; bicycles are so lovely, aren’t they? And yurts, and coracles…

Favourite books: anything by Monbiot, he’s just the business.

Favourite albums: Whale Song IV; Dolphin Moods; Chumbawumba; The Levellers; Goa Krusty Trance Classix XVII

Favourite films: An Inconvenient Truth (duh!)

You shop: nowhere if, you can possibly help it. Far better to grow your own or barter. Otherwise Whole Foods.

UKIP

You are: pretty frustrated, right now

You believe in: Morris dancing; cream teas; sunlit uplands with no wind turbines on them; Agincourt; social stigma; grammar schools; Winston Churchill; Shakespeare; Morris Minors; warm beer and a cheeky fag; mowing the lawn; manners; pubs with horse brasses and shove ha’penny; Albion

Favourite films: Zulu; The Italian Job; A Matter of Life And Death; A Canterbury Tale; Where Eagles Dare

Favourite albums: Vaughan Williams’s English Folk Song Suite played by Neville Marriner and the Academy of St Martin in the Fields; Elgar’s Cello Concerto; Jethro Tull’s Songs from the Wood; Traffic’s John Barleycorn Must Die; Led Zep IV

Favourite books: Wind in the Willows (starring the Dear Leader as Mister Toad); The Rats by James Herbert.

You shop: at Aldi and Waitrose.

Read more at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. The date of the General Election is:
  2. General Election 2010: My mate Dave…
  3. Face it, the right are going to lose the next UK general election. Unless…
  4. The global economy is collapsing. The solution is not more media studies graduates
Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations