Gender Fascism

Homosexuality and the Slippery Slope...

"Ian Baynham was a respected civil servant holding hands with his partner in Trafalgar Square when Ruby Thomas, a privately educated schoolgirl, launched a vicious attack on him. Screaming homophobic abuse, the drunken 17-year-old was part of a group that knocked Baynham to the ground and stomped on his head until he was dead. Yet Thomas was only charged with manslaughter and will be free in three years. The sentence is an outrage. So why aren't the gay [sic] lobby up in arms? Could it be because they are too busy persecuting Christian guest-house owners who would prefer gay [sic] couples not to share a bed under their roof?" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 29 January 2011].

"Stonewall isn't a benign and benevolent gay [sic] rights charity: it is an offensive, bullying, intolerant and actively-persecuting organisation which pillories Christians and vilifies those who disagree with its political agenda. It is, by its own definition of the term, fundamentally 'bigoted', and those who sponsor its abhorrent intimidation and harassment deserve to be duly tarnished for their ill-judged association" [http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/cardinal-keith-obrien-wins-stonwalls.html].

"Nobody has been clinically diagnosed with homophobia. Not one. But if anyone accuses us of this we just say that we were born like it; it's in the genes and we have no choice but to be what we are. We might also say that we have been for therapy and counselling to get rid of our homophobia but this made us so depressed that we felt like committing suicide. But we now realise that God created us homophobes and we are coming out, confident and proud. The truth has set us free indeed. Hallelujah!" [comment at: http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2012/08/06/the-tolerance-brigade-lexicon/].

"We believers are told that we must pray for our leaders and especially for our Prime Minister... But... when David Cameron crosses the line and defies God by telling God He has got it wrong and sees fit to re-define marriage (which is in truth one woman united with one man, Holy Matrimony) then his days are numbered unless he repents" [UKIP, Christian Soldiers, Issue 1, 2013, p10].

"This is what happens when marriage becomes about the emotional and sexual wants of adults. Divorced from the needs of children for a mother and a father committed to each other for life. Polygamy was outlawed in this country because it was demonstrated, again and again, to hurt women and children. Sadly, when marriage is elastic enough to mean anything, in due time it comes to mean nothing" [Russel Moore, Southern Baptist Convention, quoted at http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2013/12/17/polyperversity/].

Feminism and its Most Unfeminine Offspring

"...the shocking case of Chloe Tebay, 18, who was dancing at Applejax, a nightclub in Chorley, Lancashire. A fellow clubber, Laura Lewis, out celebrating her birthday, turned to Chloe and said: 'I don't like the way you are dancing.' Before she could respond, Chloe was knocked to the floor and Lewis smashed her right foot into her face, breaking her nose. Chloe was unconscious and some other clubbers were spattered with her blood. Lewis was arrested, spent the night in the cells and was released in the morning after receiving a caution, as it was her first offence. Within hours of getting home, Lewis was on her Facebook page telling her 800 followers: 'Broken nose and WHAT had a sik (that's Chav-speak for 'good') birthday.'..." [Kelvin MacKensie, Daily Mail, 14 April 2012]

"I was hauling a two-year-old in a buggy down some stairs at the station last week as a gaggle of teenage girls pushed past, swearing at each other like murderers on parole. A torrent of four-letter words turned the air blue. ... 'For f***'s sake, there's a little kid there,' one of the teens said to her friend, suddenly contrite. 'Yes, tone it down, girls,' I said, ... 'Sorry miss,' one of them said meekly. 'She's drunk[!]. She don't normally talk like that.'  A likely story. But intriguing. So some teenagers do realise that they're not supposed to swear. Let's hope they won't be reading J.K. Rowling's The Casual Vacancy, published to great fanfare this week. ... The novel has what my children call 'bad grown-up words' on every other page. ... it's a self-righteous piece of liberal propaganda. ... I am truly sick of seeing the sort of four-letter words that J.K. Rowling spouts like sparks from Voldemort's wand. They're becoming every-day chit-chat" [Viv Groskop, Mail on Sunday, 30 September 2012]

"Today the rebellion of women against male domination is well under way among the intellectual classes; but among the general public it is by no means so far advanced. Nevertheless, the ferment has started to work. Among its manifestations is a determined, dignified insistence by women that they too have a right to be ordained to the priesthood. This idea has sent shudders through the Establishment of the Christian Church. One of the objections raised to the ordination of women has been that priestesses were associated with the old faiths of paganism and that their reappearance in the Church would somehow be a step backwards towards these faiths. This idea is, of course, quite correct, except that pagans would deny that it was a step backwards" [Doreen Valiante, The Rebirth of Witchcraft, 1990, p. 181]

"In addition to misrepresenting sex, porn is reducing women to objects. And children. It shocks me that after all these years of women screaming about their feminist rights, they allow their little girls to reduce themselves into whore" [comment at: http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2012/11/28/attacking-our-children-in-schools/]

"Don't look like trash, don't get drunk, don't be sick down your front, don't break your heels and stagger about in the wrong clothes at midnight. This is bad. I promise it is better to look after yourself properly ... don't be sick in the gutter at midnight in a silly dress with no money to get a taxi home because somebody will take advantage of you - either rape you, or they'll knock you on the head or they'll rob you" [Joanna Lumley, speaking at M&S campaign launch, quoted in Mail on Sunday, 27 January 2013]

"All religions are agreed that when women behave badly, it signifies the end of civilization, which also of course is why most feminists deeply hate religion, except [for] the sick feminist pagan kind [of religion], which glorifies women and makes out God is a woman, 'a divine feminist'." [comment by J. Wilks, at http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/03/we-fuss-over-mothers-then-tell-them-to-dump-their-children-in-baby-farms-and-go-back-to-work.html].

"Fighting and killing an enemy in close combat is not a right nor an opportunity... It is a gut-churning, traumatic, incredibly tough job" [Colonel Richard Kemp warns against putting women soldiers into frontline combat roles, Mail on Sunday, 11 May 2014].

Marriage, Family, Children, 'Child's Play'

"The current Left-inspired practise of going to great lengths to shield [children] from experience of failure and to tell [them] only good things about themselves is an appalling preparation for life. In adulthood, the vast majority of people are going to have to reconcile themselves to mundane jobs and no more than mediocrity in achievement. Illusions of themselves as 'special' are going to be sorely disappointed" [http://edwatch.blogspot.co.uk/]

"ITV's poignant record of several real lives began 49 years ago with Seven Up! and has now reached 56 Up. Hardly anybody can watch this account of disappointed hopes, redemption and human fortitude without tears. But what makes me saddest of all is to see the faces of the original children. You don't see seven-year-old children with faces like that anymore. The innocence has already gone. How did we let that happen?" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 20 May 2012]

"Once, there was a world without teenagers. Literally, 'teenager', the word itself, doesn't pop into the lexicon much before 1941. That means that for all but this most recent period of history, there were children and there were adults. Children in their teen years aspired to adulthood; significantly, they didn't aspire to adolescence. Certainly, men and women didn't aspire to remain teenagers. Today, turning thirteen, instead of bringing children closer to an adult world, launches them into a teen universe. And due to the hold our culture has placed on the maturation process, that's where they're likely to find the adults. Most of us have grown up - or, at least, grown - into this new kind of adulthood, this perpetual adolescence so much the norm that it's difficult to recognize it as the profound civilizational shift that it is" [http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx]

"Men, Protect Your Daughters!  Picture this: Some 17 year old snot nosed punk comes over to take out your daughter, and you say, 'No you aren't worthy of her.'  Immediately everyone is up in arms over your 'judgmental' and 'harsh' position, and for 'breaking your daughter's heart'.  Ok, so let's put it another way now: You have a beautiful, brand new $200,000 Ferrari Testarossa in front of your house, and a snot nosed 17 year old punk comes over to take it for a spin. Would you hand him the keys? See, what your problem is, is that you value a car more than your daughter" [Dr. Voddie Baucham at http://solasisters.blogspot.com/2012/01/men-protect-your-daughters.html]

"Many would argue that Barbie-type dolls are not sexy, but the real world says something else. It is very common in men's prisons and military barracks to find Barbie dolls in various stages of undress sitting in prominent places. It is a kind of hands-on pornography which they seem to find very gratifying. Did you know that some of Barbie Dolls' biggest fans are middle age men? Somehow, parents are badly deceived, and their children are the victims. ... It is a healthy and natural instinct for little girls to love babies and to imagine themselves in the role of loving mother. Role-playing is preparation for the future, but there is absolutely no similarity between playing baby dolls and playing Barbie dolls. They are two different kinds of dolls with two different purposes. What are you training your little girl to be?" [http://nogreaterjoy.org/articles/barbie-dolls-or-baby-dolls/].

"[B]y the time they are 14, only two-thirds of British children will be living with both their parents in a stable family environment. ... the coalition has actively undermined the traditional family ... the family is the greatest institution known to man. Strong families produce responsible, aspirational, self-reliant citizens. Strong families are potent bulwarks against totalitarian and over-mighty states. Strong families provide their own welfare, education and personal care systems" [Note from Bayith: Precisely the reasons, of course, why governments undermine the traditional family] [Daily Mail Comment, 29 December 2012].

"A newspaper puff for the TV snob opera Downtown Abbey says that the character Lady Mary, whose 'husband' was killed off in the Christmas episode, will be 'coming to terms with her role as a single mother' in the new series. See how language is twisted to hide the truth? The correct expression is 'widow', which you may have noticed we don't hear so much any more. Lady Mary, ... did not have a child outside wedlock. She was married. This matters. One of the great triumphs of the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s was to deny the importance of marriage. The expression 'unmarried mother' was abolished, and replaced by 'single mother'. But a widowed or deserted wife's position is and always be utterly different from that of a woman who deliberately has a child outside marriage. The difference is a moral one, and that's what the revolutionaries want to abolish - morality" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 15 September 2013].

"Our opium is our children. Ours is a culture not of ancestor worship but of descendant worship" [Tory MP Rory Stewart, Mail on Sunday, 27 October 2013].

"The BBC last Tuesday got excited about two reports - one said that attitudes towards sex had become much more 'fluid' - or, as would once have said, more promiscuous. In short, lifelong faithful marriage is dead. One impartial BBC commentator openly expresses pleasure at one aspect of this report. The other document said that gang-infested neighbourhoods are now seeing levels of sexual violence as bad as those in war zones. Girls as young as 11 are being raped. Sue Berelowitz, the Deputy Children's Commissioner, complained that many simply would not accept that this was happening, warning there was a long way to go 'before the appalling reality of sexual violence and exploitation committed by children and young people is believed'. There's also a long way to go before people (especially the BBC) will see any connection between the state-sponsored destruction of strong married families, and the growth of gangs and the cruel exploitation of the young and weak. These follow naturally from our moral collapse" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 01 December 2013].

"All modern Western politicians enforce tax, social and welfare policies that have almost destroyed lifelong, faithful marriage. They are especially brutal to marriages in which the parents actually bring up the children, instead of farming out the job to paid strangers. Nowadays, such arrangements are an eccentric, costly lifestyle choice adopted only by the old, the unfashionable or by the very rich. So what's hypocritical about ... France's President Hollande? [He's] only doing what [he is] urging and helping everyone else to do. It would, of course, be different if [politicians] headed governments that gave real incentives for marriage, and which penalised the unmarried. But they don't. So it's not. The real hypocrisy of modern times is the way that candidates for high office like to pose as members of ideal, smiley nuclear families (the nanny, of course, is always left out of the pictures). Maybe this is a true image of their private lives. ... But it's a completely false picture of their policies - the mad, giant subsidies for fatherless homes, the irresistible pressure on mothers to go out to work five minutes after the midwife has cut the cord, the divorce laws rigged against the innocent. They should openly live the cruel, inconstant, child-unfriendly lives they force millions of others to follow. And if they're not prepared to do that, and to let their children suffer the consequences, they should change their policies" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 19 January 2014].

"Heard for the first time, 'partner' as a verb. An expert on housing, on the radio, explained that people were buying houses later in life because they were 'partnering' later. Not long ago, she would have said 'marrying'. Not long in the future, nobody will say 'marrying'. It matters" [Pater Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 13 April 2014].

The State as Parent: The 'Collective' / Schools & Teachers / Social 'Services' & 'Family' Courts

General

"Marx and Engels considered that the nuclear family was one of the main obstacles to Marxism and they therefore, in their revolutionary zeal, counted it as one of the principle enemies to be destroyed or undermined. Since the 1930s the Frankfurt School's Cultural Marxism, and its 'march through the institutions', has been seeking to achieve this end by the Fabian tactic, not of outright revolution, but of wearing us down, bit by bit, in the hope that we will give up and that the family will then fall. This is the real drive, apart from materialism, behind getting woman to abandon the home and to deposing the man from his responsible role as head and breadwinner. ... The attempt in Scotland to appoint 'named persons' for every child is one of the latest attempts to achieve this goal by appointing what is really a State Intruder into the family. They want to corrupt our children at school with 'sex education' and 'citizenship' lessons - really promiscuity and class war - and then provide the conditioned child with an anti-family 'champion' in the home! ... All these moves are part and parcel of a horrendous Marxian package. What did the Jesuits say about giving them the child and they would give us the man. We need to be ever vigilant about all of these related threats. Above all things the child needs protecting from the State!" [Letter to British Church Newspaper, 20 September 2013, p.9].

"David Cameron's new plan to spend millions of pounds on parenting classes makes me wonder what country we're living in. ... Learning how to care for your child used to be passed down from one generation to the next - mother to daughter - and, in many decent families, it still is. But the mothers Cameron hopes to educate are those who have no family to speak of. Given council houses as soon as they produce a baby, living on benefits their entire lives, with no father of their children in sight, they rely on the State as a surrogate family - with taxpayers picking up the tab. So having paid for their accommodation, schooling, healthcare and the food on their tables, now the PM is asking us to pay again to teach them how to be half-decent parents.  However well-intentioned, these classes are just a sticking plaster to hide the real problem: that far from being a lifeline for such women, our welfare system is trapping them in countless numbers in a continuing cycle of poverty and underachievement. When a baby is seen as simply a substitute for earning a living, is it any wonder that too many mums don't know how to talk to their children? Many of them are little more than children themselves. And at the root of the problem is the fact that successive governments have eroded all support for marriage - the most stable and successful way to raise children. Terrified of seeming to favour one type of family over another, David Cameron still refuses to fulfil his promise to promote marriage through the tax system. That is shameful political cowardice - especially given his utterly gratuitous support for gay [sic] marriage. Surely the most important lesson his government could and should teach is not how to change a nappy, but how children fare better when raised within a stable and loving two parent family with marriage at its core" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 18 May 2012].

"It Takes a Village..."

"We must remove the children from the crude influence of their families. We must take them over and, to speak frankly, nationalize them" [Instructions given at a congress of Soviet educators in 1918, cited in Sheldon Richman, Separating School and State: How to Liberate America's Families, p.xv, quoted at: http://freedominourtime.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/nationalizing-children.html].

"When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side', I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already. ... What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.'" [Adolph Hitler, speech given 06 November 1933, quoted at: http://godfatherpolitics.com/10298/hitler-said-it-first-the-children-belong-to-the-community/].

"This new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing" [Adolph Hitler, 01 May 1937, quoted at: http://godfatherpolitics.com/10298/hitler-said-it-first-the-children-belong-to-the-community/].

"[The Soviet family] is an organic part of Soviet society. Parents are not without authority ... but this authority is only a reflection of social authority. ... In our country he alone is a man of worth whose needs and desires are the needs and desires of a collectivist. ... Our family offers rich soil for the cultivation of such collectivism" [Soviet family theorist Anton S. Makarenko, The Collective Family, A Handbook for Russian Parents, 1967, pp.xi-xii, p.42, quoted at: http://freedominourtime.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/nationalizing-children.html].

"If we want to talk about equality of opportunity for children, then the fact that children are raised in families means there's no equality. ... In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them" [Dr. Mary Jo Bane, in Dolores Barclay, The Family: It's Surviving and Healthy, in 'Tulsa World, 21 August 1977, quoted at: http://freedominourtime.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/nationalizing-children.html].

"Ever since Plato, the idea of capturing the hearts and minds of children has fascinated social planners. ... Hilary Clinton summarised the attitude well when she insisted Americans 'have to start thinking and believing that there isn't really any such thing as someone else's child'. In her book, It Takes A Village, she reveals that babies of all classes are born in a state of crisis so profound that immediate state intervention is required. They need immediate aid from the 'helping professions' [aka the Child Snatchers'] since even wealthy parents feel stress and 'we know that babies sense the stress'. If ever there was a utopian goal for government, the elimination of parental stress must be it. Like so many progressives, Clinton seems ignorant of how her ideas might come across to people who don't already agree with her. For instance, those with a memory of Orwell's 1984 might be disturbed by her idea that the government should mount giant television screens wherever 'people gather and have to wait'. The screens would play, on a continuous loop, official instructions on how to care for your children. Across the Western world, the politically correct micro-managing of daily life continues to intensify. ... In Australia last month [Dec 2008], a local government ruled that its beaches must be cleansed of sharp seashells that might cut children's feet" [Jonah Goldberg, Daily Mail, 04 January 2009].

"Bring up the child in an atmosphere of a widely developed Socialist family" [Alexander Kollontay, People's Commissaire, Decree: Child Welfare, 2nd Principle, Department for Safeguarding Motherhood and Infancy, 31 January 1918].

"We have never invested as much in public education as we should have, because we've always had a kind of private notion of children: 'Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility.'  We haven't had a very collective notion [that] these are our children.  So, part of it is, we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognise that kinds belong to whole communities.  Once it's everybody's responsibility and not just the household's, then we start making better investments" [Melissa Harris-Perry, MSNBC host, 'Lean Forward' on YouTube: All Your Kids Belong to Us, 04 April 2013].

"[Melissa] Harris-Perry thinks that, after they're born, children fundamentally belong to the state. ... the notion of collective responsibility for children was a philosophy that undergirded the Cultural Revolution in Communist China under Chairman Mao. I bring that up because, as you may recall, another Harris-Perry 'Lean Forward' spot contains a reference to a 'great leap forward', which calls to mind the disastrous agricultural reform plan which starved millions of Chinese to death in the 1950s" [Yazchat at YouTube: All Your Kids Belong to Us, 04 April 2013].

"When liberals say, 'It's everybody's responsibility', they really mean it's the State's responsibility to be paid for by everybody. ... When a liberal says something about 'making better investments', we have to automatically assume that the government - the State - must involve itself in the life of children so they are taught so-called Progressive ideals, with money confiscated from working families and implemented by the State" [http://godfatherpolitics.com/10298/hitler-said-it-first-the-children-belong-to-the-community/, 09 April 2013].

“’Increasingly, decisions about our children’s wellbeing are being taken out of our hands. Not just education, but sex, health, lifestyle, even political life is taught to children by people outside the home.’  That is the nature of the New World Order. You can’t build a new society without first dismantling the old one and to do that you need to destroy the family unit and take control of the children” [Comment at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/stuart-walton-care-plan-sees-dystopian-future-arriving-early-1-2922270].

Pavlik Morozov...

"Ever since Plato, the idea of capturing the hearts and minds of children has fascinated social planners. Mussolini cast himself as 'schoolmaster' to the nation, while in the Soviet Union a prize was given by the State in honour of a boy who informed against his mother and father. Late last year [2008], a British energy company created a website to teach children how to become 'climate cops' and turn in their own parents" [Jonah Goldberg, Daily Mail, 04 January 2009].

"It is the mark of a truly authoritarian regime to recruit children to nag out-of-tune parents or to spy on disobedient citizens. ... ruthless governments, from the Soviets to Chairman Mao, cultivated zealous little police-kids: because childish minds are easily moulded to accept political orthodoxies. In Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four it was 'almost normal for people over 30 to be frightened of their own children' because they were 'ungovernable little savages' who spied for the Party" [http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/2577151/as-orwell-warned-children-now-spy-on-adults/].

"Mobilising children to police their parents' behaviour used to be something you only found in totalitarian societies. I grew up in Eastern bloc Hungary and I remember children being encouraged to tell teachers if their parents listened to rock'n'roll" [Frank Furedi at: http://www.prisonplanet.com/state-brainwashing-children-to-re-educate-their-parents-for-green-dictatorship.html].

"The secret police of Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu recruited thousands of children aged 12-14 to spy on their school friends, parents and teachers, according to communist-era archives. At the height of the dictatorship, a staggering 15 per cent of the country's informants were children. They were encouraged to report anyone who expressed a political opinion contrary to the status quo or those who merely made a joke of Ceausescu" [http://www.infowars.com/scotland-every-child-to-have-state-guardian-from-birth/print/].

"Is the Scottish government also taking cues from George Orwell's 1984? In the dystopian classic, 'children who turned in their own parents as traitors' are treated as heroes by the party" [http://www.infowars.com/scotland-every-child-to-have-state-guardian-from-birth/print/].

"In the old communist countries, the regimes also encouraged denunciations by children, who usually had little idea what would follow. In Soviet cities, until 1991, there were statues of a little monster called Pavlik Morozov, who turned his own parents in to the secret police for hoarding grain. Schoolchildren would be marched to these shrines of evil and told to revere his memory. And yet the 'Conservative' Party is proposing to write childish denunciation of parents into the law of the land this summer..." [http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2014/04/get-ready-to-go-to-jail-your-children-will-denounce-you.html].

Social 'Services' and 'Family' Courts (aka Professional Busybodies / the Child Snatchers)

"British social worker evil ... is neither negligent nor random. It follows exactly the pattern you would expect to see from the Marxist-orientated indoctrination they get in social worker school - where the middle class is seen as the enemy and the underclass is seen as virtuous. So social workers are lightening fast to take children away from normal decent parents on the basis of minor or imaginary infractions while turning a blind eye to gross child abuse by the underclass" [http://pcwatch.blogspot.com/].

"UKIP's opposition to multi-culturalism was cited as the reason why the two foster carers in Rotherham were banned: why should not the opinion of conservative evangelicals about male headship in the family also fall foul of social workers? ... there is a variety of factors that make for good parenting, ranging from the moral to the relational to the psycho-emotional. But ... the conservative evangelical conviction that children need to grow up with the love of a married father and mother and that the man and the woman each bring their own distinctive God-given contribution to the nurture of children makes for excellent parenting. The idea that fathers are the servant leaders of their wives and children also leads to a responsible, hands-on approach to family life by conservative evangelical men. In a society devastated by fatherlessness, who would complain about loving, leading fatherhood, unless they were motivated by socially Marxist dogma?" [http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/ukip-foster-carers-banned-could.html].

"How long will it be before one must be a card carrying member of the Labour Party before one may foster or adopt?" [comment at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2238374/Ukip-row-Its-foster-family-bigots--multicultural-thought-police.html, 26 Nov 2012].

"[T]he affair of the UKIP foster parents, ... give[s] us an insight into the intolerant fury of the modern left-wing mind. ... I am surprised that so many people are surprised, and see it as an individual case or scandal that can be corrected. No, this is simply what Britain is now like. Get used to it. It isn't going to change. Most such cases never get into the papers and never will. Look at the Prime Minister's own long-ago dismissal of UKIP members as (amongst other things) 'fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists'. Rotherham Council's social services department and Mr Slippery both share more or less the same view. Despite what they now say, I should think the front benches of all three 'centre' parties, and the senior editorial staffs of the BBC and several newspapers do so too. They are closet bigots. ... the left have increasingly embraced the racial determinism that (to their credit) they rejected back in the 1960s. Those who once saw the racial categories of national Socialist Germany, or later of Apartheid South Africa, as sinister and offensive, have now adopted the most elaborate schemes of racial categorisation ever seen. You cannot apply for any sort of state service, let alone employment, without being confronted with questions about your ethnicity (I always refuse to answer these, but how much longer will this be permissible?). ... There have been dozens of attested stories about fair-skinned, middle-class, conventionally-married heterosexual couples facing insuperable problems over being allowed to adopt or foster, especially if they gave any sign of having socially conservative opinions, or of adhering to the Christian religion. Since the reasoning, informed human being knows that ... what matters about someone is not the colour of his or her skin, but the content of his or her character, these questions, and this behaviour are grotesque insults to reason. And surely bigotry is just that, the denial of reason, the refusal to use it, the dismissal of people, institutions, ideas on the grounds of a reasonless prejudice" [Peter Hitchens, http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2012/11/who-are-the-bigots-now.html, 27 Nov 2012].

"The Bill to increase the powers of the Child Snatchers reminds me of Ronald Reagan's remark about the most terrifying sentence in the English language: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help you.'  I believe in Scotland there are plans to give every child at birth a state guardian to supposedly watch over its interests. Even Hitler and Stalin did not go so far. The question should be asked: are people who are just prepared to hand over their freedoms so easily worthy of it in the first place? History is replete with examples of peoples who could not hang on to the freedoms their ancestors bequeathed them" [reader's comment at: Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 06 April 2014].

Schools and Teachers

"The 6-year-old boy who was suspended from school because his parents refused to fill his lunch box with tofu, lettuce, carrot sticks and wheaten bread as per the school's dictatorial 'healthy eating' policy, preferring to give him a sausage roll, or scotch egg and mini cheddars or other snack type foods, how now been expelled from his school ... The school said: 'If we are faced with a situation where a parent threatens to send a pupil into school with insufficient food to sustain them throughout the school day, it is a risk we simply cannot afford to happen'.  This is the usual demonising, twisted doublespeak we have some to expect from the control freaks who are determined to take control of the upbringing of our children. This issue was not insufficient food, rather the parents did not conform to the kind of food the school decided should be provided. ... Welcome to the glorious fruits of the quiet, slowburn cultural marxist revolution in action" [http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com].

Absence from School

"Government indoctrination is essential to the maintenance of a compliant slave state. By interrupting the scientifically-designed process of brainwashing, you are subverting the state and potentially opening the possibility that non-standard worker units will infect the working population in years to come with ideas of independence, personal liberty, freedom of choice, and other disruptive concepts. This cannot be tolerated" [Comment at: http://my.telegraph.co.uk/schoolholidayfines/onsolar/1/unauthorised-school-absence-results-in-fines/, 23 May 2011].

"This is a very dangerous thing to do in socialist Britain. I expect the child catchers, I mean, 'health visitors' will shortly be paying a visit. Truly, with forced adoptions, secret courts, compulsory academic education (unsuitable for so many), you are merely suckling cows and emotional teddy-bears for the children of the Fatherland. They are not your children and haven't been for some time" [Comment at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/10414228/Scrap-term-time-holiday-ban-say-parents.html, 30 October 2013]. 

"Prosecuting for Telford & Wrekin Council, Carol Trigger told the court the family were warned they did not have permission [!!!] to go on holiday [Bayith emphasis]" [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540054/People-make-laws-dont-live-real-world-Anger-father-fined-600-taking-three-children-school-weeks-holiday-Greece.html, 15 January 2014].

"Such inflexibility is typical of a dictatorship, not a democracy"  /  "as soon as you register your child to the state, they become their property"  /  "These ridiculous bully boy tactics are becoming common in the UK, while real crime goes unpunished"  /  "This is a great example of the totalitarian state bullying parents and a reason why everyone should remove their children from the socialist incubators they call schools and teach their children at home. Alternatively, reclaim control of schools from the nasty state"  /   "If 'Big Brother' says something, you must obey. Otherwise the thought police will be on to you"  /  "And as everyone pontificates that Fathers should bring up their children the state chastises them at every turn"  /  "Welcome to communist Britain"  /  "Half the reason these kids are behaving poorly is because of being forced in to these desolate institutions and never getting to spend quality time with their families"  /  "The education system is already in a state, that's how governments like it. It's easier to control an uneducated population"  /  "This is not about the council protecting the children's (so called) education, it is about showing hard working, law abiding tax payers who is boss"  /  "If they were going on a sabbatical to Pakistan I doubt there would be a problem" [Comments at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540054/People-make-laws-dont-live-real-world-Anger-father-fined-600-taking-three-children-school-weeks-holiday-Greece.html, 15 January 2014]. 

"[This] shows just how far we have come in allowing the establishment to interfere in out lives, one week off from school will not destroy a child's life"  /  "State education exists within its own self-important ivory tower, believing all its own propaganda, convinced of its own righteousness, and signally failing to realise its role has changed from a means of bettering poorer children, to an instrument of an increasingly orwellian state. ... churn[ing] out befuddled 20 somethings with a mickey mouse degree, a 30k debt and very little idea of how to get through the rest of their lives. This latest incursion, by the courts no less, into a family taking a holiday is an absolute outrage! It's no surprise to me that the two families I've met who've chosen to home educate their children have some of the most well adjusted, loving and respectful (and bright) kinds I've had the pleasure of meeting"  /  "The sole aim of the education system is to churn out drones that conform. Its  purpose is to stamp out individuality. It would be too dangerous for the government if we were allowed to think for ourselves and do what we believe is best for our kids"  /  "Whose kids are they, their parents' or the Department of Education's? ... The children would have benefitted far more from a week in Greece than yet another week in HM training and brainwashing camps. [Real]Education has nothing to do with dogmatic adherence to the National Curriculum, which is all about dog training and control" [Comments at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/10574965/Couple-fined-over-term-time-holiday.html, 15 January 2014].

For much more on Education please also see here and here.  See also the Education section here.

Statism: Entitlements Culture & Welfare / Public Sector / H&S / NHS / Unions

The Welfare State and Entitlements Culture

"A safety net must always exist for those that need help ... but at the moment the state wants to control every aspect of a person's life" [http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/WhoWhy.htm (No Date)].

"[A]rguably the most devastating solvent of morality in Britain has surely been the welfare state and the culture of rampant entitlement and selfishness it has spawned, which have all but destroyed personal responsibility and concern for others" [Melanie Phillips, Daily Mail, 08 November 2011].

"Whether tax-avoidance schemes are moral or immoral, those involved in them are at least trying to hang on to their own money. Those who abuse welfare are spending  other people's money, taken from them by the taxman. And in many cases the cheats live alongside those they are cheating. ... Those who work hard resent seeing their money squandered in what sometimes appears to be a free-for-all abuse fund. Nobody objects to the existence of a safety net for those who really need it. But they are weary of the culture of entitlement. ... We cannot, as a country or an economy, leave welfare unreformed any longer" [Mail on Sunday, Comment, 24 June 2012].

"A Latvian single mother of ten on £34,000-a-year benefits demands a bigger council home. Linda Kozlovska arrived with three kids, four more joined her later and she's given birth to three here. In Latvia, she'd receive just £9.26 per child each month. She believes it is unacceptable that some of her children have to sleep on mattresses on the floor. Maybe she should have thought of that before she had them" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 22 September 2012].

"If you deliberately and openly injured yourself, for instance by breaking your own fingers, and made yourself unfit for work, would you seriously expect the taxpayer to keep you? Of course not. In that case, why are millions of pounds of my money and yours being spent on benefit payments to so-called 'alcoholics' and 'drug addicts'? Roughly 34,000 such people receive Employment Support Allowance, and more than 21, 000 receive Disability Living Allowance. ... why would they want to stop if they are told by society that their gross appetites are a disease, and they are paid unearned money because of their alleged sickness? This is an insult to the truly ill, whose problems are not their own fault, and who in many cases deserve more generous treatment than they actually get from the welfare state" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 11 Nov 2012].

"A Manchester housing association suggested to its tenants that, in these hardened times, it might be worth considering whether or not they could afford 'Sky TV, fags, booze and bingo'. This dose of common sense was met with predictable outrage from the hand-wringers of the Left, and the Association was duly forced to apologise for being 'deeply patronising'. One resident, Tracey MacDonald, even went on ITV's Daybreak to state: 'We get our benefits and we should be able to spend them on what we choose.'  She would do well to remember that our welfare system was designed as a safety net to provide the truly needy with a roof over their heads and food on their tables. Today, it's too often become a piggy bank that pays out for the lifestyle choices of the idle and ungrateful. Cigarettes, alcohol and satellite TV may be desirable, but are certainly not essential. Tracey should be the Tories' poster girl for the 2015 election - she makes Vicky Pollard look respectable" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 23 March 2013].

"For anyone who wonders why welfare reform is so difficult, here is the explanation. State handouts are taken for granted. They are viewed as an entitlement, equivalent to wages or property. In the eyes of the Left (and the BBC), to reduce them is not to give less, but to take away money that is the claimant's by right" [Mail on Sunday, Comment, 31 March 2013].

"A fascinating survey this week showed that 86% of members of the Unite union agreed with the government's new benefit cap of £26,000 a year. This figure proves what everyone apart from senior Labour figures knows - that hardworking people resent paying taxes so the unemployed next door can stay in bed all day. There was a second survey, too, which also concerned what Labour would patronisingly call its 'people'. It showed that of all the ethnicities in Britain, white young people as a percentage are least likely to apply to university. These two facts are linked: they show that too many youngsters have had aspiration knocked out of them by a welfare state whose ethos is now being rejected by the very class that successive Labour governments have sought to bribe with benefits. By stuffing sections of the working class with welfare under Blair and Brown, Labour has killed their work ethic and removed any determination to better themselves. The party has compounded this betrayal by appearing to do all it can to encourage family breakdown. One reason why children of Chinese and other Asian origins in Britain are so much more likely to end up at university is that those cultures have strong family values, of which the core is self-reliance. ... this is a terrible indictment of welfarism ... Labour has consistently destroyed and devalued educational opportunities for working-class people, whether by wrecking grammar schools, driving down standards in comprehensives or making welfare a substitute for work. The under-achievers should know who [is] to blame" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 27 July 2013].

"Since this is an era when many people are concerned about 'fairness' and 'social justice', what is your 'fair share' of what someone else has worked for?" [Thomas Sowell, quoted at http://americasvoicenow.org/the-mindset-of-the-left-part-i-ii-by-thomas-sowell/].

"I have never understood why it is 'greed' to want to keep the money you've earned, but not greed to want to take somebody else's money" [Thomas Sowell, quoted at http://americasvoicenow.org/the-mindset-of-the-left-part-i-ii-by-thomas-sowell/].

"No society ever thrived because it had a large and growing class of parasites living off those who produce" [Thomas Sowell, quoted at http://americasvoicenow.org/the-mindset-of-the-left-part-i-ii-by-thomas-sowell/].

"My politician of the year gong goes to Work and Pensions Secretary Ian Duncan Smith. despite being vilified by every hand-wringer on the Left - and having seen off Dave's attempts to sack him - IDS has done more to create social justice for the poor in this country than anyone since Aneurin Bevan" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 28 December 2013].

Health and Safety

"'I was brought up in a country where men risked their lives to save the lives of others. That was a period in our history that has almost ceased'.  Coroner Michael Rose, after paramedics refused to jump into a water-filled ditch in Somerset to save a man due to health and safety" [Quotes of the Week, Mail on Sunday, 21 July 2013].

NHS

"Nurse Caroline Petrie has now been let off, after at first being suspended, for offering to pray for a patient. But that is only because of the publicity. The important thing is that Mrs Petrie was not just punished for her Christianity, a faith regarded with increasing official suspicion and dislike. She was ordered to believe in another creed, or risk her career. After an earlier incident she was told that the 'Nursing & Midwifery Council code' states that 'you must demonstrate a personal and professional commitment to equality and diversity' and 'you must not use your professional status to promote causes not related to health'. these are amazing statements, both sinister and self-contradictory. She must promote Left-wing politics, but she must not mention Christianity. Equality (alias Marxism) and Diversity (alias political correctness) are contentious and highly political aims, not at all 'related to health'. yet she 'must' be personally and professionally committed to them. I am surprised that so little fuss has been made about this totalitarian rubbish. Who wrote it? I can't find out. How did it get there? By some anonymous 'process', apparently. Chirpy commissars known as 'Code Champions' are even now being recruited to enforce it in every hospital. This is slow-motion Stalinism, and by the time it has throttled free thought in this country it will be too late to stop it" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 7 February 2009]

"Who could not be moved by Ann Clwyd's tears over the awful death of her husband in a cold, cruel hospital? If this can happen to an MP's spouse, who is safe? Yet the hatchet-faced spokespersons of the nursing profession flatly refuse to see anything wrong with the 'graduate' revolution that turned a noble, selfless calling into a version of social work" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 09 December 2012]

"Fresh fears have been raised about the risks to patients posed by foreign doctors after it emerged that two-thirds of medics banned from practising have been trained abroad. ... of the 669 doctors struck off or suspended by the GMC in the past five years, 420 qualified overseas. ... 63% of foreign doctors working in the NHS are failing exams to become a GP..." [Mail on Sunday, 30 December 2012]

"After the urine-soaked and faeces-encrusted revelations from Stafford hospital (no doubt to be followed by more of the same soon), doesn't Danny Boyle's simpering Marxoid Olympics Opening Ceremony look even worse than it did at the time?" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 10 February 2-13].

"When this was still a free society, it was run by independent-minded, well-educated, confident people who knew what they were doing, took decisions and accepted responsibility. Now we are a cut-rate people's republic, as full of regulators, snoopers and inspectors as the old East Germany. We despise good education as 'elitism', are scared of rigour in training, ceaselessly undermine the authority of professionals, and prefer rules to initiative. That is why the NHS does not work. The excellent Left-wing journalist Jenni Russell, as capable person who you might have thought would be able to secure reasonable treatment, recently eloquently described the position. Admitted to hospital in an emergency, hoping she was at last in good, firm hands, she found instead that she was in the iron clutches of a moronic, bungling, obstructive robot. 'Nothing in my life has made me feel as helpless and uncared for as the week I spent in an NHS hospital as an emergency admission two summers ago', she wrote. She was denied drugs she needs. She was not fed. She waited seven hours for a bed. Her blood test was - dangerously - mixed up with someone else's. ... 'I spent my days in a state of frightened hyper-vigilance, frequently in tears, as one muddle followed another. ... it was not just me who felt impotent in the face of an incompetent system. The hospital staff, many of them very well meaning, told me they felt the same. None of them, ... had the authority or understanding to cut through the errors and make the organisation work.'  All MPs, doctors, nurses and journalists should read her account. Yet it will change nothing, because nobody will admit that the Left-wing dogmas tat have wrecked this country are wrong" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 21 July 2013].

"In Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, if I recall details correctly, remains of the deceased under the 'civilised' world's regime were similarly recycled to fertilise food crops or make nutritional supplements for the living human population. If man is merely an energy-plus-matter biological machine and nothing else, disposal of human corpses ultimately becomes no more significant an exercise than the disposal and recycling of their living relatives' and neighbours' weekly garbage. Instinctively, we should all shrink back from such a dehumanisation of humanity - such a dishonouring of the God after whose image and likeness we are created"   /   "This is the depths of utter barbarity and ignorance. An unborn person, whether an embryo, foetus, or about to be born, is a unique human being. It is different from its parents in that it has a DNA that is a mix of the two: it is not part of the mother's body. It is not something to be disposed of. It is high time that abortion was criminalised for what it is. It is incredible that such a level of ignorance of basic biology is so widespread"   /   "On what basis does health minister Dr Dan Poulter brand this as 'totally unacceptable'... That they were killed? That they were mixed with garbage? That they were incinerated? or That they were used to warm the hospital?" [Comments at: http://billmuehlenberg.com/2014/03/25/lets-kill-babies-and-put-them-to-good-use/].

"A Nigerian-born GP refused to treat an 88-year-old woman who fell down outside his practice because he was not 'first-aid trained'. He clearly didn't know the Good Samaritan doctrine, which decrees that all British doctors have legal indemnity if they treat a stranger in an emergency in good faith. How sad that, despite receiving years of medical training in Britain at our expense, Christopher Uwagboe was unable to find the compassion to look after a desperate old lady who, like millions of the elderly, had helped pay for that training through her taxes" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 27 September 2014].

The Trades Unions

"It was utterly predictable that Ed Miliband would renege on his promise to change the system whereby union members automatically opt in the fund the Labour Party. He now says it won't happen for five years and will apply only to new, not existing members. This, of course, is a man who owes his position to the union block vote and who refuses to publish the inquiry into vote-rigging in Falkirk. The corruption that permeates his party and Mr Miliband's serial failure to keep promises should be noted by anyone tempted to vote for him" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 07 December 2013].

Crime & Law Enforcement / Courts & Legal System / Surveillance / A Police State

"After 13 years of Labour party rule [the British police] have become highly politicized, with values that reflect the demands made on them by the political Left rather than what the community expects of them. They have become lazy and cowardly and avoid dealing with real crime wherever possible - preferring instead to harass normal decent people for minor infractions - particularly offences against political correctness. They are an excellent example of the destruction that can be brought about by Leftist meddling" [http://pcwatch.blogspot.com/]

"As for PC (not Police Constable, the other one) Plod's performance in this whole sickening case, they're just the BBC in uniform" [Comment at: http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2012/05/09/hammering-point-home/]

"Years of indoctrination by the liberal left have produced policemen with no sense of duty to protect the most vulnerable in society. Politically Correct police chiefs have no morals, no decency, no empathy. They are now driven by the fear of being labelled racist, apparently a far worse crime than racist gang paedophilia. ... The British police are now more than just a disgrace, they are a stain on the history of this country" [http://britishfreedom.org/video-muslim-rape-and-liberalleft-complicity/]

"The main purpose of the Crown Prosecution Service is to save money by pretending that crime and disorder are not as bad as they really are. That is why it is almost impossible to get it to prosecute anyone, unless you have clear, high-definition film of the crime actually being committed. Burglary? Why bother? Here's a crime number, if you can still get insurance in your postcode. Car theft? Happens all the time. Probably your fault. Assault? How about a caution? Drugs? Well, Chuka Umunna, the Shadow Business Secretary, reckons that it isn't news anymore that he smoked dope. So why would we trouble ourselves over that? In which case, why on earth did the CPS think it was worth spending heaps of our money on prosecuting Cinnamon Heathcote-Drury after a bizarre and faintly comical scuffle in Tesco, in which nobody was hurt? Could it be because her accuser was a Muslim who alleged she was a 'racist'? But now that a jury has thrown out this ludicrous case after 15 minutes of deliberation (God bless them), will anyone in the CPS be disciplined? [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 08 July 2012].

"Yet again newspapers refer to a lawless murder as an 'execution'. Please stop doing this. An execution is a just punishment for a heinous crime, and if we still had them, we'd have fewer murders and less violence in general" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 09 September 2012].

"...And then there's the bit about how Mr Mitchell 'said' he was the Chief Whip. Said? How could this officer not have known? When I worked at the House of Commons, in another age, the wise, calm, helpful constables who staffed the place made it their business to know by sight the name of every single MP, 630 or more, within a week of a General Election. If I were in charge of the police guarding Downing Street, I would get rid of any constable working there who could not identify by sight and without hesitation every member of the Cabinet. This episode will, I hope, rebound hard on those who seem to me to have abused their positions to make trouble for a Minister. They should remember who employs them, and who pays their wages. They are not paid to leak such matters to the papers. This is lawless personal spite, not law enforcement. If they really thought the law had been broken, then they should have arrested Mr Mitchell. Our police force has gone badly wrong and it's time it laid down its guns, sold its helicopters, removed its baseball caps and stompy boots, and went back to patrolling on foot - and on bikes. That's my 'policy'" [Pater Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 30 September 2012].

"Security was made for man, not man for security. The point of all these searches, gates, checks, X-rays and stupid questions is - we a re told - to keep us safe. So why is it that the people in charge of these systems act as if they were prison warders processing us for a ten-year sentence?..." [Peter Hitches, Mail on Sunday, 30 September 2012]

"Personally, I hope that the judge is not too hard on Detective Chief Inspector April Casburn, who seems to have rung up the papers in a moment of madness, and now faces prison for doing so. If this is enough to get a police officer locked up, then who shall escape? DCI Casburn was quite rightly appalled by the ridiculous celebrity-worship of the modern police. She saw how her colleagues were pathetically excited about meeting the actress Sienna Miller, to discuss her problems with phone hacking. These cases are so much more interesting and urgent than a bugled pensioner, or a persecuted and lonely family such as the late Fiona Pilkington and her daughter Francecca, whose miseries were ignored by police until Mrs Pilkington killed herself and her daughter in a blazing car" Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 13 January 2013].

"The dim 'police' officer who was so exasperated with Suzanne Dow's pleas for help that he emailed a colleague 'you just can't win with some people, can you?' is widely condemned. But he was only doing his job as it is now understood in the Land of Human Rights, in which the police are a sort of UN peacekeeping force mediating between victim and 'offender', not taking sides or being 'judgmental'. That would never do. Why, if we were judgmental, we might grasp just what a cesspool we have made out of our country, and do something about it" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 3 February 2013].

"A judge refused to jail a repeat-offending paedophile who downloaded hardcore images of children, as he was worried Mark Martin would have a 'hard time' in prison. Not half as hard as the poor children forced to perform these hideous acts to satisfy the perverted needs of men like him" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 6 April 2013].

"Wanda Maddocks was sentenced by a secret court to six weeks in prison, without even legal representation to defend her. Now we discover her brother Ivan suffered a similar injustice and was given a two-month suspended sentence. They were punished by the Court of Protection, which settles the affairs of those too ill to make decisions for themselves. Her and her brother's crimes were to take their elderly father, who suffered from dementia, out of his council-designated care home, as they were both fearful of the care he was getting. He later died there. What a crazy world when the human rights of villains such as Abu Qatada are more sacred than those of two children simply trying to protect their dad" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 27 April 2013].

"Once again, noisy promises to give us the freedom to defend our homes against burglars has been watered down. If the law protected us better, this problem would not arise. But with 633,000 burglaries a year - 29% involving violence - the police and the courts are failing the public. It is no good complaining householders and shopkeepers are 'taking the law into their own hands'. Whose is the law in the first place? If the state will not enforce it why should we not do so  in our own defence?" [Daily Mail Comment, 28 April 2013].

"Politicians who know the case for capital punishment is unanswerable will often wriggle out of supporting it by a trick. They will ask anxiously: 'What about hanging an innocent person by mistake? How could we have that on our conscience?'  Leave aside the fact that every murder victim is innocent, and that many now dead would be alive if we still executed heinous murderers. Note that nearly once a year, an innocent person is killed by a convicted murderer given a 'life' sentence but freed to kill again. The latest such horror is the death of Graham Buck, a valorous and noble man who went to the aid of a neighbour. That neighbour was being attacked by Ian McLoughlin.  McLoughlin, now back in prison, will, with a bit of luck, stay there until he is no danger to anyone. But you might ask why he was free, or even alive. In 1984, a court somehow ruled that it was 'manslaughter' after McLoughlin killed Len Delgatty, smashing his skull seven times with a hammer, cramming his body upside down into a cupboard and ransacking the house for money. He was out of prison in five years. The judge pretended to sentence him to serve ten. Even that was reduced to eight years on appeal. Can these judges sleep? Three years after his release, he was sent to prison for 'life' for stabbing Peter Halls to death. Then some genius allowed him out on day release, so freeing him to murder Mr Buck. Innocent deaths all over the place. And I promise there will be more. But none of them causes our compassionate, conscience-stricken politicians to regret their abolition of the gallows, or reconsider it. Funny, that" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 27 October 2013].

"The Court of Protection was set up in 2007 as a product of one of Labour's most contentious laws. The court, which was introduced by the Mental Capacity Act, can force people to stay in care homes or hospitals. It decided who controls the money of people who can no longer handle their own affairs and judges have the power to make life-or-death rulings about withdrawing treatment. At first, ministers said the Court of Protection should hear cases in public. But since autumn 2007 the court has operated in routine and almost total secrecy. Earlier this year the Daily Mail exposed the case of Wanda Maddocks, who was secretly imprisoned for five months for repeatedly trying to release her father from a care home. After the Maddocks affair, judges ruled that no one should be jailed without being named or having details of their offence published" [Daily Mail, 03 December 2013].

"The Royal Marine who shot dead a wounded Taliban prisoner pleaded for anonymity to protect his family from revenge terrorist attacks. This request was denied by our most senior judge, Lord Thomas. He ruled that to conceal the identity of the decorated war hero Sergeant Blackman would undermine the principles of open justice. Yes, that's the same 'open justice' that secretly removed an unborn child from its mother's womb. What shameful double standards" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 07 December 2013].

"Seen in Sainsbury's, a small yellow notice warning that 'for the safety and security of our colleagues and customers, audio may be monitored and recorded'. We knew they were watching. Now they're listening too. Who would have thought that Big Brother would come into being among the yoghurt and the biscuits?" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 08 December 2013].

"Mr Justice Mostyn is the judge who, in the secret Court of Protection, allowed doctors to perform a Caesarean on a mother without her knowledge or consent, then immediately remove her child for adoption. Now he's ruled that a Bangladeshi woman who tried to murder her own child can remain in the UK on the grounds that sending her back to her country would violate her human right to a family life. What kind of warped country do we live in when a mother who has never threatened her child can be denied any rights, while one who tried to slaughter hers is given life-long access?" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 28 December 2013].

"A jury (God bless it) has taken 20 minutes to acquit a man who defended himself against a violent burglar - a case that should never have been brought to court in a civilised country. The Innocent man, ... had previously lost equipment worth £25,000 to thieves, crimes a proper police force would have prevented. He faced prison if convicted. The thieves... were fined £75. Did the jury know something the Government and the police don't know - or wont admit - about modern Britain? I suspect they did. No wonder juries are being quietly abolished" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 26 January 2014].

"Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, the beleaguered Commissioner of the Met, is utterly misguided to think the law should be changed to allow positive discrimination and the recruitment of more ethnic minority [police] officer. The public will have even less respect for the police if they think some officers are only in ht e job because of a politically correct appointment system" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 05 April 2014].

"One of the strongest arguments for hanging heinous murderers is that it is more humane than locking them up until they die. ... Now I read that a Belgian serial killer, Frank van den Bleeken, has won the 'right to die' under that country's laws which I suspect we will soon adopt. I don't think he'll be the last. I find this quite funny. Modern liberals lack the moral courage to defend the gentle with strong laws, so won't directly kill even the worst criminals. But the ludicrous twaddle of 'Human Rights', with which they try to replace Christian morals, allows them to euthanise the people they won't execute" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 21 September 2014].

The Armed Forces

"There is growing unrest about the plan to cut 20,000 soldiers from the Army - a fifth of the total - and 'replace' them by expanding the Territorial Army by 15,000. It costs far more to train reservists, and their employers are often reluctant to let them be away from their jobs for up to a year. Colonel Bob Stewart, the Tory MP who led UN troops in Bosnia in the Nineties, has said many reservists could not be deployed overseas. This being the case, why in earth does the Government think it is more important to use our overseas aid budget to give money to foreign dictators and tyrants rather than spending it to defend our country properly?" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 27 April 2013].

"[A] short insight into the daily grind of a working soldier in Afghanistan. Early morning, as couple of weeks ago, we found ourselves on the way down an ever-widening wadi. The murmur and gurgle of the stream alongside the dusty footpath we were on, was peaceful; it reminded me of home. Our eyes constantly flicked between the waist-high growth next to the water and the powder puffs of dust exploding from underneath our boots. We trained for this, the man ten yards in front of me, would look to the left and down, I would to the right and down; the man ten yards behind me to the left and down; and endless repeat that kept us alive. We'd gone about two clicks when a hoarse whisper from Mike, the full screw behind me, jerked me to a halt just as I started another step. 'Linc', he said, 'stop right there, don't move!'.  I froze with my left foot in the air, rocked back onto my right heel. My eyes flickered, I blinked, I can see again - for a moment back there, I'd gone blind from shock. 'That was an, IED, eyes on, call!' In front of me, behind me, the whole patrol had frozen; eyes darting around; like me, they waited. Sixty yards ahead, Pierce, our 'Vallon' man had turned around; he stared back at us with eyes as big as saucers. Scared s******s, paralyzed with fear, heart pounding like a trip hammer, I waited. I could feel a line of sweat trickle down the side of my face. Man, this is not good, if ever there was a bad call, this is it. Under the combined weight of the pack on my back and body, my right leg trembled. Thoughts raced through my mind. 'Am I standing on something, a trip wire underneath the sand, an IED I can't see, what? For f***s sake, come on Mike, I'm dying here!' There is a movement behind me, a soft footfall; I felt a nudge against my left thigh. 'Hold onto my rifle,' He said, 'steady yourself, then look down and slowly step back into the footprint behind you.' I took hold of the barrel, looked down; saw both at the same time. I was standing in between two IED pressure pads. So fresh was the plant that I could see where the mixture of covering sand and dust had sagged in on itself. In the slanted rays of the early morning sun, I could even make out the shapes below the sand. Even the brush marks were they carefully whisked the excess powdery camouflage dust away were clearly visible. The morning breeze that would have covered all the brush mark with dust hadn't started yet, thank God for that. We made it that time. ... As for 'Vallon' man; it wasn't his fault, I stepped outside his line of sweep" [http://www.damndunk.com/].

"I find it quite morally baffling that [Marine A] could get a ten-year sentence when someone like Baby P's mother only served a few years. If you put these people next to each other, the moral gap is huge. he has been given a longer sentence than some rapists and child molesters. People think he murdered someone in cold blood. But that person was a terrorist insurgent intent on killing British personnel and maiming them and, given half a chance, would do the same thing here" [Former Lance Corporal Matt Croucher, the most highly decorated Marine to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan, quoted at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2519606/Alexander-Blackman-Royal-Marine-murdered-Taliban-fighter-jailed-life.html].

"The Prime Minister says that Robert Graves's Goodbye to All That is one of his favourite books. Really? This clear-eyed account of the First World War makes it absolutely plain ... that British and Commonwealth troops frequently killed German captives after they had surrendered. Everyone knew. Nobody cared. So why is Marine [A] in prison for doing the same ... ?" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 26 January 2014].

"Since we have decided to join the air strikes on IS, can we please bring forward the defence review, scheduled for next year? The present, shrunken services were emasculated because of the ridiculous view that there was no likely threat to our country, and that it was more important to spend money on African dictatorships via our overseas aid budget. If Mr Cameron thinks the threat from IS is as lethal as he says it is, then he needs to put more money into defence. That's all there is to it" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 27 September 2014]. 

Education and Academia

"You can't make Socialists out of individualists - children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming, where everyone is interdependent" [John Dewey, Fabian Socialist founder of public education in America, quoted in Gena Suarez, What About Public School?].

"[M]oney went to promote John Dewey, Marxism, a One-World-Government agenda, and Socialism. The foundations (principally the Rockefeller and Carnegie) stimulated two-thirds of the total endowment funding of all institutions of higher learning in America during the first third of [the] 20th century" [http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/antiamericangroupspt2.htm].

"Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted. Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever" [Vladimir Lenin, quoted at: http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2012/11/30/losing-our-children-in-the-classroom/]

"My first experience of political correctness came in 1965. ... One morning during assembly at Luton Grammar School, the Headmaster coolly announced that for 'political reasons', the Grammar School was to close and was to become a Sixth Form College. As from the start of the next school year, all pupils would have to attend their local neighbourhood comprehensive. ... ever since I could remember, teachers and parents had been emphasising the importance of working hard and passing the 11+ which was the first step to getting a good education which would help you through life. ... On further investigation, I found out what the 'political reasons' were that the Headmaster had briefly alluded to. Apparently the local labour council had decided that streaming in education was 'elitist' and if a first class education was not available to all then, unfortunately all would have to settle for a second class education. This is a clear example of how PC always reduces standards" [http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/WhoWhy.htm]

"Successive governments have let educational standards slide dramatically rather than take on the left wing dogma that has invaded the classroom. Apparently teachers mustn't teach anymore as this is 'oppressive' and their function now is to be like a helpful friend to the pupils who will only learn what they want to! Rules, such as grammar apparently 'stifle the child's creativity and oppress them'. But common sense reveals that the reverse is actually true. Our language is a common medium through which we all communicate and to express ourselves clearly and unambiguously we therefore need a common structure. Programming a computer is the same - to get the desired result we have to stick to a syntax that the processor understands other wise the result will be a crash! When the child leaves school unable to read or write properly and applies for a job, the result is also a crash that leads to a life doing unskilled jobs or on the dole. So rather than oppressing the child, grammar actually liberates the child to be a free spirit armed with the means to make their own way in life [NB from Bayith: precisely the reason, of course, that the PC change agents don't want schools soundly educating our children!]" [http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/WhoWhy.htm]

"Even the famous Marxist Theoretician Antonio Gramsci ... was a deep opponent of 'progressive' educational methods.  He wrote: 'the most paradoxical aspect is that this new type of school is advocated as being democratic, while in fact it is designed not merely to perpetuate social differences, but to crystallise them.'  He rightly saw that 'progressive' methods were no help to the poor" [http://edwatch.blogspot.co.uk/]

"The NEA and similar unions worldwide believe that children should be thoroughly indoctrinated with Green/Left, feminist/homosexual ideology but the '3 Rs' are something that kids should just be allowed to 'discover'" [http://edwatch.blogspot.co.uk/]

"A small quote from the past that helps explain the Leftist dominance of education: 'When an opponent says, "I will not come over to your side," I calmly say, "Your child belongs to us already. You will pass on. Your descendents, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time, they will know nothing else but this new community.".'  Quote from Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 6th November 1933" [http://edwatch.blogspot.co.uk/]

"Nearly three-quarters of faculty members of U.S. colleges and universities describe themselves as liberals, and at elite schools, the proportion is 87 percent (7/05 Baptist Watchman). ... Business Week in 1981 said over 10,000 Marxist professors were teaching in U.S. colleges and universities" [The Calvary Contender, Sept-Oct 2005].

"The philosopher John Stuart Mill ... linked his call for the compulsory schooling of children to his distrust of parental competence. He believed that state-sponsored formal education might free children from the 'uncultivated' influence of their parents. He asserted that since 'the uncultivated cannot be competent judges of cultivation', they needed the support of enlightened educators to socialise their children. This lack of confidence in parents' capacity to develop their children led many nineteenth-century reformers to view formal education as the principle institution of socialisation. In the early twentieth century, educators and child experts sought to bypass parental authority through assuming more and more responsibility for the socialisation of young people. And since the 1990s, the once-implicit questioning of the ability of parents to socialise their children has become explicit, and increasingly strident" [http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/11067/]

"Ask an English child of 2011 about the iconic dates of English history such as Hastings, Blenheim and Waterloo and your chances of getting a correct answer are very small. Quiz them on who was Alfred the Great or ask them to describe the outcome of the Spanish Armada and the odds are that you will be met with blank stares. Pose a question relating to English geography such as the position of the Chilterns or the course of the Severn and a shrug of the shoulders is the likely outcome. Mention a Shakespeare play or a Dickens novel and childish eyes are wont to roll. Sadly, the modern English child is more likely to be able to tell a questioner about the Muslim festival of Ramadan than relate the story of Easter. They will know more of the geography of Africa (if they know any geography at all) than of England. On the rare occasions when they are told about England's history, it will only be in the context of the country's 'evil' past, with the Atlantic slave trade elevated to the status of the ultimate act of historical immorality and the Empire recounted as an unrelieved tale of the exploitation of native peoples. The upshot is that we have several generations of English children who have commonly left school with next to no meaningful knowledge of their own history and higher culture. That applies not only to those who depart education with a basic education at the age of 16, but even those who go on to university. Worse, their education is designed to leave them with, at best, a belief that thy have nothing to be proud of because they are English, and, at worst, that they should be thoroughly ashamed of the fact that they are English" [Robert Henderson, http://englandcalling.wordpress.com/2012/03/19/english-education-a-project-to-culturally-cleanse-the-english/

"English history and culture ceased to be taught in schools in any meaningful way from [the 70s and 80s] and the history of Britain and England was only discussed in order to constantly denigrate it for being oppressive, e.g. the transatlantic slave trade and colonialism are always promoted by left-wing teachers as examples of British history and how imperialistic and racist it is. This has created ethnic 'victim groups' in society who express an antagonism for the host culture, and it has damaged our young children who grow up with a sense of historic guilt and self-loathing for their country. Our children spend the best part of their early education feeling that they have no sense of place or history, no culture to be proud of as the cultures of those around them are promoted and celebrated and their own denigrated. To disinherit children of their heritage is one of the greatest crimes committed by the liberal/left elite in this country and surely one day they will be held accountable for this" [Matthew Roberts, http://britishfreedom.org/islam-in-education/]

"The ludicrous and sinister General teaching Council will soon doubtless be ensuring that all teachers spout the proper views on 'Equality and Diversity' - words that just happen to appear prominently in its PC new 'Draft Code' shortly to be imposed after the usual charade of consultation. I suspect that its real purpose is to be the educational branch of the Thought Police. To get the measure of this body, compare and contrast two cases that have come before it. First, look at its treatment of a teacher who admitted using crack cocaine and falling asleep in lessons. William Horseman will be allowed to carry on teaching children - maybe yours - though he will be 'monitored'. Then recall what happened when an experienced former teacher, Angela mason, went undercover to record the true extent of disruption and disorder in our classrooms, so doing the country an important service. She was suspended by the GTC for a year. So snorting crack cocaine gets you monitored. Telling the truth about schools gets you suspended. If you have ever wondered what the real priorities of our new Establishment are, this should give you a pretty good clue" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 21 February 2009]

"'Diversity missionaries' are being sent into [UK state] schools to teach children about bigotry, while teachers have to monitor incidents of alleged racial harassment.  Those schools that don't report any cases are told to put up posters raising awareness of racism.  So if their pupils aren't aware of what bigotry is, they soon will be.  Yet another pathetic example of an insidious grievance industry seeking out intolerance where there is none" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 31 October 2009].

"The true history of England is forever set in stone, ready and waiting to be found by those that seek it out. As long as there is left standing one true Englishman, holding steady and unwavering to the ever fixed mark. Then the ebb and flow of the tempest will froth and rage in vain" [comment at: http://englandcalling.wordpress.com/2012/03/19/english-education-a-project-to-culturally-cleanse-the-english/]

"Control over people requires quality and freedom to be discarded and sacrificed on behalf of compulsory indoctrination. For a state possessed by socialism, it does not matter if schoolchildren are not learning to read and write satisfactorily. What matters is to turn away children from parental sphere, authority and values in order to indoctrinate them directly into the state interests" [Julio Severo, quoted at: http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2012/09/05/homeschooling-under-threat/]

"Under Labour, poor standards in the classroom were masked by an Ofsted inspection regime which focused on 'healthy pupil lifestyles' and the way a school 'promotes equal opportunity'. To his great credit, Michael Gove swept away this ludicrous, politically-correct system, replacing 27 indicators with just four - teaching quality, grades, leadership, and behaviour and safety. The results, revealed yesterday, are shocking - with the rule changes leading to an instant doubling in the number of 'inadequate' schools. Overall, four out of ten are now rated satisfactory or worse. What a damning indictment of the way Labour placed its obsession with social engineering before educating children" [Comment, Daily Mail, 15 September 2012]

"Most parents and teachers still believe that critical thinking refers to factual, logical thinking. They have been misled. School fliers explain that it means teaching students 'to think for themselves'. It actually means the opposite; it's a psychological strategy for dismantling old beliefs and values and instilling new ones by limiting factual knowledge while encouraging myths, imagination, and group synthesis. Since it trades the traditional broad knowledge base for selected information that supports the new ideology, most students can easily be manipulated towards the preplanned outcomes" [http://www.crossroad.to/Books/BraveNewSchools/5-Earth.htm]

"Conservatives have long bemoaned liberal dominance in education from the universities on down, but we haven't done anything about it. Marxist intellectuals realized decades ago that the eventual victory of socialism would be assured if leftists dominated the educational system and used their influence to push a leftist worldview. The power of their 'long march' through the cultural institutions was that it was not necessary for students to consciously convert to socialist thinking; generation after generation would simply be gradually immersed in the assumptions and dogmas of the left" [http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/why_we_lost_the_republic.html]

"I ought to rejoice at the impending departure of the terrifyingly political-correctness enthusiast Dame Suzi Leather, from the Charity Commission. Her nasty chivvying of independent schools was hypocritical (she went to one, and sent her daughter to one) and destructive. However, the supposedly conservative Education Secretary Michael Gove has taken over her role as Commissar for Moronic Equality. Left-wingers all over Britain are still fawning and drooling over a speech that Mr Gove made recently in which he complained about private-school dominance of the professions, but failed to mention that this was caused by the destruction of state grammar schools by Tory and Labour governments" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 20 May 2012]

"Three, or possibly four, cheers for Michael Gove. Not only has he insisted - to the outrage of the teaching unions - that the children in primary schools should be taught times tables and foreign languages, but he has also proposed training teachers on the job in good schools rather than in Marxist-dominated colleges. It is precisely because those colleges are so useless that the teachers they produce are often incapable of teaching to a high standard. So when teachers protest about standards being raised, it is not because they fear for the children, but for themselves. They know they will be found out" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 16 June 2012]

"In any country undergoing political change, school history is deeply controversial. It shapes the next generation's views and thoughts for the rest of their lives. The battle over what should be in the history curriculum has now raged for more than 50 years, and most intensely since the Schools Council History Project of 1974, which ditched knowledge in favout of empathy. Many teachers have grown up with the vaguest knowledge of our national past, and history has been pushed to the edge of the curriculum. Good luck to Michael Gove in his battle to restore and reform it, but the task may be bigger than he thinks" [Mail on Sunday Comment, 30 December 2012]

"Children need to be raised again with a sense of Englishness, for far too long students throughout the schooling system have been instilled with cultural Marxism. We have reached a point now where it has become second nature for young adults to repeat unthinking Left-wing ideology that has been forced upon them by Marxist teachers. Anti-Englishness, State intervention, high-taxation, antagonisms towards the successful, mass immigration, multiculturalism, preference for the Other - are now seen to be good, right things, as they have been taught these things in schools"   /   "Having endured the 'education' system for the past 13 years I can safely say I have been taught more about Black Rights movements in the US than My own history of MY ancestors and MY country. Whenever any history of a British sort is taught it is done so with disdain and a sort of bitter resentment, as if we need to be ashamed of it. I realised this and have sought to educate myself outside of school, but many have taken in this indoctrination as truth and have been brainwashed into accepting the foolish left-wing concepts of Multi-culturalism and 'diversity'. It's about time things changed, but I fear it's too late. I am 17. I fear by the time I see my 30s my country will no longer be British. How is that right?"   /   "It would be impossible to teach the abolition of slavery without William Wilberforce"   /   "After 30 years of politically motivated National Curriculum, I would like to see the end of any party dogma dictating how our children are brainwashed"   /   "NuLabour socially engineered British success out of British history lessons and replaced it with left wing brainwashing. For ever a decade cultural awareness, immersion days, dumbing down and PC correctness [sic] put the British people second in the classroom. In addition, the left wing BBC brainwashed the children when they were not at school"   /   "So glad the force feeding of Politically correct figures in schools is to end. ... The tosh fed to school children recently would have us believe that we were 'saved' from being nasty Britis [sic] by these people. Our native British ancestors have contributed massively and positively to the modern world. Modern history as told in schools presently diminishes our national identity and achievements" [comments at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2254705/Gove-faces-war-equality-activists-axes-Labours-PC-curriculum-dropped-greatest-figures-history-lessons-Leaked-drafts-new-history-curriculum-emerge.html?printingPage=true].

"Yet again the top universities are accused of being unfair to state school pupils. This is upside down. The state schools are being unfair to their pupils, by refusing to select on ability, by insisting on watered-down comprehensive schooling and by failing to tell the young that they need to take the tougher A-levels to get into the top colleges. Why should good universities lower their standards to indulge this stupidity?" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 31 March 2013].

"Britain really is two nations now - the pre-1960s patriotic, Christian moral conservative one, and the post-1960s omnisexual, multicultural liberal one. The annual Social Attitudes survey does not show people changing their minds. Very few do, as it's rather difficult. It shows that younger people have completely different views from their elders on almost every major issue of life. So at some point - and this must be the first time this has happened in history - the older generation stopped being able to pass on their values to their own children. How was this done? Who was responsible? Was it an accident? My own view is that it was deliberate and sustained. Could it now be reversed? I rather doubt it" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 15 September 2013].

"This week's shocking revelation that British teenagers have dropped out of the top 20 international rankings in maths, science and reading is a devastating indictment of the education policies of the last Labour government. But it also offers a golden opportunity to Education Secretary Michael Gove to shake up the teaching profession. He should end the requirement for state school teachers to have a teaching qualification and let them learn on the job instead. And this would mean they escape the Marxist influences of so many teacher training colleges" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 07 December 2013].

"An article in Thursday's Mail by Robert Peal, a brilliant Cambridge graduate who taught history in a state school, was an alarming expose of the dire conditions in parts of our state education system. His new book, Progressively Worse, shows the damage wreaked on children by trendy educationists over many decades, leading to generations leaving school illiterate, innumerate and lacking in intellectual curiosity. Worse still, the minority of children who want to stretch their brains stand almost no chance of doing so. And yet, as we saw this week at the National Union of Teachers' annual conference - which looks increasingly like a Monty Python sketch about the Soviet bloc - a hardcore of Leftist teachers seem intent on destroying education standards. particularly worrying is their demented and irrational [sic] hatred of Education Secretary Michael Gove. Thankfully, there is talk of forming an alternative union to oppose the shamefully destructive NUT. I hope it succeeds" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 26 April 2014].

For much more on Education please also see here and here.  See also the Education section here.

History and Revisionism

Homosexuality

"Re-education occurs in the school curricula, which now include such treasures as Black History Month and Gay, Lesbian and Transgender History Month, where history is rewritten on the flimsiest (and even non-existent) evidence that national icons such as Florence Nightingale and William Shakespeare were homosexual" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, p. 17]

Slavery

"After two decades with some rather stunning successes, we took time to step back to evaluate our experience fighting to abolish slavery. Here's what we learned: A major flaw in the human rights community needs to be addressed. The history of the modern day abolitionist effort is a history of small, dedicated passionate groups of people, fighting slavers and slaving nations - while the large, well funded human rights organizations sat on the sidelines, or in the case of Sudan, actually hindered our work. I spent more than a decade unravelling why this was the case: how could the very people who led the fight against apartheid in South Africa turn their heads away from the plight of black slaves in North Africa who suffered much worse oppression? The short answer is what I have called, 'the human rights complex'. Briefly: Western rights groups consist mainly of decent white people who are motivated to fight evil committed by people who are like themselves. The vast majority of slave-owners are non-white. If human rights organizations are embarrassed to point out, much less fight hard against awful behaviour by non-whites, they cannot be counted upon to be an important force in a movement to abolish slaves around the world. Any effort to free the some 27 million people who are today in bondage, without addressing this human rights flaw, is destined to remain relatively small, no matter how heroic" [http://www.iabolish.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=188&Itemid=29]

"Compare the USA's short Colonial slave history to that of the history of Arabs (Islamic and Pre-Islamic) who colonized North and east Africa, who hunted, enslaved, tortured and killed Ethnic Africans for several thousands of years before the same geographical Arabs started/opened the slave trade to Colonial America who merely (in comparison) bought slaves for servitude. M.E. Arabs have a history of thousands of years of human slavery, which even continues today in the M.E.'s 'modern world'" [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJhSejBDTPI]

"Europe did not have a monopoly on slavery. Muslim traders also exported as many as 17 million slaves to the coast of the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, and North Africa. [Slavery was a] horrible, nasty trade in human beings. Who could disagree? Eventually it was stopped, not least because of the great work of a British man - William Wilberforce" [http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/slavery.htm]

Social Studies

"The fifth grade Houghton Mifflin social studies text called America Will Be ... includes a series of lessons that idealize Native American beliefs and lifestyles, then asks students the following 'Critical Thinking' question: 'The Creeks [Native Americans in the Southeast] and the Europeans had different ideas about how the land should be used. Compare the Creeks' ideas with those of the Europeans. Which ideas do you think are better? [Emphasis mine - EMcD] Explain your opinion.'  The Teacher's Edition shows the correct opinion, which is the predetermined outcome: 'Creeks believed land belonged to everyone and couldn't be individually owned. They believed in a respectful use of the land so it would continue to provide food and forest resources. Europeans believed that land was a commodity to be bought and sold and owned by individuals for their own benefit. They cleared forests to make room for farms to make a profit. Students who agree with Creek ideas might cite reasons such as this - clearing forests caused valuable topsoil to be blown away and a loss of trees that produce the oxygen people need.'  Since students reading these misleading suggestions usually receive negative information about European settlers and idealistic images of native American lifestyles, they are hardly equipped to resist the convincing conclusion. Committed to doomsday environmental scenarios that fuel the demand for a global government and earth-centered religions, educators hide the fact that Native Americans often burned forests to expand their cornfields and that 'forest growth in America exceeds harvest by a wide margin'." [http://crossroad.to/Books/BraveNewSchools/5-Earth.htm]

Statism / Capitalism / Collectivism / Society

"The creation of a vast State bureaucracy [in Germany, but also applied to in the Western world] had created an influential class of people who were, in economic terms, parasitic on capitalism (they were paid for out of taxes), but in social terms antagonistic to it; a class which was jealous of its own power, disdainful of the commercial classes (and later envious of their growing prosperity); a class of administrators and planners whose entire reason for existence was predicated on limiting the freedom which capitalism tends to encourage, and needs in order to flourish. ... The modern State did not arise in order to 'curb the cruelties' of capitalism. Far from it. It arose specifically to preserve the privileges of the existing ruling classes against the democratic, liberating, enriching and levelling forces of capitalism" [http://www.martindurkin.com/blogs/nazi-greens-inconvenient-history]

"In her malevolently-misquoted speech about society, Margaret Thatcher expressed her judgement very clearly. She said 'There is no such thing as society' and so suffered the hysterical wrath of Marxists, the left wing press, the BBC and the academic sociologists who make a fine living out of their worship of the abstracted concept 'society'. But she went on to say that we are individuals in families and in all kinds of benign associations and groups and that we have a responsibility to one another. In other words, Margaret Thatcher paraphrased that most hated thing, Christian morality..." [http://www.churchnewspaper.com/?p=32507].

"'The whole direction of politics in the last 30 years' [Margaret Thatcher] contested in 1981, 'has always been towards the collectivist society. People have forgotten about the personal society. And they say: "Do I count, do I matter?"'  It was a boldness of expression that led to her infamous 'no such thing as society' assertion to Woman's Own magazine in 1987. In fact, the phrase has been so taken out of context as to have had its meaning reversed. She was criticising those who did nothing to help other people by using the excuse that it was up to 'society' to do it. Her following sentence was, 'There is a living tapestry of men and women and people, and the beauty of that tapestry, and the quality of our lives, will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us is prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate.'  Far from being an ode to selfishness, it was an appeal for good neighbourliness" [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/margaret-thatcher/9991843/Margaret-Thatcher-never-forget-the-chaos-of-life-before-her.html].

Empire / Colonialism / Leftist 'Guilt'

"Whenever I read something like this, I am remind[ed] of this quote by General Sir Charles Napier: 'You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.'"  /  "After fifteen years of celebrating diversity in Blair's Britain, general Sir Charles Napier today would have been reduced in the ranks to Private Napier due to his lack of sensitivity to different but equally valid cultural choices, while letters criticising British 'Colonial Imperialism' would have appeared immediately in the Guardian. It's a brilliant quote. Someone should send it to Theresa May, together with a picture of a backbone" [comments at: http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2012/08/04/rural-pakistan-values-in-britain/].

"Personally, I am proud of the role that Britain has played throughout the ages in the cause of freedom. This is the nation that brought common law, democracy, industrialisation (which has caused a massive increase in life expectancy and quality of life) and good governance to billions of people across the globe. This is the nation that abolished slavery, that confronted political hegemony, that defied fascism" [http://tangentreality.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/rejecting-remembrance-day.html].

"[Nelson] Mandela began as a terrorist and never turned his back on monsters like Arafat and Castro, whom he considered brothers in arms. When he was released from prison by de Klerk, he showed unexpected statesmanship, counselling reconciliation rather than revenge, no small achievement in a country in which the 'liberation' movement (led by Mandela's wife and party) placed oil filled inner tubes around the necks of former comrades and set them on fire. But if a leader should be judged by his works, the country Mandela left behind is an indictment of his political career, not an achievement worthy of praise - let alone the unhinged adoration he is currently receiving across the political spectrum. South Africa today is the murder capital of the world, a nation where a woman is raped every 30 seconds, often by AIDS carriers who go unpunished, and where whites are anything but the citizens of a democratic country which honors the principles of equality and freedom. Liberated South Africa is one of the epic messes the Left created and promptly forgot about" [http://www.horowitzfreedomcenter.org/nelson_mandela_1918_2013].

For more on Revisionism please also see here and here

Redistribution of Power & Wealth / Foreign Aid / Corporatism, Capitalism, Politics of Envy / Oppressors, Victims / Affirmative Action / Double Standards / (see also the above section: Revisionism)

"At its most fundamental, political correctness seeks to redistribute power from the powerful to the powerless. At its most crude, it opposes power for the sake of opposing power, making no moral distinction between whether the power is malign or benign, or whether the powerful exercise their power in a way that can be rationally and reasonably justified. Eg (1) ... It is more politically correct for Hamas suicide bombers to deliberately kill as many innocent civilians as possible than it is for Israel to selectively kill the terrorist leader responsible for the wave of suicide bombers while trying to avoid the loss of innocent life because the Israeli government is [seen as] strong, and the Palestinians [seen as] weak; (2) America, as the world's most powerful country, can never do any good, even though it is ... the largest donor of overseas aid; (3) The West, as the world's most powerful cultural and economic group, can safely be blamed for all the world's ills, even though it is largely responsible for the worldwide spread of prosperity, democracy and scientific advance; (4) Multinational corporations are condemned as the oppressors of the world's poor, rather than seen as engines of global economic growth with vast job-creating investments in the world's poorest countries, pushing up wages and transferring knowledge. Conversely, political correctness automatically supports the weak and vulnerable, classifying them as nearly untouchable victims, irrespective of whether they merit such support or not" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, pp. 9-10].

"Automatically opposing the powerful and supporting the powerless means that, when presented with a new issue, the politically correct must decide not what is right or wrong, malign or benign, true or untrue, but who is the more powerful and who the less powerful. The PC analytical process enjoys the beauty of simplicity: (1) identify the victim, (2) support them and their interests, irrespective of any other factors" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, p. 11].

"[P]olitical correctness undermines the age-old incentive structure that has driven progress in society, whereby virtues such as hard work, discipline and education are rewarded with success and wealth, and lack of such virtues is punished by failure and poverty. ... PC rewards victim status, ... and scorns ... successful people who are deemed oppressors. By encouraging people to strive for the bottom rather than the top, PC undermines one of the main driving forces for progress in society, the individual pursuit of self-improvement" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, p. 45].

"PC tells the weak and vulnerable that it is society that is wrong and needs changing, not themselves. ... (1) If, ... someone is poor because they are lazy, ill-disciplined, addicted to benefits and resentful of those who aren't poor, then encouraging them to blame other people rather than emulating them, and supporting their self-inflicted harm through generous benefits, will in fact just perpetuate their poverty; (2) In the US, the widespread use of historical slavery as an excuse for failure ... may be emotionally comforting in the short term, but does nothing to help African Americans take what steps they can to improve their own lives; (3) Persistently blaming the West for many of the Third World's problems discourages Third World countries from facing up to the fact that many, and perhaps most, of their problems are self-inflicted. ... the key to development is largely in a country's own hands. ... Stressing the importance of aid and debt relief may reduce Western guilt, but risks diverting attention from the more important hindrances to development, which in the long run are bad governance, lack of rule of law, corruption, poor education, poor healthcare, excessive bureaucracy, socialism and distorted international trade laws" ... self-inflicted reasons need ... to be encouraged to copy others, rather than blame them, and they need their self-harming behaviour and attitudes to be challenged rather than comforted" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, pp. 45-48]

"Since victims are supported not because they are right but because they are vulnerable, critically questioning them is seen as attacking them, and those who do so are vilified as oppressors. In the world of PC, victims can say or ask for anything, not because they are right or deserve it, but because they are safe from public scrutiny or objection. the most overt racism, sexism and homophobia in Britain is now among the weakest groups, in ethnic minority communities, because their views are rarely challenged, as challenging them equates to oppressing them. PC's inherent contradictions make it largely incapable of resolving such objectively simple ethical problems such [sic] as the murderous homophobia of Jamaican rap singers or the cruelties of forced marriages. The ... government tolerates the numerically far greater animal cruelty of halal slaughter and bans the far less significant cruelty of fox hunting simply because the perpetrators of halal slaughter have victim status while fox hunters have oppressor status" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, p. 13]

"One of the most successful campaigns for victim status has been by Muslim groups in Britain, notably the Muslim Association of Britain, which increases its lout by ... accusing anyone who tackles its extremist Islamic agenda of 'Islamophobia'. Although it has a thoroughly oppressive agenda ... the MAB passes itself off as oppressed so convincingly that it has fooled the PC establishment, notably the Guardian, Independent and BBC, into promoting it unquestioningly" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, p. 43]

"Classifying someone as a victim or oppressor before considering the rights or wrongs of an argument is much easier if you divide humanity up into groups of victims, identified and united by their victimhood: ... It is only one step further from attributing group identities to giving people rights on the basis of those group identities ... If you are black or Asian, you may have a right to affirmative action ... Judging people by the group they belong to makes them ... less likely to be seen as individuals, responsible for their own destiny. it is, ultimately, not just patronising, but dehumanising and counterproductive" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, p. 24]

"Double standards: (1) countless groups, associations and publications based on ethnicity which would be unacceptable if they were working for whites; (2) Men are (still) openly legally discriminated against in terms of retirement rights that would be utterly unacceptable if it applied to women; (3) Although European slavery of Africans is endlessly commented on, the Islamic world's enslavement of Africans (and to a lesser extent Europeans) is rarely discussed; (4) Left-wing activists have campaigned hard and passionately against the [sic] Israel's occupation [sic] of the West bank, while being almost totally silent on the Syrian occupation of Lebanon, and pretty mute on the Chinese occupation of Tibet; (5) communist dictators, such as Stalin, are treated far more leniently than fascist ones such as Hitler ... [despite the fact that] communism ... was responsible for far more deaths than fascism" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat of Reason, pp. 25-26]

"We know why many of our leaders accept this double standard [appeasement of Islamic jihadists and condemnation of Western values and beliefs]. They have bought into John Lennon's juvenile utopia in which there is 'nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too'. Shorn of their transcendent, non-negotiable foundations, all our beliefs are now contingent and negotiable, easily traded away for security or comfort. At the same time, multiculturalism bestows on the non-Western 'other' a finely calibrated sensitivity to his culture and religion, no matter how dysfunctional or oppressive, all the while the West refuses to extend such consideration to its own. Why would it? Haven't generations of Western intellectuals and artists told the world how corrupt and evil the West is? Haven't they asserted, as Pascal Bruckner put it, 'every Westerner is presumed guilty until proven innocent'? Having culturally internalized this self-loathing and lack of conviction, we are vulnerable to those who are filled with passionate intensity about the rightness of their beliefs and the payback due to us for our alleged historical sins such as colonialism or imperialism or globalization. And then we wonder why the jihadist considers us ripe for conquest, and destined to be subjected to the superior values of Islam" [http://frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-thornton/the-futility-of-apology/]

"Economic freedom, which gave birth to capitalism, is the means by which people become politically free; it has been the flameholder of the promise for which people by the millions have left their native countries to seek freedom in the United States. What capitalism ultimately represents is an equal chance for all members of society to improve their own lives. Where we've gotten bogged down is in the socialist insistence that everyone deserves not equal opportunity but equal results. The Soviet Union demonstrated how eliminating competition and depriving people of the fruit of their labor destroys ambition and, hence, the quality of life. And yet that is what the Misery merchants would wish on the United States [and the UK]. It's time that we admit the failure of socialism and embrace the benefits of capitalism and competition. No, not everyone will end up at the top of the heap, but most of us will land in a pretty comfortable place. And because we Americans are a generous people, we take care of those who are truly unable to make it on their own. The least we can expect, though, is that everyone tries to participate, giving honest effort. Socialism has had its appeal because it offers, albeit falsely, an environment that appears to be safe and consistent. The free market does not offer those comforts; it demands constant effort" [Tammy Bruce, The New Thought Police, pp. 240-241]

"[W]ho pays for the NHS, the welfare system, the roads, the police, the fire service, the schools, to empty your bins, to light the streets? Capitalism does. Capitalism brings civilisation ... When you want to buy your house or a flash motor do you save up for twenty five years the money you make from your capitalist job? No... you borrow from the bank...which transfers money from the rich into your pocket as a loan...which you pay back but in the meantime you have a roof over your head for 25 years by which time you own the house. So 'redistribution' is a Capitalist idea...enabling you to live comfortable lives you couldn't afford otherwise and puts all that wealth to effective use" [http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2012/09/09/come-back-marx-all-is-forgiven-luv/]

"Why are we such cringing serfs about tax? Our money belongs to us. It isn't pocket money from the State, but our own. If they want it, they should prove they know what to do with it. What evidence is there that the Government, that incompetent waster, would spend money better than Starbucks? Who do you think would pay in the end, if Starbucks paid more tax - why, the customers. Even Leftist politicians are careful not to pay too much tax when (for instance) they inherit property. Leftie BBC journalists are fond of (legal) arrangements to keep their tax low. Why should coffee shops be expected to behave differently?" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 09 December 2012]

"A new poll reveals that three-quarters of people have no idea where out £8.8billion foreign aid budget goes - or even if it's well spent. And that's just the Cabinet" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 29 December 2012]

"...[T]he ballooning overseas aid budget ... is mainly used to buy arms, Mercedes-Benzes and finance shopping trips to Singapore and Paris for the wives of cruel African dictators" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 19 January 2013]

"We can only wonder how our troops greeted the news that the UK will soon be gifting £11.3 billion every year to foreign powers, while asking our Armed Forces to cope with further cuts and no fully-functioning aircraft carrier. ... seven out of every ten developed countries in the world have decided to slash their overseas aid, which they consider unaffordable at a time of such grave economic crisis. ... cut the international aid budget by half and give the money to our heroic Armed Forces. It is morally unsustainable that our soldiers die for a lack of resources while third-world dictators are given money to squander on their kleptocracies" [Comment, Daily Mail, 2 February 2013]

"I don't like [Red Nose Day] because people in this country, dressing up in pyjamas, baking cakes, giving £5, think they're doing something good and helping and things are getting better, when they're not. In fact, they are perpetuating the problem. ... I find it obscene that a bunch of white, rich celebrities can produce not even good comedy so that they and we can feel better about ourselves. Friday night was a bit like Christmas Day, hen we give presents to relatives we ignore for the rest of the year, except Red Nose Day is a day of giving to people we don't know and, in fact, don't want to know. It is imposed on us in exactly the same way: media saturation. This year there was even chocolate involved: ... We were shown film of celebrities and children who have raised money by being sponsored to do something entirely pointless. I have never understood the logic of sponsorship; you either care or you don't. Why someone has to walk the Great Wall of China in a bra to persuade me of injustice, I've no idea. We were treated to film of celebrities crouching among poor black people, who are always the victims. These black people are never filmed angry or articulate; they are always supplicant. ... [W]hen you go to these countries where children die of pneumonia or tetanus or malnutrition, you realise not just how damaging these charity-thons are, but how irrelevant and misinformed. Instead of [celebrities] explaining how £5 can inoculate a child, why not tell people why these countries are in the state they are in?..." [Liz Jones, Mail on Sunday, 17 March 2013]

Western foreign aid is quite often "an excellent method for transferring money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries" [Lord Peter Bauer, quoted in http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2013/09/18/christians-and-foreign-aid/].

"Since this is an era when many people are concerned about 'fairness' and 'social justice', what is your 'fair share' of what someone else has worked for?" [Thomas Sowell, quoted at http://americasvoicenow.org/the-mindset-of-the-left-part-i-ii-by-thomas-sowell/].

"I have never understood why it is 'greed' to want to keep the money you've earned, but not greed to want to take somebody else's money" [Thomas Sowell, quoted at http://americasvoicenow.org/the-mindset-of-the-left-part-i-ii-by-thomas-sowell/].

"The catastrophe in the Philippines should remind us what proper overseas aid is - an emergency fund to give as much help as possible to people who are victims of natural disasters. It is not an open chequebook to squander money on Mercedes-Benzes for African despots, to finance their wives' shopping trips to Paris or fund India to send a space mission to Mars. The British public's generosity in donating to Philippine disaster victims should prompt our Government to re-think its misguided £10 billion-a-year foreign aid programme" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 16 November 2013].

"As it's revealed Britain's on track to become the strongest economy in Europe, thanks to austerity measures which have seen us avoid the catastrophe brought about in other nations by unfettered State spending, it's worth remembering that a strong economy - and the jobs it provides - remains the best means of lifting families out of poverty. Or, in the words of one veteran campaigner: 'Commerce [and] entrepreneurial capitalism take more people out of poverty than aid.' His name? Bono. Funny how you never read that on charity billboards" [Amanda Platell, Daily Mail, 28 December 2013].

"Thanks to the foreign aid commitment to give a specific percentage of GDP to the Third World, the economic recovery means a larger amount of taxpayers' money will be on its way into the pockets of foreign despots. It's estimated another £1billion will be found - some of which will go towards their wives' shopping trips and new Mercedes-Benzes. It's the British people who should benefit from the proceeds of our country's economic growth. at the very least, the money ought to be spent on keeping in their jobs our brave troops returning from Afghanistan, rather than making them redundant" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 07 December 2013].

"Socialist politicians like increasing top tax rates mainly because they enjoy taking money from the well-off, and because it wins them easy support. It doesn't really matter to them if the change produces extra money for the Exchequer, which it often fails to do. Ed Balls's plan to restore the 50 per cent top rate is a promise to Labour's remaining core vote of class-war enthusiasts as well as a threat to entrepreneurs and high achievers. It is a dispiriting sign that Labour is once again ready to stir up ancient, dangerous and economically illiterate resentments to seek office. Mr balls knows that the pledge will lose Labour support among important opinion formers in the professions. But he is counting on old-fashioned envy to more than cancel those losses out. He thinks there is a widespread feeling that the better off have escaped unscathed from the recession, while the poor have suffered. Labour's leaders have also belatedly discovered that their record on immigration has made them nearly as vulnerable to UKIP as the Tories - and so they need to shore up their heartland vote with crude populist gestures. It will be a great pity if this works. It is cheap politics, but it is also expensive for the country, driving away talent, reducing the rewards for hard work. it is a sad lapse into short-term vote-catching irresponsibility, and a worrying sign that Labour, bereft of new ideas, is heading back to its pre-Blair days of envy and spite" [Comment: Mail on Sunday, 26 January 2014].

"In the past it was believed that Labour's tax raid on company retirement funds amounted to about £5billion a year - a devastating enough figure in itself. Yet now the Independent Office of Budget Responsibility confirms that the true scale of the state's depredations has been vastly greater. Figures released this week show that under Labour's 'reforms', the Treasury has seized a monstrous £118billion - an average of almost £7 billion a year - that would otherwise have cushioned retirement for hard-working savers. The result has been to lay waste to a system that was the best funded in the world before Messrs Brown and Balls got their hands on it. Indeed, until 1997 it promised almost half of company staff 'defined benefit' pensions, typically worth two-thirds of their final salaries. Now fast forward to 2014, when such schemes exist only in the public sector - funded, of course, by taxpayers in wealth-creating businesses, whose own miserly pensions (and retirement ages) have become a perilous guessing game. Indeed, this pensions apartheid is tearing our society in two. Yet Mr Balls still has his eye on private sector pensions as a rich source of revenue if Labour wins the next election. As he said in September, he is working even now on plans to restrict reliefs, so that the highest earning savers are taxed twice on their retirement schemes - once when they pay contributions in, and again when they draw money out. In their greed for cash to finance grandiose spending plans, Labour did hideous damage to our culture of thrift. Is Mr Balls determined to finish the job he helped to start?" Comment, Daily Mail, 26 April 2014].

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"
(Isaiah 5:20-21)

Quotations Page One   |   Quotations Page Three 

Political Correctness Articles Pages   |   Websites and Recommended Materials   |   Scripture References

The Front Of It (Chart)   |   The Front Of It (Documentation)   |   Bayith BTR Articles