Saturday - March 31, 2012

Same Tactics, Other Side Of The Pond

Peiper’s posting continues to be very light while he takes care of his ailing wife. So this post is pretty much his. I’m just writing on news clippings he mailed me; he found them first.

I got a packet in the mail from him the other day, another big envelope stuffed with newspaper clippings from the UK. Letters From Littleton I call them. Along with the usual snips of utterly gorgeous homes and Edwardian manors for sale for eye watering prices, colorful in depth reporting on Things British in the Sunday papers with wonderful pictures, and the latest crazy from UK’s never ending hit show Muslims Gone Wild, he stuffed in two essays on the twist the Progs put on daily life. More indications that we are all Breitbart, and that fighting the patently false meme they throw out is the only way to defeat them (the Brits pronounce that “Pay-tent-lee fullz” which is adorable).

Never bother to argue with a leftist. They start from a false premise, build up strawmen, wantonly use projectionism, and immediately devolve into ad-hominem attacks. Which means they debate like the smallest of children, and any parent knows you don’t waste your breath debating with little ones. Simply lay down the law and walk away, ignoring their tantrums.

From the first essay, here’s UK Telegraph author Simon Heffer cutting through the muck on the whole Gay Marriage thing. Interesting in that the same “issue” is over there, and the same bunch of progs are making exactly the same kind of infantile noise, with the same kind of implicit media support. Heffer is Breitbart. Heck, he was probably Breitbart before Breitbart was. Andrew didn’t invent the anti-meme meme. He just gave it a new face. It’s the same old fight, the never ending battle. The progs - I will never again grace them with the once-respectable label “liberal”, for they are not liberals at all, they are statists: socialists, communists, and tryrannists, and like the Australians I will not let them co-opt the term - push just about every single one of their causes and ideas from a false pretense. Cut away the lies and their house of cards falls; like their Emperor Teh Won, they too have no clothes.

The real bigots in the gay marriage row are the liberals

On Thursday, the Government launched a consultation on its plans to allow people of the same sex to be ‘married’ in civil ‘weddings’.

I use quotation marks not to denigrate the idea but because, like millions of others, I believe that the only people who should be able to marry and have a wedding are those of different genders. My opposition to homosexual ‘marriage’ is straightforward. The phrase is simply illogical — and no change in the law can make it otherwise.
...
We used to be a society where differing views were respected. I respect the views of those who support same-sex marriage, even though I profoundly disagree with them. I would not dream of insulting them or their beliefs. Indeed, anyone wishing to make the case against same-sex marriage must do so rationally. Calling its advocates rude names, or deriding their arguments, would simply weaken the case.

This view is plainly not shared by Lynne Featherstone, the Lib Dem MP who is Equalities Minister. She said the opposition expressed by prominent Christians to same-sex marriage was ‘homophobic’ and belonged in ‘the Dark Ages’. She singled out as ‘medieval’ the use of the term ‘heretic’ by a cleric to describe those advocating a change in the law. Miss Featherstone said her own views were, by contrast, ‘progressive’ and the Government’s policy was ‘loving’.

Such blinkered intransigence — indeed, I would go so far as to call it bigotry — does not bode well for the free, pluralistic society that liberals claim to believe in. And it makes a mockery of their much-vaunted virtue of ‘tolerance’.

Two things I generally adore about the British press: first, you actually need to be able to write well to get one of the jobs; second, they are not afraid to use their own language. “Dumbing down” simply is not done. This isn’t an article in the Times, it’s from the Daily Mail, the newspaper for everyman. Can you imagine seeing “blinkered intransigence” in the New York Post? I love it. But let’s get back to a proper bit of prog prodding:

My homosexual friends tell me that many of them are opposed to the planned law change, for much the same reasons as I am. One told me he thought they were ‘silly’, ‘patronising’ and ‘just designed to make a political point’. Therefore the majority of people — mostly silent — are being asked to accept a policy advocated by a minority, but which would have a serious effect on the nature of marriage.

The fact that the language used by those urging a change is intemperate only adds insult to injury.

The arguments of the mainstream Anglican and Roman Catholic Churches against same-sex marriages are well known. These are not pariah groups.

However, the language Miss Featherstone uses about them might suggest to the ill-informed that they are.

The slur ‘homophobic’ is designed, like ‘racist’, to shut down any argument — in other words, to censor debate. When a liberal such as Miss Featherstone calls someone ‘homophobic’, the implication is that person is prejudiced and holds views that are beyond the pale.

The truth is that ministers are all too aware of the widescale opposition to their policy (not just among clergy, but also among many reasonable people of faith and no faith), and have cynically decided to launch an all-out assault on their opponents.

Their weapons are abuse, vilification, unreason and moral blackmail as they attempt to silence, or at least cow, the opposition.

This is a shocking attack on freedom of speech.

Mr. Heffer is absolutely correct. The tactics used over there are the same ones used over here. “Intemperate”, which is a classy way of saying “poo flinging monkeys without a leg to stand on”. It is as if they all came from the same play book, some bit of manifesto somewhere, some set of rules for radicals. Hmm, ya think?? But such tactics are nearly universally applied to any of their causes. They are not at all limited to the gay marriage “controversy”, which itself is a lie: such a controversy didn’t exist for 5,000 years of human history, until just a couple years ago, when certain destructive factions felt they could get another kick in at that so-famous weak horse. The only way the progs win is by silencing all the other voices. And making you feel the outcast until you submit. Lan astaslem. I will not submit. Not to the progs, nor to the jizzlamics who use the exact same playbooks.

Now this assault on traditional conservative values is in full cry. Some argue that this is simply Mr Cameron and his friends trying to isolate and weaken his party’s Right-wing. Yet I fear there is more to it.

There is a sneering, disapproving tone used by Mr Cameron and his outriders against a wide range of conservative beliefs.

For example, those who protest against the exploitation of the taxpayer-funded welfare state by scroungers are dismissed as heartless. Those who want higher standards and the return of selection in education are regarded as divisive. Those who deplore the easy availability of abortion or divorce are dismissed as antediluvians.
...
The fact is that traditional conservative values are not a minority interest. They are instinctively held by millions of people of all ages, faiths, sexual orientations and classes in our society. Liberals, however, maliciously seek to stigmatise the values as evil. They do this because they cannot trump conscience by reason alone.

My only critique against Mr. Heffer is that I would have written “by reason AT ALL” instead of “by reason alone”, since the progs really have no honest reasoning behind their caterwauling.

Fight the meme. Lan astaslem.

Posted by Drew458     on 03/31/2012 at 01:45 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner