Jonathan Chait and the End of Liberal Society in the West

/45 Comments/in , /by

The Charles Hebdo affair presents a difficult dilemma to liberals and the left in general. Typically, they have no problem with censorship of views they don’t like. They jump on board campaigns to fire college professors for publishing about race differences or White dispossession, and they shed no tears when some poor soul in the media gets fired for blurting out something about Jewish power in Hollywood. They would love for such people to go to prison.

But they want to think of themselves as principled and high-minded. So what to say about the murderous attempt to shut down Charlie Hebdo?

Here’s what Jonathan Chait says in New York magazine:

Let us stipulate for the sake of argument that Charlie Hebdo is crude and even racist. Freedom of expression is not a strong defense of crude, racist, or otherwise stupid expression. Indeed, one of the most common and least edifying defenses made by people who have proffered offensive opinions is that they have the right to free speech. The right of expression is not the issue when the objection centers on the content.

This last comment—that “the right of expression is not the issue when the objection centers on the content”— reflects Chait’s intellectual arrogance about the dogmas of liberalism — that for example,  there is no such thing as race, but if there is, genetic differences are irrelevant to average group differences in IQ or any other trait important for success in the contemporary world, etc. From his point of view, these dogmas are set in stone and massively supported by scientific data. So it’s perfectly legitimate to exclude people who dissent from these dogmas from having any voice in the mainstream media, and exert pressure to get them fired them from their jobs or put them in jail.

And Chait, as a prominent contributor to the elite media, is well aware that he is in a great position to do exactly that.  Read more

“This Comment Has Been Removed”: Charlie Hebdo, The Guardian and Free Speech

/37 Comments/in /by

Liberalism is not so much an ideology as a psychiatric condition. How many ordinary Whites have been murdered, raped or injured for life by Third World immigrants in the past fifty years? Who knows? Who cares? Certainly not the Guardian. But dead left-wing cartoonists – now that is serious. In response to the massacre in Paris, the Guardian sternly and resolutely organized a conference of its finest windbags. This was the line-up:

At the We are Charlie event, organised in response to the attack in Paris that left 12 people dead, a panel of writers discussed why the French magazine had been targeted and how other publications should respond. Chaired by Guardian columnist the Rev Giles Fraser, it featured former Le Monde editor and Guardian leader writer Natalie Nougayrède, Observer columnists Nick Cohen and Henry Porter, cartoonists Steve Bell and Martin Rowson and Guardian writers Sunny Hundal and Shahidha Bari. (We are Charlie: ‘freedom of speech needs to be strongly defended’, The Guardian, 9th January 2015)

I count two non-Whites and at least two Jews, Giles Fraser and Nick Cohen. So the panel was chaired and numerically dominated by people from groups that don’t identify with or care about native White Europeans. When Cohen wrote about the Charlie Hebdo massacre in the London Spectator, he didn’t mention mass immigration once. But he did mention “white racists” and note that a “religion is not a race.” Plainly, then, he supports Britain’s “hate-speech” laws and doesn’t believe in free speech.

As far as I know, the panellist Steve Bell isn’t Jewish. He’s just a deluded White liberal who draws self-righteous and unfunny cartoons for the Guardian. His response to the disturbing reality of the Hebdo massacre was simple. He pretended that it wasn’t there. Laughter bends gun-barrels. The presence of millions of Third-World non-Whites in the West doesn’t matter, because liberals can magic their pathologies away with bad cartoons. That’s what Bell obviously thinks. Read more

Garron Helm vs. Charlie Hebdo: Elite versus non-elite mechanisms for censoring public discourse

/84 Comments/in , /by

Here is a sobering thought.  How many of those left-wing defenders of free speech who stood to remember the victims of Charlie Hebdo also condemned the PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans against Islamization of the West) anti-Islamification rallies in Dresden over Christmas?  How many would have supported the counter-rallies in which the German government is doing so much to encourage?

What would the reaction of those same people have been if the targets had been members of anti-immigration Front National or any other right wing or nationalist group.  We know the answer because of their reaction after the murders of Dutch anti-Islamisation campaigner Pym Fortuyn and film-maker Theo Van Gogh; sneers, contempt and an undisguised glee that the right-wing had got what it deserved.

And what of the victims themselves?  Indeed they were in many ways caricatures of the antifa campaigners who would go to the barricades to preserve mass immigration and the end of France.

Take Stéphane Charbonnier, the editor of Charlie Hebdo, and one of the victims. He is of a kind you can find in every White country in the West.  A dedicated “antifascist” who occupied a crucial opinion-shaping position in the French media.  In fact, as Joshua Bonehill points out,  everybody killed in the attacks today would have almost certainly have been anti-White and left-Wing  and there’s a great irony behind that as well.

Another victim was cartoonist Georges Wolinski who had a strong Jewish identity and whose work appeared in a number of left-leaning publications besides Charlie Hebdo, including Liberation (which has agreed to allow Charlie Hebdo to use its offices in the wake of the murders). Read more

Murdered for telling jokes

/52 Comments/in , , /by

Two immediate consequences of the Paris massacre are already clear — one is that, as usual our political leaders are completely baffled as to why Muslims would act like Muslims and carry out such a horrific crime  in the name of their religion.  Who on earth could have predicted such a thing?

But the second is more interesting. None of the normal evasions and rationalisations trotted out by our leaders on these occasions can do anything to obscure the reality of what has happened.

Twelve people killed in a European capital for the crime of telling jokes. No one can say they were not real Muslims or still pretend that Islam is a religion of peace. It is far too late in the day for that. Nobody can say it was “lone gunmen” with possible mental health issues whose motives were a mystery.

Of course they’re crazy, but it’s a craziness that is quite common among Muslims in the West. And the craziness that hostility to such cartoons is all the fault of Western disrespect rather than Muslim intolerance is supported by large percentages of Muslims in the West and even larger percentages in Muslim countries. We have to suppose that large percentages of Muslims are quite comfortable with the Paris massacre. Tell me again, why are Western countries importing Muslims in droves?

Read more

Nick Griffin on the Paris Massacre

/33 Comments/in , /by

By Nick Griffin as posted on the British Unity Facebook page, with permission.
See also the statement of the Alliance for Peace and Freedom, edited and expanded by Nick Griffin.

Kalashnikovs, mass murder and fears of a YouTube beheading in the heart of Paris. France is already in shock as the news of the CharlieHebdo Massacre sinks in. But the shock waves will also be felt all over Europe, and in Britain, as people grasp the enormity of what has just happened.

This wasn’t a criminal gang attack. It was a well-planned and ruthlessly executed assault by a highly trained military commando. It is likely that at least the ring-leader has military experience – either gained in the French army or fighting in one of the proxy wars against Arab nationalists that began when the USA, Britain, Israel and France promoted the so-called Arab Spring and then trained, armed and provided air cover for the ‘rebels’.

This is the first real example of ‘blow-back’ from that criminal lunacy, but it will definitely not be the last.

“When I used the term ‘vicious, wicked faith’ back in 2004, the BBC and British state tried to put me in prison for it,” says Nick Griffin.

“But in the wake of the revelations about the gigantic scale of the sexual grooming scandal, of the mass murders and sexual enslavement of non-Sunnis in Iraq and Syria, and in the light of this multiple execution for the ‘crime’ of publishing a cartoon, will any of the liberals who condemned me then STILL deny that it is the perfect description of the brutally aggressive strain of Sunni Islam that has infected so many young Muslims?

“More recently, after my visit to Syria in June 2013, I published a video interview with a captured Islamist in which he said that the aim was to bring their Jihad to Europe. “The Christians – they are the real target” he told me quite openly. Read more

Denmark: Tone of debate makes immigrants want to leave

/33 Comments/in , , /by

During the 2012 U.S. presidential election, Mitt Romney was roundly criticized for suggesting the common sense policy that illegal immigrants would deport themselves if there all the goodies were taken away — work, driver’s licenses and any public benefits, etc. Now it turns out, it may be even easier than that if Denmark is any indication. Just create a negative environment. From “Tone of debate makes immigrants want to leave“:

Immigration, and particularly Muslim immigration, is a perennial issue in the public debate in Denmark [but not in Sweden, see below]. From calls to make it harder for people from Muslim countries to enter Denmark to pleas from business leaders to change the way the nation discusses its newcomers, immigration is constantly under discussion.
But for some immigrants, it has become too much. An opinion poll of Danish-Turks residing in Denmark revealed that three quarters of them have considered leaving Denmark altogether to escape the negative debate about immigration.
In the poll, conducted by the magazine Opinionen, three out of four respondents said that they are either ‘strongly’ or ‘somewhat’ considering leaving Denmark for Turkey. And for nearly half of those who are thinking of leaving, the debate on immigration and Islam was cited as a primary reason. …
Inger  Støjberg of the Venstre party, who had suggested “that Denmark should make it harder for people from Muslim countries to enter the country, said the negative tone that surrounds immigration is immigrants’ own fault.”

Read more

Power and Perversion: Leon Brittan, Greville Janner and Britain’s Establishment Abuse Scandal

/18 Comments/in /by

Here’s a word that deserves to be better-known: cratology. It means the study of power. Who has power? How is it exercised and extended? How is it protected? These are dangerous topics, because one way to protect power is to forbid criticism of the powerful. The best scientists win Nobel prizes. The best cratologists win opprobrium.

Their insights can be applied right around the world. For example, a scandal is brewing in Britain about sex-abuse allegedly committed by powerful men from politics, law and other public institutions. In the early 1980s, a maverick Conservative MP called Geoffrey Dickens gave a dossier of alleged establishment paedophiles to the then Home Secretary, Leon Brittan. This may have been rather like giving a rabbit to a python. The rabbit would disappear. The dossier certainly did. And guess what? It is now widely alleged that Brittan himself was part of the so-called “Westminster paedophile ring” (Westminster refers to parliament in general, i.e. elected MPs, appointed Lords and government officials).

These allegations are unfortunate for Britain’s Jewish community, of which Brittan, now sitting in the House of Lords, is a prominent and widely respected member. Even more unfortunately, allegations are also swirling around another prominent member of the Jewish community, a man who might be described as Britain’s “Mr Holocaust”:

Police were blocked from arresting a high-profile Labour MP suspected of child abuse more than 20 years ago, it was claimed yesterday. Greville Janner, now Lord Janner, was interviewed by appointment as part of a major inquiry into attacks on boys at Leicestershire care homes in 1991.

The prominent politician and campaigner, who represented Leicester West, was accompanied by his solicitor and did not face charges. Detectives had taken legal advice from a senior lawyer on the rare and potentially controversial move of arresting the serving politician. This would have given them the power to search his home and offices, as well as taking his fingerprints and other evidence.

But sources close to the case told The Times [of London] that at the last minute the planned arrest was blocked. It is not known by whom. Arrangements were made instead for Lord Janner to attend a police station by appointment with his solicitor, Sir David Napley. … Lord Janner, now aged 86, faces more than 20 allegations of historic abuse at children’s homes, including claims of rape and sexual assault. They suspect he used his hobby as a magician — he is a member of the magic circle — to get close to his victims and gain their trust. One man said he was seven-years-old when the politician visited his care home and left him ‘scarred for life’ by sexually assaulting him. But in an unusual move, police have not interviewed Lord Janner under caution or arrested him over the damaging allegations.

This is despite searching his home in Golders Green, North London, and Parliamentary office during the course of their nine month inquiry. It is believed that the Labour peer’s poor health, he suffers advanced dementia, has prevented officers from speaking to him [compare the Jewish businessman Ernest Saunders, who miraculously recovered from Alzheimer’s after using the condition to leave jail early after a financial scandal]. A partial file of evidence has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service, which is providing the police with ‘investigative advice’. Yet, some fear Lord Janner’s rapidly failing health could lead to him escaping prosecution. He has strongly denied the allegations against him in the past. …

Lord Janner, who represented Leicester North West and then Leicester West for 27 years, was made a life peer on his retirement from Parliament in 1997. The father-of-three, whose wife of more than 40 years died in 1996, became a barrister in 1954 and was appointed a QC [Queen’s Counsellor] in 1971. He is associated with a number of Jewish organisations, having served as president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews from 1978 to 1984.

He chairs the Holocaust Educational Trust and is vice-president of the World Jewish Congress. The Labour peer is described on his website as ‘a key international figure in efforts to seek compensation and restitution for Holocaust victims.’ (Police to probe why arrest of Labour MP Lord Janner over child abuse accusations 20 years ago was ‘blocked’, The Daily Mail, 9th August 2014)

Read more