Race & Crime UK
Follow
Find tag "Teleghraph"
45.5K views | +28 today
Race & Crime UK
In association with Nationalist Media Network - Home Page http://britishnationalistreview.tumblr.com
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Nationalist Media Network
Scoop.it!

Just how dumb is Unite Against Fascism ?

Just how dumb is Unite Against Fascism ? | Race & Crime UK | Scoop.it

Just how dumb is Unite Against Fascism ? Having lobbied the government many times in recent months to ban marches by the English Defence League, it is now outraged that the Government has not only taken up this offer to squish the EDL but has pushed it further, by banning all public protests in five London boroughs for the next 30 days. That means both the Right-wing EDL and the lefties at UAF – and anyone else with a political gripe – are forbidden from marching in Tower Hamlets, Newham, Hackney, Islington and Waltham Forest any time in September. “This is a huge attack on everyone’s civil liberties”, bleats UAF, which is weird, considering that they’re the ones who invited the Government to undermine people’s civil liberties in the first place.
Theresa May’s blanket ban on all protests, following a request from the Metropolitan Police, is certainly outrageous, not to mention ironic, coming as it does just days after her boss David Cameron talked about his role in introducing political freedom to Libya. But UAF has no one but itself to blame for this extraordinary clampdown on the right to protest. For an apparently radical leftist campaign group, UAF is awfully fond of asking the Tory government to ban things – it has frequently demanded the outlawing of EDL marches, on the basis that they “spread fear” and might brainwash stupid working-class white people into turning racist. And when you cravenly invite the Government to play the role of in loco parentis in community life, to squish heated marches or protests on the basis that they might warp people’s minds and hearts, you really shouldn’t be surprised when it jumps at the opportunity. If you spend your every waking hour going cap-in-hand to the powers-that-be, demanding “No Platform!” for people you don’t like, you’re not in a very good position to complain when the authorities decide to deny you a platform too.
Now, UAF has issued what must rank as one of the silliest political statements of the year so far. “We the undersigned welcome the banning of the racist English Defence League’s march through Tower Hamlets,” it says. “But we are appalled to discover that the Metropolitan Police are applying for a blanket ban on ALL marches across five London boroughs… It is our human right to peacefully march in Tower Hamlets.” Wait – how come UAF has a “human right” to march, but the EDL does not? Are EDL members not human? Moreover, it really is spectacularly daft to talk about the importance of the right to march in the same breath as you welcome a government decision to ban a march. What UAF is effectively saying is: “We should have the freedom to march, but they shouldn’t.”
Which rather confirms that the anti-fascist Left doesn’t know the meaning of the word freedom. Freedom of speech only exists if everyone has it. The freedom to protest must mean that everyone, from worthy Left-wingers to cranky EDL types, should be at liberty to gather where and when they please and to demand whatever they want. What UAF is fighting for is not freedom but privilege. If a thing is denied to some people but granted to others, then it’s a privilege rather than a right – and UAF wants the “privilege to protest” in certain London boroughs where it expects other, less privileged, possibly non-human political activists to be silenced and curfewed on its behalf by the government. That is, UAF only really believes in Government-approved, Tory-approved, forms of public agitation. Maybe now, having fallen victim to its own boneheaded illiberalism and censorious stupidity, UAF will recognise that privileges can quite easily be taken away.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Nationalist Media Network
Scoop.it!

Why liberals turned a blind eye to the 'grooming' of girls

Why liberals turned a blind eye to the 'grooming' of girls | Race & Crime UK | Scoop.it

To understand how a modern liberal will come down on any complicated issue, simply look for a victim. It’s been the case in every major battle of the last 50 years, and it’s an almost infallible guide to Leftist thinking.

 

The conviction yesterday of nine men in Rochdale on “grooming” charges, a rather gentle word for the sexual abuse of children, is a classic example. Almost immediately the Guardian produced a comment piece vigorously playing down any racial element. Sunny Hundal made the same point, even while linking to a criminal justice report which seemed to suggest the opposite. The BBC this morning went out of its way to deny there was a cultural element to this phenomenon.

Yet if the overwhelming majority of perpetrators of a particular type of crime come from one ethnic group, we can say that this crime has a racial or cultural element; if the vast majority of their victims come from another group, definitely so. To deny this seems bizarre. As Norman Dennis once wrote: “One of the unintended effects of teaching statistics to students in social-affairs departments is that a historically unprecedented large number of people have been equipped with the tools that enable them to dismiss out of hand all figures but those they want to believe.”
Yet despite several prominent Pakistani-Britons saying as such, the liberal media still see their primary job as dismissing these figures in order to defend their favoured victims.
It was different a century ago. As the Leveson report intensifies, it’s worth recalling that investigative journalism began with a child prostitution scandal, which led to the age of consent being raised to 16. Such outrages were eliminated by sturdy Christian feminists who hated the sex trade but saw that a human being could be both sinner and victim; yet such atrocities were to return to British soil in the 21st century.
That this has been allowed to happen can be partly explained by the victimisation of politics from the 1960s. The two great liberal reforms of that period, in attitudes to nationality and sex, both came about because of how certain people were perceived as victims: immigrants the victims of white racism, and young working-class girls the victims of male hypocrisy. In the latter case this influenced the Abortion Act, the change in housing rules that gave preference to lone parents, and the move away from moralistic approaches to sex towards safe-sex teaching.
Whatever the noble intentions, in practice this has not been a success: there are now 80,000 children in care, about four times as many in “chaotic” homes and, as these grooming cases showed, very large numbers of vulnerable young girls available for sexually exploitation. Yet the authorities, so desperate to turn away from any sort of moral judgment, even officially sanction children being sexually active.
At the same time as sexual attitudes were changing, Britain was experiencing the arrival of large numbers of people from countries with conservative ideas about sexuality. The theory behind free movement was that people around the world were interchangeable and that, once exposed to British air, people would adopt British attitudes and world views. But that doesn't necessarily happen, especially when a society is in its decadent stage; and history tells us that where barbarism and decadence clash, women are going to get hurt. Because the anti-racism movement became the core of the liberal conscience, when stories of sexual harassment and more began to filter down no one wanted to know, Nazir Afzal being one of the exceptions.
That this was ignored, that the police were weary of investigating, and that the media’s initial reaction is to worry about racism rather than the thousands of young girls who are in a similar situation, is testimony to the power of victim politics.
It’s why modern liberals can end up justifying some of the most bizarre, illogical, illiberal or morally repulsive situations, from the actions of Palestinian Islamists, late-term abortion, hate speech laws or the ban on mixed-race adoption. All of these came about because of the need to help an identified victim.
And it’s why, over a century after the scandal was first exposed, we turn a blind eye to the sickening return of organised child rape to these shores.

more...
No comment yet.