And it's the Illiberals of course who now pose the greatest threat to Western democracy. Since June last year I've catalogued on here the shock and horror of the Illiberals that the majority of the British people didn't do as they were told. Little Owen Jones joined Polly Toynbee in a profound shriek of pain. Even Roger Scruton declared that ordinary people were too stupid to make such decisions - before contritely recanting.
And Mick Hume in a good piece in the Mail lists the others who think that democracy cannot be trusted to the people; A.C.Grayling's eunuch-like whine, John Major, Gina Miller, Richard Branson, Tony Blair, Hilary Mantel, all making crass and unintelligent comments. The litany of hate, insults, abuse, crude stereotyping, the street thuggery, bullying, coercion and intimidation employed by the Illiberals and I suspect experienced in some form by all of us, in reality or online, tells eloquently the extent to which they are ready to abandon democratic and civilised behaviour for the totalitarian Illiberal jackboot.
And now the tame stooges of the Illiberals - the think tanks, academic institutes, professional associations, the RSA and so on - are beavering away to find novel means of subverting democracy so as to silence the voice of the majority.
We must stand absolutely firm. We must uphold the rule of law. We must defend free and open elections and ballots, universal adult suffrage, the secret ballot, free association and above all freedom of expression, speech and thought. Our freedoms are under prolonged and sustained assault by a fanatical enemy who will stop at nothing. We stand here against the Illiberals. We stand firm.
14 comments:
Your musings point, once again, to the MEDIA being the controlling influence.
The illiberals can have their say just like the rest of us but it is the controlled media that gives them their opportunity to spread their hate and intimidation etc.
I note with some amusement that the BBC and the DM are on the Trump hit list in the UK for 'fake news' - the DM potentially for their inability (unwillingness) to control their comments section, the BBC for..... well, being the BBC!
With a growing realisation of the public towards recognition of the sources of such fake news the media will have to change or die. We can already see the media trying to take the initiative on fake news (and failing) so perhaps there IS light at the end of the tunnel.
The light has a name - populism.
I've been using "illiberal" for a while, but as their reaction to the result of Referendum has demonstrated, they've gone far beyond illiberalism. They are seeking to control everything we do, say and think.
My new branding is Dictatorials. I'm proud to be a Deplorable in the opposite camp, along with Raedwald and the other believers in democracy, free-speech and national sovereignty ....
Raedwald, DeeDee, Nigel Farage uses the term too. Perhaps combine your branding: Illiberal Dictatorials, maybe illib-dics? :-)
May I offer a name which applies equally to the anti populist leadership and their sad uninformed conniving followers "The Deceivables"
Sorry that should read "uninformed or conniving"
John Redwood is having a go at Fake News over here today.
Echoing Mr Trump. It's a pity though we don't have anyone who is prepared to stand up to the BBC like Mr Trump has.
May I recommend a book called "The Autobiography of William Cobbett" ? (It is really a compilation of autobiographical passages from his writings.)
He faced a very similar situation in the early 1800s. The establishment fought viciously to destroy him.
Cobbett was wrong about many things (and right about as many), but the point is that people like him should be free to speak and write freely, without being jailed.
Blair and Mandelson are entitled to free speech too, wrong though they are.
Don Cox
Raedwald said:
'The litany of hate, insults, abuse, crude stereotyping, the street thuggery, bullying, coercion and intimidation employed by the Illiberals and I suspect experienced in some form by all of us, in reality or online, tells eloquently the extent to which they are ready to abandon democratic and civilised behaviour for the totalitarian Illiberal jackboot.'
You have to look at what you've experienced personally, including folk you know who are involved - in order to give witness to this new illiberalism.
For a number of years I was an observer for English Witness and what I saw changed my life. To cut a long story I was there when Englishmen were fighting Englishmen over the inherited rights of a people on one side, and the ideology of a dead German economist on the other. That's what it was: the non-political versus the political. The right to life that includes the right of a people to live homogenously has been cancelled without say by the political class.
We are living with the consequences of a decision made by just a tiny fraction of the population and upon which that future, handed to us by our ancestors, is now revoked. There is no love on either side, no common cause, and war therefore is inevitable. It'll be as nasty as it gets so choose your side carefully. That is all.
Steve
I have been using the term Illiberal Liberals for these left wing do as I tell you zealots. They want to control our thoughts and of course scupper Brexit. There are droves of the bastards posting on the Graun online.
They are already known by a perfectly good word-FOOLS-I see no reason to use a twenty dollar word when a perfectly usable dollar word defines them succinctly.
I admit FOOL does not ascribe greed and malevolence to them but neither does illiberal.
The first occasion it registered with me that there was a new specific type (rather than "left" wing, or "socialist" or Labour or LibDem) was when there were dozens of letters to the local paper complaining about the 2015 general election result - "how can people vote for the evil Tories" - type of thing. It was clear that these people valued thinking like them above democracy.
I think we all recognise the type, but do they? It does seem that our education system has propagandised rather susceptible young minds into a belief system without them being aware of it. It is therefore difficult to use any label, because they do not self-label. Clearly that is the most effective type of propaganda.
If there is to be a label what about: Internazis? They are in the international socialist mould. After all, they unthinkingly favour one world government, common purpose, cultural marxism. Indeed that is what the EU favours too, so their emotional dependence on the EU should not be that surprising.
And talking about illiberal despots and EU wank stains, there's this #!! For crying out LOUD! these children........ now what are they so bloody frightened of - mere debate? Fucks sake, if they are so convinced in the goodness, the efficacy, the strength of reason in and of the conviction of their arguments, then what the fuck have they to worry about?
/"The European Parliament has introduced new rules which could see populist speeches wiped from the system without citizens ever knowing that they had taken place.
The unprecedented move, which gives the president the power to pull the plug on speakers deemed offensive during live broadcasts of parliamentary debates, and to purge offending audiovisual material from the record, has attracted concern as the rules on what is considered offensive are unclear."/
btw Radders, great post lad1
QUOTE]
presumably because we stand for free speech, free thought, universal suffrage, secret ballots and the rule of law
[ENDQUOTE
No problem with that at all ...
The exact opposite of Donaldo Trumpolini, in other words?
Post a Comment