A quarterly magazine of urban affairs, published by the Manhattan Institute, edited by Brian C. Anderson.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Muzzled Britain « Back to Story
Showing 23 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
You might be a little more wary of who you take your 'instruction' from.
'Nullius in verba'
Pop a Ritalin.
Britain provides a scarily instructive example of what gradual boa constrictor-style suffocation looks like when it is applied to political discourse. The constrictor's victim is compressed a bit more with each exhalation until finally it can't inhale at all. Death ensues.
Not the most reliable of sources.
They kind of have an agenda.
Not sure if you're aware of this but the riots that occurred last year were influenced by gang culture in the United States. Some were in email contact with these gangs.
UK far more violent than US:
"But it is the naming of Britain as the most violent country in the EU that is most shocking. The analysis is based on the number of crimes per 100,000 residents.
In the UK, there are 2,034 offences per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-placed Austria with a rate of 1,677.
The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 92 and South Africa 1,609."
On the origins of PC google "The last testament of Flashman's creator: How Britain has destroyed itself."
On comparative crime rates for us and UK:
"The overall crime rate in England and Wales is 60 percent higher than that in the United States. True, in America you’re more likely to be shot to death. On the other hand, in England you’re more likely to be strangled to death. But in both cases, the statistical likelihood of being murdered at all is remote, especially if you steer clear of the drug trade. When it comes to anything else, though—burglary, auto theft, armed robbery, violent assault, rape—the crime rate reaches deep into British society in ways most Americans would find virtually inconceivable."
Google "sean gabb enemy class 47" for a remarkably prescient account (from Jan 2001) of where Britain is going and what it will take to get it back.
I would agree that PC started here as a result of the need to protect Democratic politicians from their failures in the black community - the way I see it anyway.
But Britain seems to have carried the concept well beyond anything we have here, not that it matters - there isn't any real way to measure it. It's still a repugnant way of looking at the world, and it has been used to hide some very uncomfortable facts, especially inthe United States.
What is the current status of this ridiculous situation? It was clearly a political decision by Rotherham council.
Deprived of their children?
They are foster parents.
There was always a raciale streak in the British, especially in the thirties and the fourties when Britian was an Imperial Power. Having lost the colonies in the late fourties and fifties, the British were cut to size and more liberal thought tempered their political approach, but, the streak of superiority over the others ,especially their immediate neighbours the French and the Eastern Europeans remained. And thats what kept them out of the ECM and other programmes of European Union programmes.Our sympathies with the couple in Rotherham who have been deprived of their children and for the children who have lost a home.
It doesn't matter "which side of the Pond" PC originated on -- that's trivial. What matters is what it's doing to Western civilization, specifically the Anglosphere.
Marie Claire et al., the author of this article is English, not American. You might try reading it before you react.
PC originated on your side of the pond.
Makes you appreciate the U.S.'s litigious culture.
Another example of how the left is all about repression, hypocrisy, and restraints on freedom and liberty. The more control the left takes, the more repressive the society becomes.
The fact that those on the left claim to be for "freedom" stamps those who are in their camp all the more hypocritical. Speech codes, shouting down speakers, not even allowing those speakers and organizations to exist at all are evidence of the repression of the left. For an example, take a look at any college campus - those that disagree with the prevailing political views know better than to speak up. Silence is strictly enforced and freedom of speech is only allowed for those who strictly adhere to the left's world view.
I've noticed Britain seems to lead the way in the area of political correctness - where Britain is now is a good indication of where the United States is going. Those on the left seek nothing less than to exstinguish traditional western culture. Unfortunately those institutions that could and should fight against this repressive movement are all too often willing to go along to get along. The Catholic Church is one example, as is the Republican Party over here. Both seem to be completey helpless - and spineless - when it comes to political correctness, even as those on the left seek to destroy anyone who disagress with their twisted goals and policies.
As far as I know the self hating and cultural suicide which has engulfed the West, and especially the United States and Britain, is unique in history. Yes, you can read in Juvenal and other authors a dislike of the prevailing culture but it comes nowhere near what is going on today.
I used to wonder if what was going on is the remnants of Soviet cold war propaganda but the persistance of these ideas is nothing short of amazing. I thought that with the fall of communism, and the publicity over conditions in the eastern bloc that this would be the end of it. However, the cultural hatred and power of the left is stronger than ever, and is growing stronger every day.
What other society ever did or does the same, even on a more local level, even in the West? Do the French hate French culture? Do the Chinese or the Japanese hate their own culture? Mozambiquians hate Mozabiquian culture? Of course not, but somehow in the United States and Britain, there are incredibly strong movements bent on destruction of anything that smacks of the traditional culture, the replacement of which seems to be some fascist state which has bizarre ideals, enforced by repressive thought control.
The ideals of the left are doubly bizarre since they don't ever get applied to other cultures - only those in the West are subject to it. Accordingly, even though, for example, there is a constant drum beat for women and gay rights, there is little real condemnation of, say Iran, for executing gays for the crime of being homosexual, or of Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries for the repression of women. However, that was not true for South Africa when it came to the repression of blacks. Both the South African, and Iranian and Arab actions are reprehensible. Why the difference in treatment?
Whatever the movement that support political correctness is, it is, as noted above, truly bizarre, truly hypocritical, and truly - and dangerously - repressive. It is also growing stronger, and it is only a matter of time before those who profess it seize power and impose its twsited belief system with real muscle.
One can only imagine what the society would look like if the left ever truly becomes in charge. Think China during the cultural revolution.
Really? All 60 million of them?
And Britain may wonder why many people fail to include the word "Great" when referring to it. Like the U.S. it is circling the drain but at a much quicker pace and soon it will be no longer a multicultural country beacause the whites will all be gone and it will slip into the chaos of the third world. Just wait.
On January 15, 1999, David Howard, a white aide to Anthony A. Williams, the black mayor of Washington, D.C., used "niggardly" in reference to a budget. This apparently upset one of his black colleagues (identified by Howard as Marshall Brown), who interpreted it as a racial slur and lodged a complaint
And I hear that American children are bring taught that Mark Twain's delightful novels: Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn depict racism.
We don't need your pity, America.
London is minority-white-British, not minority-white. You should correct that, I think.
I was born and raised in Britain in an era when there was no necessity to defend freedom of thought and speech; they were accepted as the norm.
It appears that today this is no longer so. I am happy that I no longer live in the UK, but if I did I'd vote UKIP
Thank goodness the Left won't use innocent little children as political pawns.
Welcome to the world of Minority Bolshevism. Google it.
My dear England, land of my birth, you are selling out your heritage... hard won and fostered for generations. Who are these people who would allow such? I would guess those jealous of your great history and anxious to bring you down. Beware.