Going Gentle

When I was young, I’m sure the word sleaze meant dirty, obscene, perverted, disgusting, and any other words that could be used to describe a morally disreputable character. I always associate the word with sexual impropriety, such as with middle-aged men leching over barely-legal teens, or the haunting of the dungeons of deviant Soho. Even as I approach retirement age I still can’t quite get used to it being used instead of graft.

Graft is generally described as “The act of getting money or advantage through the dishonest use of political power and influence.” Or “The unscrupulous use of a politician's authority for personal gain.” Surely this is a far better term to use when describing the alleged shenanigans of MPs, PMs, even, when it comes to money power and influence? Sleaze, it seems to me, oozes slime and sweaty lechery far better than it expresses anything else.

But of course, semantics are the least of our concerns when, as is now more often the case than not, the two main parties in British politics are locking horns over genuinely minor issues of deportment in public and personal life, instead of engaging in fierce debate over policy. Long gone are the days when the public expected impeccable character of their betters; now we just want some idea of what the parties stand for.

As far as I can tell the Labour stance is simply to oppose; whatever the Tories are doing it is wrong, or not hard enough, or not deep enough, or not fast enough. It is as if the entire Labour machine is now devoted to slagging off the Tories and in so doing bringing themselves into disrepute likewise. Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone, etc… Please, for heaven’s sake, stop giving Boris and company such an easy ride and get on with some serious thinking about why anybody would want to vote for the exact same thing.

While some voters will cast for Labour no matter how corrupt they have become and some will cross their box for Conservative out of sheer desperation for fiscal prudence, knowing there will be none, the fact is there is little to choose between them. Both are Green in their toothless, clawless incompetence, and both will readily sacrifice the independence of the electorate in the search for approval from the noisy pressure groups for climate action, diversity and the legions of equality cabals.

And while many who are engaged in the wars of words on social media predict a sea change in domestic politics I just see more of the same. I have been seeing more of the same for thirty-odd years and I don’t expect any form of revolution – other than the impending islamic one – any time soon. Do not go gentle into that good night, they say, but we have already gone. It’s every man for himself now.

Authentically White

I was a bit late to the party on this one, but apparently Luther, as played by proposed black James Bond Idris Elba, is not black enough: BBC diversity chief Miranda Wayland says that ethnic minorities are portrayed inauthentically, even, apparently, when written by people from those same backgrounds to parody their own portrayal. As for Idris Elba, the vicious, far-right, ‘so-called comedian’ Andrew Lawrence asked, did he not leave a long enough trail of abandoned illegitimate children? Did he not deal drugs, etc? My favourite suggestion from the Twittersphere was that the series should perhaps be renamed ‘Looter’. Boom!

As another Tweeter remarked “gypsies on the BBC aren't gipsy enough. Chinese people aren't Chinese enough. Black people aren't Black enough. Asian People aren't Asian enough. African people aren't African enough. And White people are racist!” This is becoming a tedious and unimaginative theme now, yet the crazy dogma of critical race theory is still swallowed wholesale by many in the establishment who have yet to work out a decent counter offensive

Black Lives Matter cultists are incensed when white people suggest, even hint, that black people may be different. But when we insist that they are not, that they are equal, that they are the same as everybody else, we are accused of… of what, exactly? I’ll try, but I’m not sure this will fly: Non-indigenous ethnic citizens of the United Kingdom are the equals, in every respect of their white peers, but need – nay, demand – special treatment in order to not be unequal. Is that anywhere close to the mark?

If you have no black friends you are racist, but if you have black friends you are also racist? I believe this is where the industry of perpetual offence has currently planted its flag. To pretend there isn’t a problem is a problem, but to try and address the problem is, to say the least, problematic. There isn’t much to work with here, so it is little wonder that when the establishment tries to aim at the moving goalposts of minority identity they lose the penalty shoot-out every time.

Fortunately, as always, the left has a solution; just agree with everything negative that anybody has to say about the country, its people, its government and anybody in any position of power or influence. To which end Labour Party supporters have been shining beacons of bigotry as they have spewed out their hatred of the society which has given them so much, yet demanded so little of them.

From nasty, snippy jibes aimed at the Royal Family as it mourns one of this country’s greatest ambassadors, to Sadiq Khan announcing his intention to rename the overground network to better represent ‘diversity’, it is as if the left has completely abandoned any semblance of sanity. When Londoners have to commute to work on the Kampala Trail to downtown Nyasaland Junction on the Bin Laden Express, does the little khant think people will harbour warm, fuzzy feelings towards dusky despots?

We've always had black faces...

I rather think not. The fight back will not, it has been seen, be led from Downing Street. Nor will it feature in any Parliamentary sessions in the future, our politicians having long ago abandoned any attempt to counter the lunacy. Instead, the British people will do what they have always done and quietly ignore the injunctions to behave any differently towards outsiders. Fit in and we will accept you; fight us and we will not.

The Wisdom of Youth

When I was young I believed in Father Christmas. We didn’t do the Easter Bunny, but the Tooth Fairy pursued a roaring trade in our household, brought up, as we were, in the era when losing all your teeth by the age of 40 was practically the norm. Naturally, at an early age we discovered that these founding myths of our childhood were just that. But it’s not as if we weren’t susceptible to adopting new mythology in place of the old.

In the nineteen seventies, ghost stories were big business. The Exorcist and its cinematic sequel preyed on the natural inclinations of god-fearing folk to believe in the flip side of the good and evil coin. The devil was real and he was in your child! But as that faded, the fads of the eighties formed around spontaneous human combustion, the shenanigans of poltergeists and those pesky crop circles. All bollocks of course and all beliefs we outgrew as real-life priorities took precedence.

In some, the juvenile beliefs persist; to this day there are adults, some now in retirement even, who still believe in the supernatural, in benevolent faeries and malign goblins, and forces beyond our control. But if you really want to gull large cohorts into singular irrational beliefs in general you have to aim at the young. And the younger you get them the better. Throughout history extremist regimes have pursued the mass indoctrination of young people; willing armies of unthinking drones.

No wonder then, that on learning of the BBC’s Project 17 I was immediately both curious and uneasy. The UN has set what are compellingly called Sustainable Development Goals, which are an easy sell to the naïve, schooled in the lazy language of human rights. Like the Midwich Cuckoos they eagerly parrot the learned responses to the articles of faith, chanting in unison the catechism, with little understanding of what they demand.

Ending poverty, halting climate change, bringing about the nebulous and ever-shifting goals of ‘equality’, and in talking about rising sea levels no doubt intending to turn back the tide itself, there is something other-worldly about their ambitions. But at that age, and especially in the current climes, they have been brought up to believe they matter, that they are the solution, that they are the future.

But children are no more ‘the future’ than are their parents and grandparents. The future contains all of these groups, with the older battalions far better placed to bring about real change. Every child eventually becomes an adult, leaving behind the follies of youth and learning about the realities of responsibility, not just the fantasy of entitlement. If there is hope for these young idealists, it is that they grow out of their myths sooner or later.

You will believe...

There are reasons we have minimum ages for voting and there are reasons why political movements on the left wish to lower those ages. Call me cynical but as I have aged I have rejected, on the evidence, pretty much every daft belief I may once have held. In a blatant piece of plagiarism, I repeat a joke I stole from Twitter today: A socialist, a climate change warrior, a neo-Marxist and a Project 17 advocate walk into a bar and try to order drinks. The barman tells them: "We don't sell alcohol to anyone under 18.”

Testing, testing?

Two tests a week, they are now saying. Take two lateral flow tests per week and report your findings via the government website. What could possibly be more reasonable than that, some may ask? But why would anybody buy into it? It’s okay, I guess, if you can work from home, and isolation isn’t an issue, but where does that leave the hands-on wage slave who simply can’t?

And quite apart from all that, given that so many people are convinced the entire Covid thing is either a sinister plot (to what possible end?) or else an overblown reaction to a perfectly survivable ‘flu’, what sort of participation rate do they expect? If, as the conspiracy theorists repeatedly claim, this has all been about controlling you, the idea of voluntary self-testing is the very opposite, given that it is so open to abuse.

Where are the controls to prevent you from simply reporting negative results? Or, even if individual tests were identifiably and traceably allocated to an individual, what is to stop a negative-testing family member from taking the swab? Is there even a way of telling whether the test was taken at all? And as for follow-up testing, would this only apply to those who reported positive? If negative reports were to be similarly investigated, I could see millions just not bothering.

Surely the time for testing was last year, except that a swathe of anti-government propaganda relentlessly poured cold water on the process. It has already cost a lot of money for test and trace to fail; why throw good money after bad? And what incentives do asymptomatic carriers have to possibly risk their livelihoods by getting involved? I, for one, would not readily wish to incriminate myself over a sniffle or a cough.

I am genuinely unafraid of being infected by the coronavirus – I fully expect my body to deal with it as it has dealt with everything else over the last sixty-odd years – but I have watched a lot of formerly sane and rational people thoroughly lose their minds over it. My natural phlegmatic approach to much in life finds the hysterical over-reaction almost amusing and more than a little curious. It’s certainly not a British way to go about things.

I have steadfastly refused to adopt a position on lockdowns, travel restrictions, vaccinations and the like because I freely confess to being largely disinterested and materially unaffected. I have had my first jab because, why not? And I will happily offer up my arm for the second. But testing twice a week? Not if it might affect by ability to make a living, no. No, thank you.

We have it! The cure!

And back to the conspiracies. I fully expect somebody to arrive at the conclusion that the offer of a testing regime is there as an alternative to carrying a vaccine passport, given that they are convinced this is all about making you jump through hoops. (Again, to what possible end?) But isn’t it probably closer to the truth to conclude that in the government’s urgency to return society to safe normality this is more likely simple desperation?

All White on the Night

We need to be more white, a recent report concludes. The report, after extensive research into the socio-economic make up and multi-ethnic structure of the United Kingdom was commissioned, by me, to shine a light on the routine discrimination faced by white people. The findings are based on observation, careful interrogation of tribal narratives and scrutiny of the falsehoods spawned by a vested interest in obscuring the truth; or what used to be referred to as the bleeding obvious.

Open your eyes and look. The bleeding obvious is, well, it’s bleeding obvious, isn’t it? Given that nobody is going to defend white people from the relentless assault on our ethnicity, one could be forgiven for wondering whether it is worth even being white, but it turns out there is little we can do about it. I very much doubt that blacking up would help, in the current febrile climate, so don’t do that. Instead, it’s time to start actually celebrating the wonderful white diversity we bring to these islands.

Whiteness is nothing to be ashamed of, in fact it is something to salute. Although a search through the modern history books reveals little, it turns out that every single historical building in the realm was designed and built entirely by whites. Every last one. The roads and railways and canals which were central to creating wealth are towering and enduring achievements of raw white muscle. The law, education, etiquette and the general civilised functioning of society; all white.

They have Black History Month, we should celebrate White History Millennium. The galleries, the theatres, almost all literature and the massive majority of cinematic wonders are wrought by white minds and hands. When we are brought together we can achieve things that those of other ethnicities can only gaze upon with envy; flight, ocean navigation, personal transport, gainful employment, communication, computers, space exploration, world trade... Almost nothing we rely on in the modern world would exist if not for the white people who created it.

There is much talk of de-colonising the school curriculum, of blackwashing history, of dismantling systemic white bias in everything. But, you know why there is systemic white bias? Because we fucking built everything; one would think others would be grateful. Instead they are hypocritical because, while demanding we change all that – in their analysis – discriminates against non-white faces, they also insist that we actively favour black over white in every respect.

They’re not redressing any balance, they are systematically dismantling a civilisation developed over centuries and replacing it with a ramshackle collection of ill-thought and discriminatory knee-jerk polices. And worse, they are aided and abetted by those white people who are far too clever, and far too ‘well-educated’ to see what is right in front of their noses; the absolute annihilation of their race.

Where's ours?

So, this Easter weekend let us take a moment to consider how very fortunate we are to have been born into one of the entire world’s most tolerant, intelligent, thoughtful, inventive and industrious peoples. Without the greatness of Britain, built entirely on white endeavour, the world today might be a very much poorer place to live. But let’s not be too ostentatious in our celebration; let’s instead spend a quiet minute to appreciate our true glory. In short, let us be wonderfully white about it.

Witch Doctor

Pleasingly, the predictable response of the new left – by which I mean the identity-driven, proto-communist, useful idiot left – to the report from the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, is to scream Uncle Tom at every non-white person on the panel. Ash Sarkar helpfully tweeted “A government who doesn't like it when people say institutional racism exists appointed a panel of people who don't believe institutional racism exists, and they've produced a report which argues that institutional racism doesn't exist.”

Shame that the same degree of scepticism wasn’t levelled at the ‘Nope, no anti-Semitism here!’ inquiry into the Labour party which then immediately whisked the whiny Ms Chakrabarty off to the House of Lords. Not a murmur of dissent, not a raised eyebrow, not a single challenge to the elevation was heard. The left at least know how to stick together, defending each other against the indefensible.

The disgusting racist, Shola Mos-Shogbamimu , a lifelong black supremacist decided that the chair of the commission, was a ‘token black’, a charge which, had it fallen from white lips, would have attracted censure, outrage and possibly violence. And this is the difference, isn’t it, between ordinary people who genuinely wish to rub along nicely and fantasists like Shola who thrive on conflict. People whose entire raison d'être is to foment hatred.

Because the real racism, as we have learned over the last few years, is not the discrimination by whites against persons with different ethnic origins, but a concerted attack on whiteness. You can’t open a newspaper, watch an advertisement, search the internet, or quietly try and absorb television or radio without being aware of it. Under the pretext of trying to attract a wider audience, white culture is being ostentatiously removed from some forums.

White people are to blame for all the world’s ills, but never to be praised for all the world’s ability to function. It is not enough that we created the means to alleviate poverty and donated it freely to the developing world. We are now to blame because the developing world has failed to explore the paths we cut for them. We are to blame because instead of using what we showed them they decided, instead, to beat a path to our door and demand we do it for them.

None of this is about equality, or white racism; there is no white supremacy to be found outside a few small cabals of idiots who are just as much despised by the white society they do not represent. And for all the clamour, for all the fawning over by media outlets, people like Shola Mugabe Umbongo and ‘Tash Sarkar do not represent the black community either.

Doctor Shola will see you now...

‘Doctor’ Shola might like to take a leaf out of another doctor’s book and instead of forever trying to perpetuate the hate industry she has partly created and from which she profits greatly, start to judge people not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character. At Easter, a time of renewal, a time of forgiveness for betrayal, she might, for once forego the thirty pieces of silver and try instead to just be a decent human being.