Jul 28

I have a relative who’s done rather well. He’s the social mobility that people say is missing. What does his example mean to the other 1000 who went to his school? Does it mean because the boy done good the rest who have not eating at soup kitchens makes society fairer? Social Mobility is a sign for me not a goal. Its lack a sign of a society where Capital is hoarded by a small connected minority whatever creed or colour or religion they are, The Privileged.

Now US Liberals who tend to lead UK Liberals or Progressives as they ironically call themselves have coined the term “White Privilege”. Now it’s true people at the top regardless of the odd token are mainly white. Indeed away from elections and politics probably more so. White Privilege to extol the need to promote a small minority of a minority is just another angle of the racist creed of Multiculturalism. A few token faces to pad the reality that society does not use the full talents of its people only a mostly chosen clique. I wonder if this is a way for mainstream ‘Progressive’ politics to isolate Occupy and the growing numbers who see through the ‘left’ ‘right’ farce of a debate between our major political parties.

Austerity reduces public  education and health on both sides of the Atlantic. The poor they’re likely to get poorer. Yet take care of Health and Education and offer jobs with real wages and everything else will take care of itself to a degree. Economies of countries dedicated to their financial system parasite create no wealth without creating ever more debt – unsustainable. They atrophy the rest of the economy into an unchanging zombie existence that neither pro or anti Capitalists should support.

This is a downward spiral that doesn’t care what race its victims are.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Nov 30

Warning Contains Labels Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , ,

Nov 24

UKIP is a thoroughly reactionary one issue party. It’s leaders are if you scratch the surface exposed as at best ignorant at worst bigots. Nonetheless taking foster children off people who support such a party is bananas. Worse it is politically motivated tosh.

Should we take children off parents who vote Labour because it’s the party of Tom Watson and Ruth Kelly and its MPs deemed Phil Woolas suitable for the shadow cabinet even after his self pitying bigotry was openly stated in his election diary published in The Independent. Indeed current darling of Labour is political thug Tom Watson who used to try to win bi-elections by stoking hatred of asylum seekers.

The party that signed the Human Rights Act but was happy to lock up foreign children and have foreigners rendered and tortured, engages in ridiculous wars to kill johnny foreigner, practised the creed of multiculturalism that sees people defined by where they were born and their parents religion or race, appointed Ruth Kelly, Phil Woolas and Tom Watson to cabinet and shadow cabinet says you’re racist….

UKIP’s policy is one all anti racists would agree with

end the active promotion of the doctrine of multiculturalism by local and national government

UKIP probably don’t mind the publicity never mind the credibility. Labour supporting parents must hope that the mild racism in the party they support does not lead to their children being taken away.

We now have a febrile atmosphere around race where yes we may put people in prison and the country comes to a halt if someone on a football field might have been racist but the only people celebrating all these imbecilities are the racists and bigoted multiculturalists.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , ,

Aug 06

Like most words fetishised by Labour and made the focal point of rhetoric legacy has been de-valued into a grubby search for more rhetoric to justify past actions. See Tony Blair hawking himself round the world trying to attach his name to a policy as good as on the spot fines. Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

Aug 09

It’s shocking how quickly the knees have jerked over the recent spell on looting and fire bombing. People reach instantly for the need for the army or water cannon even though this is not a demonstration to control but sporadic outbreaks of almost guerrilla looting. Indeed many liberal people sat at home in their impotence at this suddenly become weak and demand everything be done. People even commenting this does not happen in Syria!  Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , ,

Feb 07

David Cameron in a classic one step up 2 back speech signaled the end, hopefully forever, for the Labour left’s fatuous we’re not racist but… policy of Multiculturalism. Of course being a Tory he could not help splicing Muslim and Terrorism in a speech even Jon Cruddas might have felt was ill judged and stupid. Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Feb 05

I don’t think many on the left understand yet quite what a desperately racist creed multiculturalism is. In many respects we donned the clothes of equality not because we were better than other people but we wanted to feel better than other people. Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Aug 27

I have been following the easy line on Park 51, it’s not a mosque and it’s not at the site of the former World Trade Center. End of. Yet a quote from Chris Hitchens in Slate struck me:-

One would want assurances, also, about the transparency of its funding and the content of its educational programs. But the way to respond to such overtures is by critical scrutiny and engagement, not cheap appeals to parochialism, victimology, and unreason.

This is not the uncritical unquestioning much of the left is indulged in. It recognises that much of what we are sold as mainstream or even moderate Islam is in fact anathema. The easy opinion let ‘them’ have their centre and let’s all glory in how open and tolerant we are it is not. Indeed the mirror Hitchens throws up shows a lot of the easy answers are mere rhetoric.

One has to ask who is funding and what is to be distributed at this Muslim Center. It is a fantasy that such a centre is necessarily benign. Worse to allow such a centre and find later it has pushed the kind of crack pot theories that al Quada  and the Taliban spew forth would be more damaging than not allowing this center.

Opponents of the proposed Center of course are delusional. Are they really saying that Americans cannot tolerate any vestige of Islam within 2 blocks of a terrorist act? Or that they blame Islam as a whole for the attack? What is their position or point? Where is the logic bar an illogical link with 9-11 because the murderers were Muslim.

It’s time for us on the left to move on and stop treating ethnic advancement and the stupidity of the right on racial and religious matters as proof of our own magnificence. I am not sure I’ll ever agree with Christopher Hitchens on Iraq and pretty sure on Afghanistan too but one can see why he moved from a self congratulatory Left that asks no hard questions and has propagated the vile and damaging racist theory of multiculturalism.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Aug 19

I do not know who came up with the word multiculturalism a word for a racist concept that has no opposite – monoculturalism is not a word as my spell checker attests. It takes the  clothes of multi cultural society, a good thing, and twists them to support its opposite. The main application of this brutal creed by New Labour was the increased use of state funds to fund religious indoctrination. The result is religious schools can teach whatever religious theory it likes.

What I really object to is not so much this sad pathetic attempt to keep the coffers of the pedlars of superstition full for many years to come. Indeed judged on my friends brought up Catholic all a Catholic education brings many people is a life long contempt for the cult. However what it does do is separate children into racial and religious groupings. People in formed groups can develop visceral hatred of other groups whether they believe the religion or not – especially when those other groups have a markedly different appearance.

Many councils are already starting to try to tackle the legacy of multiculturalism and to try to mix children who have become separated by even regular state schools yet this is undercut by schools who can exclude on religious grounds.

It’s also divisive and dare I say racist. Suppose I want my child in the state school local to me. He cannot get in as he is the wrong religion. My choice of schools is compromised. Indeed you could argue in a small way we have a Jim Crow/Apartheid law here whereby state schools for different groupings may be considered separate but equal. Metaphorically the front of the education bus in my area might be for catholics and the back atheists and the middle Hindus, Jews and Muslims.

Some say to not allow religious schools is a denial of parental choice but clearly to allow them is a denial of parental choice on the grounds of religion which is normally known as bigotry.

What next Scientology schools? And if not why not? Is a revealed religion any less credible for being newer?

The only fair solution is for state schools to become almost all secular.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , ,

Nov 30

John Denham the so called Communities Secretary chucked in the following gem of specious politicing:-

White working-class communities feel a justifiable sense of grievance and deserve additional help reserved for minority groups

It shows the cul de sac of the divisive and patronising creed of multiculturalism at the heart of New Labour. Somehow the 90+% who are so called ‘white’ are now an oppressed race under this Govt.

What the working classes of all groups have suffered from is the failures of Govt. If white working class communities are being failed it’s because New Labour is failing all working class people.

I am sure the ethnic working classes and poor don’t feel the last 12 years has been some nirvana for them. Their children are being left by the way side and leaving school ill educated and equipped. Their children are also growing up together being taught to fetishise their petty differences when their shared experience is the same – no social mobility and being left to rot in poor housing with no access to the best health and education.

The pressure on housing from immigrants if true is only because they are not building enough homes and have not been for 12 years. Indeed Labour have deliberately stood by and allowed immigrants to cop this for their decisions. Yet now they find BNP votes threatening their seats they don’t man up and take the blame they de facto endorse the BNP position.

Brown’s outlandish plan to build new housing without the resources to do so will further hit established communities of all types by cutting the budget for repair and modernisation. A temporary fix if it’s anything and  long term pass the problem to the next Govt or the one after.

What are they trying to achieve? As though the working classes will suddenly say “you’ve only had 12 years to make our lives worse and I am sure it will improve if we give you 5 more”. I can only assume the Govt is assuming the working classes are even dumber than their education system assumes. 8 years on they are as desperate and dangerous as Billy Hague to shore up a low vote.

If we must sub divide the country like a human cake then the most indulged minority by per capita spending is what Denham would call ‘White’ and ‘Sir’.

The Scots.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , ,