Tuesday 10 April 2018

So you think you're reading this? Fascist!

Offensively, I said, "Hi, I'm Z." Offended, he replied, "What an offensive thing to say! You must be a fascist!" 
Offensively, I said, "Hi, I'm Z." Offended, he replied, "Whoever you are, how dare you say that! I assume you're a fascist?"  
Offensively, I said, "Hi, I'm Z." Offended, he replied, "How could you utter such a thing? By my troth, you must be a fascist!"  
Offensively, I said, "Hi, I'm Z." Offended, he replied, "You didn't add a trigger warning! FASCIST."  
Offensively, I said, "Hi, I'm Z." Offended, he replied, "That's a strong opinion. You must be a fascist!" And so on.

We aren't a fan of banning members from political organisations for merely some assertion concerning facts, like Ken Livingstone's assertion about German history. It's not a partisan assertion, it is a neutral statement that does not necessitate any particular response. The assumption that a person like Livingstone is secretly evil and a budding supervillain for saying it seems unfounded. We're also not a fan of most political organisations, which helps. These bans tend to thrive on an atmosphere where emotion seems more important than politics, which is indeed most political organisations. This seems apt when the political realm is generally marginalised, however politics contains facets which cannot be comprehended in such a way.

However, Ken Livingstone's suspension from Labour was one of the more ridiculous bans of late. It wasn't for a usual, controversial topic. No, it was for a trivial suggestion about occasional early Nazi collaboration with Zionists. Well, the Nazis later invaded the Soviet Union, and often condemned their take on socialism. Yet they co-operated with them, even starting World War II in co-operation with the Soviet Union. Yet people don't seem offended at this. In lieu of considering Livingstone, he is merely hounded out based on vague insinuation.

Of course, the Labour Party had ties to the Israeli 'Labour Party,' which recently condemned Corbyn for his criticism of Israel. They also have the Friends of Israel groups, which doesn't help matters. So them getting strict about this while allowing pro-Israel factions to stay is a slightly absurd figure. Okay, so Labour is disunited. Some Labourites supported and still support senseless war in Iraq, yet they aren't all banned. Indeed, it might seem like that decision was quite recent. However, in the light of these Labour escapades, what we totally couldn't allow was - Ken Livingstone. This might seem farcical, however people can reduce almost any political current to farce when they sniff wind of alleged 'anti-Semitism.' All of a sudden, it's the height of anti-communism, it's fascism, it's in brief pure villainy. Few labels are as trivialised as being branded a villain by the usual leftist.

Quite frankly, if the liberal Labour wish to make their administrative decisions like this, perhaps they should stick to a 'laissez-faire' platform.

Let us cut to the chase. So, we have decided on a new rule for this blog. You are not allowed to assert that the state of Transnistria invaded England in 1066. You will also be harshly reprimanded for suggesting that the state of Croatia had the majority of its population convert to Buddhism in 975. Finally, as an unspoken rule, you are not to say that Nuri as-Said was overthrown in 1941.

We trust that commenters will do all of these things, so that we can follow up with a concerned post involving the fear of a scandalous culture running rampant in the comment section.

You might also wish to go further and join a political group which posts contemptible, dull pseudo-political agitation on social media sites, by which I mean basically any political group on social media sites. Then post incriminating material that people can screenshot. There are clearly not enough incriminating screenshots available on social media at the moment, because social media is dull, so the media is having to grasp at straws. Perhaps someone who believes that journalists' lives matter should try to help them, by providing convenient material. All the same, the number of people who believe that is justifiably shrinking.

28 comments:

  1. Excellent point well made.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was really shocked that most of Croatia converted to Buddhism in 975. The thought of it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, the Croats are full of surprises! I think Buddhism is too deep for them, though. It still surprised me when they converted to Buddhism.

      Delete
    2. @Yates.

      You just broke our rules. I hope you understand that this makes you a worse person than Blair, Bill Cosby, Obama or George W. Please state that you understand this condemnation, then we will undertake the task of banning you.

      Delete
    3. Nice send-up of the Western governments. Yates is worse than all of those though?! Srely not, he was a loyal comrade!

      Surprised I'm not banned yet, maybe soon

      Delete
    4. A law breaker here is NOT a loyal comrade! And don't call me Srely.

      Delete
  3. Excellent write-up. I guess what makes it worse is that Livingstone's was quite scathing about Hitler's treatment of Jews, anyway. I guess the rules can be bent if Zios ask nicely. Another case where Labour just run things arbitrarily, and aren't any better than the Conservative Party.

    I think that Transnistria invading England in 1066 was the closest you'll see to Marxist-humanist communism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's clearly true.

      However, you have committed unpardonable sins. You should be sent to a priest to repent for your clear anti-Marxism. Before your ban, however, feel free to plead your innocence over breaking this hallowed God-given rule.

      Delete
    2. Is there actually a priest for anti-Marxism? I think many Marxists think so...

      I can't see how they can plead innocence, they are wicked. Although I didn't see it when Transnistria did invade England in 1066. Did you like it, Unzicker?

      Delete
    3. https://m.vagalume.com.br/evergreen-terrace/to-the-first-baptist-church-of-jacksonville.html

      As far as priests who combat anti-Marxism, there probably are. Who else would?

      However, your last paragraph surprised and offended me. Please convince me in under 4 words that you are not a racist anti-Semitic bigot. Otherwise I will have to ban you.

      Delete
    4. Never said Jew...

      Delete
    5. I'm not convinced.

      Despite your offensive and irresponsible reply, your decrying of Husk has convinced me that you should have a further chance to plead your case.

      Please fill in this form, by selecting the appropriate answer to each question:

      1. Do you, like many racists, 'name the Jew'? Please answer indicating your propensity to name a hypothetical Jew.
      Jew / Jew.
      2. How often do you deny the Holocaust per day? Please answer in occasions per day.
      4 / 24 / 39 / 3000.
      3. How many Jews have you insulted for their race?
      6 / 30 / 500 / 6000000.
      4. Do you have problems with the state of Israel?
      Yes, because I hate Jews. / No.
      5. Have you read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
      Yes. / No.
      6. Are any Jewish bankers corrupt or greedy?
      Yes. / No, that would be a common anti-Semitic trope.
      7. If a Jew lies, do you believe him?
      Yes. / No.

      Delete
    6. I'm not sure how to answer some of them!

      The last one would be no, so would the fifth...

      Delete
  4. The Transnistrian invasion in 1066 confirmed England's fears of cultural Marxism!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And showcased its destructive effects!

      Delete
    2. @Husk.

      A female lizard next to me has explained that you are a Nazi and a rapist. While we weren't there and can't seriously determine that they were raped, it is clear that the lizard dislikes you from their copious use of swear-words. How do you plead?

      Delete
    3. OMG! Husk you rapist!! #MeToo

      Delete
  5. Nuri as-Said was overthrown in 1941. After occupying the Middle East less than a century ago, the West still like to invade it and get surprised that others take issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excuse me, Patria. There are some things which you just don't say. I am amazed at your insensitivity and lack of discretion.

      Everyone please shame the poster 'patria,' for his clear offence. After that is done sufficiently, he shall be banned.

      Delete
    2. You're scum, patria!! (not really)

      Delete
    3. This is excellent. The Labour Party needs more of it. They should follow the example of the 'libertarian communist' Zionists. Or maybe they should feel free to diverge from the lib-coms. Regardless, jolly good from you commenters.

      Delete
    4. Thank you. Shame on patria!

      Delete
    5. Fie, patria!! I used to like you!

      Delete
  6. Would you agree that the Labour anti-Semitism charges are like a smear directed at Jeremy Corbyn?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They are smears, usually with little attempt to even seem valid. That said, while Corbyn has radical supporters, he is relatively mild and often doesn't mind when his supporters are kicked out. Hence, the concern over radical politics is hardly something that stops at the left-liberal Corbyn. Corbyn is not the target, rather the more radical elements that have arisen against right-wing Labour.

      A further point: although 'nationalists' and 'anti-EU' voters tend to get most of the flack for being 'reactionary,' the right-wing Labourites have made it into a perpetual modus operandi. The Labourites are involved with little except for explicitly rebuking radical politics. They are often given space by 'left-wing' liberals in Labour. You suspect that they would get superior advice from the NF or that one Party that wishes to leave Europe and join Africa.

      Delete
  7. Excellent piece. I liked the humour at end.

    ReplyDelete