polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 15
th, 2016 at 12:28am:
Fine, whatever, lets take that bigoted view for arguments sake...
Then we start justifying and apologising for people who assault them - right? You've had about 2 months to retract your bigoted statement that women who get bashed for wearing the niqab are the "inconsiderate" ones - and each time I raise it, you haughtily go on this "muslims are the only problem" trip. Its nearly as bad as FD and his howler about women who joined ISIS and got raped, beaten and murdered "deserved everything they get" - as if any woman "deserves" to be raped and murdered.
You need to understand, G, that the old boy has been railing on about difference before he'd even heard of the Muselman. For the old boy, the beards and burqas are the great crime, just as slinty eyes were the problem when the Asians were the enemy. Terrorism and security are just rhetoric. The real project is to alienate and exclude the tinted races. The less cunning knuckleheads here - Homo, Honky, Herbie, etc, openly acknowledge this.
I've come to believe the same applies to FD. His whole "sustainability" thing has turned into a subtle campaign to keep out the tinted races. What FD doesn't say is just as important as what he does say. The evasions, the unanswered questions, the trickiness. Where the old boy was always the old boy, FD has turned. This board has become a railing point for racists - old style neo-Nazis. Once, this sort of discourse was unthinkable. It was a given that racism was ridiculous. It went completely against the Western Enlightenment tradition. It went completely against modernity. We'd seen its conclusion in the Holocaust, and we saw how divisive, destructive and ultimately pointless it is.
But it's returned. Today, it's the sort of "freedom of speech" FD and the old boy defend. What bedazzles me is how far they'll go to defend it. Both defend the use of lies. When lies are exposed, they go quiet or defend the basic principle. When the old boy says to "begin with the truth", he is referring to a form of Orwellian doublethink. Platitudes such as truth, justice and freedom are all used to promote their opposites.
FD and the old boy have both called for an end to religious tolerance. The old boy thinks the very idea of tolerance is a joke, although he'll allude to liberal values in the defense of ripping them apart. Both call for the introduction of religious discrimination, although they're silent when it comes to fleshing out the details. You know, things like religious tests for people entering Australia or the process of constitutional reform. Both claim they support the rights of people to wear what they choose, but cheer on when other countries ban Muslim head coverings. Both defend the use of laws and bans to restrict people's liberties while they feign liberal values. They try to fudge this, but it's transparent to all who read the posts. The agenda is not about liberalism at all, but brute force. The only liberties being defended are the liberty to attack Muslims, verbally and even physically.
But make no mistake, Islam is only a target for an entire collection of people, those the old boy calls the tinted races. This is just old style racism, and FD and the old boy will defend racism each and every time it rears its head. One of the tricks is the old Mafia ruse: racism doesn't exist. This is all about "culture", or religion, or politics.
The other trick is to assert the importance of racism: discrimination is a virtue. All people are racist. Racism is a natural part of the human condition - why fight it? We have to be racist. White man's burden, innit.
The other trick is to play the victim. Calling racism is trying to silence people. It's a tactic to restrict free speech. This trick is hollow. Calling out racism is just calling out racism, it's not restricting free speech at all. But what this trick acknowledges is that racism is not desirable at all. FD and the old boy might be happy to defend racism and the right to be bigots, but they don't like being called racists. They see this as most unfair.
The old boy knows he's a racist, he just tries to cover it up. He understands the implicit hypocrisy of emigrating to another country and then seeking to exclude others based on their race, but he does not like to acknowledge this.
FD, on the other hand, has little awareness of racism, but that's understandable. FD has slowly abandoned the principles he learned at university. He's switched teams. He's joined the racists and been slowly converted to their agenda.
This agenda is not just about culture, or Western values, or identity politics; it's about reintroducing tribalism and racial division. The ultimate goal is a new form of Apartheid. There is no reason or sense in any of it, which is why you can never convince through logic. After all, how do you convince those who are happy to propagate lies while they tell you, straight-faced, to "begin with the truth"?
Forum
Pages: 
Free speech is under threat from Islam .. (Read 20276 times)
