William Crawley was questioning people on Talkback yesterday about ‘intolerance masquerading as liberalism’, and how people could be ‘de-platformed’ in the name of liberalism.
I thought that was pretty hilarious – William sounded as if he was a total stranger to such a notion. The BBC is a classic example of supposed liberalism that padlocks its doors against anyone who doesn’t follow its mainstream media line. It did so for years against Sinn Féin voices; it currently continues that policy in at least one case I can think of. BBC presenters know all this but they would rather pretend they don’t.
All that said or swallowed , the question Crawley raises is interesting. I was watching ‘Bill Maher Realtime’ on Sky the other night – it’s a US political talk show. Maher is a veteran political host and strongly anti-Trump; he’s also quite witty. But last time I watched him, he had a guest on who talked about a number of things in US politics, and got a fair hearing from Maher and the studio audience. Then Maher asked him about his views on abortion, and the guy said he was completely opposed to it. Sharp intake of breath from audience; Maher gave him another 30 seconds on the topic, made it clear that he thought his guest was talking rubbish, and moved on.
Abortion is just one of the things that Must Not Be Mentioned, except you go with the liberal majority. Another is the decision of some people to move from the gender they were born into and assume a different one – male to female and vice versa. I think people should be free to have themselves reconstructed if that’s their idea of using their time well and ultimate happiness, but personally the thought of moving from one gender to another makes me shudder. It also is surely fraught with danger – certainly if you allow pre-teen children to declare which gender they want to be and then facilitate their wishes.
Even were the youngster beyond pre-teen I would be uneasy. When I was in my teens I made decisions which, with the benefit of hindsight, were unequivocally buck stupid and not at all in my own interests. Fortunately they weren’t decisions that were permanent and irreversible.
There are a range of other problematic things on which you must follow the mainstream line or you’ll wake up nailed to the nearest tree. An example: rape isn’t, as is frequently asserted, the worst possible crime. It certainly is a crime and a cruel act of savagery as well, but in my book it comes after killing someone. Or even mutilating them – say, cutting off their nose. If you were to ask the first father you meet today what would be the worst news about his daughter he could receive, he would tell you rape would take its place behind these other two horrors.
But to say as much is to open yourself to the charge that you think rape is somehow acceptable, which even the stupidest and most callous of mortals knows it isn’t. But you’ll still be nailed to that tree for saying there are crimes worse than rape.
Anyway, to come back to my central point: there is a longish list of topics on which, according liberals, you must sing one song only. Try to to even quietly hum a different one, you’ll be verbally flayed alive and your attackers will be glancing around for a suitable nailing tree. All in the name of liberalism and freedom to choose. I mean, WTF?
Comments are closed.