Spot the Hate Crime!


Article in progress!

About these ads

14 responses to “Spot the Hate Crime!

  1. You can read a bit about this song here:
    http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=23536
    You might like to compare it with this one
    http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=15704
    by the black songwriter Ernest Hogan.
    And especially this one:

  2. Hugo Miller

    We should make this our ‘anthem’! What would Mr Ambrose have said if he had a crystal ball? Wonderful arrangement isn’t it.

  3. Paul Marks

    So playing a song that has a vulgar word in it costs someone their job – even if they did not know the song had the vulgar word in it.

    Some libertarians believe we can play this game – appeal to P.C. types, by stressing we are P.C. to. To them P.C. just means being “polite”.

    This policy is folly – because it does not understand the nature of the tyranny (not too strong a word) that now engulfs the Western World.

    For example talk as Gladstone and Winston Churchill did of Islam and you are a “Fascist” “Islamophobe”.

    The treatment of people who do not conform to the PC tyranny (who for example ask WHY they should contribute money to the spreading of Islam because they are buying halal meat, without even knowing it is halal, and the Islamic scholar who certifies the slaughter house has to be paid and has to give a percentage of what he paid to…..) is getting worse and worse, any dissent from PC (an at all) is punished, and the punishments are getting more and more severe.

    It is not a “nonstory” as some libertarians think and it is not “amusing” – it is not amusing at all.

    Freedom has fallen so much in my lifetime that I am astonished – yet I fear it has much further to fall.

    Especially as some people crawl (yes crawl) to the left.

    “Oh he played a song with the n word in it – get rid him!”

    How long before it is “burn him”?

    As for libertarians who mock those who are persecuted (such as the Reason magazine article which mocked those upset because they had been tricked into paying for halal meat without being told what it was or how their money would be used), I was shocked.

    Yes cynical, paranoid Paul – even I did not expect Reason magazine to mock the persecuted (comparing them to anti-Semites and pretending that the people who expressed dissent were worried about “magic spells” being cast on the meat), to side with the persecutors – with the P.C. rulers that libertarians should oppose to our dying death breath.

    “I was all a joke Paul”.

    Yes – like this BBC man being forced from his job was a “joke”.

    I do not find Saul Alinsky style humour funny – especially when libertarians start to ape the left.

  4. Julie near Chicago

    O.T., speaking of “Reason”:

    http://reason.com/archives/2014/05/01/affirmative-action-is-a-lost-cause

    So what should progressives do?

    Go with the current rather than against it. Seek racial justice not by louder calls for minority preferences — but by scrapping systemic preferences enjoyed by the white majority.

    From the 2-page article
    >Strong>”Affirmative Action is a Lost Cause”
    …But there are better ways for progressives to advance racial justice.
    by
    Shikha Dalmia | May 1, 2014

  5. I worked on the West End revival of Me And My Girl, and this number opened Act II. I know they didn’t sing the niggers line, though cannot remember what they sang instead. It’s entirely possible for somebody to not realise it is in the original.

    It is quite obviously an oversight, for which a polite apology should suffice.

    As I often say, one day people of the future will look back on these times with disbelief at the insanity of it all. It is though a good example of a situation in which rules become an end in themselves, and at that point all sense of proportion is lost.

  6. Julie near Chicago

    “[R]rules become an end in themselves.” Good observation!

    I want to be Dolores Umbrage when I grow up. (Although there was more to the dear lady than just that. “Power corrupts…and absolute power is absolutely delightful.”

    Wish I could remember who.

  7. I cannot resist using the example of one of my favourite bits of faith-based insanity-

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_on_Shabbat_in_Jewish_law

    -becos rules is rules, even if we can’t agree even if there is a rule. There might be, so we’d better follow it…

    • With a religion like that, it’s hardly surprising so many Jews take to the Law.

  8. Ian B – To be fair, how the Jews deal with electricity on Shabbat causes some of them great stress and worry. I certainly don’t think it’s clever to use their dilemma as an example of “insanity”.

    Voting LibLabCon every time is insanity. Actually, that is more due to mind-control than insanity.

    Paying the BBC TV tax is insanity. I became sane nearly ten years ago.

    As for the song; whoever knew some versions contain that word? And doesn’t the producer have as much or more culpability, if that’s the right word?

    Why is it in the BBC’s collection (without a warning)? Aren’t they the real cause of the problem? Why is the DG not resigning for failing to destroy (public burning?) all records and CDs containing the N-word?

    Except for rap ‘music’. It’s perfectly all right there.

    Ain’t that so, niggas and wiggas?

    P.S. Calling a woman ‘bitch’ is just dandy too. If you want to stop 99% of offence, ban rap.

  9. Paul Marks

    Julie “systematic preferences enjoyed by the white majority” ???????

    That is just nuts – or is it another example of it is “Reason magazine was just joking do you have no sense of humour”? As I was told when I showed displeasure with Reason siding with the persecutors of ordinary people – by mocking the victims of our P.C. rulers (“putting the boot in” to the powerless victims of P.C. is hardly an example of brave “humour”).

    As for the idea of using leftist language (and aping their manners generally) in order to “win them over”. If just does not work – the effort has always ended in disaster.

    Ian – Jewish law.

    The “interpretation” of the Torah via the vast conversation of the Talmud.

    When Selden was sent to the Tower he requested one work – the Talmud. Because (he said) its reasoning was an inspiration to the Common Law.

    Of course there are less positive opinions…..

    For example the cry of Islam was “raise your hand”.

    A complaint against the Jewish practice of placing one’s hand over the savage punishments in the early books of he Bible – so that one did not read them aloud (instead using the Talmud to “interpret” things in a more humane way).

    Islam insisted that death meant death, stoning meant stoning (and on and on) with no “interpretation” – and added things of its own such as perpetual slavery (rather that the idea of a limit of a certain number of years service).

    The Muslim claim was that at the time of Joshua (when whole towns had been put to the sword – down to the babies) Jews would have understood their position (or rather “God’s position”) – but that Jews (and later Christians) had rebelled against God’s clear commands in citing a degenerate “reason”.

    The Islamic message had (and has) the virtue of simplicity – and that is part of the reason for its worldly success.

    Of course it should be noted that (in both the Jewish and the Christian tradition) the Bible is mostly NOT the literal word of God – the Ten Commandments are, but the “books of the law” are THEMSELVES “interpretation” by human beings – and thus may be subjected to “reinterpretation” (which is what both the Talmud and the New Testament, in their different ways, do).

    The Islamic view is quite different – the Koran is the literal word of God.

    Not a few lines of it (as with the Ten Commandments) but EVERY SINGLE WORD OF IT.

    Mohammed was told God’s word (not “inspired” as with Jewish and Christian writers) but literally told word-for-word.

    Mohammed then passed on the messages verbally (without changing a word of them) and his followers later wrote them down (again without changing a single word).

    Indeed Muslims hold that a copy of the Koran is with God himself (the original copy) and is older than the world.

    There is room for lawyers in the Islamic world (most certainly – in fact there are several Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence).

    But it is not the sort of “law” that a Common Lawyer or a Talmudic scholar would be familiar with.

    To appeal to “abstract” reason (or to conscience) is heretical in Islam – reason may only used in the context of how best to carry out the Commands of God (not to try and establish law from first principles) and conscience has no place AGAINST the Commands of God (for that would imply that the Commands of God might be morally wrong – remember the Koran is the literal word of God, NOT of “inspired” humans).

    “The Jews are no longer like a Joshua, Christians are no longer like the Inquisition – Islam will also develop”.

    Errr no it will not – that was decided a thousand years ago (when those among the Muslims who denied that the Koran was eternal were crushed) and actually……

    Its immunity to such “development” is a strength (yes a strength) of Islam.

    George Orwell’s character “O’Brien” would understand.

  10. Julie near Chicago

    Paul, the whole piece is about how to advance Progressive ideals of egalitarianism, except of course for white men who, after all, do not deserve to be equal. In particular, about how Progressives can rescue “affirmative action.”

    This has nothing whatsoever to do with libertarianism. It would be a good fit at commondreams.org or moveon.org.

    “But Reason is not a libertarian publication.” –Oh? OK. Well, the column does not exhibit much in the way of reason, either. It’s just plain pleading, and pleading a bad argument at that.

    Reason should be ashamed of itself. Pieces like this are a perversion of what a magazine with that name should stand for.

  11. Julie near Chicago

    PS. Paul, I’m quite aware that you understand all that. I just addressed you because it was your comment above that prompted it.

  12. Paul Marks

    Yes Julie – I should try and explain it to you-know-who.

    But I am tired.

    Besides if he thinks that (for example) people being tricked into financing Islam every time they buy meat in the supermarket (by buying halal certified meat without even knowing that is what they are buying – let alone that the certification process for slaughter houses involves an indirect financial contribution to the Islamic cause) is a “nonissue” then I do not where to start.

    But it is mostly because I am just tired, I think a lot of people are tired now.

    Perhaps it is best to believe that nothing is bad is happening and just join in the “joke” against ordinary people.

    Compare us (the “Babbits”) to anti-Semites and pretend that we think that halal meat is about “magic spells” – it works for “Reason” magazine.

    The weird thing is that I think I know what this tactic is supposed to achieve – it is supposed to win over the college students (the Jon Stewart watchers) to the libertarian cause.

    “Look we are hip to – we also laugh at your stupid square parents”.

    It is just that I think the whole tactic (although meant sincerely to help the libertarian cause) is fundamentally misguided.

  13. Hugo Miller

    A nerdy correction to Stewart Cowan if I may; “……..Except for rap ‘music’..”
    Rap is not music; it is Rhythm And Poetry. Music consists of melody as well as rhythm, So whatever RAP is, music it ain’t.