2011 March 26 Saturday
British Man Denied Right Of Political Activity

The lack of a guarantee of free speech in Britain allows us a view into what America's elite would do if it could silence dissenting views: A political activist with the English Defence League (EDL) has been banned from all political activity or even travel by train. He has been subjected to a "Criminal Anti-Social Behaviour Order" or "crasbo". If you get silenced in Britain you get crasboed.

Last week, a man was hauled up before Doncaster Crown Court for using ‘offensive’ language. As punishment, he was banned from attending or helping to organise any demonstration, meeting or gathering held by his political organisation or even visiting its website for 10 years. In addition, he was banned from travelling by train anywhere in the UK and from entering a mosque, meeting room, school or cultural centre.

As more views become deemed offensive the number of unutterable viewpoints could get rather large. In such an environment I'd be tempted to voice views I didn't even have just to defy authority.

He is accused of insulting some people because of their race.

So for unemployed 38-year-old Shane Overton, the UK has effectively become an open prison for the next 10 years, one in which he can no longer play any role in the (perfectly legal) activities he was previously engaged in with his political organisation, the English Defence League (EDL).

This all amounts of speaking out of church. But church these days is church for a secular belief system whose rise was foreseen. Recently I happened to be reading Amazon reviews of books by Vilfredo Pareto. Great comment from Pareto from the late 19th century:

Pareto, after discussing some socialist 'sectarians', writes, "One day we will perhaps have the Holy Inquisition of the socialist faith. (Note 18)" The Soviet 'show trials' of the thirties were indeed this Inquisition.

While some economic aspects of the socialist belief system have lost credibility many other aspects have not lost any power over their believers.

Update: The UK Spectator is under police investigation for a blog post where Melanie Phillips describes some Arabs as morally depraved for killing some Israelis. Normative judgments against members of minority groups are now against the law in Britain?

It’s a funny old world. I have now been contacted by two journalists informing me that Bedfordshire Police are investigating The Spectator. Why? Because of the Melanie Philips blog where she referred to the “moral depravity” of “the Arabs” who killed the Fogel family in Israel. CoffeeHousers can judge for themselves if they agree or disagree with her language and views – but should this be illegal?  The Guardian has written this story up, claiming The Spectator is being investigated by the Press Complaints Commission. This is untrue. The PCC tell me that a complaint has been lodged, but that’s as far as it has gone. They investigate only if they believe there is a serious prospect that their code has been breached, and it hasn't. Our blogs, as well as the magazine, adhere to the PCC code.

Western Civilization's elites desire to force the West to commit suicide.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2011 March 26 05:28 PM  Cultural Wars Religious


Comments
British guy said at March 27, 2011 9:58 AM:

oh and why is this happening?

nothing ofcourse to do with that popular (in America) British ex Prime Minister Tony Blair?

I never understand why Americans love that fascist so much, and I mean fascist in the original sense of the word. Tony Blairs very dangerous government introduced a whole series of laws and 'regulations' that allow the government to basically do whatever the hell it likes on the whim of a handful of politicians at the top. Including harrasing political opponents. Many people give the government a pass on this because they think its only the BNP who are the target but as we now see things are escalating.

I am not a number. said at March 27, 2011 12:30 PM:

Reactionary! Rebel! Disharmonious!
Number 249 is unmutual!
Social conversion for number 249!

fascist blogger said at March 27, 2011 3:26 PM:

British guy, you are utterly mistaken as to what fascism is. Tony Blair is not a fascist. It is rather laughable that you would go so far as to declare that he is a fascist in "the original sense of the word". The word "fascist" did not originate as a slur used by liberals such as yourself against those they dislike. The word was coined by Italian fascists to describe themselves. They obviously did not consider it an insult to be called a fascist but they certainly would consider any reference to Tony Blair somehow being a fascist like them insulting in the extreme.

British guy said at March 28, 2011 9:55 AM:

I know what it means, so it seems like you who is utterly mistaken.

Blair changed the balance of power in Britain significantly in favour of the state over its 'subjects', while keeping the initial appearence of business as usual. As we see from Randalls post, and this is not an isolated case they started slow after the hate crime laws were introduced (or strengthened) but its becoming more common.

fascist blogger said at March 28, 2011 7:59 PM:

If enhancing the States' power over its subjects was sufficient for fascism then Communists (and Leftists more generally) would all be fascists. Why not use the word statist, or even authoritarian, rather than fascist? You are using the word fascist as a generic slur, plain and simple. That was not how the word was originally used.

Also, the idea that Tony Blair is a fascist is so absurd that it is only barely worth replying to. But I will humour you. So, do you think Tony Blair wanted to bring fascism to Iraq? What do you think Tony Blair thinks (or would think if he knew who these people were) of Mussolini, Gentile, Primo de Rivera, Codreanu, Oswald Mosely, Hitler etc? What do you think he would think of The Doctrine of Fascism? How does he feel about nationalism? How does he feel about Jobbik, the BNP, etc?

Everyman said at March 28, 2011 10:03 PM:

From the article: Taking ‘exception to them speaking in Urdu’, he ‘used racist abuse and told them to “get out of our country”'

In parts of England telling someone to speak English and/or get out of your country is illegal. It shouldn't be, but setting that aside how does one respond? You respond by finding exactly where the line is at behavior that the law can never ban and walking right up to that line and staying there. Maybe you can't say "get out of our country" but you can be viciously rude without so much as saying a word, and the law can't do squat about it. Blacks and Hispanics and many Asians seem to know how to behave that way naturally, almost like marking their territory. It's time for overrun whites to learn it, too. It can start with something as simple as an undfriendly or downright nasty look. Innovate from there.

British guy said at March 29, 2011 1:52 PM:

oh no he just wants peace and love for Iraq like all of those nice Neocons.

Erm, I'm sure Tony Blair knows of those people..
Blair no doubt claims to oppose Nazis, Communists and Fascists, and the BNP who are not really either just plain nationalists that are used as a bogeyman at election time.
However you have to claim to oppose those groups if you want to be involved at a high level in modern Western politics, so that doesn't tell us what he really thinks.
Who knows..

No politician is 100% one thing and whatever label is attributed to them you could find areas of disagreement.

I don't have to accept your definition of fascism. from wikipedia (since its easy to cut'n'paste)
"Historians, political scientists and other scholars haves long debated the exact nature of fascism.[25] Each form of fascism is distinct, leaving many definitions too wide or narrow"

"One common definition of fascism focuses on three groups of ideas: the Fascist Negations of anti-liberalism, anti-communism and anti-conservatism; nationalist, [b]authoritarian goals for the creation of a regulated economic structure to transform social relations[/b] within a modern, self-determined culture; a political aesthetic using romantic symbolism, mass mobilisation, a positive view of violence, promotion of masculinity and youth and charismatic leadership."

Well ok I got it wrong, New Labour didn't promote masculinity!
Self-determined culture? well depends who self is, in the modern West its manipulated by immigration policies of the elites.
Blair unlike traditional British left, is a big supporter of military intervention and got involved every chance he got.


I wouldn't call Blair a nationalist no but its not so clear cut, like most of the left in Britain, they don't have a problem with (and often support) Welsh nationalism, Scottish nationalism, Irish nationalism, and from most other countries as well. What they find particularly disgusting is British or more specifically English nationalism. Scotland and Wales are the heartland of the labour party and also the large Irish diaspora in England are big supporters of labour too, after devolution Scotland and Wales now have extra political leverage that England doesn't have, so maybe they are nationalist to some degree after all.

But the new loyality of the establishment is to the EU, not ethnically nationalist, but economically EU 'nationalist' (many don't consider the EU a nation, but its trying to become one).
From wiki "Fascism is anti-communist, anti-democratic, anti-individualist, anti-liberal, anti-parliamentary, anti-conservative, anti-bourgeois and anti-proletarian, and in many cases anti-capitalist".
Just like the EU.


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©