Niall Ferguson writes in the Sunday Times that Trump, bad as he is, is not the tyrant America should fear. So who is the real tyrant?
The modern American left…[it] thirsts to get rid of one of the most fundamental protections that the constitution enshrines: free speech.
He goes on to list the Left’s often violent attempts to silence those whose opinions they don’t want to hear and don’t want anyone else to hear. Ferguson then illustrates the convoluted thinking and warped rationalisation to excuse such crimes…a New York Universty professor writing in the NYT [of course] tells us that..
The idea of freedom of speech does not mean a blanket permission to say anything anybody thinks….freedom of expression is not an unchanging absolute…it requires the vigilant and continuing examination of its parameters.
The good professor thought that if anyone had their feelings hurt by anything said then that cannot be allowed…apparently we must balance the right to free speech with the obligation to be all inclusive….if free speech, however truthful, means a negative view of certain communities with the result that that community feels that it cannot fully express its own culture and beliefs then we must keep quiet and not criticise those cultures and beliefs even if they are in direct contravention of the legal and cultural practices of the nation this community has embedded itself within.
Ferguson says ‘If the criteria for censorship is that nobody’s feelings can be hurt, then we are finished as a society’.
He finishes with this…
Mark my words, while I can still publish them with impunity: the real tyrants, when they come, will be for diversity (except of opinion) and against hate speech (except their own).
I’ve got news for him…the real tyranny is already here…and it’s the BBC, the BBC that does not concern itself one little jot with this massive threat to free speech but instead fills the airwaves with far fetched fantasies about the rise of the Fourth Reich.
Want to speak freely about Islam, immigration, climate change or the EU? Not on the BBC.
The BBC is keen on shutting down and denouncing those who utter hate speech and yet this is the BBC which calls Nigel Farage a Nazi and labels UKIP voters as Far Right and racists, the BBC which labels Leave voters as violent racist little englanders….or mad as Rod Liddle reveals...
A senior BBC apparatchik said to me: ‘What you have to understand, Rod, is that these people are all mad.’
The BBC which dismisses all white people as racist, all white men as ‘male, pale and stale’….needing to be replaced by black or brown faces. The BBC is one of the biggest, most divisive and dangerous purveyors of hate speech in the country….Vince Cable aside it would seem.
It’s not just the left-wing media or the academics who work hard to police our thoughts, it is the police themselves…here defining what they consider ‘Islamophobia’ to be….a rather open, catch-all definition:
An Islamaphobic Incident is “Any incident that is perceived by the victim or any other person to be due to a persons religion (of Islam)”.
An Islamaphobic Crime is any Islamaphobic Incident that constitutes a criminal offence.
And here is the ultimate definition they probably work to as a final reference…..extraordinarily wide ranging and wrong……it comes in a report done in conjunction with the Met. Police…..
Essentially say anything about Islam and you’re heading to the slammer regardless of its truth…for instance the first definition is one that is central to Islam itself…Islam is one single religion [Hence the separate Shias and Ahmadis are not considered Muslim], the Koran is unchangeable and timeless…Islam cannot be ‘reformed’…Tariq Ramadan is a fraud pulling the wool over gullible liberal eyes who are all too eager to believe. And yet say that and you will apparently get your collar felt. As for the rest….seems a pretty good description of Islam rather than Islamophobia.
Be afraid, very afraid. They’re coming for you.