With everything that’s happening out there, we can be swept up in which famous person said what to whom, e.g. Brand. We can bring it down one rung to ordinary people we know and that starts to bite, we stand back and just look at that.
But it’s when it personally affects us that it really strikes home. A few tales of when I came back from overseas in 2008:
As a rule in Russia, one does not criticise the govt publicly but at a personal level, no one much worries what you say – you are accepted or ostracised accordingly. The essential difference in the west – UK, USA, colonies, Europe – is that it’s becoming like Russia in that your politics will see you losing your job, e.g. at Harvard, a cesspit of leftism since Faust, and in so many other ways now as well:
But there is the personal side too, the one on one, and this is where the entire society is truly gone – we’re not speaking here just of govt and its agencies, online platforms, official bodies, but of ordinary people in dialogue and nowhere is this worse than in man-woman communication.
You would think that in Russia, I’d keep to myself, say nothing, look at no one, caught in an oppressive atmosphere of fear. It certainly had been that way in Soviet times and I heard many a tale – one of the worst things was the policy of Denunciation, where anyone could denounce his neighbour and that person was taken away for interrogation – an impossible situation which really was not like that by the time I got there, some years post USSR.
It’s not easy to convey to readers just how open life at the personal level was. I’d go downstairs to pick up something from the shop for supper and the chances of not running into three or four girls I knew – well, it was a rarity not to. They expected and chaps delivered that thing which Katie Hopkins called banter – if you didn’t, you were a stuck up person.
I think readers know by now that I’m not crass to wimmin, unlike those old men on the football show who couldn’t help their sleazy remarks, which in today’s atmosphere always ended up with them apologising. So of course PCism does have its points and those two men were fools.
But as Katie pointed out – most situations are not like that, they’re just banter and so what? Lighten up a bit, she said. Now, in Brand’s case, she was openly telling someone to throw acid. This is a far cry from just saying you don’t like someone, or the govt should deport them or whatever – she was openly exhorting, under the guise of ‘comedy’, left loonies like Antifa and HatenotHope to do their worst. You find one thing I’ve written which exhorts people to do violence to a person I don’t like.
There were four incidents I’d like to mention and have probably mentioned before. In my first year back, I was still much freer and easier in banter, assuming that the west was still as it was in the early 90s. True, I’d seen snippets here and there, I’d read blogs and knew it had changed but could hardly ‘feel’ that change over there.
The first was the first day back, in London, on the tube station platform – it was shoulder to shoulder crowded, I went with the flow, got on the train and some man went beserk at me for queue jumping – er, have you seen queues on station platforms before? Not just that but he was threatening violence. Welcome back to Blighty. In my entire time in Russia, I’d had a threat of violence three times, things had almost always been civil.
Second was on the station platform some days later in the town I was in and through the tannoy, some Spotty Herbert was threatening people about prosecution. Er … no welcome? Just a reading of the charges? What fascistic hole had I come back to?
Third was at the doctor’s – there was a locum and she did what was needed, we then had a second consultation a couple of days later. This time, we got into conversation about my experiences, about thoughts on this and that, we parted and that seemed that.
Apparently she filed a complaint two days later about me being ‘familiar’.
You wot? I notice she’s not there now. I’m sure I was not the only one. The worst part was that they wanted to run some sort of tribunal over it and I wasn’t having that. I went up there and sorted it.
But that immediately soured my openness, except for one time we were on one of these interminably drab four day courses where they waste so much A4 paper that it must add up to a pretty penny. There was banter at the table and one female started telling people she was a dancer, that she loved dancing. I remarked she should get up and show us a few moves.
Tribunal – four stern-faced judges behind a long table, single chair, at least not under a single bulb light. It was bollox, they could have chosen a better one to get me on – they started with, ‘It’s come to our attention.’
‘Who made the complaint?’
‘You don’t need to know that.’
‘Yes I bleedin’ well do, by law, but I’ll save you the job, it was Xyz, wasn’t it?’ Silence. ‘Did she also tell you that …’ and I listed some of the ways she’d been openly defrauding them, she’d said it at that table.
‘It’s not your place.’
‘Hang on, you’ve set up this kangaroo court with no pre-hearing, you say something is so without evidence, these proceedings are quite questionable. if this goes further, you can be sure I’ll be taking it further myself, each person involved in it.’
They halted proceedings. If they’d had something, anything, well OK, but this was bizarre and it taught me from that day – never, ever say anything in front of any obviously lefty woman or pussified man. Not in this country. All banter stops as of now.
Then through the blog, tales came in from many countries that it was exactly the same and so we’ve been exposing this sort of thing for years now. I seriously asked myself after those two incidents if I’d been out of order – one does that, thinking through what they could get you on. Banter is flying around a table, things are said and most times it gets edgy but that’s that. The woman who was my partner there [next day] was nonplussed, she’d said far worse. She was a decent sort by the way, so they do exist.
I don’t want to go over old ground again but the question as to what this is all about must have crossed the minds of anyone on our side of politics – it’s not just ‘hit the right’, it’s the breaking down of any sort of conviviality, breaking down of any sort of bonhomie, any esprit de corps, it’s sowing distrust, creating enemy groups, dividing and ruling.
And one of those divisions is male versus female – they’re hellbent on that with all this woke tosh and the anti toxic white male. And golly gosh, isn’t all the bile coming out now? The big payback methinks.
To finish up, there are many legitimate grievances which various ladies I know have but I also see them placed in context and within that reasonable framing, one is far more inclined to consider and modify – seems to me most people are reasonable if shown politely and not in a hostile way. Sometimes we’re not at the time but then we go away and think it through.
This thing though with the feminazis and in fact, all left-loonery, is the new edginess, the blatant provocation, and my reaction to provocation is to get stuck into the offending party,. hence the things written here. This is the new element in relations between people and is just one part of the plan, which include suppressing religious faith and freedoms of various kinds, banning inheritance, breaking down the economy and reducing people to penury by various means … and so on.
As for ethics – I don’t believe for a moment that Pelosi’s lot won the House, any more than Labour won Peterborough or the Tories won Thanet South. If all was above board, I’d stay silent, so would most people, but there’s just too much backlash from those in the know quoting incidents.
So it’s not just perma-offence-taking today, it’s also perma-lying, blatant corruption, e.g. on expenses and all round lack of integrity in dealings with others.
Couple that with the empty generation coming up and how does that augur for society?