Category Archives: speech codes

Nationalism is fraught with danger

screen-shot-2016-11-16-at-08-37-20But so is refusal to recognise that attachment to one’s culture and history is a normal part of human experience

A democracy that stifles debate on vital and difficult matters by means of speech codes, explicit or implicit, is asking, writes Dalrymple, for a fascist reaction. He points out that in France, the genie of unease about the North African influx cannot be returned to its bottle. For the sake of democracy,

vigorous, civilised debate must replace the law of silence that political correctness has imposed.

France, Dalrymple reminds us, has

a large, undigested, and growing immigrant population from North Africa that congregates—unwanted by the bulk of the population—in huge and soulless modern housing projects that surround French cities, as if besieging them. There are now Muslim ghettoes in France so crime-ridden that the police will not enter, except in armoured convoys.

The Front national addresses

widespread anxieties that ‘respectable’ politicians have preferred to ignore for fear of appearing illiberal and unenlightened.

The party dares say on the subject of mass immigration

what many Frenchmen think and feel. A problem as essential to France’s future as how 5m North African Muslims are to be integrated successfully into French society has been left unexamined, obscured behind a cloud of wishful thinking and politically correct platitudes.

Dalrymple explains that the ‘respectable’ politicians,

by espousing the banalities of multiculturalism, left those with a desire to conserve something of traditional French identity with nowhere to go but Le Pen. By declaring that realities as obvious as the high immigrant crime rate and the resulting fear that many Frenchmen feel cannot be mentioned by the polite and sophisticated, they have ceded all public discussion of such evident facts to the impolite and the outré. The élites were the architects of the Front national‘s triumph.

She who must be obeyed

Screen Shot 2016-03-24 at 22.26.01The dreary tyranny of political correctness

Dalrymple looks up suicide in an online compilation of drivel that purports to be an encyclopædia, and steps into the following ordure:

As Baron d’Holbach pointed out, the contract between an individual and her society is a conditional one, presupposing ‘mutual advantages between the contracting parties’. Hence, if a society fails to fulfil its obligations under the contract, namely to provide individuals with the goods needed for a decent quality of life, then the individual is not morally required to live in order to reciprocate an arrangement that society has already reneged on. Moreover, once an individual has discharged her obligations under this societal contract, she no longer is under an obligation to continue her life. Hence, the aged or others who have already made substantial contributions to societal welfare would be morally permitted to commit suicide under this argument.

The baron was a philosophic radical, of course

The baron was a philosophic radical

One possible cause of loss of the will to continue living, Dalrymple points out, is

the impotent observation of the creep of political correctness through academe.

Screen Shot 2016-03-24 at 22.05.38

Screen Shot 2016-03-24 at 21.57.13

Sexmobocracy

Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.07.01

Yet the feminists are silent — deafeningly so

And hardly a peep from the feminists

Muslim men, writes Dalrymple, are

integrated enough to want Westernised lives for themselves, but not integrated enough to want such lives for their sisters.

Or even for any non-Muslim women who happen to be around.

It is not, says Dalrymple,

  difficult to see the reasons for this.

But

where are our feminists, fearlessly fighting for speech codes and the use of the impersonal she in academic books, when women suffer such severe oppression? Hardly a peep is heard from them.

Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.09.34Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.10.52Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.15.08Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.16.24

Europe is asking for a fascist reaction

Screen Shot 2015-12-06 at 08.14.51The price the West pays for stifling debate

Nationalism, writes Dalrymple,

is fraught with dangers, of course, but so is the blind refusal to recognise that attachment to one’s culture, traditions, and history is a creative, normal, and healthy part of human experience. A democracy that stifles debate on such vital and difficult matters by means of speech codes, explicit or implicit, is asking for a genuinely fascist reaction.

He points out that in France the genie of unease about the North African influx cannot be returned to its bottle. For the sake of democracy,

vigorous, civilised debate must replace the law of silence that political correctness has imposed.

France, Dalrymple reminds us, has

a large, undigested, and growing immigrant population from North Africa that congregates—unwanted by the bulk of the population—in huge and soulless modern housing projects that surround French cities, as if besieging them. There are now Muslim ghettoes in France so crime-ridden that the police will not enter, except in armoured convoys.

The Front national addresses

widespread anxieties that ‘respectable’ politicians have preferred to ignore for fear of appearing illiberal and unenlightened.

The party dares say on the subject of mass immigration

what many Frenchmen think and feel. A problem as essential to France’s future as how 5m North African Muslims are to be integrated successfully into French society has been left unexamined, obscured behind a cloud of wishful thinking and politically correct platitudes.

Dalrymple explains that the ‘respectable’ politicians,

by espousing the banalities of multiculturalism, left those with a desire to conserve something of traditional French identity with nowhere to go but Le Pen. By declaring that realities as obvious as the high immigrant crime rate and the resulting fear that many Frenchmen feel cannot be mentioned by the polite and sophisticated, they have ceded all public discussion of such evident facts to the impolite and the outré. The élites were the architects of the Front national‘s triumph.

This is happening not only to the French. For example, the Danes

have seen that, in the name of diversity, everywhere is becoming the same. There are large parts of Copenhagen in which it is impossible now for a stranger to guess what country he is in. The Danes fear to become foreigners in their own land.