Any attempt to ban hate is the triumph of mad ideology over social anthropology. It is thought control, pure and simple: it will never work, and achieve nothing beyond tightening the grip of the State upon the citizen.
Exemplifying the absurdity of such legislation shouldn’t even be required, but – our educators having failed miserably to cement the principle of Free Thought among the young – it is not so much desirable as a life and death issue. Didacticism rarely works in such a context, and so parody is required….based on the assumption that our young still have a sense of irony. Discuss.
Rob Antifart: Right colleagues, we are here to pass a law banning all hate as expressed by lower-than-vermin scumbigots against any religious, racial, gender, sexual preference, demographic or otherwise disabled minorities.
Genevieve Redrag: Especially oppressed feminist victims of oppressive male sexist oppression.
Antifart: Quite right Colleague Redrag.
Arthur Nicebloke: And the Queen.
Antifart: No, not the Queen you fuckin shithead, we hate the fuckin Queen….
Nicebloke: Well, she’s old, a woman, and married to a sexist.
Redrag: Yeh but she’s not a fuckin oppressed minority is she you nobrain snowflake?
Nicebloke: Yes she is…we want to oppress her, and there’s far more of us than there is of her.
Antifart: But its not a crime to hate the rich you fuckin moron and she’s unfeasibly fucking rich right?
Nicebloke: But only 3% of people are rich, so they’re a minority and we want to oppress them, so they’re victims of hate crime.
Redrag: They won’t be oppressed until we’ve taken all their money away, and then they’ll be part of the huge majority, and only minorities are oppressed victims of hate crime.
Antifart: Well said Colleague Redrag.
Nicebloke: Taking all their money sounds oppressive to me. I’d feel oppressed if somebody took all my money.
Redrag: You haven’t got any fucking money you fucking retard, so how do you know?
Nicebloke: If I know I’d like more of it, I know I’d dislike having less of it.
Antifart: Look, the rich are hateful…..they deserve to be hated.
Redrag: Because they have the majority of the money, now shut up.
Nicebloke: Fine, just so long as I know they’re an exception.
Antifart: An exception to what for fuck’s sake?
Nicebloke: The no-hating thing. It’s OK to hate rich people like the Queen.
Redrag: Correct, because they’re anti-social. Now can we move on?
Antifart: Right, all those in favour of……
Nicebloke: What if, say, a religious minority is seriously anti-social though?
Redrag: Like who, fuckwit?
Nicebloke: Um, Jihadists maybe.
Antifart: Jihadists are victims of a non-inclusive reactionary culture whereby people are not allowed to think for themselves…
Redrag: Exactly….and they’re being victimised by bourgeois Christian Rightists trying to dictate a narrative suggesting all Muslims are like them…
Nicebloke: Fair enough….and those Rightists – you say they’re misogynist, right?
Redrag: Well of course I do you fuckin idiot…
Nicebloke: So why do these Christian misogynists victimise Jihadist misogynists? I mean, don’t misogynist oppressors stick together?
Antifart: Not necessarily.
Nicebloke: Why’s that then?
Redrag: Because Christian misogynists choose to be like that whereas Jihadist misogynists were never given a choice.
Antifart: Yes. Exactly.
Nicebloke: But Christian misogynists don’t kill people.
Redrag: How the fuck do you know?
Nicebloke: Well, probably because I never read headlines saying, like, “Methodist minister sought in Paris atrocity”.
Antifart: Look, what exactly is your fucking point?
Nicebloke: I just want to know who the exceptions to the no-hating thing are.
Redrag: Hate crime is hate crime, that’s it.
Nicebloke: Except for the Royals, the very rich, and the bourgoisie and the Christian misogynists, because it’s not a crime to hate them, right?
Antifart: Yes. It’s OK to hate the Royals, the very rich, and the bourgoisie and the Christian misogynists.
Redrag: Because they’re hateful.
Nicebloke: Right. I’m clear about it all now.
Antifart: Terrific. OK, all those in favour of….
Nicebloke: So is it going to be a crime to hate Trump?
Redrag: Of course not you antediluvian twat, he’s an opportunist pussy-grabbing brute who lied his way into the White House and…
Nicebloke: ….sounds like a good description of Bill Clinton to me. Do we hate Bill Clinton too?
Redrag: Look shit4brains, Bill Clinton is one thing, and Hillary Clinton is another…
Nicebloke: ….yup, she’s his wife. She stuck by him. And he fucked around and stuck cigars up intern vaginas and without lots of bourgeois folks voting for him, he’d never have gotten two terms in the White House….
Antifart: No, we don’t hate Bill Clinton because…
Redrag: Yes we fuckin do Goddamnit, we hate the fuckin shit out of Bill Clinton for the same reason we hate Donald fuckin Trump because they are both…
Nicebloke: ….oppressive misogynists by choice?
Redrag: Right on, for fuck’s sake – and that’s why we should’ve elected Hillary so she could clear out all these corrupt men owned by people like….
Nicebloke: …Goldman Sachs?
Nicebloke: …but they supported Hillary, not Trump.
Antifart: Look, bankers have no morals, they only support winners….
Nicebloke: But she lost.
Redrag: She won the popular vote
Nicebloke: But the election is based on electoral college votes…
Antifart: Yeh well, that’s gonna be the first thing to go, it stole the election off the People.
Nicebloke: So it’s OK to hate the electoral college.
Redrag: Yes. No. Yes.
Nicebloke: I’m just trying to get, you know, totally clear about the exceptions. So we hate the Queen, the Royals, the very rich, the bourgeoisie, the Christian misogynists, Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, and the electoral college. Now I understand.
Redrag and Antifart: Good.
Nicebloke: And racists.
Redrag and Antifart: Yes.
Nicebloke: And the Republican white proletariat.
Redrag: No, we disagree with them, but we don’t hate them. It’s just that they were misled by Trump.
Antifart: But Trump said racist things. You said Trump supports the KKK. And the Republican white proletariat must agree with Trump because they voted for him.
Redrag: Just because they fucking voted for Trump doesn’t mean they’re racist for fuck’s sake…
Nicebloke: But Antifa and Momentum have said if you agree with a racist, then you’re a racist.
Antifart: OK, look, some of them will be be. Maybe. They’re just gullible.
Nicebloke: OK. So we don’t hate the naive, gullible Republican white proletariat.
Redrag and Antifart: Correct.
Nicebloke: Just the racists.
Nicebloke: All racists.
Redrag: Of course.
Nicebloke: Without exception.
Redrag and Antifart: YES!
Nicebloke: So we hate Diane Abbott?
Redrag: Of course we don’t hate Diane you fucking bonehead, we support her in her plight of having to put up with racist scum insulting her on social media….
Antifart: Since when has Abbott ever said anything racist?
Nicebloke: She said all white people divide and rule black people. And the insults were about her lack of prep for interviews, not her race…
Redrag: They were fucking racist for suggesting she’s stupid, it’s obvious.
Nicebloke: Then she must obviously be racist for suggesting all white people divide and rule black people.
Antifart: Do you hate Abbott?
Nicebloke: No I don’t.
Antifart: Then what is your fucking point?
Nicebloke: I don’t really hate anyone.
Redrag: Ah right, now we’re really getting to it…..you’re not committed to the cause, are you?
Nicebloke: Not if it means becoming a criminal.
Antifart: Hah! Criminal! What a joke….you should view being a criminal in the corporate fascist State as a badge of honour….
Nicebloke: You may be right, but I don’t hate anyone, and I certainly don’t want to become a criminal because I agreed to hate someone.
Redrag: You’re a fucking screw loose, do you know that? That’s a totally fucking contradictory position you spineless worm.
Nicebloke: It’s nothing more than you’re asking of me.
Redrag and Antifart: WHHAAAART???
Nicebloke: Look, you want to pass a law making hate a crime, right?
Antifart: Yes but…
Nicebloke: …and you agree that the exceptions are the Queen, the Royals, the very rich, the bourgeoisie, the Christian misogynists, Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, the electoral college, and racists?
Redrag: Yeees….and so….
Nicebloke: So we pass a law saying it’s a crime to hate people who aren’t hateful, right?
Antifart and Redrag: Agreed.
Nicebloke: So then I say something hateful about someone you tell me is hateful, and because I’ve said something hateful about that person, he denies he’s hateful and brings witnesses to show he’s not hateful at all. So I get prosecuted for hating the wrong person. And no matter how many witnesses I bring forward to show I’m not hateful, I’ve already said something hateful and so I’m guilty. So I go to jail for a hate crime but I don’t hate anyone.
Redrag: Then it was your fucking fault for not having a mind of your own you fucking cretin, you shouldn’t have expressed hate.
Nicebloke: But you told me he was hateful. So to be committed, I said he was hateful. Or she was. “I hate the Queen,” for example.
Antifart: Jesus fucking Christ, what are you trying to say?
Nicebloke: That the law you want to pass will shoot you in the foot, because as many people on message in our Party will go to jail as in the hateful Parties you want to keep on hating.
Redrag: Is that it?
Nicebloke: No actually, it isn’t. If we put together all of the Queen, the Royals, the very rich, the bourgeoisie, the Christian misogynists, Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, the electoral college, and racists, based on the popular vote, that’s the majority of citizens. Because you say people who agree with Trump are racists and people who voted for Brexit are racists, and they won both the elections involved.
And it strikes me as illogical to pass a law banning hate crime when a majority of the People are excluded from being protected by it.
Antifart: You just don’t get it, do you?
Nicebloke: You’re right, I don’t. But anyway, let’s put it to the vote…..
Postscript: in the ensuing vote, the motion was carried by 34-1. In the movies, Arthur Nicebloke would’ve won the day, but real life among The Progressives is not like the movies. Genevieve Redrag then proposed a motion to expel Arthur Nicebloke. This too was carried by 34-1.
There is a surreal dissonance apparent in the politico-legal response to a concerted attempt by the world’s most aggressive, totalitarian and misogynist religion to improve its recruitment levels via the medium of mass terror. This is, in a nutshell, to pass a law condemning harsh criticism of it as “hate”, and then incorporate this into a framework enjoying the full force of the law.
When I was young and studying the rise of Nazism first in Germany and then Europe, we called this appeasement. I wonder how Herr Hitler would’ve reacted to a British law banning all hate of people goose-stepping around and barking genocidal instructions in German, but such pondering is academic: it’s the sort of law that foul little anti-Chaplin would’ve passed after invading and subduing the United Kingdom.
Not all Nazis stomp about in brown shirts and jackboots; these days, it’s not a good look. In 2017 – to disguise their intolerance – ideologues of all species call themselves other things. Like ‘newspaper proprietor’, ‘anti-fascist’, ‘President’, ‘ISIS’ and so forth.
There are two organisations smashing statues at the moment: Antifa, and ISIS. This is no coincidence, for their goal is to eradicate history and then rewrite their own twisted version of it.
This is what ‘hard’ ideologies and ‘fundamentalist’ religions do. This is why I posted this on Facebook and Twitter yesterday: