PayPal

Thursday, January 05, 2017

Has James Delingpole Gone Soft? Or was He Always? “Conservative” Writer Tells Allies to Assume Their Own Moral Superiority, and Refrain from Doing Anything to Monstrous, Racial Socialist Enemies

Excerpted by Nicholas Stix

DELINGPOLE: Rules for Righties — a War-Winning Manifesto for 2017
January 1, 2017
Breitbart

I use the war analogy first because World War II analogies never fail, but second because this really is a war that we’re fighting. The bad news is that wars are hard, costly and ugly. The good news is that we’re on the right side and we’re going to win. Here’s how:

We will never underestimate the wickedness of the enemy

The liberal-left loves to portray us as the bad guys. But that’s just projection. From Mao’s China to Stalin’s Soviet Union, from Cuba to North Korea, history is littered with the wreckage of failed left wing schemes to make the world a better, fairer place.
As the great, now sadly-retired Thomas Sowell says, “Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.” Its malign influence is still with us today. Innocent boys being accused of rape on college campuses; genuine rapes committed by gangs of Muslim taxi drivers in northern England and by gangs of Muslim immigrants in German cities like Cologne; hundreds of thousands driven into fuel poverty, landscapes ravaged, avian fauna sliced and diced as a result of crazy renewable energy policies; a Nobel-prize-winning scientist driven out of his job because a feminist loser misreported something he said about women at a conference; generations of kids denied a rigorous, disciplined, useful education; the needless violence and tension engendered by #blacklivesmatter: we should never concede the moral high ground to the kind of people who make all this sort of stuff possible, no matter how many times they tell us how evil and selfish and uncaring we are.

We will always remember that we are better than them

[This is loser talk.]

I’ll give you an example: the dumbass lecturer at Drexel who tweeted that what he wanted for Christmas was “white genocide”. Should we be demanding that the university authorities sack him at once? Of course we shouldn’t.
The man has performed an invaluable public service: he has provided the perfect example of how ingrained the values of the left are in academe; he has shown prospective applicants to the Politics and Global Studies course at Drexel University in Philadelphia that unless they want to be indoctrinated with hard-left lunacy they might want to reconsider; he has further shown alumni of Drexel University who believe in old fashioned stuff like free markets that maybe they shouldn’t include their alma mater in their million dollar bequests, after all.

Sure, we should jeer and crow when we catch idiots like this man expressing reprehensible opinions. But the idea that someone should actually lose their job for something they said on Twitter ought to be anathema to those of us on the right side of the argument. One of the most thoroughly hateful things about the left is the way it tries to constrain free expression. If we play the same game, we are no better than they are. And face it: we just are….

[Of course, he should be fired! As many genocidal monsters like him should join him, as well. Racial socialist professors don’t just make monstrous twits; they destroy people’s lives. They routinely engage in grade discrimination, etc.]

The reason Sowell’s great and Milo’s great and Krauthammer’s great is not because they’re black and gay and disabled and therefore “helpful” to our cause, but simply because they think clearly and sensibly and have come to the right conclusions about the world. [Thomas Sowell is great, but Milo Yiannopoulis and Charles Krauthammer are not. Kraut’s been pulling his punches forever, and Yiannopoulis is a narcissistic homosexual who almost never writes anything, passing himself off as a journalist.]

We support our own through thick and thin. We are all equal and we all have equal rights, just like the 14th amendment says. (Which means, by the way, that we don’t believe in positive discrimination – which is just another form of discrimination, as practised by the disgusting left not the sensible and just right).”…

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

jerry pdx
Breaking news: Racist hate crime 4 negroes torture mentally disabled white man and stream it on Facebook! http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/05/hate-crime-charges-filed-in-chicago-beating-shown-on-facebook-live.html
Yes, it really happened and is getting headline coverage. This story will likely be used by the media to claim "We do report black on white hate crimes"
However, it's more illustrative of the hypocrisy and race double standards of the media regarding hate crime reporting. Black on white hate crimes occur on a regular basis but they are virtually always ignored, it takes a case like this, where the perps actually stream their crime over the internet, that makes it impossible to ignore. Otherwise the media would have just ignored it the way it always does when blacks practice race based violence. The perps clearly stated they were doing this because the man was white which makes it undeniable it is a hate crime. When the media blasts "white on black" crimes it doesn't need that kind of undeniable evidence, all it needs is a a possible white perp and black victim to turn it into a "hate crime".

Anonymous said...

"Should we be demanding that the university authorities sack him at once? Of course we shouldn’t."

Fire the guy. And if the institution of higher learning does not, then disrupt the place with rent-a-mob until the university gives in.

Anonymous said...

"But the idea that someone should actually lose their job for something they said on Twitter ought to be anathema to those of us on the right side of the argument."

People do not realize how serious a statement and violation of law it is to make a statement about advocating genocide, even if made in jest. The U.S. is a signatory to the Genocide Convention. Tio advocate the destruction of a people in part or in whole is illegal, even if again in jest.

Law of the land by treaty and above any other considerations in the Constitution. Is part of the Constitution.