Thursday, 26 June 2008

For Discrimination

Some time ago, in the context of removing all religious conscience from a pluralist society, a government minister wrote that you could "either be for discrimination or against it". Well now we know. They are for it. Group rights give no regard for any individual; they judge them wholly on their membership of a group. Accordingly, in the tiny, bigoted minds of Harriet Harman, etc, it is perfectly ok to deprive a white man of a job on the basis of his skin & bollocks: but it would be wholly wrong to apply the same logic to anyone else. Think about what this means: it doesn't matter who you are, what you have struggled through, how hard you have worked: if you are white, and male, in the name of social justice it can be right to deprive you of a job solely on the basis of the colour of your knackersack. Group rights don't care about you: they care about what they think you represent: and if you appear to represent something they don't much like, you can be fucked, fucked regally and legally up the arse without any consent at all. It matters nothing at all that you may have faced a life of hardship, because of what you are, you cannot have done, and you are privileged, and to strike a blow against your kind, you must suffer.

This is compassion. This is tolerance. This is liberalism.

Let's repeat that, for the hard of thinking: it is ok to discriminate against someone on the basis of skin colour and gender.

If they have the wrong skin colour and gender,that is.


Colin Campbell said...

Can I suggest that you arrange to have these wrong thinking people dispatched from their roles as custodians of your great country?

It's all gone a bit mad from my perspective in the Antipodes.

Lord James Bigglesworth said...

Very interesting stuff going down at your site, TD.