General Quotes and Comments

"Liberal thought in the best sense, whatever its limitations, must be credited with the remarkable achievement of creating societies capable of combining social order with a high degree of personal freedom. This really is a huge achievement and is too readily dismissed by those of a more utopian cast of mind. It has led to the creation of societies with a high degree of compassion, a fact which the utopians are far too ready to dismiss. There is no word for [the mentality of the utopians] so I have called it malsi-tung. Those afflicted with it I refer to as Malisites" [source].

"[T]he left is governed by the Manichean belief that everything not the left is the right; that the left is the embodiment of virtue; and that the right is therefore irredeemably evil" [source].

"An extremely effective tactic of the Far Left is to call themselves 'centre left', and to label anyone who opposes or disagrees with them even slightly as 'right wing'. I should remind you that most if not all of [our] views and policies were regarded as common sense just 30 short years ago" [source].

"It is undeniable that the Left is a great success in the United States and throughout Europe: from rebelling boomers who instigated the age of Aquarius to today's teenagers who wear Che Guevara tee-shirts, a large number of people identify themselves with the Left and accept unquestioningly its caricature of the Right" [from a review of the book, The Left is Seldom Right, by The Discriminate Thinker].

"Leftists hate the world around them and want to change it: the people in it most particularly. Conservatives just want to be left alone to make their own decisions and follow their own values" [source].

"Because their beliefs serve their ego rather than reality, Leftists just KNOW what is good for us. Conservatives need evidence" [source].

"Politics is the only thing Leftists know about. They know nothing of economics, history or business. Their only expertise is in promoting feelings of grievance" [source].

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic, and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of snivelling brats" [P.J. O'Rourke].

"Message to Leftists: Even if you killed all conservatives tomorrow, you would just end up in another Soviet Union. Conservatives are all that stand between you and that dismal fate" [source].

"The left-wing Politically Correct indoctrination that has enabled these shameful events means one thing and one thing only: By deliberately ignoring crimes against humanity and subsequently seeking to disguise these crimes, the liberal/left have lost their very own humanity, along with their morals and their souls. ... Despite facilitating genuine evil and wickedness their prime concern is to ... seek to halt the rise of what they term the 'right wing' ... But ... [the right] are rising only because the public are awakening to the results of all that the liberal left stands for. ... Betraying your country via mass immigration and Multiculturalism is bad enough, but to betray, and to continue to betray your own children is simply a step beyond the comprehension of all decent people, and no amount of liberal/left propaganda and evasion can alter this one simple fact. For the first time in a very long time I feel deeply ashamed to be part of a country that you, the liberal left have produced" [source].

"Indeed, it is a sign of just how intransigent the Left has become that even when approaching an issue such as abortion, it does not begin by asking what stance is morally valid or illegitimate, but rather it starts by asking what is Left or Right" [source].

"It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so" [Ronald Reagan].

"It is not for nothing that George Orwell had to invent terms like 'double-think' and 'double-speak' to describe the universe totalitarians created. Those who have watched the left as long as I have, understand the impossible task that progressives confront in conducting their crusades. Rhetorically, they are passionate proponents of 'equality' but in practice they are committed enthusiasts of a hierarchy of privilege in which the highest ranks are reserved for themselves as the guardians of righteousness, and then for those they designate 'victims' and 'oppressed', who are thus worthy of their redemption. Rhetorically they are secularists and avatars of tolerance, but in fact they are religious fanatics who regards their opponents as sinners and miscreants and agents of civil darkness. Therefore, when they engage an opponent it is rarely to examine and refute his argument but rather to destroy the bearer of the argument and remove him from the plain of battle. Consequently, misrepresentation of facts, distortion of motives and general acts of character assassination are the preferred modes of progressive discourse, as any conservative who as acquired a public persona can attest. ... Efforts by the targets of this malevolence to correct fabrication and mis-statements of fact are guaranteed to fail nearly every time, in part because progressives don't regard their judgements as opinions but as received moral (and therefore incontrovertible) truth. Eventually an alternative reality is created by this process which no one would even think to check" [David Horowitz, The Surreal World of the Progressive Left at source].

"The use of the term 'anti fascist' is a clever poly by the extreme left. It allows them to avoid stating what they really believe in (most of them don't really know what they believe in or are middle class pseudo commies). When you are lucky enough to come across one of these hate filled hypocrites avoid the temptation to stoop to their level and try asking them what they actually believe in. They are all very vocal about what they hate, (fascism, racism, capitalism etc) but most of them will struggle to even define what any of those concepts actually are and they rarely want to state what they actually believe in. ... Most of them have no understanding of politics, economics, or life beyond what you would expect of the average sixth form student. Their beliefs (if they have any) are based on emotion and not fact. They are hypocrites and fools are being used and mislead" [comment at source].

"Even though we are greeted every day with countless stories of 'political correctness gone mad' we tend to dismiss them as solitary or silly. But the reality is that they fit into a bigger picture, a coherent Left-wing agenda" [Jonah Goldberg, Daily Mail, 04 January 2009].

"The loss of Mr Greaves, a 68-year-old grandfather, has left a great dark gap in the lives of many people who loved, liked or respected him. But it is the manner of his death that ought to wake a feeling of alarm - and shame - in the minds of those who have subjected this country to a vast, 50-year liberal experiment. We were going to be so enlightened and progressive that we would no longer have to be good. Authority, punishment, morality, self- discipline, patience, thrift, religion were all deemed to be outdated and unnecessary, not to mention repressive, backward and unfit for this wondrous new century. It was, of course, a terrible mistake, though none of those responsible will admit it, so it goes on and on. And now we can live in a country where an organist can meet a violent end on his way to to a Christmas service, and the police an explain such an incident as 'a robbery gone wrong'. Who thought of this idiotic, insulting phrase? Do our modern non-judgmental police think there is ever a robbery that goes right? The trouble is that they probably do" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 30 December 2012].

"The Liberal Elite normally prefer to ignore me as if I were a bad smell. ... [But] Mrs Vince Cable ... wrote to criticise my article about how cultural revolution and mass migration have destroyed this country we used to know. She accused me of nostalgia for the Fifties, and argued that independent-minded individuals could flourish without the married family. She claimed we need mass immigration, and that a property tax would narrow the gap between rich and poor. First, ... I don't want the past back. I just think we chose the wrong future. The best way of bridging the gap between rich and poor would be to rebuild the old middle class, open to all with talent. But it has been squeezed half to death by confiscatory tax, an expanding State and by the destruction of the grammar schools - like the one her husband went to. It is in childhood that the stable married family promotes private life, allowing one generation to pass on its morals, faith, language and traditions to the next. These days most children are swiftly indoctrinated either by the TV or by the State, ... As for her idea that we 'need' the skills of migrants, who does she mean by 'we'? Certainly not the British-born people priced out of work by newcomers. If Britain does need these skills, then why can't it impart them to the millions of young people already living here, now idle on benefits? Could it be because of the disastrous failure of comprehensive education, evident to almost every thinking person in the country, except for politicians like her husband?" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 30 December 2012].

"Whatever he was, Enoch Powell could not have been a collaborator with Hitler, nor could he have been part of a government that rounded up Jews and sent them to certain death in National Socialist concentration camps. He actively hated Neville Chamberlain's policy of making concessions to Hitler, and joined up to fight in 1939 as soon as he could. But modern Leftists, who like to insinuate that all conservatives are Nazis at root, can't understand that. I think this must be why the author C.J. Sansom thought he could get away with portraying Powell as a Nazi collaborator in his new thriller Dominion. It's all very well making up historical episodes that never happened but might have done. But if you bend the truth too far, you actually betray your craft. Actually, many prominent Left-wing people in British public life did collaborate with Stalin's communist tyranny. If I ever take to writing thrillers, I could have a lot of fun - and stay within the bounds of truth - by talking their actions to their logical conclusion. In the meantime, I suggest that Mr Sansom says sorry to Mr Powell's family for this babyish, historically illiterate slur, before the book goes into paperback" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 13 January 2013].

"It's amazing how the left hold non-whites to a much lower standard than whites. It's so patronizing and racist but they don't get it. If a white guy committed the kind of violent acts of terrorism that Neo-Marxist Nelson Mandela committed you'd never hear the end of it" [comment at source].

"A great tidal wave of syrup swept across the surface of Earth as soon as the death of Nelson Mandela was announced. ... He chose to adopt the path of violence. he did not have to. Apartheid South Africa was a political and moral slum, but many fought it without resorting to gun or bomb. ... The ANC was dominated at every level by the South African Communist Party, the most rigidly Stalinist movement outside North Korea, and grovelling supporters of Kremlin repression. This is the real point of the whole exaggerated Mandela cult. Anyone looking at the world in the second half of the 20th Century could see that the harshest and cruellest regimes on the planet were Left-wing ones, in Moscow, Peking and Havana. But the fashionable Western left will never admit that. They are interested only in 'Right-wing' repression and secretly think that Left-wing oppression might actually be justified. That is why there was nothing like this fuss on the death of another giant of human liberation, Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Solzhenitsyn was at least as great as Mandela - and, in my view, greater. He never wielded anything more deadly than a typewriter, yet he brought down an Evil Empire, with all its concentration camps, tanks, guns and bombs. But when he died in August 2008, I don't recall hours of eulogies on the BBC, or his face on every front page. Ask yourselves why" [Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, 08 December 2013].

"Ed Miliband jumped on Alex Salmond's bandwagon and offered votes to 16-year-olds. He does this because at that age most minds remain half-formed, and therefore it is highly likely that their owners will vote for a party with joke policies run by charlatans. I've never been convinced by the arguments that led to the reduction in voting age from 21 to 18 in 1967. If you are going to give the vote to children, then, frankly, don't complain if you get politicians with childish policies" [Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 27 September 2014].

"There is a joke: the definition of a racist is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal. ... There are essentially two reasons the left use this insult. Firstly, as they lose the argument on immigration, they must shift the debate from facts to morality. Secondly, racism is such a damaging accusation that even when untrue, it can do great harm to opponents. ... Leftists do not live in a reality-based world. They live in a world of ideology and theory and 'wouldn't it be nice if'.  As a result, they tend to be very uncomfortable with arguments that revolve around observable fact. In debates about immigration they ideologically believe that immigration is good. But when they are shown the facts about the negative impact of mass immigration, they become defensive. Leftists rarely win arguments based on the facts, as facts are not their currency of choice. Instead, they focus on the alleged moral failings of their opponent" [source].

Barrowford Primary School, Lancashire:

"More social engineering from [no doubt] a 'right-on' leftie head"   /   "Which hippy commune did the head[mistress] escape from and who gave her the job?"   /   "There's the answer why the system has fallen to pieces and teachers have lost control in the classroom, this person has officially handed over everything a teacher represents and put the kids in charge, another left wing idiot far removed from the real world let [loose] as a teacher" [comments at source].

"When they hit the workplace or anywhere other than a hippy commune they will be screwed. It's the looney left at its worst"   /   "I'm hoping the good burghers of Barrowford are slightly more switched on to reality than the Trendy Left of Hampstead and remove their children from this very abusive environment before the poor mites are damaged beyond repair. Thus the next generation of moronic social engineers is created" [comments at source].

The Left-Right Paradigm

The following extract is taken from the article:  The Left-Right Paradigm and the New World Order

"On the Right:  we have faux-Conservatives - nothing more than Crony Capitalists/Corporatists.  The 'Conservatives' represent big business, especially Globalist interests; the military industrial complex; the finance industry; aristocratic and old wealth (eg the Rothschilds); and foreign billionaires.

"They represent controlling and subjugating the masses, and preserving power in the hands of a small corrupt supranational elite.

"On the Left:  we have faux-Liberals - nothing more than Cultural Marxists who have long since destroyed Classical Liberalism.  The 'Liberals' represent all totalitarian and unelected bodies of power and sources of wealth and micro-management and control of people through the Unions; the EUSSR; ever-enlarging NGOs, Charities, and Voluntary sector; and ever-increasing Government at every level.

"They represent controlling and subjugating the masses, and preserving power in the hands of a small corrupt supranational elite.

"The Left-Right paradigm makes less and less sense ... It is controlled and given to us by academia, which has been almost completely controlled for generations by Leftist leaning academics, who give us a spectrum which they say has on the Far Right: monarchies, oligarchies, crony capitalists, radical Islam, Christian Fundamentalists, Neo-Nazis, and Fascists of all stripes... but on the Far Left: Communism...  It seems somewhat unbalanced.  All those listed as 'Far Right' seem very different to one another.

"A better way to understand it is that it is not simply a Left-Right scale, but ... also an Up-Down scale: It is Collectivism verses Individualism.  Or, Big State verses Small Government.  It can mean believing that the State knows best and has a right to tell you what to do and interfere in your life verses believing that the ultimate way of determining how successful a country is is by how small the Government can be whilst still maintaining or increasing the same standard of living.  See here"

The Real Left-Right Paradigm

Far-Left  <--  Left  <--  Less Freedom  <--  Government Power   |   Individual Liberty  -->  More Freedom  -->  Right  -->  Far-Right

Communism/Nazism/Fascism/Marxist <-- Socialism <-- Liberalism/Progressivism <-- Centrism --> Conservativism --> Libertarianism --> Anarchism

Identity Politics

The following extended extract is from the article: The Origin of 'Identity Politics' & 'Political Correctness'

"Identity politics (sometimes dubbed 'political correctness') is the result of a political-Left major backlash against the mass of ordinary people (in Europe and 'the West'), beginning in the 1920s/30s, in the wake of the persistent failure of Marxist theory to be realised in European 'revolution' or any real change through democracy. In shifting the blame away from Marxist theory and those gullible enough to adhere to it, and on to those the theory had prescribed and predicted would have been the beneficiaries, if only they had responded accordingly ('the [white, male] workers'); then the cognitive-dissonance within the political-left mindset caused by this crisis to an extent was salved"

"As with any fervent ideology, a hallmark of the political-Left is interpreting anything and everything in its own ideological terms to claim as a manifestation of the ideology and its prophecy - jumping on a bandwagon, so to speak; though here only to hijack it. The bandwagon here was, of course, the American civil rights movement, which though enjoying ubiquitous support within black communities - to the point often of various forms of extremism - featured virtually nil endorsement of socialism ... It is from the time of this co-option that 'identity politics' dates; many considering that the movement was incorporated into the Left in the wake of King's assassination in 1968 - the major turning-point year in political-Left politics generally"

"'Civil rights', as the first great 'single-issue' campaign, served not least to provide an acceptable cloak for the Left to avoid provoking a resurgence of McCarthysim. The major social upheaval of 'civil rights' with its large-scale and widespread rioting was easily the nearest thing in then recent US history to look like the promised Marxist 'revolution', and obviously was just the practical application the 'theory' was seeking. Moreover, the protagonists (black Americans) were eminently separable form the now despised 'workers' per se, in being presentable as a new 'group; from outside of the former fray of 'boss' versus 'worker'.

"This accident of history served to add 'black' to 'woman' as 'the new oppressed' ... 'The worker' in effect was retrospectively stereotyped as both 'man' and 'white'. With the inverse of this stereotype of 'white' being not just 'black American' but 'black' - that is, ethnic-minority generically ... so it was that the new 'agents of social change' / 'disadvantaged' / 'oppressed' were extended from women to also include all ethnic minorities"

"It is only with the knowledge of how this developed that sense can be made of why ethnicity is held above the myriad other possible differences that could be utilised as in-group markers, when in fact there is nothing inherent in ethnicity as an in-group marker to produce inter-group prejudice that is particularly more pernicious"

"Indeed, the worst inter-communal conflicts nominally between different ethnicities usually are between different cultural heritages with no discernible 'racial' differences of any kind - and what (non-ethnic) differences there are can be minimal; the lack of contrast actually fuelling the intensity of conflict, such is the need for groups to feel distinguished from each other"

"Furthermore, ethnic prejudice is anything but restricted to or even predominantly 'white' on 'black': inter-ethnic (eg, 'black' on Asian) and ethnic-on-'white' 'racism' can be, often is and may usually be the greater problem; and a negative attitude to a certain ethnicity does not imply a similar attitude to other ethnicities"

"The specific US experience, given the highly divisive politics in the wake of the American Civil War over the basis of the Southern US economy in African slavery, does not translate to elsewhere; notably not to Europe - as was starkly evidenced in the experience of World War II 'black' American GIs stationed in England in how they were favourably received by locals, who sided with them when discriminated against"

"'Racial divides' in European 'white' host countries are the result not of mutual antipathy but affiliative forces, principally within migrant enclaves and secondarily within the 'host' community; in both cases being through in-group 'love', not out-group 'hate'" [EMcD: though the latter part of this observation is indeed true in normal circumstances, this does not, of course, take account of the Islamic/Koranic doctrines of Al-Hijra (Immigration), Taqiyya (Lying and Deceit), and Razzia/Ghazwa (Rape and Slavery), Dawa (Cultural and Stealth Jihad), and Terrorist and Violent Jihad, carried out by fundamentalist Muslims as they settle in increasing numbers in Western countries with the sole and deliberate purpose of making every remaining Dar al-Harb ('House of War': i.e. any non-Muslim country) into a Dar al-Islam ('House of Submission': i.e all Muslim countries) until Islam finally achieves its longed-for global Caliphate.]

[End of Extract]

The Frankfurt School

"The Frankfurt School believed that as long as an individual had the belief - or even the hope of belief - that his divine gift of reason could solve the problems facing society, then that society would never reach the state of hopelessness and alienation that they considered necessary to provoke socialist revolution.

Their task, therefore, was as swiftly as possible to undermine the Judaeo-Christian legacy. To do this they called for the most negative destructive criticism possible of every sphere of life which would be designed to de-stabilize society and bring down what they saw as the 'oppressive' order. Their policies, they hoped, would spread like a virus - 'continuing the work of Western Marxists by other means' as one of their members noted.

To further the advance of their 'quiet' cultural revolution ... the [Frankfurt] School recommended (among other things):

(1) the creation of racism offences,
(2) continual change to create confusion,
(3) the teaching of sex and homosexuality to children,
(4) the undermining of schools' and teachers' authority,
(5) huge immigration to destroy identity,
(6) the promotion of excessive drinking,
(7) emptying of churches,
(8) an unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime,
(9) dependency on the state or state benefits,
(10) control and dumbing down of media,
(11) encouraging the breakdown of the family.

One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud's idea of 'pansexualism' - the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would:

(a) attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children,
(b) abolish differences in the education of boys and girls,
(c) abolish all forms of male dominance - hence the presence of women in the armed forces,
(d) declare women to be an 'oppressed class' and men as 'oppressors'."

Programmes of Treason

"There are eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state:

• Healthcare - Control healthcare and you control the people;

• Poverty - Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live;

• Debt - Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That wa6y you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty;

• Gun Control - Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state;

• Welfare - Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income);

• Education - Take control of that people read and listen to - take control of what children learn in school;

• Religion - Remove the belief in God from the Government and schools;

• Class Warfare - Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take from (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor" [source].

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil;
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"
(Isaiah 5:20-21)

© Elizabeth McDonald     https://www.bayith.org     bayith@blueyonder.co.uk