Round 8,568 of the Education Debate

You know the one. We've been having it ever since the dawn of state control over the schools. On one side the 'traditionalists'. On the other the 'progressives;. The former believe in Latin and the cane. The latter want five-year-olds to explore their own sexuality and report their parents for failing to recycle. Meanwhile, away from the sound and fury, the 'progressives' have been running the system all along.

Turning to Fiona Millar's contribution from the gruesome Grauniad, we find, after the obligatory attack on Gove, this:

There has always been a compelling argument that education policy should be the preserve of political parties. Education is a big political issue – it goes to the heart of what sort of society and young people we create. But even I now reluctantly wonder whether big questions such as this one, the answers to which will have such a deep and permanent impact on the lives of so many people, should be made in this sort of haste, without proper debate and consultation, or to further the ambitions of individual politicians. Better to seek some sort of cross-party collaboration or even take the issue out of the hands of politicians and give it to an objective body that can review the evidence away from the day-to-day political maelstrom.

Here we see the collectivist, authoritarian mind peeping out from behind the layers of self-delusory 'liberalism'. Firstly, she offers nothing to back up the assertion that there be 'a compelling argument that education should be the preserve of political parties'. Such an argument would rest on certain presuppositions which I would challenge. Those presuppositions shine through the phrase 'what sort of society and young people WE create' - that's 'WE' in the Yevgeny Zamyatin sense of the word. The authoritarian social controller 'WE', to whom the idea that each of us should be free and independent to follow our own plans and principles is utterly alien.

Millar looks at the system we have, sees it's not working and reluctantly comes to the conclusion that the part which must be removed is the political part, the democratic part. She's obviously happy with a powerful state dictating to everyone and running the schools from Whitehall, but, given that democracy occasionally throws a spanner in the works, far better to put it in the hands of an 'objective body' out of sight, mind and influence of the people over whom it is to rule, and, if I may be so bold as to suggest the bleeding obvious, wholly made up of people who think - to whatever extent that verb is applicable - just like her.

The corrupting influence of welfarism

Cross-posted at Orphans of Liberty

The Mail is covering the publication by the government of some of the lame excuses people have given when caught fiddling benefits, leading with someone claiming that he was only carrying ladders as therapy for his back. Okay, I can see the humour in that one, but certain other ones stand out from the list, namely:

‘We don’t live together, he just comes each morning to fill up his flask.’

‘He lives in a caravan in the drive. We’re not together.’

‘He does come here every night and leaves in the morning and, although he has no other address, I don’t regard him as living here.’

Here we see the pernicious corrupting influence of welfarism at work, how it encourages the things that it is supposed to be alleviating. In each of the cases above, I surmise the 'benefit cheat' has been claiming that they are living alone, when in fact they are not, because you get more money if you're living alone. In other words, the state is saying to women 'we will pay you more if you have no man in your life (as a little reward for being so helpless)'.

It's one of those bandied-around facts that there no longer any such thing as a 'common law' husband or wife, and yet, when it comes to benefits, there is indeed. Whereas your benefits will not be affected if you take home a different man every night of the week, if it's the same man, you better report it or risk exposure in the Daily Mail.

The implicit incentivisation through welfare of behaviour which is harmful to society has been recognised since the very beginning. Usually in life, you get what you pay for. The Welfare State pays for a dysfunctional, broken-down society. No surprises, then, when this is what we get.

Equality watchdog gone rabid; fetch the shotgun

If our government really is in the mood for some austerity, they need no more excuse than the latest report from the Equalities Commission to justify savagely cutting its budget. Sadly I doubt that will happen, so we, the idiot tax-payers, will continue to fund loony sociologists and their sick obsessions with children's sexuality.

From a position that few would argue with, namely that it's not good that children are bullied for whatever reason, they attempt to justify prying into the personal lives of children and inculcate the state's orthodoxy in the maleable minds of minors.

If, in the name of scientific inquiry, these academic perverts wish to research the thoughts and feelings of children, then let them do so in the proper manner, which requires them to seek consent from the parents and use the data anonymously. The point of such research is open to question. Its only use, I suggest, is to paedophiles seeking to exploit the vulnerable.

Let this report be a death warrant for the Equalities Commission. It obviously has time on its hands, and as the devil makes use of idle hands, better to turf all these quango-rats out on their arses and save some money for the poor, abused tax-payer.

(Covered in the Mail)

The fair and balanced BBC

From today's Telegraph we learn that:

Anti-fluoride campaigners take to High Court

Campaigners have mounted a High Court bid to prevent fluoride being added to their water without their consent because they are concerned over its health consequences

They say they will have "no choice" but to drink fluoridated water if South Central Strategic Health Authority (SCSHA) is allowed to add it.

The potential side-effects, they argue, range from bone cancer to thyroid problems and dental fluorosis, brown spots on the teeth.

SCSHA wants to add the chemical to supplies in Southampton and parts of south west Hampshire, arguing it is the best way to cut tooth decay, particularly in poorer children.

The story was also covered on BBC Radio 4's Today Show, known for its forthright, combative style, right? Not in this case. Rather than follow the usual procedure of inviting two guests on to represent both sides of a controversy, they just got one guest from the pro-sodium fluoride in the water side and asked him a few softball questions.

Yet again, I feel proud that I don't have a television and pay their stinking licence.

The State: enemy of the family

"Last week I listened for an hour to a sobbing mother describing how she recently lost the six-year-old daughter who is the centre of her life. Her fatal mistake was to ask social workers for advice when she was being troubled by "harassment" from the child's father, from whom she parted some years ago. Within days, although it was never suggested that she had harmed her daughter in any way, she found herself facing a "case conference" of 20 people at the local council offices, the conclusion of which was that her child must be placed in foster care.

The solicitor she was given by the social workers refused to oppose the care order. At a "contact" session, when she and her bewildered daughter emotionally expressed their love for each other, the interview was halted. She has not been allowed to see her child again."

Christopher Booker - Forced adoptions get no sympathy from the ministry - wrting in the Telegraph 27/11/10

The re-normalisation of smoking: the fightback begins

Ah! That's better. "Since I took up smoking, I'm more relaxed and less of a cocksucking control-freak."

My fellow blogger Dick Puddlecote draws my attention to the latest from the big pharma shills, AKA the anti-smoker control-freaks, who are currently having kittens lest their tax-payer-funded pork barrel be reduced in the present austerity. On such occasions, you must expect the control-freaks to become even more shrill. I don't know that they have much to fear from the newbies in government, who are all pressed out from the same mould as the last bunch.

Anyway, key to the anti-smoker campaign has been the agenda to de-normalise the pastime, to ensure that no reference is made to smoking without an attached denunciation, and that old photos, cartoons and movies should be photo-shopped, edited or banned, to prevent the sight of a cigarette, cigar or pipe legitimising use of the nicotiana tabacum plant. Well, two can play at that game. Here's Peter Kellner, Fabian agent embedded in the establishment, married to EU apparatchik and traitor to her nation Baroness Ashton. Ooh, Peter, don't drop ash on your tax-payer-funded suit!

The Fabian Wolf amongst the Tory Sheeple

Wandering over to Roger Helmer's blog via the happy Frog (whose smiling face always cheers me up) I discover this post entitled; 'Remind me which Party we belong to?', where I learn of a fringe event at the Tory conference sponsored by one of my particular bete noirs, the despicable Fabian Society. Although they've toned down their policies since the 1930s, when famous Fabians like George Bernard Shaw (whose works the Fabian acolytes pray to in the notorious stained glass window) called for disabled people to be gassed, and lauded any crackpot dictator to the skies (the Webbs used to have an altar with Lenin's picture on it), their underlying agenda remains no doubt the same: scientific tyranny ruled over by a cadre of cold-blooded psychopaths. I expect they would phrase it slightly differently.

Nevertheless, what the F are they doing at the Tory conference? Apparently running an event about that most cloying of words: fairness. Ooh, doesn't it just drip poisoned honey. Roger, who seems to be trying to summon the moral fortitude to leave his traitorous Party, which I encourage him most strongly to do, has this to say:

So what’s wrong with fairness? Surely we all believe in fairness, along with cream teas and roast beef? But the trouble is that “fairness” is one of those weasel words, a trap set by the mendacious to confuse the unwary. I believe in fairness, by which I mean the right of everyone to opportunity, to making the most of their lives, and to selling their labour on a free market to the highest bidder.

Unfortunately, what doctrinaire socialists (like the Fabian Society and Vince Cable) mean by “fairness” is quite different. They mean social engineering, they mean creating dependency, they mean excessive welfare, and disincentives to work. They also mean redistributive tax policies and soaking the rich. I don’t like that kind of “fairness”, because it means damaging the life chances of millions; promoting fecklessness; and damaging our national growth prospects. Above all, I don’t like that style of fairness because – well – it isn’t fair.

Oh, those ghastly Americans!

I am informed that Britain has declared war on Americanisms in our language. May I say, in my best Surrey accent: bollocks to you, Matthew Engel (wanker!). Is that English enough for you, mate?

Although I believe there is a modicum of a good argument here, the rest is made up of a pathetic sense of cultural superiority that is just not merited, and ignores the fact that with many differences between American English and English English, it's because the Americans have preserved elements of our common language which we have jettisoned.

The debasement of our native tongue may be aided by certain American habits, but there are more important enemies abroad. It isn't the Americans who've spent the last hundred years attacking 'bourgeois values', such as education and aspiration, denigrating the middle class and bigging up the authenticity of ignorance. It wasn't the Americans who decided that correcting children's spelling mistakes was oppressive and counter-productive to their sense of worth, it wasn't the Americans who have attempted to manipulate language for political ends, changing the meanings of words, deciding what the 'politically correct' term of the week was.

That's right: it's the fucking Fabians to blame!

Still, I'm sure Alan Partridge would endorse it.

The welfare state we're in

"It has been well said that, while we used to suffer from social evils, we now suffer from the remedies for them. The difference is that, while in former times the social evils were gradually disappearing with the growth of wealth, the remedies we have introduced are beginning to threaten the continuance of that growth of wealth on which all future improvement depends. Instead of the 'five giants' which the welfare state of the Beveridge report was designed to combat, we are now raising new giants which may well prove even greater enemies of a decent way of life. Though we may have speeded up a little the conquest of want, disease, ignorance, squalor, and idleness, we may in the future do worse even in that struggle when the chief dangers will come from inflation, paralyzing taxation, coercive labor unions, an ever increasing dominance of government in education, and a social service bureaucracy with far-reaching arbitrary powers - dangers from which the individual cannot escape by his own efforts and which the momentum of the overextended machinery of government is likely to increase rather than mitigate."

Friedrich Hayek, 'The Constitution of Liberty' (first published 1960), from the chapter 'Social Security'.

A world turned upside down

I've been sucked into a parallel universe or something. How else to explain Roy Hattersley's comment that the Labour Party should become 'a libertarian party AGAIN'?

What a cunt. Roy, your party is not, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be anything other than the deadly enemy of freedom. Moving on through your ridiculous article, and going by the straight, dictionary definition rather than the tainted political slogan, there's nothing progressive about Labour, and as for being radical, indeed you are: radically wrong. It's all very well you celebrating, like the rest of us, the fall of your party from government, but don't think you can sneak away whistling from the crimes of New Labour. You don't get a 'clean slate' to start again. You wrecked our country, and think yourself lucky you're not all hanging from a gallows for your collective(ist) treason.

Hat tip: Libertarian Party blog

New Labour's war on freedom

Freedom of speech is one of the most fundamental of our natural rights. For this reason it is the subject of the First Amendment to the US Constitution, but that doesn't help you much if you're living in Airstrip 1 under the fabian jackboots of New Labour, and godless as the fabians undoubtedly are, they're not averse to burning one of their co-irreligionists, for the greater good.

Hence we learn of an atheist convicted of the absurd non-crime of putting anti-Christian and anti-Islam leaflets in a 'prayer room' in Liverpool Airport. We can safely assume that the authorities would have let the anti-Christian stuff pass, especially as 'prayer rooms' are for muslims. This is deemed to be "causing religiously aggravated harassment". Aw, diddums.

The Secular Society is up in arms, for good reason, but as usual they will blame religious people, but it wasn't religious people who brought in all these ludicrous laws, it was your pals the fabians in government. The aim is not to shield the religious, but to stifle free speech.

The unbearable cuntness of our nazified school system

Via Corrugated Soundbite, the execrable Diane Abbot rap, pausing at the Express story on politicising the school curriculum, I come to the diabolical 'Education for Citizenship' website, a monstrous, hitlerian programme for indoctrinating school children into the New World Order's vision of the future. I recommend readers to browse amongst the pages to understand how deeply propagandised every facet of the school curriculum has become.

Children are no longer expected to learn even how to add up or subtract without a brain-washing subtext:

"Mainstreaming antidiscrimination in the maths curriculum can address the needs of all pupils by helping them to question values, have a truer understanding of the worldwide sources and application of maths and gain true equality of access to the curriculum."

They can't do PE without the Commissars stamping their mark:

"Gender equality is an important issue in PE. The subject can provide opportunities for pupils to learn about and discuss issues of discrimination in sport both locally and nationally."

Science is fucked:

"Biology as a subject can help pupils explore these rights through the Human Genome Project which was set out to safeguard human rights."

History is reduced to the Holocaust, the slave trade and the suffragettes. Geography is just another platform for the UN;

"Human rights are the rights we all hold in common as expressed in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Geography as a subject can encourage investigations on issues relevant to the exploration of human rights issues. Looking at population movements in developing countries is one way of doing this."

It goes on and on. This is not just deluded, left-wing scum in Scotland. The same agenda is to be found throughout the world, and is linked to Unicef and Agenda 21. That is why it should be seen in a global context. The enemies of free humanity are very clear in what they intend to do, and they're doing it. Until further notice, parents must try to get their kids out of these political indoctrination prison stations (or state schools as they're more usually called), and if they can't do that for whatever reason, they must take steps to neutralise the brain-washing. Otherwise, don't be surprised when your kids turn on you and denounce you, because that's what has always happened in the past when the same methods have been employed.

Ripping a baby from its mother's breast: just an ordinary day for the eugenicist social workers

The eugenics agenda may have gone underground since Hitler gave it a bad name, but it shows itself alive and well in the sickening case of Kerry Robertson, who first came to public attention when social workers prevented her marrying her boyfriend on the grounds that she wasn't intelligent enough. The couple went on the run to Ireland, fearful that the Fabian ghouls would take her child away (she was pregnant at the time), believing that the Irish authorities were not quite as evil as their British counterparts. Alas, her baby has now been kidnapped by the state.

Kerry has committed no crime, unless the love of a mother for her own child is now forbidden by this monstrous Fabian regime.

Hat tip: Freedom Theory UK

Fabian state snoopers target five-year-olds

The Big Brother control freaks are going after five-year-olds, making them fill in questionaires about their home life. The information will be entered into a database and parents will be targeted for re-education.

As usual these sickos are able mask their agenda in the language of moderation. They will 'encourage' parents to meet with the local SS (Social Services). It is not difficult to imagine that failure to comply with such 'encouragement' will be viewed very dimly.

New Labour's army of do-gooders are fundamentalists, upon whom rational argument is wasted. These people, who in a free society could be viewed with ridicule, are, when empowered by the force of the state, very dangerous indeed. They have no concept of individual liberty, and, worse still, they have absolute faith in the righteousness of their poisonous creed.

New Labour paedo nazi scat-munchers push on with tyrannical agenda

New Labour, the worst government in this country's history, a government dreamt up by George Orwell at the height of tuberculosis-induced fever, a study in limp-wristed tyranny, are rushing ahead with their destruction of all vestiges of freedom in our benighted country.

So we learn Transport Commissar Paul Clark has stated that passengers cannot refuse to be put through the DNA-frying perv-scanners being set up in airports around the world. We'll see about that, you perverted nazi cunt.

Paul Clark is a terrorist. He employs terrorism to advance a political agenda.

Beyond parody: Fabian Ed Balls accuses the tories of 'social engineering'

What can you say about Ed Balls, a key Fabian operative in the Brownist junta, accusing the tories of 'social engineering'?

Surely this is the highest praise, coming from the mouth of a Fabian? Their whole agenda is based on social engineering. Indeed, their spiritual guide George Bernard Shaw went as far as to advocate the use of gas chambers to rid society of undesirables, which is close to the ultimate in terms of social engineering. Is he complaining perhaps that the tories are stealing labour clothes? In fact, no. He is actually criticising the tories, on the basis that social engineering is a bad thing - at least when practiced by non-Fabians.

So what social engineering is he opposing? Why, supporting married couples and families. Naturally, he tells us what we all know, that the best upbringing for a child is to be raised by two married parents, but any attempt to support this traditional family is wrong, because it will 'stigmatise' those children who are not so lucky.

Right, so to support married parents is social engineering which will (in a zero sum game) be to the detriment of single parents and their children. Does this not mean that Balls and his Fabian pals have been attempting social engineering in the opposite direction? Intentionally seeking to break up and denigrate married families?

Yes it does. Why? Because that is what the Fabians have always wanted.

"Boys aged three must work more": Is this North Korea?

More bollocks from the nanny-from-hell-state, with the spotlight turned on three-year-old boys, who 'must work more', according to the latest worse-than-useless guidance from the Ministry of Fucking with the Heads of Little Children.

Why don't you leave them the fuck alone, you perverted pedagogues? Can't a fucking three-year-old have some peace from your crazy social engineering? Not likely, under these Fabian monsters.

The Fabian wolf is hungry

Labour's war on individual freedom continues with its planned assault on home-schoolers, for whom the psychopathic Fabians hold a particular hatred, as was also the case in that laboratory of Fabianism in action: Nazi Germany.

Not for nothing is the Fabian Society's symbol a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Hat tip: Infowars

"For us world government is the final objective"

"In 1945, it was the hope of the whole world that east-west co-operation would prove close enough to permit the United Nations to be transformed step by step into a world government."

"Labour always regarded the cold war strategies as a second best, forced on us by Russia's obstinacy and remained faithful to its long-term belief in the establishment of east-west co-operation as the basis for a strengthened United Nations developing towards world government."

"For us world government is the final objective - and the United Nations the chosen instrument by which the world can move away from the anarchy of power politics towards the creation of a genuine world community and the rule of law."

All quotes from the 1964 Labour Party Manifesto. Of course, only a crazy conspiracy theorist would read the above and think that they were calling for a world government.

Hat tip: Carl Teichrib

More Zieg Heil Labour shit from the enviro-nazi cocksuckers

'Lord' Chris Smith is pimping the Fabian hell of scientific dictatorship over every aspect of everyone's life - all to save the planet. In order to throw the ordinary people off the scent, one of the Enviro-Jugend claims that 'it will probably only be bankers and those on extravagant lifestyles who would lose out.' But this is a complete fucking lie.