Pat Condell: 'There's no racist like a liberal racist'

Post Reply New Topic

One of the few certainties in this life is that if you criticise the religion of special needs you will be called a racist by people who know perfectly well that you're not, but who don't care. These people are called "progressives". A "progressive" is what happens when a liberal goes bad.

So bad, in fact, and so desperate are they to assume that you're a racist that if they can't find any evidence of it, they will actually accuse you of disguising your racism by not talking about it.

I wish I was joking. Believe me, I'm not.

Personally, I can stand being called ugly names by people whose opinions I don't respect but it must be hard for victims of genuine racism to see such an important word soiled and devalued like this but that is the "progressive" way. We know this now. We've learned it the hard way. We know that "progressives" occupy the high moral ground where the end always justifies the means, and, as they've shown us time and again, there is literally no limit to how low they're prepared to sink in asserting their lofty moral superiority. No lie is too great, no slur too egregious, and if not for double standards, they wouldn't have any standards.

So, when they throw the word "racist" at those of us who criticise Islam, we know there's no point in arguing with them about definitions because we know they're not remotely interested in whether the word is appropriate, only in whether it will stick, and in how much damage it will do. You see, in "progressive" hands, the word "racist" has become the verbal equivalent of a chemical weapon, or a dum-dum bullet, used spitefully, disproportionately, as a first resort, and without the slightest justification.

To summarise the "progressive" position (without the juvenile insults): "All religions have fundamentalists, and all are equally reprehensible. Singling out Islam is the same as attacking all Muslims, and that's racist. Yes, I know that technically Islam is not a race, but I've chosen to believe that your views are driven by an underlying hatred of brown-skinned people, for which I have no evidence, but I sense it from your tone, which I find unhelpful, and therefore racist in intent, so you are a racist and you ought to be arrested, la la-la la-la." Or words to that effect.

But, you know it seems to me that the people who constantly invoke skin colour for no reason, as "progressives" do to the point of obsession, are the ones who actually have a problem with it.

They see racism everywhere because they're riddled with it themselves. The patronising racism of lower expectations for non-white people is very "progressive", and has been allowed to permeate western society like an insidious slime. You can't pick up a copy of the Guardian newspaper without getting it all over your fingers. And this kind of racism gives Islam a free pass by default (and with it the misogyny, homophobia and anti-Semitism explicitly endorsed by Islam) because, and only because, it's a religion followed mainly by brown-skinned people.

It's the brown skin that makes all the difference. "Progressives" measure a person first and foremost by the colour of their skin, and it's the brown skin that gets Islam a free pass it doesn't deserve from racists.

Contrast the way "progressive" racists treat Mormons, whose beliefs are equally batshit crazy, but they'll happily condemn and ridicule them in a way they wouldn't dream of doing to Muslims and the reason is entirely to do with skin colour, as it usually is with genuine racists. You see, "progressives" don't really believe that non-white people are equal, or are capable of being equal on their own merits, but only in the way that a handicap golfer is equal - artificially. They justify this racism in historical terms that no longer exist, thus condemning non-white people to carry around the values of the past forever, and to always need compensating for the colour of their skin, which "progressives" regard as a kind of residual disability, because they're racists.

Traditional liberal guilt is something we're all familiar with, and, even if we don't agree with it, we can sympathise, we can respect it as part and parcel of being civilised. But "progressives" have taken this to a whole new level, an almost religious level of toxic self-hatred, of ideological self-flagellation, a kind of Original Sin of being born into the First World, for which "progressives" can never forgive themselves, or anyone else.

To the "progressive" mentality, we are all imperialist oppressors in the West, whether we want to be or not, and everything wrong with the world is our fault by default. So, when a bunch of hysterical Muslims throw a violent public tantrum because they've chosen to be offended by some ridiculous trifle, the default "progressive" racist response is to look around for any excuse not to hold them to account for their behaviour, and to find somebody to blame and call a racist for provoking them.

"Progressive" journalists are eager to explain away Islamic atrocities in political or economic terms while carefully ignoring the poisonous religious beliefs that actually drive them because those poisonous beliefs make the brown people look bad, and that's terribly racist.

An Islamic terrorist can stand in the street soaked in blood, quoting the Koran as justification and "progressives" won't hear it because they've decided his real motivation is hostility to western imperialism, which means we can take the blame again, thank goodness. Otherwise we'd be racists.

Patronising brown-skinned people in this way is what "progressives" are all about. It's the fundamental difference between a "progressive" and a genuine liberal. It's what turns the wine to vinegar. You know, I've always had time for genuine liberals because I can see that they're motivated by a sense of decency so I can still respect them even when we disagree.

But there's nothing liberal or decent about the "progressive" mentality which has shown itself to be just so morally corrupt, malodorous, and downright dishonourable that on the rare occasions I find myself agreeing with a "progressive" it's like shaking hands with a leper. And it's more than apt that these wretched people have so thoroughly taken ownership of the word "racist", what's left of it, because nobody, but nobody, wears it better.

Peace, and happy racism.

Again, according to the progressives, we are allowed criticise every other religion except for Islam and if criticise Islam you're a racist.

Well, this is typical Scotsman behavior. I wish it wasnt so but it is. It's a shame really but now everyone can at least see it.

The liberals he is talking about do exist but tarring an entire movement is low brow rubbish.

Now what group is almost every extreme right group and neo nazi mob focussing their hatred against these days?

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46814000/jpg/_46814475_children.body.466.jpg

The problem is, when it comes to Islam there is a conscientious attempt to demonise it by politically partisan forces in every developed country in Earth.

Until Mr Condell and similar reactionary demagogues understands the concept of the economies of social power

Why is Islam treated differently? Because most Muslims are non-white.

Zionists. Nothing much has changed. Check out Stormfront recently, chum?

Oh, and your beloved Iran. And your beloved Palestinians. And racist Muslims in Europe. Here's a fascinating article, written by an Irishman actually, who documented his feelings wearing a kippah for only a few hours in the Swedish city of Malmö: http://www.thelocal.se/50790/20131014/

Islam doesn't need anyone to demonise it. The religion does it every day. And if it needs any help, people like Mehdi Hasan and Mo Ansar (who get endless air time) will gleefully make their religion even more despised and disliked than it already is. If I was a non-Islamist even vaguely secular British Muslim, I would be angry at the media for allowing these disgraceful bigots to pretend that they speak for me, or for anyone but themselves.

So, when do you think the concentration camps will be opened? Bearing in mind that the UK has no problem allowing jihadis to settle here whilst keeping out Australians of British ancestry and, say, African anti-Islamist campaigners fleeing for their lives?

You prove his point magnificently.

You are labouring under the racism of low expectations. You don't want Muslims (or indeed any non-white people) to be seen and to be treated as full citizens,

It's the brown skin that makes all the difference.

Not criticizing Moslems must be something unique to UK. In the USA, as far as I can tell, people don't have a whole lot of nice things to say about Islam. Particularly since 2001.

Yes, I know that technically Islam is not a race, but I've chosen to believe that your views are driven by an underlying hatred of brown-skinned people, for which I have no evidence, but I sense it from your tone, which I find unhelpful, and therefore racist in intent, so you are a racist and you ought to be arrested, la la-la la-la." Or words to that effect.

...it's the brown skin that gets Islam a free pass it doesn't deserve from racists.

"White" refers to a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East or North Africa. It includes people who indicated their race as White or reported entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan or Caucasian.

The situation in the USA is the textbook example of what I'm referring to. Rampant Muslim bashing

Actually, we don't hear a lot of Muslim bashing. Well, apart from the occasional nonsense from Fox News

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/eri ... rise-here/

and maybe from our friends at Storm Front. We just don't have very many Muslims here.

Well, yes. People in America are afraid of Muslims.

Actually, our friends at Storm Front are too busy hating Jews to have much time for Muslims.

.