UPDATE
Minutes after I posted this article, the ludicrous Jess Phillips published an article in the Guardian which could not have been better designed to prove my thesis. A number of people have posted comments on the Guardian article pointing this out, and they have all been immediately deleted by the Guardian. I just tried it myself and was also deleted. I should be grateful if readers could now also try posting comments there, in order to make a point about censorship on the Guardian.
Catching up on a fortnight’s news, I have spent five hours searching in vain for criticism of Simon Danczuk from prominent or even just declared feminists. The Guardian was the obvious place to start, but while they had two articles by feminist writers condemning Chris Gayle’s clumsy attempt to chat up a presenter, their legion of feminist columnists were entirely silent on Danczuk. The only opinion piece was strongly defending him.
This is very peculiar. The allegation against Danczuk which is under police investigation – of initiating sex with a sleeping woman – is identical to the worst interpretation of the worst accusation against Julian Assange. The Assange allegation brought literally hundreds, probably thousands of condemnatory articles from feminist writers across the entire range of the mainstream media. I have dug up 57 in the Guardian alone with a simple and far from exhaustive search. In the case of Danczuk I can find nothing, zilch, nada. Not a single feminist peep.
The Assange case is not isolated. Tommy Sheridan has been pursuing a lone legal battle against the Murdoch empire for a decade, some of it in prison when the judicial system decided his “perjury” was imprisonable but Andy Coulson’s admitted perjury on the Murdoch side in the same case was not. I personally witnessed in court in Edinburgh last month Tommy Sheridan, with no lawyer (he has no money) arguing against a seven man Murdoch legal team including three QCs, that a letter from the husband of Jackie Bird of BBC Scotland should be admitted in evidence. Bird was working for Murdoch and suggested in his letter that a witness should be “got out of the country” to avoid giving evidence. The bias exhibited by the leading judge I found astonishing beyond belief. I was the only media in the court.
Yet even though the Murdoch allegations against Sheridan were of consensual sexual conduct, Sheridan’s fight against Murdoch has been undermined from the start by the massive and concerted attack he has faced from the forces of feminism. Just as the vital messages WikiLeaks and Assange have put out about war crimes, corruption and the relentless state attack on civil liberties have been undermined by the concerted feminist campaign promoting the self-evidently ludicrous claims of sexual offence against Assange.
As soon as the radical left pose the slightest threat to the neo-con establishment, an army of feminists can be relied upon to run a concerted campaign to undermine any progress the left wing might make. The attack on Jeremy Corbyn over the makeup of his shadow cabinet was a classic example. It is the first ever gender equal shadow cabinet, but the entire media for a 96 hour period last September ran headline news that the lack of women in the “top” posts was anti-feminist. Every feminist commentator in the UK piled in.
Among the obvious dishonesties of this campaign was the fact that Defence, Chancellor, Foreign Affairs and Home Secretary have always been considered the “great offices of State” and the argument only could be made by simply ignoring Defence. The other great irony was the “feminist” attack was led by Blairites like Harman and Cooper, and failed to address the fact that Blair had NO women in any of these posts for a full ten years as Prime Minister.
But facts did not matter in deploying the organised feminist lobby against Corbyn.
Which is why it is an important test to see what the feminists, both inside and outside the Labour Party, would do when the leading anti-Corbyn rent-a-gob, Simon Danczuk, was alleged to have some attitudes to women that seem very dubious indeed, including forcing an ex-wife into non-consensual s&m and that rape allegation.
And the answer is …nothing. Feminists who criticised Assange, Sheridan and Corbyn in droves were utterly silent on the subject of Danczuk. Because the purpose of established and paid feminism is to undermine the left in the service of the neo-cons, not to attack neo-cons like Danczuk.
Identity politics has been used to shatter any attempt to campaign for broader social justice for everybody. Instead it becomes about the rights of particular groups, and that is soon morphed into the neo-con language of opportunity. What is needed, modern feminism argues, is not a reduction of the vast gap between rich and poor, but a chance for some women to become Michelle Mone or Ann Gloag. It is not about good conditions for all, but the removal of glass ceilings for high paid feminist journalists or political hacks.
Feminism has become the main attack tool in the neo-con ideological arsenal. I am sceptical the concept can be redeemed from this.
RobG
Did I not read something somewhere about an MP saying that no MPs could care less about the housing crisis because it doesn’t affect them personally? Something like that.
Kind regards,
John
Ben
18 Jan, 2016 – 10:34 pm
This pretty well sums it up.
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2016/01/18/the-fake-left/
Taster from Exexpat (on Squonk this evening):
” Villager be a good chap and stop felching habby – save some for anon1 and the other feeders ”
_________________________
Squelching – is that something expats do when they return to “fascist” Britain? 🙂
Squelching = felching (I was laughing too hard. 🙂
Mr Goss
“At long last BDS is taking effect.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/inquiry/23389-israels-qwarq-against-bds-is-increasingly-desperate”
_________________
Given where that particular source is coming from I think the expression “they would say that, wouldn’t they” is rather appropriate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To repeat myself – it’s always wise to take what you read on the net with a pinch of salt…..
John Goss
18/01/2016 10:41pm
From your link:
“If books like Noam Chomsky’s Occupy or Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine, or Chris Hedges and Joe Sacco’s Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt had been genuine, they would have brought people to the barricades in the streets, and there would surely have been attempts to suppress them.”
You know, John, I do find statements like this terribly puzzling. I admit I haven’t read any of these books, but personally I would have described neither Chris Hedges nor Noam Chomsky as “fake left”. Would you?
How is a book supposed to bring people to the barricades exactly? Did reading this article bring you to the barricades? And there have undoubtedly been attempts to suppress Chomsky’s writings, for example, as perhaps you know.
What attempts have there been to suppress Dady Chery’s We Have Dared To Be Free or Gilbert Mercier’s The Orwellian Empire? Do you know of any?
How many people have Chery and/or Mercier brought to the barricades with their writings?
Am I wrong to scratch my head rather over this kind of thing?
Kind regards,
John
Thanks for the link John. Incremental change is like death from carbon monoxide…slow and imperceptible.
Thugs of Israel: Let no day pass without victimising helpless Palestinians. Humiliate them, beat them, kill them. Fence them in and starve them. Destroy their farms, their orchards and their fishing boats. Have no pity on them, for only through genocide will we steal their country for ever.
Israeli achievements on 14 January 2016:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Israeli Navy opens fire on and hijacks Palestinian fishing boat
4 attacks by Israeli Army positions on Gaza farms
Israeli Army exercises force more Palestinian families from their homes
Israeli Army destroys poultry farm and uproots olive trees and grapevines
Night peace disruption in 8 towns and villages
8 attacks (6 Israeli ceasefire violations)
12 raids including home invasions
2 dead – 1 abducted (aged 17)
7 acts of agricultural/economic sabotage
9 taken prisoner – 11 detained – 89 restrictions of movement
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://palestine.org.nz/phrc/index.php
Node
18/01/2016 11:27pm
Thank you for continuing to post these sources. This is important work, and you’re being got at for it, and I for one am glad you are taking the trouble to do it and asking you to please continue.
Kind regards,
John
JSD, I notice you left George Soros out of the equation. I know Mercier and Chery do not mention Khodorkovsky but that criminal oligarch, see previous page, is funding with the filched multimillions all the media opposition to more decent nations like Russia with his OpenRussia and OpenUkraine media attempts at creating an opposition (soft left).
However, I do not agree with the overall generalisation in the article that MSM journalists of the soft left sell out. Some are very good and very principled. News Junkie Post is unfunded. But people have to live. Journalists, sometimes doing very dangerous work where their lives are at risk, have to work to provide for their families as in any other line of work.
One reason NJP is allowed to publish alternative articles, I suspect, is because its reach in global terms is not significant enough to cause ripples, let alone waves, in the polluted MSM oceans that daily wash the minds of the world’s sheeple. You are allowed to disagree with my analysis. However the unfunded NJP did break and will continue to break some good stories despite having no dosh. I’m sure if it was considered a threat the powers that be (again see the previous page) would find a way of bringing it down. Michael Hastings springs to mind.
John Goss
18/01/2016 10:41pm
I will send off a copy of this article to Chomsky, Klein, Hedges and Sacco, together with my musings, and ask them if they have any comments. I’m just irritated. I feel like a heretic, and I don’t really want to feel like that.
Did you know Chomsky has married again? Good for him.
Kind regards,
John
John Goss
18/01/16 11:46pm
Does that really matter? Was it a crime, for me to concentrate on what seemed to me to be an unwarranted attack on some genuinely left wing people? I don’t know very much about George Soros except he’s a rich and powerful man who doubtless has his own agenda to pursue. Maybe they are right about him! But I do know something about Hedges, and a considerable amount about Chomsky, of course, who has in fact been in the streets, and arrested, and thrown in jail for his beliefs. When he was a much younger man, of course.
Kind regards,
John
“Did you know Chomsky has married again? Good for him.”
No. I have nothing against Chomsky, but what I’ve seen or read of him has been a bit wishy-washy.
There are others who I think do a better job: John Pilger, Robert Fisk and Peter Oborne for example, but they are not armchair socialists, just good investigative journalists.
By the way I don’t man anybody’s barricades.
John Goss
19/01/2016 12:13am
I do hope you did not think that was aimed at you personally. Of course, it was not, and I am very sorry if you took it that way. I was just illustrating what seemed to me to be something of an absurdity: condemnation of other people’s writings because they weren’t bringing crowds out on to the streets.
Kind regards,
John
Giyane: “Political Islam in conjunction with the German police, directed the young Muslims to assault the women. They are in fear of their imams and the authorities, whom they know collaborate together. Job done.”
This is fascinating, Giyanne. You’re actually saying that decent, honourable men who happen to be Muslims are directed to assault women, sexually molest under-age girls – and they just do it, no questions asked?
So they don’t enjoy their perversion of gaining sexual gratification from innocent women abroad, and of course vulnerable young teenagers, not at all – heaven forbid! – it’s just a terribly regrettable religious duty they are forced to perform. My God, what a burden to live with – forcing yourself into abusing some poor young white girl, on orders of Allah Himself! How they must hate themselves.
JHC.
Doesn’t this tell you that the religious delusion under which they operate is incredibly dangerous, and ought to be stamped out?
As Descartes said (or was it Voltaire, dammit) — “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities”. I hope you agree that any religious delusion is an utter absurdity which can indeed make atrocities inevitable, as you have well argued here, for many days – clearly it’s not a passing absurdity on your part.
John Goss: “No. I have nothing against Chomsky, but what I’ve seen or read of him has been a bit wishy-washy.”
Are you serious? I’m currently reading ‘Turning the tide’ (updated edition), and a more comprehensive demolition of the long-term hypocrisy of the US Establishment, the corporate media, the compliance of client states, and a forensic examination of its crimes in Latin America (which is the main concentration of this book) has probably never been written.
That’s just one book. Could you tell me an example of one you found to be “wishy-washy” ?
JSD, no, I did not take it personally. I do not have to agree with my colleagues on every issue. There is a NT saying: “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.” Jesus, who the Jewish authorities had crucified, was Jewish, preaching in the occupied Holy Land. Pontius Pilate, a Roman, could find no reason to condemn him to death and washed his hands of the affair.
Ah, with Habbabkuk’s return (most welcome, IMHO!) I’m very glad to see his faithful hound Anon1 is right there at his heel. I hope you had it in decent kennels for the duration?
“Could you tell me an example of one you found to be “wishy-washy” ?”
Yes, it was a video presentation he did. But I would need to look it up. So not tonight.
John Goss
19/01/2016 12:31am
Yes, but in a different Gospel He says it the exact opposite way around!
It was clumsy of me, anyway. Glad you were not offended.
Kind regards, John
Dan Glazebrook’s quite good.
Sums things up rather neatly:
“Author Dan Glazebrook joined us for a discussion around his newly published book on what he understands to be the development and refinement of ‘western’ strategy in relation to the Global South.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m66-ZCMHVg
Shorter version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUVrfcaorxA
By the way, John, I cannot agree more with Glenn.
Possibly a good place to start (if you are not familiar with them) are Chomsky’s numerous recorded interviews with David Barsamian, such as Chronicles of Dissent, Keeping the Rabble in Line, and others. Highly readable, and not as heavy as his written work.
J
This is one which made me very suspicious of Chomsky. My colleagues at NJP might not agree.
http://digwithin.net/2013/11/29/chomsky/
John Goss
19/01/2016 12:45am
Oh, John. If every left-wing activist has to be a 9/11 truther to make them acceptable to you, then there are a lot of class traitors around.
Kind regards, John
He thinks Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F. Kennedy as well.
J
I’ve been discussing 9/11 and explosive demolition on the 9/11 thread (where it belongs):
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-20/#comment-573446
Chomsky’s clever.
But yeah, fake Lefts and indeed fake Rights were the way it was managed, in mass democracies.
In other jurisdictions it will have been Tribal, Ethnic and Religious fakery.
Dividing and ruling is the simplest method of control.
Look at the maps!
The peeps are always divided against themselves.
Not difficult.
Serves’em right, some may say.
“Serves’em right, some may say.”
Made me laugh Herbie.
“I’ve been discussing 9/11 and explosive demolition on the 9/11 thread (where it belongs)”
It might belong there but nobody is reading it. Nobody is going to read it and respond there Clark. In other words you are having a discussion with yourself. Bring it here and we can all join in.
otherwise people are going to think it is being deliberately marginalised.
John Goss
19/01/2016 1:10am
John, be fair. Clark’s following blog rules, and we’re not.
Goodnight, anyway.
J