Feminism a Neo-Con Tool 2656


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.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

2,656 thoughts on “Feminism a Neo-Con Tool

1 61 62 63 64 65 89
  • glenn_uk

    It’s actually worse than Nazi Germany. Hitler may have gassed millions of Jews in industrial slaughterhouses, but he never went so far as to issue wristbands. #fascistbritain #worsethanhitler

    Heh – that’s actually rather funny, in a macabre way.

  • giyane

    John Goss

    “a better life somewhere where they might not get perpetual bombs falling on them from the sky.”

    Russia’s bombing campaign has been targeted at Al Qaida, who are supported by USUKIS and Saudi Arabia, and helped by turkey on the ground.

    Bombing the capitals of the supporters might have an effect on them. It would be a painful but as worth it in the end as the neo-con re-drawing of the Middle eastern borders.

    A nice hole in the side of the Palace of Westminster, a few in the Royal palaces in Saudi Arabia, Ankara, and Washington. Then the flow of migrants might start to come down!

  • glenn_uk

    Macky:

    Resident Dissident; “Is that the same Chomsky who although he despises the US so much and could probably live anywhere he wanted still choses to live in the US?”

    LOL ! Well that certainly wraps it up & refutes all of Chomsky points ! ?

    Indeed! Funnily enough I was saying just the other day here, that Chomsky’s arguments are impossible to dispute, because he uses very well referenced facts, linking them to form a narrative which right-wingers and Imperialist apologists simply don’t want to recognise.

    So all they have left, as ably demonstrated by RD here, is name calling and weak yah-boo style insults.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Macky
    Glenn_Uk

    Chomsky has a profound commitment to freedom of speech, extending even to Holocaust denial, and has always praised the United States for its libertarian tradition in this matter. It’s one reason he likes to live there.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    I knew the West would get some creatures on the ground to fight its wars in the ME.

    Turkeys, now? Doesn’t surprise me art all.

    Wonder if Craig is just hibernating for the winter.

    Anyway, I’m off to Thailand.

    See you in the spring.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    I mean, of course, the matter of freedom of speech. Not Holocaust denial (to be clear).

    J

  • Anon1

    Glenn

    Chomsky is undoubtedly an expert in his field of linguistics. In politics, he gets no-one excited except his hardcore base of student support who collectively cream themselves whenever he speaks. There has certainly been plenty of criticism of Chomsky, just none that you would want to recognise.

    Macky has a wet behind the ears student union outlook on the world so it is no surprise to find he is a follower of Chomsky. You on the other hand I am disappointed by.

  • Anon1

    Glenn

    “Heh – that’s actually rather funny, in a macabre way.”

    There’s more. Hitler may have had camps, but never did he dream of subjecting the inmates to Songs of Praise.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Refusal to debate someone is not a restriction of their freedom of speech.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • glenn_uk

    Indeed, JSD – it was obvious enough what you meant, not to worry. I’ve always thought it a pathetic response to a critic : “Well go and live in Russia then”, or some-such. So only people who remain utterly uncritical should have the right to exist in their own country? We must assume it’s already perfection, so any change would be to its detriment? (Actually, a lot of Amerikans do think exactly that. Take a look at this horror-show: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/01/14/donald-trumps-freedom-girls_n_8984518.html)

    *

    Anon1: So you can only offer ad-hominems concerning Chomsky too, I take it? Got nothing huh?

  • Anon1

    Johnny Goss

    To clarify, it is all our fault that Muslims are slaughtering Muslims, causing millions to seek refuge in Europe? I mean, you really can’t go on pretending it’s our pissy little bombing campaign in Syria that’s causing this crisis, can you?

  • Anon1

    Glenn

    Seeing as some of you are worshipping Chomsky without actually posting any argument of his, I am quite free to dismiss him without argument.

  • Anon1

    John Goss

    “But from someone who time and again has proved to be racist…”

    Give me just one piece of evidence, Goss. Or withdraw.

  • glenn_uk

    Trowbridge: Can’t you accept that some people – such as Chomsky – are only working within the framework of accepted and fully documented fact, such that even the opposition have no grounds to dispute it?

  • Anon1

    Macky writes

    “The refugee crises is due to the neocon warmongers devastating other people’s countries”

    You’ve got to give him an award for textbook student union stupidity. He’s probably never even been to one of these countries.

  • glenn_uk

    Anon1: Fascinating concept you have introduced here. You’re saying I’ve got to introduce all of Chomsky’s arguments, myself, right here and now, or you feel entitled to dismiss his work in it’s entirety?

  • Anon1

    Glenn

    You are becoming rather boring with this idea of yours that you keep repeating that Chomsky must be right about everything because what he says is based on known facts. It’s which facts you use and how you use them, dear boy. Must say I am depressed by your naivety. Go and do a history degree or something.

  • John Goss

    People on here keep telling me there is no war against the people, no FEMA prisons, no imprisonment without trial, the west is a libertarian place worthy of praise. It is not what I’m seeing when an Itheca grandmother gets sent to prison for taking photographs of a peaceful protestors opposed to drone killings.

    http://brooklynculturejammers.com/2016/01/21/photographer-goes-to-jail-in-us/

    Or a Nazareth professor who has protested against drones at the Hancock Base and has yet to be awarded his sentence.

    http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2016/01/22/nazareth-professor-stand-trial-protesting-drones/79077592/

    That’s the USA. Then of course there is my own article on the derogation of British Justice through organising an Inquiry to replace an inquest.

    http://newsjunkiepost.com/2016/01/22/litvinenko-inquiry-death-of-justice-in-the-united-kingdom/

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    And you are wrong, Glenn, about Chomsky using proven facts about his ideas.

    Just read his treatment of JFK in Failed States where he quotes the President as saying that the USSR is a “monolith and ruthless conspiracy” (p. 106) to take over the world with no sources provided for the absurd claims.

  • Republicofscotland

    It’s actually worse than Nazi Germany. Hitler may have gassed millions of Jews in industrial slaughterhouses, but he never went so far as to issue wristbands. #fascistbritain #worsethanhitler

    __________________

    Surely the above comment, must be sarcasm, no one could seriously compare, the having to wear a wristband, to systematic dehumanising and killing of a section of society, by the Nazi’s during WWII.

  • glenn_uk

    RoS: Hard to believe, but what you produced above (#worsethanhitler etc.) was actually a fairly funny bit of sarcasm that came from Anon1 himself. Credit where it’s due and all that!

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Certainly stopped any discussion, JSD, when he refused to discuss with me ANY ideas bordering on conspiracies.

    Never helped the pontificating bore from lecturing us again.

  • glenn_uk

    Trowbridge: “Just read his treatment of JFK in Failed States where he quotes the President as saying that the USSR is a “monolith and ruthless conspiracy” (p. 106) to take over the world with no sources provided for the absurd claims.

    If you don’t believe Chomsky’s quoting him, perhaps you’ll believe it from the unassailable JFK himself (in his own words):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhkjYJAHCjM

    Go to 1’35” if you can’t be bothered to watch the whole thing.

  • Republicofscotland

    Meanwhile in a rather predictable turn of events (IHAT) Iraqi Historical Allegations Team, have decide to dropped cases brought against British soldiers in Iraq. Allegations of unlawful killing and other illegal activities, will not now be investigated.

    The Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) is a unit set up by the Labour government in March 2010 to investigate allegations of abuse and torture by British soldiers in Iraq.

    Much of these have focused on three interrogation sites near Basra operated by the Joint Forward Interrogation Team (JFIT) between March 2003 and December 2008.The inquiry was established in November 2010 after 146 Iraqi men claimed to have been tortured.

    It shouldn’t surprise anyone that an organisation set up by a British government decides there’s no case to answer to.

  • Anon1

    Glenn

    Thanks. I know what the HMV label looks like.

    It’s funny that you were deploring the insults and dismissals, and then you go right ahead with one yourself.

  • Republicofscotland

    “RoS: Hard to believe, but what you produced above (#worsethanhitler etc.) was actually a fairly funny bit of sarcasm that came from Anon1 himself. Credit where it’s due and all that!”

    ________________

    So Glenn, it was mean’t to be sarcastic, I’m rather surprised at Anon1, I know he’s a committed racist, but I didn’t think he had the ability to produce sarcasm, not a well known trait in the Neanderthal world, still you live and learn.

1 61 62 63 64 65 89

Comments are closed.