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 7 8 9 10 11 89
  • nevermind new year, whats happening about bullied Elliott Johnson RIP?

    The distinguishing marks between me, Nevermind, and the newly arrived Nevermind is visible in the avatar generated and words posted.

    Welcome Nevermind.

    The one’s who are saying nothing are the neocon media sores, empty and deprived of any ideas on how to establish Mr. Danzcuk as the regular guy’s paedo hunter, they just forget about it and pounce on Corbyn, with all sorts of rubbish.

    Selective right wing news is shaping minds, not just in Germany, Thanks god the newly elevated PEGIDA god Tommy Robinson is stirring it up in Cologne.
    The man is busy forming a new Pegida chapter in Holland and Gt. Britain, all with the obvious agreement of the security services, a useful tool for their diversionary tactics, handy for undermining lefties and a snip compared to mercenaries.

    Is Tommmy Robinson Camerons secret missile? … we should not discount anything anymore, because these arm thrashing politics of survival know no friends, anything that helps them stay afloat with the scum is useful, from whatever corner.

    Thanks for reminding us of Mondays date regards Guantanamo, John, I hope someone will attend on my behalf. How many tears has Obama shed over Guantanamo or Ghaza?

  • defo

    Dec.
    Doubt it, but you never know maybe he’s sitting at home, staying out the cold and bored.
    They were constitutionally inferior here less than a century ago, possessions not long before that, and even into the post war period giving the missus a slap was semi ‘normal’ behaviour.

    Understanding this doesn’t get away from the fact that what we have had foisted upon us is a clash of civilisations, parallel overlapping universes, where each is at a different developmental level.

    And therein lies the paradox which fries the pc, or even the compassionate mind.

  • nevermind new year, whats happening about bullied Elliott Johnson RIP?

    Those who assume that the Cologne excesses and alleged rapes were provoked by paid thugs of whichever faction or direction should really work on their argument, dare I say, provide some motive’s at least, their assumptions only create bad breath.

    Germany is a powder keg, within some powerful forces are crystallising, forces which are also present here and who could easily be involved in ‘helping Germany along’.

    Like here, its the right wing party in power who sits on their hands.

  • exexpat

    @Tony if he’s a new starter for Goldman Sachs/Morgan Grenfell he will only be driving it to/from work. You could of course offer to chauffeur but very early starts and late night shifts might not suit 🙂

  • giyane

    Nevermind

    With all due respect my friend, if you refer to them as ‘Norfuk’s hoite poloite’, they well might return the piss-take.

  • stewart

    Astonished in one interview Danczuk said he CHOSE women much younger than himself because that just happened to be where his sexual interest lay, no challenge at all from interviewer

  • giyane

    I told you before who set up the North African Muslims to grope. This is a political stratagem of political Islam. No no, it was the Bundesbank, it was the living conditions of asylum seekers, you all complain. These guys are Muslim, they know how to respect women.

    After 5 years of war in Syria, who do we actually think is doing the fighting? 2nd Question, who do we actually think is sponsoring them?

    Like all the false=flags of the last 20 years, the colour revolutions and Arab Spring, the drivers are a pact between the Muslim Brotherhood and the West, in which Al Qaida neutralises power on the ground, and USUKIS creates the media-generated democratic desire to attack the sovereign governments which they are not legally entitled to attack on the wave of popular feeling. Stooge politicians, stooge sharities, and stooge corporations stand ready to serve the popular demand for regime change. Job done.

  • From the Wild Wood

    I have the feeling that the gangs abusing women in Koln, Stuttgart, Hamburg etc on New Year’s Eve could have been ‘rent-a-mobs’, ?possibly funded by Pegida or some other right wing organisation, in order to stir up anti-immigrant reaction. Do you think that this could be a possibility? Or could it be more of a press-fueled ‘event’? I seem to have seen the same victim/witness being interviewed across various sites, but not multiple victims/witnesses. Does anyone on this site have first hand knowledge of these events, or know anyone who was attending any of these celebrations?

  • Alcyone

    Who is Morgan Grenfell?

    I think those citing their name should jump into the freezer with the rest of the cubes.

  • Sandra

    Re Jess Phillips, from what I’ve seen of her she’s the political equivalent of a Big Brother contestant, determined to wring every ounce of personal advancement out of her five minutes of fame. No doubt she was hopeful of a shadow cabinet post herself, given her relentless self promotion (she got one thing right in her article – she rarely shuts up about anything). In the eight months since her election she’s been all over the meeja like a fly on ordure, bad mouthing her leader in the most pathetic attention seeking manner that only exposes her own immaturity. Self interest is the only ideal these red Tory ‘feminists’ hold dear, whatever they may claim.

  • John Goss

    Sandra, well said. She does not belong in the real Labour Party, the one that Kier Hardie first represented. Kier Hardie was a pacifist and a supporter of the suffragettes. His opposition to the Boer War saw him lose his seat. He died in 1915. There have been a few real Labour MPs since then, but not many. My suspicion about Jess Phillips is, like yours, that she is a career politician.

  • RobG

    On the subject of the presstitutes and what they do or do not report, there’s been a massive gas release just outside of Los Angeles that’s been going on for a few months now, and is a severe danger to human health. Have you ever heard of it..?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBYpL3JDCzA&feature=youtu.be&t=345

    Next time I bang on about Fukushima I would strongly advise you not to take pinches of salt.

    Have you noticed all the cancer stuff in the hews just lately? Obesity will cause cancer rates to soar. Too much booze will cause cancer rates to soar, etc.

    We are now coming up to year five of the ongoing Fukushima disaster, and that’s when cancer rates really start to kick in.

    We live in a very, very sick society.

  • MerkinScot

    Sandra : ‘Re Jess Phillips, from what I’ve seen of her she’s the political equivalent of a Big Brother contestant, determined to wring every ounce of personal advancement out of her five minutes of fame.’
    .
    Well said, Sandra. This brings us back exactly to where Craig started it.
    .
    In my opinion, Ms Phillips is a wannabe Katie Hopkins of the neo-con feminist left.
    Someone who will ‘jump into bed’ with whoever will advantage her career.
    No real ‘feminism’ there, no real ‘left’ there.
    A fair amount of Murdochism, Blairism and Jannerism. That’s for certain.

  • Strategist

    There is an interesting debate going on right now in Naked Capitalism on the same theme as Craig’s post.

    (The all-round wonderful) Yves Smith argues, regarding Democrat National Caucus chair Debbie Wasseman-Schultz: “She’s an influential member of the Wall Street-owned New Dem caucus and is a constant pull on the Democrats in a rightward direction. Oh, don’t get me wrong… Debbie’s fine on certain issues: women’s issues, LGBT issues, gun issues… but anything that involves economics, watch out.”

    To which, commenter jgordon said: “women’s issues, LGBT issues, gun issues… but anything that involves economics

    This is important. Initially I started out not having much of an opinion on LGBT and women’s issues. However, the more I saw corrupt neoliberal politicians advocating for these issues (wasn’t Obama trying to make Lloyd Blankfein the ambassador for LGBT issues or something a couple of years ago?) the more I started associating them with corruption and evil. This isn’t rational at all, but whenever I see HRC or Obama advocating for some particular culture war issue, the more I despise the groups and causes they’re advocating for and the more I want to fight against them. Why aren’t these people in the LGBT and women communities vocally and continually disowning these corrupt politicians? It’s like having a serial killer come out in support of you.”

    And so a similar debate kicks off.

  • John Goss

    In three days President Barack Obama makes his last State of the Union address. His first was a brilliant piece of optimistic and apparently new-style politics, all about closing Guantanamo Bay, creating jobs, improving welfare and making the world a better place in which to live. As I listened to it live I was moved, almost to tears. I believed he was genuine and thought there was hope for the world. What a wonderful speech, whoever wrote it. I still get the White House newsletters, which is why I know in three days he will make his last State of the Union Address.

    The reality of course turned out to be more of the same. Obama might have been genuine. I do not know. Presidents however are simply mouthpieces of the cabal that runs the country. Same here I’m sorry to say. They might like to be different, pioneering, original, unanswerable to anyboody but the electorate. It does not work like that. All pyramid structures, selling, masons, councils, governments, government departments, the media, the law-courts and lots of others, are bought and sold by big money. If they cannot be sold, like Craig Murray, they are disposed of one way or another.

    Obama, if he was genuine – and when you join a secret society I understand you are told that in joining it will not restrict any freedom of expression or the ability to exercise your free will on any subject – he may have believed it. It just does not work like that! Even if Obama was a pure whiter-than-white fidel (new word, apart from Castro of course) and I have no knowledge of his integrity, proclivities, faithfulness, but it does not matter. All the CIA needs to do is show him some of the more graphic images of the exploded head of JFK for him to know he is not in charge. On a lesser scale an errant freemason might be brought to toe-the-line by just threatening to have revealed aspects of the initiation ceremony to certain members of his family, special friends, or others if it might be embarrassing for him.

    But yes, it is the CIA, MI5 and 6, MOSSAD, KGB, Ku Klux Klan, IRA, UDF, Freemasons, Opus Dei and all other organisations that work secretly without the law, whether those involved know it or not, that are responsible, in my opinion, for the ills in this world. Hope I’m not making enemies here. 😀

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Strategist
    10/01/2016 12:20am

    “See, capitalism is not fundamentally racist—it can exploit racism for its purposes, but racism isn’t built into it. Capitalism basically wants people to be interchangeable cogs, and differences among them, such as on the basis of race, usually are not functional. I mean, they may be functional for a period, like if you want a super-exploited workforce or something, but those situations are kind of anomalous. Over the long term, you can expect capitalism to be anti-racist – just because it’s anti-human. And race is, in fact, a human characteristic – there’s no reason why it should be a negative characteristic, but it is a human characteristic. So therefore identifications based on race interfere with the basic ideal that people should be available just as consumers and producers, interchangeable cogs who will purchase all the junk that’s produced – that’s their ultimate function, and any other properties they might have are kind of irrelevant, and usually a nuisance.”

    Noam Chomsky (quoted in Bolton, K.R., “Multiculturalism as a process of globalisation”)

    I think exactly the same is true of gender, which is why many of these people can seem very rights-orientated: basically, it doesn’t matter if poor women or poor blacks have the same rights as poor whites as long as they keep on working in the burger bar.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • fedup

    Craig often derides the value of the comments section, however to point his error, I must admit that I have just understood his position on “feminism” from the last few posts starting with Sandra, whom I find myself in agreement with, and ending with MerkinScot whose assessment is similar to my own.

    Craig was not being critical of feminism but the feminists whom are purportedly practising feminism!!!

    Alas these are just as goo d as their male counter parts female psychopaths with a much diminished moral compass and a a greater cultivated senses of greed and sense of entitlement.

  • Paul Barbara

    @John Goss 7 Jan, 2016 – 6:31 pm
    “We, the Rockefellers funded feminism.”
    The late Aaron Russo thought feminism was a noble thing.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN05DHO9bJw

    He may well have thought that before his talk with Nick Rockefeller, but hardly after.
    That video, but in it’s entirety, is probably one of the most important videos any of you will see(incidentally, Aaron ‘contracted’ cancer in 2001, the year year he started to speak out, and died in 2007; RIP, Aaron; thanks for not selling out,and putting your truth out to the world; here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3NA17CCboA (it’s an hour nine minutes long, but it may change your (I don’t mean you, John; you’re already aware) wordview drastically).

    @Rsimon 7 Jan, 2016 – 7:25 pm
    ‘It’s not what the press says, it’s what it doesn’t say. If you think it’s unbelievable that the major media outlets are unreliable, spend some time checking what they don’t report. Sadly the Gruinard should be better, the Torygraph, well what would you expect.’ RS

    Oddly, the ‘Torygraph’ accept my comments, whereas the ‘Grauniad’ deletes most.

    @Jon 7 Jan, 2016 – 8:30 pm
    ‘The only other explanation is that the many paid hacks who are responsible for this bias are doing it deliberately and consciously – in which case the argument is that they are receiving instructions from the security services or money in brown envelopes through the post, etc.

    Of course it is possible that some people are doing that, but keeping that scheme secret for decades involving thousands of journalists – and many more across all highly developed nations – would be a bold claim indeed.’

    Well, I fully subscribe to that ‘bold claim’; check out:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B_3-KWIfkc
    I suggest, to anyone who wonders who controls the MSM, to check out ‘Operation Mockingbird’: http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.php#axzz3wo4OxriK

  • craig Post author

    The reconfiguration of this blog after midnight last night appears to have led to a disappearance of a number of comments which were not moderated out. I hope this is a one-off glitch.

    I have however personally deleted the false “nevermind” comments. Stelaing someone else’s identity is not allowed nor are multiple identities on the same thread. The comments were agent provocateur style comments putting forward “the women deserved it” positions.

  • craig Post author

    Macky whatever the rights of the argument you are trying to conduct with your protagonist, I do not see why you think anyone else would want to read it.

  • Macky

    @Craig, is somebody trying to impersonate me ?

    or are you referring to the Coe/Blatter Thread where Alcyone has directly called me a liar, to which I am entitled to reply, especially as I recall that you get very hot under the collar when you even suspect that somebody might just be misrepresenting you, nevermind calling you a bare faced lair ?!!

    If you don’t want me to respond to Alcyone’s lie, then the decent thing to do is to remove it !

  • ------------·´`·.¸¸.¸¸.··.¸¸Node

    Looks like there’s been some impersonating going on. Unfortunately, the one from me at 4.45am is genuine, but I’m suspicious of the comment by John Spencer-Davis at 7.41 who doesn’t usually sign off with “hugz”.

    However just in case it really is John : Thank you, I’m feeling better than I should considering the length and depth of my partying last night.

1 7 8 9 10 11 89

Comments are closed.