NOTW and brotherly love

In posting on the NOTW demise, I focussed on Rebekah Wade who’s got off scot free and pointed to these:

… which produced a reaction from Cherry Pie:

Everyone needs to forget about left and right it is quite irrelevant. It is a false dividing line which has been constructed to set people against each other…

The media feeds that false construct…

Maybe the following link will give you an insight to how the media giants operate:

Or maybe this:

If that is understood, why is everyone focusing on (or being distracted by the weeds) and side-lining the real issue ??

WE are the PEOPLE we need to work together and not put up false dividing lines… If we can do that, the world is our oyster 😉

I thanked her for that lesson and now provide one of my own, in all humility:

The left’s insistence that there is no divide is like two young brothers in a nursery. Both have their toys and play parallel, as the youngest children do, before they learn cooperative play. The parents encourage industry so if the brothers do their little jobs around the place, they earn a new toy.

One brother, the lazy younger one, has broken his toys but the first has carefully looked after his, built up his collection, assuming a certain amount of wear-and-tear and still has most of what he’s been given. The second looks with envy at the first and while he’s not looking, steals his brother’s toys.

The first wakes up, sees what’s happened and demands his toys back. The second serenely says that all toys are in common anyway and everyone should just get along and work together, in one big happy family, where peace and brotherly love are the order of the day, just as mummy always says..

The first gets angry at this theft and gives his brother an ultimatum, which naturally, the second ignores because he knows he’ll have the backing of his mother. The first tries to grab his toys back but the second calls in mummy who goes ballistic that the first should be disturbing the happy peace of the nursery.

He is to be punished for breaking the rule of brotherly love. He points out that brother two has stolen his toys and he wants them back. Mummy says the issue is not whose toys are whose but that he was not being kindly to his brother and after all, the Bible says we must be kind to our brothers.

Brother one becomes immoderate and says, “F*** brotherly love! I want my toys back.”

Brother two smirks in the background because the machinery of state here is backing his theft quite nicely, he thinks. He starts to whistle and sing – this is easy, isn’t it? Steal what you want, use the admonition to brotherly love to cover the theft and then change the meanings of all the words to ensure the first brother is kept from his property.

Brother one says, “Bollocks to that,” and goes in and takes back his toys but Brother two cries foul and mummy rushes in, sees what’s going on and lectures Brother one:

“You are feisty and divisive – why can’t you be like your younger brother – calm and loving to all the birds and nature and all that?”

“Because, mummy dearest,” Brother one explains, exasperated, “it’s all very well preaching brotherly love but this “brother” of mine stole from me. We had an agreement that what I earn through my toil is mine and what he earns is his. Father made that rule and I’ve stuck to it, done what I needed and more. I’ve kept to the agreement. The Bible also says, ‘Thou shalt not steal,’ if I recall correctly.”

“Yes, well never mind that – you know very well your father doesn’t live with us any more, becoming surplus to requirements and we now live on government handouts and what I earn on the side. So, as there are no more toys to be had, what there is is the whole sum total of what we have and we have to divide them all equally.

Now because you’ve been so mean to your brother, you are to be deducted three toys. I have spoken. You can go through an appeals process by appealing to my sister, your Aunty EHRC and good luck. She’s also booted out her husband and taken over half his property. Shall I ask her to hear your appeal?”

Brother one knows he’s been utterly f***ed over by a system which fails to play by the rules which had served them well for so long. He becomes morose and withdrawn.

At one stage, he has an idea. He says to his mother, over their increasingly meagre rations because no one’s working any more, “Let me start over. Let me start earning toys again.”

Mother hushes him: “Now you know very well we have new rules – all for one and one for all. The toys you earn go into a pool and are then distributed fairly.”

“Then why does he have more?”

“Because he plays the game, he cooperates, he doesn’t rock the boat, he’s concerned about more than his own selfish property. Now, I don’t want to hear any more about it.”


“No, I have spoken. I neer had this trouble with you when your father was here. Whatever’s come over you?”

Some weeks later, Aunty EHRC is over for a visit and asks, “What’s wrong with Ludwig?”

‘He has psychological problems – it’s his father’s genes, I think. We’re having him assessed. The doctor says it’s the regressive von Mises gene.”

“Poor dear. You keep him isolated, of course.”

“Of course but it’s all I can do getting him to see the error of his ways. His younger brother tries to teach him but he refuses to listen. He’s gone without his supper many times and when we tell him property is theft, he keeps retorting: ‘No – this is the theft of my property, an utter swindle.'”

“Sad case. He’ll need reeducating about this,you know. Any more tea?”

“I’m afraid there’s no tea in the shops anymore.”

11 comments for “NOTW and brotherly love

  1. john in cheshire
    July 10, 2011 at 12:07 pm

    In one respect Cherry Pie is correct; the dividing line is between socialists and normal. All bad politics appears to have socialist/communist values at its heart. I think the opposite of socialism is a bit like the definition I was given of Nitrogen when I was at school. It is defined by what it isn’t.

  2. Edgar
    July 10, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    You insult your readers when you present your argument in the form of a parable. We aren’t children …

    • July 10, 2011 at 12:25 pm

      Did Jesus insult his disciples? I think a parable is a good way to challenge entrenched wrong ideas that have become so commonplace as never to be thought about.

    • July 10, 2011 at 12:33 pm

      John – yes.

      Edgar – this was always going to be the risk if I wrote a story [which you call a parable]. However, it’s an effective way to get a point across and if simplistic, it’s no less true for that. As you’re not a reader at my blog, you’d probably not be aware of my posting and comments policy. Let me quote part of that:

      3. Discussion and debate are the whole point of this blog – it is categorically not some sort of lecturing tool, as some blogs seem to think they are, imparting their wisdom to us, the dumb readers. Posts on this blog are only catalysts – food for thought.

      So I’m well aware of the point and would not try to patronize or talk down in any way – however, I can see how it might well look that way.

      Tom – good point.

    • Lord T
      July 10, 2011 at 4:56 pm

      All the best Chinese parables educate people.

  3. July 10, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    I don’t care if it is a parable – it gets the point over creatively, clearly and without jargon. What more do we want?

    • July 11, 2011 at 8:04 am


  4. Lord T
    July 10, 2011 at 4:58 pm

    Perhaps we are getting to an new ending both in your parable and in society where brother one decides to destroy all the toys and stop being good and earning more until he is old enough to go off with his dad or on his own. leaving the others to it.

  5. Tom Dexter
    July 10, 2011 at 10:40 pm

    Its a bit like this story isn’t it

    You seem to be taking the opposite line to the one that Christ took in Luke: instead of forgiving the younger brother, you are extolling the righteous anger of the older brother. Instead of rejoicing in teh forgiveness of the Lord, you are condemning humans who behave the same way as a system which f***s you.

    Is Christianity on the right just a fig leaf?

    • July 10, 2011 at 11:11 pm

      Is Christianity on the right just a fig leaf?

      That’s a debatable point, of course, Tom.

      On the left though, it’s far more clearcut. We see the result of the left in society – PCism, surveillance society, state control of our lives, esp. courtesy of the EU, erosion of moral standards and blurring of the sense of right and wrong, e.g. in the way children are now prey to the worst aspects of the adult world, courtesy of leftist teachers and parents who seem to have stopped bothering and one thing is for certain – that has zero to do with Christian anything.

      The point of the story was that the 2nd brother and his support services were pushing a lie. The first brother was angry and he had just cause to be peeved. They made out he didn’t.

      We haven’t got to part two yet, as it hasn’t yet been posted and that’s where your quoting of Luke comes in. That was going to be my next question – does he quell his wrath before the sun goes down, does he leave the retribution for a conspiracy of evil to his Maker [Romans] or does he rise with the others who have suffered this way too – does he rise on the streets with them, on the grounds that there has been a universal evil perpetrated and that’s the only way to overcome it?

      This part two is the real reason the story was relevant to this blog.

    • MarkF
      July 11, 2011 at 8:39 pm

      The point of the parable of the Prodigal Son is that the younger brother came to his senses and repented .

Comments are closed.