The 47% who are helping it all collapse

How can you summarize something like the following? I tried but have to reprint it unabridged [H/T IPJ]:

Progressive Culture War Caused Rotherham UKIP Child-Catcher

by Guido Fawkes

There is no doubt that the children removed from the foster care of a UKIP supporting couple are just the latest victims of the culture war being waged by so-called progressives. Marxists and Fabians have waged war on the traditional family since the days of George Bernard Shaw who wrote in “Socialism and the Family” that socialism

…intervenes between the children and the parents, claiming to support them, protect them, and educate them for its own ampler purposes. Socialism, in fact, is the State family. The old family of the private individual must vanish before it, just as the old water works of private enterprise, or the old gas company. They are incompatible with it. Socialism assails the rampant egotism of the family today… So far as English Socialism is concerned … I must confess that the assault has displayed a quite extraordinary instinct for taking cover, but that is a question of tactics rather than of essential antagonism.

The antagonism between progressive ideologues and traditional families continues to this day, the obsessive efforts to normalise and celebrate non-traditional family structures, the relentless drive to have the state take care of bringing up young children so that both parents can work. The perverse incentives of the tax and welfare system which undermine marriage not to mention the rendering of the concept of marriage legally meaningless by legislating for same-sex marriage which can not produce children.

All these are part and parcel of a progressive imperative stemming from a mindset which understands consciously or unconsciously that the traditional family is the fundamental building block of a society which is incompatible with progressive values. Today’s progressives like their socialist ideological ancestors have changed their language not their essential antagonism to the family.

How is this relevant to the UKIP foster parents having the children in their care removed? The Rotherham Social Services said “We would not have placed these children with you had we known you were members of UKIP because it wouldn’t have been the right cultural match.”

Well done, Guido. It’s quite understandable why socialists would want the family destroyed as the core unit in society – they can’t achieve their agenda until both the family and religion are killed off because both are small c conservative loyalties which militate against the State. I’m so pleased that Guido has come out and written this because at this blog, left-liberals, including feminist women, have been consistently trying to make out that it is only my arrogant, racist, misogynist, homophobic and wickedly capitalist attitude which makes me write precisely what Guido has written above.

So yes, it’s easy to see why hardline socialists themselves [in academia, law and medicine] would want to destroy the family. These people are now beyond reason, as Yuri Bezmenov noted, they are hardwired into some bizarre mindset where they actually think anyone who doesn’t want things twisted, perverted and full of hatred is twisted, perverted and full of hatred.

Why though would the average, garden variety left liberal/mild feminist who [used to] come to this blog also lap up and spout this stuff?

The answer, once again, suggests itself. These people obviously don’t think that that is what they are aiding and abetting. They focus almost entirely on what they see as the plight of women, blacks, the disabled, the unemployed and the evil of the greedy capitalists and fascists and they see this as a measure of “social responsibility” in achieving “fairness” and “tolerance” for all.

Many of these things do need addressing, it’s true but not the way they’re going about it, which achieves the opposite result.

So they wage war on these single issue concerns, ignoring new injustices perpetrated by their very action and inaction, ascribing to themselves the epithet “compassionate”, thereby making themselves the politically “good” people in their own eyes.

That’s the crux of the matter – they truly believe they are the “good” people.

They are incapable of seeing that what they are actually aiding and abetting is the Rotherham situation and countless other situations.  Read Julia’s posts to get an idea.

They are simply handing the malfunctioning yet predatory State exactly what the State wants and the State has shown time and time again, especially of late, that it has zero interest in the welfare of people in it – it is only interested in its own ideological narrative, these days called political correctness, a euphemism for the most terrible of injustices perpetrated in its name and in incompetence.

And left unchecked, the State bloats itself with fatcat salaries, pointless fake charities and quangos and pushes a handout mentality on its citizens, educates them via various measures that this is a good way for a community to operate, reserving for itself wisdom – nanny knows best. The left-liberal thinks he or she has achieved “victories” by discriminatory legislation and officially jaundiced mindsets, that it is work well done.

The question of what to do about the PTB itself, what to do about the hardline socialists now training teachers or who are in academia, in law, in medicine and in all key posts in society, is the conundrum of our age today.

In Scotland, for example, the situation is dire. Whilst the paedo ring gets off Scot free [sorry] and manages to get the perpetrators felt sorry for, even at OoL, the State meanwhile keeps merrily on its way, this time taking break and enter powers. But that’s for another post.

A greater conundrum though is what to do about the left-liberal. Re-education? That fails on four counts:

1. It is employing State/Common Purpose techniques;
2. As Bezmenov said – these people are now beyond reason, they’ve been brainwashed;
3. They believe that they have correctly identified the pressing issues of the day and have the solutions to those issues [not understanding that those solutions were fed to them in a three-card trick];
4. All people almost invariably think they are correct, that wisdom resides in themselves.

Anyone who attempts to open their eyes is arrogant, racist, misogynist, homophobic and a wicked capitalist. What can be done?

Because until something is done, the Rotherams and Scottish break-and-enters are just going to proliferate, not diminish.

20 comments for “The 47% who are helping it all collapse

  1. November 25, 2012 at 6:50 am


    What an awesome post – thank you – will be linking at my place…

  2. November 25, 2012 at 7:47 am

    Unsurprisingly the head of Rotherham children’s services (sic) is well in with CP, as Guido noted.


    • Scaredypants
      November 25, 2012 at 8:32 am

      Ah! My next question answered

  3. Derek
    November 25, 2012 at 8:09 am

    The Daily Mail website is reporting that Barnardos are banning anyone who is a member of UKIP from fostering.

  4. anon
    November 25, 2012 at 8:16 am

    Well said JH – and IPJ, and Guido also (I just wish this guy would put his undoubted talent for networking to other than the normal “bread and circuses” he usually wastes his time on)

    I spend an unusual amount of time trying to explain to work colleagues that the Labour party that they think works for them is actually working against them – with limited success I’m afraid.

    But, for good or bad, Labour voters are beginning to drain away to the smaller parties such as UKIP.


  5. Greg Tingey
    November 25, 2012 at 9:15 am

    Today’s papers make an interesting read on this one …
    Universal condemnation & contempt for Rotherham.

    I wonder if R council & their jobswoths will back down, or will they lie & bluster?
    My money is on the latter, of course.

    And it isn’t “socialism” btw, it is the universal political desire for CONTROL.
    And you should not link this to the reduction, maginalisation and hopeful extinction of the murderous blackmail of religion, any & all religion.

    Religion exerts a much greater & much more malign influence than any political syatem.
    Which is why communism is a religion, it ticks all the boxes.

    • November 25, 2012 at 10:34 am

      Hardwired, Greg, aren’t you? Can’t see socialism for what it is – look, you give it any semantic name you like, it’s still socialism, requiring coercion of the people.

      One of the planks of socialism is social engineering, which is seen at Rotheram – only allowing certain points of view and the points of view it tries to stamp out include:

      1. the family

      2. freedom of choice, of worship, of speech, of association

      3. small government and low taxes

      4. butting out of our lives.

      Socialism is antithetical to all those things. It says: “That is yours but I need it with no effort on my part. Let’s get the government to take it from you and give it mainly to us, the politburo but a bit to designated fake charities which will keep our prime supporters on clover for the foreseeable.

      There are many in this fair land who won’t stand for that.

    • mikebravo
      November 25, 2012 at 11:22 am

      Flip the record Tingey FFS.
      The socialism good religion baaaad side has got a scratch on it.

    • November 25, 2012 at 11:31 am

      Socialism it is Tingey, whether you like or or not. The same Socialism that was responsible for the slaughter of millions of innocents last century. The last paragraph is utter twaddle. Utter twaddle. You poor bloke.

      • Greg Tingey
        November 25, 2012 at 8:40 pm

        Some aspects of “socialism” include things like, erm, the NHS, and unemployment benefit – for those thta really deserve it, and, you know, things like suposed “fairness” – this is emphatically NOT communism.

        For the record, I have voted for Labour, Lem-o-Crat & Tory candidates in different parliamenetary elections – depending on time & the personal charcateistics if the individual candidates …
        or isn’t that waht you are supposed to do?

        Jeremy Poynton
        “Socailism” is a political idea & movement, communism is a religion & very different.
        I suggest you look at why a socialist-governed Britain joined the USA in war against a communist state (N Korea) back in 1950/51, as I well remember, [ad hom removed]

        • mikebravo
          November 25, 2012 at 11:59 pm

          The old juggling act that the left always pull out of the hat. ” Ahh… thats communism not socialism etc etc..” They are both the theft of one man’s sweat and labour for the benefit of the elite’s supporters of the day.
          Whatever you call them they are one and the same.

  6. Robert Edwards
    November 25, 2012 at 9:38 am

    Guido’s blog refers to the interview with that mad bitch as a ‘car-crash’. If that’s a car crash, then Le Mans, 1955 was a fender-bender.

    Time and time again, these idiots are exposed, and time and time again they get away with it.

    But perhaps something is changing? Even the egregious James Naughtie did a fair job of putting her feet to the fire on the ‘Today’ programme (I caught it on i-player, as to listen live is bad – really bad – for my blood pressure)and that was q. satisfying.

    But then I thought: “Perhaps this is a ritual sacrifice – the public disembowelment of the one who has committed the serious offence of being found out – the equivalent of running up the battle colours too early?”

    After all, ‘Today’ is the public voice of Common Purpose – no ‘graduate’ (spit) will have missed it, so we can expect some crocodile tears and a rapid repositioning and meanwhile, all the other swivel-eyed loons who beaver away at sabotage every day will pause, briefly, duck, and cover.

    But they will be back…

    • November 25, 2012 at 10:47 am


      I hesitate to call this thing a godsend [for obvious reasons] but it couldn’t have worked out better. Let there be much more putting in of the feet in the mouth so that even the most unpolitical person in the land finally sees what’s going on.

      • Robert Edwards
        November 25, 2012 at 11:34 am

        I think it’s a case of “be careful what you wish for…” The chameleon-like ability of the nasty left to morph into something which resembles something which it is not (like, er, nice) is the only bankable asset on their otherwise discredited and essentially false balance-sheet.

        A good example is the odious Jo Moore, she of the ‘bury bad news’ e-mail, who wore a brooch depicting an ice-pick, bless her. So, not a Stalinist at all, then.

        In 2003, apparently, according to a Wiki reference, she retrained.

        As a teacher…

        See what I mean?

        • November 25, 2012 at 12:03 pm

          Very much so. So if we can see it, why can’t others? We all have two eyes each [usually].

          • Henry Crun
            November 26, 2012 at 9:06 am

            Because James, there are none so blind as those who do not wish to see

  7. Robert Edwards
    November 25, 2012 at 12:07 pm

    “Socialism is incapable of defending democracy…”

    Marshal C.G.E. Mannerheim.


  8. November 25, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    A fine post on a very worrying development. Mind you, I doubt if anyone with their eyes open was genuinely surprised. Disgusted, horrified, shocked even – but not surprised.

  9. November 25, 2012 at 4:38 pm

    A fine post on a very worrying development. Mind you, I doubt if anyone with their eyes open was genuinely surprised. Disgusted, horrified, shocked even – but not surprised.

  10. November 25, 2012 at 5:46 pm

    Common Purpose graduate…. No chance of her being sacked then. None at all. “Keep your head down for a bit till it quietens down”.

Comments are closed.