The state has taken on the role of God and Law Giver. Political Correctness stands as Lord of all. It began like a joke bride, with British Values the ceremonial bridesmaids: carrying sets of ideals for life derived from PC principles; a series of directives that few thought could carry the day. They imposed themselves here and there, becoming a mild irritant that most of us I guess thought would simply pass away. But no part has passed away, it has got a grip and is beginning to squeeze in areas that do not as yet much concern the majority. My purpose in commenting on the modern world is to show that our inexorable move away from the laws of God leaves us open to the consequent void being filled. And of course, it is being filled by laws based on post truth perceptions of reality. They decree that minority views and feelings must be enthroned above those of the inglorious past. This kind of change when enacted at accelerating speed can sweep away all previous perceptions of reality, and to such a degree that it could be diagnosed as madness. It is like having a house clearance without considering what the losses of major items may mean for the future. In the nineteen seventies ripping out the fixtures from a nineteen twenties house seemed like a vast improvement. Decades later it is perceived as a desecration of a world whose style was far superior. We now routinely revert back to the old and shudder at what we once so admired. Modernism rides on the back of the assumption that what we now define as progressive is the last word. It is in fact just a new look, a veneer which says nothing about the true value of anything.
To make the accusation that this is madness, a kind of self mutilation is a bold claim which will require some considerable justification. What I want to try to demonstrate is that this post truth, postmodern reality is not only wrong but so dangerous it can even be held responsible for terrible injustices; like a disease where the body begins to attack itself. Where one law begins to destroy another law, a new lesser law destroying one much older and greater. The move away from God’s laws to those of our own invention has consequences. Has anyone considered whether or not they were foundational to a stable society.
Former generations of indigenous British would not and do not recognise current British values as having any connection to the Britain in which they grew up. We are told what to approve and what to hate by people we would not necessarily welcome into our home. Just try some names or titles or leaders of national organisations. Told what to hate or approve of by the Prince of Wales, Theresa May, Nigel Farage, Jeremy Corbyn, the director of the CPS, a Supreme Court judge, Richard Dawkins, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Clare Balding, Piers Morgan, the editor of the Guardian or Daily Mail or even polls of public opinion. British values are based on a consensus of opinion led by small cabals of people you may or may not like. These values are a trumped-up concoction of modern liberal thought, given a gloss of moral superiority and authority by usurping ground scoured of Christian influence. Any secularisation process in a post Christian era was bound to go down well. The cherry on top was the imposition of rafts of new hate laws which seem open to any interpretation chosen by the judges and politicians and even public opinion.
These laws and regulations have been drilled into the heads of the box tickers in every state department, big business corporations, educational establishments, the media and even churches and the military. Regiments of police, schoolteachers and council workers abide by these rules as if they had been inscribed by the finger of God. The bible expresses the judgement of God. These people are trained in the same way, taught the same ideology and sent out like disciples to teach their new gospel to those who need to hear it. and please do hear it and get it right because there are consequences for non compliance.
‘In the place of judgement wickedness was there, in the place of justice wickedness was there.’
Ecclesiastes, Ch.3 v 16.
So, when the STATE, Big Brother, wraps itself in self-righteousness and decides it knows best what to think, speak and do, then prepare yourself for the worst. Suppose for the sake of argument the state does not know best: what then? The French Revolution, Eugenics and Communism all seemed like good ideas when espoused by philosophers and politicians, but their implementation in the real world by the state was horrific. Each one became a cruel dictatorship. The most famous symbol of the French Revolution was the guillotine and its mass killing of all those the powers and people deemed to stand in opposition to the new constitution. Justice did not result from the carnage; chaos and anarchy arose, and mob rule governed until order was restored. Eugenics, conceived on the Darwinian basis that you should only breed from the best of your stock caused some countries to consider implementing laws preventing those humans who carried perceived defects or of low class to breed, with many women forced into sterilisation programmes. In its worst manifestation the theory of eugenics gave rise to the super race concept; the logic of which led to ethnic cleansing. Powerful ideologies are weapons best kept out of the hands of ambitious politicians, zealots, scientists and social engineers. My third example, Communism, was shown up by the book Animal Farm. We are all equal in this brave new world but some are more equal than others. That differential can be massive, the difference between the haves and the have not’s, masters and slaves, the chosen and the not chosen, and finally those whose views adhere to the consensus opinion and those that do not.
These ideas tend to sound good when introduced by talented orators, but they are often poisoned sweets made tasty through Utopian rhetoric livened up by threats and inducements and the chance to persecute the least favoured or the most hated. This doctrine now applies in the UK. Hate legislation exists to protect a wide but well-defined group of minorities. It is these groups that have the law solidly behind them to the detriment of those outside those groups. If Political correctness is Cultural Marxism, then it should by now be obvious. What would it look like in practice? In Marxism the state becomes the provider, sustainer, protector, and lawgiver for every citizen. Anything that places itself above the State has to be suppressed or abolished or reduced to the level of a state puppet.
In the video below Douglas Murray argues that the Establishment attack the wrong targets because they are afraid to deal with the real and primary problems. They take down the effects and leave the cause largely untroubled. The ideal and just way to proceed is to deal with the cause in whatever way is appropriate in a liberal democracy.
