In clinical psychology, a phobia is defined as an unreasonable, exaggerated fear of an object or situation, causing anxiety and distress. Typically, phobias are distinguished from genuine fears by their irrationality: think of your great-aunt Molly, who used to break out in hysterics every time a completely harmless daddy long-legs crossed her path, or was deathly afraid of heights. Lately, the language of phobias has been used to describe dislike and hatred for certain social phenomena — homophobia, xenophobia &c. — as a reflection of the idea hitherto unconfirmed that all hatred comes from fear. The new clinical entity I propose, however, is more akin to good, old-fashioned unreasonable fear.
Just as an arachnophobic will believe tales of man-eating spiders, conservophobics will believe the strangest of tales, and repeat them with utter conviction. This played out just this week in relation to an article in the Daily Currant, a fake news magazine of the same genre, but hardly the same quality, as the Onion. According to the article, right-wing commentator Ann Coulter — she of the rather questionable taste and sense — refused to board an airplane after learning that the pilot was black, fearing he had received his pilot’s license by affirmative action. The article was, of course, in bad taste — however, that’s Daily Currant’s job. What the job of the conservophobic left would have been was to check whether a site named the Daily Currant (yes! currant! not courant!) could, perhaps, just perhaps, be a joke site (because something named after a berry is probably right on par with major newspapers in authenticity). Left-wing twitter posses retweeted and repeated the fake story *ad nauseam*, as one would expect, without even having a sense for the over-the-top humour of the article.
That, so far, is not conservophobia, it’s just plain stupidity and the result of a life filled with vituperative bitterness and devoid of humour. Where conservophobia comes in was the sincere belief that this could be, in fact, true. Conservophobia is not merely fear, it is also an irrational conviction that anyone who is an avowed conservative is capable of just about every wrong on the planet. And in a world where the lie could bounce off a dozen of syndicated news websites before the truth has tied its laces and posted its refutation, vast, uneducated masses believe phantasmagories of Romney wanting to ban tampons and ‘gun nuts’ heckling a father who lost his child in the Newtown massacre. The remarkable thing here is not that such nonsense is dreamed up — the remarkable thing is that there are people who have been so deeply ingrained to fear conservatism that they would readily believe its adherents to be sub-human, man-eating, poor-mincing, slave-driving, blood-sucking fiends toasting each other with the tears of orphans from goblets made of the skulls of secretly murdered benefit claimants. Or something.
Conservatives want to reform the benefits system? Conservophobes immediately paint pictures of the ‘grey buses’ of Nazi Germany’s ‘euthanasia’ (read: mass murder) programme for the mentally disabled, and shamefully appropriate the black triangle, the identification symbol in concentration camps for those designated as ‘asozial’: the ‘habitually work-shy’, alcoholics and, often, the socially marginalised — because to the mind overtaken by conservophobia, it is perfectly reasonable that if today the government of a country party to more human rights treaties than I could readily list here decides to make small cuts to certain benefits, tomorrow all disabled will be herded into gas chambers. Of course, conservophobes — like everyone with a phobia — are easily led, and it took little more than some allusions to Nazism by certain political interests and their spokespersons who style themselves as ‘campaigners’ and ‘activists’ to make conservophobes immediately apprehend their deportation and an impeding holocaust.
Conservatives want to limit federal funding for abortion? Conservophobes immediately plaster their rhetoric with abundant mentions of coat-hangers and regression to the 19th century and talk of a ‘war on women’. Conservatives want individual responsibility for health-care? Conservophobes bring up the age-old caricature of the wealthy, privileged conservative who wants the poor to wither and die. Conservatives want to protect the constitutional right to keep and bear arms (right or wrong, it *is* in the Constitution)? Conservophobes parade victims of the school shooting in a sickening sideshow with mock heartbreak and crocodile tears, safe in the knowledge that their assault rifle-wielding bodyguards will be the last to be disarmed (if ever).
The shame in generations of conservophobes brought up by other conservophobes filling the state educational system is that they never learn about what it really is they hate. They cannot, may not, ever, learn who the enemy is, what the enemy wants, what the enemy loves and what it disdains. Arachnophobes will not sit down and read “All You Ever Wanted to Know About Spiders”. Conservophobes, then, will never learn more about conservatism than their masters and handlers permit them to. For knowledge is a dangerous thing. Knowledge of one’s opponent — enemy! — breeds compassion. As Longfellow wrote, “if we could read the secret history of our enemies, we would find in each person’s life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility”. If those staunch haters who denounce Coulter could for one moment see her as a person, they would find common humanity with her, and would hardly believe a silly hoax about not boarding an aircraft because the pilot was black.
It appears conservophobia is now an epidemic engulfing the Western world, to the point that satire websites have to make it clear that they are actually satire, lest they be taken seriously by conservophobes (a new low for satire). An oft-repeated point in the rage- and death threat-filled tweets of the tolerant, ‘new tone’ left was how much Coulter needed psychiatric care. Perhaps, in view of the events, it is not her but the conservophobes who condemned her without scrutinising the evidence that need to seek treatment for their conservophobia.
I suggest they start with a good dose of George Santayana.
Having survived a stint in academia and other harrowing adventures, Chris is now practising law in the City. When not billing hours, he blogs at Scribbler-at-Law, runs, watches bad movies or spends time with his fiancee.
{ 119 comments }
As a sufferer from Humanophobia, my dear the people, this may not be rational but it is the only thing that makes sense.
The Ann Coulter item is another spoof parody by the Daily Currant…
http://www.mediaite.com/online/no-everyone-ann-coulter-did-not-refuse-to-board-a-plane-because-pilot-was-black/
I know Anna is a clever type, but I can’t tell if she’s satirising us when she says conservaphobia is a fear of the Nazis? The Nazi party (or it’s full name, the National socialist German party) was not right wing or conservative. High tax, high public spending, anti-capitalist and bankers.
Not many lefties like to talk about that.
You don’t live in America, apparently! Become more familiar with the 22nd Amendment, and then argue it. We don’t need a standing militia to defend ourselves against the government – might have 200 years ago, and then armed only with muskets, not automatic weapons capable of spitting out two rounds every second, in the latest instance riddling the bodies of 20 young children who had done nothing but go to school.
The 22nd Amendment relates to the President’s term limits. The right to keep and bear arms is in the 2nd, not the 22nd, Amendment. Please read your own Constitution. As a constitutional lawyer, I happen to be rather familiar with it, so I know for instance that the purpose clause is not construed as a limitation thereon. Automatic weapons ‘spit’ out those two bullets per second (you actually mean around ten rounds a second, the fire rate of an AR-15 on full auto is 13.3- rounds per second or 800 rounds a minute) every day, hurting innocent people in a tiny, minuscule percentage of instances. Newtown was a truly regrettable instance of that, and my heart goes out to all wounded by that terrible incident, but you really don’t need a gun to kill a lot of people, as Timothy McVeigh proved. To make guns the culprit is to completely miss the point, namely that there have been multiple systemic failures in identifying a violent offender.
Take this as my position – I will not dispute the 2nd Amendment (or 22nd, as you would call it) with you, as that was not the subject matter of my post. You want that debate, fine, but not here. And also, ideally, after you’ve brushed up on con law.
Chris, your automatic might fire 10 bullets and eject 10 cases per second but if it ‘spits out’ 10 ROUNDS then there is something very amiss.
ZING!
Entirely right. I’ll blame this one on my meds. As a marksmanship instructor, I should really be ashamed 
An AR-15 is not a selective fire weapon: it cannot fire full auto, just semi-auto, in which mode it is impossible to fire ten rounds a second. This is not just weapons pedantry: the point is that anti-gun types usually (yes, customarily, most of the time, nearly always) get their facts wrong.
I just noticed that Chris is not an “anti gunner” – apologies. But what I said holds.
Obviously you’re not an engineer. There may be no “legal” way to convert to full auto, but it has and can be done – why you’d want to is another matter.
The Newtown, Connecticut shootings were carried out with two automatic pistols. The ‘Assault weapon’ people keep mentioning was never used and remained in the trunk of the killers car.
There’s a lot of obfuscation about this as that has apparently been retracted, with the police now claiming that he killed them with the rifle, and the item recovered from the trunk (boot) was a shotgun.
Doesn’t really make a lot of difference except as a Headline grabber. My last two semi-automatic pistols had 15 & 18 round magazines and three/four mags for each was normal – you do the maths.
This “Assault weapon” thing is just gabble, as is all the bollocks talked about High Powered Assault Rifles. They said that guy in Cumbria had a powerful Sniper Rifle – because it had a telescopic sight and a silencer, it was a 22LR, certainly fatal but the media just had to have it’s uninformed say, s usual
Zanshin; I agree that to the ignorant people who live in the bubble world of the mainstream media, even an air rifle with a cheap 10x telescopic sight could be an ‘assault weapon’. My wife and I are often annoyed by the ‘fact lite’ version of events they often portray.
Julia; yes, I’d heard this, but had also heard no mention that the killers mother (to whom all the murder weapons belonged) actually owned a shotgun. A shotgun and bullet wound are pretty distinctive (I’ve seen both for real). How Police Officers could fail to tell the difference makes me wonder if political pressure was brought to bear on front line personnel and eyewitnesses to make them change their story. Stranger things have happened.
True, but I don’t thing we need to reach for wilder theories when we can look instead at human error, public sector flapping at the scene of a major incident and the modern fast-paced news story that desperately tries to keep up with FaceBook and Twitter.
In one of the recent (post Sandy Hook) shootings, a reporter (CNN I think?) was actually responding to the Tweets of someone caught up in it and pumping her for information!
I mean…what sort of bizarre disconnect from reality lets you do that?
mewsical, as has been mentioned I think you are talking about the second Amendment but never mind.
What you should be looking at is who are the idiots that think a sign saying it is a no gun area will stop a drugged up loon from taking a gun there.
From all the reports I have seen regarding the various mass killings in the US the perpetrator has been the recipient of various ‘black box’ prescription drugs, all of which can, and have, lead to what has been done. Until the pharmaceutical and medical ‘industry’ takes responsibility for what they are causing – I include the psychologists in this as well – nothing will change. Ask yourself why is it that many children line up at the start of the school day to get their drug ration? When you have the answer to that you need to find a way that would stop it and communicate that to the masses.
That’s a bit dubious, although I’ve long been thinking about writing up a post on this. Millions are on psychotropic meds, very few commit violent crimes, much fewer than would if not for the meds. There’s actually a statistical fallacy at work here known as the availability heuristic. Cases where someone took psych meds AND committed a crime are marked out because the existence of something (‘took psych meds’) is more evident than its absence. Therefore crimes by people who should have, but did not, take psych meds are not generally factored into the same dataset and as a result it’s relatively easy to show that a large number of crimes are committed by people on psych meds, but relatively hard to show that a large number of crimes would have been/have been/are being prevented by the use of psych meds.
I wonder if you equally ask yourself why we let young people have their insulin every day when we know it’s actually not the safest of all medications. Nor are vaccines always safe (and I’m not talking about the autism-MMR nonsense here), nor are the simplest surgeries 100% safe. Even given rational drug design, finding good psych meds is ridiculously difficult, and the huge profits of this ‘industry’ you so condemn are compensating for the dozens of false tries, each costing millions in testing and development, before you can even make a single dime off the drug. Psych meds enable a lot of people to live their lives with their loved ones in dignity and not be a slave to a brain dysfunction that deserves no more to be uncorrected than the lack of insulin in a diabetic’s system. Well damn, let’s not have it, though. Let’s go back to insulin shocks and the Victorian madhouses, lest someone actually makes a *profit*!
“We don’t need a standing militia to defend ourselves against the government ”
Lol…good job a majority of Americans seem to disagree with your position…
The 22nd Amendment? The one introducing term limits to the Presidency?!
My MP tells me that he is concerned about the potential of ‘right-wing’ terrorist groups in the UK. I’m inclined to think this is rather like public and government concerns over predatory ‘stranger-danger’ to our children. The reality in this case is that the real risk to children comes from their own parents. Fortunately that risk is reasonably low, so, so far, we don’t put children into the care of the state, (the highest risk case?). So, really just a made up panic for political reasons.,
This whole ‘right-wing’ business is carefully nurtured by the Marxists and their fellow travellers, implying that their political opponents are the spawn of the (left-wing) National Socialists of the 1930-40s. For the German working class thug it was probably a toss-up whether to join the communists or the Nazis and many swapped sides. Nobody likes to be labelled a Nazi so all the thugs are now right-on members of the UAF, SWP, Animal Rights or Occupy movements and proud to be self-described as ‘left-wing’.
My MP is concerned that these invisible ‘right-wing’ groups spread hatred. Now I might lead a sheltered life but I hear plenty of ‘hate speak’ on the BBC, all of it from self-described ‘left-wing’ writers and so-called comedians, many of whom are not beyond launching nasty attacks on named individuals. It is strange that these people find it offensive to ‘insult’ a group, (individual members of which can always excuse themselves “Yes most Jews are…, but I’m not”), but not to go for an individual. But then as Polly Toynbee says, it is interesting that most ‘nice’ people are left-wing, (if you have ear-plugs in?).
“My MP tells me that he is concerned about the potential of ‘right-wing’ terrorist groups in the UK. ………………….. So, really just a made up panic for political reasons.,”
As usual a right wing “blind eye” response to a worrying problem. Obviously the rise (and fall) of far right groups like the BNP, BNF, EDL, EFL and countless others has passed you by, and those are just in the UK
On a Europe wide basis, there has been a large rise in the number of right wing, nationalist and usually specifically rascist groups – nowadays often anti-Muslim/Asian. This is probably because right wing nationalist parties usually appeal to the ignorant and stupid or give the hopeless a target to blame for their own shortcomings – a switch from Jews, Romany, Homosexuals, Communists etc to “Muzzie scum”
Perhaps if you were in the position of being a shopkeeper of asian descent or on your way home from mosque you wouldn’t be so blasé about the threat of right wing terror groups. – ref. Norway, Greece, France, Italy, Spain, former Yugoslavia, ad nauseum, not to even mention the “home of the free” and their thriving right wing, neo-nazi sub culture.
Incidentally, to equate National Socialists as left wing is trying satire and failing, at least I hope it is..
You seem to equate left wing with nice/caring and right wing with evil/racist – do you work for the BBC, the Guardian, or the Labour Party?
Not at all, I have no time for dogma from either “side”, I do however use my eyes and ears and I call a spade a shovel as needed. My post was a reply to the right centric previous post and I don’t think I mentioned the left except in relation to the comparison of Nazis with Communists.
Do you work for The Telegraph, Daily Mail or Conservative Party?
Just as a point of order, a ‘spade’ and a ‘shovel’ are two different tools designed for different jobs. Calling a spade a shovel is like calling a left-winger a right-winger – they may be related is as much as both have political opinions, but there the similarity ends.
PS. The use of the word ‘spade’ in this context refers to a tool for digging, and not to a human being of any particular skin pigmentation. Just for the avoidance of doubt.
You ar,e of course, absolutely correct I didn’t write clearly enough. I should have written, I call things as I see them, if it’s a spade then it is and if it’s a shovel it is – don’t mix them up
“they may be related is as much as both have political opinions, but there the similarity ends.” though sometimes you can’t see daylight between the dogma and cant of either.
Zanshin, the so called far right groups are in fact very hard left. The German National Socialists were also very left wing – hint, there is Socialist in the name and we have yet to find a right wing socialist.
Ivan, adding the word socialist to your party title does not make it so, anymore than most Communist/states using the word Democratic in the countries name, makes them so.
I do think though that different labels/descriptors would be useful, because I agree that if most far left or far right groups looked over their shoulders they would see each other close up. Thanks for the hint but I got there about fifty years ago, all by myself. It seems that the only critique of the main point of my post has been semantics and not the subject itself – far right terror groups.
Or even “Liberal Democrat” when neither.
Exactly, perhaps we should see politics as something other than linear, left or right of central (or whatever you want to call it)
The thing to note re. the Nazi’s is that they didn’t steal votes from the socialist or communist parties or other left wing groups – their vote increased at the expense of the right wing conservative parties.
So either there were a lot of closet socialists at the time, or else just maybe the label ‘national socialist’ was adopted as an opposition to ‘international socialists’ of the left.
You are of course correct, but others don’t want the facts to spoil a good story.
The British National Formulary is a right-wing terror group? Sure, I know it’s full of drugs, but terrorism?!
Chris, I think they’re waiting for you at The Apollo.
Or the place where we know the names of organisations we dislike. If you don’t so much as know that the NF is not the same as the BNF, and that basically it’s been defunct since 2000, what the heck DO you know? Other than talking points gleaned from various websites?
I am fully aware that the name of the party concerned is The National Front, but tend to call it the British National Front as clarity for the hard of thinking.
I also know that the NF is basically defunct, but like most of these extreme right-wing nationalist groups they become defunct and then the Yobs, Skinheads , Football Hooligans and other savoury characters with pickaxe handles just move along with their hatred, violence and rascist idiocy anf join the BNP, and when they lose members ,those same charm school graduates become members of the EDL, Infidels and Casuals. These bastards don’t disappear, they just change shape. Incidentally how close have you been to John Tyndall?
I know that as a Republican Contitutional Lawyer you must be busy, but why don’t YOU do some research on far right groups, I don’t have to because the knowledge is in my head and have my own talking points from experience. Get to it quickly as Republicans are dying out at a rate of knots and you may learn something useful and real for a change. Happy hunting and don’t kill any kids – Doh!
I challenge anyone to show me a single casualty, in the UK, of an actual right-wing (not racist, not national socialist, not xenophobic, not Islamophobic but right-wing: capitalism ‘n family values ‘n shit) terror group. Go on. Entertain me.
FYI Zanshin dear, I came to Britain in October 2005, a few months after Tyndall died (also, make another vague insinuation of racist/neo-Nazi associations, and I’ll sue you into penury). So far, I’ve been a lot of things but no Republican, not being a US citizen or resident. The fact that I despise the sheer stupidity and phobic irrationality of the left does not make automatically Republican. The fact that I’m very familiar with firearms doesn’t make me automatically American. I seriously think you need a dose of actual reality. And by ‘research’ on right-wing groups, can you please tell me which academic institution you have done that research, who your supervisor was or refer to any peer reviewed articles you have authored? Otherwise, I might think you confuse ‘research’ with ‘looking shit up on t’internet’.
Cleansing operative to Public Bar please! Cleansing Operative to Public bar!
Customer reports scattered remains of left wing commentator squelching underfoot….
Who’s that then Anna? I don’t know any left wing commentators, squelching or otherwise.
“I challenge anyone to show me a single casualty, in the UK, of an actual right-wing (not racist, not national socialist, not xenophobic, not Islamophobic but right-wing: capitalism ‘n family values ‘n shit) terror group. Go on. Entertain me.”
Well obviously when we get a casualty from the far right, as defined by you (wtf?) then you’ll be suitably entertained, time will tell.
“FYI Zanshin dear, I came to Britain in October 2005, a few months after Tyndall died”
“(also, make another vague insinuation of racist/neo-Nazi associations, and I’ll sue you into penury)”
Ok sweetie, good luck with that. I think that you think, that you’re still in the USA – You came to the UK AFTER Tyndall died, so basically you know sod all, except what you have gleaned from “‘looking shit up on t’internet’.” Is that supposed to be a Northern UK accent?
I’ve made no insinuations, vague or otherwise that you have racist/neo-Nazi associations – so keep taking your medications, or don’t listen to “the voices”, you are delusional and need a good dose of actual reality.
” The fact that I’m very familiar with firearms doesn’t make me automatically American.”
The fact that I’m very familiar with firearms (and explosives) doesn’t make me automatically American either. However I forgive myself for thinking you may at least be dual nationality as a) your original post is very USA centric and b) You have a lot to say about the USA Constitution c) You claim to be a constitutional lawyer, d)Your kneejerk response to the call for stricter gun control is typically Republican right-wing American – so if I’m wrong about you being American, then tough shit.
“However I forgive myself for thinking you may at least be dual nationality as a) your original post is very USA centric and b) You have a lot to say about the USA Constitution…”
Great logic there, Zanshin. I have a lot to say about dangerous dogs, but I don’t have a shaggy coat and a wet nose…
Whereas there is a rise in ‘right-wing political groups’, even in ‘organised right-wing thuggery’, we have yet to see any ‘right-wing terror groups’.
Or perhaps you are engineering the usual conflation of “things I don’t like” with “things no rational person likes.”
I’m not conflating anything, if that were the case I’d mention the Conservative Party, The Labour Party, UKIP, the LibDems, SWP, Marxists et al.
At what point does “organised right-wing thuggery” become right-wing terrorism? Is it when a UK Breivik turns up?
In October 2012 fifty-three EDL supporters in a furniture removal van, were stopped by police on the motorway and arrested. They were “allegedly” on their way to a mosque in London, to coincide with a TUC demo, which would occupy the police. Would this have been right-wing terrorism?
No because the EDL are left wing!
In what universe?
Conservophia has been a regular theme of the Left for many years. It is the mindset that says: you want to reform, you want to express concerns about the direction of travel: Fascist! Racist! You dare to question wwhat we, the self appointed Guardians, have decreed should be so!
One of the best examples of a form of “conservophobia” was the fabulous and telling incident of Gordon Brown and life long labour voter Gillian Duffy. This seinsible elderly lady expressed concerns about the numbers of easternd europeans moving into the area – and whether you are pro or anti that is a legitimate debate to have – but the mere expression of concern, the mere touching on a topic, caused her to be labelled in his world a “mad”, “bigotted” woman.
To many of the Left, ignorant of history and unable to tell the difference between a Nazi and a pot plant, to express concern for the direction of one’s community was was the Great Sin!
The greatest affliction the Left has wrought upon modern Europe is straight from the pages of “1984.” With delicious irony it is exactly what any Nazi Gauleiter or Kulak killing Commissar would have recognised and adopted as part of the brutal apparatus of control: “Thought Crime!”.
In earlier times it was the mindset of the Inquisition: in all times it is doctrinal, blind, unintellectual and in the end game cruel.
If anuthing is contrary to the self referential and established mid left concensus on how the World should be, then it the work of the modern political Heretic – the Deviant Right, meaning anyone who disagrees with those who declare themselves to be the Intelligentsia, but are just those with the biggest mouths and smallest minds, and who have the smallest library of history books too.
Phew! Rant over.
Great writing btw
Gildas – When I was younger I watched the big noise about a place called Cuba and some bloke called Nikita and troops marching in Red Square and people in the USA beating up black Americans for trying to catch a bus, or go to school and couldn’t quite see any difference between them. They all seemed to have to swear allegiance to their respective countries on a daily basis, had big armies and interfered in other countries while not sorting out their own.
Now go and look again at the history books and see how many times, say in the last two thousand years, you can draw a parallel , What goes around, comes around, plus ca change.
Sorry, I am a bit slow. And your point is….? As I say, sorry, I am a bit limited in the brain box department
” ignorant of HISTORY and unable to tell the difference between a Nazi and a pot plant, to express concern for the direction of one’s community was was the Great Sin!”
“meaning anyone who disagrees with those who declare themselves to be the Intelligentsia, but are just those with the biggest mouths and smallest minds, and who have the smallest library of HISTORY books too.”
Oh, I don’t think you’re limited in the brain box department, social grace is something else though.
I do think your allusions to knowledge and history speak for themselves though and if you’d actually bothered to read, rather than scan my post, you may have got the point that history is in the hands of the writer BUT as they say it’ll all be the same in a hundred years.
My personal views, which are being shaped by some of the self-righteous, libertarian, I’m alright Jackery on this site lead me to believe those with the biggest mouths and smallest minds are gathered hereabouts complaining about immigrants, the EU, dole scum, dodgy disabled. The irony is that quite a few of the most vociferous are actually NOT living in the UK (immigrants to the EU and elsewhere) and also pensioners, disabled or not – and so it changes.
You’re not suggesting that just because someone happens to be an ex-pat, or a pensioner, they’re not entitled to an opinion and the right to express it, are you?
Zanshin, you might as well have strapped live chickens to your self. Even the late Steve Irwin would have thought twice about which posts he commented on.
Don’t sell yourself short, Gildas..
Engineer – of course not, I believe in freedom of speech and abhor censorship. There is however, more than a smell of hypocricy , when those who do all the complaining about immigrants for example, are immigrants themselves. Or those taking their winter heating allowance, who live in warm climes complain about “benefit scroungers” And before anyone starts banging on about “I’m a taxpayer – blah”, everyone who buys just about anything in the UK is a taxpayer, so no kudos for that.
Saul – It beats stamp collecting
Does individual responsibility for health care mean getting rid of the NHS?
Yes. I think it’s no news I have expressed support for that view at every single possible occasion, but let’s not sidetrack the discussion.
Republican through and through.
He didn’t say “get rid of healthcare”, he said “get rid of the NHS”.
The NHS certainly isn’t perfect. Despite substantial funding increases since about 2000, there are increasing and depressingly frequent scandals of failure – South Staffordshire, care of the elderly, Maidstone, among others. There is a perfectly reasonable point of view that a different way of organising healthcare may offer better service, and it deserves to be aired. Shutting the debate down may have the effect of perpetuating whatever it is about the current arrangements that lead to the failures, and ultimately, that helps nobody.
Actually he said that INDIVIDUAL healthcare meant getting rid of the NHS. All fine and dandy for those who can afford individual healthcare or the insurance, but what about those who can’t?
I know, let’s copy that paragon of healthcare, the USA, where nearly a quarter of the population have no basic health cover at all. Perhaps they should put away more of that minimum wage to cover their costs, if they have a job.
What do you mean the anaesthetist will cost £30,0000? The surgeon will cost £60,000 and the maintenance drugs afterwards will cost £2,000 per month???
But I’ve also got type1 diabetes and without insulin I’ll die………
The NHS may be a bit bent out of shape, but it is better than the alternative, so you can sleep better as you get older.
There does seem to be a bit of an unhealthy trend to this. Some of those decrying the article and the supposed actions of Ann Coulter (must admit, first thing I thought on starting to read was “Ann Who? Never heard of her” and on reading on, realised why) may be a tad hard of thinking, but such people are not limited to the left. The right have their own ‘knee-jerk reactionists’, it’s just that they don’t get quite the same publicity, not being popular on the BBC, for example.
There are plenty of examples. Offer the opinion that wind power is a waste of taxpayer’s dosh (which it is), and you’ll be berated by a brainwashed, fact-free loon quicker than you can say “George Monbiot”. Point out that we have accumulated several decade’s worth of temporarily stored nuclear waste (which, incidentally, hasn’t actually harmed anybody yet), and it needs to go into a permanent store of some description, and you’ll be similarly berated.
The problem is that it shuts down sensible, fact-based discussion, and we end up with loony decisions that will cost even more to put right later – if indeed, they ever get put right. That costs us all a lot of money, including the knee-jerk shouters. They do need to shut up and think a bit before they allow their knees to jerk. Won’t happen, though – human nature. No doubt we’ll muddle through somehow, regardless.
The right have their own ‘knee-jerk reactionists
I’m a bit confused here – are the anti-wind, anti-nuclear reactionists right-wing, or just examples of arguments that are dismissed by name calling?
As a general principle, and I think that is your point, I don’t think it is helpful to respond to arguments just by name-calling. Trying to look at this with an open mind I can’t think of any examples of the ‘right-wing’ doing this, possibly bevause we are ‘all ‘left-wing’ now, or so the media would have us belief.
The ‘left’ have deliberately carried out a policy of denying space for true debate by defining some words as ‘totally unacceptable’ and redefining others, e.g. ‘tolerance’ used to mean ‘put up with’ whereas now it is closer to ‘positively embrace’.
An earlier comment (Zanshin) suggested that I am taking a ‘right’ stance by ignoring various ‘right-wing’ groups throughout Europe; apparent they have risen (and fallen) so what is the problem? My gut feeling is that most if not all of these groups are formed in response to perceived mass immigration and a frustration that their governments do not listen and act on their concerns. I don’t think their is a political movement here in the sense that Marxists and Islamists clearly would like to achieve as their goals. Indeed these ‘right-wing’ groups are formed and recruited from the same social groups that the ‘left-wing’ intellectuals try to incite to their causes. They aren’t some sort of ‘Oddessa’ seeking the Fourth Reich, indeed that is already under way but we call it the EU, which is hardly ‘right-wing’.
Ah – no, I didn’t phrase my original comment very well, so I see how you misunderstood me – my fault entirely.
I meant to make two seperate points. Firstly, that knee-jerkism isn’t just a left-wing monopoly, though as they seem to get disproportionate coverage in some parts of the mass media (such as the BBC) the lefty knee-jerkism does have a disproportinately distorting effect on public discourse. Secondly, that the lefty knee-jerkism over such matters as wind power and nuclear waste tends to drive fact-based discussion out of political discourse, to the eventual detriment of all of us.
No, I suggested that a typical rightist response was not to see when it suits – if the cap fits though….
You have hit the nail on the head with your gut feeling, however perceived mass immigration and prejudice are not starting points for a rigorous debate. It’s certainly not helped when headline news is that Polish is the second most spoken language in the UK, at 1%(+-) of the population, most won’t get past that figure and start fulminating instead of thinking. Remember, lies, damned lies and statistics.
No-one has suggested a Fourth Reich Odessa, however no-one (who was listened too), thought that Mr Hitler (that’s what he’s called in my 1936 copy of “Mein Kampf”) would be responsible for the deaths of millions.
Then of course there’s that charmer Breivik and his supporters, notably those from the UK, but also worldwide. Then you have stated there is no Fourth Reich conspiracy and promptly lay that at the feet of the EU???????
I’ll be glad when they give the UK it’s referendum, and then all the uninformed luddites who want the UK out can vote and with any luck the EU will be rid of the whiners and leave the rest of us alone.
“…perceived mass immigration…”
Eh? Are you referring to the clustering that occurs in cities or do you think they really aren’t here at all?
“Eh? Are you referring to the clustering that occurs in cities or do you think they really aren’t here at all?”
Actually Julia, I didn’t say it, I was quoting JimS, but I took it to mean the public perception of immigration. The constant blatting on by old favorites like The Daily Mail, Telegraph, The Star, The Sun.
I’m not “here” (wherever that is) but of course there’s immigration, notably amongst the Asians in places like Birmingham, Bradford, Manchester and of course London. Of course now there’s a new demon, Poland. In France theres notable clustering of immigrants in places like the Dordogne, Lot and Garonne, the same can be said for Spain, Italy, Bulgaria and so on.
We’re not all stupid or unquestioning, and from experience I guess most people have enough sense to pick over the dross that is published and broadcast. Tempered of course by our own not necessarily rational, but not particularly harmful prejudices and eccentricities.
So I don’t buy the archetypal ‘Sun reader’ myth, applied to whatever media.
We’re humans, not clones in some world where if only we made the right choices (i.e. did as we’re told by the better informed), we’d create a brave new world. It’s why we choose different breakfast cereals and motor cars, regardless of what’s most efficient.
So I happen to find the present and the planned future eu and it’s consequences very disturbing. The more my views are patronised and offensively mislabelled by the disciples, the more misinformation, the more often I’m told there will be a plague of boils if we don’t get with the programme, the firmer my resolve.
We’re way past any balanced debate and the resources available to stifle it are huge.
Believe it or not Binao, I don’ disagree (not that you’ll care:)) I’m just as tired of the endless rhetoric and noise, but it requires more than a simple Yes or No.
As for your belief in the Sun reader myth, look around. There are, and were, also rational thinking people in places like Germany in the late 20′s and 30′s, Russia in 1917, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Spain, Italy, Greece, China, USA and that didn’t help any of them.
My concern about a referendum is that the result may be No, but it should be for the right reasons, not based on some “bloody foreigners” nonsense. I also think that a Federal Europe is a logical conclusion, no more stupid than a US of A.
“When they give the UK it’s referendum …”
Think that exemplifies the difference between you and the loony Luddites. Here in Luddsville we think that referenda are an essential of democracy and not something to be ‘given’ by the Statists.
Incidentally, and off-topic, why on earth are you so content with the lack of democracy in the EU? Lessons from history an’ all …
There is a lot of bureaucracy and kingdom building in the EU, but I think that is the nature of the current beast, just human nature – look at Whitehall and Parliament or your local council for example.
Of course there should be democratically elected people in charge of the EU, but I think that by missing the principle of a Federal Europe, you are in danger of chucking out the baby with bathwater. No doubt at all the EU is a bit of a basket case, but try thinking of a future where the States (countries) of Europe start to move as Europeans instead of the old school tribal divisions that we currently use. That also needs European wide political integration, which may be impossible, but I’m always hopeful that people may become a bit better than manger defenders.
The problem is not conservophobia. It’s being damnably gullible, unable to use their critical faculties to spot a spoof and unable to make elementary checks for themselves. I see it every day on social media – and as well know, some of the worst offenders are journalists. Luckily, in real life people are less easily fooled and all together more sensible. I don’t know why that is.
The problem these days is that the spoofs are so plausible, because real life is so damned strange!
The difficulty with Conservaphobia is that even for someone as naturally conservative as I am, there are many Conservatives who make me run screaming. This is not as a result of ignorance and prejudice. Quite the reverse; I’ve met them. They are not offering conservative actions and conservative policies; they are offering a peculiar mash of things which are designed as bribes for key electoral groups regardless of what this does to the quality of the nation as a whole.
It’s like opening the a box of what are assumed to be a conservative assortment of teatime biscuits, – shortcake, pink wafer, cream sandwich, bourbon – only to find it has been replaced with a half-and-half mix of sunflower seeds and pig’s ear. Never mind what is written on the lid of the tin; the contents are an offence against good sense and would be insulting if offered by the Surprise Biscuit company. But take these back to the shop and point out that their chef has gone mad or the marketing manager is a liar, and they say ineffably stupid things like “Don’t complain, you’ll be sorry if the Surprise Biscuit Company get the contract”.
Will I? And how am I supposed to tell the difference when the Conservatives have clearly got their underpants on their heads, pencils shoved up their noses, and going ‘wibble’.
Spot on! The Left (in particular, the ‘Guardian’ and the stranger websites that seem to have provided us with Zanshin, like some weird and wonderful deep-sea inhabitant best left ungazed upon by the eyes of men) keep banging on and on and on about ‘the Tories’ and I keep thinking ‘Really? Where?’.
This bunch aren’t the Tories I grew up with…
The sort of Tories I grew up with used to win elections.
If it pleases you to use me as some sort of poster person for “the left” or “Grauniad readers” then alright, but I think that says more about you than me. I have no drum to beat for the left, the right or the centre. You are obviously seeing, but not reading, at my posts ???
Bullshit, Zanshin – gotcha. “No drum to beat” my arse! I’ve just caused myself some slight mental pain by reading a succession of your posts, and perhaps an illuminating extract is, “..try thinking of a future where the States (countries) of Europe start to move as Europeans instead of the old school tribal divisions that we currently use. That also needs European wide political integration, which may be impossible, but I’m always hopeful that people may become a bit better than manger defenders…”
A couple of chaps rather better know than you had similarly grandiose visions, which brooked no opposition – until they were defeated by force of arms. Napoleon and Hitler were rather keen on “European wide political integration”. Denial of any similarity, by you and quite a few other ardent “political integrationists”, always ring hollow: ultimately you engage in the wildest sophistry in an attempt to excuse your authoritarian wet dreams – see above…
Fortunately quite a few of us will resist your Greater European Co-Prosperity Sphere. We might even know as much as you do about firearms – and be better armed.
“Bullshit, Zanshin – gotcha. “No drum to beat” my arse!”
You are talking utter bollocks, no wonder you had slight mental pain.
I only wrote about political integration by democratic means and certainly didn’t advocate the use of violence or force of arms.
My only reference to firearms (and explosives) was in reply to the words of the noble Chris, whose only answer to disagreement, is to threaten to sue me to penury, so Yah boo sucks to your arse.
Zanshin – EU political integration is not being attempted by democratic means, and it never has been. The decision-makers in the EU are the Commissioners (unelected). The only time Britons have been consulted about European politics was in the mid 1970s, and the question put was whether or not we would like to continue as members of a free trade area, or withdraw. We were signed up to it first, and asked the question later. We have never been consulted on whether or not we would like to join the Euro, or whether we agree to closer political integration.
The EU is, with the exception of a toothless talking shop set up to rubber-stamp the decisions of Commissioners, completely free of democracy. The current leaders of Italy and Greece were appointed by the EU, not elected by their voters.
There is no chance whatsoever of the EU doing anything democratically, because it is not structured to do so. The EU is, to all intents and purposes, a dictatorship.
Now, you either think that dictatorship is a good thing, or you don’t. I don’t.
Blue Labour where once there were blue rinses, and an unattractive comfort in their association with Clegg’s Yellow Labour. DC no doubt happy not to be frightening the horses with any worrying veering from the middle way.
No wonder the back benches need sick bags.
Engineer – I know, I voted to join the EEC. I have also stated a number of times that there are problems that need addressing about the lack of elected anybody (MEP’s?) But that doesn’t change the fact that, given the solving of the problems, that a Federal Europe could work.
The USA has still not solved it’s problems and they’ve had over 200 years to do so. Early days yet, but I can see a time when the evolution will happen, given a bit of goodwill and good people, and 200 plus years – so not much chance there then Sigh!
Above, you stated that you were committed to EU integration by democratic means. Now you say that there is a problem with a lack of elected ‘anybody’.
You’re just a bullshitter, aren’t you?
“Above, you stated that you were committed to EU integration by democratic means. Now you say that there is a problem with a lack of elected ‘anybody’.
You’re just a bullshitter, aren’t you?”
Engineer – I am committed to EU integration by democratic means. There is a problem with a lack of elected ‘anybody’. Both statements are true, and unambiguous.
You’re just being deliberately obtuse, aren’t you?
Bullshit. You changed your original stance because it was found wanting in free debate.
“pencils shoved up their noses”
Well said, a real conservative, though I don’t think their noses is anatomically correct.
“Arachnophobes will not sit down and read “All You Ever Wanted to Know About Spiders”. “
Unless they are undergoing desensitisation therapy, of course…
Conservophia, I always wondered what the “C” in CBBC stood for.
“refused to board an airplane after learning that the pilot was black, fearing he had received his pilot’s license by affirmative action”
I fear you have misread the urban legend – not only was the pilot black, but they were also female.
Hmm – URL seemed to break there: http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/coulter.asp
Swivel-eyed lefties are clearly alive and well and living here. It pains me to be forced to point out that the left, having hijacked just about every issue in the public domain (Environment, Economics, The English Civil Wars, the American Revolution, Slavery, etc.) have now reduced themselves to moving even further beyond satire or parody than they were in the 1930s.
Nazism? Bolshevism? Two cheeks of the same arse. No-one got fat on the difference. To be a conservative (or, like me, a questioning reactionary), seems a perfectly reasonable political posture to adopt. But, I would say that.
Oh, it’s ‘progressive’, is it? Progressing to where, or what, exactly? A state of Marxian beatitude? Well, tell that to the Ukrainians, or the Poles, or the Czechs or Cambodians. Tell that to the poor unfortunates who managed to survive the cultural revolution.
I dislike the left in the same way that I dislike AIDS, or malignant bacteria, or piles. They will always be with us. Why? Because they are lazy…
Bacteria and piles are less malign than Leftists – the former can be remedied through medical intervention, but to deal with the latter, eternal vigilance and superior firepower are required.
I’m curious as to how many people round here have actually read any of Ann Coulter’s books?
So you’re saying that I advocate violence privately (based on what evidence?), whereas you advocate violence publicly, so your sort is the better sort? As for the yah-boos, I didn’t mistake insult for debate, you did, and your sort never understands satire or irony – pathetic.
Oh my, I am so out of my depth with you clever folk! Also, I have been banned, but it doesn’t seem to have eventuated, at least not permanently.
From my perspective we have Chris, who is super clever and has a sympathetic back story, which allows him to mouth off, because he will survive.
Others are less fortunate. Small cuts to certain benefits can be very difficult. And with a nod to Chris, who is obviously gifted, talented and blessed, he also has a mindset which is not exactly flexible.
There are many people in this world who can overcome adversity. The real test of strength is to empathise with those who are not equipped to cope and to help them.
For someone who believes himself to be banned, you ain’t half a visible sight on this site!
Not related to John Demetriou are you by any chance? He spent half his life banging on about how he was banned from hereabouts, though he never was!
Feel free to demonstrate your own ‘flexible mindset’ as and when.
“Others are less fortunate. Small cuts to certain benefits can be very difficult. And with a nod to Chris, who is obviously gifted, talented and blessed, he also has a mindset which is not exactly flexible.
There are many people in this world who can overcome adversity. The real test of strength is to empathise with those who are not equipped to cope and to help them”
Agreed and agreed, at last a voice of reason from the dullness:)
And is this article perhaps guilty of leftohobia?
Leftophobia, on this site? Does it show?
Yes, you are completely stable aren’t you. No axe to grind at all, just a one subject noise about your lack of firearms, your random attacks on what I do and don’t know, based on nothing other than your inner frustrations at ” the repressive, intolerant, intellectually lazy mindset of the UK Establishment as demonstrated consistently since the Fireams Act of 1920 – aided & abetted by their lapdogs, mindless hangers-on with a slave mentality. “
You are full of shit and bile, go get a life, AND some professional help with your anger issues -sheesh!
Erm.. you say I ‘ain’t half visible’ on this site!’ What? I an a very infrequent commenter these days, and I say I was banned, because you told me that I was not welcome to comment here.
It doesn’t seem to matter what I say. (however mildly) You jump on any remark . Why? I don’t know but I would guess that you are a woman who enjoys being admired, whose opinions, backed by they are by perfect prose, are not to be questioned by intellectually inferior tossers.
Sometimes Sue, you write beautiful crap. Someone will always tell you that.
Good Morning, Zanshin. Keep on questioning the lovely lady. She really doesn’t like it.
“you told me that I was not welcome to comment here”
No, I told you that you were welcome to add your views on a subject under discussion, but that was not to include gratuitous insults to other posters.
Er, I think you will find that Zanshin is questioning the opinions of another author on this site – not me!
Do try to keep up Jim.
“but that was not to include gratuitous insults to other posters. ”
Gratuitous insults aren’t allowed, but ad hominem attacks are?
So you’ve sent a warning to JuliaM, Engineer, Chris et al. JuliaM for likening me to some alien or deep sea creature, Engineer for being deliberately obtuse and attacking my character for no good reason and Cris who seems incapable to accept that others may disagree with his world view?
“Er, I think you will find that Zanshin is questioning the opinions of another author on this site – not me! ”
Er, I think that you’ll find that I’ve questioned or commented on your opinions many times. Especially your massive bias against anyone who dares to argue against the views of your tame mutual back patting club. In fact, why don’t you go over this very thread and see that I generally comment against just that.
“Sometimes Sue, you write beautiful crap. Someone will always tell you that.
Though they should be prepared for illogical responses , laden with insult and infantile sophistry.
Good Morning, Zanshin. Keep on questioning the lovely lady. She really doesn’t like it.”
Good Morning Jim – though a few days late
No, she doesn’t like any dissent at all. What do you call that again – authoritarian or something like that?
What I find interesting is the way this phobia is transmitted.
It’s often simple group dynamics. A group of, shall we say students, is in the JCR, talking slightly aimlessly. They’re young, so there’s still a kind of pressure to conform, and a desire for simple answers, a simple framework for right and wrong. They want to know who the bad guys are, and to save the world from them.
And as it happens the prevailing political trends they are exposed to (from their lecturers, the BBC, and other students) are fairly basic leftist ones, and there are people on hand telling them that the bad guys are Conservative politicians and voters (oh and Daily Mail readers, too, there’s a lot of “hate-speech” directed against them) Our students therefore quickly learn who the accepted bad boys and girls are, and they’re away. Perhaps this will affect their politcal views for much of their lives. It must be galling for a student who secretly doesn’t absolutely concur, but who may end up paying lip-service to the orthodoxy.
I’m convinced that this is just a game people like to play, they like to make villains of one group or another. Much more fun than the very difficult task of actually picking up a few books and working out what’s going on in the world.
I think you wrote…”Right that’s it, you’re banned” That’s as I remember, and I can’t be arsed to check back. The essence is there, and the truth for anyone who happened to read that particular post. Luckily for you, I tend to comment retrospectively so most of your admirers will not see this exchange.
I don’t care, and I don’t need to keep up. You are the one who doesn’t realise that your dishonesty is obvious, and your cleverness disguises an inadequate person who doesn’t answer valid criticism. You are a frightened, wizened old lady, demanding recognition as a fantastic brain. You achieved a double first. Really? I also got awarded a first, but that was in Mathematics. Only a single, so I can’t keep up. The only double firsts, I ever heard of were from years ago, usually, if not exclusively, Oxbridge. Not some Welsh institution, in recent years.
So do continue to brag and to rage against those who will not pay homage. And know this. We can keep up as much, as we need to.
Spot on Jim, keep up the good work
Interesting and uninformed comment on the winter fuel allowance – you are aware that apart from southern Italy (n some years) those who live in so called ‘warmer climes’ actually endure far harsher winters than anything you whinge abou t in the UK. Minus 12 doesn’t even get talked about around here, perfectly normal for this time of year.
Been reading the Sun again have you?
Uh, Uninformed? Who says so, you Anna, and you are in no way biased at all, are you? I don’t whinge about the weather in the UK, I don’t live there, the weather is just the weather. the last time I was in your neck of the woods it was a good minus 14 and no relief.
“Been reading the Sun again have you?”
Certainly not, I prefer more adult comics. Why have you been writing for them?
I visited someone just north of Sarlat last year, who said he’d recorded -20 on one day the previous winter…
Hang on a minute – just up the thread you complained about the hypocricy of ex-pats expressing opinions on UK current affairs. Now it seems you’re not a UK resident. For an ex-pat, you sure have a lot of opinions about UK current affairs….
Petard sighting….
No I didn’t and who said I’m an ex-pat?
I complained about the hypocricy of ex-pats who live in the EU and complaining about it to the point of swallowing their own tails. As an uninformed, uneducated person, I do know that in France people with potentially terminal illness get 100% cover for travel, treatments and medications, those in glass houses should have their catapults confiscated.
“Petard sighting….”
Exactly Anna, but the next time you sight it, just bear down and it’ll pop right out….
You might not have advocated violence openly, chum, but then your sort never do. I, on the other hand, made it clear that the only answer to your sort, ultimately – when your monomanical utopianism runs out of control as it unfailngly does, every time – is superior force. Your schoolboyish yah-boos (goodness, you’ve been an expat since the 1960s by the sound of things) are just a little pathetic.
So you’re saying that I advocate violence privately (based on what evidence?), whereas you advocate violence publicly, so your sort is the better sort? As for the yah-boos, I didn’t mistake insult for debate, you did, and your sort never understands satire or irony – pathetic chum.
Zanshin:
1. I am quite possibly more familiar with the AR-15 than you are – I fired many rounds from one (and other semis: FALs, Rugers…) prior to the 1988 Act which stopped us from owning them. Of course it can be modified, in fact in the USA one can buy a kit to do so without much difficulty – but it’s not manufactured or marketed as a selective fire weapon. You’re probably confusing it with the M-16, the vulgar error of those who know less about firearms than they pretend…
2. Your millenarian view of the virtues of the EU places you firmly in the category of people who know that their extreme radical views can be imposed only through force. You’re just another collectivist authoritarian hypocrite.
“You’re probably confusing it with the M-16, the vulgar error of those who know less about firearms than they pretend…”
No, you see it’s easy, just follow me and move your lips if you want to – the AR15 is the AR15, the M16 is the M16 – clear? good! They ARE incestuously related which IS vulgar.
” Your millenarian view of the virtues of the EU places you firmly in the category of people who know that their extreme radical views can be imposed only through force. You’re just another collectivist authoritarian hypocrite.”
I think that you need to seek professional help. Your mindset is the reason why you lost your kit in 1988.
Now you imply that you know something about the history of UK firearms legislation, as well as guns themselves. I don’t believe you. I think you’re a contrarian – as well as the other things I already mentioned. We all “lost our kit” for several closely related reasons, in 1988 and 1997 too, but the individual mindset of any given gun owner had nothing to do with it. It had far more to do with the repressive, intolerant, intellectually lazy mindset of the UK Establishment as demonstrated consistently since the Fireams Act of 1920 – aided & abetted by their lapdogs, mindless hangers-on with a slave mentality. People like you.
The evidence so far suggests you won’t perceive the teensy contradiction between your silly injunctions/observations, and your increasingly wild (now scatological) outbursts. You talk about “anger” but I doubt the police would be so rash as to permit you a Firearms Certificate – something I’ve held for a very long time. I just threw in that little guns reference to crank up your hissy fit a notch or two, maybe bring on indigestion if not a mild stroke…
Yes, you are completely stable aren’t you. No axe to grind at all, just a one subject noise about your lack of firearms, your random attacks on what I do and don’t know, based on nothing other than your inner frustrations at ” the repressive, intolerant, intellectually lazy mindset of the UK Establishment as demonstrated consistently since the Fireams Act of 1920 – aided & abetted by their lapdogs, mindless hangers-on with a slave mentality. “
You are full of shit and bile, go get a life, AND some professional help with your anger issues -sheesh!
” something I’ve held for a very long time”
Yep, me too chum.
Extremely bored with you now.
TTFN
X
Comments on this entry are closed.