Permission to laugh, Comrade? In defence of James Carr

The world has always been divided into those who understand that maybe they don’t know best, and those who are certain that they do.

It is a divide that plays out terribly for society, as it is Those Who Are Certain (the TWAC) that grab power and try to inflict their certainties on everyone else. Freedom lovers aren’t attracted to power because – apart from rolling back the policies of the TWAC – their only use for it would be to say, ‘Yeah, I’m not going to do anything’.

Currently the TWAC are in power almost everywhere. They are emboldened and trying to enforce their joyless world of constant self-censorship and apology on everyone else. Their latest target is the comedian James Carr.

James made a joke that they didn’t like and now they are trying to cancel him. You expect this from the leftist offence police who try to use exaggerated hurts and accusations of phobias to destroy their enemies. It is disappointing to see similar calls for cancellation coming from Number 10 and the health Secretary, both nominal Tories.

No matter what the joke police are saying, it doesn’t matter what the joke was. It doesn’t matter that Carr is renowned for making tasteless jokes. All that matters is that he is being attacked for telling a joke. This basic fact is enough to know that the attack on him is misguided.

We have to push back against societal capture by professional complainers. It doesn’t matter how offensive the joke was, in a free society we have to live with that which offends us.

A joke is the verbalisation of a thought. We cannot allow thought to disappear because it might offend someone. We cannot allow thought to disappear because it has offended someone. The TWAC are certain that offence is a terrible thing. They are terrified of causing it. It is certainly unpleasant to be offended. But they ignore the fact that offence, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Carr had recently joked about people with different views to him about Covid. In that case his views coincided with those of the TWAC, so they took no offence. But why should their eye be the one that judges what is offensive? By definition none of us like being offended. But we cannot allow a society to develop that polices offence. Because what is offensive is always a political decision.

It is similar to another current attempt at cancellation. In the US Joe Rogan is being targeted by the American TWACs. They are suddenly appalled at recordings of his that have been around for years. But if they have not been offended before then the offence they feel is surely manufactured.

The TWAC are shouting for James Carr and Joe Rogan to be cancelled. There has even been a call by a politician for Carr’s audience to be prosecuted. This leads us back to a Lord Chamberlain approach where the government can control what we are allowed to find funny.

In that case, if someone laughs at the wrong thing, well, off with his head. Or maybe, in these enlightened times, just destroy his life and income instead.

We must stand up to this attempt to impose laugh tyranny. Because often, those who are certain they know best know nothing of the sort

Aussie TV news actually covers the #politicalpolicing the UK is suffering #lockdownprotests

Three cheers for Oz!

Why are the media in the UK not discussing this? Why does it fall to an Australian TV channel to point out that the British police are acting totally differently to anti-freedom protests than they did with BLM protests. They took the knee to a leftist organisation that wants to destroy them! yet they violently employ snatch-squads to arrest actual peaceful protestors protesting about the response to Covid-19.

We should be able to expect the British mainstream media to ask these questions and point these things out. For cricket fans things are very bad when we have to rely on the Aussies to help us out.

On hearing of a teacher sacked for challenging ‘Toxic Masculinity’…

As headmaster I feel compelled to put out a statement about the latest goings-on at my school.

Reports are being made that we have sacked a master for having the temerity to suggest that men aren’t all bad. This is true. It is hard to believe in this day and age that anyone could be so downright sexist. The fellow was not able to deny that he said ‘Sometimes bravery is a good thing,’ and we have actual proof that he said ‘Men do have some good points.’

This is the sort of misogynistic clap-trap that women have to deal with everyday and it is our duty to get rid of it wherever we see it. Some say that we are a school and should concentrate on teaching. Nonsense! Our duty is to get rid the world of oppression. What is the point of being able to speak French or conjugate Latin verbs if you do not have the first idea about critical social justice? If you cannot see non-existent sexism and racism everywhere, what good are your eyes?

No, we have done the right thing. Without sacking this master we might have a generation of children for whom it is normalised to see men as useful members of society. This we cannot allow.

Either the police are in great danger or we are being lied to. What is the truth?

Observing the police in central London today was instructive.

If Covid-19 is the terrible disease the government claims and can be caught by being less than two metres from someone else then the police would surely not be standing next to each other. If there was a real danger to their health then they would be standing apart, unwilling to approach the public. Their union would be failing in its duty if it didn’t make sure this happened.

Instead the police were close together.

You might say there will always be some heroes who will put their lives at risk to protect others. But these were just policemen chatting to each other. Even ‘on duty’ they were not doing anything that couldn’t be left undone if there was a real threat of ill-health or death.

Does a young women really need harassing – without social distancing – for waving a cardboard sign? Does another young girl need to be arrested? Does a girl need to be repeatedly told to leave the area when she is upset and saying to a policeman who won’t let her see a friend, ‘but she’s only 15’.

If Covid-19 was so deadly that we had to endure lockdowns, be kept from our families and watch the economy be destroyed then the police would be too frightened to bother arresting people – especially people like those today who were causing no trouble. The fact that they are doing this suggests very strongly that they are not frightened of catching Covid-19.

So why are we being forced to endure these authoritarian measures? If the police can meet up in groups to do unnecessary things without issue why can’t the rest of us meet up to do necessary things?

Something makes this arrest-happy/riot gear approach of the police even more galling. During the height of the pandemic, when we were assured Covid-19 really was deadly and that we must not leave the house the BLM protests took place. These were waved through by the police, who even took the knee to the protestors in an appalling act of fealty. People like the young girls arrested and harassed today were not arrested back then. People on BLM marches even shout abuse at the police, yet the police turn up in shirt sleeves and caps and just listen. Today it was riot gear, helmets and handcuffs. Political policing is a terrible thing.

To see the police marching like the military through the streets of London, dispersing and arresting people for protesting and snatching protest signs is chilling.

Maybe Covid-19 is so dangerous that any group of people must be dispersed. But if so, why aren’t the police social distancing at all possible moments? And why was BLM allowed to protest without issue when the virus had an even greater hold than it does now?

The conclusion can only be one of two things. Either the police are in great danger or, if they are not, then we are being lied to and Covid-19 is not as dangerous a threat as we are being told.

What is the truth?

Comment isn’t hate

It seems bizarre to have to point it out, but comment is not hate. If someone says something and it is not the officially accepted view, that does not make it hate.

Just because someone doesn’t agree with your point of view it doesn’t mean what they are saying is hate.

This should not need pointing out. Hopefully in a few years we will look back at this period we are going through with relief that it is over and we have returned to a time of free speech. But right now we have to stand up and make the point. Comment is not hate. Comment about Islam is not Islamophobia. Comment about homosexuals is not homophobia.

And most important of all, preaching the gospel must be open to all without fear of reprisals. The gospel is the good news that everyone needs to hear. It must not be held back by fear of being accused of speaking hate.

It is crazy to have to say this. But we must be wary of what laws are coming and fight to keep free speech for all.