« On class difference | Main | Against retail politics »

March 19, 2019



This is of course nonsense. Those defending the MSM are correct.
Even at its height, The Times's coverage of Rotherham was a very small percentage of that paper's output. Nothing was being crowded out.
Rod Liddle - a supposed leading villain - has one page in The Spectator and a page in the Sunday Times. That's it.
While people in NYC were apparently blaming Chelsea Clinton FFS.
Nothing is more likely to stoke Islamophobia than crying wolf over Islamophobia.


"We all want to believe we are the good guys, and the wish is father to the belief; nobody really wants to believe they have contributed to mass murder."

A question the Left should be asking of themselves rather the the Right I suspect.......there is one side of the Left/Right divide that has consistently claimed the moral high ground, that they are indeed 'the good guys', and that side is not the Right.

Ralph Musgrave

Chris’s claim in his first couple of paragraphs that Islamophobia derives from MSM journalists’ “jobs depending” on spreading an Islamophobic message is plain bizarre. Possibly that’s the case with the Daily Mail, but at the other extreme, the idea that journalists’ jobs at the Guardian or Independent depend on them spreading the latter message is hilarious.

Moreover, what exactly is wrong with Islamophobia? As Rowan Atkinson put it, “What is wrong with inciting intense dislike of a religion if the activities or teachings of that religion are so outrageous, irrational or abusive of human rights that they deserve to be intensely disliked?”


"Possibly that’s the case with the Daily Mail, but at the other extreme, the idea that journalists’ jobs at the Guardian or Independent depend on them spreading the latter message is hilarious."

Their insane partiality, special pleading, barefaced hypocrisy and anathematisation of dissenters seeks to reinforce it too. The Guardian (and the bourgeois current it springs from and represents) too is almost explicitly a machine for seeding and curating division.


Imagine a parallel reality Britain. It has exactly the same Muslim share of the population, growing at exactly the same rate. It has exactly the same varied experience of Muslims, both good and bad, from delightful bake-off winners to vile jihadis and grooming gangs. It has exactly the same rate of mosque attendance, halal meat consumption, hijab wearing, you name it. Everything is the same, except one thing:

In this parallel reality Britain, every single Muslim is a white convert.

Would this change your attitude to Islam in Britain?

If so, why?


Damn, that's a good question.

I suppose the absence of a preexisting cultural tradition ought to make a difference but allowing this strikes me as fundamentally at odds with current liberal ideology.


I think it would change everything.

There are religious movements which grow largely by converting whites; e.g. Mormonism, Scientology. The MSM will attack both in ways they’d never dream of attacking Islam. This is partly because MSM journalists are "Islamophobic" in the most literal sense; they’re straight up frightened of Islam in ways they’re not frightened of Mormonism (think Charlie Hebdo vs The Book Of Mormon). But the fact most UK Muslims are non-white is massively important. It gives Muslims victimhood points on the progressive stack they wouldn’t have if they were white.

Islam is the world’s fastest growing religion, the world’s second largest religion, and is on course to become the world’s largest religion within the next 30 years. It may even be the world’s wealthiest religion, if you count all the petrodollars available for Dawah. Yet the whole “Islamophobia” narrative portrays this most confident and self-assertive global religion as if it’s as beleaguered as Falun Gong. We even have the absurdity of Hindu Nationalists in India being described as “White Supremacists”, simply because they dislike it.

I’ve become increasingly resigned and fatalistic about Islam. It’s very far from my favourite faith, but I know once it reaches critical mass our ruling class will simply convert en masse and take it over. The Roman aristocracy started off by feeding Christians to lions; once they could see Christianity was going to win they got their act together and took over the Papacy. Leo I, the heroic Pope who talked Atilla the Hun out of invading Rome, came from just such an aristocratic background.

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Blog powered by Typepad