JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Books

Hate: weaponizing a word to shut people up

All decaying civilizations have a decaying language

Some call the changes an “evolving” thing or a “living language” but when all the changes produce ambiguous misunderstandings or emotional reactions rather than analytical ones, it’s obvious the abuse of words is just degradation for political gain, not progress. Civil behavior is what makes civilizations. Any barbarian can rant with indignation.

When words are exploited we lose meaningful tools.

It’s about free speech

One word has become a favourite weapon to silence people and stop discussions. Hate.

Pat Condell reminds us that “hate” is a powerful word, the darkest emotion, an extreme word — but it’s misused and abused now for any old reason, but only in a selective way.

The word hate is thrown like a verbal frisbee — tossed like verbal acid — every unwelcome remark, and unpleasant truth is “hate”. If you vote for the wrong candidate, you are voting for “hate”. And now this extreme word has been crowbarred into the law. 

You can be arrested if you say something that may causing alarm and distress to people who are determined to be alarmed and distressed by your free speech. But if the suppression of your birthright causes you alarm and distress, you won’t see anyone arrested for that.  

Being offensive and mocking is not “hate”. It’s just a word but it is wielded like a baseball bat.

He makes a great defense for free speech.

h/t Bill in AZ

9.8 out of 10 based on 89 ratings

227 comments to Hate: weaponizing a word to shut people up

  • #

    Even worse is the projection of hate on your political opposition, for example, how the left calls everything the right supports racism in order to inspire hate, or how they misrepresented facts and outright lied to get the public to hate Trump, or how Biden and his comrades in the MSM lied about Georgia’s new election law in order to make a case for HR1.

    Emotionally driven hate is all the left has since logic and reason undermines their entire agenda.

    711

    • #
      Jojodogfacedboy

      In Canada, the police are fencing in a Church and yet if it was a mosque or a native issue, they ignore it now and will not intervene.
      The victim hood the media portrays has shield them and made white conservative the scapegoat of being racist or supremacist.

      When bad people do bad things to you, you either submit and take it, or bring them to task for their unprovoked attacks.

      431

      • #
        David Maddison

        Here is an article about that church they are fencing in to deny access.

        https://globalnews.ca/news/7742895/edmonton-area-gracelife-church-closure-covid-19/amp/

        It all about the Left’s war against the Judeo-Christian moral and ethical basis of Western Civilisation. They wouldn’t dare do that to a mosque or followers of an animist, shamanistic or nature religion

        331

        • #
          Tilba Tilba

          “It all about the Left’s war against the Judeo-Christian moral and ethical basis of Western Civilisation. They wouldn’t dare do that to a mosque or followers of an animist, shamanistic or nature religion.”

          I don’t think so … reading the link it states clearly that the church has been blocked off because the owners have been violating Alberta’s health rules as part of its Covid-19 response. Hardly a war again “the Judeo-Christian moral and ethical basis of Western Civilisation” – it is just trying to reduce stupid and reckless behaviour that has public health consequences.

          And why blame the “Left” anyway – the 2019 Alberta general election saw Jason Kenney and his new United Conservative Party (UCP) sweep to power winning 63 of 87 seats in the Alberta legislature, returning the province to right-wing politics.

          127

          • #
            Gary Simpson

            Woke ‘conservatives’.

            41

          • #
            sophocles

            – it is just trying to reduce stupid and reckless behaviour that has public health consequences.

            With modern economists, that’s a faint hope. Creating policy and attempting to implement it based on propaganda and rent-seeking instead of solid engineering and the Public Good principles, is a recipe for a long-term disaster. Germany is not far off one …

            Why blame the left? Because it’s the source of most of the nonsense.

            Then I spotted this headline at WUWT:

            Pro Big Government Economist Calls for a Renewable Energy Moonshot

            After I had picked myself up off the floor, I read the article it was attached to. It’s not quite what first impressions would leave one to expect… but it’s still dangerous and if implemented would be a recipe for more disaster.

            31

            • #
              sophocles

              A headline from NoTricksZone.com:

              A new peer-reviewed paper published in the International Journal of Global Warming identifies 79 “apocalyptic” predictions formulated since 1970 by “researchers and activists” who “predict cataclysmic events” resulting from “catastrophic climate change.” Already 48 of these “truly apocalyptic forecasts” have failed. The other 31 are likely just as wrong, but the prediction end dates haven’t expired yet, as “the apocalypse is always about 20 years out.”

              91

          • #
            Greg Cavanagh

            “The prosecutors, the public health inspectors and the police who were involved showed a great amount of patience and trying to work with the community…”

            Apparently the community aren’t afraid of the flue. There’s a message here if one was to listen.

            41

          • #
            Sceptical Sam

            Dick head.

            20

  • #
    CHRIS

    George Orwell was absolutely right. 1984 is here, right now. The left wing thought police are taking over society.

    622

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      All you have to do is challenge them – they rely on people shutting their eyes and hoping it will go away.

      Push back or lose your freedoms…..

      141

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Orwell’s 1984 featured Hate Week where the Proles were whipped into a frenzy over “reported” crimes against them by their enemies, here is a clip from the 1984 move version, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zYlOU7Fpk

      Note how the people blindly follow the information fed to them fully engrossed with the messages from Big Brother and how it relates to current SJW, Woke and anti-capitalist movements, where even 5 years ago the fully committed zealots were a minority in gatherings or protests this number has grown through media lies and social peer pressure, consider what control fundamentalist minorities had over entire nations last century then think of what a majority could do, if this balance is not restored very dark times for those that love liberty will ensue.

      121

      • #
        Gary Simpson

        When you can no longer say the things you want to, there will be nothing you want to say.

        31

  • #
    Klem

    One great thing about the lunatic Left is their capacity to point fingers and project their evil thoughts onto others.

    Another great thing is that the Left always eat their own.

    It’s quite entertaining really.

    222

    • #
      glen Michel

      I like to think of an upcoming hatefest of the left as akin to the Grand Peu post- revolutionary France. I have warned my younger relatives to be careful about what is it that you want.They think in purely emotive terms. Of course they think that they are morally right. Such is the idealism of the young.

      111

    • #
      John Galt III

      Problem is you get eaten first

      11

  • #
    • #
      TdeF

      A bit waffly but the pitch is that ‘unhappy numbers’ are not racism at one extreme and white supremacy at the other. There are huge cultural differences in uneducated black rural and tribal societies and the same groups of people inside a British/American system which highly values education.

      I find it obvious that the very successful American black people are people who were part of or influenced by the standards and expectations of English and Scottish societies. Kamala Harris’s father is a Jamaica American economist and professor at Stanford. Barack Obama’s father was a senior government economist in Kenya. Colin Powell may have grown up in Harlem but his mother was Scottish. It is more outrageous that all black people are lumped together purely by the colour of their skin. That is racist.

      And almost no one mentions all the other people of America who are doing very well, despite their non white skin colour. You would think the only racism in the world was in Western societies when the racism in China is rampant with public facial recognition camera systems now used to identify Uighurs. Hitler and Stalin would approve. Electronic racism.

      421

      • #
        James Murphy

        Your comments reminded me of this video – When Wokes and Racists Actually Agree on Everything
        https://youtu.be/Ev373c7wSRg

        11

        • #
          TdeF

          And again the dialog is only about black people and white people. Is that really the only area of racism in the world? How does exclusively black/white racism explain the Rwandan massacre of 800,000 people in 1994, black Hutus exterminating minority black Tutis?

          In the insanity of blaming every social disadvantage on racism or sexism, I am reminded of the Goodies parody of the 1980s, heightism, where Bill Oddie had to be a servant to his taller friends because of ApartHeight. It affected Simon and Garfunkle too.

          However I cannot link the Video as the BBC has blocked it on ‘copyright’ grounds. Obviously it contains hate speech about short people.

          141

          • #
            Tarquin Wombat-Carruthers

            Also, IIRC, John Cleese, representing the British Upper Class, and the Two Ronnies (Barker and Corbett), representing Middle and Lower Class respectively, with Corbett, the Lower-Class minion stating “I know my place”.

            51

            • #
              Deano

              I think I remember that sketch where Cleese in an expensive suit smugly tells that he has the key to the executive toilet which is cleaned after every use. Barker in a shirt and tie reveals he has access to a key to the middle management toilets which are cleaned daily. Corbett in his overalls simply says “I ‘ave to wait until I get ‘ome.”

              21

          • #
            James Murphy

            Ahh, the Goodies…. still just as funny today as when I was a child! When I first saw them, I don’t think I was old enough to care or know about the details behind the ApartHeight episode, and others, but still found it to be hilarious.

            21

            • #
              Annie

              I loved The Goodies too.

              31

              • #
                Hanrahan

                Ah! I remember well their pirate radio station anchored off-shore. Their only record was Walk In The Black Forest.

                00

            • #
              Deano

              Graeme Garden’s inventions used to tickle me. He had a machine that brushed his teeth and combed his hair simultaneously and was of course utterly impractical.

              21

  • #

    What about the word CLIMATE?
    John Locke said: “The achievement of human knowledge is often
    hampered by the use of words without fixed signification” British philosopher, 1632-1704.

    Scientist and sceptics in the climate change field are using the word CLIMATE in the same way, not recognizing that they use a word from the layman sphere since the ancient Greeks over 2000 years ago. The UNFCCC offers not any definition on climate at all. IPCC says “Climate in a narrow sense is usually defined as the average weather” but does not say what weather is, and so on. For sure, John Locke would repeat this demand clearly again today.
    More at: https://oceansgovernclimate.medium.com/climate-science-must-be-able-to-say-what-it-means-by-this-but-it-cannot-609eb3b9e55a

    102

  • #
    Clyde Spencer

    Jo,
    You are right on the mark about a trend to use words to emotionally manipulate people, rather than communicate ideas. The Enlightenment appears to be coming to an end.

    241

    • #
      R.B.

      It ended 200 years ago. If you are referring to the idea that rulers shouldn’t be telling citizens what to think in regard to artistic and scientific issues, the Catholic Church was never as heavy handed in enforcing a dogma as the CC religion.

      Copernicus was never harassed. The Pope at the time was impressed despite the system being as poor as the Ptolemaic one used at the time, and that is the last Copernicus version that had many more epicycles. The real paradigm change was dumping the circular orbits rather than putting the Sun at the centre. Jesuits supported the Lutheran Kepler to do this while Galileo was on trial.

      The giants whose shoulders Newton stood on were pre-renaissance academics, most of who were part of the clergy. A big part of the Enlightenment is wiping them from history.

      The Enlightenment is about people spinning the explosion of learning due to the printing press as the result of enlightenment, as defined above. The truth is that cheaper books lead to both, with enlightenment being an explosion in brainfarts as well as good ideas.

      62

      • #
        Tilba Tilba

        Copernicus was never harassed.

        Well, he died before he could be. The heliocentric theories of Copernicus were however condemned by the Catholic Church over the next century, including via the heresy charges against Galileo. Inconvenient truths indeed. The Scientific Revolution (and the Age of Reason) occurred despite the Catholic Church, not with its support.

        39

        • #
          R.B.

          He had finished it 13 years earlier. Pope Clement VII was aware of Copernicus’s work and supported it, along with his successor, whom Copernicus dedicated his book too. Manuscripts of part of the work were circulated and getting approval long before his death.

          There was only little criticism of Copetnicus’s approach, a bit like the modelling that can be fine tuned to fit data doesn’t necessarily describe reality, rather than theological.

          It was 60 years after his death before any controversy. Galileo was given a stipend to write his defense of the heliocentricity and used it to insult the Pope, who was supposed to be his friend. His punishment was to live a very good life in the palace of a bishop away from Rome.

          Its a lefty thing to ignore the start of science in Europe in the late medeival period. The story of Pierre Duhem is an example. He wrote 10 volumes on the history of science but focussed on the contribution of early scientists before Copernicus. He had difficulty in publishing after the first volume, with his daughter managing to fight to get a few more published after his death. His work was essentially black listed because the truth had to be that the Church stifled the Age of Reason.

          51

          • #
            Tilba Tilba

            Its a lefty thing to ignore the start of science in Europe in the late medeival [sic] period.

            A very odd statement – brought on by ideological or partisan blinkers. Many people who have an interest in – even a love of – the history of science (myself included) come from the moderate-centre-left.

            Many very bright people find a comfortable home at that wavelength of the spectrum – unsurprisingly.

            10

            • #
              R.B.

              Love of the history of science?Very doubtful if you think that the statement isn’t based on reality. Very doubtful that you are bright rather than full of it.

              result of all Duhem’s work was relative obscurity for about half a century. His publisher, Hermann et Cie, refused to publish the final volumes of his Systeme du Monde. The excuse given was financial hardship. The real reason why Duhem’s work would not be published was divulged by an insider into the workings of the French scientific establishment; the head of the Institute d’Histoire des Sciences at the Sorbonne, Abel Rey. The reason that Duhem’s work was not published was not financial concerns. Hermann et Cie was being pressured by very powerful anti-clerical elements in government and academe not to promise publication of his work. The information in the manuscripts was not something they wanted published; information that showed significant advances in the theoretical understanding of mechanics had occured well before the “Scientific Revolution” and during a time when the church was the central influence on society

              11

  • #
    Glen Livingston

    Face it, the left are cultural bullies!! Labeling and language are just part of the arsenal they use as well as violence (think antifa and BLM). Think of all the words that have been “redefined” …… marriage, racism, white supremacy, insurrection, hate speech, ect.. Add to that all the veto’s listed by Pat Condell and compelled speech laws like Canada’s now defunct C-16 and you have the beginning picture of what cultural bullies look like.

    171

    • #
      Mike Jonas

      It wasn’t all that long ago that the word was ‘violence’. Any statement disliked by the left was declared to be violence. Now the word is ‘hate’. When ‘hate’ runs out of steam they will find another word to replace it.

      41

      • #
        Klem

        I’m thinking the next word might be ‘re-educatation’ speech.

        If you say something with which the Left disagrees, you will require long term re-education.

        And re-education facilities will be arranged to help you, for your own good of course.

        11

  • #
    Fuel Filter

    Those here who don’t know Pat’s vids going back well over a decade should watch the brave stance he has taken over the muzzie invasion of his country.

    And I mean BRAVE! Tell the truth, I have no idea how he’s evaded being thrown into a British prison.

    Plenty of hi-brow defenders of “die-versity” would, I think, adore that outcome.

    291

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    This is another outstanding post.

    There’s so much Verbiage floating around in the madcap Media that anything can be made to sound “wrong”, or politically incorrect, while the “True” message we are required to endorse can be made to emerge from the flood of Words that engulfs us.

    Verbalism affronts us at every turning point and all avenues of dissent are closed off to allow propagation of the required “True” message.

    Job done: victory to the Elites.

    121

    • #
      Gary Simpson

      Can we please just settle this once and for all? Every human ever born is subject to what is termed ‘bias’. This is just a part of the normal human condition and is a direct result of lived experience and what used to be known as ‘thinking for yourself’ and making your own mind up on how you view any given subject. There is nothing wrong with expressing the opinions you have formed – you cannot force them on other people who have, like you, formed their own. You do not have to agree or disagree with any of them. If you don’t like it, it’s simple – don’t listen.
      Then you can’t possibly be offended can you?

      10

      • #

        Nice summation.

        So people like you who are aware that they have biases and that their opinions are biased and if they are themselves ethical people, act upon their knowledge for the common good (and likely to their own advantage as a consequence of the goodwill and peace that ensues). Racists are unaware, believe themselves to be unbiased and cause harm to their targets and the the community in general.

        14

        • #
          Klem

          Exactly right, gee aye. My federal Leftist government has lots of programs to help bipoc folks succeed in business, so if a non bipoc person applies for one of those programs they will be rejected because of their race. The government is completely unaware of their systemic racism and the damage that it causes.

          I agree with you, gee aye. Good one.

          41

      • #
        Kalm Keith

        Hi Garry,

        Can’t

        Really

        Accept that

        Proposition.

        You have overlooked the most important aspect of the situation.

        20

      • #
        Tel

        That’s part of the trick though.

        If you read the words in various “Hate Crime” legislation they carefully muddy the distinction between hate and bias.

        For normal people “hate” is a very strong word while “bias” usually implies something small, although some people no doubt are more biased than others … but yes I agree it’s practically difficult to have perfect zero bias.

        The trick goes that if you can find any tiny thing that might be a “bias” you then get to apply the “Hate Crime” rules giving it the appearance of a much more serious offense than it really is. Multiply that by the Mighty Media Wurlitzer and a backup social media mob and it’s easy enough to destroy people. Of course, it goes without saying that this only gets applied to anyone inconveniently conservative … if you are a left wing “comedian” you can pose waving a severed Trump head and that’s neither hateful nor biased.

        40

  • #
    Yonniestone.

    It’s really shutting down verbal communication with laws and by communication I mean counter arguments.

    141

  • #
    graham dunton

    There are developments occurring,to reign in the obstruction of free speech by the tech giants.

    Braking news The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled on Laura Loomer’s social media lawsuit

    (SIC)Laura Loomer & Larry Klayman v Everyone (Including SCOTUS)

    The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled on Laura Loomer’s social media lawsuit, albeit indirectly. Laura and her attorney Larry Klayman join me to discuss the details of this monumental opinion which you just might have missed.(EQ)

    Available on
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AL2jr2NVl4

    But yet another shut down by YouTube

    There have been the continual efforts by big tech, to obstruct the scientific analysis of the disastrous covid lock down, it was based on a pandemic, that did not exist.

    This is the commencement of that analysis- but the YouTube channel was blocked, obviously not adhering to their agenda?

    https://brandnewtube.com/watch/the-ugly-truth-about-the-covid-19-lockdowns-nick-hudson-co-founder-of-panda_V9LYc7e9P2o1JQo.html

    111

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      Thanks for putting this up Graham.

      Used the bottom link.

      The South African guy speaking puts it all so clearly.

      51

  • #
    David Maddison

    Here is the same video on Bitchute for those who want to support the free speech platform and not direct traffic to pro-censorship/Leftist YouTube.

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/epozNGNU6Yg/

    81

  • #
    David Maddison

    “Hate speech” is just free speech that Leftists don’t like.

    271

    • #
      Deano

      The Left seem to be the biggest practitioners of hate anyway. Accusing others excessively of a particular flaw is often a method of diverting attention away from that flaw in one’s self.

      91

  • #
    David Maddison

    Censorship also kills or harms people or swings elections.

    E.g. negative opinions about certain COVID vaccines were censored by social(ist) media platforms but it turns out the people posting these opinions were correct and the vaccine is being stopped in certain age groups.

    Or censorship on socialist media about Hunter Biden’s laptop. Even many DemocRATS said they would not have voted for Biden had they known about that. Trump may well have still won the election despite the massive fraud. (Well he DID win, but you know what I mean.)

    162

  • #
    PeterS

    Yes, the left have been winning all the battles over the past few years. How long before the conservatives wake up and do something about it? Or as usual of late do they just continue to sit back and do nothing while pretending all is ok? Here in Australia the very first act they need to do is to defund the ABC. That would be just for starters.

    191

    • #
      David Maddison

      I wonder if it’s too late to do anything? Rudi Dutschke’s Marxist “long march through the institutions” has been going on since the mid 60’s and the Left have now infiltrated all institutions, even notionally conservative ones, and including political parties like Liberals (Australia) and Republicans (US).

      Now they have control, the Left are ruthlessly exercising their powers and it is getting far worse.

      This is what happens when conservatives remain silent.

      President Donald Trump was the free world’s last hope and the Left cancelled him as well.

      191

      • #
        PeterS

        It’s never too late but the longer nothing is done about it the more painful it becomes to rectify the situation. When you have a bunch of people like the left wanting a fantasy to become a reality, they become psychopathically crazy and dangerous. We are already there but it will get much worse before things get better. Otherwise, we ought to see changes right now to stop the cancer form growing. Given we are not seeing any changes as yet, things will most definitely get worse fro now.

        61

  • #
    David Maddison

    There is NOTHING the Left won’t try to censor or control. Numerous food items have now had their names changed due to Leftist censorship.

    E.g. in Australia C00N cheese, named after its inventor, not a slur. Redskin sweets, named for respect of the bravery of native American warriors. There are now campaigns against the ice cream “Golden Gaytime” and Paul’s “Smart White milk”.

    In America the name of Aunt Jemima has been changed as well as Uncle Ben’s. Both African American characters.

    Descendants of Lillian Richard, who portrayed Aunt Jemima for years, said they and families of other women who brought the character to life were not consulted.

    “Erasing my Aunt Lillian Richard would erase a part of history,” her niece Vera Harris told NPR.

    Uncle Ben was modelled after the real life Frank Brown, a beloved Chicago chef now also erased by the Left.

    And we all know how the Left are erasing and rewriting history in general. Just consult their instruction manual, Nineteen Eighty Four.

    161

    • #
      Furiously curious

      No, Coon cheese has survived, it’s still on the shelves. A rather unimpressive cheese?

      41

      • #
        David Maddison

        Apparently the cheese will be cancelled in May.

        21

      • #
        bobn

        What? What has the Racoon been renamed as?

        51

        • #
          bobn

          My comment has received a ‘Your comment is awaiting moderation.’ notice.
          What other animal species are we no longer allowed to mention?
          Dont mention the G word! Or p word or x,y,n, m words

          41

        • #
          Analitik

          The wokeness filter here will be triggered if co0n forms ANY part of a word so mentioning certain animals and wine regions will put a post into moderation.

          Utter stupidity and no one involved in running this site apparently has any control over it (apart from having the filter running in the first place)

          21

  • #
    David Maddison

    Even the UN, now also taken over by the Left, notionally believes in freedom of speech and association. Of course, it is ignored these days.

    From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.

    Article 19
    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

    Article 20
    1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
    2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

    91

  • #
    DD

    The irony of it is that some of the people who accuse others of hate speech are themselves motivated by hatred.
    But let us NEVER forget that the ONLY reason Western society is being ruined is that ‘conservative’ politicians are too cowardly and too self-serving to take a principled stand on social issues.
    Another video: Rowan Atkinson defends free speech.

    161

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    You mean I can now use the “d” word on this site?

    115

    • #
      robert rosicka

      Yes you can use “Democrat” !

      101

    • #
      Travis T. Jones

      You could call people a “denier”, but, like you, no one here denies the last ice age.

      When pointless name calling is all you have, guess you gotta roll with it.

      91

    • #
      Paul Miskelly

      Peter Fitzroy,
      It may be useful to know that I stopped using Wikipedia once I saw that, under Jo’s profile there, she is described as prominent in “promoting climate change denial” My boycott of that site is not as a result of this particular personal attack, but because as a service, which purports to provide factual information in a dispassionate way, it resorts to the use of what is a personal attack term.

      Might I suggest that others here might take similar actions as regards sites that resort to the use of this language.

      To answer your question, Peter, if this is the “d” word to which you refer, then should you choose to use it as a label to describe someone – and I doubt that anyone here will stop you, because this site is a haven for free speech – then let me remind you, again, as I did recently, of the words of the great John Coombes: you will immediately lose any argument where you attack your opponent with any such label.
      Always remember, Peter, on this blog, if you want to maintain credibility, you fight the issue, you never attack the wo/man.

      Another great post, Jo.

      Regards to All,
      Paul Miskelly

      311

      • #
        David Maddison

        Wikipedia is now useless on political matters or even science and engineering matters that have any element of politics such as supposed anthropogenic global warming. It’s very sad. However, even other online encyclopedias have now been taken over by the Left as well.

        The concept of Wikipedia was brilliant, but its fulfillment has mostly failed for anything with a political element that the Left can rewrite and not allow a corresponding conservative viewpoint.

        Jo, can you see if you can possibly get your entry in Wikipedia corrected?

        I invite others to read, in disgust, what has been falsely written about her.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joanne_Nova?wprov=sfla1

        91

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        From experience, you can not use the “D” word here.

        29

      • #
        PeterPetrum

        I just had a look at Jo’s entry on Wikipedia. What a load of crock! Just shows you how left leaning that site is.

        81

        • #
          williamx

          Ok

          Wikipedia states:

          quote.

          “She (Jo Nova) has falsely claimed that fewer than half of climate scientists agree with the IPCC’s conclusion that CO2 is the dominant contributor to climate change.”

          The next statement:

          Politifact described that as a “flat-out wrong” interpretation of data from a survey.

          end quote.

          my comment.

          Whom is Politifact?…

          “Politifact” is an arm of the Poynter Institute.

          What is the Poynter Institute?….

          The Poynter Institute for Media Studies is a non-profit journalism school based in St. Petersburg, Florida, USA….

          It is a school.

          This school provides a platform for political comment and editorial posts in Wikipedia by trainee journalists.

          end comment.

          What survey? Not the one Jo referred to, but theirs

          they quote in full, which states:

          “National Science Board member James Powell surveyed what’s actually published in scientific journals, finding that the consensus in the literature is about 99.9 percent.”

          That is the quote.

          Wow. “about 99.9 percent.”

          How many scientists did James Powell survey by question?…. None.
          What field is their expertise?…. I don’t know.
          What were the questions asked?…. None.
          What parameters were used in the assumptions made?…. I don’t know.

          I do know that it was James Powells’ survey on scientific literature that the Poynter Institute used.

          My opinion… it is conjecture. If said person knows the fact it would be a definitive answer.

          Imho, if a survey is done you have the hard evidence.. you can give a definitive answer.

          Why do The Poynter Institute or Wikipedia not give a link to James Powells survey?

          If Jo is wrong, publish James Powells survey.

          They don’t….so ask yourself why.

          So whom funds the Poynter Institute, that uses Wikipedia to discredit her?

          https://www.poynter.org/major-funders/

          I’ll help you out. Some of the Major funders are:

          Facebook
          Google
          Charles Koch
          Environmental Defense Fund
          Foundation to promote open society

          many more. Look at the link.

          Stay well my friends.

          141

          • #
            williamx

            Re “Powells survey” that the Poynter institute still uses today, Via Wikipedia to try to discredit Jo…

            “Powell’s methodology was to search the Web of Science to review abstracts from 2013 and 2014. He added the search term “climate change” to the terms “global climate change” and “global warming” that were used by C13. He examined 24,210 papers co-authored by 69,406 scientists and found only five papers written by four authors that explicitly reject AGW. Assuming the rest of the abstracts endorsed AGW, this gives consensus figures of 99.98% (by abstract) and 99.99% (by author).”

            https://skepticalscience.com/Powell.html

            61

            • #
              PeterPetrum

              The problem with that kind of survey is that many of those who do not specifically reject “anthropogenic global warming” may not endorse it or support it in any way. The number of papers that mention global warming in any way have used it as a lever to get funding. All you have to say on a research project is “to establish the possible effects of climate change on XYZ” and, hey presto, funding is approved.

              51

          • #
            williamx

            Re the Poynter institute and James Powell.
            James was a “National Science” Board member appointed by President Reagan.
            He served from 1986 to 1998 on that board..
            He is a geologist.
            He is retired,
            His age, 84.

            Mr Powell has released a book titled. “2084 Report” (An oral History of the great warming)

            Theses are the reviews.

            “If the existential threat of climate change keeps you up at night, James Lawrence Powell’s The 2084 Report will make you want to do everything in your power to elect leaders who will combat global warming and save our planet.”
            MarieClaire.com

            “Powell debuts with an alarming, somber vision of catastrophic climate change over the course of the 21st century in this speculative oral history.
            Powell lays out an intriguing level of detail about the cascading effects of climate change. Fans of climate apocalypse fiction will be chilled by this convincing work.”
            Publisher’s Weekly.

            “A sobering and scary (and fascinating) book–a look at where we’re going if we don’t quickly get our act together. And it’s replete with clues about how we could indeed make the changes that would make this fiction, not prophecy.”
            Bill McKibben

            “Probably the most important literary work on climate change.”
            Neil Mackay, Glasgow Herald.

            On his website, James Powell stated:

            “My November 2019 article, Scientists Reach 100% Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming, has achieved an Altmetric Attention Score that puts it in the top 100 scientific articles of 2019. See below.”

            My comment

            I am glad that according to James Powell we have a 100% consensus on AGW.
            The Poynter Institute can now update their “approximately 99.9%” to 100%.. brilliant.
            We don’t like approximations.

            Thankyou James.

            http://jamespowell.org/

            51

            • #
              R.B.

              I think it was the IPCC report AR4 where they said that they were confident that at least a half of warming since 1950 was due to human emissions. That was 0.6°C out of 1°C at the time. So 0.4° was not due to emissions, and 0.3° was definitely due to emissions. That is not dominant.

              It’s hard then to see where the 99.8% comes from.

              01

              • #
                williamx

                R.B.

                With warm regards.

                My post was investigating the claims stated in Wikipedia against Jonova.

                Not a claim stated by the IPCC.

                R.B.

                review my posts.

                James Powell (a geologist) did a survey of scientific literature.

                I will state that again… a survey of Scientific Literature.
                James Powell stated that 99.8% of scientists agree by abstract. 99.9% by author re AGW.

                That is not my assumption.. That is his statement.

                Politifact used his findings to try to debunk Jonova on Wikipedia.
                Politifact is an arm of the Poynter Institute.

                I present fact.

                Read all my posts.

                19.3.3.1
                19.3.3.1.1
                19.3.3.1.2

                look at the links.

                11

              • #
                R.B.

                Don’t be silly.

                In a recent article in Skeptical Inquirer, geologist and writer James Lawrence Powell, claims that there is a 99.99% scientific consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). You might think that after all of the harsh criticism that the 2013 Cook et al. paper (C13) has received from climate contrarians that we would be pleased to embrace the results of a critique that claims we were far too conservative in assessing the consensus. While it certainly does make a nice change from the usual rants and overblown methodological nit-picks from the contrarians, Powell is wrong to claim such a very high degree of agreement.

                He makes many of the same errors that contrarian critics make: ignoring the papers self-rated by the original authors; and making unwarranted assumptions about what the “no-position” abstracts and papers mean

                This is SkS, the website set up by John Cook of Cook 2013 fame.

                That paper is probably the evidence used by Jo that it was only 50%. Hence, what the IPCC is relevant. It wouldn’t go against the views of 99.8% of climate scientists (although senior scientists have been known to spin things into something both agreed on).

                00

        • #
          williamx

          Sorry Peter, I was tying to respond to David M’s post.. at 19.3.1.

          11

          • #
            Yonniestone

            Excellent fact checking williamx, what happens when that information isn’t out there to check? scary times ahead.

            41

            • #
              williamx

              Scary indeed, Yonniestone.

              I fear you are right.

              We need to call out individuals and institutions that promote premise as fact.

              Whilst we are still able to do so.

              Take care.

              21

    • #
      Graeme#4

      Peter, I regard the use of the “d” word as a form of Ad Hominem attack, when we should all be focusing on what a person has said and not casting personal slurs. In other words, “play the ball, not the man”.

      32

  • #
    Roger Knights

    Animosity and disdain, especially when used defensively, as a counter-attack against intrusive wokeism and censorship, and when accurate, aren’t “hate speech,” which connotes unprovoked N*zi-style untruths.

    31

  • #
    David Maddison

    One of the most obscene and destructive acts of rewriting history and censorship the Left have ever pulled off was to have National Socialism relabelled as something from the Right, not the Left (as obviously indicated by its name).

    That meant anyone of the right/conservative was automatically bad because the more right you were the more Nazi-like you were.

    This is the very core of the Left being able to call the Right “racist” etc.. And the Right cowardly cringed into submission because no one wants to be associated with the evil of the Nazis.

    In fact Nazism is of the Left as most people used to know. Is Nazism of the Right or Left is discussed by Dinesh D’Souza in the following video. And yes, he had been cancelled by the Left as well and Leftists are especially vicious and racist against non-white conservatives.

    Video: https://youtu.be/m6bSsaVL6gA

    131

    • #
      Ian

      “One of the most obscene and destructive acts of rewriting history and censorship the Left have ever pulled off was to have National Socialism relabelled as something from the Right, not the Left (as obviously indicated by its name).”

      It is a favourite ploy of the Right to distort facts and claim the Nazis were Socialists. They were not. History shows this is totally false as is detailed below.

      https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

      “Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party.” (To clarify a canard is an unfounded rumour or story.)

      If you read the detail you will find that

      ‘although the Nazi party was initially Socialist by the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies.

      Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character.

      Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps. Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.”

      318

      • #
        David Maddison

        Did you watch the video? I didn’t think so.

        91

        • #
          Ian

          Yes David I did watch the video before posting.

          In fact the video was one of the reasons I posted. It is biased tripe.
          It is presented by Dinesh D’Souza “a right-wing political commentator, provocateur, author, filmmaker, and conspiracy theorist. His films and commentary have generated considerable controversy due to their promotion of conspiracy theories and falsehoods as well as for their incendiary nature.”

          As the presenter is clearly of the far right the video is so biased that it has no credibility whatsoever

          The material in my reply to you came from Britannica, which may be many things but it is not politically biased unlike Dinesh D; Sousa The facts presented by Britannica are historically proven to be accurate. Something that cannot be said about D’Sousa’s video

          426

          • #

            Apologies
            Accidental thumbs up.

            101

            • #
              Ian

              Thanks Susan. I do, however, prefer thumbs down as I now don’t share the views of most commenter here.

              214

              • #
                robert rosicka

                Why come here then ? Oh that’s right free speech !

                81

              • #
                Lucky

                Wish granted.
                ‘Now’ do not share views, when was it that you did?

                01

              • #
                Analitik

                Why come here then ? Oh that’s right free speech !

                Trolling is the term normally used for Ian’s behaviour but allowing him to act in this manner is the price for not being a locked down echo chamber like the left and CAGW sites.

                31

          • #
            bobn

            The Britannica bit you quote is erroneous and biased and wrong. The clue is in the name ‘National Socialists’. Socialists dont have to believe in democracy – ultimately none do, because they refuse to let people elect not to have socialism. The further left you go the less democratic you become. The Nazis did evolve from a soft socialism to neo-communism where troublesome unions etc are extinguished. Sure they used the industrialists and then dominated, controlled and used them. The Nazi state controlled everything (State control is the definition of socialism!) See Soviet Union and Maos china. So the Nazis were extreme socialists, but you and Britannica and wikipropaganda with your commie chums have done a fine job of rewriting the history books. Another lesson from Goebbels and the Nazis – rewrite the books.

            191

            • #
              Dave in the States

              And Mussolini started out an ardent socialist.

              91

              • #
                Ian

                “And Mussolini started out an ardent socialist.”

                Indeed he did. Mussolini was a socialist early during the First World War, but broke with his comrades to support Italian expansionism, and then formed his fascist party to crush them.

                22

            • #
              Ian

              “So the Nazis were extreme socialists, but you and Britannica and wikipropaganda with your commie chums have done a fine job of rewriting the history books. Another lesson from Goebbels and the Nazis – rewrite the books.”

              I note you didn’t provide any links to back up your statements. I do have some substantiation for mine

              Mein Kampf has an entire chapter discussing how the Left were enemies of the Nazis.

              https://fullfact.org/online/nazis-socialists/ This link agrees with Britannica and Wikipedia. Perhaps they’re commies too?

              https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/09/05/were-nazis-socialists/
              In his 2010 book Hitler: A Biography, British historian Ian Kershaw wrote that despite putting the interests of the state above those of capitalism, he did so for reasons of nationalism and was never a true socialist by any common definition of the term:

              https://www.abc.net.au/religion/nazism-socialism-and-the-falsification-of-history/10214302
              “Under Hitler, the party looked squarely to the middle classes and farmers rather than the working class for a political base. Hitler realigned it to ensure that it was an anti-socialist, anti-liberal, authoritarian, pro-business party – particularly after the failed Beerhall Putsch of 1923. The “socialism” in the name National Socialism was a strategically chosen misnomer designed to attract working class votes where possible, but they refused to take the bait. The vast majority voted for the Communist or Social Democratic parties.’

              02

              • #
                Curious George

                And the Trump-organized uprising of January 6, 2021 was armed by a fire extinguisher. Source: The article of impeachment.

                31

              • #
                James Murphy

                Snopes has shown that it is biased. The ABC is biased. Why would I use them as ‘references’?

                11

          • #
            Dave in the States

            “Dinesh D’Souza “a right-wing political commentator,…, and conspiracy theorist. ”

            No bias there. Do I really need a sarc tag?

            162

      • #
        robert rosicka

        My mother seems to recall an election where the vote was done via a list for each party , one on each side of the street and so everyone could see who voted for whom . Those that chose poorly disappeared overnight and were never seen again.
        Im positive somewhere in the house there are documents or papers that have “Socialist Republic “ on them from the time in question must see if I can find them.

        61

      • #
        robert rosicka

        Ian by your own admission and what “Nazi” actually means there’s no doubt they started out socialists, used it as a foothold to gain control and we all know what happened after that.

        41

      • #
        Mike Jonas

        The original comment was “Nazism is of the Left”. That is clearly correct, since Nazism was based on authoritarian government control. Socialism (communism) and Nazism (fascism) are both of the left, the former by government owning the means of production, the latter by government controlling the means of production. The Chinese Communist Party under Xi Jinping is in fact fascist.

        ‘Left wing’ supports authoritarian government. ‘Right wing’ supports individual liberties. ‘Far right’ is libertarianism. The left-wing media consistently label as ‘far right’ anyone they don’t like, especially thugs, and especially if there’s actual violence.

        51

  • #

    In 1967 famous American intellectual, Susan Sontag, was howled down for her racist comment that “the white race is the cancer of human history”. I doubt she would be criticised for that comment today. But if I were to say “Critical Race Theory is a cancer on society” it would undoubtedly be classified as hate speech. This hypocrisy has to be stopped. Dictators in China and Ruussia must be looking on in admiration and anticipation as a once great civilisation destrys itself. They won’t have to lift a finger.

    151

  • #
    Neville

    I’ve looked at Pat Condell’s videos a number of times and he’s definitely one of the best at his craft.
    But the hostility you can sometimes observe by discussing the climate or weather today is amazing. Some people agree but some get very hostile and insist you shut up or stop lying.
    BTW here’s a recent study trying to measure the extra warming from co2.

    A recent Norwegian study has tried to measure any extra warming from co2 and seems to be be very thorough and with a number of checks and balances. BTW they conclude that co2 warming may be 0.5% and I think that would be about 0.07c of warming if the global average temp ( for example) was about 14.5 c. Here’s the link and abstract and their conclusions.

    https://www.scirp.org/pdf/acs_2020041718295959.pdf

    Abstract” The Greenhouse Effect was simulated in a laboratory setup, consisting of a heated ground area and two chambers, one filled with air and one filled with air or CO2. While heating the gas the temperature and IR radiation in both chambers were measured. IR radiation was produced by heating a metal plate mounted on the rear wall. Reduced IR radiation through the front window was observed when the air in the foremost chamber was exchanged with CO2. In the rear chamber, we observed increased IR radiation due to backscatter from the front chamber. Based on the Stefan Boltzmann’s law, this should increase the temperature of the air in the rear chamber by 2.4 to 4 degrees, but no such increase was found. A thermopile, made to increase the sensitivity and accuracy of the temperature measurements, showed that the temperature with CO2 increased slightly, about 0.5%”.

    5.” Conclusion The results of our study show the near-identical heating curves when we change from air to 100% CO2 or to Argon gas with low CO2 concentration. Nevertheless, we observed absorption of IR radiation in the front chamber. We also observed the increased radiation density in the rear chamber due to the backscatter from CO2. The change in observed backscatter radiation should give us a measurable temperature increase of 2.4 to 4 K by using the Stefan Boltzmann law. But we only observe a very slight temperature increase due to CO2 backscatter. This indicates that heating, due to IR backscatter from CO2, is much less than what is assumed from the Stefan Boltzmann law or from the forcing Equation (1a) and Equation (1b). The near-identical heating curves for all the three gases indicate that the thermal energy transfer is only driven by the temperature of the back wall of the rear chamber. Without extra heating of the walls in the rear chamber, the air temperature cannot increase. These findings might question the fundament of the forcing laws used by the IPCC. Another possibility is that our setup has unexplained heat losses that cancel the effect of the increased backscatter IR and prevent higher temperatures in the rear chamber, but after testing this and finding only slight losses, we do not see that this could be the case”.

    81

    • #
      RickWill

      Earth’s surface temperature is thermostatically limited to 30C in the ocean warm pools. The oceans are the net energy intake so control the energy balance. Any claim that Earth has warmed is a claim that cannot be backed with any reliable measurement.

      It is difficult to warm the planet when the tropical oceans regulate to a maximum of 30C. They have done that for millions of years now. Pacific and Indian Oceans even manage that during periods of glaciation.

      Any claimed sensitive it a false claim. It can have zero impact because it has no control over the energy balance. The “greenhouse effect” is mythical nonsense.

      61

    • #

      The thursday unthreaded is still active.

      46

    • #

      BTW they conclude that co2 warming may be 0.5% and I think that would be about 0.07c of warming if the global average temp ( for example) was about 14.5 c. Here’s the link and abstract and their conclusions.

      Did you multiply 0.5/100 * 14.5?

      Did you?

      Like there is only 14.5 degrees? You’ve chosen an arbitrary zero.

      0.5/100 * (14.5+273) = 1.4

      27

      • #

        The publisher

        Scientific Research Publishing (SCIRP) is an academic publisher of presumably peer-reviewed open-access electronic journals, conference proceedings, and scientific anthologies of questionable quality.[1][2][3] Although it has an address in southern California, according to Jeffrey Beall it is a Chinese operation.[4]

        As of December 2014, it offered 244 English-language open-access journals in the areas of science, technology, business, economy, and medicine.[5]

        The company has been accused of being a predatory open access publisher[6] by Jeffrey Beall and of using email spam to solicit papers for submission.[4] In 2014 there was a mass resignation of the editorial board of one of the company’s journals, Advances in Anthropology, with the outgoing Editor-in-Chief saying of the publisher “For them it was only about making money. We were simply their ‘front’.”[7]

        26

        • #
          Kevin kilty

          Jeffrey Beall is apparently famous for being Jeffrey Beall. Let’s see. SCIRP charged my group $400.00 U.S. to publish a paper. I am not sure how that qualifies as “predatory” when a journal like “The Physics Teacher”, which is a great journal I like, offers to expedite a paper for $2200.00. We got a review by two academics; so, it seems “peer reviewed” although I have no idea who these academics were, which is as it should be. They appeared to be pretty professional. Although I must admit there are some pretty dodgy papers in those journals from time to time.

          Let me tell you about a review we got from one well-known journal that Jeffrey would approve of: Academic says “do not publish as this work contradicts 1600 years of church doctrine.” Now there’s a professional job.

          The world of academic publishing is a snake pit, and the establishment journals hoped to keep the business entirely to themselves. Lots of self-interest masquerading as QA/QC.

          21

    • #
      Ross

      Seim and Olsen (those Norwegian researchers) found there is almost no effect at all – perhaps an additional 0.15°C at most – when adding PURE (100%) CO2 to a halogen-heated chamber (+30°C). In other words they had to exaggerate their experiment to create any so called “CO2 forcing”.

      91

    • #
      kribaez

      Unfortunately, the paper has several major weaknesses.

      (i) Their starting equations are specific to Earth plus Earth atmosphere and not relevant to the experimental problem they set up.
      (ii) Their calculation of loss of IR from HITRAN is relevant only to a source emitting a uniform flux commensurate with a source at (a uniform) 100 deg C. Their actual heat source is a small plate accounting for only .036m2 (about 24%) of the area of the back plate. Although this is heated to around 100 deg C, the remaining area of the back plate doesn’t get above 46.5 deg C, so the emission flux is far from uniform and does not correspond to an even 100 deg C. The fact that the estimated loss of outgoing IR seems to roughly correspond to their expectations from this calculation is purely fortuitous because of the third problem below.
      (iii) Most of the area of the back plate (76%) is made of styrofoam. There is no mention of it being painted or coated. Typically styrofoam has an emissivity around 60%.

      It is an interesting experiment, but unfortunately it is not possible to rule out the possibility that the true expected temperature gain should in reality be very small with this set-up.

      01

  • #
    Hanrahan

    What’s his name: Condell?

    11

  • #
    John R Smith

    All the intellectual arguments for free speech have been made.
    The argument has been long won.
    The internet has shaken the power cabals because they can longer control a free exchange of ideas that they previously pretended to support.
    The never had to include the common people before.
    They been forced to crate an intellectual and political facade against it.
    I hope free speech can be saved by speech.
    Are the Amendments listed in order of necessity?
    Those Thomas Jefferson statues have to go.

    61

  • #
    Furiously curious

    Wow, it sounds like Hitler was just copying the Russians? So the USSR was fascist too? I guess they wouldn’t have had many industrial moguls to deal with in 1920? Then socialist BS thought reigned, while on the ground the blood flowed, very deep.

    71

  • #

    One word has become a favourite weapon to silence people and stop discussions. Woke.

    113

  • #
    Ross

    Many years ago in the early bloom of decent internet access I did sign up to “The Conversation”. I thought naively that because a decent chunk of the topics and contributions were by academics that the conversation would be just that – a nice erudite, thoughtful chat. Boy, did I get disillusioned quickly!! In fact towards the end I would count the number of comments before someone would call someone else a “Nazi”. Generally, that was the end of the conversation on any topic. One thing I can say about Jo’s blog is there is a level of civility still evident. Minimum ad hominem attacks. But perhaps the moderators remove all the rude stuff. 🙂

    141

    • #

      the blog rules here specifically encourage civility and abusive remarks will be snipped, you f[snip

      😉

      Which is as it should be as this is how real life works. If someone joins in a conversation and starts abusing people the response will be to kick them out, walk away from them or simply not talk to them. Freedom of speech has responsibilities as is often stated. People are also free to not listen to someone speaking.

      [How dare you!]AD

      86

      • #
        robert rosicka

        Valid points you make Gee Aye but cancel culture has stepped in and they hate pretty much everything they hear and see but the kicker from what I’ve seen is they are all from the left . If they hear something they don’t like no matter how trivial or ridiculous it must be silenced and removed or the tantrums and violence start until they get their way.

        51

      • #
        Peter C

        How dare You!

        You seem to have overstepped the mark professor.

        21

      • #
        James Murphy

        You’re right. I find your particular brand of superciliousness to be quite grating, but you should be free to express yourself.

        The response by those who revel in censorship on Twitter, etc, is that people are free to build their own platform if they want to. When said people do find somewhere that doesn’t delete them for wrongthink, then it is only a matter of time before they are faced with the prospect of being chased off, or having their “new” platform shut down. Seems all too easy to whip up a baying mob online…

        31

  • #
    David Maddison

    The sheer viciousness of attacks by Leftists against non-white conservatives prompted black conservative Larry Elder to make a documentary oral history movie about it.

    Official website: https://www.uncletom.com/

    91

  • #
    Flok

    Words have always been used to as tool. They will always be used as a tool. It is the intentional construct of the reason we use them. To communicate and learn.

    As if this society is reconstruction of Roman era. Paganism and emperors above all signal how lost in life the left really is. Haunting invention of such era is the act of crucifixion. Domination by force and submission to authority. Just like that era was built and existed in insecurity, the product failed.

    People moved on while recording the history. Etched in toppled ruins of every war before and since.

    It is blatantly obvious that people have an issue living in freedom. It appears as if the decay of the mind sets in, to eat away the foundations of life from within.
    We all have our foundations, occupations and drive that we obtained through education and life’s travels. This means that we have all dug through the books of knowledge. Here is a problem.
    Few are clinging to such knowledge with intent to oppress every notion that threatens their own learning. Experts they call themselves, in a single discipline with absolutely zero ability to be open minded to a possibility that it was all wrong.

    Everything in this life exists in opposition. Such is the knowledge and experience. True growth, but the true art is finding the balance that benefits to the growth of societies without oppression. Free speech for that reason will continue to hurt without an open mind and an open dialogue. Non-existent in open media.

    Communism thrives on mechanism of suspicion which installs insecurities, for many generations. It is in continues contradiction with self and is insecure. For that reason it will self-destruct. The left is less travelled outside of their comfort zone.

    I personally don’t hate, I simply don’t conform because I believe in something that will always be bigger than me. For that reason my school will never end with graduation.

    Thank you Jo 🙂

    61

  • #
    David Maddison

    Leftists have been systematically dismantling and destroying Western Civilisation for about half a century now, just as Western Civilisation was about to embark on its most glorious achievements.

    Who do Leftists think is going to fill the void of their destruction?

    The victors that replace our civilisation will not be nice people, that is certain. And they will not even treat the Leftists, who facilitated their takeover, well either.

    151

    • #

      I think you need to mention leftists some more.

      314

      • #
        Hanrahan

        Yea David, you know the rules: It’s TRUMP you should be talking about.

        101

      • #
        Kalm Keith

        Why dignify them with that direct name.

        The are CRs, aka ContraRights.

        But in truth I dislike terms such as L and R because they’re a lazy inaccurate way of describing the situation.

        What we need to do is push back against evil wherever it sits in the political spectrum.

        71

        • #
          PeterS

          And that includes the so called centre where it exists, which at the moment is present and growing.

          21

      • #
        Steve of Cornubia

        Urban Dictionary:

        “A person who posts remarks or comments onto internet forums or message boards in an attempt to get someone to comment negatively to it and to redirect attention onto himself. Usually, these remarks are controversial, stupid, off-topic, inflaming, illogical, or childish. Sometimes, the comments are enough to enrage the people in the forum to want to respond back with their own negative remarks which starts a flame war and changes the topic and attention of the discussion. Since, internet trolls are attention whores, this is exactly what they want since they probably don’t get enough attention in real life and needs someone else to acknowledge their self-worth and existence. Nowadays, they are commonly found infesting internet forums and websites … “

        01

    • #
      Philip

      its been much longer than 50 years. This was going on before WW1.

      21

  • #
    Tilba Tilba

    Leftists have been systematically dismantling and destroying Western Civilisation for about half a century now, just as Western Civilisation was about to embark on its most glorious achievements.

    I’m not so sure about that … I have lived through the last half century of Western Civilisation, and that experience tells me that in general it has been a time of massive advancement in so many areas that are too numerous to list in full.

    But I would include women’s liberation, gay rights, laws against racial discrimination, the end of the White Australia Policy, Indigenous land rights, the environmental movement, reduction in pollution, recycling as mainstream, far more access for the working and middle classes to higher education, better health care, better health & safety regulations, and so much more.

    So I can’t agree that there was a “Golden Age” in Western Civilisation that we have fallen from, or are falling from.

    In respect of “hate”, I think the term is used egregiously by the right at least as much as the left and so are other terms of dismissal and insult, such as leftist, socialist, communist, marxist, globalist – and so on. These terms of supposed abuse have essentially become rote, and fairly meaningless.

    I agree there are complicated issues in respect of “free speech” and the marketplace of ideas, and who gets to have a say in the town square. I lean towards free speech myself – and recall not joining the demand for banning or boycotting controversial speakers on university campuses, up to and including Holocaust Deniers.

    But it’s a two-way street – the left by no means has a monopoly on shutting down free speech or censoring unwelcome and dangerous thoughts. Look at Fox News – it is essentially the marketing and propaganda arm of the Republican Party, and doesn’t even attempt to gloss that.

    117

    • #

      TT – it was a golden age for blokes like him when all those things that you mentioned that are no more, favoured him.

      19

    • #
      Harves

      Tilba, you write a lot of words portraying yourself as a supporter of free speech. Then raise the issue of Foxnews, as if it is somehow wrong to have a single right leaning news outlet (paid for only by those who want to watch) when just about every other free and Govt funded news outlet is blatantly left leaning?

      211

      • #
        Tilba Tilba

        Then raise the issue of Foxnews, as if it is somehow wrong to have a single right leaning news outlet …

        Firstly, there are a lot of “right-leaning” media outfits, including Newsmax and OANN, not to mention the whole suite of Sinclair TV stations, and also a lot of Limbaugh-style AM Radio. The broadcast majors are mostly vapid and centrists, as are most newspapers. I don’t receive MSNBC so can’t comment, but CNN disliked Trump a great deal – so presumably their audience did too.

        And to my mind Fox News is not a “news outlet” – as I said it is a marketing and propaganda machine for the Republicans, and when Trump was in office, it operated as State Television. Sean Hannity went to Trump rallies as a participant, not as an impartial news gatherer.

        110

        • #
          wal1957

          And to my mind Fox News is not a “news outlet

          I notice you didn’t add CNN to your statement.
          Are you saying that CNN is a news outlet?

          Sean Hannity doesn’t present a news service. It is commentary. His opinion.

          To be fair though, I don’t think any broadcaster has the right to be called impartial or unbiased. They haven’t earned that right. Truth has been discarded and we are worse off for that.

          101

    • #
      Philip

      Haha. Youve got a long way to go my friend.

      11

    • #
      William Astley

      I totally agree. 20 years ago, there were interesting and thoughtful, practical ‘left’ wing people in the news media and in the Democratic party. PBS has interesting.

      PBS brought thoughtful left and right thinkers together. 20 years ago there was thoughtful, knowledgeable discussion of debt and economics. PBS once cared about the truth and wanted a strong country.

      At that time there was discussion of issues.

      In the last 4 years, the Democratic party and the world media were suddenly taken over. Trump was used as the excuse to start organized world media censorship and the pushing of specific stories to push a narrative/propaganda.

      The origin of Covid is the perfect example. Covid was designed and manufactured. Releasing covid required a plan. And the plan included the release of more infections versions of covid. All of the Western countries are spending at a rate that will result in economic failure. Part of the sneaky plan… required the news media to stop talking about sovereign debt and about will happen. We are spending our way, like idiots, into a trap. This is economic warfare. We are too stupid to understand what is going on.

      The ideology is anti-US … Design to create problems, not solve ‘racism’ or poverty, and to kill the US economy… Designed by the Chinese and their puppets.

      There is a cold war on… And we are losing.

      71

  • #
    Gaz

    As my mother said often: “Sticks and stones will break your bones, but names will never hurt you”

    71

    • #

      Was that because people said nasty things about you or her?

      214

      • #
        Steve of Cornubia

        From Lifewire:

        “An Internet troll is a member of an online social community who deliberately tries to disrupt, attack, offend or generally cause trouble within the community by posting certain comments, photos, videos, GIFs or some other form of online content.”

        31

      • #
        David Maddison

        Gee Aye, the fact that you would say that indicates you lack empathy.

        31

    • #
      Annie

      My mother’s version of that was ‘Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me’.

      91

    • #
      David Maddison

      From Wikipedia:

      Earliest appearances

      Alexander William Kinglake in his Eothen (written 1830, published in London, John Ollivier, 1844) used “golden sticks and stones”.

      It is reported to have appeared in The Christian Recorder of March 1862, a publication of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, where it is presented as an “old adage” in this form:

      Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never break me.

      The phrase also appeared in 1872, where it is presented as advice in Tappy’s Chicks: and Other Links Between Nature and Human Nature, by Mrs. George Cupples. The version used in that work runs:

      Sticks and stones may break my bones
      But names will never harm me.

      31

  • #
    Gaz

    Can we start a movement to take back the term “progressive” – it seems it now means exactly the opposite of productive progress – economically, in freedoms, etc. etc.
    Whoever controls the language controls the agenda

    161

    • #
      Tilba Tilba

      It’s always been a puzzle why the term “liberal” is used by the US Right to attack people as well – being liberal is a positive quality in humanity, to my mind.

      39

      • #
        TdeF

        Fully agree. It is another stolen word like gay. Now the call is to ban the Golden GayTime. Hate speech possibly. Or just silly.

        And when will Eskimo Pies be banned? Redskins are gone. And it seems the old lolly ‘teeth’ will be banned after complaints from the Collingwood Football club.

        161

        • #

          Now the call is to ban the Golden GayTime.

          Is fake news. It was put out there to try to illicit the exact response you just gave.

          110

          • #
            TdeF

            Coon cheese is gone. It was not fake news.

            And how can you label any call is fake? It’s getting press and that is all that is needed in a world where anyone can take offence at anything on anyone’s behalf?

            91

            • #

              but the gaytime was fake news. Pay attention.

              19

            • #
              glen Michel

              Coon still on shelves around my area.

              11

              • #
                TdeF

                We’re excited to announce that CHEER™ Cheese will be the new name for COON cheese. CHEER™ Cheese is a cheese for everyone and supports our values as a company.

                CHEER™ Cheese is the same recipe that millions have come to love, and will continue to grow up with, for generations to come. We remain committed to our Australian farmers who continue to produce the high-quality milk that goes into all our products, including CHEER™ Cheese.

                CHEER™ Cheese will appear on supermarket shelves nationwide from July 2021.

                So it ‘supports their values as a company”. Really? Ethical non racist cheese? What, disrespecting Dr. Coon, the inventor for some crazy notion that there was racism involved in the product name? This reinterpreting history has to stop. If Churchill was a racist, what was Hitler?

                You have to feel sorry for the London plumbers who installed so many flush toilets that Americans brought home the name. The new fangled flush toilets had the name Crapper on them. And returning home, Americans started going to the Crapper and a perfectly good name was trashed. Could the Crappers sue for reparations in a US court? Possibly.

                Our infamous Australian practical joker Dick Smith who bought Vegemite also brought out his own matches. I still have a packet. Not racist Redheads, but Dickheads.

                When did humour vanish from the country?

                21

      • #
        Neil Crafter

        Why would you be puzzled? It’s just another term that has been corrupted from its original meaning by being associated with left wing philosophies.

        71

    • #
      David Maddison

      Like everything from the Left, the truth is the opposite. They are not progressives but REGRESSIVES.

      11

  • #
    TdeF

    When will Climate Change Denial become hate speech? Reading the rant on Page 1/2 of the Australia by Dr. Glasser, he used every Climate Change scare in the book. It seems our military should be far more worried about the Climate than a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or the Spratlys.
    And those seas are rising 4x faster in SE Asia than anywhere? (which is hiding the fact that 4x nothing is still nothing)
    And El Nino and La Nina are going to cycle faster, which is a fantastic story except no one can predict them except Dr. Glasser.
    Climate Change Denial would be a criminal offence if Dr. Glasser had his way.

    Of course he is an an Honorary Associate Professor for the ANU Climate Change Institute. His CV is worth reading. How any human could accumulate such senior and weird positions in one lifetime is itself amazing. Of course he is very worried about Climate Change.

    Soon even mention of the total failure of man made Global Warming will also be hate speech.

    171

    • #
      TdeF

      And in case you were wondering, his PhD is in international relations. We will all sleep better knowing he is advising our military on their appalling priorities in defending Australia when they should be worried about the weather. And racism. And hate speech. And sexism.

      Of course the ANU Climate Change Institute is a lot better name than the ANU Institute of Hot Air, but that could be hate speech too.

      161

      • #
        Annie

        Looked him up: really well qualified to expatiate on climate science. Sarc/

        81

        • #
          Analitik

          He’s as qualified as Ross Garnaut (economist), Tim Flannery (extinct marsupial specialist) and Greta Thunberg (high school dropout)

          41

    • #
      glen Michel

      The way the Australian newspaper is these days. Now reported that CO2 concentration is 420ppmv in Northern Hemisphere despite a downturn in economic output. More renewables! Couldn’t consider outgassing from oceanic origins. Fools.

      21

    • #
      David Maddison

      The once erudite Columbia University published this garbage:

      https://blogs.cuit.columbia.edu/culr/2016/11/07/why-free-speech-does-not-include-denying-climate-change-a-legal-explanation/

      WHY FREE SPEECH DOES NOT INCLUDE DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE: A LEGAL EXPLANATION

      See link for text.

      11

  • #

    Gaz
    “Can we start a movement to take back the term “progressive” – it seems it now means exactly the opposite of productive progress –”
    Rust.
    Very progressive.
    Erosion.
    The same.
    Enthropy.
    Gang Green has been very progressive.
    The same with “Social Studies”..
    So “progressive ” is a perfect label for the blind worms gnawing at the roots of civilization.

    We live as Gods,compared to our Great Grandparents,but this luxurious technological society needs technically skilled to maintain it.
    The lotus eaters now rule.

    61

    • #
      TdeF

      A movement? Like the protest march on Washington. Totally unarmed. Now cast as a riot by the Congress and the usual media.

      One of the problems is the general collapse of accurate or responsible journalism and news. Social media now have the greatest impact and Directors of huge corporations like Coca Cola bow before the social media. A Twitter storm outweighs facts, science and news. It becomes news. The children are running the news and they are all looking for attention.

      The ABC attack on our Attorney General stands out. It used to be essential to check with the accused for a comment before running a derogatory article, but no more. And Cardinal George Pell, jailed for a year with no evidence at all and freed only by the High Court. When a publicly funded broadcaster has no respect for the truth and conducts pogroms, what hope is there for fairness and accuracy in a Twitter/Facebook world?

      There are just websites like Jo’s. And even then the Trolls descend and sneer from the heights of popular ignorance. Who needs science, facts or fairness when you have opinion?

      181

    • #
      bobn

      Very true John. As the earth progresses it Erodes, as organic matter progresses it decays and rots.
      So instead of progressive good synonyms would be
      decaying,
      eroding,
      rotten

      11

  • #
    Gaz

    Has anyone noticed that if the supposed rape by our AG had been investigated at the time, information would have not been public and any publication would have been banned since he would have been a minor

    61

  • #
  • #
    Philip

    Depends on who the hate is toward. White males can cop any level of offense and its never classified as hate. A great example is the latest series of MAFS on channel 9. They openly and repeatedly show footage of a guy being hassled quite aggressively for having a big nose.

    If this were any person of colour receiving a physical characteristic hassle, or a woman, the show would be stopped and they would never show the footage, the nation would be called for an address by the PM. Or if it were a jew of course for that matter. Astonishing they repeat the hassles constantly, even on promo material. It is extremely offensive yet not just tolerated, promoted and thought of as quite funny. Extraordinary. (anyone who watches the show I agree he is a disagreeable character).

    21

  • #
  • #
    John R Smith

    “in our century we’ve learned not to fear words”

    Well, so much for that.
    So much for space exploration.
    But Keith Richards still lives.
    Did he get the vaccine yet?

    51

  • #
  • #
    Harry Passfield

    Thank you, Jo, for posting this video. I have been somewhat of a fan of Pat Condell for some years but haven’t kept up with his well-argued pieces of late. It is an exercise well worth the effort for people to seek out his opinion pieces, though a great pity that he doesn’t get more coverage. His exposure of and defenestration of CP as being at the bottom of much that is going on in society today is good to see and to listen to. I just wish more people would take note – although, I am bound to find some will make his argument by accusing him of hate speech.

    31

  • #
    John R Smith

    Is it possible to debate free speech without free speech?
    The fact that we’re here means trouble.
    Centuries to attain.
    One Orange Man Bad Presidential term to loose.

    22

  • #
    Lance

    HRH Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, has passed away, aged 99 years.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-10224525

    He lived an amazing life. RIP.

    132

    • #
      Analitik

      A proper, wartime serving naval officer for his adopted country, too. Not someone just endowed with a politically motivated military rank.

      I will add that his knighthood bestowed by Tony Abbot WAS a politically motivated endowment and the most pointless act of his Prime Ministerial term. Plus it ended up just providing his opposition (media, other parties and the Turncoat faction) with material with which to attack him.

      11

      • #
        TdeF

        That’s just silly, a beat up by the press who really hate Prince Phillip and the Royal Family, as only real haters can.
        And now all the massive mourning and lift out obituraries by the Press for someone they hate, someone who acheived more in his lifetime than journalists can dream. Hypocrites and toadies. It was only a well deserved and totally symbolic award by Abbott. And before Prince Phillip was married to his Princess, he was a Prince anyway.

        Of course the award was token, but with envious haters like Malcolm Whatshisname, it never ends. Malcolm even asked that his great aunt, Angela Lansbury, was made a dame. Malcolm sees hypocrisy as a virtue.

        And his great uncle was head of the British Labor party and split it down the middle in 1932. And besties with Adolph Hitler and against rearmament. So Malcolm shows the same fine judgement .

        21

    • #
      Peter Fitzroy

      He was a storing and committed environmentalist
      “ The late Duke of Edinburgh helped found the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in 1961 and the Australian Conservation Foundation in 1963, becoming president of the former between 1981 and 1996 and authoring several books about the threats faced by many of the planet’s most exquisite creatures, notably Wildlife Crisis in 1970.”

      Note the dates

      The independent

      12

      • #
        beowulf

        Why not tell the whole story Peter? He certainly was an environmentalist, but not in the way you portray him.

        Despite founding it, Prince Phillip disavowed the WWF after it became nothing more than a nest of global warming activists.

        After David Bellamy had been black-listed by the BBC for daring to tell the truth, HRH pointedly invited him to give a lecture at the Palace as an up-yours to the climate industry gangsters and the Beeb.

        He also effectively told a wind turbine promoter where to shove his turbines when the promoter suggested that they be installed on the Royal Estates, the Duke labelling them an “absolute disgrace”.

        THAT is an environmentalist.

        31

  • #
    David Maddison

    RIP HRH The Duke of Edinburgh.

    52

  • #
    David Maddison

    The Left regard it as “hate speech” and silence anyone who makes the observation that “trans kids” are the latest exotic pets of Leftist Elites. It’s trendy to have one but the damage done to the kids is irreparable. Who are the real haters? Certainly not those who express grave concerns about this obscene trend.

    61

  • #
    David Maddison

    Notice how Leftists are allowed to post here but conservatives are routinely banned on the Leftist sites?

    Leftists cannot tolerate alternate opinions but conservatives are prepared to consider them.

    71

  • #
    Kim

    I find with these wokies that I can’t understand what they are saying half the time. The other half they seem to be spewing out insults. So I just disconnect and ignore them.

    51

    • #
      David Maddison

      You can frequently immediately spot a woke Leftist with their speech pattern which normally employs a high rising terminal intonation.

      41

      • #
        Kim

        “high rising terminal intonation” – statements as questions – that’s how Australians traditionally speak. However they are easy to spot by their creepy character and weasly words.

        31

        • #
          Simon B

          The woke are also really easy to spot, because their groupthink training manual begins with character assassination, continues on to perception of aggression and hate speech to mask that they don’t have facts. They invariably finish with burning a low income neighborhood and assaulting anyone who isn’t in the inner circle.
          There is no tolerance in the tolerance movement!

          51

  • #
    WXcycles

    Wokie-Dopie Hate-Party Mission Statement: “By virtue I influence you because I’m better than you, deal with it.”

    41

  • #
    Simon B

    Marxists aren’t interested in free speech. Their twisting of words and language is a demonstration of how their tantrums have a voice now. They’ll continue to use a civilised society’s rules and norms against them until they force the majority to fight fire with fire. That’s the lesson free enterprise capitalism and western civilisation has been slow on the uptake to recognise. The West hasn’t been setting the agenda for the repair of capitalism after the internal combustion of 2008 by US banks. The wedge was driven by the strengthening controls of tech oligarchs, US marxism thru BLMantifa and the CCP encouraging them all as useful idiots to destabilize the West from the inside while they industrialise to getvahead of schedule on their 100 year plan.

    The CCP loves the fact that naive millennial activists have risen up and are attacking the political system which educated them to express their free speech and are picking at every western society seam, by claiming that the western education they received is hate and the provision of every modern advancement they have is because of hate.

    There are many Western critical thinkers who warned against allowing groupthink in education, where facts don’t matter and now the West is paying the price as those brainwashed permeate the media, education, corporations and politics as 20/30 something ‘political advisers’ to career political dancing bears like Biden and Pelosi only too willing to mouth the words if it puts a few more scheckels in their personal coffers.
    The end of the Empire is nigh, unless the brief fight back under Trump is recognised by conservatives for what it was, an attempt from outside the system to stem the woke bleeding and internal combustion of the one economic system which promotes inventors and growth of the species.

    51

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘Marxists aren’t interested in free speech.’

      Moscow ans Beijing are pseudo Marxists, fascists to the core and they don’t like free speech

      ‘China’s antitrust regulators slapped a record fine on one of the country’s largest technology conglomerates, closing a months-long investigation that began last Christmas Eve and setting the precedent for the government to use anti-monopoly rules to regulate the country’s Big Tech.

      ‘Alibaba Group Holding, the world’s largest e-commerce company and owner of this newspaper, was fined 18.2 billion yuan (US$2.8 billion) by the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR).’ (SCMP)

      12

    • #
      Tel

      Marxists aren’t interested in free speech.

      Oh selectively they are … when it suits them … much like everything else they hold as “principles” which really means “convenience”.

      00

  • #
    Tilba Tilba

    I think it’s heartening to see young people (and people of colour too) having a much stronger voice. For at least a century, a very big slice of the population have not done well out of capitalism – the vast majority of the wealth has been taken by the super-wealthy.

    The vast working class has been told for generations to “work, consume, die” – and know your place. Labor and social democratic parties hold power very rarely, and the ruling class attacks them unceasingly when they do get a sniff.

    Even during the pandemic, the 1% increased their wealth by trillions.

    So to see class struggle emerge (starting back with Occupy Wall Street, but continuing with #MeToo and BLM, and equivalents in other countries) – where workers, working families, students, and the poor or marginalised have something of a voice, and even some political power – I see all that as positive.
    What are conservatives so concerned about? What do they see as the enemy?
    Do they want the super-rich to claim just about all the wealth, and leave the rest of society with a few crumbs plus bread and circuses?
    There is a pretty dark side to all this opposition to progressive movements, to do with racism, anti-multiculturalism, and xenophobia … but that is a longer debate.

    There are very genuine issues about (a) the export of millions of jobs to low-cost countries (totally caused by the owners of capital, chasing higher profits), (b) uncontrolled immigrant and refugee numbers, especially in the US and Europe, caused by poverty, population over-shoot, desertification, and much else, and (c) the power of capitalist elites to overwhelm governments, set up tax havens, fix the markets, and essentially contribute nothing to society.

    But conservatives seem to want to throw terms around like “Leftist” and “Marxist” as if such people are the problem – they are not – the ruling class and the owners of capital, with almost all the political and media power, are where the problem is.

    44

    • #
      Peter C

      For at least a century, a very big slice of the population have not done well out of capitalism –

      Complete BS TT. Everyone does better with free markets.
      Please give supporting references.

      61

      • #
        Tilba Tilba

        Complete BS TT. Everyone does better with free markets.

        Free markets? hahahahaha – what a cruel joke. I can’t believe anyone even believes this stuff, let alone says it out loud! I prefer to deal with the Real World.

        16

        • #
          TdeF

          That’s just ridicule. And completely wrong, but not unexpected.

          51

          • #
            Tilba Tilba

            So what are you alleged conservatives advocating … it’s okay for the ultra-wealthy elite globalist class to own all the wealth? Jeff Bezos is your cult leader? Workers should get $7.50 an hour? Really? Is that what you’re saying?

            13

            • #
              TdeF

              So how many of your super rich people inherited or stole a cent? There have always been rich people in every generation. And they pay the bulk of the taxes while half of the people in Australia effectively pay no tax.

              Rich people are not the problem. That’s just envy. Socialism is all about making everyone poor and what does that achieve?

              Marx knew nothing of consumerism and that has driven the single generation Microsoft and Apple empires which allow you to afford your keyboard, not any government. And they will fall in time too.

              But socialism makes everyone equally poor, except the people at the top. And they would not allow you to express an opinion.

              31

      • #
        Hanrahan

        To be fair to TT it is harnessing oil that has delivered billions out of poverty not the [email protected] version of “free markets” we run. But of course TT’s favoured form of government has delivered millions INTO poverty.

        Free markets can no longer be trusted, they have spawned men of such wealth that they have outgrown their home country. It is not enough to bleed one nation dry, they need to suck them all dry. The world’s poorest may not be able to add $s to their bank but subjugated masses certainly can.

        The “robber barons” of the 19/20 th centuries had “fabulous” wealth but they never seem to have forgotten they were “American”.

        21

        • #
          TdeF

          You mean the people who built America? Carnegie, Rockerfeller, Morgan, Ford. Ford fought hard to create a people’s car and he was dragged through the courts by the patent holders and just survived. And they are all gone now but the good they did lives on. The markets are freer now than ever before but there are always opportunists and power ends up concentrated.

          President Xi is now President for life, like Putin. The Security council countries, China, The US, Russia, France and the UK are nuclear. We don’t even have a nuclear power station. The balance in the world has been on a knife edge since 1945 and the Vietnam, Korean wars were proxy wars between China, Russia and the US. It is easy to talk about what you want and how free we should be,
          but if America falls to the extremists, all balance is gone.

          However while it remains, the free markets are free. Not because China does not want to rule the world, but its wealth depends so much on trade, which was Kissinger’s plan. So a balance remains. And meanwhile commercial empires rise and fall, but we have freedom. For now.

          21

  • #
    David Maddison

    The BS just never ends…

    The man who got one of Australia’s most famous brands changed has said a top flight AFL club now needs to alter its “racist” theme song.

    EXCLUSIVE

    The indigenous activist who led the successful campaign to rename Coon cheese due to claims its brand was racist has a new target in his sights – a top tier AFL club.

    https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/carlton/campaigner-who-fought-to-get-coon-cheese-renamed-calls-on-carlton-to-change-racist-theme-song/news-story/8b114119539dff6bb94161fe228416d4

    21

    • #
      TdeF

      The reason Coon changed to Cheers is that the majority owner is Canadian, a country which is now even to the left of New Zealand. And they have big markets in America. Saputo has sales of $US15Billion and employs 17,000 people. They are vulnerable to a hate campaign against their cheese, perversely by people who are not black people.

      AFL clubs are a very different matter, but as the successful attack on Eddie McGuire proved, no one is safe from the haters of the thought police. And the clubs are big businesses which need sponsors and so many Australian companies and brands are now owned overseas.

      So perhaps any idea which gets support on social media will have companies apologising and agreeing that everyone is a racist and Australia is full of privileged white supremacists who should all leave their houses and car keys and go home.

      21

      • #
        TdeF

        And the man who led the campaign is part Koori but professes that did not believe that the Cheese was named after Dr. Coon, something a PhD academic could check with the US Patent office.

        “COON is the Australian trademark of a cheddar cheese produced by the Warrnambool Cheese and Butter company (WCB).

        It was first launched in 1935 by Fred Walker. Coon cheese is named after its American creator, Edward William Coon (1871–1934) of Philadelphia, who in 1926 patented a method, subsequently known as the Cooning process, for fast maturation of cheese via high temperature and humidity.”

        I suppose he will need to ban the Cooning process too as racist. And the patent is online but you have to search the USPTO and make sure you use the earliest date search. Yes, Edward William Coon is real and he did invent and patent the process. And the origins of the word Coon as a racist insult is uncertain, presumed and not Australian anyway. Like the Golden Gaytime, the inventors likely had no idea that fifty years to a century later people would be offended by a name which had changed meaning. Maybe.

        31

        • #
          TdeF

          For those who want to see for themselves. Select 1790 to Present.
          and search for COON, EDWARD. It is patent 1,579,196 and click on Images to see it. He was a clever cheese making Coon. I assume everyone in his family was a Coon. How could he possibly envisage that his surname was insulting to a Koori academic a hundred years later?

          31

          • #
            David Maddison

            It’s best to view it as the PDF file at this link.

            https://patents.google.com/patent/US1579196A/en

            I wonder if the inventor’s name and the process named after him will be altered or erased from history, as per standard Leftist practice and as already down with the cheese name?

            Lots of people have that surname. What are they meant to do?

            And there is a street by that name in Gladstone, Queensland. They have so far refused to rename it.

            If you Google C— St USA you will find a lot there as well.

            21

          • #
            Tilba Tilba

            It seems you just don’t get it – or indeed anything else.

            The etymology of the word “Coon” doesn’t matter in the slightest … it is the word negative association today that matters.

            I would have thought this was totally obvious.

            00

            • #
              robert rosicka

              You are part of cancel culture by deciding someone’s name is racist , it’s you who see colour and bring race into the argument so it’s you who are racist.
              We don’t see colour we see a tasty cheese .

              20

  • #
    TdeF

    It will be sad to see Australia become America where white and black food is racist. White bread, white coffee, black coffee and the rest. People taking offence especially on behalf of others is becoming an industry. And fame is addictive.

    31

    • #
      David Maddison

      What about if you have a surname of White or Black (or Green or Gold) etc.? Wouldn’t want to offend green or gold coloured people either.

      21

  • #
    CHRIS

    Can you imagine what a character like Alf Garnett would be like today? The Garnett character on ‘Till Death Do Us Part’ would be crucified. Anybody saying the words ‘Coon’ , ‘Wog’ and ‘Sambo’ would be hung, drawn and quartered. As for the current ‘PC’ correctness, it is just another example of how society has gone to the (left wing) trash.

    11

  • #
    David Maddison

    Good morning Lefties?

    Here is a classic quote from Dirty Harry (1971).

    You will probably melt down if you view it because you will be unable to understand its context.

    For rational open-minded thinkers, enjoy!

    https://youtu.be/RitnM9n0jTY

    21

  • #
    Russ Wood

    Many years ago, I read an SF story that was not particularly memorable – except for the society in which it was set. That society had TWO laws:
    (1) You must not annoy other people.
    (2) If you are ‘other people’, you must not let yourself be too easily annoyed.

    There seems to be a lot of ‘other people’ around these days!

    10