Scott Adams of “Dilbert” asks:

I’d also like to know how the Holocaust death total of 6 million was determined. Is it the sort of number that is so well documented with actual names and perhaps a Nazi paper trail that no historian could doubt its accuracy, give or take ten thousand? Or is it like every other LRN (large round number) that someone pulled out of his ass and it became true by repetition? Does the figure include resistance fighters and civilians who died in the normal course of war, or just the Jews rounded up and killed systematically? No reasonable person doubts that the Holocaust happened, but wouldn’t you like to know how the exact number was calculated, just for context? Without that context, I don’t know if I should lump the people who think the Holocaust might have been exaggerated for political purposes with the Holocaust deniers. If they are equally nuts, I’d like to know that. I want context.

Scott, let me clue you in.  Look at the Holodomor (which occurred just prior to the election of Hitler as Chancellor of Germany), take any plausible ratio of deaths occurring in the Holodomor to deaths occurring in the Holocaust and compare that ratio to the ratio of Holodomor public exposure to Holocaust public exposure.  You don’t need to come close to splitting hairs to see that just maybe, perhaps, it might possibly be the case that there is a disparity here and that this disparity might have something to do with the same thing that makes Jews the primary influence on both the Bible and Hollywood.  The thing referenced is left as an exercise to the idea rat.

A subject that crops up pretty regularly at MR is the profound unsuitability of the standard left-right political spectrum, as expressed in the seating arrangements in revolutionary French parliamentary life and employed in the standard political compass.  The correlation of anarchism <> fascism and collectivism <> libertarianism simply cannot process, and so mischaracterises, radical-right or even fundamentally Conservative thinking.  Nowhere is that more true than with the very normal human characteristic of racial consciousness, and if you want to know why just visit the front page of politicalcompass.org where you can read:-

The idea was developed by a political journalist with a university counselling background, assisted by a professor of social history.  They’re indebted to people like Wilhelm Reich and Theodor Adorno for their ground-breaking work in this field.

There is a body of psychological research that affirms the conventional axes, as John Ray has often attested here.  I contend that this is prejudiced by the researchers’ own immersion in the liberal analysis.  They do not ask the questions that would test true radical-right motivation and represent it accurately.  The result is nothing more than a test of liberalism.

So, I wondered whether political orientation could be addressed by using a system that, from the outset, describes the radical right and allows the liberal sleepers to fall where they will.  It does not matter where (it would likely be bottom right, off the chart!).

READ MORE...

“The first time the Church has launched such a defence of the country’s Christian heritage” is how an un-named bishop described a confidential Church document, leaked to The Sunday Telegraph today.

“An astonishing attack on the Government’s drive to turn Britain into a multi-faith society” was how the Telegraph saw it.

The paper, titled Cohesion and Integration – A briefing note for the House [of Bishops], was written by Guy Wilkinson, the interfaith adviser to the Archbishop of Canterbury.  These are the criticisms it levels at our so-liberal political masters:-

1. The attempt to make minority “faith” communities more integrated has backfired, leaving society “more separated than ever before”.

2. Divisions between communities have been deepened by the Government’s “schizophrenic” approach to tackling multiculturalism. While trying to encourage interfaith relations, it has actually given “privileged attention” to the Islamic faith and Muslim communities.

3. The Church of England has been sidelined. Instead, “preferential” treatment has been afforded to the Muslim community despite the fact that it makes up only three per cent of the population.

4. Britain remains overwhelmingly a Christian country at heart and moves to label it as a multi-faith society suggest a hidden agenda.

5. Public funds have been used to fly Muslim scholars to Britain, legislation on forced marriage has been shelved, financial arrangements to comply with Islamic Law have been encouraged.  Yet none of this has produced any “noticeable positive impact on community cohesion.  Indeed,” the report goes on, “one might argue that disaffection and separation is now greater than ever, with Muslim communities withdrawing further into a sense of victimhood, and other faith communities seriously concerned that the Government has given signals that appear to encourage the notion of a privileged relationship with sections of the Muslim community.”

6. The Government is wrong to see faith as the cause of a divided society.

Of course, one has to note from the outset that the Church of England is more the wounded liberal Establishment at prayer than the forthright, awakening defender of an imperilled Christian nation.  It still adheres firmly to the pluralistic faith-society, the la-la “why can’t we all love one another” ideology.  But this is kumbayah with an oddly refreshing note of menace - at least as far as this useless, fearful, screwed-up Government is concerned.

The day that menace finds its proper target amid the golden crescents of England’s northern towns and cities will be really something.

Just one more ball to find.

Slowly the British political Establishment is coming to terms with what it means when you replace a people for the sake of cheap labour and equality.  From The Times:-

Spread of race ghettos fuels gang warfare

AN east London teenager who became a drug dealer and a knife-wielding member of a street gang lays the blame on the transformation of his neighbourhood into an ethnic minority “ghetto” where turf warfare flourishes.

“I fell in with the wrong crowd,” said Syed Miah, 19, who regrets his life of crime. “Before, it was mixed and you would get to know other people, but now no one meets anyone. You grow up with this mentality that ‘we’re Bangladeshis, whites are whites and blacks are blacks’.”

... There are ethnic gang fights in Manchester and Birmingham and last week they spread to Windsor, where rioting erupted around an Asian-owned dairy and nearby prayer centre.

... Nowhere is the ethnic basis of gangs more evident than in London, where the cultural patchwork is the most complicated in Britain. According to new figures, in the borough of Brent there is an 85% chance that any two people chosen at random would belong to different ethnic groups.

Bangladeshis, Somalis, Pakistanis, Afro–Caribbeans and Turks have all formed their own gangs who are as likely to fight each other as they are to attack or be attacked by white thugs.

Last year Lee Jasper, a policing adviser to Ken Livingstone, the London mayor, warned that one south London gang, the Muslim Boys, was the “most serious criminal threat” the black community had ever faced. It was accused of shooting a man, execution-style, after he refused to convert to Islam, and has been implicated in dozens of other muggings and attempted murders.

... Many peaceable residents, however, are being pushed out of the area. Carly, 25, a white telephone receptionist, said that every day during her 15-minute walk to and from work she tries to “make myself invisible”.

Last month 30 gang members had an armed brawl in the area. In August Carly saw a gang pull a knife on a passer-by. When the police were called, said Carly, they stopped briefly at the end of the road and drove on. “I’m planning to move out now,” she said.

And the Establishment’s answer to this: more supposed integration.  More la-la land.  They haven’t noticed yet that the game is lost.  They may never notice.

The UK Telegraph reports that:

Some 150 immigrants were rounded up and deported by Russian police yesterday. Officers demanded that schools draw up lists of children with Georgian surnames, prompting fears that the expulsions could be widened. Several hundred thousand Georgians are believed to live in Russia…

“It’s something that concerns Georgia and it’s something that should concern the rest of the world because you are being confronted with an emerging ruling class that does not know the rules of behaviour.”...

“Georgia was a jewel of empire for them and accepting Georgia as a free and independent nation is really very hard but that’s what they have to accept. Somebody decided to draw the line: OK we’ve lost eastern Europe, we’ve lost the Baltic countries but no more. The point is that they are doing exactly what they don’t want to do by applying openly racist rhetoric and alienating people.”
Police raids in Moscow this week led to the closure of several popular Georgian restaurants and hotels but until yesterday school children had not been a target…

A senior western diplomat in Georgia expressed deep concern…

The Georgian president is unabashedly pro-western, and that may be at the root of the problem. He has introduced market reforms, tried to reduce the Kremlin’s hold on the country where Stalin was born and — to widespread Russian disgust — is seeking membership of Nato. Georgia is not alone. Russia is also furious with Ukraine, and even with Communist Moldova for moving towards the West.

and the last word is given to the Georgian president:

“They should be respected,” he agreed. “But you cannot ask for respect and behave like a bully in the back yard. Respect works both ways.”

So let me get this straight… the “furious” “bully” who “doesn’t know the rules” is treating Georgia, which wanted its independence, like a sovereign country and treating the border like—a border by deporting illegal immigrants from the other side of the border. 

Then the Georgians want their independence but don’t want to be subject to Russia’s immigration laws - hence the ending assertion by the Georgian President that, “Respect works both ways.”

It sounds to me like Putin is on the right course and should continue to secede from territories like Georgia, deport their illegals and continue building a Russian middle class founded on a strong labor market and low real estate prices for workers.

Here follows a diverse selection of quotes from news pieces great and small in today’s British national press.  A feast of shockingly inconvenient truths lurk in each story.  However, our beloved news folk, ever optimistic about the free, vibrant future of Babylon, avoid all that - and feed us this stuff instead:-

Jack Straw, stoking up his leadership bid: With all the caveats, I would prefer women not to wear the veil.

… Communities are bound together partly by informal chance relations between strangers - people being able to acknowledge each other in the street or being able pass the time of day.  That’s made more difficult if people are wearing a veil.

David Davis, the alleged right-wing Conservative Shadow Home Secretary, commenting on John Reid’s sudden interest in how immigration overtakes the infrastructure: At long last the Home Secretary looks like he is coming round to our way of thinking. We have consistently been saying that immigration can be of benefit to the country but only if it is properly controlled.

Dr Jamil Sherif, optimistic secretary of the research committee of the Muslim Council of Britain, swallowing some government spin: The ONS report highlights the ethnic and religious diversity in Brent and Harrow. Both local authority districts have good community relations and cohesion - which shows multiculturalism works.

Windsor Council leader Mary-Rose Gliksten, fiddling away furiously while the on-going dairy riots between English and Asian youths in the town get as far as petrol bombs by the roadside: We have got a long and proud history of our community relations in Windsor and we regret incidents that have happened this week. We will be doing everything to calm the situation.

A BBC News source commenting on newsreader Fiona Bruce’s dhimmitudinous removal of her cross necklace: It was argued that BBC staff on screen should not wear anything which hints or directly points to a political or religious leaning and that the cross contravened this and should not be allowed.

A “friend” of Premiership footballer, Lua Lua, after the Congolese “star’s” arrest for allegedly beating up his fiancée at 2am in a hotel room: Natalie is his long-term girlfriend but he does put himself around.  None of his children are hers.

Natalie lives with him but when he’s clubbing it’s with his male friends, not her.  Girls swoon over him because he’s a star.

The mother of murdered black teenager Anthony Walker, on the pathetic inadequate who posted offensive rubbish on Anthony’s tribute site, and got 2 years and 8 months: Hitler started with an idea, slavery started with an idea, so it is good that this was stopped in time.

And just one little note of truth, but not coming out of real life events ... just an opinion piece from the most censorious Multicult-lover in the game …

Ugandan Asian journo Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, lambasting us as usual in The Independent: There is another island nation which fears the stranger, wants high walls to keep out the multiracial wash, is pitiless in its rejection of non Anglo-Saxon peoples and their ways - curries notwithstanding. (Remember 87 per cent of Britain is white and 75 per cent Christian.).  Here things are getting appallingly hostile.  The anti-Muslim riots in Windsor, the whites who voted for the BNP in Barking, blatant and shameless middle-class racism makes me wonder if there is a future for the Britain I praise.  Muslim separatist fanatics feed the prejudiced.  In small pockets there is a ghetto mentality if not quite the reality.  White no-go localities are becoming lethal places for outsiders.

… Inter-ethnic and inter-religious rancour increases among the young and most-educated too.  State policies have heightened tribal consciousness; unemployment rates among British-born ethnic groups are twice that of whites …

From a correspondent:

The UK Telegraph reports that:

Radical Muslims in France’s housing estates are waging an undeclared “intifada” against the police, with violent clashes injuring an average of 14 officers each day.

If these European colonialists would simply leave the Muslim homeland of France, there would be peace.

The Brit papers are all over Sir Ian Blair’s eggregiously correct Met this morning, following the fun news that a Muslim member of the Diplomatic Protection Squad was re-assigned at his own request from guarding the Israeli Embassy in London.

Apparently, the officer concerned, one PC Alexander Omar Basha, suffered moral qualms at his presence on the steps of the Embassy while the occupants’ friends and family were bombing Lebanon.  The last Merkava 4 has rolled back across the border and PC Basha is working normally again.  But the damage is done.  And, it seems to me, in a couple of ways.

First, professionally.  The man who is quoted everywhere this morning is John O’Connor, a former Flying Squad commander.  He told the Sun:-

This is the beginning of the end for British policing.  When you join the police, you do so to provide a service to the public.  If you cannot perform those duties, you leave.

But if it was just a question of professionalism Sir Ian would not have reacted so jumpily in ordering an urgent review of the decision to grant PC Basha’s request.  No Commissioner has been more political than this one.  He has made politics paramount in his beloved creation, the Metrocultural Police Service.  But leftist idealism like his always justifies its little political crimes by the presumption of Good, and that presumption is glorious, hypocritical toast if a discomforted Muslim must be moved from any duty on grounds, basically, of faith or even evil race.  Sir Ian’s progressive, inclusive Met is stripped of all moral force.  It’s a joke, and I or anybody else can refuse to give a witness statement, for example, to any minority garbed in blue simply because that is the dictate of conscience.  Muslim, Hindu, black, queer, they’re all fair game.

As multicultural luck would have it, Sir Ian’s truest friends have very quickly worked this out and come forward with a possible answer.

The chairman of the Association of Muslim Police, Superintendent Dal Babu, insists that the Basha issue was not one of conscience:-

This is about the welfare of an individual and not about a moral issue,” he said.

“I think we are going down a very, very slippery road if we start having postings based on individual officers’ conscience.

Of course, it’s all just sophistry.  There are no clear dividing lines between conscience and welfare in the aims of Mr Babu’s association.  They intertwine and dissolve within the peculiar whole of Islam:-

The AMP is formally recognised by the Metropolitan Police Service.  It is active in pursuing faith-friendly policies and has been instrumental in ensuring the provision of many facilities to the benefit of Muslim staff, including Hijaab for female officers, ability to wear Islamic/cultural dress when not in uniform, provision of Halaal food and facilities for Salaah (Islamic Prayer).

People are not cyphers.  That’s the problem.  But neither is multiracialism remotely normal.  As long as there are a hundred and fifty varieties of humanity in my capital city we must all be equal under the law, and the law must be enforced by serving policemen with as complete an impartiality as humanly possible.  Cyphers the police must indeed be.

In contrast, however, Sir Ian truly, madly, deeply believes that the Met must look like those one hundred and fifty varieties of homo sapiens wandering the streets.  He is simply wrong.