Sunday, 26 February 2012

1400's "Heretic!" - 1600's "Witch!" - 1990's "Racist!" - 2000's ?

Its good to see that these mindless calls to 'mob' a victim are out of favour at the moment.

At these various times these various accusations have had the magical quality of automatically condemning the accused - someone would make the accusation and the 'mob' would descend - then regardless of the outcome of any investigation/trial the accused would still be condemned/tainted by the accusation alone.

In the politically correct 1980's up to around the 2000's 'racist' was an accusation that could be made against anyone and you could be reasonable sure that the mere accusation would damage and condemn the accused even if untrue - it lost its 'magic' when it was finally recognised that most of the nasty people making the accusations were deliberately using it in that way.

What these abusers had no regard for was that by crying 'wolf' so often the word is degraded and real accusations get ignored, so genuine victims are left impotent. But this is of no concern to the false accusers, their motivation is simply to damage people they don't like in anyway they can, at any cost to society or to real victims.

Many of Brighton's politicians seem to have learned their lesson in 2010 when they and supported a 'call to arms' ( along with Brighton Unity against 'March for England' - a call intended to bring violence to the streets of Brighton.

Even at the time many UAF (unite against fascism) supporters blogged to condemned the call, as March for England while being 'pro-England' were not considered racist, and the racist organisation EDL (English Defence League) that sometimes tried to muscle in on March for England events had been told to keep away and had agreed to do so.

But there are still some idiots that continue to throw around worthless, bogus allegations - particularly when they have no argument of substance to advance, and particularly when they seek to cover up their own racist or otherwise objectionable views.

1 comment:

  1. Care to give me any evidence that the EDL condones or promotes racism as you seem to imply here?