Sunday, January 05, 2014

British government minister blasts 'Blackadder myths' about the First World War spread by television sit-coms and left-wing academics

Left-wing myths about the First World War peddled by Blackadder belittle Britain and clear Germany of blame, Michael Gove says today.

The Education Secretary criticises historians and TV programmes that denigrate patriotism and courage by depicting the war as a ‘misbegotten shambles’.

As Britain prepares to commemorate the centenary of the outbreak of the war, Mr Gove claims only undergraduate cynics would say the soldiers were foolish to fight.

In an article for the Daily Mail, Mr Gove says he has little time for the view of the Department for Culture and the Foreign Office that the commemorations should not lay fault at Germany’s door.

The Education Secretary says the conflict was a ‘just war’ to combat aggression by a German elite bent on domination.

‘The First World War may have been a uniquely horrific war, but it was also plainly a just war,’ he says. ‘The ruthless social Darwinism of the German elites, the pitiless approach they took to occupation, their aggressively expansionist war aims and their scorn for the international order all made resistance more than justified.’

Britain has pledged £50million in public money to mark the event, with school trips to battlefields and ceremonies planned over four years. The French government has also embraced the centenary, planning 1,500 events across the country. But there are few plans for events in Germany itself.

Mr Gove, who has rewritten the school history curriculum to give pupils a better grasp of the broad sweep of British history, reserves his greatest scorn for those who have sought to depict the soldiers as lions led by donkeys.

He says: ‘The war was, of course, an unspeakable tragedy, which robbed this nation of our bravest and best.  ‘But it’s important that we don’t succumb to some of the myths which have grown up about the conflict in the last 70 or so years.

‘The conflict has, for many, been seen through the fictional prism of dramas such as Oh! What a Lovely War, The Monocled Mutineer and Blackadder as a misbegotten shambles – a series of catastrophic mistakes perpetrated by an out-of-touch elite.’

Mr Gove turns his fire on ‘Left-wing academics all too happy to feed those myths by attacking Britain’s role in the conflict’.

He singles out Richard Evans, regius professor of history at Cambridge University, who has said those who enlisted in 1914 were wrong to think they were fighting to defend freedom.

Mr Gove writes: ‘Richard Evans may hold a professorship, but these arguments, like the interpretations of Oh! What a Lovely War and Blackadder, are more reflective of the attitude of an undergraduate cynic playing to the gallery in a Cambridge Footlights revue rather than a sober academic contributing to a proper historical debate.’

The Education Secretary says it is time to listen to historians such as Margaret Macmillan who has ‘demonstrated how those who fought were not dupes but conscious believers in king and country, committed to defending the western liberal order’.

He also cites the work of Professor Gary Sheffield, who has reassessed the damaged reputation of British commander Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig.  {Haig did at least want an armistice long before anybody else in authority did]


Rose Parade Gay 'Marriage' Float Degrades Family Event, Say Conservative Activists

Two homosexual men will be married on a float in the 2014 Rose Parade on Wednesday, Jan. 1,  in what critics are saying transforms the family-friendly event into a vehicle for promoting the gay rights activists’ political agenda.

Aubrey Loots and Danny Leclair were chosen by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation by lottery to be married atop a float made to resemble a wedding cake.

“The decision to allow two gay couples to ‘marry’ on a float during the Rose Parade denigrates this once family-friendly event,” said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization of Marriage. “It’s another ‘in your face’ example that should serve as a teachable moment for the American people.”

“Once marriage is redefined to make it genderless, this perverse construct of ‘marriage’ is forced on everyone,” Brown said.

The Pasadena Star-News reported on Thursday that San Diego, Calif. , resident Karen Grube started a Facebook page protesting the same-sex wedding.  “Gay marriage is illegal in over 30 states, why would they promote something that is blatantly illegal?” Grube said in the article. “That’s just stupid.” 

In 2008, voters in California passed Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman. In June the U.S. Supreme Court decision on the matter meant that an earlier California U.S. District Court decision that the law was unconstitutional could stand and same-sex marriage has continued in the state.

On her Facebook page entitled ”Boycott the 2014 Rose Parade,” Grube calls for a boycott of the parade and to protest its sponsors, which include Disneyland, the Hallmark Channel and Coca-Cola.

In the “About” portion of the Facebook page, which has more than 5,600 likes, Grube decries the political nature of the gay marriage-themed float.

“The Rose Parade shouldn't be used by gay activists to promote the gay agenda, and a Rose parade float is no place to flagrantly display a gay wedding,” the text states. “But I guess they think they can pervert this year's theme, ‘Dreams Come True, to allow this disgusting exhibition.”

The Tournament of Roses Association has expressed support for the float, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The article published on Tuesday said the Times had acquired a statement for the association stating it is “pleased” that the AIDS Healthcare Foundation has a float in the parade.

According to news reports, about 700,000 will watch the parade live at the scene and about 45 million Americans will watch it on television, with an additional 25 million viewing internationally.


Sarah Silverman's Insult Act Gets Old

Sarah Silverman celebrated Christmas in her usual mode: mocking Christians and religion in general. On Twitter, she wrote "Happy Birthday, Jesus! I'm sorry (you) were murdered by people afraid of new ideas!"

Her last HBO special in 2002 was even mockingly titled "Jesus Is Magic." Her new special is called "We Are Miracles." Once again, in the new show, she makes fun of the death of Jesus, as a Jew: "You're welcome. If we hadn't killed him, he wouldn't even be famous."

Silverman then mentions Scientology as crazy, but adds, "it's no more bats—t crazy than every single religion. It's just new. Christianity is super-old, but its f—-ing crazy." Silverman turned to mocking Catholics and confession. She claimed that Hitler could kill 6 million Jews, and then go to confession and have a priest say, "'No problem. Say 10 Hail Marys,' and Hitler goes to heaven!"

She also praised the late Mother Teresa for not being obsessed with her body image, and then went for the humor by calling her "stick thin," and adding "f—-ing bitch." Silverman and Bill Maher are religion-trashing peas in a pod for HBO. This woman lives for gags like this: "Don't forget, God can see you masturbating. But don't stop. He's almost there."

Silverman hates how separation of church and state — which leftists always think is actually text in the Constitution — is a joke in America, since "In God We Trust" is on the money, and witnesses in court swear to tell the truth on the Bible and say "so help me God." She sputtered, "If I tell the truth, it's because I tell the truth, not because I put my hand on a book and made a wish. It's f—-ing crazy!"

The "We Are Miracles" title refers to the "science-based" miracle that "we were all once a microscopic speck," leading to a joke she begins in her father's testicles and then flopping spectacularly into an incest joke. At least this atheist who just hosted a New York telethon for free abortions in Texas didn't attempt to reconcile her "unborn speck miracle" talk with her fist-pumping feminism. She might have pulled a mental muscle.

Silverman also unloaded a typically scabrous joke about "praying" for Republican sperm that dies inside the rear ends of prostitutes. "Surely there are Democrats that have butt sex with prostitutes, and you're 100 percent right there are, but Democrats aren't trying to take my rights away."

Silverman spares nothing in her attempts at humor. She made up a fake study saying Sept. 11 widows are better at casual sex acts, and said she loved rape jokes because who would object? "I'd say rape victims, but they're traditionally not complainers."

Comedians like this are too busy making a living being "hilariously" insensitive to contemplate what it's like to be on the other end of the ridicule.

At a recent roast for James Franco on Comedy Central, actor Jonah Hill unleashed on Silverman: "Sarah is a role model for every little girl out there. I mean, every little girl dreams of being a 58-year-old single stand-up comedian with no romantic prospects on the horizon. They all dream of it, but Sarah did it." (She's 43.)

Hill then added another insult: "People say it's too late for Sarah to become successful in movies at her age. I again do not agree. It's not impossible. I mean, it's not like they're asking you to bear children or anything like that."

Silverman admitted in a TV interview it took her several days to get over the insults. "As soon as a woman gets to an age where she has opinions, and she's vital and she's strong, she's systematically shamed into hiding under a rock. And this is by progressive pop culture people!"

She added in self-defense: "These issues always come up when an actress hits a certain age and has a voice she can use. It's not any kind of new notion. It's just new for me, you know what I mean? I love all those guys (at the Franco roast). Still, I think it was OK to admit that it cut me. We're just made of feelings."

As if Silverman's targets don't have feelings? Like rape victims and 9/11 widows don't have a little more reason to be spared than Silverman does?

As Silverman has now announced her comedy role model for the future is half-plastic Joan Rivers, the size of her ridicule target is only going to enlarge. Why would a godless comedian refrain from insulting her for archaic religious concepts like charity, or mercy, or respect for your elders?


The Dubious Future of Romance

Suzanne Fields

The New Year explodes with dire prophesies for men and women and their mating patterns. If they're correct, or even close to it, the lot of men will not be a happy one -- nor will the women who love them (and want one of their own).

That future, in fact, is almost here. In their failure to appreciate the biological differences obvious to most of us, second- and third-wave feminists have downsized men and denigrated their values, forging a radical imbalance in the way the two sexes relate to each other. Women surpass men in formal education, and the male and female elites of the upper economic brackets compete with each other in courtroom, boardroom -- and, inevitably, in the bedroom.

The traditional divisions of labor among working-class men and women have gone from bad (and bed) to worse in the recession as service jobs favor women. Jobs that once required heavy lifting are gone with Detroit's emblematic bankruptcy, and President Obama's promised shovel-ready jobs never arrived in the numbers he said we could count on. Role reversals abound where PowerPoint dominates.

Camille Paglia, a prominent feminist critic and unhappy prophet of heterosexual doom, thinks we're watching civilization commit suicide. She warns her sisters they must beware, lest they turn themselves into Komodo dragons, hammerhead sharks and pit vipers, who will have to clone themselves by parthenogenesis if they are to reproduce themselves.

"Is it any wonder," she asks, "that so many high-achieving young women, despite all the happy talk about their academic success, find themselves in the early stages of their careers in chronic uncertainty or anxiety about their prospects for an emotionally fulfilled private life?" These questions have been asked before, of course, but never with such growing urgency as women debate male abdication of responsibility to them.

The metaphor of the popular movie "Her" is the stalemate in male-female relationships posed for the near future. "Her" is about a computer geek -- the actor Joaquin Phoenix actually looks like one in the movie -- who has a love affair with a highly advanced computer operating system. He gets paid for writing letters in purple ink for others. He's tongue-tied to a machine when he's speaking for himself.

The voice in the computer is called Samantha and belongs to Scarlett Johansson, conjured in imagination by Theodore, her geek lover. Her sotto voce voice is silky, smooth and sexy, and she reads Theodore's emails and gains electronic omniscience. She straightens out his filing system, too. She confesses she has 8,316 other conversations going, and she's in love with 641 others. She loves him most, of course.

This is an almost-believable fantasy because nearly everyone in it is isolated by their computers, from which they seek friendship and love. Broad scans of the camera expose men and women walking and talking alone, speaking to the air, phone buds hidden in ear canals. That future, as all can see, is now.

When Theodore attempts a kiss with a woman of flesh and blood and their lips touch, she begins a monologue of instructions as if she's the voice of a GPS -- brake pressure on lips, move nose, turn left with tongue -- until she bursts into tears to ask if he'll be another one of those guys who only wants to take her to bed and will never call again.

If the disembodied computer voice is a fantasy of the feminized and passive man of the future, who seeks the perfect woman to respond to all his needs, the flesh-and-blood woman who tries to control the kiss is a real-life nightmare, aggressive and hysterical and terrorized by her ticking biological clock. There's real-life urgency in their failure to connect. He has been emotionally neutered and escapes into a relationship with a computer that "reads" his every need. She has grown aggressively angry about the way real men have treated her in seductive encounters.

This is the inevitable metaphor for what happens after decades of narrowing feminist ignorance of the natural and enduring differences between men and women. Glib how-to books that tell women how to take control can't teach them how to excite the masculine drive for creating and protecting a family.

In the movie "Her," a computerized woman with a husky voice goes a long way to seduce a man, but ultimately it's the feelings of a frustrated, angry human woman that leaves us questioning the direction for men and women moving into the new year and the future. The sequel is likely to be called "Him."



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


1 comment:

Irv said...

USA - from Puritans to Impure-itans

Is there a connection between beautiful New England and entire American cities turned into smoking rubble? There is.
Take same-sex marriage. I would have guessed that a "sin" city (San Francisco? Las Vegas?) would have been the first to legalize it.
Oddly it's been the place where America started that's wanted to be the first place to help bring about the end of America and its values! It's been a Nor'easter of Perversion (helping to fulfill the end time "days of Lot" predicted in Luke 17) that began in (you guessed it) Boston in 2004.
New England has gone from the Mayflower Compact to the Gay Power Impact, from Providence to decadence, from Bible thumpers to God dumpers, from university to diversity to perversity, and from the land of the Great Awakening to God's Future Shakening that will make the Boston bombings look like Walden Pond ripples by comparison!
The same Nor'easter has been spreading south and as far west as Washington State where, after swelling up with pride, Mt. Rainier may wish to celebrate shame-sex marriage by having a blast that Seaddlepated folks can share in lava-land!
The same Luke 17 prediction is tied to the Book of Revelation which speaks of the cities that God will flatten because of same-sexism - including American cities - a scenario I'll have to accept since I can't create my own universe and decree rules for it.
I've just been analyzing the world's terminal "religion" that has its "god," its accessories, its "rites," and even a flag. It's an obsession that the infected converts are willing to live for, fight for - and even die for!
Want more facts? Google "God to Same-Sexers: Hurry Up," "Government-Approved Illegals," "FOR GAYS ONLY: Jesus predicted" and "The Background Obama Can't Cover Up."
Also Google " 'Jesus Never Mentioned Homosexuality.' When gays have birthdays..."