That the strangle-hold which the middle-class liberal elite have over our culture and society — without having anything close to hegemony — will be tightened still further, and their [right-wingers] views marginalised or even criminalised. And the excuse given will be they are trying to stop us being blown up, or stabbed to death on London Bridge. That’s my worry too — that in order to placate the sensitivities of the adherents of a recently imported culture, the beliefs of indigenous people will be proscribed. When there is not the remotest comparison between them.
The problem with the BBC is that many people who should know better think there is no problem with the BBC…and then there are those, like Tory MPs, who don’t have the courage to put it to the sword even as it does everything it can to destroy them and their party.
Here’s an almost completely delusional take on the BBC from Stephen Daisley in the Spectator as he recognises failing grandeur but can’t bring himself to send the BBC to the vet thinking the old guard dog is still the faithful and fit watchdog rather than the corpulent, bloated, greedy, self-interested and slightly rabid mutt that it has become:
The BBC is our other national religion and like the NHS it inspires a devotional intensity that can be a little creepy.
By any sensible assessment, the Beeb invites a lukewarm response. What it does well, it does better than any broadcaster in the world. Its news and current affairs output is eclectic, comprehensive and informative.
Its news and current affairs programmes are untrustworthy, partisan and shaped to promote the liberal intelligentsia’s world view not facts or news.
At moments of national triumph or catastrophe, it is the reassuring voice of British resolve and self-deprecating celebration.
A voice of national resolve? The BBC that would sell us out to the EU rather see an independent and energised Britain breaking free of its EU shackles, the BBC that when bombs go off promotes the bomber’s message, the BBC that always talks Britain down.
And yes, it annoys. In BBCland, immigration is Congolese restaurants and cheap nannies, not bulging classrooms and community tensions. The LGBT debate is no debate at all; anyone who dissents is a bigot and a Jesus freak. Refugees are all genuine and everyone who lives outside London is probably racist. Islam is a religion of peace and Brexiteers incipient domestic terrorists. Its voice may no longer toll in crisp RP tones but it is still predominantly middle class, graduate, and southern. It is the voice of a monolith that demands money with menaces from the poor and non-conforming. It is gratingly aloof, unresponsive to its coerced customers, and hostile to all criticism except the theatrical and self-justifying auto-flagellation in which it occasionally engages.
All very serious charges that anyone with a degree of common sense and some backbone would realise made the BBC more ‘an enemy of the people’ than their friend and protector.
But when you consider the merit of maintaining a public service broadcaster in 2017 you appreciate that not only is the BBC still worthwhile, it is more necessary than ever. Crucially, it’s a force for unity in a Britain divided by identity and fractured by devolution. A national news broadcast confirms our shared concerns and priorities….It is a silent rejoinder to the Prime Minister’s philosophy, a platform where we can be citizens of the world and citizens of somewhere at the same time.
A crucial force for unity? LOL. The BBC that sets the rich against the poor, the BBC that sets young against old, the BBC that works to smash the United Kingdom due to the Left’s hate of ‘Britain’ and what they see as its dangerous power and influence in the world and of course by dividing Britain it leaves it open for the EU to move in and to rule over us, the BBC that works hard to foster the hate and division between Remainers and Leavers, a BBC that encourages open borders and mass immigration having no concern for the destruction of society that would entail and the ‘tribal’ ghettos of the different communities that arise and end in violent conflict. Yep, working for unity…that’s the BBC alright.
The rise of fake news and the ascendancy of Trump and Corbyn make the BBC all the more needed. Liberal societies can endure many trials but not the absence of universal facts. Without a commonly-agreed set of facts and a referee to uphold them Trump winning the popular vote and Corbyn advancing peace in Ulster become alternative truths — plausible, perhaps preferable.
The BBC is fake news. This site can ony possibly list a minute proportion of the highly political and partisan material that comes out of the BBC….there is a vast torrent of ‘fake news’ flowing forth from the BBC everyday all day. And for the BBC to appoint itself as the ‘referee’ of what can be termed ‘fake news’ or not is beyond parody….like the Catholic Church in charge of child abuse investigations.
Daisley ends with this:
In the end, the BBC is neither straightforwardly Left nor Right. It is a taxpayer-funded national educator staffed by the London intelligentsia — a social democrat’s reverie. It is also a conservative institution, entrenching tradition, maintaining continuity and lending reverential pomp to the monarchy, the church, and Parliament. Our times are afflicted at once by popular cynicism and idealism run amok. The BBC, itself an alloy of the two, is a bulwark against both.
Hmmm…the BBC a conservative institution?…..the BBC that is anti-Royalty, anti-Christianity and anti-democracy [in that it wants a one party state…run by Labour]…and anti ‘popular cynicism’? Would that ‘popular cynicism’ be a vote against the EU? Not cynicism but an informed, reasoned and appropriate response to being railroaded by the liberal intelligentsia into remaining under the tyranny of the undemocratic EU…and as for a bulwark against ‘idealism’…this is the BBC that supports Corbyn and his violent Marxist running mates as they seek to impose their crazed economic, social and political dogmas upon us…their lies, hypocrisy and violence going unchecked by the BBC.
The BBC is a force for disunity, for violent inter-communal conflict, for political chicanery unchecked, for destruction of nation states and national identity, for what will be the end of an organised and stable State…the end of the NHS, the end of free schooling, the end of peace and trust as communities divide, the end of the welfare state system as the whole world tries to ‘sign on’ when the BBC continues to invite them to our increasingly overcrowded shores.
The BBC is in denial about the consequences of its policies [the consequences that are playing out before us as we watch as Merkel’s ‘humane and compassionate’ policy on migration destroys Germany and with it the whole of Europe]
Shame some commentators on the BBC also seem in denial even as they admit the huge problems. Daisley thinks that because the SNP’s Tartan Brownshirts, the Muslim Jihadists and the Corbyn street thugs, all attack the BBC the BBC must be ‘impartial’ and be reporting accurately on these groups…this shows a complete lack of undertsanding, one of the fact that the BBC actually supports these groups but that these groups don’t care…their intent is to make absolutely sure you are too afraid to say anything negative or critical of them and they will use any means to enforce that. Hitler, who better to ask, tells us the truth about these ‘mad-dog exercises’ of intimidation and bullying…
Before two years had passed, the theory as well as the technical methods of Social Democracy were clear to me.
I understood the infamous spiritual terror which this movement exerts, particularly on the bourgeoisie, which is neither morally nor mentally equal to such attacks; at a given sign it unleashes a veritable barrage of lies and slanders against whatever adversary seems most dangerous, until the nerves of the attacked persons break down and, just to have peace again, they sacrifice the hated individual.
However, the fools obtain no peace.
The game begins again and is repeated over and over until fear of the mad dog results in suggestive paralysis.
And as Douglas Murray says in the Spectator:
In an email to Bloomberg, Soros says that his foundation is trying to ‘uphold European values’ while Orban is trying to ‘undermine those values’. Making it clearer, Soros writes of Orban:
‘His plan treats the protection of national borders as the objective and the refugees as an obstacle. Our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.’
Putting aside Soros’s depiction of the hundreds of thousands of people coming into Europe as ‘refugees’ rather than – more accurately in most cases – ‘economic migrants’, perhaps in the next round the Hungarian Prime Minister can point out to Mr Soros that without national borders those ‘European values’ he seems so keen on will be blown away like so much sand.