Koup Klutz Klan

 Koup Klutz Klan

By Ranting Panda, 13 June 2021

6 January 2021. The date that traitors stormed the US Capitol in an effort to usurp democracy and keep Donald Trump as President. Trump was resoundingly defeated in a valid election, but neither he nor his supporters could accept the truth. Even today, Trump still believes that he won the election. 

Trump's followers, gullible and gutless, refused to take responsibility for the insurrection, and instead blamed Antifa for it. The FBI, however, confirmed that it was Trump loyalists who staged this coup attempt (Anderson 2021, Sadeghi, 2021). Antifa isn't a threat to democracy. The real threat is the MAGA cult, with its inability to grasp truth, its willingness to rewrite 'facts' to suit its ignorance, its hatred of anyone who is different, its twisted religious fervour, and violent nationalism. They wanted to kill the Vice President during the coup attempt. They'd bought wrist ties & built a noose. These people are not right in the head.

There's no point arguing with MAGA cultists. It doesn't matter what facts are presented, they are so brainwashed that they can't accept truth, fact or reality. Just like cult-members, the MAGAs need de-programming, otherwise they stick with their self-pitying, paranoid, victimhood talking points that Trump cultivated and nourished. 

Trump deliberately attacks truth in order to create doubt about facts. He once admitted to a journalist that he attacks the media to, 'discredit you all and demean you all so that when you write negative stories about me no one will believe you' (Applebaum, 2020). This is one thing that Trump has been very successful at. His supporters lack the critical thinking skills to challenge Trump's blatant lies; they believe everything he says. The real danger of this is that despots are renowned for their propaganda, manipulation of media and use of falsehoods and fear to manipulate the populace. 

When Twitter purged its platform of Trump and many of his adherents because of their flagrant lies, conspiracy theories and hate speech, the MAGAs claimed it was an attack on their freedom of speech. However, freedom of speech doesn't mean that others have to listen to it. Twitter was cleaning house ... as anyone can if some racist fool comes into their house and starts spewing vitriol. MAGAs can get their own soapbox and head down to the local corner to spew their vile hate-speech, ridiculous conspiracy theories, and victim-mentality rubbish.  

Freedom of speech only goes one way for the MAGAs; the moment anyone has a contrary viewpoint, the MAGAs screech socialism and 'Reds under the bed' conspiracy theories. They believe that if someone challenges them, they are victims of 'cancel culture' ... yet, the MAGAS tried to cancel an election because they didn't get their own way. They only believe in freedom of speech for themselves, not for anyone else.

Stripe Inc ceased processing payments for the Trump election campaign because of the 6 January insurrection (Andriotis, Rudegeair, & Glazer, 2021). Ever portraying themselves as victims, the Pity Party MAGAs claimed it was yet another attack on their freedoms. However, the action by Stripe was similar to the action that financial institutions took in dealing with terrorism. And the Trump cult is a terrorist organisation, evidenced by their violent attack on the very heart of US government.

Trump was impeached for inciting the insurrection. It needs to be kept in mind, that he did nothing during this riot to quell it. He was hoping that the coup would succeed and install him for another term ... perhaps a perpetual term in which he never loses (Applebaum, 2020). Trump is anti-democratic and only interested in his own power. Despite significant evidence of Trump directly inciting the coup attempt, the Republican Party voted against convicting him at his second impeachment trial (Holpuch, 2021). This says a lot about how anti-democratic the Republican party is. They try to claim they are patriotic defenders of democracy, but they value power over free and fair elections. Republicans value authoritarianism over liberty.

During riots following Black Lives Matter protests, Trump big-noted himself by dog-whistling to his racist followers that 'when the looting starts, the shooting starts' (Burns, 2020). Trump incited violence with this tweet. A couple of months later, a gutless piece of shit named Kyle Rittenhouse, shot dead BLM protesters. Trump and his followers supported these killings (Wilson, 2021). Yet, when it came to the Capitol riots, Trump didn't threaten to shoot the protesters, instead, he supported them and even told them how much he loved them (Caldwell, 2021). Although he eventually told the rioters to go home, he did it under duress. Trump had an expletive-laced argument with House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, after McCarthy told Trump to call the rioters off because they were Trump supporters. Trump abused McCarthy, telling him that the rioters cared more about the election than McCarthy did (Gangel et al, 2021). Republican senator, Ben Passe, claimed that Trump was delighted that the Capitol was being stormed (Papenfuss, 2021). 

Prior to the riot, Trump gave a speech in which he told his supporters to 'fight like hell' or they would lose their country because, according to him (and in keeping with his admitted attacks on truth mentioned earlier), the election was corrupt. He then told his supporters to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol to 'try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country' (Blake, 2021). Trump directed conspiracy-theorist, Alex Jones, to lead the march that stormed the White House (Linge, 2021). It took six hours for the situation to be brought under control. This period revealed Trump's leadership to be paralysed, to be no more than a passive viewer who stood back as five people, including a police officer, were killed by his supporters (Parker, Dawsey & Rucker, 2021). 

Only weeks before the riot, Trump the Grand Traitor, directed the neo-Nazi Proud Boys to 'stand back and stand by' (Pilkington, 2021). Now we know what he was asking them to stand by for. 

This isn't the first time he has supported violence. In 2017, he condoned white supremacist violence that culminated in the killing of an innocent woman. He even went so far as to describe the white supremacists as 'very fine people' (Coaston, 2019). Throughout his presidency, he directly incited violence by white supremacist groups (Pilkington 2021). 

The traitors who stormed the Capitol included Nazis wearing shirts such as 'Camp Aushwitz - Work brings freedom' and '6MWE', which stands for Six Million Were Not Enough ... in reference to the number of Jews killed during the Holocaust. These are the extremist groups that Trump claims are 'very fine people' (Kessler, 2020).

Trump and his followers are white supremacists. They believe in fascism, not democracy. 

During the Covid-19 pandemic, there was a mass casualty event every single day of the final year of Trump's presidency, culminating in more than 420,000 deaths by the time he was finally removed from the White House. The deaths were directly caused by Trump's lies, inaction and incompetence. This puerile moron was more interested in shoring up his own power, while spreading lies, hatred and division, than in saving his fellow Americans. His incompetence was on a genocidal scale.

Republicans claim they are the 'law and order' party, yet they've let Trump get away with murder ... literally: around 420,000 deaths from his ineptitude in addressing Covid-19, five deaths during the insurrection he orchestrated, and several executions that he directed in the final days of his presidency (Honderich, 2021). They have let him get away with his threats and cheating over the election, such as when he rang the Secretary of State for Georgia and demanded more votes be found to overturn the election results (Morris, 2021). Does this seem like the leader of the free world, or the tyrannical dictatorship of a far-right murderous despot in a banana republic?

The Republican Party  condoned Trump's treason, by voting against holding an inquiry into the Capitol insurrection (Fandos, 2021). The Republicans are not defending democracy, they are defending the traitors within their own party. They are defending Nazism, white supremacy, and fascism. 

Nothing was done about the deadly 2017 white supremacist protests in Charlottesville ... and this culminated in the storming of the Capitol by Nazis. The Trump presidency wasn't the first time that white supremacists were incited to violence by a megalomaniac. Another leader also incited mobs to violence by using racist dog-whistling and bigoted fear-mongering ... and nothing was done to stop it! That leader was Hitler and we saw how that went. Many of the Capitol insurrectionists were Christians who believed they were doing God's will to keep Trump in power (Green, 2021). They claimed that God was telling them to 'let the church roar' (Posner, 2021). This has an eerie resemblance to Nazi Germany. Throughout his rambling manifesto, Mein Kampf, Hitler stated numerous times that he was doing the 'work of the Lord'. Not surprisingly, this galvanised Christians to support Hitler and incited them to violence and, ultimately, genocide. 

Today's United States faces the same threat of Nazism that Nazi Germany did (Brenner, 2021). The Republican Party has links to many far-right extremist groups, including the Oath Keepers, Three Percenters, Proud Boys, and QAnon (Broadwater & Rosenberg, 2021).

No leader has damaged the US as much as Trump has. All the efforts by the Soviet Union during the Cold War to bring down the US never undermined democracy as much as Trump. It's not surprising then, that Trump is alleged to have been cultivated by Russia to undermine US democracy. An ex-KGB spy claims that Trump was cultivated as a Russian asset for 40 years (Smith, 2021). A book by journalist, Craig Unger, entitled American Kompromat, states that the spy alleged there were celebrations in Moscow as Trump parroted anti-Western propaganda (Smith, 2021). 

Trump did significant damage to US democracy, however, what may have saved it was Trump's mental instability and his complete ineptitude as a leader. This ineptitude however, killed more Americans than World War 2. 

Meanwhile, Republicans continue supporting Trump. There's even talk that he will run for president in the 2024 elections. This is a clear indication of just how morally bankrupt the Republican Party is, and by extension, the Christians who continue supporting and defending Trump in the face of significant evidence of his genocide, treason and white supremacy. 

In 1993, musician Frank Zappa, made the prescient observation, 'There's been an incredible rise in racist and fascist attitude here, most of them being helped along by the Republican Party' (Ouellette, 1993). 

Nothing has yet been done to hold Trump to account for the Covid genocide in the US, that is directly attributable to him. Nothing has been done to stop Trump inciting Nazis and conservative Christians to violence, so we have not seen the end of extreme right-wing blood-shed, insurrection, and treason. Allowing Trump to continue empowering these extremists could signal the end of democracy and the rise of fascism in the United States. 

References

Anderson, M 2021, Antifa Didn't Storm The Capitol. Just Ask The Rioters, NPR, 2 March, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.npr.org/2021/03/02/972564176/antifa-didnt-storm-the-capitol-just-ask-the-rioters.

Andriotis, A, Rudegeair, P, & Glazer, E, 2021, Stripe stops processing payments for Trump campaign website, The Wall Street Journal, 10 January, viewed 12 June 2021, https://www.wsj.com/articles/stripe-stops-processing-payments-for-trump-campaign-website-11610319116. 

Applebaum, A, 2020, Trump won't accept defeat. Ever., The Atlantic, 7 November, viewed 13 June 2021, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/trumps-forever-campaign-is-just-getting-started/617021/.

Blake, A 2021, What Trump said before his supporters stormed the Capitol, annotated, The Washington Post, 11 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2021/annotated-trump-speech-jan-6-capitol/.

Brenner, M 2021, Pre-Nazi Germany tells us the fight to save American democracy is just beginning, The Washington Post, 9 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/01/09/pre-nazi-germany-tells-us-fight-save-american-democracy-is-just-beginning/. 

Broadwater, L, & Rosenburg, M 2021, Republican ties to extremist groups under scrutiny, Hartford Courant, 29 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.courant.com/nation-world/ct-nw-nyt-gop-extremist-groups-20210129-fstili3spvea7fss3mdsobu5eu-story.html.

Burns, K 2020, The racist history of Trump’s “When the looting starts, the shooting starts” tweet, Vox, 29 May, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/5/29/21274754/racist-history-trump-when-the-looting-starts-the-shooting-starts. 

Caldwell, T 2021, Trump's 'We love you' to Capitol rioters is more of the same, CNN, 7 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/07/politics/trump-history-comments-trnd/index.html.

Coaston, J 2019, Trump’s new defense of his Charlottesville comments is incredibly false, Vox, 26 April, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.vox.com/2019/4/26/18517980/trump-unite-the-right-racism-defense-charlottesville.

Fandos, N 2021, Democrats failed to get enough votes for an independent inquiry into the Jan. 6 riot, The New York Times, 28 May, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/28/us/politics/capitol-riot-commission.html.

Gangel, J, Liptak, K, Warren, M, & Cohen, M 2021, New details about Trump-McCarthy shouting match show Trump refused to call off the rioters, CNN, 13 February, viewed 6 June 2021, https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics/trump-mccarthy-shouting-match-details/index.html. 

Green, E 2021, A Christian Insurrection, The Atlantic, 8 January, viewed 7 June 2021, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/01/evangelicals-catholics-jericho-march-capitol/617591/. 

Holpuch, A 2021, 'White supremacy won today': critics condemn Trump acquittal as racist vote, The Guardian, 14 February, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/14/trump-acquittal-white-supremacy-racist-vote. 

Honderich, H 2021, In Trump’s final days, a rush of federal executions, BBC News, 16 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55236260.

Kessler, G 2020, The ‘very fine people’ at Charlottesville: Who were they?, The Washington Post, 8 May, viewed 12 June 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/08/very-fine-people-charlottesville-who-were-they-2/.

Linge, M 2021, Alex Jones claims he funded rally that led to Capitol chaos, The New York Post, 9 January, viewed 12 June 2021, https://nypost.com/2021/01/09/alex-jones-claims-he-funded-rally-that-led-to-capitol-chaos/.

Morris, J 2021, Georgia secretary of state's office launches investigation into Trump's phone call, CNN, 16 March, viewed 6 June 2021, https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/08/politics/georgia-secretary-of-state-trump-investigation/index.html.

Ouellette, D 1993, Frank Zappa, Pulse!, August 1993, sourced from https://www.afka.net/Articles/1993-08_Pulse.htm.

Papenfuss, M 2021, Trump Was 'Delighted' His Supporters Stormed The Capitol, Says GOP Sen. Ben Sasse, Huffington Post, 9 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/ben-sasse-delighted-trump-capitol-attack_n_5ff93b1bc5b6c77d85e6df60.

Parker, A, Dawsey, J, & Rucker, P 2021, Six hours of paralysis: Inside Trump’s failure to act after a mob stormed the Capitol, The Washington Post, 12 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-mob-failure/2021/01/11/36a46e2e-542e-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html.

Pilkington, E 2021, 'Stand back and stand by': how Trumpism led to the Capitol siege, The Guardian, 7 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/06/donald-trump-armed-protest-capitol.

Posner, S 2021, How the Christian right helped foment insurrection, Reveal News, 30 January, viewed 12 June 2021, https://revealnews.org/article/how-the-christian-right-helped-foment-insurrection/.

Sadeghi, M 2021, Fact check: What's true about the Capitol riot, from antifa to BLM to Chuck Norris, USA Today, 14 January, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/01/14/fact-check-truth-capitol-riot-antifa-chuck-norris/6653343002/.

Smith, D 2021, 'The perfect target': Russia cultivated Trump as asset for 40 years - ex-KGB spy, The Guardian, 29 January, viewed 12 June 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/29/trump-russia-asset-claims-former-kgb-spy-new-book.

Wilson, J 2021, US police and public officials donated to Kyle Rittenhouse, data breach reveals, The Guardian, 16 April, viewed 6 June 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/16/us-police-officers-public-officials-crowdfunding-website-data-breach.

Cancel culture & the Snowflake War: Do-gooders, No-gooders & Do-nothings

Cancel culture & the Snowflake War: Do-gooders, No-gooders & Do-nothings

By Ranting Panda, 8 August 2020

If one listens to conservatives, it would seem that lefties, or progressives at least, are waging a war on freedom and free-speech. Conservatives frame this non-existent war as a product of 'political correctness', or 'virtue-signalling', because of left-wing do-gooders, who are supposedly being overly sensitive snowflakes who manufacture offence and then meltdown in the face of this 'contrived' offence.

There is some truth in conservatives claims. There are times that progressives 'cancel' those who are perceived as having some moral failing, such as being racist or sexist. 

Many conservatives see themselves as thick-skinned heroes defending freedom ... they see themselves as victims of the Snowflake War. 

Anyone would think that conservatives are resilient people who would never indulge in 'cancel culture' or 'political correctness'. However, they have been guilty of these very issues themselves. The difference is that when progressives do it, it is because of abuse perpetrated by systemic discrimination or in response to someone harming others. When conservatives do it, it is usually because they are upset that someone thinks, acts or looks different to them.

Yes, believe it or not ... Conservatives are epic snowflakes, waging war on freedoms using their own brand of self-centred political correctness and virtue-signalling that dog-whistles to other conservative snowflakes.

'Conservative political correctness?', I hear you ask! Yep. Conservative political correctness usually revolves around respecting flags and statues, rather than people. For instance, patriotism is sacrosanct. 

One such example occurred in Australia in 2017, when a Muslim feminist writer named Yassmin Abdel-Magied, posted a tweet on Anzac Day which stated: 'LEST. WE. FORGET. (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine...)'. Conservatives were so affronted by this innocuous tweet, that Yassmin was hounded out of the country. She received rape and death threats because of it and ended up leaving Australia to live in England. Many of the threats targeted Yassmin's religion and gender. I mean, being a Muslim and a feminist was never going to sit well with conservative snowflakes. Conservative commentator, Prue McSween, called Abdel-Magied a flea and stated that it was acceptable for her to feel unsafe in Australia, then compounded this disgusting tirade by stating that if she saw her, she would be tempted to run her over (BBC 2017). Ironically, many of the people who were offended by her tweet, claimed that Anzac Day commemorates those who fought and died for Australia's freedoms. Apparently, those freedoms don't include freedom of speech for young, feminist Muslim women, even though these same conservatives will claim that it's Muslims who hate Australia's freedoms ... 

In 2017, not long after the disgustingly racist and sexist abuse of Yassmin Abdel-Magied, the Australian Human Rights Commission made a submission to a parliamentary inquiry into multiculturalism, regarding the lack of non-Anglo-Celtic people represented in the public sphere. This may seem innocuous enough, however it triggered Rowan Dean, editor of The Spectator Australia, into racially attacking the federal Race Discrimination Commissioner, Tim Soutphommasane. This racist abuse was given a platform on Sky News, were Dean defiantly declared that Mr Soutphommasane should 'hop on a plane and go back to Laos'. It should be noted that Mr Soutphommasane isn't from Laos; he was born in France to Laotian parents. (BBC 2017).

Then there was Scott McIntyre, a former SBS journalist, who tired of the drunken nationalism that has taken over Anzac Day. McIntyre believed that Anzac Day had taken on a cult-like following, in which people glorified war and dehumanised the 'enemy'. McIntyre decided to remind Australia that some of our diggers were involved in horrendous crimes in the fog of war, such as rape and murder (Davidson 2016). These snippets of truth went down like a lead-balloon with conservatives, leading to McIntyre being sacked by SBS in response to howls of conservative rage.

The problem with this unquestioning nationalism is that it condones and perpetuates war crimes and other criminal behaviour by defence force personnel. For instance, when the ABC reported on the abuse of asylum seekers by Australian military personnel (Roberts 2014), then Prime Minister Tony Abbott accused it of being unpatriotic (Bourke 2014). Apparently waving the Aussie flag was more important that stopping the abuse of innocent people by the military. When the ABC reported on alleged war crimes by the SAS in Afghanistan (Willacy 2020), conservatives were angry with the ABC for reporting it, not because there may have been war crimes committed by Australian troops. 

Still don't believe that conservatives can be snowflakes? Tell them that their food is Halal. In their apoplectic rage, they will boycott the product, write angry letters to the company, to their local politicians, to the newspaper, and fire off incoherent tweets and social media posts. Yep, cancel culture, right there!

More fun can be had if one dares say 'Happy Holidays' at Christmas time. They will become proudly indignant and declare that it is 'Merry CHRISTMAS'! Even though many of these conservatives only look forward to Christmas for the presents, food, decorations and holidays. Most of them couldn't care less about it being the celebration of the birth of Jesus. Most of them have never set foot in a church. And those who have? Clearly, they love their dogma more than they love people. I mean, seriously, if someone wishes you well, then be thankful. It takes a special kind of spitefulness to complain that a season's greeting didn't meet the expected standard. As Benjamin Franklin astutely observed, 'How many observe Christ’s birthday! How few, his precepts! O! ’tis easier to keep Holidays than Commandments'.

There was a call to boycott Starbucks because their coffee cups were deemed 'anti-Christmas'. How can a coffee cup be anti-Christmas? When it is red. Well, when it is red only and does not feature Christmas trees, grimacing Santa Claus faces or (most appropriately) snowflakes ... because nothing screams 'Jesus is the reason for the Season' than a coffee cup covered in European winter symbols (Dvorak 2015). 

Conservatives can continue the rage and wallow in their victimhood straight after Christmas, when Easter Eggs appear on the shelves. Well, there will be rage if said egg dares not mention the word 'Easter'. God forbid selling a chocolate egg that doesn't say Easter. I mean seriously, What Would Jesus Do? We all know how that Jesus smashed down a big helping of Easter Eggs during the Last Supper. Over the years, conservatives have boycotted Nestle and Cadbury for both daring to produce Easter Eggs that don't meet the high moral standard set by privileged conservatives who clearly have nothing better to be offended at. Ironically, these symbols of Easter that they lose their collective minds over, have nothing to do with Jesus, but are pagan symbols of fertility. Easter has links to several pagan fertility religions, including Ishtar, the Mesopotamian 'Queen of Heaven' and goddess of sex, drugs and rock'n'roll. Although Easter was likely named after the German 'Eostre', it was a northern hemisphere celebration of fertility, that Christians appropriated to make their message more palatable to the locals (D'Costa 2013). Compromise, anyone? It seems that the early Christians weren't quite the snowflakes that today's conservative Christians are. 

Speaking of drugs, sex and rock'n'roll, how can we forget when conservatives waged all-out war on rock music: the 'Devil's Music'! This reached peak silliness when John Lennon made the astute observation that The Beatles were 'more popular than Jesus now'. People melted down, believing that The Beatles thought they were greater than God. Lennon clarified later that he was referring to how their fans saw them, not that he was anti-God or anti-Jesus. In response to this perceived insult, Christians bought Beatles albums and then burned them (think about that, take all the time you need ... cancelling a band by buying their stuff ... riiiiight). Tragically, this attempt to cancel The Beatles culminated in Mark David Chapman shooting and killing John Lennon in 1980. Chapman was a 'born-again' Christian, who stated that part of the reason he did it was because of Lennon's comment about The Beatles being more popular than Jesus (Jones 1992, pp 117-118). Chapman had also been upset with the songs 'God' and 'Imagine'. Chapman believed that Imagine was a Communist song, and subsequently wrote his own lyrics to it, which included 'Imagine John Lennon dead' (Jones 1992, pp 117, 189). 

Chapman's hatred of Communism wasn't his own invention. The last time Christians got so upset about Communism, they unleashed they sang the praises of Adolf Hitler ... and we know how that ended.

Conservatives are currently melting down over cheese. Yep, believe it or not, they are more interested in cheese than in ending racism. In fact, many of them don't believe in either systemic racism or casual racism. Systemic racism is evidenced by significantly higher incarceration rates of indigenous people or people of colour, higher suicide rates, poorer educational and health outcomes, and increased poverty. Casual racism is much more insidious, but just as harmful. It may include jokes or snide comments based on racial stereotypes, but it presupposes white superiority and the subjugation of people of colour. 

So, cheese. Australia's Coon Cheese was named after the man who invented the ripening process for cheese, Edward William Coon. The ripening process is also named after him and is known as cooning. Unfortunately, Edward Coon's surname is also a racial slur. For decades there were requests to change the name of the cheese. Keep in mind, that Edward Coon did not found or own Australia's Coon Cheese; it was merely named after him. It was created by the Warrnambool Cheese and Butter company, and launched by Fred Walker. In July 2020, it was under the ownership of Canadian company, Saputo Inc, who decided to change the name based on its association with the racial slur. 

And didn't the conservatives cut their collective cheeses over it! Now, the cheese could just as easily have been called Walker Cheese, WCB Cheese, or any other variant of its original or current owners. It's just a name. Saputo recognised that while Coon was the surname of the man who invented the maturation process, it can cause significant offence, so they changed the name. They didn't shoot Bambi. But conservatives carried on as if their first-born was being torn from their arms, and promised to boycott the cheese. Not that the boycott will do much, because some had already boycotted the cheese when it became Halal certified. Yep, conservative cancel culture: cancel cheese. Conservatives tackling the big issues. After all, cheese is more important than addressing racism. 

The man who drove the name-change is Dr Stephen Hagan. In retaliation for Dr Hagan daring to challenge the name of a cheese, One Nation member, Mark Latham, mocked him and suggested that 'evil snowflakes' would start targeting products that included the word 'white'. He included a photo of Paul's 'Smarter White Milk' product. Not surprisingly, several media outlets ran this as a factual story. So incensed were the racists who actually believed this puerile drivel, that Hagan received more than 30,000 abusive comments, hate mail and several death threats (Roe 2020). Yeah ... death threats over a fake story about the name of a milk product. Latham is leader of One Nation in New South Wales and a member of the NSW Legislative Council, the Upper House in the NSW Parliament. This is the standard of politics and media in Australia. It also shows just how sensitive racist snowflakes are in Australia: they will cry over milk and cheese. 

Speaking of racism, there was the matter of an NFL player, Colin Kaepernick, who kneeled during the national anthem prior to a football match in 2016. He was protesting against police brutality. Small-minded conservatives took this as a affront to US sovereignty. Yeah, I know ... how freaking sensitive does one have to be to interpret an anti-racism protest as an attack on US sovereignty? But such is the depths of nationalism that permeates right-wing media and group-think. In protest, many conservatives burned their own NFL jerseys and Nike shoes. Again ... take all the time you need to think about this ... protesting by burning something they've already bought. That's really going to hit the NFL or Nike's bottom line. The sad thing, when asked, many of these people had no idea what Kaepernick was protesting. Many thought he was opposing the flag, the anthem, or US troops, because of bigoted group-think manipulated by racist politicians and media. 

The anti-Kaepernick brigade were already so emboldened with nationalistic fervour and racism, that it didn't take much to push them over the edge ... and we ask how Germans could be so duped by Hitler? Indeed.

Speaking of football players, in Australia many indigenous people played in the rugby league and Australian Rules football codes. Throughout the years, many reported receiving racist abuse, including former Brisbane Broncos player, Steve Renouf (Pengilly 2020), and former St Kilda player, Nicky Winmar (NMA 2020). Adam Goodes had a stellar AFL career, playing more games than any other indigenous player, twice winning the coveted Brownlow Medal for being the best and fairest player in the competition, and in 2014, he won Australian of the Year. Despite his achievements, Goodes was subject to years of racist abuse. During the Indigenous Round in 2013, Goodes was racially vilified by a spectator. Goodes called her out for it during the game (McRae 2020). It transpired the spectator was 13 years old. The conservative response? Well, rather than agreeing that Goodes had every right to challenge racist abuse from a 13 year old brat, they attacked him, doubled down on the vilification and drove him from the game. 

Conservatives have a track record of prioritising racism over respect. Although, they also have a track record of claiming that 'kids of today have no respect for their elders'. Well, why should they, when their elders glorify such disrespectful behaviour.

Don't get conservatives started on statues. During the Black Lives Matter protests, there were calls to tear down statues of confederate soldiers because they had defended slavery. Conservatives, in their rather simplistic rationale, equated this to changing or erasing history. Hello ... there are things called books! These books actually record history. Ditching a statue of some slave-owning racist white supremacist is not erasing history, it is acknowledging history and raising awareness of the person's vile behaviour. Interestingly, many of the confederate statues were not erected during or immediately following the American Civil War, but were erected specifically in defence of racism (Robinson 2020). Many were put up during the early 1900s to defend the Jim Crow laws which legalised the disenfranchisement and segregation of black people. In the 1960s, many of these statues were erected in response to the Civil Rights movement which was calling for the dismantling of the racist systems established by the Jim Crow laws, and the attitudes and systems that had existed in America before, during and since slavery (Williams, Armitage & Stein 2020; Gunter & Kizzir n.d., p 11).  

Speaking of Black Lives Matter ... not surprisingly, many conservatives piously claimed 'ALL lives matter', not just black ones. This little act of defiance represented an incredible level of hypocrisy because these same ALM advocates have actively campaigned against, or voted for politicians who oppose, refugees and asylum seekers, LGBTIQ+ rights, same sex marriage, Islam, migrants, and the list goes on. Perhaps, the ALM brigade should look up the meaning of 'All' in the dictionary. Just to be clear, the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines 'all' as meaning, 'every member or individual component'. Everyone! Not everyone except for black people or gay people or Muslims or refugees! Funnily enough, those marching for BLM are also most likely to also march in defence of the rights of other persecuted groups; its BLM activists who actually believe that all lives matter, rather than the pious ALM proponents.

Nothing triggers some conservatives like suggesting that others have equal rights. Recent campaigns for same sex marriage resulted in conservatives boycotting numerous companies who expressed solidarity with the cause, such as Qantas, Virgin and Hallmark. 

Sadly, many conservatives see social justice and human rights as being an affront to their own rights. This is typical of the selfishnessness of conservatives who only sympathise with issues that impact them specifically. They couldn't care less about issues that impact others. This is why they oppose anti-racism campaigns, they oppose same sex marriage, they oppose other religions. Meanwhile, they will hurl insults at those who dare to stand up for these rights, labelling them 'do-gooders', 'social justice warriors', 'bleeding hearts', or accusing them of 'virtue-signalling', just because they want to help others. If you're not a do-gooder, then what are you? A no-gooder? A do-nothing? Seriously, if you're not wanting everyone to have the same rights as you, then you can't say 'ALL lives matter'. At best, you're a do-nothing ... at worst, well you're doing no good and maybe those words like bigot, racist, white-supremacist, may appropriately describe you. 

These conservatives label human rights and social justice as 'cultural Marxism'. Conservatives have been responsible for a lot of fear-mongering: fear of black people, fear of Islam, fear of a gay agenda, fear of communism. During the 1940s and 1950s, the 'reds under the bed' paranoia was cancel culture writ large. It culminated with witch-hunts led by Senator Joe McCarthy and a Congressional committee known as the House Un-American Activities Commission (HUAC). These witch-hunts resulted in the destruction of many people's lives and careers. Dozens of singers and actors suffered through this paranoia, including Charlie Chaplin, Harry Belafonte, Pete Seeger and Orson Welles. There were some who managed to rebuild their careers, others disappeared into obscurity, reputations destroyed by anti-Communist paranoia.

The new focus on 'cultural Marxism', or neo-Marxism, is just rebranding of McCarthyism, playing on the fears of gullible conservatives. Their fears are unfounded. President Donald Trump exploits these fears by accusing the far-left and Antifa of inciting violence during BLM protests. However, in the last 25 years, no-one has been killed by the far-left in the USA. Contrast this to the 329 people who have so far been killed by right-wing extremists in the United States (Pasley 2020). This indicates the danger of fear-mongering and demonisation is that people will focus on the wrong things. Racism continues and hate-crimes escalate, while conservatives wring their hands claiming 'All lives matter'. Some claim that they oppose racism, but will then boycott a business that supports Black Lives Matter ... nothing says anti-racism like boycotting a business that is actively anti-racist ... 

Conservatives love to play the victim, even though they are often the perpetrator. Their claim of 'Cultural Marxism' is ingrained in them by opinionated conservative commentators dog-whistling to their xenophobia and bigotry, which reinforces their feelings of victimhood (Wilson 2015). They will claim that free speech is under attack because of left-wing do-gooders. What they don't seem to understand is that free speech means that everyone is entitled to speak their mind. Just because a conservative is called out for their racist, bigoted or false claims, doesn't mean that their freedom of speech is being threatened; it means that someone else is exercising their freedom of speech in retort. 

I saw a statement recently, which said, 'Racism asks for your silence. Anti-racism asks for your voice'.

It is important to speak up and challenge racism. Speaking up is not the silencing of others. 

While there are some examples of left-wing cancel culture, it is blown well and truly out of proportion by conservatives who struggle with changing social norms, so react by manufacturing their inability to adapt into a national crisis (Hobbes 2020). 

We share the world with billions of people, which means that there will be billions of disparate views and values. Rather than trying to ban everyone or everything that we disagree with or don't understand, we would be much better off trying to understand others and learning to disagree without taking offence. Having said that, there are times when behaviours and systems need to be addressed. Racism, sexism and bigotry are harmful and should not be tolerated. This is not just a matter of agreeing to disagree. We need to reach a point where these behaviours and values are not acceptable. 

Why do conservatives feel led to defend racism, sexism and bigotry? Why do conservatives defend exploitative labour conditions and environmental degradation? Why do conservatives feel it is acceptable to condone violence against black people, women, Muslims, refugees, leftists and anyone else they don't understand? Why do conservatives deny science, but take the word of uneducated, unqualified shock jocks as gospel? They claim they are the victims, when they have no idea what being a victim of racism, sexism and bigotry means. 

Most conservative protests are to enforce their views on others, rather than defending the rights of  others. They think their opinions and values are superior to the rights of others.

Many conservatives value symbols over humanity. Their idea of morality is symbolic. Their idea of equality is that everyone should think, look and act the same as them; they do not value diversity, whether it be in culture, art or ideas. 

Until conservatives empathise with those who suffer discrimination, they won't change their behaviours. As the old adage says, 'Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are'.

References

BBC News 2017, 'The Anzac post, outrage and a debate about race', 10 August, viewed 31 July 2020,

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-40712832.

Bourke, L 2014, 'Prime Minister Tony Abbott says ABC not on Australia's side in interview with 2GB', ABC News, 4 February, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-29/tony-abbott-steps-up-criticism-of-abc/5224676.

Davidson, H 2016, 'Former SBS reporter Scott McIntyre repeats Anzac Day accusations on Twitter', The Guardian, 25 April, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/25/former-sbs-reporter-scott-mcintyre-repeats-anzac-day-accusations-on-twitter.

D'Costa, K 2013, 'Beyond Ishtar: The Tradition of Eggs at Easter', Scientific American, 31 March, viewed 8 August 2020, https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/anthropology-in-practice/beyond-ishtar-the-tradition-of-eggs-at-easter.

Dvorak, P 2015, 'The phony ‘War on Christmas’ is back, fueled by those alleged Jesus haters at Starbucks', 10 November, viewed 31 July 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/the-phony-war-on-christmas-is-back-fueled-by-those-alleged-jesus-haters-at-starbucks/2015/11/09/ed8471de-86f7-11e5-9a07-453018f9a0ec_story.html.

Gunter, B & Kizzir, J n.d., Whose heritage? Public symbols of the confederacy, Southern Poverty Law Centre, https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/com_whose_heritage.pdf.

Hobbes, M 2020, 'Don’t Fall For The 'Cancel Culture' Scam', The Huffington Post, 11 July, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/cancel-culture-harpers-jk-rowling-scam_n_5f0887b4c5b67a80bc06c95e.

Jones, J 1992, I'm going to take you down: Inside the mind of Mark David Chapman, Villard Books.

McRae, D 2020, 'Adam Goodes: 'Instead of masking racism, we need to deal with it day-to-day'', The Guardian, 3 March, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/mar/02/adam-goodes-interview-racism-walk-away-afl. 

NMA 2020, Nicky Winmar’s stand, National Museum of Australia, 13 March, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/nicky-winmars-stand.

Pasley, J 2020, 'Trump frequently accuses the far-left of inciting violence, yet right-wing extremists have killed 329 victims in the last 25 years, while antifa members haven't killed any, according to a new study', Business Insider, 31 July, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.businessinsider.com/right-wing-extremists-kill-329-since-1994-antifa-killed-none-2020-7.

Pengilly, A 2020, ''It was crushing': Broncos apologise to Renouf for racist slurs during career', The Sydney Morning Herald, 31 July 2020, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/it-was-crushing-broncos-apologise-to-renouf-for-racist-slurs-during-career-20200731-p55hf2.html.

Roberts, G 2014, 'Acting Prime Minister Warren Truss defends Navy amid claims asylum seekers beaten and burned', ABC News, 18 February, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-22/australian-navy-accused-of-beating-burning-asylum-seekers/5211996.

Robinson, J 2020, 'Myths About Confederate Monuments - ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jeffrey Robinson exposed Confederate monuments for what they really are', Now This News, 19 June, viewed 1 August 2020, https://youtu.be/55ehKPUm7dc. 

Roe, C 2020, 'Anti-racism campaigner cops death threats over fake story', SBS News, 18 August, viewed 15 August 2020, https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2020/08/15/anti-racism-campaigner-cops-death-threats-over-fake-story.

Willacy, M 2020, 'Culture of Cover-up', ABC, 17 March, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/four-corners-sas-allegations-war-crimes/12028522.

Williams, P, Armitage, R,  & Stein, L 2020, 'As America grapples with its history of racism, relics of the past are being toppled by a new generation', 11 June, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-11/why-people-are-pulling-down-statues-in-the-us-in-protest/12343766. 

Wilson, J 2015, ''Cultural Marxism': a uniting theory for rightwingers who love to play the victim', The Guardian, 19 January, viewed 1 August 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/19/cultural-marxism-a-uniting-theory-for-rightwingers-who-love-to-play-the-victim.

Updated 19 August 2020

Israel Folau - Making a martyr out of a molehill

Israel Folau - Making a martyr out of a molehill

And just like that ... Rugby Union great, Israel Folau is a martyr for free speech and Christian persecution!

Folau's martyrdom was the culmination of a couple of years in which he'd posted on social media parts of the bible that stated homosexuals would go to hell (among others, such as drunkards, liars, fornicators et al). This isn't illegal and Folau has freedom of speech to post this to his heart's content. However, he was under contract to Rugby Australia who had clauses in his $4 million a year contract about not bringing the sport into disrepute. RA considered these posts to be homophobic and warned him to stop. Folau initially promised, even saying that he would gladly resign if necessary (Folau 2018). Then he fired off another post and RA decided it was time to sack him for breaching the contract. Rather than gladly leave as he'd previously promised, Folau portrayed himself as a victim whose freedom of speech had been restricted, and set about suing RA. Folau, with a $7 million house, cried poor and created a GoFundMe page to raise $3 million to cover his legal bills. GoFundMe stated it was a breach of their conditions because they didn't wish to promote homophobia, and promptly cancelled the account. In rides the Australian Christian Lobby, a highly antagonistic lobby group who claims charity status so that they can conduct campaigns that persecute LGBTIQ+ people. Within a few days, they'd raised more than the GoFundMe campaign.

Israel Folau's Instagram post

Talk about making a martyr out of a molehill!

There are so many elements to this case, but it is fundamentally about whether an employer can sack someone for posting bible verses. RA will argue that it was part of their contract and they'd warned Folau to desist. Folau will argue he has a right to his views and that he never called for violence or persecution of LGBTIQ+ people. Contract Law versus Freedom of Speech.

This case has polarised the community with many Christians jumping on the Folau bandwagon and supporting him through either donation or deed. Others have jumped on the RA bandwagon and cheered on their stance against homophobia.

For some, the perplexing question is whether they support Folau's freedom of speech or whether to oppose persecution of LGBTIQ+ people. Sadly, this has become somewhat of a wicked problem for many people because many of those who support gay rights also support freedom of speech. However, many people, whether left or right, will say they support freedom of speech, until that speech offends them.

It should be noted that this isn't exactly about freedom of speech, because no-one is stopping Folau from posting those verses. Rather, it is about the consequences of those posts and an employer who has taken umbrage against them.

While I disagree with Folau's belief that homosexuals will go to hell, I believe he has a right to state it. He was quoting text from the bible. If organisations have a right to sack people for quoting biblical or other texts, where will it end? Organisations already have far too much say over people's private lives. There was a time when people's work life was confined to working hours and their private life filled the remaining hours however they chose. Now, organisations can dictate how people behave and what they say outside the work environment. This is a loss of freedom and should be rolled back.

Even Folau's wife is being targeted because she dared to share Folau's fund-raising campaign. She is a representative netball player and some sponsors, such as HCF, called on Netball Australia to take action against her. Seriously? What is her crime? This is making the proverbial mountain out of a molehill!

Personally, I hope Folau wins his case against Rugby Australia. Not because I agree with him, but because it will help set a limit on employer over-reach into people's personal lives. Ironically, courts require witnesses to swear an oath, which may be done on the Bible ... the very book from which Folau has quoted in this case.

Folau's post does not constitute hate speech, although the bible has been used to persecute and marginalise LGBTIQ+ people for millenia. Folau has stated he did it out of love not hate; he wants to save people from going to hell. As scripture goes, this one is pretty useless for saving people's souls. Think this through, that scripture exposes gay Christians to further rejection by God because of their natural sexuality and gender. So that's probably not useful considering many of them have been rejected by family and church already. And for non-Christians, it is threatening them with a hell they don't believe exists.

If Folau genuinely wanted to see people saved from the hell he believes in, he would have quoted scriptures about love and acceptance, and shared testimonies of people who have experienced love and acceptance in the church, rather than rejection. This scripture belongs to an anachronistic version of Christianity that governs by fear and shame; fear of hell and shame that one day all your sins will be revealed before the entire world. If everyone's sins were exposed before the world, it will merely show that we all have far more in common that we dared admit.

The better way to deal with Folau would have been to ignore him, rather than turn him into a martyr of Christian persecution. Ignoring Folau would have isolated him to his own little conclave of bible-bashers who use judgement and threats of hellfire and damnation to control people. Thankfully, there are fewer and fewer who can be controlled by these tactics.

Folau's views are archaic and demonstrate the hypocrisy of people who selectively quote the bible, while continuing to disobey it themselves. For instance, while Folau is berating a whole raft of people who are going to burn in hell, he is also pushing it up hill if he thinks he is going to escape those hell-fires and inherit a mansion in heaven, according to the bible anyway. The bible states that it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into heaven. Folau might want to ponder this as he kicks back in his $7 million mansion fighting to reinstate his $4 million a year contract.

Many Christians are funding Folau's legal defence as if their Christian values depend on it, yet they have failed to stand up against the persecution and torture of innocent asylum seekers and refugees at the hands of the Pentecostal Prime Minister Scott Morrison and other politicians. Apparently caring for the poor, the sick, the refugee, is completely unnecessary for conservative Christians. It's ok to persecute the persecuted, but woe-betide anyone who allegedly persecutes the persecutors. Try stopping Christians from stopping others living their own lives and all hell breaks lose in conservative Christian circles ... as we're now witnessing with Folau's case.

If we're going to defend freedom of speech for one, then we defend it for all in the spirit of the Voltairean principle: 'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it'. Voltaire's sentiment allegedly followed the burning of a book that caused great offence in 18th century Paris. Voltaire disagreed with the contents of the book, but felt that it was an 'airy trifle' and much 'fuss about an omelette'. How apt for the Folau case. Much ado about nothing. I wholeheartedly disagree with Folau's views, but defend his right to share them without being sacked.

Do those who defend Folau, also defend Yassmin Abdiel-Magied? Yassmin, a 2015 Queensland Young Australian of the Year, published a tweet on Anzac Day 2017, which stated 'LEST.WE.FORGET. (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine...)'. Sadly, many people took this as an attack on Diggers rather than seeing that she was raising awareness of human rights issues. In the case of Manus Island and Nauru, the government covered-up its human rights abuses by threatening to jail whistle-blowers who exposed them. Yassmin was forced to flee Australia in the wake of horrendous abuse in which she was threatened with rape and death. Many of the same people who are defending Folau also attacked Yassmin. The difference being that Folau is a Christian man and Yassmin a Muslim woman.

People are free to spend their money how they wish, but it does say a lot about the values of people who fund Folau's right to post hellfire and damnation, while failing to fund efforts to help the poor, the needy, the refugee. Perhaps, they shouldn't have been so quick to threaten Yassmin Abdul-Magied. She did raise some good points about people ignoring the plight of refugees on Manus and Nauru.

Yassmin also mentioned Palestine, which raises even graver concerns about anachronistic Christians supporting Folau, while not just ignoring, but gleefully encouraging and even financially supporting crimes against humanity. Far too many Christians blindly embrace the Zionist claim that modern-day Israel is the fulfilment of biblical prophecy. Based on this, many Christians defend the killing of Palestinians in the name of God - because, you know, the bible! These Christians support ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity in Palestine, reflecting the depth of hatred and intolerance that resides in the hearts of many Christians. If they are willing to support genocide and ethnic cleansing, what expectation can we have that they will treat LGBTIQ+ people with respect.

Folau has a right to freedom of speech. All of us do. But this freedom means that those who disagree also have the freedom to comment and criticise. This is not persecution. Unfortunately, raising the profile of Folau's social media posts and subsequent sacking, is now causing more harm to LGBTIQ+ people than had it been ignored. There are people, such as the ACL, who are empowered by this case and are using it to further their fear-mongering of 'gay agendas' and 'neo-marxist plots' by blaming it on the legalisation of same-sex marriage. And they wonder why people accuse them of bigotry. They claim Folau is being persecuted for his beliefs, while they want to continue persecuting and marginalising LGBTIQ+ people.

So why are people taking such a strong stance against Israel and defending Rugby Australia's sacking of him? It was a simple post by a simple man who can't see the big picture; who fails to see that rejection by the church is the very reason why so many people have taken a stand against him. Folau is not spreading the love of God, but reinforcing the abuse and rejection that many LGBTIQ+ people have suffered at the hands of so-called Christians. 'Love the sinner but hate the sin' is just Christian weasel-words for persecuting others.

Everyone needs to calm their collective farms. There will always be people who have these black and white views of the bible; who criticise 'moral relativism'. Thankfully, these people are in a shrinking minority as more and more people realise that segregation and prejudice are not acceptable. The opposite of relativism is absolutism. Black and white. Yet, few people are truly absolutist, regardless of what they claim. Relativism is about context, facts and understanding, while Absolutism ignores contexts and facts that contradict a person's understanding. We can see that with Folau himself. The bible prohibits tattoos, yet he is tattooed. Some may argue that biblical scripture prohibiting tattoos were simply part of Mosaic law used by ancient Israel that do not apply today. Fair enough. That's relativism. The bible said to stone murderers, adulterers and so on. I haven't heard too many Christians calling for public stoning of late, perhaps because they realise that stoning was relative to Mosaic law and is a tad archaic for the 21st century. That's relativism. The bible said that after a particular conquest it was ok to kill every man, woman and boy, but to keep virgin girls as slaves, which in that culture would have included sexual slavery. How many Christians abide by this? Absolutism would say to continue this practice, relativism would consider that this behaviour existed 2500 years ago, but is unacceptable today.

But Folau. He merely quoted the bible in an absolutist sense. Should we ban the bible? No. Mind, some of Folau's supporters have called for the banning of Islam, while claiming persecution when people criticise Christianity ... oh, the irony. Mind, while they're busy with their moral relativism in contextualising the bible, they don't afford Muslims the same luxury when Koranic scriptures are quoted out of context. Just for fun, wish one of these conservatives 'Happy holidays' instead of 'Merry Christmas', or tell them their Easter eggs are halal. They will wallow in their persecution complexes and melt down quicker than a chocolate Easter bunny in the fires of hell.

Sacking Folau for his religious views is employer over-reach. However, the vehement support of Folau by Christians who just as vehemently attack refugees is indicative of those Christians lack of validity. 

Given conservative Christianity's blind support for politicians who persecute the persecuted and demonise those who the bible calls 'the lowest of these'; those most in need, is it any wonder then they've found a rallying post in Folau's case. The wailing and gnashing of teeth that we're witnessing from some circles in their rabid support for Folau while ignoring the gaping holes in their own moral values, is indicative of conservative Christianity's lost legitimacy, revealing this to be a desperate attempt to shore up their waning pertinence and mask their lack of concern for the real issues that the bible would have them address.

Should Rugby Australia or any employer have the right to sack someone for their religious or political views? No.

Allow Folau to post his anachronistic views, rather than making a martyr out of a molehill. Meanwhile, the rest of us can be there to counter the rejection of conservative churches and ensure that LGBTIQ+ people are included and valued, with the same rights as everyone else.

Reference

Folau, I 2018, 'I'm a sinner too', Player's Voice, 16 April, viewed 28 June 2019, hhttps://www.playersvoice.com.au/israel-folau-im-a-sinner-too.

Who's a little snowflake then? Right-wing sensitivity and its tolerance of fascism and bigotry.

Who's a little snowflake then? Right-wing sensitivity and its tolerance of fascism and bigotry.


Right-wing pundits generally try to portray themselves as being strong and logical, not prone to the sensitive, emotional and allegedly illogical behaviours of the left-wing. Yet, many on the right-wing are extremely sensitive to criticism about God and country, often invoking emotional accusations of the left-wing not being patriotic or being communist, and then will follow this up by attempting to ban anything that doesn't meet their approval or which contravenes their 'values'.

Often these attempts to ban things are not accompanied by a great deal of logic, but based on logical fallacies and false equivalents. For instance, the right-wing have attempted to ban an entire religion and some of its aspects, namely Islam, halal, hijabs and burqas. Other things that the right has attempted to ban include refugees, abortion, homosexuality, marriage equality ... and even multiculturalism. Many of them completely melt down (pardon the pun) over climate change.

The right-wing get all touchy and upset whenever the left-wing accuses them of racism and bigotry. These accusations are usually based on the right's attacks on Islam, migrants from non-English speaking backgrounds or other things where people's race or religion come into it. Apparently running fear-mongering campaigns that accuse people from particular countries, races or religions as being terrorists, rapists and pedophiles is not racist or bigoted in the eyes of the right-wing. So, they retaliate and call the left-wing 'snowflakes' or 'libtards', and even attack fellow right-wingers as 'cucks' if they appear to have even a modicum of social justice values.

The right-wing got all offended when Michelle Wolf cracked jokes at Trump's expense⁽¹⁾, yet many of these were the same people who wore t-shirts at Trump rallies telling Democrats 'fuck your feelings'. Who's a little snowflake then?

The faux outrage from the right-wing didn't stop here. They were pulling their best lemon-sucking faces when Samantha Bee called Ivanka Trump a 'feckless cunt'⁽²⁾. Yet they were fine when Sid Miller called Hilary a cunt⁽³⁾ ... and for that matter when Ted Nugent called Hilary a 'toxic cunt' way back in 1994. Hilary's daughter, Chelsea Clinton, referred to Ted Nugent's comment when she called out the hypocrisy of right-wing outrage over Samantha Bee's comment about Ivanka⁽⁴⁾.

The right figure that the left are snowflakes because they argue for political correctness. Keep in mind that PC is about treating people with respect which you'd think the religious right-wing would be in favour of.  The religious right love to quote biblical scripture and nothing says the bible more than the golden rule articulated in Mathew 7:12, 'So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you'. In everything, huh? I wonder if that includes locking others up indefinitely on a remote pacific island when they've committed no crime other than to ask for protection from persecution ... but who knows, perhaps being brutalised on a desert-island has been a long-term fantasy of the right-wing.

The right-wing argue that left-wing snow-flakes take offence at everything, hence the whole PC thing. They accuse the left-wing of shutting down free speech and banning people from entering the country if they disagree with them. An example of this would be the left's attempts to ban speakers such as Milo Yiannopoulos and Geert Wilders, both of whom have been embraced by ultra-right-wing extremists for their extreme attacks on Islam, refugees and migrants ... not bigoted or racist, right?

So on banning people which the right claims they don't do ... there is the thing about banning asylum seekers from entering the country, whether it be Australia or the USA, even though under the UN Refugee Convention they are legally allowed to enter and seek asylum regardless of the irregular method of entry. Banning people fleeing persecution ... think about that. Thousands of people banned, yet the right-wing bang on about the left trying to ban a couple of hate-mongerers from entering the country ... hmm ... Funnily enough, the right-wing falls hook, line and sinker for the demonising of refugees and asylum seekers by the government and hate-mongerers. They are so gullible that they believe the lies about asylum seekers 'illegally' entering the country, so feel that if asylum seekers break the law, they should be locked up. If the right-wing is so concerned about the rule of law, then why aren't they upset about their government breaking numerous international laws and conventions, including conventions on refugees, torture and the rights of the child. It's hard to believe that they aren't motivated by racism and bigotry when they justify these human rights abuses in the name of 'border security' or preserving 'national values' ... it is really in the name of nationalism, which basically equates to keeping people who are different out of the country! Yeah, one can see why the left accuses these nationalists of racism and bigotry ... and fascism.

Former US President, Henry A. Wallace stated, 'a fascist is one whose lust for money or power is combined with such an intensity of intolerance toward those of other races, parties, classes, religions, cultures, regions or nations as to make him ruthless in his use of deceit or violence to attain his ends'.

And then there are some examples of specific individuals that the right-wing tried to ban. Cast your minds back to when an Australian woman named Yassmin Abdel-Magied dared to post an Anzac Day tweet that said, 'Lest. We. Forget. (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine…)'⁽⁵⁾. This was hardly an insult to Anzacs or the Australian military in general. It was acknowledging the role of the Australian military in these locations as well as the government's attempts to cover-up ongoing abuses of people fleeing war and persecution. Considering the Australian military has fought for our freedoms, then why not call out government actions that remove freedoms of people, particularly when they ordered the military to help out in its 'border security' operations. Right-wingers across Australia showed that they too have their own version of what they consider politically-correct, which often is anything that dares to criticise the military or their political and religious views. In this case, Yassmin was bombarded with death-threats and vile abuse from right-wingers who attacked her politics, her religion and her gender - nothing racist or bigoted about that, yeah? When she finally decided it was too much, Yassmin left Australia and moved to Britain, to great howls of approval and back-slapping from right-wingers who felt they had justifiably run her out of town. A couple of years later, Yassmin hosted a new show on the ABC and the right-wing went from indignant to apoplectic in micro-seconds⁽⁶⁾. They called for the show's banning ... but aren't they the self-appointed guardians of free speech, always telling the left-wing snowflakes to suck it up whenever the right-wing offends someone? If the military fought for our freedoms, then it is an insult to their sacrifice to deny freedoms to others seeking our protection.

While this letter refers to America, the points it makes about the Allies fighting against fascism to defend freedom is relevant as the right-wing instead tries to defend fascism and hate-crimes.

In England there was the case of Munroe Bergdorf, a trans-gender model and political activist who dared to criticise the 'racial violence of white people', and stated 'Yes ALL white people. Because most of ya’ll don’t even realise or refuse to acknowledge that your existence, privilege and success as a race is built on the backs, blood and death of people of colour. Your entire existence is drenched in racism'. Bergdorf has made numerous posts about the racist behaviour and history of white people. Apparently, having an actual history lesson about the blood-drenched impacts of colonialism is not PC in the right-wing world. The right-wing did what they do best: they unleashed all manner of vitriolic attacks on her, which eventually forced her to stand down from the Labour Party's LGBT advisory board. Bergdorf  stated, 'This is a decision that I’ve had to make due to endless attacks on my character by the conservative right wing press and relentless online abuse. I refuse to be painted as a villain or used as a pawn in the press’ efforts, especially those at the Daily Mail, to discredit the Labour party and push their transphobic rightist agendas'⁽⁷⁾.

For people who claim to stand for freedom of speech, they sure do have issues when people exercise that freedom. This has been particularly evident when the media challenges statements and actions of the right-wing. Donald Trump is consistently accusing the press of fake news and being left-wing. In Australia, the right-wing are constantly attacking the ABC and SBS for unbalanced reporting. This is pretty ironic considering that most of the people attacking the ABC don't actually listen to, read it or watch it with any regularity. They generally tend to read the Murdoch papers which have little balance and are more prone to publish opinion than fact. The ABC can and does challenge politicians from all sides of the fence about the claims they make. Right-wingers criticise the ABC for being too left-wing, yet it is only that the critics are so right-wing, they see any unbiased article as left-wing. The fact is that the ABC is banned by law from providing opinion and is required to be balanced; it can only provide facts, it interviews politicians and commentators from both sides of the fence, and its correspondents and hosts are from both sides of the political divide, e.g. Philip Adams from the left and Amanda Vanstone (former Liberal politician) from the right.

So what does the right-wing do? They de-fund the ABC through forced savings of $324 million in 2014 and funding freezes in 2018 that cut $84 million from the ABC's budget which impacts their service delivery⁽⁸⁾. Then they appoint a former Murdoch-stooge to conduct an 'efficiency review' of the ABC⁽⁹⁾. Clearly the government doesn't want to pay to protect the free speech that it claims to value.

Attacks on the press are almost de rigueur for the right-wing. In the United States, the Texas Governor laughed about shooting reporters⁽¹⁰⁾. Donald Trump, feckless President of the United States, has incessantly waged war on the media, as have many others in the Republican Party. Trump has accused the media of being the 'enemy of the people' and during his election campaign, t-shirts were available that said, 'Rope. Tree. Journalist. Some assembly required'. This war hasn't stopped at words. A Republican candidate was charged with assaulting a reporter⁽¹¹⁾. Right-wing troll, Milo Yiannopoulos stated that he 'can't wait for vigilante squads to start gunning journalists down on sight'⁽¹²⁾. Days later, a gunman walked into a newspaper office in Maryland and shot five people dead⁽¹³⁾. The attacks from Trump and others may not have directly inspired the killings, but a number of people from the so-called alt-right rejoiced in the murders⁽¹⁴⁾.

The Australian government doesn't just attack the media, but threatens to prosecute it for reporting government corruption. In 2014, the then Abbott-led government passed legislation that could see journalists and whistle-blowers jailed for up to 10 years for reporting government actions, corruption and bungles by security agencies⁽¹⁵⁾.  The most recent case being of 'Witness K' and, astoundingly, his lawyer⁽¹⁶⁾. Witness K was a former Australian spy who revealed that during tense negotiations over oil and gas revenue between Australia and East Timor, the Australian government illegally bugged the East Timorese cabinet room. The government was not concerned about the illegality of the bugging, but they were concerned about it being exposed so they've taken particularly vindictive action by not just charging Witness K but his lawyer. This is not just an attack on free speech, but an attack on civil liberties. Everyone charged with a crime has the right to legal representation, so how can the lawyer be charged?  In July 2018, saw enactment of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Act 2018. Originally introduced to parliament by Prime Minister Turnbull, the new Act criminalises the leaking and reporting of classified information; this includes whistle-blowers. Imagine a government that is less concerned about crime and more concerned about charging those who expose crime.

The UN has condemned the Turnbull government for an 'anti-democratic slide' in which there is 'mounting evidence of regressive measures being pursued by the government', this includes 'frequent vilification by senior public officials of charities, community groups and democratic institutions who hold the government to account'⁽¹⁷⁾.

The left-wing love a good protest. So the conservative New South Wales government banned protests on crown land. The Council for Civil Liberties condemned it as being an 'unacceptable infringement on the civil liberties of people in NSW'⁽¹⁸⁾.

As can be seen, the right-wing has double-standards around offensive language, behaviour, freedom of speech and freedom of movement. Many people have compared their actions to those of Hitler and the Nazis in 1930s Germany. While we haven't yet seen the mass incarceration of unionists socialists, we do see deportations of people who have lived in the country for years, we see the demonisation, vilification and indefinite detention of innocent men, women and children from other nations who have done nothing worse than flee war and persecution. They are often accused of being terrorists even though many are fleeing terrorism. In Australia, refugees are usually characterised as being Muslim, yet they are a mix of Muslim, Christian, Buddhist and other religions, and sometimes of no religion. We may not have arrived at the full-scale brutality of Hitler, but we are on the path to it. The latest method of the Australian government to justify these human rights abuses is to attack compassion itself. The Home Affairs Minister, Peter Dutton, stated that 'It's essential that people realise that the hard-won success of the last few years could be undone overnight by a single act of compassion in bringing 20 people from Manus to Australia'⁽¹⁹⁾. So the indefinite detention of people who have not committed a crime or been charged with a crime will continue. There are thousands locked up by the government in the name of border security and the right-wing condones and encourages it. Recently, the Greens pushed to stop the reciting of the Lord's Prayer in parliament to howls of protest from the religious right who fail to abide by the bible in their treatment of refugees, the poor and in the basic commandment of loving their neighbours and loving their enemies ... Forgive us of our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us ... yep, the right seems to miss this in their outrage.

Such human rights abuses are often lost in the mire of economic debate. The right-wing will claim that conservative governments are the better economic managers than more left-wing governments, as this justifies the abuse and torture of innocent people. Surely human rights atrocities take precedence over balancing the budget. It should be kept in mind that during the 1930s, Hitler turned Germany's economy around as it recovered from the Great Depression, yet his economic successes are eclipsed by his human rights atrocities and the holocaust. Numerous historians have stated that had Hitler died in 1938, he would be remembered as the greatest statesman in German history⁽²⁰⁾. Had his supporters challenged his human rights and civil liberties abuses instead of crowing about his economic and nationalist successes in 'Making Germany Great Again', then there wouldn't have been the holocaust or the second world war.

The comparison to Hitler is not exaggerated. Holocaust survivor, Stephen B. Jacobs, states, 'America today feels like 1929 or 1930 Berlin. Things that couldn't be said five years ago in public are now normal discourse. It's totally unacceptable. Trump is an enabler. He's a sick, very disturbed individual. Appeasement of fascism is what led to everything'.

The right-wing carry on about political correctness stifling freedom of speech, yet as can be seen, they take offence at all sorts of stuff which they try to shut-down or ban. To accuse the left-wing of this, to accuse the left of being sensitive souls in a state of perpetual outrage is particularly disingenuous and a failure of circumspection by the right-wing.

The left-wing claim to be tolerant in the face of the right's intolerance. Of course, the right-wing then accuses the left of being intolerant to their freedoms of speech because of 'politically correctness gone mad'. However, challenging someone's views and opinions, asking them to explain the evidence, is not attacking their free speech. Having said that, the left, and for that matter the right, should not tolerate intolerant hate speech, racism or bigotry. There is a thing called the paradox of tolerance, which states that to tolerate the intolerant is to destroy tolerance.

Right-wing politicians and correspondents have turned the people against each other. This brain-washing is based on fear-mongering and false-hoods, which are wrapped in the flag of patriotism and pages of a misinterpreted bible to con the gullible. They scapegoat the most vulnerable who are blamed for society's ills, when it is the greed of politicians and businesses that have caused job losses, low wage growth in the name of 'efficiency' and are cultivating hate in the hearts of fearful people who mistake it for patriotism.

Those who blindly defend these abuses of power and people, do not take kindly to their myopic views being challenged; views which are based on opinion rather than fact. When the left presents facts, the right-wing call them elitist. Facts by themselves can be misleading, for instance, we've all heard the adage, 'lies, damned lies, and statistics'. Facts without context can be twisted to suit anyone's viewpoint. How often do we hear bigots quote the Koran without context to justify their bigotry, yet when the bible is quoted without context those same people try to explain it away with, 'yes, but ...'.  Call the left-wing snowflakes, libtards, cucks, elites or whatever else, but this doesn't change facts of history, politics or social issues. This willingness of the right-wing to see strength and patriotism in such ignorance is reminiscent of the Ministry of Truth's slogan in George Orwell's 1984:

War is peace 

Freedom is slavery

Ignorance is strength

Sadly, it goes beyond just facts and context. There is the whole issue of respect and basic decency. Under Trump, disgusting behaviour has become the new norm⁽²¹⁾ and right-wingers across the globe (and in many churches) absolutely wallow in this deplorable behaviour as some sort of badge of honour. From making jokes about rape and sexual assault as though women are just being too sensitive, to tearing children away from their families, to his blatant and compulsive lying about pretty much everything. Conor Friedersdorf of The Atlantic perfectly sums up the situation in relation to Republican leadership relating to their tolerance of Trump and his deplorable behaviour, which also applies to anyone supporting Trump and overlooking his amoral and immoral actions and words: 'They can no longer be trusted to oppose racism or sexism. With a civic arsonist in the White House, they decline to summon the fire department. In short, they have become irresponsible citizens'⁽²²⁾.

As Lieutenant General David Morrison stated: 'The standard you walk past is the standard you accept'. Those on the right-wing who accept racist, sexist, bigoted behaviour cannot be surprised or offended if they they are labelled racist, sexist or bigoted. It is not a badge of honour to defend such deplorable behaviour, particularly when they declare anything that exposes this as being 'fake news'.

Those who feel threatened by facts, context, respect and decency are the real snow-flakes.

References

1. The Telegraph, Our Foreign Staff, 29 April 2018, Michelle Wolf draws laughs - and gasps - with barbs at Trump and Sanders at correspondents' dinner. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/29/michelle-wolf-draws-laughs-gasps-barbs-trump-sanders-correspondents/. Accessed 15 June 2018.

2. Buzzfeed, Krystie Lee Yandoli, 1 June 2018, Samantha Bee And TBS Have Apologized For Calling Ivanka Trump A “Feckless Cunt”. https://www.buzzfeed.com/krystieyandoli/samantha-bee-ivanka-trump-feckless-cunt. Accessed 2 June 2018.

3. San Antonio Current, Alex Zielinski, 1 November 2016, Sid Miller Called Hillary Clinton a "Cunt." Are We Supposed to Be Surprised? https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2016/11/01/sid-miller-called-hillary-clinton-a-cunt-are-we-supposed-to-be-surprised. Accessed 7 July 2018.

4. Huffpost, Sara Boboltz, 2 June 2018, Chelsea Clinton Points To Right-Wing Hypocrisy In Samantha Bee Outrage. https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/chelsea-clinton-hypocrisy-samantha-bee-outrage_us_5b1059dae4b0d5e89e1e2a71. Accessed 7 July 2018.

5. ABC News, 26 April 2017, Yassmin Abdel-Magied: ABC can't sweep presenter's Anzac Day controversy under the carpet, Joyce says. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-11/yassmin-abdel-magied-says-she-feels-betrayed-by-australia/8699138. Accessed 7 July 2018.

6. Junkee, Tom Clift, 11 April 2018, Yassmin Abdel-Magied Has A New Show At The ABC, And Conservatives Are Throwing A Massive Tantrum. http://junkee.com/yassmin-abdel-magied-abc-show/153763. Accessed 12 April 2018.

7. The Guardian, Jessica Elgot, 6 March 2018, Model Munroe Bergdorf quits as Labour LGBT adviser. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/06/model-munroe-bergdorf-quits-as-labour-lgbt-adviser. Accessed 8 March 2018.

8. The Guardian, Amanda Meade, 1 June 2018, ABC axes another 37 jobs in wake of $84m budget cut. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jun/01/abc-axes-another-37-jobs-in-wake-of-84m-budget-cut. Accessed 7 July 2018.

9. The Age, Jennifer Duke, 6 July 2018, Ex-Foxtel boss Peter Tonagh set to head ABC review. https://www.theage.com.au/business/companies/ex-foxtel-boss-peter-tonagh-set-to-head-abc-review-20180706-p4zpyx.html. Accessed 6 July 2018.

10. Newsweek, Alexander Nazaryan, 26 May 2017, Texas Governor Greg Abbott Makes Joke About Shooting Reporters. http://www.newsweek.com/texas-governor-greg-abbott-makes-joke-about-shooting-reporters-616403. Accessed 1 July 2018.

11. Newsweek, Alexander Nazaryan, 25 May 2017, Trump's war on the press reaches dangerous levels as Republican candidate charged with assaulting reporter. http://www.newsweek.com/trump-war-press-dangerous-615316. Accessed 7 July 2018.

12. Observer, Davis Richardson, 26 June 2018, Milo Yiannopoulos Encourages Vigilantes to Start ‘Gunning Journalists Down’. http://observer.com/2018/06/milo-yiannopoulos-encourages-vigilantes-start-gunning-journalists-down/. Accessed 7 July 2018.

13. The Guardian, Naaman Zhou , Kate Lyons, Julia Carrie Wong and Oliver Laughland, 30 June 2018, Maryland shooting: five victims named after 'targeted attack' – as it happened. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2018/jun/28/capital-gazette-shooting-annapolis-latest-live-news-updates-today-maryland

14. Hope Not Hate, The Right Response Team, 29 June 2018, Five journalists were murdered — and the alt-right celebrated. https://hopenothate.com/2018/06/29/five-journalists-murdered-alt-right-celebrated/. Accessed 7 July 2018.

15. ABC News, 14 October 2014, Fact check: Journalists face 10 years' jail for exposing security agency bungles. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-14/journalists-face-jail-for-exposing-security-agency-bungles/5776504. Accessed 7 July 2018.

16. Human Rights Law Centre, Michelle Bennett, 29 June 2018, Turnbull Government criticised for prosecution of people who exposed government wrongdoing.
https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2018/6/29/turnbull-government-criticised-for-prosecution-of-people-who-exposed-government-wrongdoing. Accessed 30 June 2018.

17. Human Rights Law Centre, Michelle Bennett, 1 March 2018, UN expert ‘astonished’ at the Turnbull Government's anti-democratic slide. https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2018/3/1/un-astonished-at-the-turnbull-governments-anti-democratic-slide. Accessed 7 July 2018.

18. New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties, Michael Brull, 20 June 2018, Council for Civil Liberties condemns regulations allowing for bans on public gatherings. http://www.nswccl.org.au/council_for_civil_liberties_condemns_regulations_allowing_for_bans_on_public_gatherings. Accessed 7 July 2018.

19. SBS News, AAP-SBS, 23 June 2018, Compassion can undo efforts against people-smugglers: Dutton. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/compassion-can-undo-efforts-against-people-smugglers-dutton. Accessed 7 July 2018.

20. Encyclopaedia Brittanica, John Lukacs, Adolf Hitler, Dictator of Germany, Hitler's Place in History. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Adolf-Hitler/Hitlers-place-in-history. Accessed 6 July 2018.

21. The Washington Post, Alexandra Petri, 6 July 2018, The disgusting 'normal' under Trump. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2018/07/06/the-disgusting-normal-under-trump. Accessed 8 July 2018.

22. The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf, 13 February 2018, When Deplorability Is No Longer a Dealbreaker. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-donald-trump-supporters-cannot-be-trusted-to-do/551201/. Accessed 8 July 2018.