Kudos to the students of Oxford University in their campaign to force the dismissal of Professor David Coleman. Their "justification?" Dr. Coleman's research into the relationship between immigration and various undesirable social phenomena has led to certain conclusions not shared by the student body. Send him packing!
How inspiring to see that the spirit of vigorous inquiry is alive and well at one of Britain's more hallowed institutions. As the Daily Mail reports:
Oxford Student Action for Refugees has circulated a petition seeking the removal of Professor David Coleman, a leading expert in demographics, because of his connections with MigrationWatch.
The students believe that because MigrationWatch warns about the negative effects of present and future immigration, it is inherently racist.
If I had more energy I might analyze this controversy in greater detail, but at the moment, with my nose dripping from an endless cold, or spring allergies, or something, I simply can't be arsed. Yes, I do love those British isms, even as Britain herself recedes beneath the waves. Pity.
Eminent and troublesome British historian Norman Stone, himself the target of accusations of sexism at Oxford and now a resident of Istanbul, had the following to say regarding the self-righteous little twerps hell-bent on driving this issue forward:
"What a nuisance - it's an absurd over-reaction. The poor darlings. It just shows they've got nothing better to do. They're just striking attitudes. They're a pest."
When Professor Stone says "darlings," I think that he actually means "twats!"
What makes this campaign particularly galling is that these spiteful little cunts have the temerity to insist that their goal is not to hound out a professor with whom they disagree, but to "invite debate."
"One of the students behind the petition, Kieran Hutchinson Dean, 19, said the aim was to invite debate.
He said: "We are not expecting the professor to be sacked straight away. But we ask that he refrains from using his academic status when promoting his own views.
"If he does not refrain he is representing the university as a whole and many of us do not agree with his views."
Tosser!
I wonder if anyone's invited him to shove that petition up his arse and set it aflame?
Says another one of these whinging little poms:
"Our campaign against Coleman has been characterised as a personal attack, but it is more about opening up a wider debate.
"The main point is to raise awareness of his views and affiliations among students.
"Academic freedom is not absolute and people using their academic titles should recognise this."
Lying little wanker!
Why not just cede to the government the power from this day forward to determine what we may and may not say if we wish to remain employed and/or out of prison? That's the way these nasty little prats want it anyway, as the good Ken Frost might say.
Having exhausted my arsenal of British insults, I now invite my readers to replenish the supply.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
BS,
as you well know, we Brits imported all this PC bollocks from the US. It has, of course, taken British inventiveness to turn an already foul practise into something totally loathsome.
'Freedom of speech' in the UK has been transformed, by untruths about a war on terrorism and by constant pandering to 'liberal ideals', into a fearful, neo-Orwellian concept. 'The truth' is now decided on the basis of the acceptability of one's views to a vociferous, morally righteous (in their own view) bunch of half-educated morons.
'Discussion' therefore, is a matter of whether one accepts or dares to reject the mob's diktat. But, in this brave new world,
dissent = denial = inherent racism/sexism, or whatever 'ism' is on today's menu.
'To kick against the pricks' may have been a great idea in Shakespeare's time (you remember Will, that racist, sexist WASP)
the present day pricks kick back.
BS,
as you well know, we Brits imported all this PC bollocks from the US. It has, of course, taken British inventiveness to turn an already foul practise into something totally loathsome.
'Freedom of speech' in the UK has been transformed, by untruths about a war on terrorism and by constant pandering to 'liberal ideals', into a fearful, neo-Orwellian concept. 'The truth' is now decided on the basis of the acceptability of one's views to a vociferous, morally righteous (in their own view) bunch of half-educated morons.
'Discussion' therefore, is a matter of whether one accepts or dares to reject the mob's diktat. But since, in this brave new world,
dissent = denial = inherent racism/sexism, or whatever 'ism' is on today's menu, the voice of reason is shouted down.
'To kick against the pricks' may have been a great idea in Shakespeare's time (you remember Will, that racist, sexist. DWM, WASP)the present day pricks, in Oxford as in the rest of the UK, kick back. What makes matters worse is that they are supported in their efforts by cringing Oxford Dons, 'The Cowering Spires of Oxford', and by HM government and its minions.
Sorry, don't know how I posted twice - the second version is the preferred one!
"scientists, technicians, teachers, journalists, broadcasters, bureaucrats, professional politicians: in general, middling people who feel themselves cramped by a system that is still partly aristocratic, and are hungry for more power and more prestige. These people look towards the U.S.S.R. and see in it, or think they see, a system which eliminates the upper class, keeps the working class in its place, and hands unlimited power to people very similar to themselves. It was only after the Soviet régime became unmistakably totalitarian that English intellectuals, in large numbers, began to show an interest in it."
The above is from Orwell's review of Burnham's The Managerial Society. I think it explains a lot even today.
Of course, look what was done in the land of the First Amendment to a Harvard Pres who was a certified liberal.
Post a Comment