The crisis of conservatism on both sides of the pond | Melanie Phillips

The crisis of conservatism on both sides of the pond | Melanie Phillips


The agony of the US Republicans, engulfed by an existential crisis since the second term victory of Barack Obama, reminds me so much of the UK Conservatives’ similar crisis after the accession of Tony Blair to power in 1997.
That victory ushered in a three-term Labour hegemony. The Tories, aghast at the inversion of the natural order by which they assumed they had a divine right to rule, looked in bewildered mortification upon the upstart Blair whom they found it impossible to dislodge -- and arrived at precisely the wrong conclusion about both conservatism and British society. It was a fundamental error that I believe the Conservative Party is still making – and if they aren’t careful, the US Republicans will fall into the same trap.
The root of the error was to misunderstand both why the Tories lost power in 1997 and the appeal of Tony Blair. They looked at Blair-- young, telegenic, hip, with his jeans and his guitar and his ‘hey man’ and his ‘I feel your pain’ -- and they were torn between thinking he was a cynical charlatan and alternatively that he won power because he was in tune with Britain’s shift towards a more caring, sharing, emoting, tolerant, liberal society.
Wrong on all counts. Blair won above all because the Tories had made themselves unelectable. The government of John Major, which took over after the reginacide of Margaret Thatcher, had become a national joke, an embarrassment, a synonym for sleaze, arrogance and supreme incompetence.  Moreover, a number of Tory MPs just looked ... well, totally weird. The whole lot of them were viewed as totally beneath contempt and wholly unfit for government.
Blair saw his opportunity – but having concluded about his own party that its left-wing positions had made it unelectable, he took a leaf out his friend Bill Clinton’s book and triangulated his message. While remaining committed under the radar to extreme, indeed revolutionary left-wing positions – the erosion of sovereignty by closer union with the EU, mass third world immigration, multiculturalism, gay rights -- he sent out the (misleading) message that he was instinctively on the side of Middle Britain and would put right what worried them most. This was above all intolerable levels of crime and disorder and poor education standards, which in turn stood proxy for a feeling that society was breaking down.
Utterly failing to understand any of this, the Conservative party promptly fell apart. Not for nothing is it called ‘the stupid party’. Concluding that Blair possessed some shaman-like property to bewitch the electorate, and themselves still viewing every issue through the prism of economics (aka making money), they failed completely to grasp that socialism had not been defeated but had simply morphed into a mind-bending culture war against the fundamental tenets of western civilisation. Failing accordingly to grasp that language itself had been hijacked – with words such as ‘tolerance’, ‘equality’, freedom’, ‘compassion’ and many such others having been turned into their polar opposite and with the term ‘right-wing’ having become a synonym for ‘enemy of humanity’, they made two disastrous strategic errors.
The first was to circle the wagons by making shrill statements about issues like immigration or the EU. But these Tories seemed to be the same old clapped-out, weird and sleazy bunch that had been thrown out; and their shrillness was no more than a retreat to their old comfort-zone which they had themselves managed to discredit, rather than a proper dissection of the true threat posed to ordinary people by their purported left-wing champions, not just in politics but throughout the politically correct cultural establishment.
The second error they made was to reverse themselves and conclude, under David Cameron, that the reason they lost three general elections to Labour was that the Tories were seen as ‘the nasty’ party – and that they therefore had to ‘decontaminate the brand’ by being seen as tolerant, compassionate, equality and freedom-loving as the left. So the Cameroons swore undying commitment to the National Health Service, ring-fenced international aid, created a minister for (ie against) climate change, mounted campaigns against bankers and promoted gay rights.
And when they failed to win the 2010 general election, forcing them into coalition with the extreme left Liberal Democrats, the Cameroons said the reason was they hadn’t been left-wing enough. The outcome is widespread contempt on both left and right for the Conservative party– which has also managed to put itself on the wrong side of the culture war. It is significant in this regard that, even while Americans despair over their future under their President’s leadership, Cameron reportedly swoons over Obama’s political skills.
The recent history of the US Republicans is a very similar series of misreadings and strategic errors. Outraged and bamboozled in equal measure by the mysteriously enduring popularity of Bill Clinton, the Republicans decided that they too had to triangulate. The result was George W Bush’s ‘compassionate conservatism’ –his now almost forgotten signature motif before he was engulfed by Iraq – which became synonymous with big government and huge rises in public expenditure which all but bankrupted the country.
Facing a ruthlessly partisan media class that was determined to bring Bush down over Iraq and then to install Barack Obama through a wholesale corruption of truth and journalism, the Republicans panicked by circling their own wagons. Ill-served by the inflammatory shrillness of talk radio and Fox News, they failed to stamp upon the crazies and weirdos emerging in the slipstream of the mainstream Tea Party movement and allowed them to define the Republican Party in the public mind. They thus gave the impression they were incapable of thinking other than on extreme tramlines. And in the insulated arrogance of those who believe they are born to rule, they thought it was inconceivable they could lose.
Most disastrously of all, they failed to understand the true contours of the culture war. As a result, they failed to confront properly what needed to be confronted, while simultaneously making enemies of those who should have been their allies. So for example, the Republicans no less than the Democrats bought heavily into the lethal myth of the ‘moderate’ Muslim Brotherhood – while managing, through their undiscriminating anti-immigration posture, to hack off those many Hispanic voters who should have been their natural constituency because these voters are in many respects on the right side of the culture war.
Now there are signs that some Republicans at least are beginning to understand this. While siren voices still insist that the only way back to power is to commit ideological suicide, others like Bobby Jindal and Newt Gingrich appear to realise that the party has to change in ways which don’t have to sell the civilisational pass in order to connect with decency and reality.
We have yet to see whether, issue by issue, they finally get this right. But if they need a good example, they certainly should not look across the pond.

Labour Bolton Councillors Mosques and houses are of equal importance

Does Cliff know his priorities?

For over a year Bolton Council has been conducting what it refers to a consultation exercise called the Draft Allocations Plan. The Council’s reason for implementing the Allocations Plan is apparently to establish parcels of land which would be suitable for house building and incorporate public feed back into the identification of such land.  

On the 25^th of November Anthony Backhouse wrote to the leader of Bolton Council, Cliff Morris regarding an answer Mr Backhouse had received at one of Bolton Boroughs Area Forums. Mr Backhouse had been attempting to establish why, with land for house building at such a premium permission had been granted to build a Mosque on land which could have accommodated 12 or 13 houses on Gilnow Rd in Bolton. It was part of the reply from Councillor Kevin McKeon which prompted Mr Backhouse to write to the leader of the council.

Mr Backhouse asked Councillor McKeon ‘are you of the opinion that providing provision for Mosques is as important as providing housing?’ To which Councillor McKeon replied ‘yes I am’.    

 The implications which might derive from such an outlook could be very serious; as outlined in this section of Mr Backhouse’s letter: ‘I would like to point out that it is my understanding that about 9% of the population of the Bolton Borough are Muslim, and if Councillor McKeon’s opinion that providing Mosques and houses are of equal importance is an opinion shared by yourself and those people responsible for drawing up the Draft Allocations Plan I believe this should have been factored into the consultation exercise. Having studied the Allocations Plan I can see no reference to providing Mosques.’

On the 30^th December Mr Backhouse received this two sentence reply from Councillor Morris’s office: ‘The Allocations Plan is only required to show land set aside for housing. As you have noted it does not nor should it include places of worship.’

So the leader of Bolton Council has overtly avoided being candid about whether he agrees with his Labour colleague that building Mosques is as important as building houses. With so many Mosques currently dominating Bolton’s skyline Cliff Morris’s evasive approach to such a serious question must be viewed as being of grave concern, not only to all those people who do not whish to see our country dominated by Islamic theocracy but also to those in Bolton who believe the Draft Allocations Plan might be little more than a PR sham. 

I Am Freeman JOHN HARRIS : It's an Illusion | 2009 (FULL VERSION)

A must watch video showing the slavery of the British People enforced by by stealth .

Communist Victory Amerika 2

"There are meaningful warnings that history gives a threatened or perishing society. Such are, for instance, the decadence of art, or a lack of great statesmen. There are open and evident warnings, too. The center of your democracy and of your culture is left without electric power for a few hours only, and all of a sudden crowds of American citizens start looting and creating havoc. The smooth surface film must be very thin, then, the social system quite unstable and unhealthy."

Invasion has begun

"But the fight for our planet, physical and spiritual, a fight of cosmic proportions, is not a vague matter of the future; it has already started. The forces of Evil have begun their decisive offensive, you can feel their pressure, and yet your screens and publications are full of prescribed smiles and raised glasses. What is the joy about?"

Liberation into Moral Poverty

• Print version
• Font Size
• Send to friend

"..in early democracies, ...all individual human rights were granted because man is God's creature. That is, freedom was given to the individual conditionally, in the assumption of his constant religious responsibility. Such was the heritage of the preceding thousand years. Two hundred or even fifty years ago, it would have seemed quite impossible, in America, that an individual could be granted boundless freedom simply for the satisfaction of his instincts or whims. Subsequently, however, all such limitations were discarded everywhere in the West; a total liberation occurred from the moral heritage of Christian centuries with their great reserves of mercy and sacrifice. State systems were becoming increasingly and totally materialistic. The West ended up by truly enforcing human rights, sometimes even excessively, but man's sense of responsibility to God and society grew dimmer and dimmer. In the past decades, the legalistically selfish aspect of Western approach and thinking has reached its final dimension and the world wound up in a harsh spiritual crisis and a political impasse. All the glorified technological achievements of Progress, including the conquest of outer space, do not redeem the Twentieth century's moral poverty which no one could imagine even as late as in the Nineteenth Century."

Alexander Solzhenitsyn , one of the greatest writers of our time, stood up to the tyranny that enslaved his country. He exposed the atrocities being done on his homeland in the gulags and slave camps. Over thirty years ago he warned others in this new country only to be ridiculed as being a "boy scout" and ignorant of the real world. He did not serve their purpose. He was ignored or laughed at. When he returned home he received the highest award in Russia, "The Order of St. Andrew".

Russia's Freedom Costly

How did Russia free itself from an atheistic government? Through the blood of martyrs and prayers of the faithful, Russia's penance purified its soul and allowed it to embrace its Savior. Like the prodigal son Russia came to its senses and went home to his Father. The living are at peace and the tortured and murdered faithful are in paradise.

And I saw them that had overcome the Beast

"These are they who are come out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and have made them white in the blood of the Lamb. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes: and death shall be no more, nor mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow shall be any more, for the former things are passed away; And I heard a voice from heaven, as the noise of many waters, and as the voice of great thunder; Singing the canticle of Moses and the canticle of the Lamb, saying: Great and wonderful are thy works, O Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, O King of ages. Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and magnify thy name?  For only thou art Holy!"

The last priest of St Basil's Cathedral was Fr Ioann Vostorgov. He had written earlier, "..,there is not and cannot be complete and absolute freedom for man, that it is limited and must be directed by the Law of God". The free thinking and lovers of mankind, the Communists, did not like what he said so they shot him in 1918. How tolerant they were. All liberals are this way. They talk about the best for mankind and give speeches on tolerance, equality and justice for all while they fill their pockets with riches and impoverish the rest. If you disagree with them they ignore you, shout at you or prefer you dead.

Witnesses

Many other witnesses came forth like Solzhenitsyn who had won a Nobel Prize in Literature in 1970. Others were more demonstrative. In 1990 a monk from the Russian Orthodox monastery at Zagorsk, carrying a life-sized crucifix seven feet tall travelled to Moscow. He stood before Lenin's tomb and straightened the cross before all to see.  He raised his head and shouted to Gorbachev and his cronies in a voice of thunder: " Mikhail Sergeyevich, Christ is Risen! " A year later the Soviet Union fell.

Conclusion

Is there a Communist in every closet? No, but the threat was a horrible reality in Russia as it is now in Amerika. Do they admit they are Communists?  How naïve you are if you think they will openly say that word.  Many do not even know that they are. They prefer to ridicule anyone who uses the word "Communist". The peaceful solution is to repent from sin.

Penance is necessary. Laugh if you will all you cynics and enjoy your suffering! "Christ's death on the cross is nonsense to those who are being lost; but for us who are being saved it is God's power" - St Paul.  Christianity is the only religion where God sacrifices his son to have us share eternal life with Him. Scream your hearts out all you adversaries and possessed and declare our imperfections and failures! Side with the accuser the devil and enjoy your torment tomorrow! The effects of Communism were already manifested in Russia during the last century. To ignore it or to think somehow it will work elsewhere is to condemn oneself to complete darkness.

There are physical laws and there are also spiritual laws that govern this universe. Ignore the spiritual laws if you will but they still exist unseen as the wind. The physical world is a shadow of the spiritual world.  As Malachi Martin, the author of Hostage to the Devil wrote, "A bird flies not because it has wings, but because it is a bird". There is nothing new under the sun. Human nature is the same throughout the annals of antiquity. The people of Rome no longer have slaves and persecute Christians in the arena. Follow Russia's lead out of the same tyrannical darkness. Repent or be enslaved.  I remind those in the USA who have remained faithful:

"But they that hope in the Lord shall renew their strength, they shall take wings as eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint." -Isaiah 40:31

Solzhenitsyn's Own Words:

Communist Victory Amerika 1

By Xavier Lerma

Once upon a time there once was a country so beautiful with spacious skies, with purple mountain majesties where everyone sang "God shed his grace on thee".  It promoted freedom of religion and allowed Christianity to grow. It gave opportunities for everyone to better themselves in education and create businesses that not only made them rich but allowed those in poverty to prosper and become middle class citizens. It became the richest country in the world and millions immigrated to this land. On the other side of the world was an evil government that enslaved its people. It saw this nation as a threat to its plan of world domination but knew conquering it could never be done militarily. "Before we can assume power we must corrupt" they said.

• Print version
• Font Size
• Send to friend

They began to invade the country as a virus infects a body. Like the plague it engulfed the whole land and the strongest lamented over the nation's weakness.  These creatures twisted the words freedom into the freedom to do every vice and evil the wicked could conceive. It turned everything upside down. Good was bad. Men became women. Women became men. Sodom and Gomorrah was rebuilt. Capitalism was no longer there to help others but selfishness grew and greed vomited out its illicit pleasures of entertainment that blinded the minds of millions. Those who could not be perverted were given comforts and toys that would satisfy them. Souls became empty and they reached out for anything that gave them temporary peace again and again.

Through all the invaders efforts there were still noises of discontent. Their shadow government, their "Shadow Party" was not completely effective. There were people who could see the sinister changes in their country. They saw the rising tide of violence. They saw how families were being destroyed as the devil rocked every cradle. The sane were considered insane. The foolish were praised as philosophers. Judges were deranged and released from prison murderers, rapists and child molesters back into the public to kill, rape and sexually assault children. Good people watched in horror on TV. Was it a movie, TV show or was it reality? Like a cat toying with a mouse before it's killed, millions were entranced before meeting their end.

These invaders had to move forward quickly. Their focus on conquering the world weakened their own government. Their very own people had overthrown its yoke of slavery and became free to worship Christ and people were normal again. They were strangers to their own land so they had no choice but to make their home in this foreign country they sought to destroy. No matter. This new country had more power to destroy and influence the world. It is richer and easier to control. They swiftly sat themselves upon the throne and boasted their intentions without fear of being exposed. Their plan of world domination could now be done militarily. "Conquest through corruption was yesterday's game" they said, "We can assume power through military force anywhere, anytime". Promising peace while attacking nations. Promising prosperity while creating poverty. We shall destroy them and they will cheer louder than any people in history.

If only it was a fairy tale

 Those who worshipped their leader lay before him like a whore and gave up their children.  They never questioned his background and accepted his lies wholeheartedly.  The words of Russian Bishop Ignaty Bryanchaninov in 1927 ring ever so clearly today, "Whoever does not obtain the kingdom of God within oneself will not recognize the Antichrist and will inevitably, become his follower".  The presidential elections in Amerika are a set up and always have been after Kennedy was shot.

Americans think the Soviets were not angry about the Cuban missile crisis. While it is true the Soviets did not want a nuclear war they did move Kennedy out of the way and they attacked America within and conquered it. Now they always point at the new Russia with cries of "foul play!" and "stolen elections!".  The Communist trick is to accuse their innocent opponent of the illegal activity they themselves are involved in.

Russia in their presidential elections had cameras in every voting station. Anyone could log in and see it. I did it myself. 600,000 Russians volunteered to monitor the Presidential Elections Online.  ID and Russian language only was required.  Paper ballots avoided fraud. Electronic voting in Amerika is a joke. Foreign observers were accepted in Russia and rejected in Communist Amerika. Any Russian could sign up to volunteer to watch out for voter fraud in person. In the end the election reflected the opinion polls from dozens of independent sources in Russia. Putin was the most popular and he was elected.

In Amerika there are only 2 main parties. Oh sure, there are others but one would never know it the way the Amerikan media hides them. . Russia had 5 parties that qualified for the presidential elections. The mainstream media in Amerika demonized Putin and insulted Russians in this video. Amerika will never show Putin like this video or this on TV. Amerika calls it Russian propaganda. Again, the Communist trick is to accuse their opponent of illegal activity they themselves are involved in.  The Communists were the bully in school who first threw a rock at a little boy and then immediately blamed the little boy for doing it. It's the Communist way. It's the Chicago way.  They blame others for being a racist when they are really bigots themselves.

Dr. Martin Luther King

Martin Luther King said "character" was more important than the color of one's skin. The Communists had him shot. They tried to help him at first thinking they could use him to divide America.  However, if "character" is more important, then they cannot divide the masses and promote social strife. They need to color code the masses and divide them just as Stalin did when he divided Russia by its ethnic boundaries. They need the blacks to hate whites not peace. Americans have been brainwashed by the Communists to be Amerikans in the new USSA, United Socialist States of Amerika.

Some people have been fooled to think that there is a cultural difference that will not allow the races to coexist. Most Hispanics, who are traditionally conservative, ally themselves with a Democratic party that promotes abortion and gay marriage. Again, they too have been happily misled. All Democrats, most Republicans and 90% of blacks hate or ignore intelligent and successful blacks like Dr. Alveda King, Alan Keyes, Allen West, and Wayne Perryman . Alan Keyes called Obama a "radical Communist"in this video  in 2009 and he is correct, but no one ever acknowledged him. Intelligent minorities that can see through the Communist lies are ignored or attacked.  Their own race attacks and laughs at them in almost the same way Christ was attacked by His own people before He was crucified.

Corrosion of Evil

• Print version
• Font Size
• Send to friend

Brave souls spoke out against this new regime but it was too late. They were in the minority. They failed to listen over 30 years ago when a prisoner from the invading country was exiled with them. He spoke out and tried to warn them before this day came.

 "Destructive and irresponsible freedom has been granted boundless space. Society appears to have little defense against the abyss of human decadence, such as, for example, misuse of liberty for moral violence against young people, motion pictures full of pornography, crime and horror. It is considered to be part of freedom and theoretically counter-balanced by the young people's right not to look or not to accept. Life organized legalistically has thus shown its inability to defend itself against the corrosion of evil."

Free love, sex, drugs and rock and roll.  "This is a free country, man!", they all shouted. All manner of illicit behavior was expressed publicly. They did not care what others said because they have rights to do as they want. "Daddy does not exist so we can do anything". These childish mentalities only rotted away their lives and society. The foreign invaders had already taught them in school all they needed to know. Their seed had been sown in universities, colleges and public schools years ago.

Mainstream Media

"In-depth analysis of a problem is anathema to the press. It stops at sensational formulas. Such as it is, however, the press has become the greatest power within the Western countries, more powerful than the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. One would then like to ask: by what law has it been elected and to whom is it responsible?"

He knew the mainstream media was controlled by the Communists and he was trying to awaken the minds of the satisfied and well fed masses. These talking heads he warned about could but only serve their master too well. They were journalists who had  sold their souls to the devil. They were given the power to change America and they did.

Communism failed in Russia so the mainstream media in Amerika always shows protesters in Russia to Americans without telling them the protesters are Communists or that the protesters are paid by the Amerikan embassy.  The Amerikan media  never shows religious gatherings in Russia or Putin in Jerusalem video.  They hate the fact that Christian Russia overcame Communism. They also twist the words of America's founding Fathers, "separation of church and state" to mean that Christianity is outlawed in public. Deep down in their hearts they want to eliminate Christianity.  It is the "opium of the people".

Destruction of the Human Spirit

"I hope that no one present will suspect me of offering my personal criticism of the Western system to present socialism as an alternative. Having experienced applied socialism in a country where the alternative has been realized, I certainly will not speak for it. The well-known Soviet mathematician Shafarevich, a member of the Soviet Academy of Science, has written a brilliant book under the title Socialism; it is a profound analysis showing that socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death. "

Oh do put a sock in it, you atheist Scrooge | Melanie Phillips

Oh do put a sock in it, you atheist Scrooge | Melanie Phillips

You really would need to have a heart harder than the five-pence piece in the Christmas pud not to feel sorry at present for Professor Richard Dawkins.
Christmas must be such a terrible trial for the planet’s most celebrated — and angriest — atheist. All that cheerfulness and pleasure associated with Christianity’s main celebration seems to drive him simply nuts.
Indeed, just a few days ago he lunged into yet another wild denunciation of religious faith. This time, the Chief Inquisitor of Unbelief declared that raising a child as a Catholic was worse than subjecting it to sexual abuse.
His view of religion is as cheerless as it is unbalanced. As countless others prepare for an enjoyable and — dare one say it — even spiritually uplifting holiday, Professor Dawkins seems to become all the more miserable.
If Charles Dickens were writing A Christmas Carol today, surely he would have replaced Ebenezer Scrooge with the figure of the joyless, rage-fuelled Dawkins spitting out ‘Bah, humbug!’ at families sitting down to the Christmas turkey.
After last week’s census details which showed that Christianity in Britain is in decline, Dawkins rejoiced that it was ‘on the way out in this country’.
Well, this is tantamount to rejoicing that Britain and western civilisation are on the way out. For Christianity underpins their most fundamental moral values — ones that both believers and non-believers hold dear, such as the difference between right and wrong, respect for other people and doing good things rather than bad.
It is also woven into Britain’s literature, art, music, history and national identity.
What’s more, despite the decline in believers, nearly two-thirds of the population still describe themselves as Christian. If Britain stops being a mainly Christian country, then it will stop being recognisably Britain.
It is not just Dawkins and his followers, however, who are dancing prematurely on Christianity’s grave.
In the eyes of just about the entire governing class, cultural milieu and intelligentsia, belief in Christianity is viewed at best as an embarrassment, and at worst as proof positive of imbecility.
Indeed, Christianity has long been the target of sneering comedians, blasphemous artists and the entire human rights industry — all determined to turn it into a despised activity to be pursued only by consenting adults in private.
As it happens, I myself am not a Christian; I am a Jew. And Jews have suffered terribly under Christianity in the past.
Yet I passionately believe that if Britain and the West are to continue to be civilised places, it is imperative that the decline in Christianity be reversed.
For it is the Judeo-Christian ethic which gave us belief in the innate equality of all human beings, the need to put others’ welfare before your own and the understanding of absolute truth.
Without this particular religious underpinning, our society will lose the moral bonds that instil respect and care for other human beings. Without a belief in absolute truth, it will succumb to the dominance of lies.
And it will also lose the understanding, embodied in both Judaism and Christianity, that government should be distinct from religious rule — a belief which eventually helped pave the way for democracy.
Lose Christianity, and what remains will be a vacuum which will result in religious, secular and ethnic groups fighting each other — and with the most brutal and ruthless filling the void.
Of course, non-believers can be good people, and believers can behave atrociously.
But non-believers who subscribe to the basic moral tenets of western society are subscribing — whether they like it or not — to the values given to the world by Judaism and Christianity.
Such people may not believe in God, but they were not born with these moral values encoded in their DNA. They are inescapably shaped by the Judeo-Christian culture in which such unbelievers have grown up.
Without that culture, our society would be a savage and uncivilised place, governed by selfishness, self-centredness and narcissism.
Indeed, I would go even further. Rather than religion and reason being diametrically opposed to each other — as non-believers contend — it was, in fact, the Hebrew Bible which gave us reason in the first place, by introducing the then revolutionary idea that the world had been created by a rational intelligence in linear time.
It was this belief that gave us the idea that the universe was governed by natural laws, which in turn gave rise to science and modernity.
It is not surprising, therefore, that the alarming slide in Christian belief has gone hand in hand with both the relentless coarsening and brutalisation of our culture and the progressive flight from rationality — as demonstrated by the prevalence of conspiracy theories, resistance to factual evidence, and belief in the occult. In other words, people who stop believing in God start making religions of other things.
For the religious instinct seems to be hard-wired in us. Some 70 per cent believe in a soul, and more than half in life after death, and these numbers are rising.
Although many no longer go regularly to church, some 85 per cent go at least once a year — perhaps to the Christmas carol service. Despite its regrettable over-commercialisation, Christmas may be the one time when some people are exposed to the Christian message.
Many would like that message to be stronger; and not just at Christmas. But for religion to thrive, there has to be strong leadership. And both in the political and religious spheres, that has been sorely lacking.
Christmas is quintessentially the time when people get together with their families. And families are at the very heart of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
But for years, political leaders have done everything in their power to undermine the family by promoting nihilistic sexual licence. Even David Cameron’s supposedly ‘family-friendly’ but in fact socially liberal policies hardly correspond to Judeo-Christian principles.
Of course, we don’t expect our politicians to be religious leaders. But if society is to adhere to basic moral principles, politicians have to uphold them. Yet so much of the political class is now governed by the desire for power for its own sake, rather than to make a better world.
The leadership of the Church itself has hardly been any better. But there are high hopes of the incoming Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, who appears to have a more robust and muscular understanding of Christianity than did his predecessor.
The challenge he faces, however, is much more profound than the divisions over women or gays in the clergy. These are but symptoms of the real malaise afflicting the Church of England — which is nothing less than a loss of belief in its own Scriptural doctrines.
This deep demoralisation can be traced all the way back to the birth of modernity itself, in the 18th century.
In contemporary times, it is why the Church has grovelled on the one hand to godless liberalism, and on the other to Islam. Desperately trying to appease both to stave off its own demise, the Church has succeeded instead in creating a vacuum which has only hastened it.
The single most urgent task for Bishop Welby is surely to find a language with which the Church can reach out to all those millions who are searching for something outside themselves in which to believe but who no longer find it in Christianity.
This is not just about saving the Church of England. It is about saving the culture, identity and civilisation of Britain and the West.

COLUMBINE SHOOTINGS STUDENT'S FATHER 12 YEARS LATER !!

COLUMBINE STUDENT'S FATHER 12 YEARS LATER !!
Guess our national leaders didn't expect this. On Thursday, Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of ...the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton, Colorado, was invited to address the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee. What he said to our national leaders during this special session of Congress was painfully truthful.

They were not prepared for what he was to say, nor was it received well. It needs to be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician, every sociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! These courageous words spoken by Darrell Scott are powerful, penetrating, and deeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness.. The following is a portion of the transcript:
"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers.

"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used.. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart.

"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that they are responsible for my daughter's death.

Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent.

I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy -- it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.

Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You've stripped away our heritage,
You've outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question "Why?"
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!

"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

"As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA -- I give to you a sincere challenge.. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone!

My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!"

- Darrell Scott
Do what the media did not - - let the nation hear this man's speech. Please send this out to everyone you can.
God Bless

Coming National Socialist Revolution In Europe , The Concept

A possible revolution a concept theory!

Sandy Hook elementary school shooting , a Suspicion!

 By Horwich Nationalists

As concerning the Sandy School shootings ,This is awful and a tragedy! innocent blood spilled!
And what I write will be as most likely be treated at first with revulsion, and duely noted as I suspect I would also normally do so say this was 1976.
But! I have a strange and suspicion in my mind, the same thing happened at Hungerford and Dunblane over here in the UK .
With the perpetrator been found dead by committing suicide. And apparently the same profile of the shooter white socially isolated male. .
And in both cases was then followed by draconian gun laws.that severely restricted the publics accessibility to fire arms. on the grounds that stopped any threat to the public.

I am sorry but I am  very suspicious about such heartbreaking tragedies now. 
As they never happened as i recall, before the clamour for gun control both here and the USA. As in both cases soon after you get the liberal elitist politicians with fake sympathy , I am sorry but I rely do think it is so, to them it is an opportunity to forward their agenda of slavery!

I put this forward as something to consider that is all . As I do not put anything past a govt that will bomb a wedding party in Afghanistan to get there one objective.When the overall objective achieved here and especially desired in the USA by the Liberal elites is to remove the 2nd amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. In which it's citizens have the right to bear arms, in case of a tyrannical government.
One only has to see how helpless we the people in the UK  are against our own tyrannical Government of elitists, with their heavily armed political police force. Who are determined on an agenda on racial and cultural genocide of the indigenous British people.To realise the awful quote of Lenin " One man with a gun can control a hundred with out one." And then concerning gun laws and the no access of firearms to the responsible adult population to a nation, one can only be suspicious now about these all to common events that seem to happen ONLY WHEN CALLS FOR GUN CONTROL ARE BING PUSHED FOR BY THE ELITE!

CHANGING THE FACE OF BRITISH POLITICS , NIGEL FARAGE IN DUDLEY SPEECH

Common Purpose exsposed Inside the Rotherham Bunker with the S.S. (Social services)

Latest video of the real face of rotherham Labour (marxist) Party in their attempts on Political kidnapping of political opponents children!

Well BooHoo to a Response on BooHoo Pork Issue and Animal Welfare

Well after waiting for a proper response from BooHoo the On-line Shopping outfit on their problem with Britain's piggy products. After contacting their HR (Human Reppressor ?) on the issue of BANNING any non islamic employees from eating any pork products as seen in my original article.
I am sorry to say that after the customary notification of receiving my email on the matter and questioning the issue that may be a breach of their non islamic employees Human rights. Their has been no response as yet. I therefore would like to ask all readers of this article to contact BooHoo.
And formaly request an explanation as to why Most likely British workers are being forced to submit to the intolerance of there islamic co workers. After all we have to be tolerant of there ritual slaughter of animals? by the slow unstunned slitting of the animals throat.
 ARE BooHoo are endorsing that method of slaughter? By preferring their employees to submit to eating only non pork islamic foodstuff that are ritually slaughtered.
So lets take a look at what BooHoo  maybe endorsing as recommended slaughter methods for employees by submitting to islamic demands on enforcement of sharia practices in the workplace. 
!st is the British way of slaughter secondly maybe is the BooHoo preferred method? I don,t know we will let you make your own mind up on that issue, I know I have reached my own opinion on BooHoo. 
And that is to NEVER EVER SHOP WITH THEM OR RECOMMEND THEM TO ANY ONE AT ALL!!!!!!

A Big F Off to You And Your Culture from Sumaiya Karim

LET'S HOPE THIS DOESN'T CATCH ON BECAUSE IT WILL MEAN MUSLIMS RUNNING THE COUNTRY. 

Sumaiya Karim, Wokingham’s Member of Youth Parliament (MYP), led a winning debate in the chamber on Friday, November 23. The 16-year-old is believed to be t...he first person to wear a hijab while speaking at the despatch box in Parliament. “It was absolutely brilliant and a fantastic experience for all of us,” Sumaiya said. “This was one of the best things I’ve ever done – something I’ll never forget for the rest of my life. “I was feeling a bit nervous, but I’ve been told that didn’t come across.” The Maiden Erlegh School Year 12 pupil, who is hoping to study medicine at university, has decided to wear a Muslim headscarf for most of her time at secondary school. “It was a decision I arrived at myself,” she said. “I did a lot of reading when I was growing up and decided it was time to start wearing the headscarf. “It’s such an honour [to be the first to speak in Parliament wearing a hijab] and I’ve been humbled by the response from everyone. I’ve been getting loads of emails and phone calls. “Parliament should be representative of the population and there are so many Muslim women in the UK. I want to show we are into politics and are part of the future of the UK.” Sumaiya, from Lower Earley, opened a debate calling for the national curriculum to be overhauled to include wider life skills. “This is something I feel really passionate about,” she said. “I think it’s really important we address this and it’s the perfect time to do it. “It’s really important we have access to education and diverse cultures have the same opportunities. It’s about engaging young people and getting them involved in these issues and engaging them for later in life. A lot of our education makes us the people we are and we are the future.” The A-level pupil was greeted with applause at the close of her speech, after she asked why her favourite chocolate bar had risen in price from 10p to 20p. The national curriculum motion was one of five debated by the UK Youth Parliament at the event, chaired by the Speaker Rt Hon John Bercow MP, and received 154 of the 295 votes cast. Sumaiya will step down as Wokingham’s MYP after deciding not to reapply for December’s election. -C-

Post Script From The Horwich nationalists
As a matter of rules is it not illegal for anyone to sit in the Parliamentary chamber who is not an fully Elected MP?
Also this example of creeping sharia, is another example of the Islamics just sticking 2 fingers up at the British People it,s Traditions and Values. And also is not the silence of the femminista deafening at this spectacle of the way women is the cult of islam are treated as mere chattels and forced to be second class in walks of life. Despite all this objects claims of choice, I have the feeling it was the choice of wear it or else!

The Guardian The ugliest newspaper in Britain PatCondell

Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama,

Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama, by Ann Coulter

Nov 29th, 2012

by Brett Stevens.at Amerika

Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama
by Ann Coulter
336 pages, Sentinel, $16

For many years, the subject of race has been so carefully tinged with the trauma of the past that we did not even pretend we could discuss it. Most generation X+ citizens grew up under a regimen of teachers, politicians, media and entertainers telling us the one right way to think on this issue.
Recently this taboo has fragmented in light of the shocking polarization of American voters. 60% of white people vote Republican; everyone else votes Democratic. The white people who vote Democratic tend to be the lost: single mothers, scared post-collegiate children, the neurotic and the miserable. This tells us that among the healthy, representation is exclusively a racial question. Whites vote Republican, and everyone else votes against them.
Ann Coulter takes on this challenging topic in her latest book, Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama. As a writer and a product, Coulter has a foot in both worlds, embracing a witty mainstream conservatism but also exhibiting a challenging realism that might even be called Nietzschean, or Machiavellian. Coulter may write for the mainstream middle class audience, but she is aware of the dark underworld of realpolitik that manifests itself in all that we do. For most of her career, this duality has created ambiguity about what she actually believes. Her books often come on strong, make some really good points, and then spent the next 200 pages creating a fog of non-disclosure so she doesn’t get too close to the really dangerous parts of reality and politics.
With this current book, Coulter resolves the duality by keeping her points clinical. She doesn’t read into her own thesis beyond the provable and documented, but she lets us draw our own conclusions with ample amounts of accurate but hyperbolic liberal-bashing. In this book, her goal is to explore the use of race by liberal parties as a kind of “get out of jail free card” and a limitless credit card on which to charge their own wealth redistribution agenda. On top of that, she explores the history of racial denial in the American media and then seeks to prove how no one, black or white, is benefiting from this situation. As Coulter might say, the only people profiteering from this situation are liberals and their media lapdogs:

It produced a destructive welfare state that was untouchable for decades. It got us anxiety, anger, fear and a major political party incapable of making an argument more sophisticated than: “You racist!”
And then it got us the most left-wing president America has ever seen.
When there were so few cases of white-on-black hate crimes that liberals had to start making them up, wasn’t that a clue that the Klan wasn’t preventing black progress anymore? If white people could be shorn of all racism overnight, it’s not clear how that would improve the black condition. (261)

The way this book approaches race is reminiscent of Colin Flaherty’s White Girl Bleed a Lot: The Return of Race Riots to America, a book which similar takes a non-judgmental view of the failure of American racial policy as a policy and not as an indictment of any ethnic group. Coulter goes out of her way, as Flaherty did before her, to make it clear that her book is not about black people. It’s about white liberals and the racial policies they advocate and the consequent failure of those. Much of this book, like Flaherty’s, involves research into historical events and current news items in which there is a disconnect between reality and the way the liberal media and liberal politicians have chosen to explain the situation. Coulter’s greatest vitriol seems to be reserved for WASPy journalists, politicos and public figures who keep beating the tin drum of “racism” while ignoring the fact that liberal racial policies do not work for anyone, black, white or other.
The thrust of the book is on white-black relations, not the broader question of race as a whole and the Democratic intent to replace the white majority with a third-world majority and thus secure a permanent demographic majority for Democrats. As said above, Coulter stays within the immediate and clearly linked because this book is like all of her books an introduction both to a mainstream conservative position, and the underlying reason behind it which may be more complex than most people are willing to undertake.
Among the first hundred pages, Coulter repeats a disingenuous argument about how Republicans fostered racial equality through rule of law, while Democrats opposed it. This is a complex area involving the flip-flop of both parties from previous positions, moving Republicans from the left-ward position toward a right-wing one. She does better when she focuses on the difference between liberal views and rational views of the situation, instead of trying to rally the troops toward loyalty to a party name. It is this type of mainstream argument that loses Coulter readers among the quiet educated and thoughtful types who would like solid logical reasoning behind their positions. They are a minority with a huge trickle-down effect on those who recognize their wisdom, so they are important in the long-term but less important to product success.
Like Flaherty, Coulter approaches the African-American crime statistics with fairness. She points out numerous times that most victims of black crime are black, and that the permissive “rehabilitation” policies of liberals are to blame, in that they not only fail to discourage crime but effectively incentivize it.

Based on their having no understanding of human nature, the smart set turned American cities into petri dishes for crime and degenerate behavior without punishment. Thousands of Americans died, were raped and disfigured in criminal acts made possible by the Warren court, the ACLU, liberal professors and activists, whose single-minded policy objective was to return criminals to the street. (94)

For any faults she has, including the aforementioned prole drift of one of her arguments in the first part of this book, Coulter breaks new ground by opening up the issue that we’re afraid to look at here in the West. Both the USA and Europe are awash in internal division, complexity and cost from their policies of diversity. While Coulter does not argue against diversity itself, she shifts the argument away from racism toward criticism of liberal pluralism and its effects in the context of diversity. This is a huge first step toward having an issue we can discuss sensibly again, and leaving behind the Soviet lock-step with liberal ideas that has prevented that discussion until now.

Well BOOHOO to Pork and to Shopping with you BOO HOO!

 Well BOOHOO to Pork

Many people on Facebook and other social network sites may have seen the Alleged HR memo given to the employees of BOO HOO

in which non muslim employees are forbidden to enjoy any pork meat or in effect products of any kind. So concerned are we at this pandering to islamic intolerance! that we have contacted a Kathy Allison head of HR at BOO HOO, (email below) as to why this Nazi style policy has been enforced on non islamic staff.

Also we hope that all who read this seriously not consider shopping on the net with this outfit. As it says in effect in the email these islamics are only offended when it suits there purpose! And why should others have to suffer due to the intolerance of others!


 To Kathy Allison at Boo Hoo contact
As some one who was considering using your service to purchase clothes this Christmas, II was horrified when i learned and saw a HR notice from you company on the internet forbidding employees from enjoying pork products a  traditional British food Can you please offer me an explanation of why you have forbidden your non islamic employees from eating pork on your premises.
I find that to do such such a thing is against the Human rights of your employees, by pandering to the intolerant islamic employees. if they find that some one eating pork is offensive perhaps they should consider that eating other cultist and ritualistically slaughter meats is offensive to others who do not share their in my view  intolerant 7th centenary views.
It all the more shocking that you as a company who no doubt pride your selves on tolerance should be so intolerant by subjecting your employees to the intolerance of others!  These islamic employees who object to others eating pork.  I am sure do not object to the extra work and wages ,overtime,ect . that they get at Christmas, Another non islamic practice. Like all Political correct/cultural marxist practises this sound like Hypocrisy on behalf of your company and those who may object to pork !

American Slavery, Then and Now

An interesting article on the effects of socialism

 

Slavery, Then and Now

By Shoebat Foundation on November2012 in Blog, General

Keith Davies

Over the Thanks Giving Holiday weekend I took my family to see the film Lincoln. While I am somewhat familiar with the history, I am sure most Americans are probably very ignorant of those times. Hopefully, this film might shock some of the most die-hard Democrats into understanding the very sordid history of racism in the Democratic Party which continues to this day, but the propaganda of our media may have you thinking otherwise.
The fight against slavery was the most divisive time in American history. The Civil War had the highest casualties in any War that was fought by Americans with about 618,000 killed from a USA population of about 35 million. Nearly 2% of the population fell in battle or died from diseases as a result of the war – the equivalent of 6.4 million people based on todays USA population. In World War II, 416,000 soldiers were killed in action out of an approximate population of 90 million.
The passion with wich each side fought for their beliefs in the Civil War – whether one agreed with those beliefs or not – was stirring. Hundreds of thousands of men on the Union side were willing to die – and they did, by the tens of thousands to free black people from bondage.
Black people (not ‘African Americans’ – that is just PC nonsense, and I am tired of the left’s propaganda terms) were given the option of freedom for the first time. I ask my Black American brothers: what is freedom? In slavery, black people had housing, food and a job with no pay. Freedom meant that you had to find your own way, your own job and pay for your own home and food. Yet today, most black people have returned to slavery and indenture by choice. The Democratic party keeps them as victims, gives them free stuff in return for votes and most black people (about 90%), along with their leadership, fall into line.
Black women were raped or abused by their white masters during the time The USA was a slave-owning country. Yet today, most black women have babies outside of wedlock – a staggering 73% according to the New York Times. Many black women have multiple fathers of their children too. Black women now choose the same behavior but this time they volunteer their bodies to abuse.
The same ethnic group vote 96% for Democrats – the same Democrats who have a terrible history of supporting slavery and being counter to Black Civil rights. It certainly has a much worse record than Republicans on Black rights. Yet, you would never know that by listening to the old media.
Black people have chosen to re-enslave themselves by choosing free hand-outs in return for Democratic votes. They prefer to be provided with free stuff than struggling and working for a living like most of us. Then they cry ‘racist’ if anyone should object to this insanity.
Not all Black people have a chip on their shoulder but many do. They think that they are owed something because they were discriminated against in the past. There is no doubt that Black people have had a very rough past but when do we stop looking at the past and embrace the freedoms America offers. If America does not offer the best freedom in the world, please tell me which country does?
Now as a country we have voted to provide more free stuff which will end up enslaving us all with confiscatory taxes to provide 50% of the population free healthcare, free public sector pensions, social security from borrowed money because the government spent the money that was paid into it, and on-going multiple government programs to capture some interest group’s vote. White, black and brown are now denying our ability to be free. Our confidence in our ability to be entrepreneurs is being stifled with government largesse while at the same time bankrupting the country and destroying the capitalist system. The USA of the past has provided untold prosperity not only for itself but for the world too. If we continue on the path we are on we will all be enslaved.
What I would suggest to Black people who continue to think this way as well as white people who choose free stuff over work and risk-taking.
Before you call me a racist, I’d like to honor the 110,000 union soldiers who fell in battle, the 275,000 wounded and the 250,000 who died of disease during the civil war who won freedom not just for black people but they freed white people from the spiritual inequity of slavery. Their sacrifice granted all Americans the right to find our own way so that we can pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, just as the original founders decided to fight for in 1776; they also fought to ratify the greatest document of freedom in 1787 with the United States Constitution. Honor these fallen heroes by living Free as the founders wanted and the fallen have fought and died for.
Freedom is not a government hand-out or a “safety net”. Freedom is making your own way with limited interference from the government. We all need to free our minds from a self-inflicted slave mentality and embrace freedom the way we all need to do if America is to survive. We owe it to the fallen from the Union army from the Civil War and the sacrifice of Abraham Lincoln.

Wanted: a Winston Churchill for the culture war

1st posted here 

Wanted: a Winston Churchill for the culture war | Melanie Phillips

The story sounds just too idiotic and outrageous to be true. A Rotherham couple, by all accounts exemplary foster parents for nearly seven years, took on two children and a baby in an emergency placement.
Eight weeks later, social workers came and took the children away — despite the fact that they were thriving — on the grounds that because the couple belonged to the UK Independence Party this was not ‘the right cultural match’.
Astonishingly, the official in charge is still unrepentant. Joyce Thacker, the council’s director of children and young people’s services, has said that the children, who were from ‘EU migrant backgrounds’, had been removed to protect their ‘cultural and ethnic needs’ from UKIP’s ‘strong views’ and apparent ‘opposition to multiculturalism’.
This is as ludicrous and illogical as it is sinister.
This apparently splendid couple have been treated as criminals merely because social workers disapproved of their political views — which happen to be shared, incidentally, by millions of fellow citizens. This is the kind of behaviour we associate with a totalitarian state.
The clear implication is that they were racists. But there is nothing racist about opposing multiculturalism. Indeed, many immigrants themselves oppose it. To damn this couple in this way is an appalling smear.
In any event, this was merely a short-term emergency foster placement. These children clearly needed as a matter of urgency a safe and loving environment — which by all accounts this couple gave them.
Ms Thacker said: ‘I have to think about how sensitive I am being to those children.’ Is this woman for real? Clearly, she is actually doing them harm by putting ideological dogma above the children’s own needs.
The whole thing sounds beyond parody. But, alas, this goes far wider and deeper than this one incident. 
In the early Nineties, I unearthed what it is no exaggeration to say was a climate of totalitarianism in social-work training.
Anti-racist zealots had captured the social workers’ training body, and built into the social-work diploma the explicit assumption that society was fundamentally racist and oppressive.
What followed was an utterly chilling degree of intimidation and thought control. Blameless social work students were forced in tears to ‘confess’ to their own racism; some failed to qualify unless they identified racist attitudes even where none existed.
These and other politically correct dogma, and the requirement to enforce them, remain stamped into social-work culture like the name of Blackpool in a stick of rock.
As a result, the needs of vulnerable children and other social-work clients have been junked in favour of the overriding requirement to impose an ideological view of the world in which minorities can do no wrong while the majority can do no right.
Over the years, this has given rise to one horror story after another. Twelve years ago, an eight-year-old Ivorian child, Victoria Climbié, was tortured and murdered by her guardians under the noses of social workers who believed such behaviour had to be respected as part of African culture.
In the early Nineties, Islington council was revealed to have ignored the systematic sexual abuse and prostitution of children in its care because it was terrified of being called racist or homophobic if it disciplined black or gay staff perpetrating such crimes.
In Rotherham itself, the sickening sexual enslavement of under-age white girls by organised prostitution and pimping rings was largely ignored for more than two decades, in part because the abusers came overwhelmingly from Pakistani Muslim backgrounds.
And for years, would-be adoptive parents have been turned down by social workers because they are deemed to be too white, too middle class or in some other way fall foul of the politically correct inquisition. 
All this goes far wider and deeper even than the failings of public sector professionals.
The grip of the Left on our culture has meant not just that many perfectly reasonable things are now deemed to be unsayable in civilised society.
 Worse still, since political correctness stands truth and lies on their heads, people are vilified as extremists or bigots simply for telling the truth, connecting to reality or standing up for right over wrong.
Let us be clear: the claim that it is racist to oppose multiculturalism is the opposite of the truth. This is because multiculturalism does not, as is so often mistakenly believed, mean being tolerant of other cultures. It is a creed which holds instead that no one culture can trump any other.
That means you can’t uphold human rights, equality for women or freedom of religious belief over cultures that don’t uphold these values.
So multiculturalism inescapably involves abandoning certain ethnic minorities to violence, inequality and persecution. And that is truly racist.
Clearly, this row is an electoral gift to UKIP, coming as it does just days before the Rotherham by-election. And now it has spawned another similar accusation that a UKIP member was barred from volunteering for the charity Barnardo’s.
Whether this is all an amazing coincidence of timing, or whether UKIP sympathisers are deliberately leaking the stories at the moment they will gain most attention, the issue at the heart of this controversy is all too real.
For what it illuminates is nothing less than our ongoing culture war, in which political correctness — which should really be called cultural Marxism — is being used by the Left to revolutionise society by undermining and subverting its core beliefs.
So, fundamental values embodied in issues such as immigration, national identity, marriage and family and many others are under systematic assault, while all who seek to defend them are vilified as bigots, swivel-eyed extremists and lunatics.
This has not been achieved by any one organisation imbued with mythical and conspiratorial powers. It has occurred over decades as a result of two main factors.
The first was the steady rise into power, across the universities, media, professions, political parties and civil service, of those whose opinions were shaped in the Sixties and Seventies by the New Left, which believed in the cultural transformation  of society.
The second was the demoralisation of the institutions which should have defended our culture — in particular, the Church and the governing class, which had become convinced of their own and their country’s inevitable decline.
The result was what far-Leftists have called ‘the long march through the institutions’ — which all fell like dominoes.
Since this culture war has been fanatically prosecuted by the Labour Party — which consigns anyone who commits a politically incorrect heresy to the third circle of hell — Ed Miliband’s condemnation of Rotherham’s Labour council is the most arrant hypocrisy.
But the real problem is that David Cameron, in his obsession with rebranding the Tories, has not only failed to recognise that fighting the culture war is the great conservative cause of our time, but has even positioned himself on the wrong side.
Recent figures have shown that under Mr Cameron even more Labour ‘cronies’ are being appointed to quangos and charities than under the last Labour government.
And in 2006 he called UKIP ‘a bunch of fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists’ — thus helping legitimise the kind of demonisation that has emerged in Rotherham.
In the wake of this row, Downing Street said the Prime Minister had not intended people to understand that all UKIP members were racist. ‘Not all’, eh? Well that’s nice of him! Talk about missing the point.
What’s needed is not just root and branch reform of social-work training. It’s a leader who will halt this onslaught on Britain’s core values and its terrifying descent into cultural tyranny. We need nothing less than a Winston Churchill for the culture war.