I laugh when I read lines like that, being a big fan of the "comedy of recognition." You take something ordinary and show it for what it is in a different light, and voila, it's funny after all. What's so funny about the Left dhimmi fascist movement swamping the West? About Geert Wilders facing criminal charges in the Netherlands for demanding an end to immigration of unassimilable Muslims; asking for a ban on the hate-filled, violence-inciting Qur'an? What is there to laugh about when the world gives us such gems of un-think as the British government taking a child from his grandparents and placing him in the foster care of a homosexual couple-- to make a political point that "all parents are equal?" When we read the entirely humourless work of Julien Benda, The Treason of the Intellectuals, there is nothing funny about it at all. To read of pre-Enlightenment intellectuals busying themselves with high-flown speculations about the nature of angels and pin-heads, and to see them now turning their lofty minds to running the daily lives of ordinary people is to find oneself also not in a humourous frame of mind. No, not funny. Government by philosophers is a sick joke at best. To read of government by social activist post-Enlightenment philosophers, it's a bit of a stretch to find it funny. No, it's not funny. It's maddening. Worse is that the people who govern, as it were, are not even philosophers, just party hacks and half-wits who take ideas from their fellows and adopt them as their own, out-doing each other in the pursuit of purity, the sense of which they obviously have no beginning clue. We do not face the treason of the intellectuals but the triumph of the pseudo-intellectuals and the "clerks," as Benda writes in French, "clerks" a better term in all. The treason of the intellectuals is their promotion of the bureaucratic idiots. The clerks. They don't know why, they know not what it means, but they are determined to make sure everyone follows The Programme. Not moral, but moralistic. Not official, but officious. Not intelligent, but moronic. Government by clerks. Treason of the clerks.
Government by uneducated and pretentious fools with a pseudo-religious mission; old women and pompous party hacks given a bit of power and a title, it leads to the mess one sees in Europe and in much of America today. We witness our lives as infantalised, our selves governed by the nanny state, our affairs conducted by attitudinizing Sunday school teachers with a bad agenda. Old lady minders who bully from boredom and lack of thought and character. Old fat duffers who like the sense of power, like to bully and smile and paternalise in public. Eric Hoffer puts it so well: "Those with no business of their own will soon turn to minding yours." Pay one of these fools and give him a big title and a little bit of power, and you get government agents committed to doing, to acting, to creating, to actually believing any damned fool thing they're told. They even take it seriously. Take a fat man, take an old lady, and give them titles and power and they will sweep the world of all opposition to anything you might propose. What do they know? Well, they know they must be right because they're important. If it weren't so dangerous to life and limb it might almost be almost humourous. But not really.
Below and in the following couple of posts, we'll look at a couple of small town English half-wits in power, a should-have-been publican and a jumped-up char woman, both with the need to prove their self-importance. What have they done? What will they do next?
"St George's parade racism fears."
A council in the West Midlands has withdrawn its funding for a St George's Day parade after claims it had attracted some "racist elements".
Dear reader, please excuse my interruption. Do you too recall the Soviet euphemism, "anti-social elements"? That referred to people, as I recall. It referred to people the minders the Soviet government didn't like for some reason -- or none at all. Just as intriguing here is the term "racist." If you're like me, you'll wonder just what it means. Yes, I know, it doesn't really mean anything in the world most of us inhabit; but what is it supposed to mean to those who use it as if it were meaningful? It might be nice to think all these hep-cats in government are transplanted from Cheshire, and that they will disappear before our very eyes after mouthing such profundities as "Words mean what I want them to mean." Good luck with that. "Racism." Silly me, I actually got curious and read Arthur de Gobineau, Inequality of the Human Races. I can give a fair account of what "racism" means in the sense the English West Midlands councillors wish it to mean. I don't think they can do the same, judging by the comments below. However, none of this "racism" is about reality or ideas or truth or racism: it's about petty power and the self-identity of little minds. Now, back to the story in progress:
It turns out, dear reader, that the Left city council in a small town in middle England have decided to cancel the English version of the Fourth of July parade in their little town because it could be, might be, is maybe-- racist, at least in small part by some people, it is reported.
Sandwell Council said it would not fund a parade through West Bromwich on 23 April but it would hold other events.
It said footage of last year's parade organised by the Stone Cross St George's Day Association showed it had been "infiltrated" by the far right.
The organisers have said the parade was "not political" and "not racial".
The association has received council funding for the past five years but organisers said they would have to cancel this year unless they could raise about £10,000.
Trevor Collins, a spokesman for the Stone Cross St George's Day Association, said organisers had intended to invite Gurkha soldiers to the event.
He said: "I think it's absolutely disgusting - it's not political and it's not racial. We are just proud to fly the flag."
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council said it made the decision based on advice from a watchdog.
"The scrutiny management board?" "Was asked [by someone?]"
The scrutiny management board [?] was asked to assess last year's parade footage and interview witnesses.
We are looking at small town England here. What "scrutiny management board?" Any of those three words and all of them together make me wonder just what happened to this green and pleasant land?
This Owellian double speak, "has to be taken seriously!" "Infiltrated by extremists!" The evidence provided by the board, we know not who they might be, showed it categorically! Watchdogs! Watch, dogs: "It's very much part of the democratic process." This pompous fool is a terrible bad joke. It gets worse.
"A report by our watchdog committee has to be taken seriously, in the same manner as a report from a parliamentary select committee, and is very much part of the democratic process."
There's more to this story, as you might guess. I'll follow up as time permits. Or, as the Sandwell Council would have it, "Follow-up will be provided by the committee of the board. The Council of Dags, having scrutinized the video surveillance tapes and having interviewed past participants, allow for such, and has confirmed the decision to return to this. Meanwhile, dream lucidly of a family fun-day.http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/
The council said it would spend £38,000 on St George's Day celebrations and had a proud tradition of celebrating the English patron saint.
It said it would provide a family fun-day on 18 April and a St George's Day concert at West Bromwich Town Hall on 23 April.
It said it would also raise the flag of St George on all its buildings on St George's Day.
The council confirmed the decision to withdraw the funding on Thursday.
We'll return to the staggeringly stupid Sandbar Council and Council leader Bill Thomas next. Wait till you meet his female counter-part. You'll be not laughing in the aisles.