This blog initially set out to focus primarily on Islam and the Islamisation of the UK. However, since that time the subjects covered have broadened. They now include (amongst other things): IQ tests, Jean Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Marxism, Trotskyism, David Cameron, Foucault, Nazism, Ralph Miliband, economics, statistics and so on. - Paul Austin Murphy
I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here.)

Friday, 16 October 2015

Nazis seek to join the Conservative Party's 'Strength' group


Members of the English Nazi Party seek to join the Conservative Party's 'Strength' group.

There are fresh questions over the new Strength group (set up deep within the Conservative Party) after it emerged that the National Socialist English Workers' Party is encouraging its members to sign up.

Strength presents itself as the successor organisation to David Cameron's successful campaign in May 2015. It has been welcomed by Mr Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne. But some centrist Conservative Party figures have expressed concern that it could be used as a vehicle to murder moderate Tory MPs.

The National Socialist English Workers' Party website reads:

Strength doesn't seem restricted to Conservative Party members, though it says it will aim to encourage people to join the Tory Party. We should go along to any local Strength meetings with the aim of taking over the Conservative Party, which is something we're very good at.”

Meanwhile,The Times reports that Tory MPs who defied Mr Cameron and abstained on the fiscal charter have been inundated with emails from unhappy Nazis. There was criticism of the Tory whips’ office for putting out the names of the 21 MPs who opposed the party line. One of the MPs said:

I’ve never seen the whips’ office behave like this. They put our names up in lights on social media, effectively telling the Nazi Brown Shirts to come and get us — they have duly obliged.”

Strength's mission is to “transform” the Conservative Party into a
Sir John Major in his prime.


“genuine nationalist and socialist entity and to bring about a mass movement for change - for real racial, nationalist and socialist change in every town and city change. And for genuine change... As well as change....”

Former Conservative leader Sir John 'No Panties' Major said:

I hope that Davy Boy will develop this new, fresh and virile politics, but I also hope that it will be the open politics that he’s preached because we don’t want organisations setting up like Strength, which that’s been established this week, being a party within a party within a party, and I think that’s the challenge for Davy Boy.”

Finally, the Nazi Party website reads:

Many Nazi socialists will consider joining Cameron's party to defend him, but is it the right move for racial nationalists and socialists such as unto us?

Sir Alexander Theodore Callinicos and Lord Charles Kimber [of the Nazi Party Central Committee] have outlined how important it is for Nazis— even revolutionary ones — to back and defend Cameron. But if we’re so keen to help Cameron hang onto his position, why don’t we just join the Conservative Party? Surely that’s where the battle will take place and where Cameron needs numbers of defenders against the left of the party?”



We can only wait and see what the British public thinks of these very strong and widespread collaborations between the Conservative Party and the National Socialist English Workers' Party.

Tuesday, 13 October 2015

Fukuyama's Dangerous Biological Truths


Francis Fukuyama has stated what he takes to be certain biological truths. Consequently, many on the Left have come down as strongly on Fukuyama as virulently as they have done previously on any other kind of truth that doesn't fit their agenda.

For example, Fukuyama says that men

have a biological disposition to be more promiscuous and less discriminating than women in their search for sexual gratification”.

This is where Leftists commit the is/ought fallacy. (Sometimes intentionally, sometimes not.) That is, when scientists (of whatever description) say that

Xis the case.

that doesn't mean that they also believe that

Xought to be the case.

In fact knowing that X is the case means that you can do something about X (if society or individuals so desire). In this case, saying that men are
“more promiscuous and less discriminating than women in their search for sexual gratification”
isn't to say that this is a good or a bad thing. It's to say that it's a... thing. Not only that: this fact is true “statistically” and over “large populations” (as Fukuyama puts it). In other words, it's not true of every man who's ever existed on the planet. In addition, this isn't a denial of female promiscuity either. How could it be?

The thing is that some (perhaps the minority) of Leftists know they're committing the is/ought fallacy when they criticise such statements. However, that doesn't matter. They believe that too many people knowing certain truths or facts (or, rather patronisingly, “misusing”certain truths or facts), is a state of affairs they simply can't allow. Thus Fukuyama and other scientists must be reprimanded, ridiculed and, in some cases, even denied tenure. Certain truths or facts are deemed to be dangerous by Leftists.

Fukuyama himself comments on this Leftist denial of truth as it can be found in sociology.

As many people know, sociology has been a largely left-wing discipline - especially since the 1960s. That doesn't need to be the case. Leftism or “progressivism” isn't (as it were) built into sociology. Nonetheless, that Leftist bias is why Fukuyama says the following:

The more I read the more it became evident that the social sciences were operating on a principle that was ideologically based.”

This has been particularly true of biological phenomena as they are interpreted by sociologists. I mentioned male and female sexuality before: Fukuyama says that sociology took this Leftwards turn as a“reaction to the Holocaust and to the genuine misuses of biology by assorted racists and bigots”. What's more, the social sciences “had been turned in the opposite direction – to say that one's genetic basis meant nothing”.

Perhaps more importantly, Fukuyama himself interprets biology politically. (Thus it can be said that he's contradicting himself.)

For example, knowledge of biological givens

shows you that there are certain constraints in social engineering that limit the kind of society you can create”.

Consequently, the many 20th century experiments in communism “provide a negative lesson that there are certain types of utopias that aren't realizable”.

Reference

Fukuyama, Francis. (1999) quoted in Predictions: 30 Great Minds on the Future