{"id":4193,"date":"2020-07-12T10:51:09","date_gmt":"2020-07-12T14:51:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=4193"},"modified":"2020-07-12T10:51:09","modified_gmt":"2020-07-12T14:51:09","slug":"telegraph-the-orwellian-double-think-of-the-woke-elite-blinds-them-to-their-own-ridiculousness-both-cambridge-and-the-booker-prize-claim-to-be-defending-free-speech-while-simultaneously-cancelling-peo","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=4193","title":{"rendered":"Telegraph The Orwellian double-think of the woke elite blinds them to their own ridiculousness Both Cambridge and the Booker Prize claim to be defending free speech while simultaneously cancelling people they disagree with"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Telegraph\u00a0The Orwellian double-think of the woke elite blinds them to their own ridiculousness Both Cambridge and the Booker Prize claim to be defending free speech while simultaneously cancelling people they disagree withMADELINE GRANT<\/a>28 June 2020 \u2022 7:00amWith the Archbishop of Canterbury\u00a0 urging ecclesiastical iconoclasm with a vim<\/a>\u00a0not seen since the days of Thomas Cranmer, one could almost think the culture war\u2019s excesses had lost their ability to shock. Yet last week produced two examples so blatant, so deranged and so shameless\u00a0as to astonish even the most cynical observer.
Archbishop of Canterbury says Church needs to reconsider portraying Jesu…Statues in Canterbury Cathedral are also going to be looked at “very carefully” to see if they should be there, …<\/a>

First,\u00a0 Cambridge University\u2019s defence<\/a>\u00a0of Dr Priyamvada Gopal, a lecturer in postcolonial literature who sparked a (not unreasonable) public backlash after tweeting that \u201cWhite lives don\u2019t matter. As white lives\u201d. Amid calls for her dismissal, Cambridge released a supportive message, apparently condemning \u201ccancel culture\u201d in all its forms:
Cambridge defends academic who said ‘white lives don’t matter’Dr Priyamvada Gopal, an expert in postcolonial literature, claimed her tweets were ‘speaking to a structure and …<\/a>

\u201cThe university defends the right of its academics to express their own lawful opinions which others might find controversial and deplores in the strongest terms abuse and personal attacks\u201d.Noble sentiments indeed, but it also happens to be a lie \u2013 and one so barefaced that it would almost be funny if it weren\u2019t so tragic. Under a \u201cprogressive\u201d new vice chancellor, Cambridge has led the way in appeasing the outrage mob. It has singularly failed to\u00a0 defend conservative academics such as the sociologist Noah Carl<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 summarily dismissed after an open letter from faculty members accused him of racism. It took university authorities just 48 hours to rescind\u00a0 Jordan Peterson\u2019s visiting fellowship<\/a>, while the students\u2019 union claimed his \u201cwork and views\u201d were \u201cnot representative of the student body\u201d. Curiouser and curiouser. In claiming to value free speech (but only for certain opinions) Cambridge is guilty both of double standards, and double-think.
Intolerant zealots are strangling the intellectual freedom of our univer…Academics have a duty to win the debate, not stifle it<\/a>

Jordan Peterson accuses Cambridge University of being ‘unprofessional’ a…The controversial professor Jordan Peterson has said Cambridge University is “unprofessional” after he found out…<\/a>

Similar sleight of mind can be seen in the tragicomical conduct of Booker Prize organisers, who sacked their long-time patroness\u00a0 Baroness Nicholson as honorary vice-president for the \u201ccrimes\u201d<\/a>\u00a0of voting against gay marriage in 2013, believing in biological sex and \u201cmisgendering\u201d someone on Twitter. An equally Orwellian statement followed:
JK Rowling has ‘fallen in with the wrong crowd’, says trans activistFox Fisher said Rowling was ‘fearful’ of transgender people and needed to spend more time with them<\/a>

\u201cWe deplore racism, homophobia and transphobia, and do not discriminate on any grounds. Literature is open, plural and questioning. We believe every author\u2019s work should be approached by readers in the same spirit.\u201dNo satire could match this delicious declaration of support for openness and plurality of opinion, while sacking someone people disagreed with. Like adults who wear Crocs in public, they seem to have forgotten that we can see them.The double-think is as unsurprising as it is flagrant. Once-niche \u201ccritical theory\u201d has infiltrated contemporary discourse, with its rejection of logic, reason and objective reality. And revolutionaries always become what they claim to abhor, like the French radicals who repressed formal religion and ended up worshipping an amorphous Cult of Reason, and replaced the judiciary with \u201cpeople\u2019s courts\u201d. Today, we are similarly discovering what atrocities may be committed under the guise of the Rights of Man.Dominating every major wing of cultural life, small wonder that the Left feels so comfortable in its exquisite hypocrisies. Influential appointments have the ring of a cosy, quasi-incestuous club, a conveyor belt of Left-wing opinion linking\u00a0Guardian\u00a0<\/em>editorships, heads of Oxbridge colleges, public health quangocrats and more. Readers may recall the popular game \u201cSix Degrees of Kevin Bacon\u201d, in which film buffs challenge each other to find the shortest path between an arbitrary actor and the prolific Bacon. A colleague suggests a version for the quangocracy; \u201cSix Degrees of Shami Chakrabarti\u201d.For how long can this state of affairs continue? Being obliged to parrot propaganda and declare the sky is pink to retain your livelihood is emotionally draining. Neither is it healthy for our institutions to be so consistently out of step with public opinion, overseen by a detached cultural elite that is only occasionally roused from its perch by a disobliging election or referendum result. Few of us wish to inhabit a monoculture, and the quality of artistic output is already suffering; take the Booker Prize\u2019s own deterioration in the literary landscape.Worst of all, it will destroy genuine progress. In liberal California, presumably to pave the way for \u201caffirmative action\u201d measures, the legislature has just voted to strike anti-discrimination commitments from its constitution \u2013 a development that should terrify all thinking people. Britain is never far behind America and already ours is a topsy-turvy world, in which bullies feign victimhood, discrimination masquerades as social justice and \u201cfeminist\u201d activists use the mantle of progressivism to hound women with impunity. Truly, we are through the looking glass now.<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
https:\/\/www.gatestoneinstitute.org\/16060\/political-correctness-britain-trevor-phillips<\/a>
<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
‘Political Correctness’ in the UK: Shut Down Discussion Before It Can Start<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
by Denis MacEoin<\/a>
June 9, 2020 at 5:00 am<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/td>

<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
Political\n correctness, whatever its commendable origins in a wish to protect \nminorities on a basis of race, sexuality, or religious belief, has come \nto do great damage in its sometimes neurotic condemnation of anything \nits advocates find offensive.<\/li>
Among\n some individuals, the word “Islamophobe” seems to have replaced the \nword Communist as sort of a new form of McCarthyism with which to smear,\n defame and neutralize anyone with whom one might disagree — presumably\n to shut down any kind of discussion before it can even start.<\/li>
While\n it is appropriate to… bring in balanced Muslim opinions about how to \ndefine “Islamophobia,” organizations with links to more radical Muslim \ngroupings are probably not the most helpful partners.<\/li>
Without\n a serious debate on these issues, no one… can engage in comprehensive\n discussions about how Western societies should handle the problems of \ndiscrimination, integration, citizenship, free speech, secular values, \nhuman rights and all the areas of our collective lives that have come to\n the fore… in recent years.<\/li>
Trevor\n Phillips is uniquely placed to bring light to these discussions. A \nwell-respected man in both British and international society, he should \nnever be shut down by anyone, especially for the ostensible sake of \npolitical correctness.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n
<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
For\n many years now, Trevor Phillips has been one of the most prominent \nindividuals of black ancestry in the United Kingdom. A well-respected \nman in both British and international society, he should never be shut \ndown by anyone, especially for the ostensible sake of political \ncorrectness. Pictured: Phillips in 2010. (Photo by Oli Scarff\/Getty \nImages)<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n
For many years now, Trevor Phillips OBE<\/a> has\n been one of the most prominent individuals of black ancestry in the \nUnited Kingdom. He is a multitalented individual who has played \nsignificant roles in business, politics, journalism, and more throughout\n a long life (he is now 66). A full list of his achievements would take \nup most of this article. Here are only a few examples:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He was, \nuntil June 2018, the President of the John Lewis Partnership, Europe’s \nlargest employee-owned company. He has also Chairman of Index on Censorship<\/a>,\n the international campaign group for freedom of expression, and was \nfounding chair of both the Greater London Authority, and of Britain’s \nEquality and Human Rights Commission. Originally chair of the Commission\n for Racial Equality, and as head of the EHRC, Phillips was a \ncontroversial figure: he was an opponent of multiculturalism, apparently\n preferring a more constrained policy towards integration, a view he \nstill maintains. Although a member (until recently) of the left-wing \nLabour party, he is still a senior fellow with the leading Conservative \nthink tank, Policy Exchange<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Shockingly, on March 9, Phillips was suspended<\/a> from\n the Labour Party on the grounds of “Islamophobia.” That this exclusion \nis shocking should be obvious given the man’s long history of \nanti-racism, principled and critical support for national \ncounter-terrorist laws, rejection of Islamic terrorism<\/a> and\n Muslim rape gangs, and his focus on faith-based integration. This \nlatter is discussed in his 2016 book for the Civitas think tank, Race and Faith: The Deafening Silence<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As\n chairman of Index on Censorship, Phillips has a policy largely derived \nfrom the First Amendment of the US Constitution, in order to permit \nfreedom of speech and the press. Although there are some restrictions in\n the UK regarding hate speech and national security, free speech remains\n a broad principle. It is here that Phillips apparently fell afoul of \n“politically correct” criticism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Political correctness”, whatever\n its commendable origins in a wish to protect minorities on a basis of \nrace, sexuality, or religious belief, has come to do great damage<\/a> in its sometimes neurotic condemnation of anything its advocates find offensive<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For\n many, especially, it seems. on the left, the notion of what is called \n“Islamophobia” has come to the fore as the perfect expression of \npolitically correct speech and writing. This acceptance seems to have \ntaken place despite the appalling use of anti-Semitic hate speech and \nanti-Jewish activism before and during the era of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership<\/a> of\n Britain’s Labour Party. One is inclined to think of pots calling \nkettles black. If the politically correct can get it so wrong about \nantisemitism, may they not be equally wrong about “Islamophobia”?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is not hard to define antisemitism if we are guided by the Working Definition<\/a> given\n by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, but defining \nIslamophobia is fraught with difficulties. That it exists in some form, \nas do most prejudices, is hardly controversial. In the UK alone, 2018 \nsaw a record number of attacks<\/a> on Muslims, sometimes, not surprisingly, in response to Muslim attacks on non-Muslims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In\n 2019, an Australian, Brenton Tarrant, murdered 51 Muslims in attacks on\n two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand — crimes to which he has now pled guilty<\/a>.\n Such attacks, and often the speech that goes with them, reflect a \ndeep-seated racism and bigotry that is rightly condemned across most \ncountries. Less violent but equally unacceptable is the persecution of its Uighur population<\/a> by China’s Communist Party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It\n should go without saying that Trevor Phillips — and often many people \naccused of seemingly the most innocuous transgressions, such as a \nBritish teacher in the Sudan naming a children’s teddy bear Mohammed, or\n in present-day Nigeria, simply being a Christian — bears no \nresemblance to any of these.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In 2016, before the current row, Gatestone Senior Fellow Douglas Murray penned an article<\/a> in the Spectator<\/em> expressing\n admiration for Phillips and defending him against early accusations of \nIslamophobia. Yet, four years on, he has been termed an “Islamophobe” by\n a major political party and many in the press<\/a>.\n Among some individuals, the word “Islamophobe” seems to have replaced \nthe word Communist as sort of a new form of McCarthyism with which to \nsmear, defame and neutralize anyone with whom one might disagree — \npresumably to shut down any kind of discussion before it can even start.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Phillips\n himself has worked alone and with colleagues on the problems \nsurrounding the definition of Islamophobia. In 2018, he wrote the \nforeword to Policy Exchange’s response<\/a> to an extremely flawed definition<\/a> from the UK’s All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims. The definition had been heavily criticized, not least by the police<\/a>, for undermining free speech and counter-terrorism work. Phillips supported the author, Sir John Jenkins<\/a> KCMG,\n who exposed the risks to free speech and a healthy democracy if the \nAPPG report were to become law. The following year, Phillips — with \nJenkins and Dr. Martyn Frampton<\/a> — wrote for the same think tank a piece entitled, On Islamophobia: A Problem of Definition<\/em><\/a>. In it, he differed materially from the views of Nathan Lean, the left-wing author of The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims<\/em><\/a>, who takes even the mildest criticism of Islam or Muslims as Islamophobic in nature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One\n of the concerns expressed in Phillips’s responses to the APPG lay in \nthe fact that the parliamentarians involved might have allowed \nthemselves to be influenced too broadly by Muslim lobbies that seemed \nnot truly representative, such as the Muslim Council of Britain<\/a> and the Muslim Engagement and Development group (MEND<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
While\n it is appropriate to recognize Jewish contributions to definitions of \nantisemitism (such as the internationally supported IHRA version \nmentioned above) and to bring in balanced Muslim opinions about how to \ndefine Islamophobia, organizations<\/a> with links to more radical Muslim groupings<\/a> are\n most likely not the most helpful partners. To eradicate hatred for \nbalanced and peace-loving Muslims, it is probably not all that \nproductive totally to avoid references to Islamic radicalism or issues \nsurrounding women’s rights, treatment of non-Muslims, prescribed \npunishments, treatment of children, and blasphemy to name but a few — \nwhich is what more traditionalist Muslims might prefer we did.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Without\n a serious debate on these issues, no one — from schools to political \nparties, think tanks, parliaments, churches and synagogues — can engage\n in comprehensive discussions about how Western societies should handle \nthe problems of discrimination, integration, citizenship, free speech, \nsecular values, human rights and all the areas of our collective lives \nthat have come to the fore with the revival of radical and \ntraditionalist Islam in recent decades.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trevor Phillips is \nuniquely placed to bring light to these discussions. A well-respected \nman in both British and international society, he should never be shut \ndown by anyone for the ostensible sake of political correctness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Following Labour’s condemnation of Phillips as a supposed “Islamophobe”, Policy Exchange published another piece The Trial: The strange case of Trevor Phillips<\/em><\/a>,\n again by Frampton, in which he dissected the charge raised against \nPhillips. In the end, it appears that however many enemies Phillips may \nhave, he is assured of having many friends. This conclusion is reflected\n in that the UK government has just appointed him as an advisor<\/a> to a formal inquiry into the disproportionate number of deaths from Covid-19.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dr.\n Denis MacEoin is a former British university lecturer in Islamic \nStudies and a Distinguished Senior Fellow with the Gatestone Institute.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Telegraph\u00a0The Orwellian double-think of the woke elite blinds them to their own ridiculousness Both Cambridge and the Booker Prize claim to be defending free speech while simultaneously cancelling people they disagree withMADELINE GRANT28 June 2020 \u2022 7:00amWith the Archbishop of … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[2269,2273,2264,2274,2272,2271,1124,729,2270],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4193"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4193"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4193\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4194,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4193\/revisions\/4194"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4193"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4193"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4193"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Notice: ob_end_flush(): Failed to send buffer of zlib output compression (0) in /home/public/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5373