The Owen Joneses of the world often trigger the same question in me: what kind of world are they trying to create? You mention the obvious flaw in his plan. He is gay. He wants more people who kills gays, indeed pride themselves on hunting them down and eradicating them. Not something his right-wing enemies do.
So what is that? Does he not believe Islam hates homosexuality? Does he imagine he will be exempt from abuse?
Or is his hatred for normality so great he wants it all to burn?
I mean this as a sincere question I have yet to see answered. What do the progressives actually want? Do they actually think the unrest in Belfast or Glasgow is genuine hard-right extremists? No multicultural society has ever survived. Ours will not be an exception. Mass immigration like this cannot work, so what we are witnessing is in fact serious restraint by the populace, although that is now in decline as people realize the horror of what they will need to deal with.
Anyway, I cannot fathom what people like Jones want. I am convinced we are now witnessing mental illness. They are not normal.
It has happened before. Look at Iran 1979. The communists want to bring down the capitalist West and install their utopian vision. The Islamists want to bring down the capitalist West and install their utopian vision. The left assumes they can put aside their differences to work together. The Islamists go ahead with it in the short term. When the West has been removed the Islamists turn on the communists who didn't see it coming.
I agree. But in the modern age how can they not see it coming? The Muslims have podcasts online boasting about what they will do if they get the upper hand.
It has to be a form of mental illness. They have such a visceral hatred of the West it destroys them.
There is a concept that was originally used in science that basically talks about how you view the world. How we understand something is called a paradigm or frame of reference. Kuhn talked about how you start off with disagreement, then the research leads to a consensus, before anomalies start to appear, then someone realises that the original paradigm might be wrong, so they research it and sometimes you end up with a "paradigm shift".
In science we realised that the earth revolves around the sun, that it's oxygen that burns in combustion, not phlogiston. You can build a machine that flies But some people get stuck in a paradigm and cannot see past it. That is especially the case with ideology. Christianity has survived because we accepted changes around the edges as society changed. Islam can't change. It is believed to be the absolute word of Allah as revealed by Mohammed. Communists rationalise its failures as not being the pure form of socialism. In both cases they are stuck in a paradigm and completely unable to see the world from any other frame of reference.
Maybe it's "mental illness". But then how do you define "mental illness"? It's a paradigm.
I was an academic for 30 years. My field was business, specifically related to tourism and aviation. EVERYTHING was about paradigms. Does tourism bring different people into contact with each other, thus improving understanding? Or is it about providing jobs and improving standard of living? Or is it white people exploiting brown people? Different paradigms. And I was introduced to Kuhn when I did my PhD.
I totally agree, Spiff and Pamela. I have seen US university students, supporters of all the leftie fantasies being interviewed, that have no knowledge whatsoever of Islam's true aims, no knowledge of geography and no knowledge of financial reality. It seems that European 'intelectual' youngsters are taking that as their lead and have removed reality from their thought processes.
We value conversation and like to think debate can change minds but Owen Jones is gone. He’s just gone. He can’t be reasoned with. And sadly, he makes his audience more like him with every extremist video or article.
The whole "left/right" paradigm has never worked. It's like trying to fit a three-dimensional figure into a two- dimensional space. Both Mussolini and Hitler started out as socialists. Both came to realise that Bolshevism hadn't worked and the biggest stumbling block was trying to enforce the "class struggle". If the workers don't have an incentive to work then productivity tanks.
Mussolini chose a corporatist economy instead. Instead of eliminating the employers he co-opted them into a tripartite system where BOTH workers and employers worked for the benefit of the state. It was still socialism in every other respect. And the reason corporatism worked (at least for a time) in Italy was simple. The Catholic Church had long encouraged a type of "bottom up" corporatist ideal. Italy was overwhelmingly Catholic so Mussolini took a concept people were comfortable with and imposed it "top down". He initially worked with the Church and lulled the populace into a false sense of security.
Hitler didn't do that. He was an atheist and tried to replace religion with what was essentially a personality cult.
The Left-Right paradigm keeps everyone involved in a state of trench warfare where The Enemy are “the guys in the opposite trench” , though it’s constantly propagandists like Owen that serve to point out ‘the enemy’ with the unceasing distortions and character assaults.
It’s a way of herding the easily persuaded into hostilities with people they don’t have to be and probably wouldn’t be hostile to, more than at a footy match.
Roughly the same goes of course for career Conservatives where they only thing going for them is that “we’re not socialists”. Sure, but you’re still self-serving snobs and serving special interests with the common populace and working class a far distant third priority. Tories have only gotten elected into No 10 when the other guys have been so god awful that there seemed to be no other choice, if my memory serves…
I see it more as left of the left Vs right of the left conflict amongst the “educated” Fabian trained elite with the rest of us local, nationalist at heart, just dragged along for the dystopian ride.
I think Jones' main benefit is he shows the degree of distortion inside the bubble. They believe frustrated people in Belfast sick of being abused in their own homes are extremists inspired by rhetoric from Rupert Lowe or even Nigel Farage.
They cannot face the reality. Unwanted foreigners from alien cultures cannot assimilate and cause problems for everyone. When that runs to hundreds of thousands or millions we are sowing the seeds for very serious civil unrest.
Very well written and interestingly provocative piece.
As for the substance on reflection I didn’t really get your point other than to make an observation about the myopia of political extremists? Was that it?
I enjoyed your linguistic tomfoolery though so thanks!
Yes…just venting. Except that recognizing that a Guardian columnist is an extremist — which he is — is perhaps an indication of how things are moving and the ‘Overton window’ is moving :)
A very good article and I agree with 99% of what you say , I also find Owen Jones an obnoxious historically ignorant fool. I do take issue with to much use of the socialist, myself and Paul Embrey come from an English socialist tradition and are both pro Brexit pro Israel and anti immigration and anti woke/net zero.
Where would you put socialists who are not marxists/fabians, and their socialist roots go back to the English civil war.
Not all socialists are bad and politics is about whether you are anti globalist or globalist now. I support Restore Britain.
That’s actually fair comment. I have a lot of time for the English tradition…William Morris….GDH Cole, the Guild Socialists ….especially where they cross over with distributists ….emphazise subsidiarity, bottom-up etc. It’s not an accident that Morris was in a sense a medievalist or that the guild socialists looked back to the pre-modern guild associations. So I’m very happy to stand corrected in that respect. It is the other side of the coin to the tension between conservatism and economic liberalism….Someone like ROger Scruton tempered his Burkean conservatism with a deep skepticism of completely free markets…..but mainly because he rejected the underlying theological anthropology of billiard ball individuals. I would also throw in Karl Polanyi - his solutions often swayed way to far towards the Fabians and marxists in teh sense of the state as a corrective. But his nuanced understanding of pre-modern embedded economic life and embedded markets….and the economic anthropology of livelihood points to the same possibilities as the distributists, guild socialists and Burkean conservatists…..or Christian anarchists /liberterians ……I guess I’m basically into communitarianism for families. But yes — I can’t stand Owen Jones et al. Thanks for the comment
If there is a chain of thought it’s a very reasonable thing to do. Pointing to other relevant essays where one has developed a point in more detail …. It’s up to the reader whether they follow the link. It’s also a strangely pedantic thing to bother commenting on. But it’s a free country and all that
The Owen Joneses of the world often trigger the same question in me: what kind of world are they trying to create? You mention the obvious flaw in his plan. He is gay. He wants more people who kills gays, indeed pride themselves on hunting them down and eradicating them. Not something his right-wing enemies do.
So what is that? Does he not believe Islam hates homosexuality? Does he imagine he will be exempt from abuse?
Or is his hatred for normality so great he wants it all to burn?
I mean this as a sincere question I have yet to see answered. What do the progressives actually want? Do they actually think the unrest in Belfast or Glasgow is genuine hard-right extremists? No multicultural society has ever survived. Ours will not be an exception. Mass immigration like this cannot work, so what we are witnessing is in fact serious restraint by the populace, although that is now in decline as people realize the horror of what they will need to deal with.
Anyway, I cannot fathom what people like Jones want. I am convinced we are now witnessing mental illness. They are not normal.
It has happened before. Look at Iran 1979. The communists want to bring down the capitalist West and install their utopian vision. The Islamists want to bring down the capitalist West and install their utopian vision. The left assumes they can put aside their differences to work together. The Islamists go ahead with it in the short term. When the West has been removed the Islamists turn on the communists who didn't see it coming.
I agree. But in the modern age how can they not see it coming? The Muslims have podcasts online boasting about what they will do if they get the upper hand.
It has to be a form of mental illness. They have such a visceral hatred of the West it destroys them.
There is a concept that was originally used in science that basically talks about how you view the world. How we understand something is called a paradigm or frame of reference. Kuhn talked about how you start off with disagreement, then the research leads to a consensus, before anomalies start to appear, then someone realises that the original paradigm might be wrong, so they research it and sometimes you end up with a "paradigm shift".
In science we realised that the earth revolves around the sun, that it's oxygen that burns in combustion, not phlogiston. You can build a machine that flies But some people get stuck in a paradigm and cannot see past it. That is especially the case with ideology. Christianity has survived because we accepted changes around the edges as society changed. Islam can't change. It is believed to be the absolute word of Allah as revealed by Mohammed. Communists rationalise its failures as not being the pure form of socialism. In both cases they are stuck in a paradigm and completely unable to see the world from any other frame of reference.
Maybe it's "mental illness". But then how do you define "mental illness"? It's a paradigm.
That’s very astute. I had never thought of that issue in relation to Kuhn.
I was an academic for 30 years. My field was business, specifically related to tourism and aviation. EVERYTHING was about paradigms. Does tourism bring different people into contact with each other, thus improving understanding? Or is it about providing jobs and improving standard of living? Or is it white people exploiting brown people? Different paradigms. And I was introduced to Kuhn when I did my PhD.
I totally agree, Spiff and Pamela. I have seen US university students, supporters of all the leftie fantasies being interviewed, that have no knowledge whatsoever of Islam's true aims, no knowledge of geography and no knowledge of financial reality. It seems that European 'intelectual' youngsters are taking that as their lead and have removed reality from their thought processes.
It will be a painful lesson for them to learn. In some cases, fatal.
Yes and the "Gays for Palestine" bunch are particularly impressive in their ignorance.
That will be quite a grounding they will get. From a great height.
brilliant 👏
i cant stand the guy
ha - me neither :)
We value conversation and like to think debate can change minds but Owen Jones is gone. He’s just gone. He can’t be reasoned with. And sadly, he makes his audience more like him with every extremist video or article.
The whole "left/right" paradigm has never worked. It's like trying to fit a three-dimensional figure into a two- dimensional space. Both Mussolini and Hitler started out as socialists. Both came to realise that Bolshevism hadn't worked and the biggest stumbling block was trying to enforce the "class struggle". If the workers don't have an incentive to work then productivity tanks.
Mussolini chose a corporatist economy instead. Instead of eliminating the employers he co-opted them into a tripartite system where BOTH workers and employers worked for the benefit of the state. It was still socialism in every other respect. And the reason corporatism worked (at least for a time) in Italy was simple. The Catholic Church had long encouraged a type of "bottom up" corporatist ideal. Italy was overwhelmingly Catholic so Mussolini took a concept people were comfortable with and imposed it "top down". He initially worked with the Church and lulled the populace into a false sense of security.
Hitler didn't do that. He was an atheist and tried to replace religion with what was essentially a personality cult.
This is exactly correct.
The Left-Right paradigm keeps everyone involved in a state of trench warfare where The Enemy are “the guys in the opposite trench” , though it’s constantly propagandists like Owen that serve to point out ‘the enemy’ with the unceasing distortions and character assaults.
It’s a way of herding the easily persuaded into hostilities with people they don’t have to be and probably wouldn’t be hostile to, more than at a footy match.
Roughly the same goes of course for career Conservatives where they only thing going for them is that “we’re not socialists”. Sure, but you’re still self-serving snobs and serving special interests with the common populace and working class a far distant third priority. Tories have only gotten elected into No 10 when the other guys have been so god awful that there seemed to be no other choice, if my memory serves…
That’s about it Im afraid :(
I see it more as left of the left Vs right of the left conflict amongst the “educated” Fabian trained elite with the rest of us local, nationalist at heart, just dragged along for the dystopian ride.
Hear, hear.
A great article - I can’t stand him. Thank you ! 🤩
I think Jones' main benefit is he shows the degree of distortion inside the bubble. They believe frustrated people in Belfast sick of being abused in their own homes are extremists inspired by rhetoric from Rupert Lowe or even Nigel Farage.
They cannot face the reality. Unwanted foreigners from alien cultures cannot assimilate and cause problems for everyone. When that runs to hundreds of thousands or millions we are sowing the seeds for very serious civil unrest.
I have always thought he is reading from an A level Sociology essay that had been marked and was ripped to shreds by the teacher …..
Sadly he’d get an A+ from most teachers.
Very well written and interestingly provocative piece.
As for the substance on reflection I didn’t really get your point other than to make an observation about the myopia of political extremists? Was that it?
I enjoyed your linguistic tomfoolery though so thanks!
I always enjoy an elegantly phrased vent
Yes…just venting. Except that recognizing that a Guardian columnist is an extremist — which he is — is perhaps an indication of how things are moving and the ‘Overton window’ is moving :)
It is the left that needs the “guard rails”. It is spilling over into tyranny.
A very good article and I agree with 99% of what you say , I also find Owen Jones an obnoxious historically ignorant fool. I do take issue with to much use of the socialist, myself and Paul Embrey come from an English socialist tradition and are both pro Brexit pro Israel and anti immigration and anti woke/net zero.
Where would you put socialists who are not marxists/fabians, and their socialist roots go back to the English civil war.
Not all socialists are bad and politics is about whether you are anti globalist or globalist now. I support Restore Britain.
That’s actually fair comment. I have a lot of time for the English tradition…William Morris….GDH Cole, the Guild Socialists ….especially where they cross over with distributists ….emphazise subsidiarity, bottom-up etc. It’s not an accident that Morris was in a sense a medievalist or that the guild socialists looked back to the pre-modern guild associations. So I’m very happy to stand corrected in that respect. It is the other side of the coin to the tension between conservatism and economic liberalism….Someone like ROger Scruton tempered his Burkean conservatism with a deep skepticism of completely free markets…..but mainly because he rejected the underlying theological anthropology of billiard ball individuals. I would also throw in Karl Polanyi - his solutions often swayed way to far towards the Fabians and marxists in teh sense of the state as a corrective. But his nuanced understanding of pre-modern embedded economic life and embedded markets….and the economic anthropology of livelihood points to the same possibilities as the distributists, guild socialists and Burkean conservatists…..or Christian anarchists /liberterians ……I guess I’m basically into communitarianism for families. But yes — I can’t stand Owen Jones et al. Thanks for the comment
"Cut back immigration" is a mainstream position, no matter what the Owen Joneses of the world think. Even Sweden gets it.
Owen ‘Hector’ Jones
The look on Little Owen's face when he flounced out on Campbell was to die for.
Silly little boy stuck in his mid-teens.
Owen Jones is a gatekeeper for the left. If you are truely a leftist, Owen should be ignored.
Sanger's first name was Margaret, not Elizabeth. But a good article.
Thanks Sue :) Mental glitch
What's your source for tens of millions being murdered by the communists?
If you start linking your own other work in the middle of an essay you look like an imbecile. Pity. Work had legs and you shat on own doorstep.
If there is a chain of thought it’s a very reasonable thing to do. Pointing to other relevant essays where one has developed a point in more detail …. It’s up to the reader whether they follow the link. It’s also a strangely pedantic thing to bother commenting on. But it’s a free country and all that