Calling out the illiberal "liberals"

@wwaycorrigan

Sharing here my latest letter in the Sunday Independent.

It's shocking to think that Declan Lynch gets paid for his column and I don't get remunerated for my musings!

Outside of the photo of the letter below, it can also be found by scrolling down on the following link, https://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/letters-time-for-bishops-to-be-humble-and-ask-for-priests-from-afar/a1461060798.html.

For more on illiberal "liberals" and suchlike see https://wwcorrigan.blogspot.com/2022/09/the-liberal-illusion.html and https://wwcorrigan.blogspot.com/2023/02/living-with-unsettled-and-unsettling.html. 

Tackling the Lynch mob.

__________________________________________________________
Listen to The Corrigan Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

The liberal illusion

@wwaycorrigan

[Listen to an audio version of this blog entry here.]

'Yes, we shall set them to work, but in their leisure hours we shall make their life like a child's game, with children's songs and innocent dance. Oh, we shall allow them even sin, they are weak and helpless, and they will love us like children because we allow them to sin.

'Freedom on our terms.' 

We shall tell them that every sin will be expiated if it is done with our permission, that we allow them to sin because we love them, and the punishment for these sins we take upon ourselves. And we shall take it upon ourselves, and they will adore us as their saviours who have taken on themselves their sins before God. And they will have no secrets from us.

We shall allow or forbid them to live with their wives and mistresses, to have or not to have children — according to whether they have been obedient or disobedient and they will submit to us gladly and cheerfully ... and we shall have an answer for all. And they will be glad to believe our answer, for it will save them from the great anxiety and terrible agony they endure at present in making a free decision for themselves. And all will be happy ... except the hundred thousand who rule over them. For only we, we who guard the mystery, shall be unhappy.'

As some of you will be aware, the above passage is from The Grand Inquisitor, a mini-story in Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov.

One would like to think that most will see its relevance to today's world.

A "safe" and sorry lot

Considering everything we've witnessed over the last couple of years, it would appear many are indeed happy to submit to those who rule over us. 

Why worry about having to make a 'free decision' for oneself when the powers that be can take care of all that? One is given certain wriggle room, a modicum of freedom 'to sin', no more, no less.

What's really wanted — not unreasonably so — are safety and security, not freedom. Thus, it's not quite 'better be safe than sorry'. It's more a case of 'better to feel safe in the hands of a greater power than to be free.'

'Such "liberals" must have to perform some spectacular mental gymnastics.'

In this light, it explains why many people who describe themselves as liberals went unquestioningly along with lockdowns. 'Oh, nobody likes them but they're for the greater good.' That was the gist of the mantra that was sold to the masses and the majority bought it without the merest of critical assessment.

Surely genuine liberals would have wanted to be as certain as one could be that such an attack on liberty was worth the significant sacrifice. 

It became obvious early on in the pandemic, to those still thinking soundly in any case, that covid-19 was a severe and potentially deadly infection for only a small percentage of society.

What wasn't fully known was the cost of extensive lockdowns — not just economically but in all aspects of life and death — although there were numerous dissenting voices telling us to tread carefully, this blog included.

In this context, 'playing it safe', liberal style, surely should have meant doing our best to keep life as normal as possible. Yet governments across the world, with consent from many of their citizens, did the opposite. (In slight mitigation, the minions were constantly fed worst-case scenarios.)

'As we should all know, however, identifying as one thing is quite different from actually being that thing.'

It's a similar story with the covid-19 vaccines. It was clear that a not-insignificant number of the population had robust natural immunity to the infection.

So again, one would have thought that those of a supposedly liberal persuasion would factor this in before endorsing, punitively, vaccine mandates. Nothing of the sort was forthcoming. (The slight mitigation here is that at the start of the vaccination rollout hopes were high that the jabs would be something of a silver bullet for all. It soon became clear that this wasn't the case.)

Then there's the response to mad Vlad's (Vladimir Putin that is) decision to send his troops into Ukraine.

That the West's hawkish right-wingers have jumped at the chance this war has presented to denounce all of Russia and its evil ways is no surprise.

What is surprising, though, are the efforts of many of our so-called liberals to outdo the neoconservatives in this regard. It seems some want to remove Russia and its people from the planet completely.

On the flip side, Ukraine and Ukrainians can do no wrong whatsoever. And they never have done any wrong. To suggest otherwise is blasphemous. I guess I was missing that day in religion class when we learnt all about the saintly, chosen people of Ukraine.

'If I say it, it's true'

These "liberal" double standards are nothing new, of course. I recently happened upon a 2002 interview with the late writer Christopher Hitchens where he spoke of such mental gymnastics performed — 'liberal illusions' as he called them — in the minds of his liberal contemporaries.

He explained how such types had to ignore many glaring illiberal practices of three fêted liberals who had been his chief targets, calling out what he considered their hypocrisy, so to put it. These individuals were Mother Teresa, Princess Diana and US President Bill Clinton. (Watch the video at https://youtu.be/93vTib-WWvs. The part relevant to this text starts around the 27-minute mark.)

One assumes that many who call themselves liberals do so because it sounds virtuous. It has non-threatening connotations.

It's much better than labelling oneself as a radical leftist — even if that shoe appears to fit well. Or saying, on the other hand, one is a libertarian or a neoconservative.

As we should all know, however, identifying as one thing is quite different from actually being that thing.

One's constitution and actions are what really count. Many, though, like to illude themselves on this. And as long as their conduct and values fit inside the accepted framework, they'll never be truly challenged on it.

A win-win for all. Except for the free-thinkers.
_______________________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way's Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

'We can do better on visas for Colombians' — Irish Deputy Prime Minister Leo Varadkar

@wwaycorrigan

Ireland's Deputy Prime Minister (Tánaiste), Leo Varadkar, has said he wants to make the visa process easier for Colombians who want to study and work in the country.

Leo Varadkar at the Irish ambassador's residence in Bogotá, with Colombia's Vice President Marta Lucía Ramírez (top left).

Speaking at a St Patrick's Day reception at the Irish ambassador's residence in Bogotá, the Tánaiste stated that he would 'love to see more Colombian students coming to Ireland to study in our universities, to learn English, to work if they want to.'

However, he acknowledged that the current visa regulations are rather restrictive for Colombians compared to those from other South American countries such as Argentina and Brazil.

Following the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with Colombia's Ministry for Education aimed at greater collaboration in higher education, Varadkar admitted that Ireland 'can do better' on visas but it is something he intends to address. 'Colombians need a visa to come to Ireland, (they) have to pay for that visa, that's not the case from a lot of other countries in Latin America, so that's something I'll try and improve or change and I've been in contact with Minister McEntee (Ireland's Minister for Justice) about that already.'

The Tánaiste, who also serves as Ireland's Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, said that while trade between the two countries is small, 'there is scope for expansion'.

Deputy Prime Minister Varadkar officially opened Ireland's embassy in Bogotá this week, an office that began operating in 2019, the same year that Colombia opened an embassy in Dublin.

Before visiting Colombia, Varadkar was in Chile where Ireland also has a new embassy. During his stay in Santiago, he attended the inauguration of the country's new president, the leftist Gabriel Boric. 'Potentially, he represents a new generation of left-wing leaders in South America. Even though he comes from the student protests, the radical left, he has been very clear on Venezuela and Nicaragua. To a certain extent that gives me some encouragement,' Varadkar said of the Chilean president.

Click on the following link, https://youtu.be/3XgauTqKJOw (or see video below), to listen to the full interview with Leo Varadkar where he also speaks about Russia's war in Ukraine and the cocaine trade.

 _______________________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way's Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

Conservative liberalism: The new 'cool'?

'I'm blue, da ba dee da ba daa ...' Those of a certain vintage will remember that pop hit from the late 1990s. What exactly the blue referred to in the song, I'm not sure, but with the passing of a generation since it was a chart-topper, it could be well worth re-releasing today.

Is where their paths cross the key to progress and the new cool? (Image from iqoncept.)

This time around the blue, from a UK and Ireland (don't mention the Blueshirts) perspective in any case, would refer to conservatism. Or conservative liberalism if you will — you can insert the appropriate colour these political philosophies mean to you.

The tune could become an anthem, cheesy as it is, for those of us growing increasingly tired of the noisy, disproportionately influential comrades of, what we'll call here for simplicity's sake, the radical left and the many otherwise centrist folk who seem spellbound by it.

Not-so-free radicals

These radicals claim to represent balance, fairness, free speech and freedom in general — broad liberal values as they are — yet they are doing anything but that. 

The discourse that dominates mainstream media and much of social media, particularly Facebook, as well as academia across the greater English-speaking world is one which aims to consign much of our essential history to the rubbish bin while encouraging malignant groupthink with its associated identity politics.

This either reinforces racism where it may exist or creates it where it doesn't, under terms dictated for the most part by middle-class whites, ignorant of the racism in their very own conduct.

To go against this implies that one is a racist, white supremacist, homophobe or what have you. 

If you're not part of the witch hunt, ergo, you are a witch. I guess 'non-whites' who also speak out about or merely question the motives of the denounce-and-destroy brigade are seen as some sort of choc-ices — if one is allowed to refer to such a term these days. 

The list of proscribed phrases and views grows by the day. Anything can be twisted to fit the 'you're a racist, etc.' narrative. As one commentator put it, 'being colour-blind is now being racist'.

Indeed, much has been said and written, with good reason, about the Orwellian nature to all of this. There is only one accepted line and woe betide all those not following it, the Thought Police are watching. Room 101 for correction awaits or face being cancelled. In practice, both tend to be the fate for nonconformists.

Thankfully, however, the Party isn't in total control just yet. Dissenting voices of reason, of openness, of inclusiveness, still have a platform, ever smaller as it is becoming.

'Where once there were no limits on the "coolness" of being left, especially for the under-40s, now it's becoming cooler to be right.'

That being said, all but the complete ignorant accept that we have many inequalities to overcome. While equality of opportunity may be an impossible ideal to achieve, much more can be done to close the large gaps that continue to exist.

Conserving the centre

The broad central motorway of dialogue, learning, understanding and tolerance is the safest route to travel to arrive at a fairer society. Veering too far to the left or right, as history has shown us on umpteen occasions, only leads to catastrophe.

Considering the highjacking of the centre-left by radical, intolerant elements and their practical dominance in the humanities at universities and, by extension, mainstream media, it's in the more conservative- and liberal-leaning quarters where the conditions for progress appear to lie. The middle ground has held firmer there.

Rather than capitulate to the extremes as has often happened, now more than ever we must defend our position. 

As George Orwell put it, 'If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.' Diverse opinions now appear to be accommodated more so in old-school liberalism than on the left and its many cheerleaders these days.

For sure, far-rightists are equally as dangerous but they don't get the same sort of adoration as their counterparts on the other end of the spectrum.

What's more, we now have people from minority groups who are running scared of these radical leftists, the very people who claim to represent them. 

For example, a number of gay friends have told me they've become embarrassed by the militaristic factions 'fighting their cause'. They've told me it was better back in the day when 'what they got up to' was a more clandestine affair. There's also some pushback from a number of prominent African Americans.

So where once, apparently, there were no limits to the coolness of being left especially for, to put a rough age bracket on it, the under-40s, now, I like to think anyway, it's becoming cooler to be right.

To do so means you're swimming against the tide, a rebel very much with a cause — to stand up to the leftist mob that is hellbent on destroying free speech and independent thought.

The blue moon is rising. Sing it loud and sing it proud.
___________________________________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way's Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

Flying the flag for political incorrectness

Many people still don't seem to get it. Or they wish it wasn't so in any case.

Basically, a significant reason US President Donald Trump proved to be — and still proves — popular across Middle America, away from the east- and west-coast echo chambers that is, is that he speaks a straightforward language.

Trump: Middle America's president. (Photo from Twitter.)

He tells/tweets it as he sees it — for better or for worse. Unlike mainstream, establishment politicians, not everything, nay nothing in terms of tweets anyway, is precisely planned, framed in must-not-offend diplomatic speak.

In the politically correct West, where the leftist discourse has taken a strong hold in the universities, shaping in such a way many of our current and future key opinion leaders, somebody deviating from the accepted script is bound to find favour with those not in the club.

This is not to say that all Trump supporters are dumb hillbilly racists, the standard charge levelled at them.

Indeed, many Trumpists I know find his controversial, excessive tweeting irritating. Neither do they agree with all his utterances — in fairness it can be hard to keep up with them in any case.

Yet, it's the feeling that despite his many flaws, he is about as honest as they come. He doesn't hide behind political advisers. What you see is what you get.

In this day of carefully groomed, mannequin-esque politicians, this resonates. (That the US economy is performing well under Trump's watch is another important plus point.) 

It's a question of, 'Who do you really trust: Somebody who comes across as "holier than thou" or a guy seemingly showing us his warts and all?'

"Now name calling does hurt us."

Trump's presidency and other similar eschewing of the standard political system elsewhere have been the inevitable backlash against the over-the-top political correctness we've had to stomach for the last couple of decades.

Where did our childhood act of defiance towards hurtful words go? You know, the old schoolyard rhyme, 'Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me.'

We realised back then that acts of real violence could be lethal, but name-calling? Whatever. We could rise above it.

Now, however, many of our law-framers and influencers have become too cool for school. 'You can have your free speech but you can't say this and you sure as hell (OMG, did I just say "hell"?) can't use that word.'

We're in the process of creating an impotent, sterile bunch of human beings. Like the announcer at the bumping cars — do they still exist or have they become too unsafe, imparting evil habits in our young? — at a funfair used to say 'one way round only', now it's 'one discourse only', even if it goes against biology, to name but one area of contention. (How many genders do we have now? It's difficult to stay, um, abreast of the accepted pronouns these days.)

The British intellectual, amongst many other things, Stephen Fry has a refreshing approach to all this craziness. At a debate on political correctness earlier this year he said that if somebody wants to call him a 'fagot' — he is gay — then so be it. It's not the end of the world. There are far greater things we should be crusading against.

It's not the case where we want things to become overly verbally abusive — radicals or fundamentalists on all sides are adept at that already — but we don't want people having to consult a lawyer every time they want to speak lest they offend some unsuspecting bystander.

Fry's common sense view is nothing more than we'd expect from a man of his standing. Yet, worryingly, he doesn't seem to be in the majority in the intellectual world.

In Colombia, one of the refreshing things about life here is how it's normal to call somebody by their outward appearance. So you have people being affectionately called 'fatty', 'blacky', 'thinny' and so on.

Imagine how that would go down these days in most "First World" countries. The courts would be on the go 24-7.

With all that in mind, we're now just over two years away from the next US presidential election. The big question is, if he survives all the scandals and potential impeachment, can Trump get re-elected?

A lot, of course, will depend on who he's up against. 

The danger for the Democrats is that in their desperate bid to win back the White House they'll opt for an everything-for-everybody candidate. A product of our one-size-fits-all globalised world. 'Tell us what we want to hear, regardless of the reality.' Ah yeah, that makes it all better.

The Democrats would be doing us all a favour, everywhere, if they look more towards the centre-ground.

Alas, the radical left will do their bit to make sure that doesn't happen. Trump will happily toot to that.

_____________________________________

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan - The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".