You don't expect much from a poor local paper like the Sheffield Star, but their bigoted PC-fascist political editor, Richard Marsden, isn't fit to be employed as any sort of journalist; and I'm sending a complaint to the (admittedly useless) Press Complaints Commission.
Marsden wrote a malicious piece about my UKIP suspension without even mentioning that I had strongly condemned Anders Breivik's appalling actions; adding a complete lie that I had commented on "Muslim groups"; and stating that I was "unavailable for comment" when I was all day and every day by two phones and two email addresses on a computer permanently online. That he well knew that my landline number is there with my full name and address in the phone book, he demonstrated by printing my address in his piece – just by way of inciting and facilitating personal aggression against me, it would seem.
A more blatant attempt by a journalist to abuse his position and try to alter the vote in an election it would be hard to find.
I went in to the Star and they refused me access to the editor and claimed Marsden wasn't in. They sent down a reporter who said the paper agreed a retraction was in order. This then did not appear. Instead there was a puny little snippet in Thursday's paper, which minimally mentioned only Marsden's lie about "Muslim groups" and his failure to point out that I strongly condemned Breivik's actions.
So I went in again. The editor still hid in his office, and Marsden refused to come down and meet me face to face; cowering behind his phone. He had no defence for his bigoted misrepresentation.
We got on to Breivik. "Why did you write on such a sensitive issue?" he asked.
'Because PC-fascists like you always close down any debate about the origin, development and nature of PC', I replied.
Breivik was being used to still further close down debate at the very time that the need for debate could not be clearer. [And this was last summer, by the way. Marsden disingenuously insisted that I must have known it would cause problems in standing for election, when in fact I've never desired to be an election candidate. I agreed only a few weeks ago to be merely a 'paper' candidate because UKIP was stretched in finding enough suitable people to cover the city.]
For a numptie like Marsden you have to spell it out.
The very reason – the 'justification' for – why Breivik behaved in the appalling way in which he did was because of the completely closed-down debate about PC. That is abundantly clear from his 'manifesto'. To head off the possibility of more Breiviks, this has to change.
The 'guilt by association' usual ruse was in full swing to close down debate yet further.
The standard line on Breivik is that he is 'beyond the pale', and therefore any analysis of PC is also 'beyond the pale'.
It most certainly is not.
That someone who acknowledges the researched historical analysis of the origin of PC is a mass murderer in no way makes the research into the origin of PC a doctrine itself of mass murder. It is never the case that if A is in some way coincidental with B, and B is 'beyond the pale'; that, therefore, A is likewise 'beyond the pale'. That would be the most elementary non-logic.
Malicious nonsense of 'guilt by association' as it is applied to analysis of PC requires combating. If there is no free speech even on the topic of the most deep-seated, entrenched and widespread fascism ever to afflict societies -- which PC indeed is -- then there is no free speech at all.
Concerns about 'sensitivity' are just smokescreens to cover a PC-fascist stance. Evidently, even the deepest irony is opaque to the PC-fascist.
'You're not fit to be a journalist, let alone a political editor', I admonished the hapless Marsden. "I don't think you're fit to be a candidate", he retorted.
But that is my point! A PC-fascist does not accept that anyone who challenges the PC hegemony can be moral; and that therefore such a challenger is ineligible to stand in any election.
That PC is itself the height of immorality -- seeking to label the disadvantaged as 'oppressors' and the privileged as the 'oppressed' – completely escapes PC-fascists. They feel obliged to stick rigidly to this self-delusion rather than to admit the failure of their whole ideology. But this vehement denial inevitably cannot long survive being comprehensively found out.