Liddle Britain

As a spectator I witness more than a Liddle bit of hate preaching.

I cannot stand and be a spectator for what I have observed - if I'm to remain a citizen of Liddle Britain, whereby nothing eliminates bigotries to be published against a creed, I’m likely to explode. What snatches my scrotum in a zip the most is acknowledging the perpetrators of odium have had ceaseless opportunities in life, education and are highly privileged to the point of automatically having a platform to spread their social disease. I’ll name the racist, Rod Liddle is that loathsome mumpsimus who’s sat on the throne of righteousness replicating a madcap Buddha, murmuring and hate preaching too long for comfort. I’ve asked comrades to cancel their Spectator subscriptions on grounds of humanity.

For prize pumpkins to burp out the requirement of free speech I hear you – but lines have to be drawn and responsibility has to be recognised. Nobody is immune from criticality even under the excrement of sewer click-bait journalism to which The Spectator has sold its soul to. As my late father said to me while dosed up on narcotics with pancreatic cancer: “I read some absolute abhorrent material on the quiet, usually in the smallest room in the house for durable periods;” He was referring to Liddle; better out than festering inside the bigot I suppose, but that was on mediocre days. It makes Ron Atkinson’s media sacking for being inappropriate towards Chelsea’s Marcel Desailly in 2004 outlandishly contemptuous, if he penned it fortnightly in The Spectator nobody would’ve batter an eye lid. But, what with the rise in Islamophobia which in Blighty is becoming a custom, we’re enlightening the world in conventional hatred under the etymology of free speech. This is the reality of a Johnsonian Britain – the written word is merely offensive banter.

In retrospect, Liddle really is an allowed narrow-minded symptom within a grandiose problem surrounding national malfeasance, spearheaded by the ilk of Fraser Nelson and The Spectator’s broadcasting grandees. What is apparent, is the ‘rogue state’ characteristic, this is by no means hyperbole, for the protectionist political discourse clarifies two main points of a ‘rogue state’ [1] propagandist use breaching constitutional convention and [2] disregarding international forums and norms. Both are displayed in UK political discourse daily, without retribution; naturally, this enables hate preaching to flourish in filthy magazines. I could almost forgive Rod Liddle if he’d adopted grammatical suggestions implying this is not for real, the fact he chose to use ‘I reckon’ to close the main offending paragraph about stopping Muslims from voting in a General Election, garners sufficient evidence this is really Rod Liddle’s view. Those whom glower and say; ‘this is just semantics’ aren’t generically proficient in semiology.

I’m all for second chances or even third but the thuggery; mindlessness of Rod Liddle takes the ‘McVities’.  Now of all hateful epochs, somehow this is employed as social commentary under the term of ‘embracing all views;’ it’s contrarily masqueraded as right-wing banter.   I despised Liddle bartering on about Rosie Duffield’s  MeeToo story; the real life analogy was too blubbing and too difficult to stomach - evidently, too close to the bone for the pregnant girlfriend basher – raving and banging regardless of consequences; albeit, his career hasn’t writhed from it, not in the slightest. He’s got the license to bang-on about holding polling day on days Muslims are forbidden to vote. This hell-bent Islamophobia surely tweaks their antennae to abscond from The Spectator’s growing readership and from Blighty itself, if of course Liddle’s protectionism remains the norm, unchallenged or penalized. Why The Spectator’s writers must strike against Liddle’s hate preaching; until the malady is removed from print. Nelson should lance the Liddle and soothe the soreness with a handsome sum, fees from bigotry readers.

Hells bells Liddle squawked with exuberance at the thought of a quashed confirmatory vote denoting a fluid democracy…  Y’see any chance of another flavour of Free State ice-cream from Mr. Whippy’s van is for the fairies; why give the plebiscites what they want? Imagine if the hoodlums ran about stuffing their pockets with public funds, bangin’ made up choons for Referendums and General Elections – worse still, cancelling a five day week, gathering up greater support and stopping this superlative misery.  This new deal utopia would dismiss Liddle’s prose indefinitely but you can bet your bottom holler, his quest for free speech would be a ten minute ‘Newsnight’ item – exclaiming he was the voice for the bigots across the nation the poster boy for talking shit.

Highlighting the human right for rancid expression; is of course a constructed myth that intrudes into common sense – notably, the purpose of myth is not designed to secure freedom of speech, enabling expression, opinions with censorship, restraint or legal penalty. The main purpose is to secure the license to speak with impunity; not freedom of expression - alas, freedom from the consequences of such expressions. Why Liddle gets decapitated on his quill, far too often – the problem is, it’s all too frequent, but who evokes the quill license? 

No dismissal or action equates to a Liddle Britain, not of the satirical variety, but of a detestable kind, a nation that gauges individual nuance on nebulous labeling, you’re either a ‘Remainer’ or a ‘Leaver.’ Before any utterance the subject is denoted as an inane dehumanized theory, so the intolerant audience knows what to expect. Liddle adheres to the dehumanized theory theatrics, too readily; The Spectator adheres to this nonsensical perversion too readily. Call it a violation of responsible publishing – see how many deplore Liddle’s hate preaching… who vehemently disagree with use of horse tranquilisers on students on polling day. His contempt for future generations deserves vengeance, on par to stripping his privileged rights to spread divide and conquer mantra, in a populist period of political uncertainty. I am gladly prejudiced to a Liddle Britain.

I tend to rally against protectionist ideologies designed to oxygenate small-mindedness who call good-hearted people ‘the enemy.’ They’re doing the absolute opposite in bridging the divides; yet has the audacity to claim all will be alright by deepening the divides.  Welcome to 'Liddle Britain'… albeit, you’re very unwelcome if you don’t fit into a creed or demographic.