Answer: he's white
The Daily Mail has the story of eighteen year-old Jamie Bauld, who recently had a charge of racially-aggravated assault against him dropped, following a seven month police investigation. So, what sort of person is Jamie Bauld? The kind of thug who goes out "Paki-bashing" at weekends, perhaps? Well, no. He's actually a Down's Syndrome sufferer, with a mental age of five.
The incident that led to the police investigation occurred last September, at the special needs department of his school, Motherwell College. Jamie had an altercation with an Asian girl, who also had special needs, during the course of which he pushed her. Hardly the most heinous of crimes in any context, you might think, and particularly not when both participants have the mental age of primary school children. However, some unknown person clearly felt otherwise. They placed an advertisement in the local paper, asking for witnesses to the "racial assault", after which the eminently sensible gentlemen of the police force decided that it was worth their while to get involved, and questioned Jamie, prior to charging him with assault. According to his mother, Jamie did not understand the questions that the police were asking him, and simply agreed with every accusation put to him, out of a desire to please his interrogators. She adds that, like many children, he does not actually notice racial differences.
A fortnight ago the prosecution was finally dropped, and Jamie's parents have received an apology from the Crown Office - Scotland's equivalent of the Crown Prosecution Service. At least that's something.
But it really is astounding that matters were taken this far. Or at least, it ought to be. However, given that recent years have also seen a fourteen-year-old schoolgirl arrested for complaining that her (Asian) fellow pupils were not speaking English, and three ten-year-old boys respectively questioned by police for using the word 'gay' in an e-mail, threatened with prosecution for throwing a berry at a Slovak immigrant, and prosecuted over a playground scuffle with an Asian child (a decision that even the judge condemned as "political correctness gone mad"), my response to Jamie Bauld's case was not so much amazement, as resignation. Our country, and, particularly, it seems, our police and our public prosecution services, are infested with censorious liberal thought police, always on the lookout for new victims to persecute, harass, and vilify. What can drive any human being to seek the prosecution of someone like Jamie Bauld is totally beyond me, unless they do it for the bully's thrill that some derive from victimising someone who is utterly incapable of fighting back.
Jamie's mother asks "how can my son be racist"? A valid question, particularly given that there appears to have been no suggestion that the altercation in the classroom was accompanied by anything indicative of racist attitudes, on the part of either Jamie, or the Asian girl. The answer, of course, is that he is white. As such, he is, in "anti-racist" ideology, presumed guilty of racism, and nothing can prove him innocent. Even though there was no racial element in this incident, the fact that he had a conflict with a non-white person, while being himself guilty of being white, proves, to the "anti-racist" thought policeman, that he had a racist motive for his actions. Because those white devils are all evil racists, you know...
The Fulham Reactionary
13 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (13)
I jested that the racist-finders-general could find 'racism' in an empty cupboard. It's no joke any more. This exemplifies the totalitarian nature of political correctness, and nobody will escape, not even sufferers of Down's Syndrome.
I read about this today. Totally bonkers.
One point though - you've got to be careful with the Daily Mail; they do tend to spin such stories and place a very particular editorial slant on them. So you've got to read between their lines to an extent and ask yourself, are they telling us the full picture? But, that said....still, totally bonkers.
Allan.
You say 'it's no joke any more'. I wonder if you realise that the term 'politically correct' (in this country at least), was originally meant to be ironical and humourous.
The first well known example was Nancy Mitford's book Noblesse Oblige, in 1956. It was a self-mocking, gentle chide about social/table manners among the upper classes.
In 1956 the aristocracy & upper classes were still relatively intact after the war, and they dominated politics. Death duties, nationalisation, and successive government sanctions (plus their dropping birth rate of course) saw this social class decline greatly.
Their passing was a great shame because with it went that counter-balance between the English working class and growing Socialism, and it's uneasy but good natured rapport between the two classes.
Socialism, grim and humourless, now took on that old 'noblesse oblige' mantle and applied it to it's own working class,... and THAT has been the disaster.
The upper classes & aristocracy have never been politically correct in their history, and the new 'social order' wanted to free itself up from any of that past taint. That long established 'counter-balance' is now no more; the working class are legislated against by their OWN people, and not by the old benign order.
But that is the nature of Socialism; it ultimately shits on it's own people.
I saw this on TV and it brought home the utter absurdity of prosecuting this lad even more than when you just read about it. As he put his arms around his mother and told her he loved her it was blatantly obvious he was incapable of 'racism'. Whoever was a party to this should be ashamed of themselves and in any decent society be sacked or at the very least severely reprimanded.
The police investigated for seven months? Are you kidding me?
This story, if true, is too stupid for words.
You people need take back some control over your silly officials.
Bernard -
It may be that Nancy Mitford first applied the 'pc' tag in this country, and if she knew it's true meaning she certainly would have used it ironically.
'Political correctness' is an explicitly Stalinist construct, invented to slur, damn and justify the murder of thousands of Russians and others guilty of many crimes and none. Kulaks were proud of the accusation. Communist apparatchiks had it flung at them. Particularly keen stakanovites found that their eagerness to impress transgressed the rules of political correctness and, most infamously, doubting victory on the Eastern Front was deemed to be 'politically incorrect' and the pretext for murdering tens of thousands of Red Army troops.
Left Wing intellectuals in the post-war West were quick to adopt it and were allowed to since Stalin's crimes were deliberately ignored until Robert Conquest's 'The Great Terror' in 1968. By then the Left were in control of much of academia and the great institutions and the culture was changing.
We all know how widespread PC is, but few know where it comes from, it's ideology or what it's aims are. But then conservatives and genuine liberals have been so hopeless in opposing this evil tool of oppression that they cannot even call describe it properly - cultural Marxism.
FR -
But it really is astounding that matters were taken this far.
If only it were. Despite overwhelming evidence that they are deluded, most people still cling to the belief that the police are somehow a decent, upstanding band of men and women dedicated to upholding the Law. Maybe when we are all damned and jailed we'll realise that the police is now a wholly owned subsidiary of the ruling liberal establishment. Until then they'll go on doing what we've paid them to do at least since Scarman - enforcing the arbitrary rules of the anti-British and anti-liberty LibLabCon clique dedicated to internationlism, criminalising free people and the subjecting us to foreign law.
That should be worth a few votes to the BNP in the local elections. And who could blame anyone for reacting with fury to such gross stupidity if not malice.
On the other hand there are cases where people are attacked because of their religion or race or both.
Racist roadworkers jailed for bullying Muslim colleague
18 April 2008 17:11
Three employees who subjected a Muslim workmate to a 10-month campaign of racial harassment were each jailed for three years yesterday.
Phillip Skett, Sean Melaney and Lee McDermott, who worked at a Walsall roadworks depot, tried to force-feed Amjid Mahmood bacon, which is forbidden in his religion, the Wolverhampton Crown Court heard.
They also placed a rucksack containing multi-coloured wires designed to resemble a bomb on top of Mahmood's work locker, and set fire to his trousers. The bullying included racist comments.
Sentencing the men, Judge John Warner said their behaviour went beyond 'horseplay' and developed into a "campaign of deliberate bullying."
He said: "You humiliated him and the things you did to him were painful, hurtful, dangerous, and done with considerable thought.
"This behaviour was an appalling example of what can happen and its consequences. This sort of behaviour will not be tolerated in a civilised society, in the workplace or elsewhere," he said.
Henry, true enough but I wonder what laws were used in that case. Was it assault, harrassment, and destruction of property or was it 'racially aggravated' such and such. I don't see why the latter qualification is necessary. There is enough to be doing in enforcing the basic laws against assault etc.
Pete Moore.
I can't argue with your origins of PC and it's roots in the Soviet era (China too, by the way).
But the Iron Curtain that descended across Europe after the war ensured that cultural Marxism remained in the East for the most part.
What interests me is how it crossed that divide and gained credence here. I can understand how it might take root in mainland Europe, as they share a common landmass and borders, and even laws, but why the great jump across to the USA and then Britain?
The fall of the Berlin wall (actually- Eastern wall) in the late 80s certainly had a greater, malign, cultural influence on the rest of Europe than is generally acknowledged when it comes to the Marxist ethos. PC decidedly took off during the 1990s.
What is odd however is why PC got such a strong foot-hold in the US. It certainly came across to Britain from there as we share a common language, rather than Europe.
I remember Alister Cooke's letters from America bemoaning the rise of the absurd 'litigation' laws (another form of PC) as long ago as the middle 70s, so it is not that new.
It seems to me that PC 'paved the way' for the Liberal left, (as you call them) rather than the other way round, and since it is another word for Repression, it probably has a short shelf life.
It's not a natural state for humankind to live under, and when it burns out it will burn quickly and violently.
We need to publicise cases like this to shame the perpetrators from doing it again - someone should identify the actual individuals who were responsible.
Bernard
Interesting comment. PC is an extreme reaction against racism. It limits free speech, and makes fools of us all.
But let's accept that there is such a thing as racism (I note GA puts inverted commas round the word, which implies that it doesn't really exist). A trivial form of racism is insults in the street, or name-calling on the bus. But in its most extreme form it leads to genocide. Hitler and Stalin practised it, killing tens of millions. The Ottoman Turks practised it with the Armenian genocide in 1917. Turkey should not be allowed to join the EU while it continues to deny this history. And the Serbs practised it against (muslim) Bosnians at Srebrenica in 1995. So it's alive and well.
It's easy to mock pc. I do it myself. But let's not forget that the evils of racism are a reality, even in 2008.