THE LAST DITCH

Quaequam Blog! » Iain Dale calls Lib Dem candidate a “whore”.

I don't usually cross-post or refer to my contributions elsewhere but not all my readers may visit the Quaequam Blog by LibDem James Graham. I recently took him mildly to task for accusing Iain Dale of sexism, earning this stern retort;

I have to say that I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve heard
so-called libertarians criticise people employing their own freedom of
speech when they choose to use it to criticise people for being bigoted
and rude. It is as if “politically correct” language has some kind of
magic power that all other language somehow lacks.

Why this blind spot? I genuinely don’t understand it.

With apologies, I repeat some of my latest response here;

If this class of defective thought is as important as you think, then perhaps you should (suggestion, not prescription) make the accusation with care and consideration, not just lob it willy nilly when you want to damage an enemy.

You devalue ideas about which you care deeply because you are so casual in invoking them. For example, the Northern working classes have been called “racist” so often as they struggled with the consequences of mass immigration, that many no longer care. They regard it (at best) as casual abuse designed only to shut them up. That perception has helped, not hindered, the BNP. Overuse the antibiotic, and it ceases to work.

“Whore” has many everyday uses as metaphor and simile, as you might have remembered if it had been used by a political ally. Used by Mr Dale, of course, it’s “sexism”. As I said, he uses such thought-substitutes himself, so is hoist by his own petard.

I found it almost as amusing as when he lobbed it at Michael White and “you too yah boo sucks” ensued. White was called (idiotically) a sexist and suddenly his accuser was a sexist too. My point is that this is about the level of thought that typically goes into the use of such words as “racist”, “sexist”, “homophobe” and “islamophobe”. Most of the time, they are no better than playground abuse and are registering as such with the man and woman in the street. That should be a problem to you. No?

What do other "so-called" libertarians think? Feel free to chip in, here or there.

One response to “Sticks, stones and sexism”

  1. Kevyn Bodman Avatar
    Kevyn Bodman

    I don’t think I’ve ever been called ‘sexist’ (except in my secret identity of Superficial Sexist, occasional commenter on Coffee House) or ‘homophobe’.
    I have been called ‘racist’ and ‘Islamophobe’ more than once.
    Never has my accuser been able to explain how either term is an accurate description of my opinions.
    Each term is used as an attempt at closing the argument,an attempt at playing a trump card which defeats all powers of reason.
    Playground abuse is a good description of these terms; the terms should not be taken seriously.
    That is not to say that bigotry based on race or religious hatred should not be countered; but the best counter is reason, not name-calling which is empty of thought.

    Like

Leave a comment

Tom is a retired international lawyer. He was a partner in a City of London law firm and spent almost twenty years abroad serving clients from all over the world.

Returning to London on retirement in 2011, he was dismayed to discover how much liberty had been lost in the UK while he was away.

He’s a classical liberal (libertarian, if you must) who, like his illustrious namesake, considers that

“…government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.”

Latest comments
  1. Lord T's avatar
  2. tom.paine's avatar
  3. Lord T's avatar
  4. tom.paine's avatar
  5. Lord T's avatar