How bizarre that the keystone of a so-called Conservative budget is a plan to help women give up their children and go to work. Anti-family socialists and hardline dogmatic feminists — often the same people — have long sought to turn women into wage slaves.
The former communist East Germany managed to cram 90% of its women into factories and offices in the 1980s, and considered this a great triumph. Some modern feminists still admire her today.
For them, the only good life is the life of paid work. The only “working women” are those who work outside the home. The enormous, responsible and future-defining task of raising the next generation as good women and men is dismissed as servitude and entrusted to paid outsiders.
Big business felt the same way, viewing the new untapped female workforce as far preferable to the old male working class, most of which was thrown into the national scrapyard during the Thatcher years, along with the blast furnaces , mine winding gears, rolling mills and greasy and noisy old-fashioned car production lines where these people worked. Yet back then most families could get by on one salary, whereas today it takes two, plus lots of tax breaks (and who pays for them in the end?).
So what have we won? The only form of child care that the state does not support or subsidize is when a mother raises her sons and daughters herself.
How bizarre that the keystone of a so-called Conservative budget is a plan to help women give up their children and go to work
In our new age of service industries, call centres, sprawling windowless warehouses and, of course, huge NHS empires, care homes and social work, a female workforce is very suitable good to everyone. Except women. And above all, except their children, who by the hundreds of thousands are denied the presence of a full-time parent.
There is no doubt that superwomen such as Nicola Horlick and Cherie Blair have always dreamed of serving on boards of directors or being judges, with gigantic salaries.
Women like these can afford great nannies to do the job of a full-time mother. But for most female wage slaves, the work is drudgery and the pay low, and that keeps them away from children.
As American conservative thinker Helen Andrews said of the post-60 feminist generation: “Baby boomers promised that jobs were the only way for women to be fulfilled and independent. [but] any socialist could have told them that there is no one more dependent than a wage earner… The net effect was to restrict the choices of typical women, taking the choice that made most of them them happy and removing it from the set of options. ‘
In the new British Democratic Republic, where most of what normal people thought has now been deemed unacceptable and wrong, Ms Andrews can say it (but only rightly) because she is a woman and lives in the United States, where speech is still much freer than it is here.
Of course, I have no opinion on this, being a man. Soon, now that all political parties are in agreement, no one will be able to disagree.
If war is hell, why demand it in Ukraine?
TRENCH WARFARE: All Quiet On The Western Front tries too hard to be smart
Erich Maria Remarque’s World War I book All Quiet On The Western Front was hated by Hitler because no one who read it could ever again be seduced by the so-called glories of war.
Note had been a real fighting soldier and therefore could not be ignored. In fact, the Nazis hated him so much that, unable to get hold of him, they murdered his sister instead.
The book is still powerful (I re-read it this week). But this one’s new movie, despite its Oscars, tries too hard to be smart and stylish.
The raw story of a group of friends, deceived by hard knocks and then exposed to the horrible truth of trench warfare, would have been better.
Those who are now calling for an endless war in Ukraine must understand what they are asking for.
The BBC’s one-sided stagnation is a disaster
Gary Lineker made his return to Match of the Day on Saturday, a week after the show aired without presenters following an unbiased row
If there was a right-wing Gary Lineker, we wouldn’t have all these problems.
Imagine if a figure of similar fame and influence, but in favor of immigration controls, could confront Mr. Lineker on Twitter or during a public debate program. Then it doesn’t matter that one of them uses their positions at the BBC to push a side.
But only the BBC could create such a figure. The national broadcaster is the only body that can elevate people to such prominence. Mr. Lineker’s huge following on Twitter – which makes his opinions important – is a result of his fame in broadcasting.
It is true that the BBC sometimes gives modest platforms to a few nominal conservatives or to confused and politically incoherent mobsters such as Jeremy Clarkson. But the only opinion from which he violently departs is social, moral and political conservatism. Dominated as he is by urban radicals, he simply cannot stand having such opinions, nor the people who defend them. This is where the BBC’s impartiality went awry.
For decades, the BBC has recruited people who actively love mass immigration because it makes the country more multicultural, and who are embarrassed and confused by conservative Christianity or people who believe in the punishment of crime.
How would he restore that balance now? Parliament works, or worked, because it was balanced between two really opposing parties. Fleet Street was the same, as was our court system. A lively public debate is a good way to discover the truth.
The collapse of the BBC into one-sided stagnation is a national disaster. If it doesn’t reform, close it and start over. Yes, let’s have a national broadcaster, but not this one. When the BBC Charter next appears, make it clear that it will only be awarded to a body willing to allow voices from both sides of our society.
Over the past week, I’ve fended off a Twitter mob raging about my argument last week that the Nazis were left-wing racists. Some moron even claimed (thinking “left” means “good”) that I condoned the Holocaust.
Listen, the line between the Nazis and their adversaries was not as rigid and impassable as the left likes to think. Large numbers of Social Democrats and Communists joined the Nazi Brownshirts after Hitler took power. German left-wing historian Konrad Heiden noted this in his 1938 biography of Hitler.
The main entrance to the Dachau concentration camp on July 29, 1945, the day the prisoners were released. The motto on the fence reads ‘Arbeit macht frei’ – ‘Work brings freedom’
The Nazis, with their vast social programs, their tight control of all aspects of society, and their aversion to Christianity and privacy, have much in common with the programs of the left. Stalin and Hitler got along surprisingly well. Leftists simply don’t believe that they and their movement can do, think or say anything wrong.
Well, they are wrong. Let us rejoice that the people who yell at me and ask me to confess my bad deeds, to retract me or simply to keep quiet, do not (yet) have political power.
