Labour party transgender opinions witchhunt

[TonyGosling]

Matthew Strange
25 January at 18:42 ·
Equality or Fairness?
23rd January 2019
https://www.facebook.com/matthew.m.strange/posts/10156469561901284

The day Bristol Labour declared war upon Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948.
On Wednesday night I experienced a sorry spectacle hosted by Bristol Labour Campaign Forum, whereby a kangaroo court bullied, trialed and made judgement on two local people committed to serving our communities, in what could only be described as a good old fashioned witch hunt. Save for the presence of a pyre, or rope hanging from a jibbet, the tell tale signs of an inquisition were present from the off.
The trumped up charges of hate crime were devoid of any legal reference and removed of context; had little regard for the abusive misogynistic behaviour of the accuser and gave no measure of the subtleties involved in what was probably a long interchange between various people in what has become a continual, unending dialogue concerning human rights. The baseless objections held little material substance aside from defamatory accusations, were fuelled by emotion, and were immune from any criticism or examination as they smeared, defamed and chastised candidates of both competence and conscience.
It was clear from the outset that the circus had but one pre-ordained outcome. The alienation and persecution of two honest, compassionate and dedicated women who only wished to serve our party; represent the dispossessed and champion our communities. What happened then?
Firstly, it began by the Chair refusing any discussion or debate, stating even that he would refuse to acknowledge any points of order, intent on reaching the verdict as soon as possible, ironically incapable of seeing that it was he, that was out of order; acting against Labour's constitution, international Human Rights legislation and indeed in complete disregard to any real semblance of democracy at all. The chair was corrupt enough even to break his own guidelines for the procedure, personally supporting the objection of the accuser, like a Judge, siding with the lynch mob, refusing any support for the defence, even though there was tangible evidence which refuted the testimony spoken by the chair, and in doing so throwing all due process to the dogs and with it any notion of democratic fairness, all it seems, in the name of 'equality'.
On Wednesday eve an assembly of lay people made a judgement based on nothing but pure reactionary emotion, pumped by hate, vitriol and glee. Shame on every Labour party member which voted against these two brilliant women, who entered this arena thinking they would be treated fairly, as comrades, as socialists, and as women. And especially, my cynical applause to the Chair, who really ought look in the mirror today and ask whether he has the scruples, substance and sincerity to competently facilitate a meeting of this type in the future. So sad was it to see someone in a position of power so corrupted by their own prejudices and so filled with contempt for those who genuinely believe in democracy, that they would deliberately block candidates struggling for the working class and instead side with those who support the bombing of Syria, the War in Iraq, Nuclear proliferation and those who sacrificed the social security for some middle road to power. Shame on them, not for their lack of judgement and moral reasoning, but their clear incompetence and unwillingness to see when they are out of the depth.
What need is there for a centralised assembly to block the candidacy of someone seeking to stand as councillor? If a hate crime has been committed, then this is a matter for the police. If party rules have been broken, then that is a matter of party discipline, and at least, in my mind not the power of a small fraction of people able to attend an LCF meeting on a Wednesday night for what was a rather casual Inquisition.
What the Labour Campaign Forum has done, is remove the ability for local people to choose their prospective candidates, showing nothing but utter disdain for grass roots democracy and highlights what little regard authoritarian identitarians have for politics of the dispossessed. Neither socialist, nor democrat, only self righteous balls of reactionary emotion.
How can we expect Labour members to handle the diversity of our local communities, if they cannot even cope with the diversity of opinion in our own party? Are we to wrap all comrades in cotton wool as they hammer on the doors of working class communities, fearful that at a moments notice a trigger word will stimulate some past life regression?
Ignorant to class consciousness, the need to raise it, and to continue the pursuit of truth, ideas and the pedagogy of the oppressed or material dialectics, these elite privileged class seek to secure their power at any cost, discarding these cultural traditions of the left and even going so far as to include the sacrifice of the dispossessed themselves, whom they cast under the wheels of the bus named 'progress'.
My dear comrades, we are at an impasse; a cross roads torn asunder by an unsurmountable gap which pleads to be breached. The virtue signalling non thinking left, who seemingly possess no politics with regard to class are so radical in their attempt to push the notion of equality, they have already begun their encroachment on the human rights of us all; incapable are they of seeing the dilemma between equality and fairness. A paradoxical relationship rotting the heart of left wing thought, setting us apart.
At first glance, it may be impossible to discern a difference between equality and fairness? Surely they are the same, until you see what was an axiom, a maxim of truth, something a comrade was once unable to deny, continue to unravel itself before your very eyes.
This week it was noted that Oxford University has decided its offering of female scholarships to be in conflict with their equality guidelines. That in essence, they are discriminatory towards men - no *. The entire point of the scholarship is that they are discriminatory. That only women may apply, the entire point being of the scholarships that they are specifically open to women and only women. Because its fair, and not because its equal.
Men and women aren't equal, so and so we must be able to discriminate fairly to keep checks and balances so as to create a world in which men and women are treated fairly, not equally. Furthermore, we must ask ourselves, what place a legislation designed to increase the justice in society has, whereby it engenders men to be treated equally to women. Yes, this fulfils some perverted notion of equality, but a far cry away from any notion of fairness, and certainly does nothing to serve the dispossessed working class women of the world.
Is it not under the notion of fairness and indeed of freedom completely just to design a scholarship, program or series of opportunities for any group with protected characteristics as laid out in the equalities act, for surely that is the spirit or hansard intention behind the legislation in the first place. What is happening here, is that our public institutions are implementing policy that is at complete odds with the spirit of the statute book, and in turn, our institutions, including the labour party, are subverting the rule of law, further removing parliament and the jurisprudence of the legislature from the rightful sovereignty it should enjoy, and in doing so posing a threat to our own individual sovereignty, our own being, and our own individuality.
Your sex no longer matters. You no longer have the right to define it. No right to discuss it, debate it, or possess any opinion on it. Your religion or philosophical beliefs are irrelevant, for you are unable to express them safely without fear of persecution. Your orientation, and the history of struggle is a myth, for you are unable to define that struggle for fear of being charged with a hate crime, for fear of being a self hater, being an outcast, a pariah, being exiled to the desert. I could go on, where this is heading, is clear. A legislation which many would believe designed to emancipate and raise the consciousness of the dispossessed, is in fact a tyrannical deception which has begun to shackle the mind and implement the worst type of censorship. Not that of the state. Not that of the army, but that of the self, driving those who seek discourse and dialectic away from the authoritarians, now bereft of political homes, into isolated abandon, where the walls of the intellectual fascists divide us, removing us of our sovereignty. My brothers and sisters, I see these events as nothing but an assault upon freedom of expression of all individuals, and an attack on the working class movement itself.
Just to spell it out, for those who still find it difficult to understand some subtleties in this. Our Human Rights, which are, by the way inalienable, that is to say, ''not up for debate'' afford every individual freedom of expression, which includes freedom of thought, and freedom of speech.
The same right which is afforded to gays in their pursuit of happiness, or transgendered people in their pursuit to present as they wish without fear or intimidation or prejudice is the same right which extends to all the protected characteristics, some of which I have listed below. In essence, it is the legal protection to believe what you wish and say what you wish unless it is considered a hate crime by the Criminal Justice Act 2003. That is the basis of freedom of expression. The spirit of the law, and any encroachment on the territory of this law, is nothing but authoritarian and should be rejected, violently, if need be, by any socialist. By any anarchist that believes in the sovereignty of the the individual, and indeed by any genuine Marxist who seeks to establish a dialectic of emancipation or a pedagogy of the oppressed.
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, states that: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
It means that if you are offended by someones religious views, or offended by someones thoughts about their own sex, or indeed their orientation or disability. Tough *. They are afforded those rights by international law.
This includes but is not limited to;
The inalienable right to religious freedoms and philosophical beliefs which form core values; are free from prejudice and discrimination.
The inalienable right to organise, assemble and engage in dialectic, or to debate all issues regarding the emancipation and fair treatment of Male, Female and Intersex'ed people.
The right to organise, assemble, discuss and debate all issues of emancipation regarding sexual orientation and be free from prejudice and discrimination when discussing these issues and concerns pertaining to orientation, including its classification.
The right, to organise, discuss and debate all issues pertaining to disability, mental health and the relationship between environment, society and behaviour.
Any attempt to criminalise and curtail freedom of expression, or hinder the dialectic or suppress the emergence of a pedagogy of the oppressed is in its very essence intellectual fascism. I stand against this fascism, this intellectual intimidation and seek to establish a dialogue of the dispossessed, that is not curtailed by an elite political class hellbent on power.
The question is comrades, and to anyone who made it this far.
Fairness or Equality?
Human Rights or Political Correctness?