Wiley isn’t ill – he’s racist

How identity politics helped to resuscitate anti-Semitism.

Brendan O'Neill
Share

Poor Wiley. The grime king must be having a hard time. He clearly has mental-health problems. What he needs is a bit of a talking-to and some education. ‘It’s just really sad’, as Lily Allen said about Wiley’s hate-filled social-media posts about Jews.

This has been the general tone of the discussion about Wiley’s 48-hour spouting of vile racist hatred against Jewish people. There has been an almost sympathetic undertone. (Allen was criticised by her social-media followers for being a Wiley ‘sympathiser’.) Where racism is normally condemned in the strongest terms possible – as disgusting, destructive, a pox, a scourge – Wiley’s anti-Jewish racism seemed to be treated more leniently. It was wrong, divisive, unacceptable. Just unacceptable?

Many have noted the hypocritical double standards on social-media outlets in relation to anti-Jewish racism. If you misgender a trans person, you’ll be booted off Twitter and other platforms faster than you can say the word misogyny. But Wiley’s tweets saying Jews run everything, and are a horrible, double-dealing people, and are ‘snakes’, and ‘you make me sick’, lingered on Twitter for hours and hours.

Yes, the racist tweets were eventually removed. But Wiley was then slapped with a mere seven-day ban from Twitter and Instagram, which suggests that in the minds of the woke suits who run Silicon Valley, expressing profound racial contempt for the Jewish people is less bad than referring to a person with a penis who wanted to force female beauticians to wax his bollocks as ‘he’. That’s what got Meghan Murphy permanently exiled from Twitter. Other feminists have also been booted off the platform forever for referring to people with penises as men. This needs answering, the question of why calling a man a man is a worse speechcrime than calling Jews snakes.

But it needs answering not only by the censorious overlords of Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, whom only a fool would look to for moral consistency and progressive principle. It needs answering by the identitarian left, too. It is now undeniable that this new left – obsessed with racial identity, devoted to the eccentric cause of transgenderism, always on the hunt for thoughtcrimes involving ‘Islamophobia’, ‘transphobia’ and ‘homophobia’ – views anti-Semitism as less bad than other forms of racism. As Tom Slater argued on spiked last year, it is seen as ‘the lesser racism’; it just doesn’t get them going in the same way that other forms of prejudice do.

This is why many identitarian leftists have responded to Wiley’s racism so softly. It’s out of order, they say. Maybe he’s unwell, they claim. Well, maybe he is – but he is also a dyed-in-the-wool racist. Online, some so-called progressives have said he has a point. Look at what Israel does to the Palestinians, they say, once again engaging in the racist ideology of collective Jewish guilt while also holding Israel to a different standard to every other nation on earth. (Note how rarely they speak about what the Turks do to Kurds or what the Saudis are doing to the Yemenis. It’s always just Israel. Always just the Jews.)

The NME even referred to Wiley’s tweets as his ‘Israel tweets’. ‘Wiley responds to anti-Semitism accusations over his Israel tweets’, a headline said. Israel tweets? His tweets were about Jews, those snakes who dominate everything, hate black people and are a destructive force. Even where he mentioned Israel, he was really talking about Jews, as is often the case, tragically, in certain sections of the ‘Palestine solidarity’ movement these days. For some people, Israel has become a proxy for the Jews. What they might once have said about the Jews – sly, controlling, bloodthirsty – they now say about Israel instead. We know this from the past few years of Corbynism, which attracted numerous anti-Semites masquerading as critics of Israel.

To see how differently anti-Semitism is treated in relation to other forms of racism, just imagine if a white celebrity had spent the best part of two days tweeting incessantly about what a disgusting race black people are. Or if a rapper raged against Muslims for hours on end and accused them of being a malignant presence in our societies. Do you think Corbynistas would have said those people just need some education? Do you think there would be silence on the comment pages of newspapers, as there has been in relation to Wiley? Of course not. There would be noisy public outrage. The celebrity’s rants would be held up as proof of widespread anti-black racism or Islamophobia across society. But Wiley’s rants? It’s just Jews. Calm down.

Why is anti-Semitism treated as less bad than other forms of racism? Why is it a growing force in some sections of the left? Why is it often greeted with the words ‘well, he has a point’ rather than with the stern, irate condemnations we would expect in response to racism more broadly?

It’s because of identity politics.

Anti-Semitism is the oldest hatred. It has exploded in societies numerous times over the millennia, often with unprecedented murderous consequences. It sometimes changes shape – going from being a religiously motivated hatred to a form of biological racism, from a far-right pursuit to a shamefully left-wing phenomenon – but it is always there, in one form or another. And today, one of the forms it takes is identitarian categorisation.

Identity politics has helped to resuscitate anti-Semitism. One of the worst things identity politics does is categorise people according to whether they are oppressed or privileged. It creates hierarchies of victimhood. Intersectionality is an avowedly sectarian, divisive cause, given to grouping entire peoples according to whether they are historic victims or the beneficiaries of privilege. This very easily morphs into a form of moral categorisation: the victim groups are good, the privileged groups are bad. So black people deserve our sympathy and our support, while white people – the most privileged, apparently – deserve scorn, and constant lecturing (‘Dear white people’), and re-education. Witness how virtually every corporation in the West is now reprimanding and controlling its workforce through the mad ideologies of ‘white fragility’ and ‘white privilege’.

Identitarianism is a toxic, divisive politics. And it has proven particularly bad for Jewish people. Where do they go in the woke racists’ categories? Which inhuman identitarian box must they be placed in? It’s the ‘privileged’ one. Consider how both far-right and far-left racists flit between terms like ‘white privilege’ and ‘Jewish privilege’. Jews are successful, right? They aren’t struggling. Therefore, they are ‘privileged’. And ‘privileged’ is bad. It’s immoral. The ‘privileged’ are the new oppressors, requiring constant condemnation. White people, ‘cis’ people, people of Indian Hindu heritage, Jews… all privileged, all bad, all on the receiving end of the new hatreds whipped up by the destructive politics of identity.

Wiley’s racist rants contained elements of the old anti-Semitism, especially the vile trope about Jews running the world. But they had a big dose of identitarian anti-Semitism, too. His belief that Jews conspire in the repression of blacks, and that Jews (being white) can be racist but black people (being black) cannot be racist, springs directly from the identitarian ideology. It’s time to face facts: the new politics of identity, this racialisation of every facet of life, the myopic obsession over skin colour and ‘privilege’ and heritage, have breathed life back into actual racism, including the oldest racism. Identity politics is a gateway drug to actual racial hatred. Reject it.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy

Picture by: YouTube.

Let’s cancel cancel culture

Free speech is under attack from all sides – from illiberal laws, from a stifling climate of conformity, and from a powerful, prevailing fear of being outed as a heretic online, in the workplace, or even among friends, for uttering a dissenting thought. This is why we at spiked are stepping up our fight for speech, expanding our output and remaking the case for this most foundational liberty. But to do that we need your help. spiked – unlike so many things these days – is free. We rely on our loyal readers to fund our journalism. So if you want to support us, please do consider becoming a regular donor. Even £5 per month can be a huge help. You can find out more and sign up here. Thank you! And keep speaking freely.

Donate now

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.

Comments

Travis Henderson

4th August 2020 at 8:02 pm

It seems that Britain has established a reputation as an island asylum. I’ve never heard of Poor Wiley, however I do know who Lily Allen is. She is a first class singer who very often has difficulty to stand up. I’m happy that people with a wide range of disabilities have a place to pass their lives.

Travis Henderson

4th August 2020 at 7:55 pm

Near the Lascaux caves in Dordogne is a museum. There are real live Aurochs there which have been cloned. I was reminded of this when I saw the photo of Poor Wiley above.

This matter is just an example of the problems to come if dysgenic inbreeding is allowed to go on.

Tony Benn

4th August 2020 at 9:58 am

If Wiley is a racist why hasn’t he been arrested for this “hate crime”?

Double Knot

2nd August 2020 at 2:52 pm

While somewhat crude, Wiley is correct. I can smell your farts from here, “Dead-end Brendan”

Graham Southern

3rd August 2020 at 8:42 am

Do you see yourself as a fascist or an anti-fascist?
Serious question.

Marvin Jones

31st July 2020 at 4:54 pm

It is the only defence and consolation that these semi evolved species have when they look in the mirror and wonder what they did for their gods to have made them like what they see. So! out of pure instinctive hatred for genetic disadvantages in life, they set out take, take, take everything they are incapable of earning through merit and intellect.

John Little

31st July 2020 at 2:30 pm

The great thing is, that this Fascist racist bigot is black. It’s good because it takes off some of the pious moral shine and humbug surrounding BLM. It also serves as a timely reminder that where racism is concerned we are all truly brothers under the skin. No exceptions, blacks included. So let’s get up off our knees folks. Racism is one of the few things which is truly diverse and multicultural.

Marvin Jones

31st July 2020 at 5:11 pm

It is inbred in the human genetic evolutionary DNA, and can never be erased or cut out. The sooner we realise this the quicker we MAY learn to understand each other. But alas, when portions of the human race waste their time and energy believing in pixies, fairies, goblins and gods, and willing to show allegiance to kill, innocent men, women and children for this sickness, others because of their inability to work and strive like some do, and then the ignorant liberal fools who think that this tiny island could be inhabited by the dregs of the third world, with limitations or incessant numbers that will never be a problem, with so many multiplying the populating by breeding because they can, “what a wonderful world!”.

Bros Bro

1st August 2020 at 12:50 am

What has religion or immigration got to do with Wiley’s racism? Seems like you have a chip on your shoulder.

Graham Southern

3rd August 2020 at 11:12 am

We have a slight natural predisposition for people who look like ourselves. However, that doesn’t necessarily translate into racism unless it is pushed for a cultural or political reason. I don’t feel any more racism towards black people than towards people with red hair, despite the best attempts of the woke left.

Dodgy Geezer

30th July 2020 at 7:54 pm

It’s a little more complex than simple racism. It has a political dimension.

The left wing are looking for votes. There are lots of Muslims – typically Pakistani – in their target seats, who have delivered reliable left wing votes and can be relied upon to keep doing so – if they are kept sweet.

The Muslim world hates Israel, for essentially political reasons. Nothing to do with race or creed. But knocking Jews will always go down well with Muslim voters. So that’s what they do.

Simple political calculation. No particular concern about race at all…

Gareth Roberts

30th July 2020 at 8:34 am

I found myself pondering Leftist anti-semitism back in 1973 when a Leftist friend of mine reacted to the surprise attack on Israel by declaring that Hitler was right about the Jews.
Many on the Left have a class-war mentality. Many of them also seem to think that every Jew is called Rothschild and has mountains of money. Hence, the Jews are on the wrong side in the class war. Once this idea has taken hold, nothing seems to shift it.

Marvin Jones

31st July 2020 at 5:21 pm

Gareth, just look carefully and you will observe that the types of people who detest the Trumps, Rothchilds, Rockerfellers, Besos, and the successful Jewish culture, are mostly the inadequate, liberal, inept left behinds, who just cannot stand on their own two feet. Brexit is an example. It had nothing to do with being a member of a corrupt flawed system, it was/is about being afraid of venturing out on our own, with our own laws and rules and pioneership.

Tony Benn

29th July 2020 at 11:53 pm

The most racist statement you can ever create is that people are different because of the colour of their skin, the God they worship or their culture. Yet we perpetuate this habit despite the fact is clearly create hatred and division. If you wish to dislike people because their religion is abhorrent in some way you should be allowed to say so. If you think some cultures are riven with homophobia or violence to women, why can’t you say so? To claim special protection because of the colour of your skin or your past is ridiculous, the only way to end racism is by ending the concept and protection of race!

Echo Romulus

31st July 2020 at 7:53 am

Is isn’t *because* of skin colour as to why people are different.

Gerry Mander

29th July 2020 at 6:38 pm

Criticism of a religion is not racism. Perhaps the religion mentioned is particularly sensitive, but there is another from the same part of the world that is just as sensitive

cliff resnick

29th July 2020 at 7:00 pm

Essentially Jews are an ethnic group and Judaism is the religion of the Jews

Vivian Darkbloom

29th July 2020 at 10:13 pm

No way Cliff. There are all sorts of Jews of all backgrounds and skin tones. Ethiopian Jews are dark skinned you silly sausage. There are Jews in India in Cochin, Kerala. It’s like saying Muslims are all brown or Christians are white.

Graham Southern

3rd August 2020 at 1:07 pm

True, but what Gerry has in mind is the hook-nosed, oily, money-grabbing Jew. This is a racial stereotype used over the millennia to distract the ignorant and stupid from realising who was really oppressing them.

Bros Bro

30th July 2020 at 12:07 am

Sometimes people camouflage their racism by talking about religion. So e.g those who dont like others from say a South Asian country can use religion as a useful alibi, but we all know what they mean and what is driving their prejudice.

Vivian Darkbloom

30th July 2020 at 10:56 pm

Yes Bros, I don’t doubt this is true. But where does the micro end and the macro begin? Wiley reckons that this whole business is a beef between himself and his manager, who is J ewish. At least this is how he is rationalising it. But his comments extend to a whole group, i.e. the macro. Conflating British J ews with I sraelis is another giveaway. But anyway, you can read my other comments on this thread. He’s been very silly and probably destroyed his career.

I hold with free speech because it is linked inextricably with responsibility. Say what you want but be prepared to face the consequences. I reject hate speech laws for many reasons but perhaps the main one is that these laws do not change minds; we’re left with very polite racists or other -ists whom we cannot identify and consequently are unable to avoid, which can lead to potential harm. I want to know clearly if someone hates me because of the superficial hue of my skin tone or my religion. It’s a matter of survival. I appreciate Wiley for his honesty but he has to understand that in the current climate he is going to be trashed and his career ruined. He is now a joke; my kids, who listen to Grime, are killing themselves laughing at him. The very mention of his name provokes uncontrollable storms of humour around the dinner table; I can’t even have a serious conversation about this without them cracking up. I’m sure that’s not what he intended, but there you go. When Pete and Bas are considered more serious than Wiley then you know it’s all over for him.

K Tojo

29th July 2020 at 4:48 pm

In his final paragraph O’Neill says:
“…but black people (being black) cannot be racist, springs directly from the identitarian ideology”.

I’m not sure we need to go into the arcane subject of identitarian ideology to confront the strange lack of self-criticism evident in some young Black males.

Take for example the stabbing to death of passenger on the Guildford to London train in January 2019. The perpetrator, found guilty in the face of irrefutable evidence that he had murdered a man, declared to the court: “I done nuffing wrong!” In what alternative moral universe is an act of brutal murder not wrong?

This Wiley chappy, asserts that he is not racist. I suspect that he is able to hold that view because his understanding of racism doesn’t go much deeper than “Black people are not being treated with due respect by White people”.

Colin Broughton

31st July 2020 at 10:07 pm

Black people can’t be racist. According to the leftist definition (It is after all a far-left concept) Racism is power plus prejudice.

Since in a white society ethnic minorities are said not to have power, a black person cannot be racist.

QED

That’s the advantage of defining something to suit oneself.

Peter Anestos

29th July 2020 at 3:55 pm

“The Jews have lived an existence that is much harder than ours. There is nothing that compares to the Holocaust. Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state.” Fidel Castro, January 2017.

Colin Broughton

31st July 2020 at 10:15 pm

There have been 20 genocides since 1950.

Sean Lydon

29th July 2020 at 12:46 pm

‘Racism’ / ‘anti-racism’ is an almighty gaslighting of Europeans who are paradoxically vulnerable to accusations of racism as the sole proponents of ‘anti-racism’, at least in the sense of being the only group who don’t automatically side with their own people, never mind actively taking sides against them.

‘Racist’ is the ‘n’ word for whites, only ‘n’ word is derogatory whereas ‘r’ word is accusatory wrapped in indignation, the accuser automatically cast as virtuous. Used by whites who instead of feeling superior to other races look down on other members of their own. To that extent the white working class serve a comparable role to those once known as “natives”.

In a reversal of the old order the political value of lower order whites, demographically displaced by an imported ‘proletariat’, has become expendable. Thus Marxist class antagonisms transferred to race and culture. ‘Racism’ in place of ‘Capitalism’ as animating principle legitimising ‘struggle’ i.e. political violence.

Remain now a left-wing cause whereas in first referendum ‘Out’ was an article of faith for “the left” whose raison d’etre was protecting British workers against the depredations of capital and an influx of cheap labour. Whereas ‘left’ today is ‘Refugees Welcome’.

‘Anti-racism’ signals ‘elite’ membership. Non-whites appropriated as a victim group. Multiculturalism / Cultural Marxism marketed to the masses as ‘Diversity’/”anti-racism” licensing saviour whites to ‘cancel’ non-compliant Europeans who cling to their ‘racist’ inherited identity, who are supposed to celebrate other identities openly hostile to their own.

Indeed the identity of the most racially antagonistic group is premised on their appearance as a literal negation. To that extent they can be understood as foot soldiers of ‘the left’ / ‘elite’ / ‘globalists’. There are hundreds if not thousands of videos of attacks on lone whites. I’ve yet to see one where the identities are reversed else it would make global headlines.

What we call “left” is an entirely negative identity premised on scapegoating European culture: what Roger Scruton characterised as a “culture or repudiation”. As the great truth-teller and ‘scapegoat’ theorist Rene Girard put it: ‘Not only is the revolt against ethnocentrism an invention of the West, it cannot be found outside the West’.

Zammo McTrotsky

28th July 2020 at 11:30 pm

Well, finally. BON can legitimately take a scattergun approach with the term “identity politics” here, I’m fine with that. This is basically right, (I don’t really expect BON to acknowledge that Tories have measurably more prevalent antisemitism than Labour did and other stuff that irks me, or that some of the readership he aims at will take this as just more “the left are the real racists now,” ammo, that is not the take-home message here) and his uncharacteristically fair and judicious use of qualifiers, “some parts of the left,” “some parts of the Palestinian solidarity movement,” etc., actually gives more force to the argument by virtue of being true. The bloke who reckons he’s done what he definitely has got a tendency to do, which is smear all criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic, he hasn’t done here at all. If a reader reads that into it, approvingly or disapprovingly that’s their responsibility, but words matter and I think BON has been clear in this one. I’m not altogether with him on nuances in this article but who cares?

Jeremiah Johndon

28th July 2020 at 10:46 pm

Baloney, his career is just fine. The cretins and creeps he appeals to have no standards or morals.

David Johnson

28th July 2020 at 8:08 pm

So you are re-defining anti-semitic and racist rants as a manifestation of courage?
Not a member of the BLM are you, by any chance?

Jolly Roger

28th July 2020 at 6:05 pm

No – he is a thick as pig s**t racist scum bag. That’t what he is.

Gerry Mander

29th July 2020 at 6:59 pm

That will “offend” him….

Marvin Jones

31st July 2020 at 5:27 pm

No it shouldn’t Gerry, “black” wasn’t mentioned.

Michel Houllebeq

28th July 2020 at 11:45 am

If Wiley was racist against White Brits the backlash would be even weaker (he was to an extent).
Studies have shown White people to have the lowest “in-group preference” of all races which debunks the racism narrative, showing the opposite and that white people are the least racist when compared to other racial groups. It also explains the reality of immigration and why BAME people continue to want to come to immigrate to majority-White Western countries.

peter simon

28th July 2020 at 1:57 pm

Good to see that there are some people in here who have know whats going on

Ian Murray

28th July 2020 at 6:50 pm

This is because white people are less affected by racism. Having basically no direct experience of it and no negative effects from it natural leaves them less bothered about it.

Major Bonkers

30th July 2020 at 1:04 pm

But that is because, prior to the post-Second World War wave of immigration, Britain was effectively racially homogenous. What differences there were were based on home nation nationality, class (meaning both money and behaviour), religion, and education.

Ven Oods

28th July 2020 at 10:39 am

“The man is clearly cracking up.”
As opposed to most of the others posting on platforms like Twatter? How do you differentiate?

Vivian Darkbloom

28th July 2020 at 1:34 pm

Ha! That’s a very good question which I can’t easily answer. Partly it’s the short format; writing at length means you at least have to think harder rather than post a brain fart when that second bottle of wine kicks in. But yes, it can be very hard to differentiate between the levels of nuttiness and the genuinely disturbed.

Gerry Mander

28th July 2020 at 8:19 am

Never criticise Jews or you’ll be in trouble, even here.

Ian Murray

28th July 2020 at 6:52 pm

You can criticise individual people and that is all you should ever need to do. Indeed. if you criticise a. person because of their race, gender, etc that is self-evidently treating them with prejudice.

Gerry Mander

29th July 2020 at 6:57 pm

Only if you consider religious beliefs (which are mere superstition in my view) sacrosanct. A person’s colour is something they cannot do anything about, but their opinions and beliefs are surely open to legitimate criticism?

Graham Southern

3rd August 2020 at 11:43 am

Except that anti-Semitism doesn’t focus on the Jewish religion, it focuses on the idea that all Jews are rapacious, cunning and evil. It’s racism.

reality lite

28th July 2020 at 1:34 am

Thankfully I haven’t the slightest idea what the term “gaslighting” means. But I have learnt that anyone using it is worth ignoring.

Mike Oliver

28th July 2020 at 4:29 am

I think you are gaslighting us.

jessica christon

28th July 2020 at 8:07 am

Nice.

Gordon Al Gopher

29th July 2020 at 12:36 am

It’s something to do with lighting your farts.

Mor Vir

27th July 2020 at 11:23 pm

Oh wow, you are spinning Trax. I accept your testimony about that stuff, never tried it. Best to stick with puff, and avoid booze too. Drink is a total back stabber, it puts you up to things, anything, and then makes you regret it 10X for days, even weeks. Puff will just show you yourself and others, it will not put you up to anything. I have been entirely off everything for months and I am quite enjoying it.

Gordon Al Gopher

28th July 2020 at 12:50 am

Cannabis isn’t the elixir you seem to think it is Mor. Sure, it’s fine for you and that’s great. It messes many others up.

In my experience of all drugs, whatever positive effect they have in the short term (eg chill you out, or give you confidence) they have the opposite effect in the long term.

Vivian Darkbloom

28th July 2020 at 1:00 am

Oh yes, of course I’m spinning tracks my brother. Phuture et al, and all that goodness the house generation brought to the world. Let’s be serious; the truth of it all has run over the hills and is now far far away, and all the rest is speculation and muttering and denigration on digital platforms when none of us really know the truth. I say what I say not to excuse but as an attempt to explain. Let’s not lose the subject. Wiley has been silly. Whether the silliness is a result of drug or alcohol use or just actual silliness we’ll probably never know. Puff though, that’s the leveller. I don’t think Wiley would have said what he said if he was smoking weed. I don’t know what he was on, if anything, but the silly sod has probably destroyed his career and that’s really sad. It’s actually a tragedy and no laughing matter. That’s all, and the rest is noise. It’s late; I’m off to bed now; regards.

jessica christon

27th July 2020 at 10:31 pm

I thought he meant “ill”, like “dope” or some other rap slang from decades ago!

Bros Bro

27th July 2020 at 9:43 pm

After writing an article defending Rebecca Iong Bailey’s right to free speech a few weeks ago, I was wondering how long it would take before BON would attempt to redeem himself.
The hypocrisy of the shyte I’ve just read is astounding.

I absolutely concede that there is a glaring double standard on social media when it comes to differing “culture war” opinions and we should all be worried for the state of humanity when there needs to be a debate about “women needing to have vaginas.”

However, Is anyone actually surprised at these state of affairs? Wasn’t this inevitable if people have a position of “I support homosexuality but not the right of gays to get married” or “I support the right of people to define their own gender but dont force me to accept their definition.” The subjects of this attitude will always demand more and those with feeble opinions will increasingly have to concede.

BON is pleading with us to consider what the reaction would be if Wiley wrote what he did about Muslims or Blacks. This is a fair point. However, where was the empathy, outrage and call for equality when right wing newspapers and tabloids were writing incendiary headlines against Muslims almost on a daily basis which would never have been written about Joos or Black people.

The man who argues for Katie Hopkins’ right to unleash her daily onslaught in the name of free speech, now wants us to feel sorry for the recipients of Wiley’s two day blitz.

BON must have turned the page of his calendar to the 1st of April with a smirk on his face before he started writing this crap. What other explanation can there be for him to ignore that “collective Joowish guilt for Israel” sounds an awful lot like “collective Muslim guilt for the actions of ISIS or the groomers in Burnley”, and “they dominate everything and hate black people” is almost identical to “imposing Shariah law through the back door” and “hate all Kuffar”

So what criticism of Isra el is acceptable to BON? Does he not understand that if the general public feel that they cannot say anything negative about a group of people, some will start to believe that everything is negative about that same group of people.

According to Brendon, “Israel” is code for “nasty Joos” but the term “Muslims” in countless hate filled columns actually only refers to ISIS.

Furthermore, who are the identitarian left? He is talking as if everyone who hates Israel must also be pro trans. I know plenty of people who have sympathy for Pales tinians while also believing that a woman cannot have a penis. I’m sure there are also “people” who see yellow cubes in urinals whilst on their period who are staunch Zionists. We are not a homogeneous group.Classification has been the first ingredient in every genocide known to man.

Finally, I was looking forward to reading how the article would end. Would BON actually come down on the side of “everyone should be able to say whatever the hell they want about each other” or “hate on both sides should be censored”. Unsurprisingly, he ended the article with his poo stained backside firmly on the fence. What an Arse!

Gerry Mander

29th July 2020 at 6:52 pm

Interesting that you leave gaps and deliberately mis-spell because I know from experience that this organ, which prides itself on free speech, censors as much as any other journal. Your ‘cure’ seems to work, so I’ll try that too!!

Vivian Darkbloom

29th July 2020 at 10:26 pm

Gerry, I keep forgetting to do that. Clearly this site employs Boolean strings which pick up on certain words and put the comment on hold until a human decides if it’s OK to publish. I’ve just had a comment put in moderation which mentions J ews – and not in a derogatory sense either. Bros Bro and others have sussed this and have worked out a simple but effective get around.

Bros Bro

30th July 2020 at 12:19 am

It wont be lost to anyone that you can write “Muslim” “Islam” “Paki” and get away with it but spell Joo or Isra hell correctly and you’ll get censored.

Bros Bro

30th July 2020 at 12:21 am

And people still think I am paranoid. More astonishing people still believe we have Free Speech in this country.

John Potter

27th July 2020 at 9:40 pm

Can you publish his tweets, please, when you write articles like this? One of my problems with the MSM is they call something racist and then don’t say what it is was said. Then I have to go and search for what they said to see if it was racist (which it often isn’t really). I’m not saying this bloke’s tweets weren’t racist (they certainly sound so), and I’m not disagreeing with the content of the article. I’d just like to know what he said in full. Spiked readers aren’t a squeamish bunch. We can handle it.

Mor Vir

27th July 2020 at 8:16 pm

If he is mouthing off openly in public then it is more likely that he has been using alcohol. Cannabis does not reduce social inhibitions in the same way, and the stronger strains tend to emphasis them rather than reduce them. Same goes for aggression; alcohol is the obvious candidate.

Vivian Darkbloom

27th July 2020 at 9:33 pm

Perhaps I was too subtle, Mor. Listen to the track I posted. I’m talking about cocaine or its inhalable derivative, crack.

Vivian Darkbloom

27th July 2020 at 10:10 pm

To add to my reply, it might be very well be that he’s on the sauce. It’s possible. It sounds more like the talk one hears from someone who’s snorted a few lines and thinks they’re in possession of some kind of truth. I know what these folk sound like; I’ve taken coke myself albeit many years ago and hung around with coke heads. One of my friends died from crack. The sense of self-importance it gives is incredible for as long as the 30 minute high lasts. And then come the drop and thereafter the little interior voice that says “just another line”. You want to get back to that better reality where you’re superhuman and what you say is charged with deep meaning but is actually bollox.

Mor Vir

27th July 2020 at 10:20 pm

Is there much c rack in UK? You cannot assume that he is on that just b/c he is black lol.

Vivian Darkbloom

27th July 2020 at 11:33 pm

Mor, I don’t know how much crack there is in the UK. I do know that cocaine use in Europe is highest in Spain and Britain, and perhaps surprisingly, Albania; Wikipedia provides an imperfect answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_prevalence_of_cocaine_use

If one follows the routes taken by cocaine importers then we can expect Spain to be top of the list as the drug is produced in Hispanophone countries in South America. But the market will spread to those countries which have the most demand for the product, and in Europe that is Britain. Crack is produced by a process which “washes” cocaine to result in a much more powerful product and a more intense “hit”. To racialise the use of crack in Europe might or might not be relevant to the discussion. I just don’t know; I had a look at the statistics and I couldn’t find anything to back your assertion that black people are more prone to cocaine use than other racial groups. It’s your assumption, not mine, and nowhere in my comment did I say such a thing. My comment is concerned with an individual and not with a group.

Mor Vir

27th July 2020 at 11:44 pm

OK, I do not know that scene. I have been offered ‘Charlie’ a few times but I have always turned it down. Seller ply their wares, and cannabis legalisation would separate customers from that. It is sometimes argued that cannabis is a ‘gate way’, well criminalisation puts users into contact with other stuff.

Vivian Darkbloom

29th July 2020 at 10:48 pm

The mods have truncated our exchange and removed the Phuture link, Mor. Is this some kind of vendetta against Chicago house music or the Trax label? Hmm. House Music Matters.

I have a several boxes full of original Trax and other pressings (which are pretty poor in terms of vinyl; I even have one where you can see traces of the previous record which was melted down. Rough.). Trax was pure house and anyone who appreciates the label and the art gets cut considerable slack by me. I’ve sometimes thought House and Techno are types of musical drugs.

John Reic

27th July 2020 at 8:02 pm

Did she consider Thomas Mair was mentally ill?

James Knight

27th July 2020 at 4:54 pm

How many trolls do have mental health issues? What would the overlap look like on a Venn diagram?

Gordon Al Gopher

27th July 2020 at 2:39 pm

I don’t disagree with the double standards regarding anti-semitism and Wiley might not actually be ‘ill’ but I read through pretty much all those 2 days of tweets and he’s definitely not ‘well’ either.

I find it really sad. I went though a period of melt down a few years back and I recognise a lot of his behaviour in the sort of thing I was doing. I wasn’t on Twitter but I remember going through a period of waking up each morning and having to delete loads of Facebook posts from the previous night.

My issue was cannabis and addiction. I looked back a little further on Wiley’s tweets and he’s talking about spice (synthetic cannabis). Could just be a coincidence. Yes a few people were trying to be sympathetic but the majority on Twitter were throwing him under a bus. Most celebs now would happily throw Wiley under a bus if it boosted their ‘woke’ credentials.

I feel for they guy and I hope he’s ok.

Gordon Al Gopher

27th July 2020 at 2:41 pm

Plus I was full of anger and resentment just like Wiley appears to be. Again, could just be a coincidence.

Gordon Al Gopher

27th July 2020 at 4:17 pm

Cliff I’m sure some of you don’t even need weed.

cliff resnick

27th July 2020 at 7:09 pm

been moderated I guess some people don’t get irony!

cliff resnick

28th July 2020 at 9:55 pm

Wiley isn’t ill – he’s racist

Tinfoil Hat

27th July 2020 at 7:42 pm

So is cannibis anti-semitic because he didn’t pick on any other race or did it lubricate his inner prejudice?

Gordon Al Gopher

27th July 2020 at 8:06 pm

I can’t speak for Wiley. In my case long term use altered my perception of something I was already angry about.

Mor Vir

27th July 2020 at 8:21 pm

The cannabis likely showed you the truth of the matter and you were right to be angry lol. If you had clearer sight in the first place then it might not have happened to you in the first place. Do not blame the cannabis for giving you a fresh perspective. How you responded to that is up to you.

Gordon Al Gopher

28th July 2020 at 12:40 am

I’m not anti-cannabis Mor, but in my case it was harmful. Especially the amount I was smoking. And no I wasn’t right to be angry. Whether or not the anger was justified, in my case the anger was an acid that did more harm to the vessel in which it was stored than to anything on which it was poured.

Looks to me like Wiley is suffering far more than anyone who reads his unfortunate tweets.

Mor Vir

27th July 2020 at 8:17 pm

Were you drinking at the same time?

Gerry Mander

27th July 2020 at 1:06 pm

ANY comment mentioning Judaism or Jews must now be “pre-moderated”? Whatever happened to free speech?

Gerry Mander

27th July 2020 at 1:05 pm

Is any criticism of Jews or Judaism now considered out of bounds? If so, why? One can criticise Christians and Christianity with impunity, so why is Judaism sacrosanct?

Gordon Al Gopher

27th July 2020 at 8:12 pm

It would appear so. Even for the champions of free speech.

Danny Rees

27th July 2020 at 12:18 pm

“”But it needs answering not only by the censorious overlords of Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, whom only a fool would look to for moral consistency and progressive principle”

So on the one hand Brendan complains Twitter etc are censorious but on the other demands to know why those who post antisemitism on social media have not been censored. So he supports some censorship then.

Mor Vir

27th July 2020 at 12:27 pm

Fair point, B does look inconsistent there and he should clarify.

In Negative

27th July 2020 at 12:57 pm

His article was bending over backwards to distinguish his own moral position concerning free speech from Twitter’s censorious approach. Nowhere does he call on Twitter to censor whiley. He simply asks the question of censorial identitarianism why they are not as quick to censor anti-semitism as they are other forms of ism. It’s a fair question.

In Negative

27th July 2020 at 1:05 pm

The quote you give misses the important first bit:

“This needs answering, the question of why calling a man a man is a worse speechcrime than calling J-ws snakes.

But it needs answering not only by the censorious overlords of Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, whom only a fool would look to for moral consistency and progressive principle. It needs answering by the identitarian left, too.”

He presents the identitarian morality and then asks it a question. He does not make any demand for censorship himself.

Mor Vir

27th July 2020 at 1:21 pm

OK, he is saying that the question needs answering, not the existence of the posts through censorship.

Ed Turnbull

27th July 2020 at 1:07 pm

Danny, nowhere in that article was BON arguing that Wiley should be censored, he was merely pointing out the appalling double standards that are prevalent in the woke-osphere. Though anyone who’s actually sapient hardly needs it to be pointed out. We’ve returned to a time when people are judged not by their actions, by the content of their character if you will, but by their secondary characteristics – race, sex, sexuality, whatever – MLK must be spinning in his grave.

fret slider

27th July 2020 at 12:08 pm

“always on the hunt for thoughtcrimes involving ‘Islamophobia’, ‘transphobia’ and ‘homophobia’”

And always spouting their totally leukophobic worldview. Orwell’s observations of the English intelligentsia didn’t go quite far enough. The post-modern left see being white as disgraceful, let alone being English.

Ian Murray

28th July 2020 at 6:55 pm

Yes I had a bad experience of winter sports hence my dislike of the colour white.

steve moxon

27th July 2020 at 12:07 pm

Brendan’s STILL not got there though, has he. It is not a “gateway” to hated, Brendan. It IS HATRED. It’s hatred incarnate. Hate is ALL ‘identity politics’ is.
See ….. ‘THE ORIGIN OF ‘IDENTITY POLITICS’ & ‘POLITICAL CORRECTNESS’: Not Consideration for Minorities but Hatred Towards the Mass of Ordinary People; Specifically ‘the Workers’ — Tracing the Roots of Why and How it Arose and Developed Reveals the Greatest Political Fraud in History’.
SUMMARY: ‘Identity politics’ — often or even usually dubbed ‘political correctness’, though it’s not the same thing, having a different, parallel origin; PC is the mode of enforcement of ‘identity politics’, as in speech codes and cancel culture — is the result of a political-Left major backlash against the mass of ordinary people (in Europe and ‘the West’), beginning in the 1920s, in the wake of the persistent failure of Marxist theory to be realised in European ‘revolution’ or any real change through democracy. In shifting the blame away from Marxist theory and its adherents, and on to those the theory had prescribed and predicted would have been the beneficiaries — the workers (if only they had responded accordingly) — then the cognitive-dissonance within the political-left mindset caused by this crisis to an extent was salved. [It is NOT at all the same as what the Left mistakenly term ‘the politics of identity’ to tag the new movements against the elite, on the false assumption that they are essentially nationalistic and ‘white backlash’. Trump and Brexit triumphed because the general populace have come to realise that the government-media-education elite has an unwarranted profound contempt for if not hatred towards them; and, therefore hardly is liable to act in their interests.]
The intellectual rationalisation was to build on false notions of Engels (co-author with Marx of The Communist Manifesto) that ‘capitalism’ created the family and ‘false consciousness’, by theorising mechanisms of how ‘the workers’ were somehow prevented from revolting. This was by invoking Freud’s now comprehensively discredited notion of ‘repression’, first to attempt to explain a supposed impact on ‘the workers’ of ‘capitalism’ acting within the context of the family. With most workers (the group considered the principal ‘agents of social change’ in a ‘revolution’) being male, then the theoreticians had in mind the male as ‘head’ of the family. It was a simple extension in political-Left imagination for ‘the worker’ to change from being the putative conduit of the impact of ‘capitalism’ to its embodiment, leaving by default women to be deemed a replacement supposed ‘oppressed’ and ‘disadvantaged’ ‘group’. The false notion of ‘repression’ was also considered in a wider sense to produce ‘false consciousness’ in the ‘proletariat’, supposedly obscuring what was in their own best interests.
This implausible and unfalsifiable non-scientific nonsense mainly festered within academia until circa 1968 the New Left in the USA, spurred by, indeed aping the Chinese ‘cultural revolution’, co-opted a movement which, though having nothing do do with the Left, appeared to be akin to the revolutionary activity predicted by Marxism: US ‘civil rights’. This added to the ‘new oppressed’ another category, which like that of women could be envisaged as an inversion of a retrospective stereotype of ‘the worker’. In the wake of the similarly seeming revolutionary Stonewall riots of 1969, the ‘gay rights’ lobby also was co-opted (again, despite having had nothing to do with the Left) to further add by inversion to the abstract demonised aspects of ‘the worker’, thereafter retrospectively stereotyped as male plus ‘white’ plus heterosexual.
This prizing into the role of being emblematic of Marxist struggle naturally rendered the specific conflicts more generalisable, allowing expansion into more widely encompassing categories. US Afro-Americans, in being championed as the ‘ethnic minority’ supposed warriors of the Left thereby meant anyone generically of an ‘ethnic minority’ was deemed to belong to the club. Likewise, ‘gays’ became generic ‘homosexuals’. The problem thereby arose of false identification. The category non-white / ethnic minority includes such as migrant Indians and Chinese, who by no criteria are ‘disadvantaged’ or ‘oppressed’. Likewise lesbians drawn into the category homosexual. As for women, by objective, non-ideological analysis, women are privileged, as they are bound to be with the female being the limiting factor in reproduction. As has been regularly pointed out, Western middle-class women are the most privileged large ‘group’ in history. The ‘groups’ are far too heterogeneous to be in reality ‘oppressed’ or ‘disadvantaged’, providing a window on the sophistry and origin of this politics as other than it purports.
The strands of the ‘new oppressed’ naturally combined as a new (neo-Marxist) conceptualisation to account for these political shifts after the fact, which came to be termed identity politics (or more pejoratively though actually more accurately, cultural Marxism). The deemed ‘groups’ replacing ‘the workers’ subsequently were not only expanded in their scope but added to — by the disabled, the elderly, trans-sexuals, the obese … . Again, all are abstractions rather than groups per se. This relentless expansion and then the use and abuse of these mis-identifications of under-privilege by educated individuals belonging to one or more of the categories, has been dubbed ‘the oppression olympics’, making ‘identity politics’ a gravy train for the already privileged, serving actually to substantially increase inequality. Worse still, it is an instrument of oppression against the very ‘group’ perennially disadvantaged and the victim of prejudice, which formerly had been identified as worthy of the liberation Marxism promised: the vast majority of (necessarily lower-status) men — ‘the workers’. This was the whole point of the political development, of course.
The pretence to egalitarianism is perfect cover for what actually is ‘identity politics’: the very perennial and ubiquitous elitist-separatism (status-grabbing) the political-Left ethos (supposedly) is to attack, and which Left zealots vehemently deny exists in themselves. Leftist bigotry betrays either unusually high status-seeking motivation or particularly deep frustration in the quest for status, which is ‘projected’ on to everyone else, who actually have normal levels of motivation to achieve status and manage to ride the ups and downs of life without requiring such dysfunctional ideation. The Left’s egalitarianism is a feint for selfishly pursuing the very opposite. If everyone else is held at a uniformly low status, Leftists thereby become ‘the chosen few’. Transparently, this is an ideology in the wake — a residue — of Christianity. A quasi-religion of supposed inevitable progress towards ‘the promised land’, rendered a utopia of equality-of-outcome. The high priests of this faith — the social justice warriors — are the ‘saved’ striving to convert the rest of us on the promise of entry to ‘heaven’. This represents a continuation of secularisation: a shift in religiosity from envisaging a ‘god’ as being in man’s image, through the humanist deification of mankind, to worship of a supposed dynamic of teleological social change (Marxism). ‘Identity politics’, in being profoundly not what it pretends to be and so deeply entrenched across the whole and every facet of the establishment in Anglophone nations especially and to a large extent in ‘the West’ generally, can properly be regarded as the greatest political fraud in history.

Jolly Roger

28th July 2020 at 6:06 pm

Feel better?
Jolly good.

Dominic Straiton

27th July 2020 at 11:57 am

Attacks on Jws are becoming common place in places like New York. The attackers are never the “far right”. The Nation of Islam doesnt help in reasoned debate. Im pretty sure most black Americans think Jws are all white when in actual fact they are mostly brown.

George Whale

27th July 2020 at 11:33 am

Diversity is our strength.

Danny Rees

27th July 2020 at 4:44 pm

Oh because antisemitism is just something black people do. Ha ha ha jokes.

Brandy Cluster

28th July 2020 at 3:21 am

Read some of Dr. Thomas Sowell’s views on diversity and multiculturalism. And Theodore Dalrymple.

Andrew Mawdsley

27th July 2020 at 11:14 am

Does it strike anyone as odd that, even though the Jews are apparently an all powerful controlling force in society, people like this silly tosser are able to spout their nonsense.

Surely if the Jews were in charge of everything then they would close down this type of discourse.

It strikes me that the influence of the Jewish people may be slightly overstated and lots of these commentators are just hate filled wankers. Just a thought.

Ray Diator

27th July 2020 at 11:05 am

He’s black. And we can’t criticise black people for racism.

Danny Rees

27th July 2020 at 12:17 pm

Said nobody ever.

Ed Turnbull

27th July 2020 at 1:01 pm

Actually Danny that’s not correct: that annoying bint (her name escapes me) who presented that appalling “Dear White People” series on MTV said as much. Since ‘racism’ has now been redefined as prejudice plus power / privilege black people are incapable of racism as they’re absent power /privilege (this coming from a black woman presenting a TV show watched by millions worldwide; no privilege / power, really?). Thus black people can be *prejudiced*, but because they (apparently) lack power / privilege they can’t be racist. Whereas some homeless ex-serviceman begging on the streets *can* be racist because, by virtue of being white, he has power / privilege. We live in a Looking Glass world Danny, where words are constantly redefined (usually without popular agreement) to support the agendas of those who are unwilling, or unable, to debate issues in good faith.

Ray Diator

27th July 2020 at 4:10 pm

Hey Danny, give us the name of a black person who has been cancelled or called out for racism

Danny Rees

27th July 2020 at 4:43 pm

Wiley. He’s being called out for it right now.

Ray Diator

27th July 2020 at 4:56 pm

Oh right, well done. But he’s hardly been hung, drawn and quartered, has he? Unlike many whites, who are totally destroyed because somebody so much as disagrees with them

jessica christon

27th July 2020 at 11:41 pm

@ RAY DIATOR “give us the name of a black person who has been cancelled or called out for racism”

I’ll bite: Trevor Phillips. He’s been cancelled, called uncle tom, etc.

The reason why they’re kid gloving this Wiley bloke isn’t (just) because he’s Black although that helps, it’s because he’s not off the woke message which allows a fair amount of slack for antisemitism – especially when it’s coupled with Palestinian sympathy as it was here.

Had he said all lives matter and there’s no evidence (yet) that the George Floyd killing was driven by racism he’d have been cancelled quick as a splash, and his race would’ve been weaponised against him just like they did to Phillips.

Ian Murray

28th July 2020 at 6:53 pm

You can criticise this person for what he has said and done regardless of his ‘race’. You cannot accuse his ‘race’ as being responsible for what he as an individual does or says.

Tony Benn

29th July 2020 at 11:55 pm

What if the person claims they have special protection from criticism because of a supposed race?

Zammo McTrotsky

28th July 2020 at 11:45 pm

I recall Jessie Jackson being called out before callout culture began for an antisemitic comment. Oh and what’shisname, (that doesn’t help), the short comic who’s huge in America at the moment, but that was for homophobia. And (Jesus, I’m getting old, and I’m struggling for names) the ex-kid’s TV presenter who’s a documentary maker now, you know, oh you know…I don’t know the names of anyone who’s become famous in the last ten years, just their faces. And you think it won’t happen to you.

Zammo McTrotsky

28th July 2020 at 11:47 pm

Oh god it’s so annoying,I actually saw him in real life. Reggie Yates! Just got there. Reggie bloody Yates. I think.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.

Deplorables — a spiked film