Subjective Objectivity – The Blog of The Reasonable Man

December 24, 2012

Plebgate; Theatricality and Deception

Filed under: Uncategorized — mikeshotgun @ 12:14 am

If there is a more detestable demonstration of the collusion between our media and political elites, I believe that what is now called “plebgate” trumps every other example. To summarise, Andrew Mitchell is accused of calling a police officer a “pleb”. He is therefore deemed unfit for government. 

I do not know Andrew Mitchell’s bona fides nor anything about him. Nor do I care. However, I do know that in our current political system calling someone an antiquated word for a “commoner” cannot be a disqualification for office worthy of the notion. One can lie and deceive, and so long as one does so effectively, and courts our media thusly, one will remain fit. I suspect this of some eighty percent of our Parliament, though I may be off in that estimate. 


It is at this point, you might expect me to say that calling someone a “pleb” is not befitting of our governance. In truth, I care not one bit. Nor is it even clear that he even uttered that phrase. But we are presented with reportage of the controversy, not the facts. Though they may become real in the ultimate account they are not the things that our press cares about. Indeed, reflecting on it, I wonder how many consumers of the media even know what “pleb” means. It’s a somewhat sophisticated insult, all told, and at least for today’s audience. 

Regardless, what we are presented with, alongside stories of greater import (or lesser, if you include the cultish and pointless obssession with the Mayan “prophecy”) is a story about what one grown man, whilst riding a bicycle, said about another grown man, This is our political theatre production, dear reader! This is WHAT MATTERS, according to the RESPECTABLE papers. Does it affect anything at all? Much like the EXPENSES SCANDAL it has so little relation to ordinary lives, yet it affects our media class much like pornography might.


I can speak from anecdote as to the quality of those who police the Palace of Westminster. In every encounter I have had with them, I might better deploy the term “fascist” than “pleb”. If anything “pleb” is a compliment beyond their actual station. Frontline police deserve a semblance of respect. The little Napoleons that populate Parliament in the name of protection of our “betters”, with all the trappings and safety it provides deserve at best, our scrutiny, and at worst our contempt. 

Having danced around the point of this, but the ultimate aim is that of, per the title, theatricality and deception. The media, in presenting “plebgate” hopes to show that it is in genuine conflict with with the political class. Yet they are not. They are courtiers who take some delight in the lewd intrigues of their former bretheren. I can guarantee you that those responsible for pushing and “reporting” “plebgate” are the rough equivalents of the gossips in school one so despised in principle, but followed in prejudice. 

The simplistic beauty of PLEBGATE is this. Does this thing that is happening affect my well being, or the Commonwealth of my society? The extant answer is “NO”.

And that is the answer to most of the questions that our failed media experiment purports to ask. 

We ought be vigilant in remembering that. 

Cross-posted at Something Quotable


December 23, 2012

When “gun rights” and fascism meet

Filed under: Uncategorized — mikeshotgun @ 10:05 pm

I watched the President of the United States of America give a speech, and was consumed with disgust. My contempt for the event was not a response to the particulars of what he had to say – it was a good response – Barack Obama is an adept at such things – but what sickened me was that it had to be given at all.

I then watched a response from the National Rifle Association, in which, among other obscenities, Wayne LaPierre, suggested that the solution to the problem that left 26 people dead, twenty of them children. His solution was to focus not on the loss that occuurred in Newton, CT. Though he pretended that he did. Instead, he led with an appeal ABOUT his own organisations members. Then he exhorted the relative silence on the topic as evidence of his organisation’s stoicism as to political motives. 

His thesis, if it can be creditted as such, is that application of gun free zones was the causal effect of the Sandy Hook shootings. This has been debated amongst those pretending to the supposed ideology of libertarianism (it’s more a of a childish fantasy when one deconstructs it. Much like, in character as opposed to specifics, pacifism). What he does then, is blame the victim. Not the individual victim, of course, that would be in bad taste. 

The NRA had two choices following this catastrophe. One was to have a sane discussion about extended clips and assault rifle bans. The other was to double down on the insane dogma that has kept them moving somehow throughout the years.  Instead, his solution is the institution of a police state. That children ought be guarded at arms like banks, and politicians. He then proceeds to, for all purposes, blame the black and hispanic populations for the prevalance of gun violence. Only the supposed “Good Guys” with guns are the solution. The silent hero who for some reason hangs around school with a gun. His solution is so utterly juvenile that I wonder if he will suggest that we make Jack Bauer the head of Homeland security. It is a fiction.

He then decides to blame video games, movies and music with supposed evidence so thin and . I will tackle these in turn in another essay, but suffice to say his critique so boils over with dishonesty that it ought make the stomach churn. In the following paragraphs I could catalogue his dishonest rhetorical turns, but the basic gist is ultimately advocacy of a fascist police state. If there is a reserve of disgust and abhorrence at a concept that can be exhausted, then for me it is dry. If everybody has guns then that will solve all ills. The NRA are apparently for “assurance of school safety”. As if the schools don’t have enough problems. 

Wayne LaPierre does what most fascists do, he abhors a particular piece of minor encroachment of the supposed rights of self-interested minority and then in response proposes a far bigger annulment of basic civil freedoms. Let us trust the men who advocate guns against those who it is supposed misuse them (though we are assured that such people are an unknowable minority). It is worth noting at this juncture that that the NRA is essentially a wing of the Republican party in the US. A party that perpetually trumpets personal freedom yet benobles military power and now seems to believe that there ought to be SERVICEMEN in “protection” of the children of that country. A party who are in part sponsored by what is soon to become an apartheid state. These people are little more than sociopaths with so little faith in humanity that they believe violence is the possible defence of the innocent within their own nation. Look through to the odious language he deploys and his solutions boil down to little more than the takeover of the education system of the US by the “Good Guys”. Note also, that they hate the current school system, and wish it altered. When they have guns in place and are the established “protectors”, under what guise will they impose their values?

It seems the extant question, yet no one asks it. The media express only outrage at “more guns” without thinking through the barbaric appeal that it foretells. The Democratic party as a mass won’t notice this, though may accidentally block its passage. The President probably knows this, and I doubt he is alone. But it will become POLITICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to do anything about it. It already is, most likely. 

Mr LaPierre ends his speech stating that “we won’t be taking questions today”. 

They don’t feel that they have to. After all, they have the guns.


Cross-posted at Something Quotable

Create a free website or blog at