> It’s possible, and Murray, of course, is as gay as a bicycle
This is the relevant throughline with Murray. It's what he genuinely cares about, and all his various writings and seemingly contradictory stances only make sense in reference to it.
He wrote Strange Death of Europe (still a brilliant and, at the time, daring book), but he doesn't seem to have anything much to say about e.g. the Jewish enclaves of north London or the question of whether Rishi Sunak is English. He feverishly defends Israel and seems more concerned with the misfortunes of the peoples of Israel than of his own homeland. He was stridently anti-trans. He takes grave exception to the president of Turkey and with the behaviour of many Arab states.
At first one can confuse oneself when reading Murray, especially if one's introduction is via Strange Death, into thinking that he's primarily a nativist, or further right than he really is. In truth, he's just anti-Muslim, and for good reason: they're anti-him. He took issue with trans because it turns the public against LGBT. He took issue with mass immigration in the Merkel era because it filled Europe with gay-hating Muslims. He supports Israel because they too hate and seek to destroy Muslims.
This is the only throughline that makes sense with this man. It's what he truly cares about. That's not to say he _doesn't_ care about e.g. liberalism, but it's not his primary cause.
Possibly. I think it's also entirely likely that he's just a big fan of Israel because he has an animus towards Muslims, and sees in them a fellow traveller on the path of combating Islam.
Of course if he spoke to many orthodox Jews he'd find that they too aren't exactly a giant fan of homosexuality.
Murray's delusionalality is shown on a few fronts.
Firstly... Israel = the western right and the right = Israel is wrong and precisely this arrogant delusion thats ironically working wonders to drive many away from it's support with exposure to AIPAC etc. There are now growing numbers on the right that are highlighting this Candace Owens to name one ... Oh how'd I love to see her debate Douglas on this.
Secondly- Murray's credentaialism is dangerous and tongue in cheek could now be used against him. Douglas with all of your 'expertise' in journalism and writing what do you know about AIPAC , mossad , HIAS??? Questions will only grow making Douglas apparent ignorance unbelievable.
Paul Taylor much like Douglas seems so favour credentailisms benefits in a healthy society using the go to e.gs of Pilot and Dr for justifications of qualification to action. This however takes in to account social trust e.g Positive trust of Drs has fallen since 2020 highlighting credenialism fluctuation over time As well as fluctuation within fields i.e fighter pilot Vs small plane pilot.
Most dangerously I see credenialism as an idealism that quickly can get out of hand , how quick does it go from 'your not medically qualified to give opinions on health' (despite many Drs having awful health) to 'your not qualified to give views on this topic as you too are not gay / white / African ( insert label self identity).
Paul's clinging to the idea (as a uni professor) that people still value credentials as they show expertise and benefit however we now are living in a very low trust society with 'expert' industries betraying trust and being wrong on matters consistently. The public naturally will remove any respect thus independent internet voices from Dave Smith to Rudyard lynch are superior to Any 'expert'.
I agree Ed, the revolution hasn't even begun. When it does, we must be unrelenting until they're all flushed out and hoist by their own petard which includes Murray and all the other Machiavellian screamers.
> It’s possible, and Murray, of course, is as gay as a bicycle
This is the relevant throughline with Murray. It's what he genuinely cares about, and all his various writings and seemingly contradictory stances only make sense in reference to it.
He wrote Strange Death of Europe (still a brilliant and, at the time, daring book), but he doesn't seem to have anything much to say about e.g. the Jewish enclaves of north London or the question of whether Rishi Sunak is English. He feverishly defends Israel and seems more concerned with the misfortunes of the peoples of Israel than of his own homeland. He was stridently anti-trans. He takes grave exception to the president of Turkey and with the behaviour of many Arab states.
At first one can confuse oneself when reading Murray, especially if one's introduction is via Strange Death, into thinking that he's primarily a nativist, or further right than he really is. In truth, he's just anti-Muslim, and for good reason: they're anti-him. He took issue with trans because it turns the public against LGBT. He took issue with mass immigration in the Merkel era because it filled Europe with gay-hating Muslims. He supports Israel because they too hate and seek to destroy Muslims.
This is the only throughline that makes sense with this man. It's what he truly cares about. That's not to say he _doesn't_ care about e.g. liberalism, but it's not his primary cause.
It's only daring if he was ever at risk, as you can see now he was as safe as could be because he's an asset of a Levantine intelligence agency.
Possibly. I think it's also entirely likely that he's just a big fan of Israel because he has an animus towards Muslims, and sees in them a fellow traveller on the path of combating Islam.
Of course if he spoke to many orthodox Jews he'd find that they too aren't exactly a giant fan of homosexuality.
Murray cannot be trusted, if you can't see that get to Specsavers.
Murray's delusionalality is shown on a few fronts.
Firstly... Israel = the western right and the right = Israel is wrong and precisely this arrogant delusion thats ironically working wonders to drive many away from it's support with exposure to AIPAC etc. There are now growing numbers on the right that are highlighting this Candace Owens to name one ... Oh how'd I love to see her debate Douglas on this.
Secondly- Murray's credentaialism is dangerous and tongue in cheek could now be used against him. Douglas with all of your 'expertise' in journalism and writing what do you know about AIPAC , mossad , HIAS??? Questions will only grow making Douglas apparent ignorance unbelievable.
Paul Taylor much like Douglas seems so favour credentailisms benefits in a healthy society using the go to e.gs of Pilot and Dr for justifications of qualification to action. This however takes in to account social trust e.g Positive trust of Drs has fallen since 2020 highlighting credenialism fluctuation over time As well as fluctuation within fields i.e fighter pilot Vs small plane pilot.
Most dangerously I see credenialism as an idealism that quickly can get out of hand , how quick does it go from 'your not medically qualified to give opinions on health' (despite many Drs having awful health) to 'your not qualified to give views on this topic as you too are not gay / white / African ( insert label self identity).
Paul's clinging to the idea (as a uni professor) that people still value credentials as they show expertise and benefit however we now are living in a very low trust society with 'expert' industries betraying trust and being wrong on matters consistently. The public naturally will remove any respect thus independent internet voices from Dave Smith to Rudyard lynch are superior to Any 'expert'.
that's not really what his main point was
I agree Ed, the revolution hasn't even begun. When it does, we must be unrelenting until they're all flushed out and hoist by their own petard which includes Murray and all the other Machiavellian screamers.