Saturday, 18 February 2017

Brexit Derangement Syndrome: philosopher A.C. Grayling calls Tory politicians "vermin"!

Actually, Grayling cast his rat-catcher's net even more widely:
This despicable gutter insult emanated from an eminent 67-year old academic who has produced about 30 well-respected books, was formerly the Professor of Philosophy at Birkbeck College, is a supernumerary fellow of St. Anne's, Oxford, and is the founder and Master of New College of the Humanities, an independent undergraduate college in London.

The subject which has sent the silly old sausage screaming over the edge of rationality into a pit of irrational despair is - inevitably - the democratic decision of the British people to leave the European Union. The refusal by a man with a brain the size of a solar system to accept political reality - as with so many member of the left-liberal elite - has left him making the sort of idiotic arguments for which a dim-witted ten year old would be slapped down by any teacher worth his or her salt:
What pathetic, tawdry piffle. By "restricted", he presumably means that only British passport-holders were allowed to vote. And this is a problem, how? Or maybe he means restricted to people who can read and write English, or who could be bothered to vote: in which case, I'm still not sure why this would be problematic. As for his central argument - that a referendum result only counts if over half the eligible population votes for one side of the proposition or the other  - it is so childish as to be beneath contempt.

I initially found the reaction of Remainers to their reversal in last June's referendum astonishing. But then I realised that it was inevitable, given that they'd had their way for so long that they simply didn't know to cope with disappointment. Then, as every one of Project Fear's predictions failed to materialise, the wrath of the Europhiles became very, very funny. But after a few months, when it became clear that many of them were determined not to accept the result - were, indeed, determined to overturn it, whatever the cost to the nation of their divisive hate- and fear-mongering - I started to get angry. This is how spoiled, petulant children - and some football managers - behave when they don't get what they want; this isn't the behaviour of rational adults. But my anger has abated, and now I am genuinely beginning to feel sorry for them - not just because they are making absolute fools of themselves, but because I'm starting to suspect that they simply can't help themselves: that part of the psyche which should come to our rescue when we've got ourselves into a terrible tizz by telling us to take a deep breath, to look at ourselves in the mirror, and to calm the fuck down, you idiot! seems to have stopped working (or, at least, to have become inaccessible to these formerly rational bedlamites). Instead, they carry on spitting venom and hurling vile calumnies, destroying friendships, pitting one part of the country against another and class against class, seemingly desperate for the economy to fail disastrously so they can scream - See? Told you so! 

This is no longer amusing: it's depressing. One hopes that the triggering of Article 50 sometime between now and the end of March will calm the raging brains of A.C. Grayling and his fellow-sufferers - but the signs aren't good. In a YouGov survey last month (and let's face it, opinion pollsters haven't been noted for favouring Leavers in the past), 54% of those canvassed said they thought that triggering Article 50 was purely a matter for Theresa May: only 31% thought MPs should vote on the issue. The majority of Britons - including many who voted Remain - just want to get on with leaving the EU. I'm not sure what sort of mandate the likes of A.C. Grayling (e.g. Tony Blair - I mean, really?) feel they have to go on attempting to thwart the will of the people. But this isn't about mandates: it's about arrogant elitists who feel the world should automatically arrange itself to accommodate their desires. Spoiled brats in need of a good spanking, the lot of them. Vermin? God almighty! Get a grip, Grayling, you fool.

Graduates of New College of the Humanities will in future know how to respond if not awarded the level of degree they're absolutely convinced they're entitled to.

8 comments:

  1. AC Grayling is the spitting image of my late Australian mother-in-law after a visit to the hairdresser on Bingo Night. Unhappy memories.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Heart of gold, though, I expect (I mean your mother-in-law, not A.C. Grayling).

      Delete
  2. So, clearly, he hasn't really got a brain the size of the solar system at all, has he?

    It's time the myth of academic achievement having a direct correlation to intelligence was dispelled. They appear to be quite separate things, as the current academic elite are repeatedly confirming.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting area, intelligence. I'm sure Grayling's IQ is sky-high, and I think we must assume that any leading philosopher - especially one with a track record as impressive as his - is intelligent in most accepted senses of the word. But intelligence divorced from common sense and humility can be dangerous: rarely should the smartest guy in the room actually be put in charge of anything important - because, when it comes to practical matters, they can be incredibly dumb. Thomas Sowell is good on this issue: "The charge is often made against the intelligentsia and other members of the anointed that their theories and the policies based on them lack common sense. But the very commonness of common sense makes it unlikely to have any appeal to the anointed. How can they be wiser and nobler than everyone else while agreeing with everyone else?"

      Delete
  3. I remain unsure about IQ, particularly as I have met some prize chumps who boast bucketloads of the commodity, but little in the way anything recognisable, at least by me, as 'intelligence'.

    It may be that great achievement in the sort of universe Grayling inhabits could be regarded as a disqualifier. Look at Dawkins as another example of high-falutin' idiocy. The failed pop star/physicist Cox and the geneticist Steve Jones are also climbing the greasy pole of supreme fuckwittery.

    I suspect Swift, as so often, had it right with Laputa.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Laputa - brilliant analogy, GCooper! "Laputans" is a perfect term for the Left's academically brilliant yet idiotically utopian camp followers! Nice one.

      Delete
  4. It is not only the left that produces these specimens. Whenever Oliver Letwin or David Willetts appear someone always praises their towering intellects. They were both in Parliament for about 19-years and one got the Duchy of Lancaster and the other was the Minister of State for Universities and Sciences [whatever that means?]. Letwin was in the habit of letting strangers into his home to use the bath-room and then rob him and "Two-Brains" looked perpetually startled and in a complete fog.

    Emotional intelligence? Self-awareness? Common-sense?
    "What's all about it?"

    ReplyDelete
  5. I suspect that very stupid and very clever politicians come a cropper because the former are too dumb to reach the right conclusions from the available evidence, and the latter because they can come up with brilliant reasons for rejecting the right conclusions from the available evidence.

    It was Oliver Letwin who kept the plans for the poll tax alive in the '80s. And David "Two Brains" Willetts used to make very clever speeches explaining why the Tories shouldn't support grammar schools because they were a really bade idea. QED.

    ReplyDelete