Skip to main content

Yes, the broadcast media ARE our enemy!

The BBC, Channel 4 etc. have been complaining lately about being under attack from their enemies.  Why have they got enemies?

The broadcast media in the UK operate by suppressing reporting of items that they feel will be damaging to the peace and good governance of the UK.  In particular the media have suppressed the effect of migration on education, the NHS and child poverty.  See The pressure on the NHS and Education is related to migration, Childhood Poverty in the UK. They distort the truth by suppressing reporting of some of the causes of national problems.  This cannot be good for democracy or for the governance of the country.

This monolithic support of migration has led to "collateral damage" in the form of suppressing any news that suggests that large scale migration is bad for the UK. What started as the suppression of negative coverage of migration is now extended to the suppression of news about anything related to migration.

The broadcast media are also involved in active campaigning to continue large-scale migration. As an example, they endlessly produce figures to suggest that migration is beneficial for the UK but never compare migration with work permits - see The Benefits of Immigration to the UK Economy.  Once work permits are introduced into the debate it is impossible to maintain that migration is a better economic option.  They distort the truth by suppressing all mention of alternatives to migration.

A major part of the opposition by the broadcast media to Brexit was based on migration.  They polarised the debate into Racist Brexit supporters and "holy" Remainers.  They did this even though there was massive support for Brexit from people who were non-racist and simply wanted self-government:


So what is going on?  Why have the broadcast media decided that support for mass migration is the pinnacle of holy thought?  Perhaps this started with a genuine desire to prevent racial tension but now it has become political.  There are several reasons the broadcast media now support migration, many journalists were recruited to satisfy the needs of multiculturalism in the late 20th century, many journalists see themselves as migrants or potential migrants, a few journalists are linked to the Socialist Workers Party , many are trained in Post-Structuralism and lastly many journalists realise that future corporate employment may depend on evidence of Internationalist fervour.  The net result is that the BBC and Channel 4 have only hired journalists and editors who support a post-modern pro-migration narrative and so have no idea about the truth.  These broadcast media are the post-truth problem.

The broadcast media do not usually lie, they just suppress any news that does not support their agenda or use a "punch and judy" model of "balanced" reporting where a university professor is interviewed to support their viewpoint and a drunk emerging from a pub is interviewed about the opposing view.

The state financed broadcast media are now our enemy and have been allowed to employ a pool of like minded people who are pushing their own agenda.  When more than half the population voted for Brexit it is shocking that there is scarcely one BBC journalist on record as being pro-Brexit. (Undoubtedly the BBC journalists would think "but we are all too clever to have voted Brexit and could be trusted to be impartial" without realising that this confirms that they are a problem).

It is not the "Liberal Elite" who are damaging democracy in the UK, it is mainly the BBC and Channel 4.  They have created an imaginary "centre ground" that politicians vie to fill but which has no relationship to the real political centre ground in the country.






Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Falklands have always been Argentine - Las Malvinas son Argentinas

"The Falklands have always been Argentine" is taught to every Argentine child as a matter of faith.  What was Argentina during the time when it "always" possessed Las Malvinas?  In this article I will trace the history of Argentina in the context of its physical and political relationship with "Las Malvinas", the Falkland Islands.  The Argentine claim to the Falkland Islands dates from a brief episode in 1831-32 so it is like Canada claiming the USA despite two centuries of separate development. This might sound like ancient history but Argentina has gone to war for this ancient claim so the following article is well worth reading. For a summary of the legal case see: Las Malvinas: The Legal Case Argentina traces its origins to Spanish South America when it was part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio del Plata.  The Falklands lay off the Viceroyalty of Peru, controlled by the Captain General of Chile.  In 1810 the Falklands were far from the geographical b...
35 comments
Read more

Practical Idealism by Richard Nicolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi

Coudenhove-Kalergi was a pioneer of European integration. He was the founder and President for 49 years of the Paneuropean Union. His parents were Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an Austro-Hungarian diplomat, and Mitsuko Aoyama, the daughter of an oil merchant, antiques-dealer, and huge landowner family in Tokyo. His "Pan-Europa" was published in 1923 and contained a membership form for the Pan-Europa movement. Coudenhove-Kalergi's movement held its first Congress in Vienna in 1926. In 1927 the French Prime Minister, Aristide Briand was elected honorary president.  Personalities attending included: Albert Einstein, Thomas Mann and Sigmund Freud. Figures who later became central to founding the EU, such as Konrad Adenauer became members . His basic idea was that democracy was a transitional stage that leads to rule by a new aristocracy that is largely taken from the Jewish "master race" (Kalergi's terminology). His movement was reviled by Hitler and H...
2 comments
Read more

Membership of the EU: pros and cons

5th December 2013, update May 2016 Nigel Lawson, ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer,  recently criticised the UK membership of the EU , the media has covered his mainstream view as if he is a bad boy starting a fight in the school playground, but is he right about the EU? What has changed that makes EU membership a burning issue?  What has changed is that the 19 countries of the Eurozone are now seeking political union to escape their financial problems.   Seven further EU countries have signed up to join the Euro but the British and Danish have opted out.  The EU is rapidly becoming two blocks - the 26 and Britain and Denmark.   Lawson's fear was that if Britain stays in the EU it will be isolated and dominated by a Eurozone bloc that uses "unified representation of the euro area" , so acting like a single country which controls 90% of the vote in the EU with no vetoes available to the UK in most decisions.  The full plans for Eurozone po...
15 comments
Read more