May’s “government” adds censorship to its fool’s repertoire

I should declare an interest, for I count Sir Roger as a friend from a day in 1985 when he was in danger of violence from a mob of the lumpen intelligentsia at York University who shouted him down and issued threats to his very existence. His address was about the importance of free speech! And twenty years later, when I was Rector of St Michael’s, Cornhill, Roger came by bicycle to deliver an inspiring sermon at the New Year City Service. I’m glad to report that his audience were not so aggressive as the York hooligans had been.

Today Sir Roger has been sacked by May’s “government” from his position as chairman of the Building Better. Building Beautiful Commission. His crime was to claim first that “Islamophobia” is “a propaganda word” and secondly to insist that “homosexuality is not normal.” Reporting these events, the Daily Telegraph describes Sir Roger as “one of England’s most controversial philosophers” – a phrase which suggests that the country is teeming with philosophers, controversial or otherwise. It isn’t. If the Telegraph had been doing its job properly, it would have added to the headline “Philosopher sacked” the information “for telling the truth.”

The first bit of truth spoken by Sir Roger was that “Islamophobia was invented by the Muslim Brotherhood to stop discussion of a major issue.” That is a fact and not at issue. Of course “Islamophobia” is a propaganda word and like all such words it is strictly meaningless. A phobia is a word borrowed from psychiatrists – who in turn borrowed it from the ancient Greek word phobos – which means “an irrational fear.” But there is nothing irrational about fearing the random slaughter, in the name of Islam, of countless thousands of innocent bystanders on four continents.

Sir Roger’s second bit of truth-telling was to say that homosexuality is not normal. As with his first statement, there is nothing controversial about this claim either. Normality in sexual relationships is between a man and a woman and it has been at least since the time of the first book in the Bible: “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife: and they shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). 

Of course, from the very beginning people have ordered their sexual preferences differently: there are accounts of homosexuality and incest in the Bible. Sir Roger did not say that homosexuals should be punished for their sexual practices. He simply stated the incontestable truth that homosexuality is not the norm – not normal. And for so saying he has been dismissed from his job. That is, a philosopher has been punished for using the English language correctly.

There is a precise word for what Sir Roger is suffering and this word is “persecution.” Subscribe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

25 Comments on Scrutophobia

  1. Unfortunately, as many of us have discovered, such people refuse to engage in discussion and are instructed by their clerics not to do so. It’s up to our cowardly government to enforce the law and compel everyone to adhere to values that have made this country so attractive to people from all over the world.

    • We in Asia are perplexed at the West, whose revered scientists (from Newton, Koch, Pasteur, Crick and Watson to Higgs) and philosophers (from Aristotle to Kant and Russell) and composers (from Vivaldi, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin to Rachmaninov) appear in all our school textbooks, turning its back on the Enlightenment values which dragged humanity out of nasty, brutish and short lives which were the sorry lot of the mass of humanity.

      • It’s a puzzle. The nearest I can get to an explanation is to compare it with the behaviour of children at the ages of two and then again in their teens. They need to kick against parents and home as part of growing to independence, Many of our politicians, traditionally on the left but now in the Conservative party, seem to be stuck in that adolescent stage – disrespecting their comfortable home country in favour of professional victims.

        • Michael, I am puzzled by it too. Even some MPs who have served in the Armed Forces are taking the side of Islam. Where did this switch originate?
          I have had a discussion with a seniour police officer, and he is on the side of Islam too. Do they not understand that Islam is incompatible with human rights?

          • The post-grad Muslim Arabs I had were in no doubt about Islam’s project. It was all light hearted and in jest: I would be able to have four wives, I was told. (To which there was only one Englishman’s reply – Once bitten!) That French novel Submission by Houellebeck shows how very easily people will give way through ignorance, inertia, and – as Aquinas pointed out in the case of men – the comfort of being a patriarch and unchallenged by uppity women.

  2. I wouldn’t always agree with Scruton, but he is a philosopher, and thus he is MEANT to say things that get people disagreeing and thinking.

    To sack him for this is… sad. It is up to people that don’t always agree with him to defend him. The burden of defending civilisation is on such people.

  3. There’s also a precise word for Sir Roger’s persecutors, “totalitarians”, to which I would append the adjectives “smug” and “self-righteous”…

  4. There are many homosexuals who fear the encroachment of Islam and anticipate being persecuted and even executed under Sharia law. I cannot stand the thought that, if current demographic trends continue, and if Islam cannot be reformed for the better (which seems impossible), then in the UK homosexuals will be executed some decades hence. I am doing what I can to prevent this, and other Islam related atrocities from happening.

    I am sending a copy of my booklet “Hellish 2050” to MPs and others, with the hope of waking them up to the existential threat. All help with this task is greatly welcomed:

    • Good luck with this, but you face two obstacles: political cowardice and plain ignorance; the refusal of Islamic ‘scholars’ to discuss or debate with people they regard as damned-to-hell infidels. I’ve tried many times and they just cut you off or walk away. Its history and present practice in the 50 Islamic states can’t be defended – maybe that’s why.

      • Michael,
        It may seem like a hopeless task, but we must at least try to do it. Doing nothing while western civilisation is destroyed by Islam is simply not an option.

        I have spoken with Muslims, and it is quite extraordinary what they do, literally, believe. Scientific absurdities, such as the sun setting in a muddy puddle. I pointed out that the sun is around a million times larger than the earth, and so it would be a physical impossibility. This did not perturb their belief that it happens, because it is plainly written in the Koran that it does so. I asked whether it was some sort of story, like a children’s story, but no, it is believed to be real and actual, not a story. This is what we are up against.

        Regarding the cowardice of politicians – they need to be replaced urgently by those who will be honest.

        • Lovely! Even the Greeks knew better. Just read Goodbye To All That, Grave’s memoir of WW1 (led by the sort of people we have I/c now) and he mentions an Egyptian Arabic prof in Cairo Uni who wanted to lecture on pre-Mohammed sources of the Koran – but no student would attend. How times change!

  5. Mixed-race people such as myself are amused (or is it “bemused”) at the way in which monoglot, mono-cultural white liberals in the UK and the US constantly accuse other white people of racism as if to curry favor with non-white people.

  6. May and her government are doomed. They have allowed the banners into their inner circle. They have drunk the ideological poison. Even a tiny sip of cholera is still fatal. Failure to defend conservative principles and one of their best advocates is madness. May is so weak. The left are very afraid of Roger though. And this digital hatred has no substance.

  7. It is a story that indicates why our political/managerial class repeatedly fails us, something that has been truly exposed since we voted to leave The EU. The attitude of the establishment cadre is summed up as; why would we want someone bright, capable, and independent minded doing a job, when we can have the dim, subservient, and busy instead.

  8. You have a convicted Labour MP turning up to vote wearing an ankle bracelet, Keith Vaz sitting in the House after soliciting male prostitutes and drugs, a boat load of expenses fiddlers, open-border extremists, anti-semites, and anti-democratic EUphiles determined to circumvent the result of the largest voter turnout in British history. All considered by the media as ‘mainstream’ and ‘centrist’ rather than tagged as ‘controversial’, or ‘extremist’. Talking of ‘not normal’ that insanity would seem to fit the bit.

    • As succinct and damning a description as can be imagined. Makes you think one of those asteroids, correctly targeted, wouldn’t be such a tragedy after all.

  9. I ‘ve today read Dominic Green’s defence and Sir Roger’s own response (both in “The Spectator”) to the calumny against him by George Eaton; and I hope Sir Roger considers seeking legal advice concerning libel action against Eaton and his organ. My goodness, even Max Mosley wasn’t subjected to slurs of racism like this when he had his comeuppance 10 years ago after being exposed as a satyr by the “News of the World” (he achieved vindication against NOTW which was ordered to pay £60,000 in damages). To me, Sir Roger has a far stronger case against the rag that ambushed him and injured his good name.

    I’ve so many books & essays by Sir Roger, and consider him a major influence in my intellectual growth. Randomly, but germanely, I can mention a essay he wrote almost 20 years ago: “Bring Back Stigma”.
    “Without it, we become a shameless society – with disastrous consequences.

    • Many thanks for this link. Reminded me of hat old Tory Adam Smith who proposed (in his Theory of Moral Sentiments) that we act as if in the presence of a neutral observer.

      • “A man of gentle and retiring disposition, he led a life of academic uneventfulness. Born in Kirkcaldy, Fife, in 1723, he went to study first at the university of Glasgow, and then in 1740 at Balliol College, Oxford — which he much disliked. One can understand why, since Balliol at that time was High Church, Tory, factional, costly and Scotophobic; and Smith was Presbyterian, Whiggish, sociable, impecunious and a Scot. It was not a happy combination. … As to his private views, we know very little. In politics he was broadly Whiggish in his belief in the virtues of constitutional monarchy, religious toleration and personal freedom.” From the FT website

    • Many thanks for this link. Reminded me of that old Tory Adam Smith who proposed (in his Theory of Moral Sentiments) that we act as if in the presence of a neutral observer.

  10. Who would have thought we would come to this? Truly the clocks are striking 13. I used to work professionally with groups of Muslim Arab survivors of Muslim Arab atrocities in the middle east. They didn’t have an irrational fear – they had an absolute and justified terror. It’s a supremacist patriarchy. We all know what life is like when men are unchallenged and in charge.