Extremism in the UK isn't just about terrorists. The term gets applied to anyone who is in disagreement.
It all comes from a culture of exaggeration. Humour is founded on exaggeration (it's only a matter of time before 'Englishman, Irishman and Scotsman' jokes are considered racist) and comedians are often given similar speaking platforms as government officials (appearing on the same TV shows, for example).
Add to the mix the UK's national loss of identity, people revert to comedy in order to be liked, and this often involves exaggeration... or 'extremism'.
After the General Election, Jeremy Corbyn said Theresa May should resign... why? For overestimating her popularity and public support? That would be the same as sacking a teacher who predicted a pupil would achieve a grade A when the pupil obtained a grade B.
Plus, a number of petitions were started by the public, calling for Theresa May to resign. Here's one, here's another. The way the UK election is set up, it allows for what's happening to happen. There is nothing illegal or immoral about it... it's just that a few people are angry that they didn't get what they wanted. It happened with Brexit.* American influence isn't particularly helpful either.
I thought that rebelling against a democratic system would be seen as... Undemocratic? Intolerant? Irrational? Or, to use more 'extreme' words... stupid, selfish and bigoted.
But would Jeremy Clarkson be considered and treated as an extremist... for saying strikers should be shot? The article even states that Clarkson "sometimes overstepped the mark in his quest for "comic" value."
Stating the facts is no longer seen as good for ratings. If I were to suggest that Jeremy Clarkson is simply quite immature, most would think that was an understatement. In order to win public favour, I would need to step-up the level of animosity: like Frankie Boyle (regarding a different incident) who called him a "cultural tumour" and a "growth".
Even David Attenborough sought after comedic praise by saying Donald Trump should be shot. But then, the response to such immature comments by some people were (according to the article)... death threats! An immature response to an immature comment.
Seriously, what hope is there for society?
We need to go back to calling a 'spade' a 'spade' and stop calling it a 'weapon of mass destruction'. News articles are guilty of exaggeration too.
And this is my point: we live in a society where people's reactions are completely disproportionate to facts and events. But sometimes the reaction is tolerated and sometimes it's not. It often depends of who has the loudest voice.
For example, if I made the following comment:
"LBGT, transgender and gay marriage supporters are intolerant bigots and homosexuality is a cancer, not just to the nation, but to the universe."
There would be huge backlash, not just from those groups but if my boss found out, I would be forced to publicly apologise and remove the comment. I would be called a bigot, fundamentalist, intolerant... I could even be done for hate crime! (Despite, of course, that view being traditional in Britain until the mid-1900s...)
But if I simply changed a few words... substituted "LGBT, transgender and gay marriage supporters" with 'Christians' and substituted "homosexuality" with 'Christianity'... nothing would happen.
But how is that justice?!
You can't counter 'extremist' comments with extremist reactions. For society to progress, we need to cut out the exaggeration and must learn to hold civilised discussion. The Western world is meant to be founded on such values, but we seem to have lost them!!
Is it any wonder that we are seeing a rise in extremist behaviour, when extreme language and comments are considered normal throughout our society, right to the highest levels of government?
*Please note the drawing of four penises on the picture of Nigel Farage's head in the photo on this link. Note also the seemingly joyous expression of the lady holding that picture. I wonder if this shows the level of maturity of those who would oppose democratic systems?
It all comes from a culture of exaggeration. Humour is founded on exaggeration (it's only a matter of time before 'Englishman, Irishman and Scotsman' jokes are considered racist) and comedians are often given similar speaking platforms as government officials (appearing on the same TV shows, for example).
Add to the mix the UK's national loss of identity, people revert to comedy in order to be liked, and this often involves exaggeration... or 'extremism'.
After the General Election, Jeremy Corbyn said Theresa May should resign... why? For overestimating her popularity and public support? That would be the same as sacking a teacher who predicted a pupil would achieve a grade A when the pupil obtained a grade B.
Plus, a number of petitions were started by the public, calling for Theresa May to resign. Here's one, here's another. The way the UK election is set up, it allows for what's happening to happen. There is nothing illegal or immoral about it... it's just that a few people are angry that they didn't get what they wanted. It happened with Brexit.* American influence isn't particularly helpful either.
I thought that rebelling against a democratic system would be seen as... Undemocratic? Intolerant? Irrational? Or, to use more 'extreme' words... stupid, selfish and bigoted.
But would Jeremy Clarkson be considered and treated as an extremist... for saying strikers should be shot? The article even states that Clarkson "sometimes overstepped the mark in his quest for "comic" value."
Stating the facts is no longer seen as good for ratings. If I were to suggest that Jeremy Clarkson is simply quite immature, most would think that was an understatement. In order to win public favour, I would need to step-up the level of animosity: like Frankie Boyle (regarding a different incident) who called him a "cultural tumour" and a "growth".
Even David Attenborough sought after comedic praise by saying Donald Trump should be shot. But then, the response to such immature comments by some people were (according to the article)... death threats! An immature response to an immature comment.
Seriously, what hope is there for society?
We need to go back to calling a 'spade' a 'spade' and stop calling it a 'weapon of mass destruction'. News articles are guilty of exaggeration too.
And this is my point: we live in a society where people's reactions are completely disproportionate to facts and events. But sometimes the reaction is tolerated and sometimes it's not. It often depends of who has the loudest voice.
For example, if I made the following comment:
"LBGT, transgender and gay marriage supporters are intolerant bigots and homosexuality is a cancer, not just to the nation, but to the universe."
There would be huge backlash, not just from those groups but if my boss found out, I would be forced to publicly apologise and remove the comment. I would be called a bigot, fundamentalist, intolerant... I could even be done for hate crime! (Despite, of course, that view being traditional in Britain until the mid-1900s...)
But if I simply changed a few words... substituted "LGBT, transgender and gay marriage supporters" with 'Christians' and substituted "homosexuality" with 'Christianity'... nothing would happen.
But how is that justice?!
You can't counter 'extremist' comments with extremist reactions. For society to progress, we need to cut out the exaggeration and must learn to hold civilised discussion. The Western world is meant to be founded on such values, but we seem to have lost them!!
Is it any wonder that we are seeing a rise in extremist behaviour, when extreme language and comments are considered normal throughout our society, right to the highest levels of government?
*Please note the drawing of four penises on the picture of Nigel Farage's head in the photo on this link. Note also the seemingly joyous expression of the lady holding that picture. I wonder if this shows the level of maturity of those who would oppose democratic systems?
No comments:
Post a Comment