Doctrines on which the West is being Re-shaped

Pluralism & Relative Truth 

“When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.” 

G.K .Chesterton

Relative truth is term that organically originated in the culture of the late 20^th century and inadvertently set itself up to discredit absolute truth.  It gained popularity in the New Age movement as it enabled a worldview whereby more than one statement can be equally true, even though another statement is in contradiction to it.  Thus, it means personal beliefs can be held without the need for factual evidence or the need for rational thought.  The result is a kind of fluidity of truth whereby there is no absolute right or wrong.  In the face of real truth, or absolute truth, any set of beliefs are allowed to persist, and challenges are not welcomed.  Hollywood celebrities may refer to “my truth” meaning a truth that is true for me.  “Your truth” conversely is only considered true for you.  In the context of spirituality, the net result is the creation of a multitude of belief systems and effectively a denial of the concept of absolute truth. 

As human beings we innately must believe in something.  The Christian scriptures provide a context for our creation, that we were created to be in relationship with God.  Therefore, we have a God-shaped hole if this aspect of our lives is missing.  Attempts are consequently made to fill this hole with other beliefs.  These beliefs do not need to incorporate a concept of God, but they cannot exist without some level of explanation for the universe and our place in it.  An agnostic for example, is undecided whether God exists and is more likely to form their sense of right or wrong based on a generalised culturally accepted morality.  Such a person would aim to be a generally “good” person.  Some aspects of a Biblical standard of outward morality may be embraced e.g. do not steal, do not murder.  However, other aspects relating to inward, personal holiness are more likely to be rejected e.g. loving your enemies or that sex is to be used in the confines of marriage.  What would be the benefit of going out of your way to love your enemies if it turns out (in the end) that there is no God to reward such behaviour?  Our values and beliefs therefore ultimately affect our behaviours.  Consider those who believe in reincarnation.  It may be that indifference is shown when walking past a beggar in abject poverty since there is a belief that choices made in their former life have put them there.  Who then has the right to interfere with this divinely ordained process?  Whereas an atheistic humanist who has grown up in a Judeo-Christian society is more likely to feel pity and offer help.  Different beliefs lead to different outcomes. 

Relativism hinders our societies as it dulls the blade of real truth necessary to cut through non-truths and harmful practice.  Confusion and inaction are its main fruits. 

Post-Truth 

“Post-truth” refers to a condition in which emotions, personal beliefs, or subjective interpretations have more influence on public opinion than objective facts.  Decisions are made based on feelings and ideologies.  The term became popular to describe narratives in the media and politics that contrasted with sound logic and reason. 

Many aspects of government policy are developed in a post-truth incubator.  Policy to relax the boundaries for abortion are made under the appeal of upholding human rights whilst ignoring the fact that the rights of the unborn are utterly disregarded.  The post-truth feelings driver for this are that people should be free to have sex whenever and with whoever they choose and that they should not be held to account for their actions.  Seldom does the argument shift to preventing the pregnancy in the first place.  Also, the importance of a nuclear family with traditional values is sneered at despite the overwhelming evidence that strong families benefit both individuals and society.  The post-truth feelings behind this states that the concept of a family with a loving father and mother is restrictive and oppressive to women and LGBT+ individuals.  They, “perpetuate inequality” by reinforcing traditional gender roles and hierarchies.  Also, by flashing the Marxist race card, it is thought nuclear families are typical of white middle-class families and that they don’t serve the needs of marginalised communities.  When policy makers and influencers think like this, they have abandoned common sense and have shut their eyes to experiential evidence. 

Post-Science and Filtered Science 

Generally speaking, since the advent of Enlightenment thinking, Western thought has either sought to hold scientific understanding in tension with Biblical revelation or, sought to completely substitute Biblical knowledge with scientific knowledge.  Individuals who opt for the latter when presented with a spiritual conversation are more likely to say, “I believe in science” as an all-encompassing riposte to end the conversation.  Inherent to this belief is that science has somehow disproved God or that science has exposed contradictions in Christian scriptures.  An example of this is the belief that life on Earth has evolved of its own doing and was not created by an intelligent being.  There is not even a hint of rational scientific process for this and yet the belief continues to be popular in Western culture and is taught in our schools. 

Given the long tradition in the West of predominantly using science and reason to understand the world and form our thinking, it is therefore surprising to witness the departure of science as a trusted guide.  Following in the footsteps of its near identical twin, Post-truth, Post-science is becoming mainstream. 

Scientific fact and reason when confronted with political agendas may only receive due attention if they align with the ideology.  If the science does not align with the ideology, the science is filtered, and the ideology takes precedence.  The Governmental responses to the Covid pandemic that facilitated the silencing of healthy scientific debate is a case in point.  Thankfully, due to the continued bravery of certain scientists who have been willing to persist in the face of ridicule, threat and cancellation, we have returned to more objective science escaping into the public domain which has thrown light on the many mistakes that were made in pursuit of an agenda that was largely about politics and control.  Sadly, there are many other examples today and it is likely the overriding of science (and sound economic principle) will continue for some time. 

Climate Alarmism  

The main thrust of Climate Alarmism is that humans are producing too much carbon dioxide and that at a future point in time this will have a catastrophic effect on the Earth and humanity.  The future point in time has a habit of shifting further and further down the road.  The scientific world has been rightly aware of the concept of carbon dioxide (as well as other gases and vapours in the atmosphere) as a retainer of atmospheric heat for decades.  However, the alarmist style threat that has become mainstream has been propagated predominantly by politics on the left and intranational politics.  Such is the dominance of the euphoria that pollical parties who have been typically more on the right have also had to play along to avoid losing votes.  Anyone who questions the narrative is at threat of ridicule or immediate cancellation. 

How is Climate Alarmism Shaping the West? 

Shifts political power away from local control 

Facilitates more power and influence away from national governments to undemocratic intranational political organisations.  “We have to find global solutions to global problems” are their slogans. 

Deconstructs the solid scientific heritage of the West 

Good science that states we are coming out of a natural low in global temperature is now side-lined or ignored.  Good science that has for years demonstrated that solar fluctuations are a predominant factor in global temperatures is side-lined.  Facts that Romans cultivated grapes in the UK are frowned upon because the narrative insists that humans are at fault and our activities are the main reason for global warming.  If humans are not at fault, there can be little basis for political control. 

Creates media bias 

Mainstream media is more likely to be selective on what it reports e.g. they will report on record temperature highs but not on record lows.  Stories about climate change are drip-fed as often as possible, even when weak in actual content.  State-owned media companies (e.g. the BBC) can be the worst.  On the reporting of any matter, climate change will be woven into the article whenever possible, no matter how tentative the link.  Big tech social media plays along with the narrative and restricts or removes open debate. 

Propagates Marxist thinking 

Climate alarmism could not have gained as much traction in the West were it not aided by Marxist influences whereby politically aligned elites are allowed to control a narrative.  Group-think is key to its propagation.  Note how aspects of the climate narrative resonate with the Marxist playbook.  In particular, the concept of disadvantaged groups that have been exploited – normally, those in distant regions in developing countries.  The West or “rich” countries (the oppressors) are implied as being at fault and must pay the consequences. 

The use of words and slogans is key to the propagation of Marxism as it seeks to leverage and amply feelings of aggrievement: 

The Climate Equality premise states that as the West is at fault, there needs to be a redistribution of wealth to make amends.  It has been said by its supporters that the climate crisis provides the biggest opportunity for global wealth redistribution.

Climate alarmism creates avenues to interfere in the lives of individuals and organisations.  It provides opportunities for state overreach.  E.g. more requirements are put on business to report their carbon footprint.  Taxes and the cost of goods (e.g. energy, transport, and fuel) are negatively impacted for individuals.  Climate alarmism puts the public in crisis mode which makes people more dependent on government – “we are your guardians and will fix the problem”. 

Politicises science 

The popularisation of Global Warming into the mainstream had its origins in the political left.  Generally speaking, the political left has a tendency to let ideology, not evidential fact dominate its output.  Remember, in more extreme forms of leftist politics such as communism, what the party states is truth and fact.  It does not have to subject itself to a higher authority (God or anyone).  The tendency to let ideology dominate nullifies one of the key benefits of science – its objectivity. 

Opens the door to pagan associations 

Note there is a pagan association with Eco activism.  Some sectors of these movements will refer to the need to protect or honour “Gaia” which is the old Greek pagan goddess of the Earth.  “Gaia” can sometimes be referenced in conversation on these matters in an affectionate personal way, implying that there is a level of conscious belief in the deity. 

Shouldn’t we look after the environment? 

Yes, absolutely.  Judeo-Christian thinking says that we have been given the Earth as part of an overall plan with meaning and purpose.  We are to inhabit it and cause it to be fruitful.  This brings with it the responsibility of stewardship.  Avoiding unnecessary waste, plastics in the environment, destruction of natural beauty, pursuing scientific breakthroughs for new resourceful solutions etc. is all part of this stewardship.  But, all of this should be truth-based and enveloped within an objective frame of reference, free of subversive agendas.  What in the World is Going On values the fixing of real problems with real solutions. 

LGBT and Trans-activism 

Arguably, this is the most aggressive influencing doctrine in recent years.  In at least living memory, nothing has matched the level of intention and investment to change public opinion as the LGBT+ message.  It is pushed from top level government and funded using taxpayer’s money.  President Biden, on his first day in office made it clear that his administration would be a big supporter of LGBT+ causes.  Liberation was to come to schools so that those children identifying as opposite to their biological sex could access any toilet they choose.  Parents who were to then oppose the ensuing rulings where then predicably shut down as, “haters”.  Teachers who dared to voice their concerns knew it would potentially lead to ostracisation and even job losses.

Biden made good on his first day’s promises and shortly after appointed LGBT+ advocates into senior political office.  In 2021 President Biden proclaimed March 31 as an annual “Transgender Day of Visibility”.  Riding roughshod over the concerns of conservative America, this devastated any pre-election promises to re-unite a divided America.  Democrat states pushed teachers not to inform parents of a child’s wish to undergo life-changing, permanent trans surgery.  In Chairman Mao’s China of the 1970s, children were told to love their Party leader more than their parents.  Now, children in the free America were also instructed to put the wishes of their presidential leader before the concerns of their loving parents. 

In March 2023, Ron DeSantis, governor of Florida, saw the horror of what was happening and sought to enact a measure banning transgender medical interventions in the state for under-18s.  In response, President Biden on the Kal Penn Daily Show stated: 

“What’s going on in Florida  is, as my mother would say, close to sinful. It’s just terrible what they’re doing,” 

And 

“It just, to me, is, I don’t know… It’s cruel.” 

Cruel?  To delay a child from making a permanent life changing decision based on their feelings until they reach the age of 18.  A life changing decision that many have made now regret.  A decision that leaves many with medical complications (pain, malfunction, disfigurement) for up to a lifetime.  An irreversible decision that trans clinics sign-off after just a brief consultation, even against the parent’s will?  Telling children as young as 5 years old that they might be trapped in the “wrong” body – preventing this is “sinful?”. 

In the history of the world, this is in the top league of evil done to children. 

Not only is this an evil done to children, like the pagan practices of old, women receive a bad deal too.  What in the World is Going On applaud those such as author J.K. Rowling who has publicly called out trans ideologies for cancelling women.  This takes some backbone, especially as the entertainment industry is vehemently liberal and champions any manifestation of moral decay.  The push-back against her has been substantial.  Where liberal authorities prevail, women can be made to share toilets with men.  It is not surprising that men who want to be women end up committing sex offices towards women in women-only spaces.  Anyone with an ounce of sense could see that coming.  In sport, men are allowed to compete in women-only events.  Imagine how a female athlete must feel having trained her whole life only to witness an amateur male arrive to the party late and steal the show?  Sadly, many sporting organisations have buckled to LGBT+ bullies.  We hope they wake up soon. 

The Biden administration, not wanting to miss out on the opportunity to cancel women, made an award to a man posing as a woman on International Women’s Day (March 2023).  Those looking on from countries outside of the West must have thought the US had lost its mind.  They wouldn’t be wrong. 

The insanity tops the bill in the US but Western Europe isn’t far behind.  In 2023 a number of UK parliamentary MPs were quizzed on what constitutes a man or woman.  Many could not say, or bent to the pressure and stated a woman can have a penis.  These included (then) leader of the opposition (Sir Keir Stammer, Labour party) and once Prime Minister hopeful Penny Mordaunt (Conservative Party).  Due to LGBT+ bullying and that much of the public sector and media has been intentionally conditioned to be pro-LGBT+ and silence those who aren’t, moral decay now features in all parties of all persuasions – left, right and centre. 

As an example of a public sector body that is a fully signed-up member of the LGBT+ cause, the UK National Health Service (NHS) takes some beating.  British users of the service encounter plenty of messaging when walking around NHS buildings.  Rainbow lanyards are commonplace.  External promotional material is keen to point out their LBGT+ alliance.  This isn’t just their preferential alignment.  You can’t take it or leave it.  In 2023 a male GP was refused from donating blood to the Scottish NHS because he refused to answer the question, “are you pregnant?”  It follows therefore that the NHS prefers ideology over their medical mandate to provide health services, even when there is a shortage of blood supplies.  The UK Civil Service has been indoctrinated by LGBT+ workshops funded by the taxpayer and so there is little or no recourse to challenge the insanity.  They are their own auditors.  In 2014, Richard Page, a non-executive NHS director was sacked for airing his views that adoption works better when there is a mother and father, not a homosexual couple.  Appeals were made but ultimately the British courts, backed by statements from leading politicians denied the reinstatement of his role.  Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali rightly stated at the time that the British justice system has:

“declared war on even residual notions of the faith having any place in our legal processes.  This is but the latest in a long line of cases having the effect of excluding Christians from public service and holding public office.”

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali

Where will this end up – LBGT+ Weaponisation Against the Church 

The next phase of the LGBT+ dictatorship is further legislation to deepen the criminalisation of verbal opposition.  Attempts have been made in the West to pass legislation that criminalises anyone who says words that are deemed non-LGBT+ affirming.  This is partly packaged under the banner of banning, “Gay Conversion Therapy”.  In the UK, attempts to date have been resisted, albeit narrowly.  In the Scottish Parliament, it was the English government who blocked the SNP’s wishes in 2023.  However, within the rest of Europe, Germany, France and Spain has enacted the ban.  As always, in post-truth societies the rationale is warped and out of balance.  Advocates of the ban refer to 1950s electro-shock therapies and big-up the scale of modern-day equivalents.  They also ignore that such “therapies” such has holding a discussion with someone, perhaps between friends, are voluntary.  Or that the LGBT+ person can choose to walk away if he/she so desires.  However, with all sense of balance thrown out of the window, casual expression of non-LGBT+ affirming words can lead to fines or imprisonment.  The Scottish SNP in their recent attempt to get the conversion therapy bill passed, had legislation that banned even parents from talking to their own children about the matter.  Should parents hold a loving conversation with their children on the matter, they would have had to weigh-up if 7 years of imprisonment was worth it.  It is no longer possible to deny that we are led by governments that, to a degree, embrace Marxist totalitarianism.  All efforts must be urgently made before the long march through the institutions is irreversible and the iron curtain in the West is fully drawn. 

What LGBT+ Ideologies Mean for the Church 

The Bible addresses the matter of transgenderism.  The Bible isn’t neutral on the matter: 

⁵ “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the Lord your God. 

Deuteronomy 22:5

This command was part of the moral code but served also to prepare the nation of Israel for their entry into Canaan in which all manner of evil was practiced.  These practices included the worship of the goddess Isthar whereby all sexual boundaries were scorned upon and men dressed as women and vice versa.  

So, there is a clash between Biblical truth and the intentional social engineering of today.  The Bible says don’t do it and that it is an abomination to Him.  Culture says go ahead and do it, it is right for you, it will liberate you, we will force others to “celebrate” your desires and we fight against anyone that even hints at their disagreement.  We will fight to the extent that we will criminalise opposition and threaten you with fines and imprisonment. 

There is therefore a perfect weapon to be used against the Church.  Note it will not be used against Islam because Islam is useful to those on the left.  We are already well into the attack.  LBGT+ lobby groups for decades have had the Church in their sights but now with government buy-in, all is virtually in place for a total crackdown.  In the 20^th century we witnessed communist revolutions make haste to overthrow the voice of the Church and stamp it out.  In the 21^st century, we are witnessing a stealth, slowly-slowly approach.  Of all Western nations, the Canadian Government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, is probably No 1 in the race towards totalitarianism.  His response to the Covid pandemic was dictatorial.  Seizing the bank accounts of individuals in opposition to government vaccine mandates is a practice that should not have a home in a democratic society.  Today, churches in Toronto are now being targeted by taxpayer funded LGBT+ advocacy groups who are demanding written responses to confirm their allegiance to LGBT+ ideology.  You can choose to decline but this of course sends a message.  As per the spirit of totalitarianism, full compliance is the only State-approved option.  Another taxpayer funded organisation, the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) in 2023 singled out Christians for their non-aligned beliefs in a frontpage article, “Inside the Fundamentalist Christian Movement that wants to remake Christian Politics”.  What in the World is Going On is not short of examples to prove LGBT+ ideology in the West is a weapon fashioned against the Church. 

The Next Stage of Weaponisation – Criminalisation for Challenging Any Behaviours or Tendencies 

If state authorities are able to unilaterally ban churches from expressing Biblical truths on sexual matters, a next possible step is to ban any dialogue that influences a person away from their “identity”.  This identity could take any shape or form of the individual’s choosing.  Such a ban would fly in the face of the Christian Gospel that declares we are in a fallen state and need to be reconciled to God by the work of Jesus on the Cross.  The outworking of this is that people’s behaviours are changed.  So dramatic is the process that the Bible describes it as a re-birth – being “born again”.  The Apostle Paul writing to the church at Corinth made the following passing comment: 

⁹ Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, ¹⁰ nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. ¹¹ And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. 

1 Corinthians 6:9-11

This why LGBT+ advocates want to ban publicity of Christians who no longer live a gay lifestyle following their born-again transformation e.g. the Matthew Grech trial in Malta.  This ban would effectively aim to shut down the very essence and existence of the Church.  The state control of the Church happened in the USSR and happens today in China and other communist states.  If it arrives in force on Western shores, it would have been accomplished by stealth over time, no revolution required.  This would contravene the laws of freedom of expression and freedom of religion.  But, as many recent events have confirmed, all laws will ultimately have to move aside to bow to the higher power – LGBT+ ideology. 

In all this the irony is that Christians recognise that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory (standard) of God (Romans: 3:23).  All Christians who have been born again know that they had their “stuff” before they came to God.  All Christians know that they were helplessly trapped, with all kinds of thoughts, sins, tendencies, addictions, issues, hurts, fears etc.  They have been there themselves.  Because of this, Christians have compassion on those who are struggling and want to engage with people so they can be set free.  Christians are utterly convinced there is nothing more powerful than the good news of the Gospel to change the very core being of a person and set them free.  In the words of the old Christian hymn, they want people to experience the same freedom they have experienced: 

Long my imprisoned spirit lay 
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night; 
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray, 
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light; 
My chains fell off, my heart was free, 
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee. 

And can it be that I should gain, Charles Wesley, 1738

Diversity, Inclusion and Equality 

IDE has its roots in relative, not absolute truth.  It fabricates its own truths and is not subject to others.  When mixed with more militant tendencies, it will disregard Judeo-Christian truths and make an example of those who uphold them.  There are many examples in the global press that confirm the actions of militant IDE adherents are overtly hypocritical.  When someone loses their job because they have quietly voiced their beliefs they are excluded, not included.  Those considered in the minority, or those categorised as disadvantaged, can riot, burn buildings down, destroy local businesses, support gross terrorism etc. but they will seldom fall out of favour with IDE evangelists.   

Disclaimer – diversity and acceptance can be good.  The Biblical writings of the 1^st century trail-blazed the concept –there is no Greek Gentile or Jew, male or female, male and female are equal.  But as per the secular saying goes, “the devil is in the detail”.  Acceptance of individuals who have different interests and different approaches to problem solving in the workplace is one thing, but accepting those who sympathise with Islamic terrorism or those who bully teachers and parents against their will into sexualising young children really ought to be classified as being outside of the healthy sphere of diversity.  The later need to be firmly rejected, not accepted. 

Critical Race Theory, White Privilege & Permitted Racism 

CRT is near-perfect classic Marxism.  It deconstructs, re-establishes its reality, pits one group against another, leverages any sense of injustice, is big on words and language.  Unsurprisingly, it has been incubated in academia. 

CRT makes some bold claims.  According to ChatGPT, the key tenants of CRT include: 

Like classic Marxism, it delivers the opposite of what it promises.  CRT has the effect of promoting racism.  A concerning development in recent years is that academic staff, politicians on the left, or people from minority groups in power have been emboldened to make overtly anti-white statements in public.  CRT ultimately turns itself into a program to advance racism.  Governments are spending taxpayers’ money to propagate this dogma via re-education programs throughout their departments.  It is state-sponsored brainwashing. 

Hate Speech and Limitations on Free Speech 

Hate speech laws are designed to protect minorities or any vulnerable groups.  In the UK, a significant piece of legislation that was introduced was the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.  This act was to broaden the scope under which racial hatred could be prosecuted but also for the first time addressed abuse against homosexuals.  In the 2000s the UK public became more aware of concept of hate speech as the Tony Blair government addressed protections against incitement to religious hatred. This was primarily achieved through the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.  This was possibly in response to increase the scope under which Islamic terrorists could be prosecuted, ideally before they carried out a terrorist attack.  Also significant around the same time, the Equality Act 2006 and the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007 were introduced which prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and provided legal protections to LGBT+ individuals. 

So far, so good.  Because of our Christian heritage, we at What in the World is Going On wish there to be zero expressions of hatred at anyone at any time.  However, what we now have a problem with is that because of the rise of Marxism (pitting oppressor groups against oppressed groups), the concept of hate speech has fully morphed into a tool for the political left.  Given this, and the polarisation of expression and language that has developed in recent years, any speech that conflicts with leftist ideals can be aggressively labelled as hate.  Those expressing support for effective border control are termed, “haters”.  Those wanting to uphold family or sexual practice standards are “haters”.  Those wanting less state control are “haters” etc.  Reason and balance are thrown out of the window as any tentative link to hate is conjured up.  Weak link to hate established?  Not a problem, a full 100% guilty verdict with passion can be delivered. 

Consequences of the Abuse of Hate Speech 

A Biblical Perspective on Hate Speech 

Jesus addressed true hate speech in the Sermon on the Mount in the section, “Murder begins in the heart” (Matthew 5:21-26).  The point Jesus was making is that hate speech is an overflow of what is already in the heart.  It is an indicator of what is on the inside.  A major theme of the Sermon on the Mount is that it’s the heart what counts, more so than the externals.  So, although Jesus addresses the concept of hate speech, we can infer there has to be hate in the heart for it to be truly hate speech.  The corrupt modern-day application of hate speech – that speaking words alone is to be classified as hate – is not recognised by the Bible.  It is a new phenomenon birthed out of 1960/1970s political correctness which in turn is inspired by Marxism.  In confirmation of its Marxist roots, those crying “hate” will interchangeably label “haters” as “right -wing” or “neo-Nazis”.  Often, it’s really about stamping out opposition to liberal ideologies, not stamping out the emotion of hate itself. 

The Biggest Errors of the Hate Speech Concept 

It doesn’t necessarily address hate; it addresses anti-left ideologies.  Because you said something you are guilty.  An individual can voice an opinion, free of the typical physiological indicators of hate (raised voice, aggressive facial expressions, threatening body language) and the individual is truly not motivated by hate.  The hate speech advocate will still find you guilty because you said words they didn’t like. 

There are plenty of cases however where hate is expressed and the motivate behind those hateful words is hate.  In this scenario, the words are designed to cause harm by intent.  In these cases, it is right to categorise this as hate speech. 

One of the greatest ironies of all is that hate speech accusers have hateful intentions against those saying the “wrong” words. 

Policing of hate speech laws becomes prone to error when culture is sensitive to words and taking offence is a pastime for some.  Hate speech accusers constantly scan the social media horizon ready to seize upon a perpetrator.  When a victim has been netted, they stand atop their high moral mountain to proclaim the injustice.  The SNP (Scottish Nationalist Party) in Scotland is a leading proponent within Europe for the enforcement of liberal ideals.  On 1st April 2024 the new Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act came into force.  Under this law, people voicing “gender critical” comments (e.g. “a man wearing a dress is still a man”) can be prosecuted.  Mirroring practices of the old Eastern Block, regional centres have been established so that such offences can be reported.  Children can report parents.  It is said this gives activists on the left a whole new power to stamp out opposing beliefs.  People who have made comments on their X feed prior to the enactment of this law will be in their sights.  In the first two weeks, only 2 of the 7000 “crimes” reported are being pursued by the police.  There are two points to note here, firstly, what a waste of police time.  Secondly, that 7000 crimes were reported shows the hyper-sensitivity of a culture that has been drip-fed a Marxist narrative.  Such is our great fall in the West.  There are aspects of Scottish government that are now indistinguishable from a communist state. 

Hate speech is a by-product of a deconstructed, fragmented society. Despite that hate speech gained a foothold in our societies over many decades to become a cultural phenomenon, the tide can be turned. As with all weaponised language projects, hate speech is hypocritical, unpractical, and does little to address the root causes of the matter (in this cause, hate that stems from the heart). If individuals resist succumbing to fear and courageously voice their objections to these contradictions, they can pave the way for a journey back to rationality.