Rod Dreher |
In the Soviet Union, not even the home was a refuge from the ears of the totalitarian state. Historian Orlando Figes, in his 2007 book The Whisperers: Private Life in Stalin’s Russia, quotes one Soviet woman’s memory of her childhood:
Decades from now, will a Scotsman brought up in Edinburgh or Glasgow offer a similar testimony to historians documenting our era? The question is by no means absurd, not in light of the Hate Crimes and Public Order Bill brought forth by the ruling Scottish National Party. In testimony before a parliamentary committee this week, Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf said that he believes the reach of the proposed law should cover words spoken in the privacy of people’s homes.
We were brought up to keep our mouths shut. ‘You’ll get into trouble for your tongue’ — that’s what people said to us children all the time. We went through life afraid to talk. Mama used to say that every other person was an informer. We were afraid of our neighbours, and especially of the police … Even today, if I see a policeman, I begin to shake with fear.
Decades from now, will a Scotsman brought up in Edinburgh or Glasgow offer a similar testimony to historians documenting our era? The question is by no means absurd, not in light of the Hate Crimes and Public Order Bill brought forth by the ruling Scottish National Party. In testimony before a parliamentary committee this week, Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf said that he believes the reach of the proposed law should cover words spoken in the privacy of people’s homes.
Continue reading @ UnHerd.
This law's outrageous. It'll pass because people forget the vindictiveness of the state
ReplyDeleteYep, and soon it will be an offense wherever you are to insult the Prophet (PBUH).
ReplyDeleteIn your own homes.
@ Steve R
ReplyDeleteAre you a betting man? Because I'd bet you £1k that it definitely, 100% will NOT be "an offense wherever you are to insult the Prophet (PBUH). In your own homes."
I mean, do you actually believe that?
Brandon,
ReplyDeleteWhy not? If there's a person trying to insinuate that criminality should cover spoken words in privacy you can be damn sure the remit will spread from 'hatespeech' to cover any criticism of a persons religious beliefs made in private eventually. It's a slippery slope.