Why There Will Never Be #Justice for Grenfell

As the flaming edifice of Grenfell Tower bust onto our news feeds it was clear that a great deal of anger had been caused by the incident. It was an appaling tragedy and people were rightly upset that such a scene could have taken place in one of the richest cities in the world.

Since the fire, it is clear that the Grenfell disaster has become a lightning rod for a whole host of different issues. These range from housing safety to racial inequality. It is because Grenfell has become such a charged subject that there will never be justice for the families that lost their lives in the inferno.

Seeing Theresa May escorted away from Grenfell Tower by her guardians was indicative of the anger people felt at the time. This frustration has no subsided since June last year.

Council meetings about the fire have been chaotic and difficult to manage, local Conservative councillors have been told to stay away from church services and the management of the families affected has been appaling.

The demands of those asking for ‘justice’ are so diverse that you would be forgiven for forgetting that there was even a fire in the first place. The prevailing attitude to the tragedy seems t be that justice will not be achieved until the whole plethora of issues that have been raised in response to Grenfell have been sorted.

To expect even a popular government to sort all of the demands that have arisen out of Grenfell is naive, yet people cling to their desires. For this reason, there will never be ‘#Justice for Grenfell. But at the same time, Grenfell is an issue that is not going to disappear anytime soon.

 

  8 comments for “Why There Will Never Be #Justice for Grenfell

  1. Paul Marks
    Jan 3, 2018 at 1:30 pm

    The building had just had nine million Pounds of taxpayer money spent upon it – which destroys the “profits before people” socialist narrative. But many people do not wish to hear the truth.

    Actually the body that controlled the building (a body that was actually dominated by local socialists, including the new Member of Parliament – in spite of the area having a Conservative Party Council) would have done better to NOT spend the money as the cladding put on the outside of the building and the communal heating ducts put inside the building, made the place a fire trap. If the building had just been left as it was (ugly though it was) it would NOT have burned down.

    In short just about everything most people have been told about this event (mean Tories not spending enough taxpayer money) is a lie.

    • Jan 3, 2018 at 1:59 pm

      Facts about the incident certainly seem elusive!

      Most of what I see on social media or hear on the radio is just people loudly proclaiming what they WANT to believe rather than the facts. But this is why Grenfell has become such a big issue, it is a lightning rod for angry leftists.

      I remember on the day after the fire a ‘professor’ was interviewed on the radio- he said that the conservative party should all be thrown in jail for Grenfell because the fire was ‘the direct result of decades of neoliberalism’…

      I laughed at first… Then I realised he was being serious and it stopped being funny.

      • Paul Marks
        Jan 4, 2018 at 12:48 pm

        Yes – “public ownership” (or “social ownership”) and endless millions of government spending by a “wet” council is now “new liberalism”.

        And it was not some random lunatic – it was an academic (the sort of person who teaches the young) and his words were broadcast (essentially unchallenged) by the main-stream-media.

        See what I mean about Marxist domination of the culture?

        Try and set up, for example, a conservative television station to give the other side of the argument – see what the “broadcasting standing authorities” do to you.

        They will force you off the air (one way on another) – just as they did with Fox News in this country. Perhaps by putting commercial pressure (via government power) on your parent company.

        We have about a dozen English language leftist stations broadcasting news to this country – and not even ONE anti leftist station.

        • Jan 4, 2018 at 8:50 pm

          For obvious reasons, I don’t want to hear lunatics on the radio. But I am not sure that I would say the media is dominated by ‘Marxists’.

          I had a discussion about this with somebody a while ago and it’s something I come across a lot. The media is dominated by people of a ‘left wing’ persuasion certainly, but not Marxist. If the evening news started with the Internationale and spoke about ‘the workers’ struggle’ then maybe then I would say that it is Marxist.

          I deplore Marxism, so when I call somebody a Marxist I want it to be shocking. If I overuse the term then it get’s diluted. A similar process has taken place with Fascism. What Fascism meant was ambiguous at the best of times even in the late 1930s. But the word has been thrown around so much that it has lost all meaning.

          These days a ‘Fascist’ is anybody who you disagree with. The Antifa movement has done more than any other group to destroy any real meaning of the word Fascism.

  2. Paul Marks
    Jan 5, 2018 at 1:46 pm

    Jordan Lee – your very example of Antifa is that of a Marxist organisation (specifically Frankfurt School of Marxism).

    However, I fully accept that many of the media and the education system do NOT consider themselves Marxists – but the “mainstream” media (everything from book publishing to Hollywood) is dominated by Marxist ASSUMPTIONS. Assumptions of “oppression” and “exploitation”. As Ludwig Von Mises made clear in his book “Socialism” (almost a century ago) even the political parties that considered themselves the ENEMIES of Marxism in the German speaking world were dominated by Marxist thinking (Marxist assumptions) and that is true now of the media (MOST television stations, book publishers, Hollywood films) and the education system (MOST schools and universities) in the English speaking world.

    What has changed is that now the Frankfurt School of Marxism (with its obsession with race, sexuality, gender…. in its desperate search for new “victim groups” to stir up against the “Capitalist West”) is more popular than Classical Marxism, as is French “Post Modernism” – that “Post Modernism” is dominated by Marxist assumptions is something I hope you know, but (if you do not know) I refer you to Professor Jordan Peterson’s talks (and to the books by specialist scholars on the subject, that he cites).

    By the way there is nothing “ambiguous” about Fascism – it was created by the heretic Marxist Mussolini (drawing on German “War Socialism” and other sources – as well as Classical Marxism) and is about the domination of society by the state – with private owners reduced to servants of the state. “All for the state – nothing outside the state”. The idea that Fascism is about the “power of big business” or a “partnership” between “big business” and the state, was a NKVD DISINFORMATION campaign in the 1930s – taken up by Hollywood (then as now under Marxist influence – see “Red Star over Hollywood” and other works).

    Would you like me to name the officers of the NKVD who spread this particular lie-campaign? Such books as Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom” and Ludwig Von Mises’ “Omnipotent Government” explaining the economic side of both Fascism and National Socialism, are not secret – there is no excuse, none, for the media or the education system to continue the spread 1930s lies from the NKVD.

    Americans in particular have no excuse – as the 1933 National Industrial Recovery Act and the National Recovery Administration (General Johnson’s jackbooted “Blue Eagle” thugs) was modelled on Mussolini’s Italy (although more moderate – it did not go nearly as far) and was struck down by the Supreme Court (9 votes to zero) in 1935.

    The main difference between Fascism and National Socialism was on RACE – not economics. Mussolini and Fascism are not really about race.

    National Socialism can only be understood as racial socialism – looking back to such German philosophers as Fichte in the early 1800s (National Socialism was strongest among teachers, students and academics – it won them over when it was only get a couple of per cent of the votes of ordinary people).

    Anyone who teaches that National Socialism was the “rule of the capitalists” or a “partnership with the capitalist class” is a clown – Mr Hitler and the National Socialists did not share power.

  3. Ken Ferguson
    Jan 6, 2018 at 8:25 am

    Whatever term you want to use to describe them, cultural Marxists, social justice warriors or whatever, there is no doubt that these people have seized the political levers and there is now almost no resistance from conservatives, or anyone else, to their agenda. Their aberrant philosophy dominates all government departments, the education system and almost all of the mainstream media.

    This monopoly of power has meant that it has become impossible for an individual to challenge the concept of equality which is at the root of their philosophy. It is becoming increasingly difficult to even countenance heretical thoughts, far less to articulate them, but let me try a few.

    Men and women are different and therefore cannot be assumed to have equal value or worth. Homosexuality is not the same as heterosexuality and therefore cannot be asserted to have equal worth. Public sector jobs are not the same as private sector jobs and do not have equal value. Islamic cultural values are not the same as those of the liberal West and do not have equal worth.

    There are many more of these!!

    It should be obvious to any rational observer that all men and women are not equal either in terms of their genetic heritage or what they do with their lives so why why do all of our media and politicians insist that they must be?

    The progress of the left in selling this lie is only resisted by the natural common sense of people who become aware that the truth they are being told does not match their experience of the world. But as the dial is turned continually in support of the equality orthodoxy other voices are increasingly howled down and those expressing alternative views are branded as fascist, racist, homophobic and misogynist.

    And of course the real worry comes if these cultural leftist values result in the election of classical Marxists like Corbyn and McDonnell to political power. That will be the moment to check out the price of beach property in Mexico!!!

    • Paul Marks
      Jan 9, 2018 at 1:25 pm

      I wish I could argue with you on all this Ken Ferguson – but the facts and logic are, on these things, overwhelmingly on your side.

      There is no real resistence from the Conservative Party to the mixture of Frankfurt School Marxism and French Post Modernism (ironically no longer fashionable in France itself) that dominates, intellectually, in the United Kingdom.

      The Prime Minister, Mrs May, may be a very nice person – but the lady is not offering any resistence to the “hegemony” of leftist ideas – because the lady was educated to believe (or half believe) in them herself.

      However, I would not advice buying land in Mexico – not till you see whether the socialist wins the Mexican Presidential election. Remember how many times people who have invested in Mexico have lost everything – with the state just confiscating their land and everything they have created. Let us hope it does not happen again – but sadly it could.

  4. Paul Marks
    Jan 9, 2018 at 1:31 pm

    The new British housing minister believes in the same thing that former President of Mexico (President Fox – another so called “conservative”) believed in. Vast borrowiing to push the endless buidling of housing in “public-private partnership”.

    The howing plan of former President Fox has proved to be a horrible disaster in Mexico, Ken Ferguson – just the promise of former President Fox (pushed by all politicians to this day in Mexico) of “free” healthcare for everyone, will prove utterly unsustaiable.

    What is happening in Mexico is a real tragedy, as private health care in Mexico was much less inflated by regulations and subsidies than it is in the United States – and so was only a fraction of the cost it is in the United States.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments will be closed in 3 months.