Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image


Now we have this race obsessed dickhead:

I’m all for a bit less Isaac Newton and Charles Darwin, Galileo and Copernicus, if it means a bit more McCoy, Banneker and Carver. It’s a question of balance. It’s important.

So, this bloke Muir wants us to study the scientists of the past based on their race? Their skin colour? Not their contribution?


Ok, take the first two, Newton and Darwin; why do we study them? Well, because they had some good ideas and helped create modern society, right?

Well, yes, I suppose they did, and that’s pretty much how they’re taught. No wonder this fool can dismiss them so casually. But there is another, even more valid reason to study them and their contributions – they were the two most influential people in all human history.


Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica and On the Origin of Species, each, in their own way, changed the way all people think, across all cultures, for all time. Only those two frauds, Freud and Marx, come even close to the influence these two men have had. And no, I’m not forgetting about Big Mo, Confucius, The Buddha or anyone else; just discounting them as not in the same league.

You don’t agree? Then I suggest you probably don’t appreciate just how radically different was the world view of your recent ancestors.

The ones Muir suggests we study instead? Well, I read a biography of George Washington Carver about forty five years ago, and he seems to have been a fine and decent gentleman; and for his times that is praise indeed. The others? Never heard of them. Is that really racism? Or a justifiable acknowledgement of their importance?

Quite frankly, we don’t accord either Newton or Darwin the attention they deserve.

As for the rest of his crap about black history month? Well, uncle Morgan gets it.

We will never abolish racism so long as idiots like this keep ramming race down our throats. Far from helping abolish racial concerns, obsessive’s like Muir just keep exacerbating it. Making curriculum decisions for political reasons.


  1. Lynne says:

    It’s just typical Guardianista fuckwittery. This sort of crap is what gets a newspaper a dwindling circulation and deservedly so.

  2. Tom says:

    I suppose he’s the sort of fuckwit who’ll take racial umbrage at be called a clueless fuckwit too?

    Have to say the Guardian editors can be tarred with the same brush of toxic fuckwittery for allowing this poisonous trash to end up in their paper.

    I wonder what they’ll blame the final demise of the Guardian on eh?

  3. Kinuachdrach says:

    From the Gruniad article: “Who plants the seed in their minds that they might be a metallurgist or a physicist …”

    Not in bloody Britain, they won’t!

    English universities shutting down their Physics departments because of a lack of students coming out of secondary schools with basic science eduation. The once proud British metals industry gutted — it produced CO2, you know.

    Martin Luther King had a dream that the colour of a person’s skin would not matter. It is a pity Guardian readers never got the memo.

    And the Guardianistas are such hypocrites. They love black guys — as long as they don’t have Bradford accents. But hey! They are not racists. They hate white guys with Bradford accents too.

  4. mike says:

    Excellent post.

  5. RAB says:

    It’s the leftist obsession with equality, and not just racial equality, but all equality, gender, intellegence, income etc.

    Well the sane know that there can be only one type of equality, and that is of opportunity. Equality of outcome is insane, because even the dimmest of us recognises that some people are smarter and more talented than others, and they are more likely to succeed, and no amount of wishful thinking or positive discrimination will alter that fact.

    Mechanisms exist to ensure that there is equality of opportunity, but strangely they dont appear to work very well.

    We have compulsory schooling from aged five, yet a quarter of our children leave school functionally illiterate. That should not be happening. Certain racial groups seem to fare better than others, and it cannot be put down to racism that Black Afro Caribbeans are out performed by white kids, because white working class kids are doing very badly themselves. It cannot be racism and lack of role models that see Indian and Asian and Far eastern kids out preform the whole lot of of them either can it?

    But it’s funny that amongst the clamour for more female senior executives, lawyers (doing well there actually) engineers, scientists and such, that where women completely outnumber men, the fact is never mentioned or quietly ignored.

    So why is there no agitation for quotas to ensure more men in in primary and junior education, where women outnumber men 10 to 1?

    Could it be that as far as the mad Harriets of this world are concerned it is job done? or could it be that they are re-enforcing their own supposedly hated stereotypes, i.e. little kids are a job for a woman?

  6. El Draque says:

    You’d think lefties would want those four white European male scientists as role models. Each of them were total radicals who overthrew an established order of thinking.
    Didn’t the modern use of the word “revolution” come from the scientific treatise “De Revolutionis Celestius Orbis”? (Apologies, I’m sure the Latin is wrong. Just can’t be a***d to look it up.)
    I suppose we’ll have to study Lysenko so as to balance the western world thinkers with the socialist world . . .

    But give the lefties a bit of the Soviet economist Kondratieff as well – just to see their heads explode as he explains why capitalism constantly revives itself.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: