'Art is central to the human condition and its flourishing relies on freedom of artistic expression. The Nazis destroyed such freedoms of artistic expression. The rise of Nazism involved such infamy as public book-burnings, the flight from Nazi territory of thousands of artists, scientists and cultural figures, the abolition and destruction of institutions of so called degenerate art such as abstract and expressionist art and institutions like the Bauhaus. One of the many victims of the Nazi holocaust was choreographer, Rene Blum who was murdered in Auschwitz in 1943, he was also the founder of the Ballet de L'Opera Monte Carlo. It is in those people's memory that we should oppose all forms of fascism. Those artists - and everyone else - who defend the BNP should tell us if they defend the full reality of its politics: claims of ignorance are no defence'. An interesting ethical and political stance, but the metaphysics is sadly lacking – as are the historical facts. If 'freedom of artistic expression' is 'central to the human condition', then what about the 'artistic expression' and freedom of racists? Why do racists have no such freedom and why is there no debate about this all important issue. Are so called anti racists frightened that racists might, after all, have a point. And doesn't this then mean that such people inevitably become as blinkered and as bigoted – in their own way – as the racists they affect to condemn? What The 1990 Trust – and its Communistic fellow travellers – desperately need is a clear definition of what freedom is before hypocritically attempting to deny it to others. If They, for example, claimed that artistic freedom was only available to those who commit no objective harm nor hindrance to others, then the above quote would be beyond reproach. The only exception to this would be that clearly Simone Clarke has committed no demonstrable harm by her racist views. Instead, we are left to guess the real, hidden agenda of The 1990 Trust. This is its obvious desire to completely control UK public discourse in order to undermine White Culture (such as it is – & it ain't much, admittedly) and replace it with Their own culture of entitlement for Blacks. All the while condemning the public discourse not of those they can prove fallacious in their attitudes, but merely of those with whom they strongly disagree. By raising personal prejudice to the level of objective fact – in this way – one undermines free discourse (as well as discourse about free discourse). This is no more than one form of racial tyranny fighting another, for racial supremacy. By the way, the Nazis never destroyed artistic freedoms, they only tried to destroy the freedoms of those against whom they were fundamentally opposed – as The 1990 Trust is doing here. So who out there is going to call The 1990 Trust Nazi sympathisers? Oh well, I guess it might as well be Frank TALKER.
Article copyright © 2007, by Frank TALKER. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce and distribute it electronically and in print, other than as part of a book and provided that mention of the author’s Website/log http://franktalker.blogspot.com/ is included: E mail notification requested. All other rights reserved. (Frank TALKER is the author of Sweaty Socks: A Treatise on Body Odour [East Cheam Press: Groper Books, 1996] and is University of Bullshit Professor Emeritus of Madeupology.)