Pat Condell Brings the Hammer of Krah Down on Liberal Apologists

This guy is wrong on so many points that I don't know where to start. First is that he jumps to the assumption that the "left" was ever a better or worse place to be now than before. The second is the idea that everyone who does not believe in using the government to abolish burkas fits into some sort of easily defined category.
It must not occur to him that there are a myriad of people who do not wish to use legal force to stop the wearing of burkas, and that those people hold those views for a myriad of reasons.
It is people like this guy that makes discussing politics not fun. They look at things through a binary lens where everyone on their side is good and everyone on the other side is the manifestation of everything that was, is and shall be evil.
An honest assessment would be to look at the unreasonable justifications for and against banning burkas and aptly criticize those reasons. Next would be to look at the reasonable justifications for and against banning burkas and try to find a middle ground of understanding based on rational and critical thinking. This is a good formula for just about any debate.
Instead of supporting his ideas he just attacks those he disagrees with by making overly broad statements.

That was a very eye opening, eight and an half minute rant, without breaks mind you, that took a right wing reactionary stance against a left wing platform.

I've been aware for a long time that "multi-culturalism" is a code word for "anti-nationalism", meaning that if two people of the same nation walk into a restaurant, they must be differentiated by some identifier that disseminates them into smaller, ofttimes opposing categories and demographics, so that two men under one flag become two strangers at odds. The examples of two Americans becoming a white man and a red man isn't necessary for this kind of implied inherited competition, but also can be seen in terms of whose culture has been more victimized, such as when a black man and an hispanic man walk into a room. The sheer mechanics of this kind of political correctness has brought to my attention that even using the word American in a way that excludes people from all of North America, South America, and Central America demands retribution, rebuke, and shame.

In any case, this post has also brought to mind a kind of revelation that I occasionally come to, that there are both extremes in the political bandwidth, left and right, and a depth of depravity on both sides that for most people has been lost. I call them, "the evil left" or "the evil right", basically representing a kind of "y" axis of a graph. Without this depth, a moderate nazi isn't an extreme right wing, and from the left's perspective, isn't as bad as a pro-lifer, who is more of a threat of invading the lives of everyone by influencing public policy.

Blind to this kind of depth, this man identifies evil nationalism, epitomized in his country as the BNP, as a simplified form of right wing radicalism he particularly despises, while he is taking an equally right wing perspective from a protectionist standpoint, what we in our country call "being conservative."

Still, good luck to him, and hopefully our culture will evolve to include the apparent motivations of each group, instead of lumping them all in too simplistic of categories when politically expedient.

-=T=-