England
Joined July 2010
The only reason anyone today believes slavery is wrong is because of Christianity.
Slavery was defended using scripture for thousands of years; human morality had to abolish what holy texts endorsed.
202
386
28
4,258
52,745
Replying to @CarolineLucas
Schrodingers gas field again: So big it "pours fuel on an overheating world" So small "It’s equivalent to just 2 months of UK gas demand" Do you not realise how ridiculous you are?
9
98
3
912
9,893
If you believe dogs are dirty, don’t move to a country or a community where the culture includes keeping dogs as pets, and expect them to stop walking their dogs. If you require quiet time for prayers, don’t go to places that aren’t quiet, and expect them to be quiet for you. If you believe alcohol should be forbidden, don’t move to a society that allows alcohol, and expect them to stop drinking for you. If you believe women should dress a certain way, don’t move to a country and expect women to change the way they dress, just for you. If you believe music is evil, don’t move to a country that enjoys music as part of their culture, and expect them to stop just for you. Moving to a new country, and learning to live amongst people who keep dogs as pets, and listen to music and dance, and have loud amusement parks and beer and wine, and women who choose for themselves how they dress - or who have any other parts of their culture that differ from yours - that’s immigration. Expecting them to change, and trying to force them to change to accommodate you? That’s invasion.
120
1,188
44
4,475
50,148
Pascal retweeted
Don’t stop talking about the mass slaughter of Christians by Islamists in Nigeria.
1,043
26,324
1,091
57,995
616,293
Nick's normally forthright but I think perhaps men stumble here because they think the burkha is a feminist issue. It's not. It's not 'very tricky' if women say they've chosen to dress like this. It's the same as if someone decides they want to wear a balaclava around our streets. It's unacceptable. A high trust society - like the one we developed over centuries - requires that you can see someone's identity and their facial expressions. Choosing to wear this garment is antisocial. It is an affront to the culture we had built in this country. That's before you even get to the *reason* it's worn. And I firmly reject it on those grounds alone. It's abhorrent. If men cannot contain themselves at the sight of a woman, they are weak men and should be shamed for that weakness. We don't cover women up to deal with their deficiencies. Women who don't cover should not feel less safe or less comfortable. And we don't have to meekly accept this practice because it's wielded by someone you've been convinced is a perpetual victim. We've already worked through the 'she was asking for it' lunacy that women who wear a short skirt were somehow giving a green light to rapists. We've already decided - as a society - that the man who chooses to assault someone is the one at fault. We don't have to relitigate that argument. People who come to the West from cultures who think differently? - They have to accept it. Many of them do. Great. The ones that don't are the ones who need to adapt, not us. We can say to the vanishingly small number of fundamentalists who choose to wear this that we just don't accept it. We don't want it spreading. It's not OK. We have been frogboiled into believing that we just have to meekly accept cultural insults as if it's some kind of pinnacle of tolerance. But respect is a two-way street. We can have the same non-rapey expectations of *any* man who walks our streets. We can have the same high-trust expectations of any woman. Having lower expectations because of someone's colour or religion is the bigotry of condescension. Have expectations. Be universal. They are the precursors to genuine respect and genuine tolerance.
Should Britain follow other European countries and ban the burqa in public? What is the correct response from government? Shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy tells Michael Gove the niqab and the burqa cut women off from society and damage social trust, and that there are pressing questions about faith schools making the hijab compulsory for girls. Watch in full | youtube.com/watch?v=9_0uvGGl… @NJ_Timothy @michaelgove
21
103
9
432
14,885
I don't mean to be so bleak but I don't think "honest conversations" will work to challenge suicidal empathy. Every institution and the culture they're immersed in echo the same lines - "they are French like us" / French history is shameful / kindness is enough / diversity is strength / décoloniser. They are repeated across public media, education, corporate brands, NGOs, and in entertainment, signifying moral status and tribal safety. Her brain adopts the tribal consensus so it doesn't matter how many honest conversations you - as a man - have with women like this. As long as the manufactured consensus holds, dissent registers as a threat to her safety, not as new information. The mass formation layer has to crack first - visible contradictions, institutional overhaul, the cost of the policy becoming undeniable on the street. Otherwise, nothing changes.
You've probably seen the video. A young Frenchwoman in Paris, in tears, begging looters to stop. "Why are you doing this? That's not what we stand for." Some accounts are mocking her. "She voted for it." I won't. Because what you see on her face is not stupidity. It's a disease that has infected the entire West, and it has a name: suicidal empathy. The term comes from Gad Saad, an evolutionary behavioral scientist at Concordia University in Montreal. A man who fled the Lebanese civil war as a child, and who knows what it looks like when a society falls apart. His new book, Suicidal Empathy: Dying to Be Kind, is the follow-up to The Parasitic Mind. Here is the thesis, and why it concerns every one of us. Empathy is one of the best things about us. It evolved for a reason: to care for our children, our kin, our tribe. It was calibrated for a world where the people you felt for were the people around you, and where empathy always came paired with its counterweight: the instinct to protect your own and to recognize a threat. Suicidal empathy is what happens when that mechanism misfires. When it fires at the wrong targets, in the wrong amounts, with no brake. When we feel more for the criminal than for his victim. More for the stranger who breaks the rules than for the citizen who follows them. More for how compassionate we look than for what our compassion actually produces. Where does it come from? Four layers. First, biology. Empathy is a spotlight, as the psychologist Paul Bloom put it. It lights up the one face in front of you and leaves everything else in the dark. The crying migrant on the boat is visible. The thousands of future victims of a broken system are statistics. A spotlight is a terrible tool for running a country. Second, our own civilization. The West is the civilization that put the victim at the center of its morality. Christianity taught us to care for the stranger, the poor, the weak. It was one of the greatest moral revolutions in history. But cut off from its other half, justice, responsibility, the duty to protect your own, it turns into something else. Third, ideology. In The Parasitic Mind, Saad described idea pathogens, ideas that hijack our reasoning. Suicidal empathy is the emotional counterpart: an ideology that hijacks our compassion. It sorts the world into oppressors and victims, then demands unlimited empathy for whoever ranks as the victim, whatever they do. Fourth, status. In the age of social media, empathy has become a display. Posting "refugees welcome" costs nothing and earns applause. The bill goes to someone else: the working class, the suburbs, the women walking home at night. The results are everywhere. Criminals treated as victims of society. Sexual assaults by migrants met with lenient sentences. Self-defense branded as aggression. Borders treated as cruelty. Saad's conclusion is simple: a society dies when it would rather display infinite tolerance than use its survival instinct. Now the part I'll add myself, and that few people dare to say. On average, women score higher than men on measures of empathy. It's one of the most consistent findings in psychology, across cultures, and it makes perfect evolutionary sense: for most of human history, the survival of children depended on it. It's a strength. But it means an ideology that weaponizes empathy will hit women harder. And the data shows it: in country after country, young women have moved sharply to the left of young men, especially on immigration. This is where men have a responsibility. Not to mock. Not to lecture. Not to say "she deserved it." Empathy has always needed a counterweight, and that counterweight was the protective instinct: the one that draws lines, says no, and stands between the threat and the people it loves. Men abandoned that role. They were told it was toxic, and many believed it. So they stayed silent at the dinner table, at work, with their partners, sisters, daughters and friends. That has to end. Men have to have this conversation, honestly and with respect: compassion that cannot say no is not compassion. It's surrender. And the first to pay for it are women. Many women already understand this better than anyone. Some of the bravest voices in this fight are women, precisely because they are the first to feel the danger in the street. A civilization rests on a balance: compassion and strength, openness and borders, mercy and justice. When one side swallows the other, the foundations crack. What we are watching in Europe is what happens when empathy has no counterweight left. Look at that young woman again. She isn't the enemy. She's what this ideology made of a generation that was told kindness would be enough. Our job is to make sure she's the last generation that has to learn it this way.
73
187
13
1,487
40,548
Pascal retweeted
We should offer £25k cash reparations to any British black person who wants them on the condition that if they accept they need to surrender their citizenship & leave permanently. Either you’re British, & one of us, & can’t owe yourself reparations, or you’re not, so fuck off.
Long before the issue of reparations reached the UN, campaigners kept it alive through decades of dismissal and ridicule. Ahead of the UK Reparations Conference, I've written for The Voice about why they must be at the heart of what happens next. voice-online.co.uk/opinion/c…
4
41
1
548
8,767
I'm imagining a student supposedly intelligent and driven enough to receive an education at Oxford, but apparently so stupid they cannot work out the meanings of common English idioms from context and so poorly read that they haven't encountered them in English literature
79
257
14
3,342
40,337
A ready willingness to attack and fight what is wrong - to confront danger, or protect against what others are willing to tolerate - often seems harsh, or even cruel. But the courage to refuse to tolerate dysfunction is often the most sincere expression of masculine love.
38
89
12
1,011
27,327
Pascal retweeted
Somali jailed for raping FIVE women wins a case against the NHS because his painkillers were dispensed during Ramadan fasting hours with the court ruling that his ECHR rights had been breached. Five rape victims, and he’s the one winning a human rights case.
386
3,461
188
25,633
664,689
Mark Rowley, Met Commissioner, says diversity hiring is a necessity because they "cannot be effective if large sections of society do not trust us, do not work with us, or do not see policing as a service that understands their experiences" This is literally an argument against multiculturalism and supports the widely held opinion that people coming here aren't even trying to fit in. Parallel societies demand special treatment. I wouldn't go to Timbuktu and demand special police officers to deal with my needs ffs
Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley says diversity hiring is ‘an operational necessity’ if we want to catch more criminals. Celia Walden argues it is hard to disagree. Read why here ⬇️ telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/10…
44
124
8
687
7,527
In a truly extraordinary attempt to rewrite history, Andy Burnham denies his own words while simultaneously throwing the left-wing commentariat under the bus. There’s just one rather inconvenient problem: he was filmed saying them. Extraordinary stuff.
363
2,057
138
6,758
134,442
The quickest way to reduce the number of undesirable migrants is to: 1. Restrict benefits to British citizens only 2. Citizenship eligibility extended from 5 to 15 years 3. Citizenship candidates must prove they won't be a burden on the state Undesirables will self deport ASAP
I asked what a Muslim convert thinks of England. "The best. Because I have my heart problem, everything is free. The best when it comes to benefits." "I don't care who is the government, as long as I am receiving benefits." Watch the full documentary: youtu.be/EYHWpMswzOI
121
627
11
4,892
77,142
I've been prototyping an automated peer review project. With current models you get human level peer review for about $0.10 of tokens. For $5 you can rederive every result, check every statistical inference, and audit every paper cited in both directions. There are about 100m papers in the scientific corpus. Most are not important. Many are sloppy. For structural reasons it's essentially impossible to change published work, even to correct a typo. For $500m today you can thoroughly audit every paper ever written. Every p-hacked result, every plagiarist, every fabrication, every citation club, everything. I don't have $500m so instead I build a tree, focusing on the 1% of papers that carry 99% of the signal, doing a cheap first pass looking for obvious problems. I can find 90% of the nonsense for a few hundred dollars of tokens. Any guesses where the biggest surprises will be found?
315
363
87
4,481
176,552
Pascal retweeted
You can think whatever you want about Israel. I don’t have strong feelings either way. Are they an important alley in the region? Do we defer too much to their desires in the region? Do we spend too much money on their cause? I don’t know. I have some thoughts, but they’re not that interesting or well informed. But if you can’t see that the Palestinians are our natural enemies, enemies of the West, enemies of everything that is good about humanity, then you’re just completely lost. They are the least sympathetic people in the history of the world and I won’t waste even a single second feeling bad for anything that happens to them. You need to be able to recognize evil. You need to know an enemy when you see one. If you gave those people an ounce of power, they would use it to destroy everything good in the world.
161
233
53
2,847
83,676
This is not a drill anymore. Yesterday in Amsterdam, dozens—perhaps hundreds—of people were chanting: “Long live 7 October.” This is outright glorification of one of the most brutal terrorist attacks in modern history, and the deadliest antisemitic massacre since the Holocaust. I don’t care who the people hiding behind those keffiyehs are, where they were born, or what their religion is. If you openly glorify terrorism and mass murder, you should be arrested and prosecuted, and deported where the law permits. We cannot build a functioning society if people are allowed to openly celebrate the mass murder of Jews, and we cannot expect Jews to stay in Europe if we simply let this pass. I would say exactly the same thing if far-right extremists were openly celebrating the Holocaust or Anders Breivik’s terrorist attack in the streets. The double standard here is staggering. In Belgium, people have been prosecuted for making offensive jokes about the Holocaust. Even Holocaust denial or minimization—not just glorification—is illegal. Yet we’re supposed to tolerate people openly celebrating a modern-day massacre of Jews? You cannot build a functioning society with people who openly celebrate the mass murder of innocent civilians. @ministerieJenV
277
1,295
121
5,122
151,761
The relevant parts of Badenoch's 2011 TED talk, without Reform's annoying cuts and music: She tells an African focused-event that she got into British politics to affect the development of Africa.
27
152
21
609
25,744
Pascal retweeted
The thing you need to understand is that on the progressive left, racism has an entirely different definition to the one you were brought up with. You were brought up in a fair and equal society, where racism meant discrimination against an individual or a group on the basis of race. Essentially meaning that anyone could be a perpetrator of racism and anyone could be a victim of it. If a gang of white kids beat up a black kid because he’s black. That’s racist. If a gang of black kids beat up a white kid because he’s white. That’s racist. Pretty straightforward stuff that everyone understands. But that’s not how racism works under woke ideology because woke ideology isn’t interested in fairness or equality. It’s interested in the Marxist concept of oppressed and oppressor groups (goodies versus baddies), and under the auspices of Critical Race Theory that “goody baddy” binary is applied to skin colour where the goodies are anyone who is non-white and the baddies are anyone who is white. The entire theory is basically anti-white racism, as you or I would understand it, but qualifies as progressivism, as the woke lefty understands it. This really isn’t a concept that’s difficult to grasp, but once you do, it immediately brings a lot of confusion into focus. So when you think to yourself? Why did the government, media, and police ignore the rape gangs for decades—because to your mind, raping children is a bad thing—in their mind it’s simply: “The victims were white, so they probably deserved it, and the perpetrators were brown so holding them accountable is obviously racist.” After every Islamist terrorist attack, you might think—why is the media gaslighting me into thinking Islam is a religion of peace instead of deporting Islamists on the anti-terrorism watchlist? The answer is because to the woke progressive (who control every institution in the country) Muslims are predominantly brown so to hold Islam accountable for Islamist terrorism … would be racist. It also explains the bizarre fetishisation for Palestine, the refusal of the white security guard in apprehending the Manchester Arena bomber, and the global meltdown over George Floyd even though “racial aggravation” was never a factor in the case against Derek Chauvin. So when Sadiq Khan opens a black and African only cinema in London, what do you see? You see preferential treatment for one racial group, which unfairly excludes another racial group, and the massive hypocrisy of the outrage that would materialise if a white Mayor of London opened a white only cinema. But all they see is “progress.” And here’s the thing, these people aren’t going to stop. They’re ideologues on an ideological mission. They’re not going to magically transform their mindset over night. They’re going to continue to neglect and disregard white people and show preferential treatment to non-white people. And they’re going to do this over and over and over again, until they are stopped.
🚨NEWS: Sadiq Khan has formally opened the first Black and African only Cinema in London You could never open a cinema dedicated to White films that promoted White people, would never be allowed
54
407
31
1,728
97,124
Pascal retweeted
Your son is not English because that is an ethnicity, I am. Your son is British because that's a nationality, I am too. He can play for the England football team because it's just a sports team. England hasn't existed as a country since the Act of Union 1707. Yours and your son's ethnicity is probably Janjua, Bhakral (Pakhral), Bangyal, Dhamial, Nagyal or Khatreel because your parents are from Bewal, Kallar Syedan, Pakistan. You're not erasing my identity because you don't give a shit about your own.
Agree Sophy We need to celebrate Kemis rejection of Suellas divisive rhetoric on Englishness But we also need to challenge Kemi and others on their divisive anti Muslim rhetoric because I don’t want to explain to my son, when we’re watching our brilliant England team play cricket, that some people don’t think our Muslim players are English or equally British or are from culturally inferior backgrounds . My party cannot be selective about which forms of bigotry they are outraged by.
42
87
2
773
19,280
We believe that the West can awaken from its long slumber – and rekindle the fire that was first lit in ancient Greece millennia ago.
2,675
10,148
1,264
62,054
2,430,176