Students and academics are being banned from using the term "Old Masters" and "seminal" because of claims they are sexist.Publishers and universities are outlawing dozens of seemingly innocuous words in case they cause offence.
Banned phrases on the list, which was originally drawn up by sociologists, include Old Masters, which has been used for centuries to refer to great painters - almost all of whom were in fact male.
It is claimed that the term discriminates against women and should be replaced by "classic artists".
The list of banned words was written by the British Sociological Association, whose members include dozens of professors, lecturers and researchers.
The list of allegedly racist words includes immigrants, developing nations and black, while so-called "disablist" terms include patient, the elderly and special needs.
It comes after one council outlawed the allegedly sexist phrase "man on the street", and another banned staff from saying "brainstorm" in case it offended people with epilepsy.
However the list of "sensitive" language is said by critics to amount to unwarranted censorship and wrongly assume that people are offended by words that have been in use for years.
Prof Frank Furedi, a sociologist at the University of Kent, said he was shocked when he saw the extent of the list and how readily academics had accepted it.
"I was genuinely taken aback when I discovered that the term 'Chinese Whisper' was offensive because of its apparently racist connotations. I was moved to despair when I found out that one of my favourite words, 'civilised', ought not be used by a culturally sensitive author because of its alleged racist implications."
Prof Furedi said that censorship is about the "policing of moral behaviour" by an army of campaign groups, teachers and media organisations who are on a "crusade" to ban certain words and promote their own politically correct alternatives.
He said people should see the efforts to ban certain words as the "coercive regulation" of everyday language and the "closing down of discussions" rather than positive attempts to protect vulnerable groups from offence.
The list of banned words is now sent out to prospective authors by Policy Press, a publisher of social science books and journals based at the University of Bristol, but is also used in many academic institutions.
The University of Bristol's School for Policy Studies recommends the guidelines to help students "challenge heterosexist assumptions", and they are included in a "toolkit" to combat institutional racism included on the University of Leeds' website.
King's College London says they "may provide a good starting point" and Liverpool John Moores University provides a link to them in its students' guide. The Open University said they are an "appropriate source of reference and advice" for students.
Napier University in Edinburgh says the list is "well worth looking at" while the University of East London advises its students they should "attempt to incorporate" it.
Even a secondary school in Norwich includes a link to the list on its website, with the statement: "Students may care to consider how far we inadvertently reproduce inaccurate sexist assumptions in the language we use, both written and spoken."
The list of racist terms features black, which "can be used in a racist sense" and should be changed to "black peoples" or "black communities".
Immigrants is said to have "racist overtones" because of its association with "immigration legislation", while developing nations - intended as a more sensitive replacement for Third World - is "prejudical" because it implies a comparison with developed countries.
Although not included on the Policy Press list, the BSA warns authors against using civilisation because of its "racist overtones that derive from a colonialist perception of the world".
Among the "sexist" terms to be avoided are "seminal" and "disseminate" because they are derived from the word semen and supposedly imply a male-dominated view of the world.
continues hereControl words and you go some way in controlling thoughts, omit certain words or “correct” certain phrases and the oppressor exercises some control over the group, they are able to engineer a situation, whereby the populace are kept in line by self-censorship or fear of in-group disapproval. Censorship of expression does indeed change societal norms however, it is foolish to believe that natural feelings simply vanish, instead individuals within the main body of the group, feel disconnected they feel alone, they believe often quite wrongly, that their thoughts and feelings are not shared by the group as a whole.
In this way, a manipulative minority can and do, exercise complete control over a majority group, yet those perfectly natural thoughts and feelings are still there, albeit, that they are suppressed, so the manipulators, the social engineers must usher in evermore draconian measures, in order to forestall, the target groups collective realisation of the widespread believe in pro-group thought. Even this isn’t enough of course, it isn’t enough, that the reprehensible left use the plight of the disabled, the ill, whilst creating unnecessary and enormous friction between the sexes, it isn’t enough that they preach hate by proxy to non-whites.
No, should the targeted group, specifically whites, form social structures or counter-orthodoxy groups, based upon the aforementioned collective realisation then they are denied a platform, not because they are hateful per se but because, it may lead to a more widespread adaptation of “normal” thinking. Of course, the penultimate ploy is to paint such thinking, “nationalism” as evil, to ferment this quite erroneous thought within the population at large, this of course leads to degradation in numbers, of those brave souls willing to take a stand.
Another downside, is that such a negative and dishonest portrayal of nationalism, attracts the wrong sort, those attracted to the “bad boy” image or those seeking release in an anti-group fashion, in essence, nationalism as a force, is utterly and comprehensively destroyed as a true counter-orthodoxy movement, permitting the state and the manipulators of it, free reign. Yet the most important thing to take from this, has already been stated in the first paragraph, namely that innate feelings still exist, suppressed though they may be, individuals are still tied to nature, rather than the artificial bonds set around them by social engineers.
Eric Blair had it quite right, as we now know, when he penned Nineteen Eighty-Four and Animal Farm, as a man of the left, he would know more than most, the machinations indulged in by leftists and egalitarians, his depiction of politicised and limiting Newspeak being particularly of note. Yet this ill-hidden repression must continue, it must out of necessity, for them, be perpetual, an on-going oppression of thought and belief and the continuing lie of egalitarianism.
Some are led to believe that the masses, the indigenous body politic, will arise as one against this oppression, should it continue to show its hand, my experience has a different tale, the mutterers will mutter, the shouters will rail and nationalists will again be steeled, yet the masses shall carry on as ever and the merry-go-round shall continue. Whites will dance with desire and dice with death, until a skeletal hand claims them, before this an awakening may occur, yet too late, the call echoed for us long ago.
Oh they can be broken, these leftist rats can be sent scurrying, tail between legs and squealing, it is time that is our enemy, time that seals our fate, marks us for disaster and binds us to extinction. We have not the time, nor yet true nationalism, you see first, we must break this hold, this hold upon free will, we must again speak freely, unconcernedly, unrestrained, then we must regain academia, the arts, and so much more, then and there, we should present our case to the world, as free men, as free nations.
We must present the true humanity of nationalism, not the ignoble fraud presented by the owned media, the fake nationalism that attracts the misfit but true nationalism, perhaps the only ideology that has chance to heal this world. So much to do, so many bonds to break, yet no time at all, racial consciousness has fled, bleeding, whilst the nationalism presented, at least here in this country, will not help us, not unless, we seek the end of Islam and not its return to the land of its origin.
An aim counter to nationalism, nationalism is simply the believe that all should live in their natural milieu, that all cultures, creeds and races are valid entities in their own right and all should be protected. In this light the exploitation of Africa would cease, as would the exploitation of Europe, the unnecessary wars in the east would end in good time and peace would reign. Yet egalitarians work counter to this aim, leftists seek its demise but I ask what is so wrong with it, what is wrong with nature, surely not even a fool would believe that current thinking makes for a happy planet.
If Muslims are offended in the west, then they must realise it is the west, for all its faults and leave us, in a stroke end of conflict, if non-whites en-masse feel strangers in our lands, alien, it is because they are, yet they remain as their lands have nothing. So we must break the grip of big business, which works for profit and profit alone, whilst exploiting lands and peoples. For the Dark Continent, we have millions trained and schooled in the west, who would use such education to build up their countries to fit standard, instead of throwing money at the problem we would throw physical help in the return of their people.
Again leftists contest nationalism, whilst dressing in the fake clothes of humanitarianism, what good is it to continually throw money at a problem, when big business exploits, despots rule and children starve, surely a building up of infrastructure, is the way forward. Yes it is true, that Africa and other non-white nations are not of our concern and yes, we seek a return of non-whites home, however, in the short term we would aid such nations, one by the return of their western educated peoples and two with some material aid.
At some point though, we would adhere to nationalist thinking that is to say, that each nation should be autonomous, homogenous and separate, retaining culture, gene-pool and creed, for the people in the people’s interest. Above all, the enforced amalgamation of the races must stop and whilst mutual respect would be shown to all, territorial and national character would never be infringed. So we all gain, the dark continent advances, quality of live improves, the east are not besieged and the west returns to normal.
Sadly though there is no time, nationalism lies fractured, our people wallow in guilt, adoring self, whilst the left hold them in their tenacious grip, Africa screams, the east explodes and the money-men laugh. Gain for an elite, whilst the earth writhes in pain, so this control of language, this censorship of expression will continue, there will be no protestation, none that is, that will make a difference, just the slow death of the white man and the planned subjugation of the earth, to the power of the money-men. 14
![Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War](http://patbuchananbooks.com/wp-content/uploads/bk-pjb-chuw165.jpg "Churchill_Hitler_the_Unnecessary_War\")
