|Getting screwed by an angry feminist at High Court. Now he's in jail for speaking his mind.|
The trial and imprisonment of Lord St. Davids was classic in this respect.
Stage 1: Self Induced Victim-hoodA year ago, when Britain voted for independence by a democratic majority, a spoiled rich girl Gina Miller took it upon herself and her third husband’s massive fortune to question the constitutional legality of the Brexit process in the Supreme Court. For a heart-stopping moment, this woman’s tight-lipped smirk and nasty scowl dominated the front pages of the press, emblematic of the smug manipulation of the nation’s legal systems by an elite minority of bad losers. Mainly the satanic left who hate GOD and WHITE MEN, who they see as one and the same. How f'd up is that?
The Supreme Court’s ruling, however, not only provided Ms Miller with the legal clarification she sought but actually served to secure the constitutional validity of the process that Brexit would take. So she quietened down and was happy for a few months.
£5,000 for the first person to ‘accidentally’ run over this bloody troublesome first-generation immigrant.The comment was shared privately on Facebook by Lord St. Davids, a society rascal. It was accompanied by a description of Ms Miller as a ‘boat hopper’ - SHE IS - as well as a suggestion that migrants in general should return to their ‘stinking jungles.’ I might not have said these things myself, but it would have been amazing if nobody had come out with something of the sort.
Stage 2: The White Knight Offense BrokerNormally, Lord St. Davids’ comments would have gone unnoticed. However, the opportunity to connect a litigious lesbian rich skank with another celebrity scapegoat for the scorn she had recently suffered proved too tempting for a desperate society blogger named Matthew Steeples. Seeing his chance to cream off some media attention for himself, this pathetic man picked up Lord St. Davids’ comments and forwarded them directly to Miller. She swallowed the bait, felt ‘violated’ by the ‘racist’ language, hired security guards and went to court. Lord St. Davids was handed a 12 week prison sentence and Steeples’ blog, a kind of low Testosterone Takimag, celebrated with the language of heroic gayness and endorsing NAMBLA, the gay pedo outfit that rapes young boys.
A distinction has to be drawn between renting bodyguards because you feel threatened by an individual and renting bodyguards because you are actually in danger.
Were Lord St. Philips’ references to “stinking jungles” and “boat hoppers” racist? Of course not.
Stage 3: Trial By PressThis pathetic and hypocritical trial became a useful catharsis for many disparate personal interests, exposing more about the nature of Lord St. Davids’ critics than I think they intended. For starters, the judge passed the sentence with a tiresomely formulaic indication of her own lesbian (why are all these women judges lesbians?) cookie-cut conscience:
…you show hatred by publicly directing abusive threats at others, which is a criminal offense in this multi-racial society we are lucky enough to live in.However, unrestrained by fetters of reality or legal formality, it was the press pillorying that truly let the mask of justice slip to reveal the underlying motives of the obstinate, bigoted and puritanical mob. In order to construe the criminality of fashion, previous comments of Lord St. Davids’, mostly on the theme of condemning immigrants, were dredged up by the courts and the papers. Few had the impartiality to concede that he had also called for Tony Blair to be tortured, because such a revelation would have risked exonerating him in the eyes of the public. The papers also wasted no time in listing his former convictions, foreign escapades and bankruptcies (which make for hilarious reading, by the way).
Predictably, however, the self-appointed inquisition overplayed their hand by broadcasting – horror of horrors – that Lord St. Davids is a supporter of Donald Trump.
“Guess Lord. St. Davids got a lenient sentence because he’s a white aristocrat – would have been longer if he was black and unemployed.” – CommentatorNo. He only got noticed because he’s a white aristocrat. If he had been an unemployed East-London Somali waving a meat cleaver and chanting death to the infidel to a cheering crowd of brethren, there would have been no virtue to be signaled in relaying his comments and no social or material capital to be gained from feeling intimidated by them. Plus, any white hate the black dindu spews out is NEVER PUNISHED BY LAW ANYWHERE. When an outburst emerges from the ranks of elite white men, however, the culprit is pointed out like a tiny green shoot in the the Sahara: irrevocable proof once and for all that the sterile, peaceful, environment is under mortal threat.
Faced with the constant prospect of arbitrary punishment a person who – by wealth, standing, opinion, or accident of birth – finds himself in the camp of the offenders might as well consider himself on relentless parole.
The only question, then, is whether or not he should self-censure accordingly. Well, I think we all know the answer to that.
Double Down and Never Surrender
Fortunately, the only person who the law is attempting to correct in this situation is the only person who won’t change a bit. The British aristocracy have mostly experienced life in a boarding school system which would make Guyana look like Switzerland and, as a result, are completely invulnerable to limp-wristed attempts at penal correction. When he gets out later this summer, Lord St. Davids is going to enjoy more goodwill than ever before. The legal order may bend toward social homogeneity and tyrannical kitsch, but the social order (that toadying court eunuchs like Steeples want so desperately to be a part of), will always follow shitlords like Viscount St.David.
Where the party goes, the nation and its laws will eventually follow. That’s how civil society works in Britain, and anyone who finds our green pastures intolerable is free to head back to their fragrant woodlands.