New Totalitarians

Last week, it was announced that Dr Hans-Christian Raabe, a GP from Partington in Manchester, had been appointed to the Government’s Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.

Dr Hans-Christian Raabe

This made sense as Dr Raabe has taken a medical interested in drug policy for many years. He takes what might be termed a vigorously traditional view. He advocates ­abstinence-based approaches and criticises the assertion that it is the illegality of drugs such as ­cannabis that is the problem.

Dr Raabe’s appointment was considered by many to be welcome as the Advisory Council has long taken the progressive view that the treatment of drug offenders is their main priority rather than reducing their numbers.

Isn’t it strange how progressives are so concerned about the weak and vulnerable that they constantly pursue policies which ensure there is a continuing supply of the weak and vulnerable for them to ‘help’.

No sooner was the appointment announced than there was a blizzard of attacks. Not as one might imagine primarily because of his views on drugs. Rather the attacks were mainly based on the fact that Dr Raabe, a member of the pastoral team of Flixton Fellowship Church, is also a supporter of the Manchester-based Maranatha Community.  Maranatha is an interdenominational body committed to unity, renewal and healing, and dedicated to re-establishing ­Christian values in society.

Indymedia, an influential web based news service for radicals, announced the appointment with the headline “Homophobic Scum Gets Job Dictating Drug Policy.” This was followed by the sub-head “Mad bastard and member of the Maranatha Christian cult, Dr Hans-Christian Raabe has been given a job on the Advisory Council for the Misuse of Drugs.”

Such vitriol was to be expected from the easily inflamed and proudly anti-Christian. But the attacks were not confined to extremist bigots.  Mark ­Easton, Home Editor of the BBC was even quicker to get into attack mode. On his BBC News blog, he claimed that Dr Raabe’s views on homosexuality were causing such fury amongst members of the Advisory Council that at least one member was threatening to step down. Interestingly the members he spoke of, if they existed, chose to be anonymous.

What do Dr Raabe’s views on homosexuality have to do with illegal drugs? According to Easton, more than one member of the ­council is gay or lesbian.

Just for a moment try to image the outcry by the BBC if it had been revealed that Dr Raabe had refused to serve on the Council because some of its members were homosexual. For such an attitude he would be pilloried, however the equivalent attitude is perfectly acceptable when it comes from the politically correct.

Dr Raabe had done the unforgivable, he had allowed his view that homosexual acts are sinful to become known. His expertise and experience in treating drug addicts were irrelevant, he did not value sodomites therefore in the eyes of progressives he failed the one test that really mattered.

Things got worse. At the weekend the Observer revealed the shocking news that Dr Raabe actually supported marriage. In briefing documents produced for MPs he had outlined the benefits of marriage in fighting drug addiction. He claimed that marriage is associated with greater happiness, less depression, less alcohol abuse and less smoking.

These claims happen to be true, however, truth is of little interest to the smugly self satisfied progressive. It was reported that drugs charities and experts expressed surprise that someone of such ‘stringent opinions’ could be appointed to the Advisory Council.

If Dr Raabe had promoted drug liberalisation and the de-criminalisation of dangerous drugs he would have been lauded by progressives. Dr Raabe instead has clear traditional Christian views on homosexuality and self-stupificiation and therefore had to be considered a bigot and if possible driven from public service.

This is why we should  refuse to use the term ‘liberals’ for progressives. Discriminating against Christians for acting in accordance with their beliefs is not liberal, it is not tolerant. It is  totalitarian. Joe McCarthy would have been proud of them.

In the past homosexuals were the victims of prejudice, in today’s politically correct Britain they and their supporters are becoming the new oppressors.


2 thoughts on “New Totalitarians

  1. You refer to these people as “radicals”, but I’d suggest that in today’s political and social sphere, this is no longer the case; they are the establishment, and people such as yourself are the radicals!

    I am of the view that drug abuse can be a ruinous activity, the ill effects of which tend to be experienced by the poor and vulnerable far more than middle class/educated people, and that greater leadership in society against drug abuse is necessary to counter this. How this could be achieved in the current climate is the real problem.

    I feel like deploying an analogy featuring the Augean stables, but probably shouldn’t 🙂

  2. Jennifer you are right, as usual. My terminology is about forty years out of date. Those who were the radicals of the 60’s and 70’s are the establishment of today. They and those who follow them hold the positions of power in politics, the media, especially the broadcasting media, and more worryingly in the church. I too played my part in the 60’s and 70’s, marching, protesting, baiting policemen. However, some of us grew up, others just grew powerful.

    The urge to cleanse the stables is understandable. Tomorrow I am due to conduct the funeral of a chap who lived in poverty all his life and died aged 31 of the cumulative long term effects of his many years of drug addiction. This does not make me feel well disposed towards the comfortably off who sit in powerful positions and soft pedal the dangers of addictive narcotics.

    We have three options:
    Meekly accept and go with the flow, which is the majority position,
    Rail against the perversions of truth we see around us, which, no matter how satisfying at the time it may be gets us nowhere,
    Resist calmly and speak out for a more rational future.

    Cultures tend to grow and change in cycles. It is the long term patient opposition to the diseased and fostering of the healthy which has effect. Speaking out in a rational manner and being visible as someone opposed to the follies of progressivism will in the long run have its effect.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s