How British Institutions Create Monsters

On British institutions being machines for making sociopaths

Whenever Hope Not Hate mentions my name, they make the claim that I inspired the American mass murderer, Dylann Roof. Their proof of this claim is a 2014/15 article I wrote with the title ‘When Jews Turned Blue’, which expanded on a common trope found on /pol/ and 4chan at that time.

In Roof’s manifesto, he also used the trope. I received an email from somebody pointing this out, and I didn’t feel comfortable with the association, so I removed the article. Roof’s actual victims were African American churchgoers, and his stated motivation was the Trayvon Martin case and issues more generally related to black people in America’s Deep South.

Not a shred of evidence has been provided by Hope Not Hate that Dylann Roof had ever read my old blog, or even heard of me, let alone that I inspired him. Of course, truth is not their aim, character assassination is.

It appears that there’s nothing I can do to remove my name and face being attached to an atrocity via an outrageous lie because Hope Not Hate is linked to the institutions of power in the United Kingdom, and I am not.

You’re either on board with the program, morally and ideologically, or you’re not. And more often than not, Hope Not Hate will be used as a source by the institutions of the land as to who is a problem, and who is not.

Hope Not Hate found the late Ann Widdecombe to be a problem.

Then, after she was bludgeoned to death at 78 years old in her home, they removed the hit piece on her. You could say Hope Not Hate Archived Ann Widdecombe.

The man now charged with her murder, 28-year-old Joshua Kerry, is said to have had:

According to reports, investigators found newspaper clippings, articles and printed material relating to Reform UK, party leader Nigel Farage and the party’s immigration policies displayed inside the council property where Kerry lived alone.

A source cited by UK media claimed the material suggested Kerry held ‘a profound dislike’ of Reform UK, its leader and its political positions.

Ann Widdecombe was a Reform UK supporter and spokesperson. Did the man charged with her murder have the Hope Not Hate hit piece among his ‘clippings’ of Farage and his party? Were Hope Not Hate tipped off and advised to archive Ann Widdecombe?

I’ve been highly critical of Nigel Farage and his various parties over the years because I see it as just Toryism with a new paint job. However, I’m well aware that is not how the British left sees him. I believe his life actually is in danger, and that he does indeed need 24/7 security.

The reason for this is that the media and institutions intentionally radicalize their own base into a frothing frenzy, while strangling the life out of anything outside of their purview and flagging them up for character assassination, or worse. When people on the right do this, it is referred to as ‘stochastic terrorism’. However, the same rules in reverse would see Hope Not Hate or James O’Brien having to be shut down or censored.

James O'Brien: The Reviled

Who ‘radicalised’ Joshua Kerry? It is doubtful that it was a Telegram chat, or a YouTuber, or Elon Musk’s X. It would, in all probability, have been mainstream and respectable outlets, outlets like Hope Not Hate or media using their work as sound sources. Or The Guardian, or LBC.

Kerry was not known to Prevent, the anti-radicalization unit, because they don’t look for people with his politics. Neither is there a right-wing version of Hope Not Hate that surveils, monitors, and generally hounds leftists. Leftists are not stopped at airports for a device snatch and work-out session by the Counter Terrorism Police.

They face no scrutiny or hardship for their politics whatsoever.

In this way, the British mainstream consensus-making apparatus has become a cauldron of corruption and crazies who never have to face any cost or scrutiny for opinions which are quite literally insane. It is the obsessive adherence to this consensus that delivers the grotesque outcome of a dying boy insisting that he isn’t a racist, as the life drains from his body and the police refuse to take his pleas seriously because he’s white.

When an elderly woman is battered to death in her bungalow, likely because she doesn’t like transgenderism and abortion, the institution that flagged her up as a problem will simply remove the evidence as if to declare ‘case closed’. There will be no ramifications, no consequences, because the system would have to indict itself and its ideological and moral priors.

Indeed, people from within the bowels of Hope Not Hate are just about to enter the new Andy Burnham government.

The heuristic ‘A system is what it does’ is somewhat overused, but if we apply it to the system of British political power and judge it by its outcomes and not the goals stated by those working for it, what actually is it? It is a machine that seeks to chew up, pulp, and annihilate the nation, people, and mores it claims to represent. Those who advance that process are rewarded; those who hinder it are punished. That’s what it does, not what it claims to be.

Thus the incentives toward sociopathy are baked in. If the standard being set is that a satirical blog post about one group can be held responsible for an atrocity committed against another group in another country, without any evidence the wrongdoer ever read the original material, where does that leave so much of the British consensus-making apparatus?

Are we to dissect the entire ‘ecosystem’ or ‘influencer network’?

Will we get a little introspection? Or will we simply get more people archived? More cases closed.