Connect with us
// (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});


George Galloway gets it right on race, class, culture and liberalism (VIDEO)

George Galloway understands why Donald Trump won and he understands why liberalism has lost. Conservatives and socialists ought to find common ground in the war against globalist liberalism and urbane elitism.




Long-time British socialist MP, George Galloway has well and truly hit the nail on the head. Galloway responded to a statement by American actor Donald Sutherland in which he claimed to feel personally ashamed at the supposed concept of ‘white privilege’.

Galloway, who throughout his political career has been a friend to downtrodden, the abused, the marginalised and the discriminated, responded in the following way:

Do liberals like Donald Sutherland think that being “ashamed of being a white male” is going to cut it with, er, white males? Or their mums? If the left doesn’t lose this obsession with identity politics it’s going to be crushed.

Do they honestly not realise that the wives, lovers, mothers, sisters, daughters of “white males” identity more with him than not? That poor working class white black Asian men and women have different interests to rich white black Asian men and women? That imagining immigrants, or the children and grandchildren of immigrants, want more immigration and even illegal immigration, is sheer nonsense?

Any Labour Party without the support and identification of the working class has no future. The imagined homogeneity of minorities is no substitute.

I agree with each word of Mr. Galloway’s statement.

Donald Trump won an election based not on ‘racial’ values, if such a concept exists. He won his election on shared economic values, shared cultural values, shared community values, and, I believe also because of an emerging notion in America and across the western world, that peace is to be valued over frivolous, immoral, deadly and costly war. He won on these issues as a conservative, though someone like Bernie Sanders could have also likely won on similar values, only articulated from a socialist perspective.

I consider myself a traditional conservative. I find liberalism to be an abhorrent ideology and its bastard children, neo-liberalism/neo-conservatism to be the most grotesque manifestations of an ideology that has long outlived its usefulness.

As a conservative, I am deeply sympathetic to many though certainly not all socialist causes. I support free education including higher education for those who are qualified, I support free health care for all with no questions asked, I support the funding of arts, culture, sport and science, and I support the state ownership of major utilities.

This however is the extent of my socialism. Beyond this I am as conservative as they come, especially in my temperament.

What’s interesting though is that as I said, perhaps better put, as I warned, prior to the US election, traditional conservatives and honest socialists have far more in common with each other than they do with liberals, globalists, the tired establishment of elites and the mainstream media. I define my conservatism as a value system which opposes frivolous change, supports the existing social orders and cultural norms in each society.

I support the unique and sovereign aspects of each society, I do not believe in the invasion or blackmail of independent states by any alien entity, I am opposed to cultural Marxism and obscenity of any kind, and I support patriotic people on the left and the right rather than subversive cosmopolitan snobs and bandits.

I have many socialist and indeed communist friends, I can’t say the same about liberals. Their views of the world and mine give us little common ground even insofar as the places and the people where and with whom we socialise.

What’s more, I am a human being before I am a conservative and before I am anything else. The fact that my skin is pale and I have male rather than female genitals has never informed my views of the world nor has it informed my views of another person in the world.

For people like Sutherland to suggest otherwise is slanderous to me and millions of others. Before he became bitter and decrepit, Sutherland stared in one of my favourite films, Kelly’s Heroes. The film was about brotherhood, comradery and victory against the odds. It also was a film that showed that humour is necessary even in the worst of times. It was an interesting look back at the American experience in the Second World War through the eyes of a country in the midst of the Vietnam War (the film was realised in 1970).

It seems that Mr. Sutherland has forgotten the lines he once read on camera and is instead parroting a self-defacing, anti-human and anti-humane liberal position which is mechanistic rather than compassionate, anti-reality rather than one which accepts the world for what it is, and one which seeks to undermine all cultures by positing a post-cultural reality.

Like others who are true to themselves, I am who I am. Anyone who doesn’t like that can go to hell.


Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement // (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Notify of


Trump Has Gifted “No More Wars” Policy Position To Bernie Sanders (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 148.

Alex Christoforou



RT CrossTalk host Peter Lavelle and The Duran’s Alex Christoforou discuss how US President Donald Tump appears to have ceded his popular 2016 ‘no more wars’ campaign message and policy position to Bernie Sanders and any other US 2020 candidate willing to grad onto a non-interventionist approach to the upcoming Democrat primaries.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

“Is Bernie Stealing Trump’s ‘No More Wars’ Issue?” by Patrick J. Buchanan…

The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016.

“The president has said that he does not want to see this country involved in endless wars… I agree with that,” Bernie Sanders told the Fox News audience at Monday’s town hall meeting in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Then turning and staring straight into the camera, Bernie added:

“Mr. President, tonight you have the opportunity to do something extraordinary: Sign that resolution. Saudi Arabia should not be determining the military or foreign policy of this country.”

Sanders was talking about a War Powers Act resolution that would have ended U.S. involvement in the five-year civil war in Yemen that has created one of the great humanitarian crises of our time, with thousands of dead children amidst an epidemic of cholera and a famine.

Supported by a united Democratic Party on the Hill, and an anti-interventionist faction of the GOP led by Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee of Utah, the War Powers resolution had passed both houses of Congress.

But 24 hours after Sanders urged him to sign it, Trump, heeding the hawks in his Cabinet and National Security Council, vetoed S.J.Res.7, calling it a “dangerous attempt to weaken my constitutional authorities.”

With sufficient Republican votes in both houses to sustain Trump’s veto, that should be the end of the matter.

It is not: Trump may have just ceded the peace issue in 2020 to the Democrats. If Sanders emerges as the nominee, we will have an election with a Democrat running on the “no-more-wars” theme Trump touted in 2016. And Trump will be left defending the bombing of Yemeni rebels and civilians by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia.

Does Trump really want to go into 2020 as a war party president?

Does he want to go into 2020 with Democrats denouncing “Trump’s endless wars” in the Middle East? Because that is where he is headed.

In 2008, John McCain, leading hawk in the Senate, was routed by a left-wing first-term senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, who had won his nomination by defeating the more hawkish Hillary Clinton, who had voted to authorize the war in Iraq.

In 2012, the Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who was far more hawkish than Obama on Russia, lost.

Yet, in 2016, Trump ran as a different kind of Republican, an opponent of the Iraq War and an anti-interventionist who wanted to get along with Russia’s Vladimir Putin and get out of these Middle East wars.

Looking closely at the front-running candidates for the Democratic nomination of 2020 — Joe Biden, Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker — not one appears to be as hawkish as Trump has become.

Trump pulled us out of the nuclear deal with Iran negotiated by Secretary of State John Kerry and reimposed severe sanctions.

He declared Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization, to which Iran has responded by declaring U.S. Central Command a terrorist organization. Ominously, the IRGC and its trained Shiite militias in Iraq are in close proximity to U.S. troops.

Trump has recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, moved the U.S. Embassy there, closed the consulate that dealt with Palestinian affairs, cut off aid to the Palestinians, recognized Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights seized from Syria in 1967, and gone silent on Bibi Netanyahu’s threat to annex Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

Sanders, however, though he stands by Israel, is supporting a two-state solution and castigating the “right-wing” Netanyahu regime.

Trump has talked of pulling all U.S. troops out of Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet the troops are still there.

Though Trump came into office promising to get along with the Russians, he sent Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and announced a pullout from Ronald Reagan’s 1987 INF treaty that outlawed all land-based intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

When Putin provocatively sent 100 Russian troops to Caracas — ostensibly to repair the S-400 anti-aircraft and anti-missile system that was damaged in recent blackouts — Trump, drawing a red line, ordered the Russians to “get out.”

Biden is expected to announce next week. If the stands he takes on Russia, China, Israel and the Middle East are more hawkish than the rest of the field, he will be challenged by the left wing of his party, and by Sanders, who voted “no” on the Iraq War that Biden supported.

The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016. And the anti-interventionist wing of the GOP is growing.

And when added to the anti-interventionist and anti-war wing of the Democratic Party on the Hill, together, they are able, as on the Yemen War Powers resolution, to produce a new bipartisan majority.

Prediction: By the primaries of 2020, foreign policy will be front and center, and the Democratic Party will have captured the “no-more-wars” political high ground that Candidate Donald Trump occupied in 2016.

Do You Appreciate Reading Our Emails and Website? Let us know how we are doing – Send us a Thank You Via Paypal!

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Over 200 killed, hundreds injured in series of blasts at Sri Lankan hotels & churches

A series of bombings hit churches and hotels across Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, killing more than 200 people.





Via RT…

A series of eight explosions rocked Catholic churches and luxury hotels in Sri Lanka as Christians began Easter Sunday celebrations, with over 200 killed and hundreds injured, media reported, citing police.

The blasts started at around 8:45am local time at St. Anthony’s Church in Colombo and St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo, a Catholic-majority town outside of the capital. The Zion Church in Batticaloa on the eastern coast was also targeted. At around the same time, the Shangri-La, Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury five-star hotels were also hit, police confirmed.

Two more explosions happened later in the day, targeting two more locations in Colombo. All attacks appear to have been coordinated.

At least 207 people were killed, Reuters reported, citing police. More than 450 were injured in the attacks.

Alleged footage of the aftermath, shared on social media, showed chaos and large-scale destruction inside at least one of the churches.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Mike Pompeo reveals true motto of CIA: ‘We lied, we cheated, we stole’ (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 147.

Alex Christoforou



The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a look at a Texas A&M University speech, and subsequent interview, with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

The former CIA Director admitted, ‘as an aside’ to the question asked, that the Intelligence agency he headed up before being appointed as the top US Diplomat had a motto “we lied, we cheated, we stole”…which, according to Pompeo, contained entire CIA training courses based on ‘lying, cheating and stealing.’

Pompeo finally speaks some truth.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...


Quick Donate

The Duran
Donate a quick 10 spot!


The Duran Newsletter