Menu
Back in the ‘good ol’ days’ when comedy worth the name was allowed to be both funny and slightly irreverent, as opposed to being Politically Correct and intolerant of anything and anyone it decided needed to be ‘cancelled’ or ‘unheard’ the Python team developed a comedic look at life. Inspired by that train of thought we offer a Python style view of the mindset that drives the dogma, class war, zealotry, and ‘Disney like’ anthropomorphism that makes up today’s animal rights foot soldier or ‘externally funded misinformation executive’ to give them a suitable politically correct title.
The Animal Rights rewrite of the Monty Python teams efforts could lead to script changes such as
Despite the above being intended as comedy, some in Government seem to have adopted a similar policy generating thought process which might be better referred to as “We are better than you cos we are nice to cuddly wuddly animals. End of” It is an approach which has its roots in such things as LACS Scotland dismissal of drag hunting as “The idea that you would take that same pack and follow an artificial scent and expect them to ignore the scent of a fox they came across is kind of ludicrous. “It’s not illegal, but it’s highly questionable. We’re certainly going to keep an eye on it.” Such a position displays no critical thought or analysis of any kind but is much like the Pythonesque verdict of someone’s fate as a ‘witch’ who must therefore be burnt.
But that was comedy, no one could really make a statement completely at odds with decades of evidence, could they?
Historical records show that all over the country the same hounds were being used on drag line and as quarry hounds on different days of the week without incident, fabricated or otherwise. Now drag hunting has no utility value to landowners but it does allow for subscribers to pay for crossing over land that would otherwise not be available to them and as such that income defrays some of the costs involved with feeding and caring for a pack of hounds it is therefore of value. Quarry hunting has utility for landowners in that it removes specific animals with a certainty that does not come about through any other control methods, Minister’s know this, or at least they should, even if they might not like it, and it MUST NOT be allowed to drive a ‘ban it because we just don’t like it’ school of thought. That way totalitarianism lies.
Worse still and despite the reality even clean boot hunting comes in for hysterical criticism from some, apparently the great god Google has stated it involves hounds, hunting with hounds is illegal and they are called Bloodhounds for a reason. There should be comedic gold in that stream of semi consciousness, instead it is another example of ‘social media’s ability to drive anonymous and risk free bullying. One of the core elements of humour behind the Python comedy team was that opinions were more important than facts – something its audience understood. Such a position was not intended to be the basis of policy for anyone aspiring to govern others.
Labours statement today regarding a total ban on ‘hunting’ does not come from a comedy sketch but is a real press release from an aspiring Minister who appears to let facts get in the way of their deep rooted prejudices, and demonstrate a wilful ignorance of both the past and any desire to develop a future for hunting with hounds or the real ‘red in tooth and claw’ countryside, despite the evidence. At a stroke they dismiss the need for a rational approach to Animal Welfare preferring policy generated through ‘rights based rhetoric’, or the fact that the ‘countryside’ that they claim to love and understand, is the way it is because of field sports. and other people’s money and effort, and all this despite constant government meddling.
This enthusiasm for banning things those in government dislike has elsewhere in the world led to books many thought of as ‘classic texts’, being removed from schools and libraries and such ‘corrective action’ might be the root cause of today’s announcement by Labour. As such, Labour has once again demonstrated its inability to govern for everybody, only the stakeholders it approves of.
Finally, another Python quote, and perhaps it is one that politicians and pollsters would do well to remember before one again pushing someone else’s agenda “There are a great many people in the country[side] today, who through no fault of their own, are sane.” They might not have taken part in your extrapolated poll.
