Right Wing SJWs and The Horse Shoe Effect

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle with you.

I have identified as a socialist for pretty much most of my adult life, but in the last few years I have come to see that socialism is obviously far from perfect. No political ideology is. I still believe in socialised concepts such as the welfare state and the NHS, but now I think a mixed economy utilising the best aspects of both socialism and capitalism is the way forward for the west, until we are ready for a full socialist society.

Sadly however despite still having some overlap with them on many key issues, I would never wish to associate myself with the left as in the last few years it has become a sick parody of its former self.

Its bigoted towards white men, its fascist and threatens to shut people who disagree with it down, it is willing to look the other way in the face of atrocities for its own agendas, and finally the left also has a soft bigotry of low expectations towards dark skinned people.

As a result of this many young people have abandoned the left and turned towards right wingers. In fact generation Z is said to be the most conservative generation since World War 2.

I myself whilst never abandoning my left wing principles, would certainly in the last few years have probably viewed the right as being better than the left overall I must admit.

However fortunately I have realised that actually there are just as many SJWs on the right.

Right wing SJWs currently are not as big a threat as left wing SJWs as its the left that has all of the institutional power. Yes we do have a right wing government in power in both the UK and the US, but ultimately the media is where the real power lies, and it is totally dominated by left wing identity politics. Also in real life if you say you disagree with any piece of received left wing dogma, like say the gender wage gap which has been debunked time and time again.

The gender wage gap is a myth

Then you are more likely to become a social pariah among friends you’ve known for years, even decades. You might actually be fired from your job and black listed.

Still this doesn’t mean that right wing SJWs wouldn’t do the same if they were in power. They can appear to be more logical, and reasonable because they are attacking the current fascists in power, but don’t be fooled.

An SJW, right wing or left wing is still an SJW. They are not really political. They are tribal and they have decided to latch onto one team, and will follow everything their home team does regardless.

Things like capitalism, socialism and feminism have really replaced religion in modern secular societies. If you dare to question anything these ideologies preach, then you will be attacked by their followers for being a heretic.

In this article I am going to run through the ways that the right and the left really are no different in terms of their behaviour.

Politics is not the same as religion. It should be looked at in an objective and fair way, and what is best for the current situation we are in, but sadly the following examples of tribalism from both sides prevents that from happening.

1/ Fidel Castro and Augusto Pinochet

These two fine gentlemen dindunuffin.

When the Cuban dictator Fidel Castro died, the left lined up to canonise him as a great man and a fighter for justice and freedom around the world.

Naturally many people on the right called them out on their hypocrisy. They pointed out that Castro was above all else a dictator who took away people’s right to vote, and that in the earlier years of his rule he, by his own admission persecuted homosexuals.

Fidel Castro Takes Blame For Persecution of Gay People

Yet the same people like Justin Trudeau and Jeremy Corbyn who love to virtue signal about how much they hate Trump for supposedly being homophobic were singing the praises of this man.

The leftists will often try and justify Castro’s human rights violations by pointing to the good things he did for his country, such as freeing it from the corrupt government owned by the American Mafia (who were definitely worse), and bringing in free education and health care for his people.

Still this obviously does not even begin to excuse the inhuman barbarity that LGBT people in Cuba were subjected too for years from Castro’s government.

This Is How Fidel Castro Persecuted Gay People

Still whilst the rightists were correct to call the left out on their hypocrisy here, at the same time they ultimately lost the moral high ground when they started defending Augusto Pinochet.

Pinochet was a Chilean dictator who ruled from 1973 to 1990. He overthrew the democratically elected socialist government of Chile and imposed a truly brutal regime that silenced any opposition.

Whilst it did not cause as many deaths as some other dictatorships, the Pinochet regime was still nevertheless notorious for its horrific sadism.

Pinochet’s soldiers tortured men, women and children in such gruesome ways as electrocuting their genitals, raping them, and forcing them to carry out incest, pedophillia and even cannibalism at gun point. He even had women raped by dogs!

Here are some sources to back this up.

Law Lords Told of Pinochet Atrocities

Agusto Pinochet’s Nazi Pedophile Cult

The Absurd Defence of Augusto Pinochet

Yet in spite of this and the fact that he was a dictator, the very same right who ridiculed leftists like Justin Trudeau for overlooking Castro’s sins all lined up one after another to actually try and defend a monster like Pinochet.

Sargon of Akkad who did a whole video attacking Castro and his apologists for instance is an apologist for Pinochet to some extent. He said in a recent video that all Pinochet did was get rid of his communist problem.

Its disgusting that Sargon would dismiss women who were forced to have sex with their own children, had spiders shoved up their genitals, and men who were raped in front of the rest of the prisoners and were forced to eat their own shit; as just being Pinochet getting rid of his communist problem.

Look at this video from Coach Red Pill.

All of the same arguments the left used to try and overlook Castro’s faults are used by Coach Red Pill.

1/ There were no atrocities in Cuba or Chile, because I lived there, went on holiday there and I didn’t see anything.

2/ Yes he was a dictator who took away the people’s right to vote, and he silenced all opposition in the most brutal ways possible, and normally I’m a big supporter of democracy and freedom of speech, but well it was okay when Pinochet/Castro did it because of the uh, economy.

3/ All of the people they tortured and killed were just trouble makers trying to overthrow their rightful leader, even though a lot of their victims were just citizens, innocent people, even children who suffered the most horrific deaths, I’m still going to dismiss them as getting what they deserved.

Now sometimes it is true that in order to prevent a greater threat we have to take the side of a dictator. For instance in Syria right now Assad though a brutal and evil man is a better option than ISIS as if they were to take control from him, even more innocent people would die.

This article here from a gay man, a group that Assad is persecuting sums up why its better to side with Assad over ISIS as with Assad for the most part you can still live under him, even if it isn’t exactly a good existence, yet with ISIS they would throw you off a roof for being gay.

We Don’t Have Rights But We Are Alive

However the right and the lefts defence for Pinochet and Castro isn’t just a lesser of two evils attitude. To be fair an argument could be made for Castro being the lesser of two evils compared to what ruled before him. But again the likes of Corbyn don’t come at it from that attitude. They praise him as a great man and overlook all of his faults.

Pinochet meanwhile was ironically only able to seize power thanks to American intervention. Many of the rightists who are apologists for Pinochet are also against intervention in places like Syria, Libya and Iraq (hence their support for Trump.)

I agree with them of course on foreign intervention in countries like Iraq and Libya just making the existing problems worse, but still how can these people then suddenly think it’s okay to remove an actual democratically elected leader which Salvador Allende was, and back a brutal dictator when its Pinochet?

Image result for pinochet pepes

(Look at the comments from right wing SJWs on this video which actually documents the horrors of the Pinochet regime. You can see more demonizing of Pinochet’s victims.)

These people just simply can’t accept that their favoured political ideology might be open to abuse, and might lead to things like the above, so they do their best to cover it up, or even just stick their fingers in their ears when being presented with the horrors it has caused.

This in turn just leads to my next point.

2/ “They Just Weren’t Doing It Right”

Right wingers will often sneer at SJWs who identify as communists and socialists. Whenever people bring up the communist and socialist states that have failed and led to massive human loss, the left wing SJWs response will always be “they just weren’t doing communism right”.

Hilariously however right wingers like Paul Joseph Watson and Sargon of Akkad use the exact same defence when trying to excuse the horrors and atrocities that capitalism has caused on a global scale too of “that’s not real capitalism, that’s just corprotism, or crony capitalism.”.

In the above video we see a debate between a socialist and a capitalist. Now again on the surface the capitalist obviously seems more reasonable, and he is more reasonable. The left winger who was given the unfortunate nickname of Aids Skrillex by the internet, screams and shouts, is openly bigoted towards white men, and dog piles with his friends on the one guy.

Still ultimately Aids Skrillex and the Info Wars Journalist’s arguments on socialism and capitalism are really no different.

They both say that they have never seen real socialism or real capitalism and also try and score points against the other side “yeah socialism may be failing in Venezeula, but capitalism caused the Iraq war”.

Of course trying to simply score points against the other side doesn’t always have to have anything to even do with politics. It can often lead to cringy attempts at proving who is cooler and more trendy with the young crowd (often by people who are completely out of touch), such as this.

As a result neither side is able to look at the failings of their own political ideologies, acknowledge them and try to fix them. Leftists and rightists are both locked in a cycle of “no its just bad people” and whataboutism.

Free market capitalism does lead to corprotism. In the free market you have to eliminate all competition, so naturally the biggest business will want to crush all of the smaller ones, leading to everything eventually being owned by one corrupt organisation. I’d also argue that globalism comes from free market capitalism too. After all a business will have to expand beyond even its home country, and eventually become the dominant global business.

Ironically all of the people that those on the right despise, George Soros, and Hillary Clinton are free market capitalists who are just simply trying to make their business the top one, regardless of the cost.

Of course at the same time, yes communism and socialism are ideologies that want to hand more power over to the government and so are obviously more open to fascism.

This is why I favour a mixed economy. A mixed economy would in my opinion help to overcome many of the problems inherent in both capitalism and socialism.

On the one hand I would like to see free health care and the welfare state be provided to people as safety nets. I also would like to see the railways, and basic resources such as gas and electricity be nationalised too. However at the same time independent businesses that can create their own product, (rather than simply monopolise something that should be for everyone) and the media should all be independent too.

Sadly however the left and the right’s tribalism will prevent there from ever being a discussion about the merits of both capitalism and socialism, as they have to demonise the other side, whilst ignoring any of the faults with their own.

3/ Soft Bigotry Of Low Expectations Towards Dark Skinned People

People hate me just because I am a strong black/Muslim woman. Its totally not because I am a lying, two faced, scummy, money grubbing bigot.

Neither the left nor the right these days hate dark skinned people. well the alt right does, but since its such a tiny minority among the actual right then it doesn’t really matter.

Still both have sadly shown that they do not treat dark skinned people as equals. They often don’t hold dark skinned people to the same high moral standard as they do white people, and worse they are also fond of using black people as human shields to defend their arguments and use them as trophies to show how not racist they are to their enemies.

The left’s soft bigotry of low expectations is most notable in their attempts to shut down any criticism of Islam.

Islam is possibly the most evil ideology on the planet. Its holy book the Quran tells all Muslims to exterminate non believers, that women are inferior to men, that all gay people be exterminated and that all black people are ugly pug nosed raisin headed animals, fit only to serve white people.

Ironically Muhammad was not only described as being snow white, but in the Hadith it is said that to describe him as dark skinned is punishable by death! Its also worth noting that Arabs are classed as Caucasians too.

Here are sources to back up what I am saying about Islam.

Quranic verses of violence

Islamic Slave Trade

Islamic View of Homosexuality

Now this is not to say that all Muslims are evil. There are many decent Muslims in the west. These Muslims either ignore the heinous parts of the Quran, or I think in some cases they haven’t even read it, and have just taken their parents or their local Imam’s word that Islam is a peaceful religion. After all not all Jewish people have read the Old Testament in the west, and not all Christians have read the bible either.

For these kinds of Muslims, their religion is either just a source of comfort for the hardships of life, like losing a loved one, or its just a series of traditions and a way of keeping their people together in a community, or even just a social thing.

However Muslims who do follow and are raised on what the Quran actually says at least hold bigoted views towards women, Jews and LGBT people, as well as other religious groups such as Hindus and Christians.

In any country where Islam is allowed to call the shots such as Saudi Arabia, or Iran then homosexuality is illegal, or even punishable by death and women hold fewer rights than men, whilst many Muslim countries still hold Africans as slaves.

Twenty First Century African Slaves in Islamic Countries

Christians are also as a result of Muslims actions, the most persecuted religious group worldwide

Christians Most Persecuted Religious Group Worldwide

Christians Most Persecuted Religious Group

Then of course there is the historic genocide of Hindus as a result of Islamic actions, and their current persecution of Hindus in countries like Bangladesh.

Muslim Persecution of Hindus In Bangladeshi

Muslim Persecution of Hindus in India

The Biggest Genocide In Human History: Islamic Invasion of India

Islamic Genocide In India

Even in the United Kingdom over 50 percent of British Muslims think homosexuality should be criminalised, compared to 2 percent of all other groups in the UK.

Over 50 Percent of British Muslims Think Homosexuality Should Be Criminalised

The majority of grooming gangs are also Muslim as well. This behaviour stems from what Islam says about women. Muhammed outright said that “your women are your fields, so go into your fields whenever and whichever way you want.”

Not surprisingly when one group of people are raised on these types of beliefs then they are probably going to be better represented in things like grooming gangs rather than in things like winning the Nobel Prize.

Grooming Gang Statistics

Now again this is not to say that ALL Muslims are like this, or that we should ban Muslims from coming to the country. However a proper and sensible discussion needs to be had about Islam.

The same problems are not happening with other religious groups like Sikhs and Christians. To say that all religions are equally bad is not only dishonest, its utter cowardice.

As Sam Harris has pointed out many times in the past, you could hardly say Buddhism or Jainism are in any way comparable to Islam. Jainism specifically tells its followers to preserve all forms of life, even insects! In what way is that comparable to a religion whose founder tells his followers “I have been made victorious with terror!”

Yes there are dodgy passages in the New Testament, but overall Jesus is a benevolent figure. He was someone who ultimately said to love your enemies, he made a point of separating the Church from the state, and didn’t command his followers to conquer people.

The Old Testament meanwhile is morally every bit as disgusting as the Quran. However from a practical point of view it is less dangerous in the modern world than the Quran is for a number of reasons.

To start with its open to interpretation. There are so many contradictions in the Old Testament, and it is also not presented as the actual word of God, but a second hand account. Also the Old Testament doesn’t actually promise its followers an afterlife if they martyr themselves either.

The Quran however is presented as the definitive word of God and therefore everything in it has to be taken literally. Also it is not full of contradictions either. Muhammed does preach love and acceptance in the early stages of his career, but he later tells his followers to ignore these teachings.

The reason Muhammed preached peace in the earlier passages of the Quran was simply because at that point his forces weren’t as strong. Once they were however Muhammed abandoned these teachings and even told his followers that when they are low in number, they should lie about being peaceful to non Muslims until their forces are strong enough to slaughter the non believers.

Muhammed named this process Taqiyya.

David Wood sums it up as always.

Taqiyya in action.

Finally the Jewish and Christian faiths have also had many reformations too that have purged them of their violent passages.

For all of these reasons Islam is currently the most dangerous ideology, never mind religion on the face of the planet.

I would love if it just vanished, but its too deeply rooted for that. So instead I think it needs to be made toothless until it does just become a harmless faith.

Peaceful measures can be taken to achieve this that don’t involve tarring all Muslims as the same.

To start with Saudi Arabia should be boycotted the same way that South Africa was. Also Islamic reformers such as Imam Tawhidi should be given more air time and support.

Also no more concessions should be made to Islam. All Sharia courts, Muslim faith schools etc, should be shut down right away. Islam needs to integrate with OUR culture, not the other way around.

Also Islam should be criticised in public as much as any other ideology and religion to ensure that there are no double standards against other faiths.

Shutting down all legit criticism of Islam will lead to more suffering for everyone.

Obviously the victims of Islam, here and around the world will be left out in the cold to suffer in silence.

Rochdale Grooming Gang

Politically Correct Do Gooders Shutting Down Discussion About Muslim Grooming Gangs

Silencing Rochdale Grooming Gangs Is Foul Snub To Victims

Furthermore the Muslim reformers who are threatened with death every day will be more vulnerable as a result too, as no one will know the danger they are placing themselves in, in trying to reform the most retrograde ideology, as hey Islam is already peaceful right?

Imam Tawhidi Sent Chilling Death Threat

Assault Threats To Australian Imam Over Calls To Close Muslim School

Death Threats Are Nothing New For Muslim Reformers.

Finally the more problems Islam causes in our society, the more anger there will be directed towards the Muslim community as a whole, but with no practical solution being offered up, people will eventually turn to genuine right wing extremists who will smear all Muslims as potential terrorists.

Acid Threats To Muslims

Sadly however the left are the people who are preventing any reasonable discussion about Islam being had, as they see all criticism of Islam as racist (despite Islam not being a race), simply because most Muslims have brown skin.

That literally is it. If Islam was a religion practised by mostly white people like Christianity or Scientology, then left wingers would have no problem with attacking it. Hell they’d probably be calling for it to be banned.

Of course ironically the left ends up betraying many of the groups that it sees itself as champions of such as women and LGBT people when it tries to silence all reasonable criticism of Islam as racism.

Goldsmith University Feminists Side With Islamists

I know Kraut is a doxxing arsehole, but this vid is probably the best run down on the horrific extent of Islamic homophobia there is. Set some time aside and give it a watch.

These leftists don’t view dark skinned people as their equals. They view them as children who shouldn’t be held accountable in the same way as white people, so its okay if a dark skinned person hates gay people, hates women, or if they follow a religion that says gay people are inferior, as well you don’t expect the same kind of morality from a dark skinned person do you?

Case in point look at Donald Trump and Linda Sarsour. Trump’s comments about grabbing women by the pussy were pathetic and stupid, but they were not contrary to popular belief advocating rape.

Trump says in the video “they let me do it“, so he isn’t boasting about grabbing women without their consent. What he is actually saying if you listen to the full clip is that because he is a big tv star and millionaire, women who normally wouldn’t look at him throw themselves at him and let him grab them by the pussy.

It doesn’t show much respect for his exes, but to be fair Trump has probably dealt with more than his fair share of gold diggers (and no that’s not saying gold diggers are all women. I think most billionaires of both genders are probably going to have to deal with a few gold diggers.)

Linda Sarsour meanwhile is a Muslim woman, and the left’s new darling. She actually organised the woman’s march in both 2017 and 18. Now this woman also like Trump made a vagina related remark.

She said that she wanted to take Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a feminist critic of Islam’s vagina away from her. Ayaan Hirsi Ali who grew up in Somalia had her genitals mutilated as a child.

I would have thought it was worse to make a remark about wanting to remove a former child victim of FGM’s vagina away in public to all of your followers, than to make a stupid joke about how because you’re rich, women will let you grab their genitals to your friends in private.

Yet the left organises marches to protest Trumps sexism, whilst making Sarsour their darling? The reason for that is again because Trump is a white man, so ironically these supposedly not racist people hold him to a higher moral standard than they do the Muslim woman.

Look at slavery. White people are made to feel guilty as a whole for slavery that happened over 100 years ago by SJWs, yet Muslims are never made to feel guilty as a whole for not only having a far more brutal slave trade, which lasted longer, but is still going strong today. In fact there are more Islamic slaves today than there ever were in the European slave trade.


Yet white people should still feel guilty for things that happened over 100 years ago, and Muslims shouldn’t? PS I am not saying that all Muslims SHOULD be made to feel guilty for the actions of others, but again if leftists think that about white people (despite being white not actually being an ideology like Islam is.) Then again why don’t these same leftists make Muslim children do things like this.

Simple because yet again they don’t hold them to the same ridiculously high moral standard that they do white people which makes them racist.

You only have to look at a lot of these edgy fedora wearing atheists who regularly ridiculed Christians in an effort to show how smart and logical they were, but when it comes to Islam they are either nowhere near as harsh or worse adopt a “noble savages” view of, we can’t criticise their culture just because its different.

Rational Wiki are a prime example of this. Rational Wiki is a website that I dislike greatly. They do make some valid points, particularly about the hypocrisy of right wingers like Sargon of Akkad. Sadly however not only is a lot of the information on the website biased, but they also though making some critiques of Islam, are far easier on it than Christianity.

Take a look at the following two Youtubers, NonStampCollector and Syeten. Both of them do cartoons mocking religion. NonStampCollector focuses solely on the Judeo Christian faith, whilst Syeten focuses primarily on Islam.

Both do humorous recreations of stories and passages from the bible and the Quran (in Syeten’s case he has modern day figures represent those from the Quran. For instance radical Muslim preachers such as Anjem Choudrary represent Muhammed and his followers, whilst Tommy Robinson represents the pagans who were terrified of Muhammed’s influence growing throughout their land, and feminists like Steve Shives represent the pagans who foolishly thought Muhammed could integrate.)

Both men also point out the corruption, and outright stupidity in both the old testament and the Quran too.

You can see that Non Stamp Collector and Syeten’s styles are similar in that their humour is very unapologetic, shocking and doesn’t hold anything back. Yet Rational Wiki brands Syeten a bigot simply because he targets the Islamic faith.

About Syetens videos they say. “Prolonged exposure may result in the following side effects: Nausea, depression, high blood pressure, loss of IQ, periodic outbursts of hysterical guffaws and broken keyboards“. Whilst about Non Stamp Collectors they say “Warning this video may cause excessive hilarity.

The youtuber Logicked meanwhile (whose work I highly recommend) also commented on how Rational Wiki used to like his videos when he skewered the Christian faith, but now that he attacks Islam he is on their bigots and Webshites list.

Rational Wiki Doesn’t Like Me Now That I Criticise Muslims.

Richard Dawkins meanwhile a long time critic of religion has been deplatformed from many events for tweeting negative things against Islam.

Richard Dawkins Banned From Event For “Hate Speech” Against Islam

Richard Dawkins Dropped From Science Event

The left haven’t bothered to analyse or read into anything they claim to be experts of like Islam. As they are a little tribe, then they will naturally just follow what the received wisdom is for that tribe. The received wisdom for the left is of course, that dark skinned people are always the poor victims of evil white people, so it doesn’t matter that Islam is the most conservative, bigoted, retrograde, backwards and misogynistic ideology there has possibly ever been. The fact that Muslims are mostly brown, means that they have to be the poor victims of evil white people.

Hence we get Owen Jones, a socialist, a feminist and supposed man of the people white knighting over Islamophobia, whilst telling us that white people don’t experience racism in the United Kingdom, right in the middle of a scandal involving hundreds of thousands of white girls being sexually abused and tortured on an unprecedented scale, because they are white all across the country!

White Women Are Only Good For One Thing

White People Are Not Victims Of Racism In The United Kingdom

Owen Jones is an utter disgrace, but sadly he is typical of people on the left these days.

Now when it comes to Islam then the right have obviously done a better job than the left. They have actually spoken out against the ideology, and indeed I think this possibly more than anything else, is why they have gained more support in the last few years.

Even then though I find some right wingers are less willing to be as critical of Islam as they are of other ideologies. Take Sargon of Akkad for instance.

Now Sargon has criticised Islam many times, and I respect him for that. However Sargon I feel is still more willing to say he hates an ideology and all of the people in it, if that ideology is practised mostly by white people.

He has openly said that he thinks if you are a communist, then you are a bad person, and has said that he wanted to bring McCarthy a man who took away communists rights and blacklisted them back.

I could never imagine him saying the same thing about Muslims. If you follow Islam then you are a bad person, and that he wants Muslims fired from their jobs and black listed so they’ll never work again.

Not that I want him to say that about Muslims of course, but still if he is going to say it about communists, then be consistent. When it comes to Islam, Sargon will say “not all Muslims” but when its communists, then it IS “all communists are evil people” simply because again most Muslims are brown so he doesn’t want to be seen as a racist.

Still whilst the right might be more willing to criticise Islam overall they have been shown to be just as willing to talk down to dark skinned people in other ways too.

The recent Candace Owens/Red Pill Black fiasco was quite illuminating. Candace Owens was a former left wing SJW who had tried to set up a website called Social Autopsy that would doxx people who said mean words online and reveal where they lived.

Thankfully the website never got launched but Candace a few months later returned as a supposedly reformed conservative. She still didn’t take the website down however until the youtuber Tree of Logic did a video exposing “Red Pill Black” for who she was.

Now it can be debated as to whether or not Candace wanted to still launch the Social Autopsy website. Personally I don’t think she was an actual left wing SJW like Tree said, though I can understand why Tree would say that.

I think Candace is just cynical and simply goes wherever the money is. This great video by April Reigne sums up the type of person Candace is.

Whatever her intentions the fact that so many right wingers like Paul Joseph Watson and Stefan Molyneaux, and Dave Rubin not only welcomed her with open arms, but did all they could to promote her, without checking her background first showed that they were desperate to have a black woman on their side.

Almost everything about the way every right winger promoted Candace was to do with the fact that she was black. Hell even her youtube name “Red Pill Black” . Who cares if she’s a black conservative? All that matters is if you agree with her opinions or not. Its hilarious that Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones, two people who often attack identity politics would revel in it.

In one interview with Candace, Alex Jones even agrees with her that he needs to have more women on his show to get the female perspective.

Hmmm isn’t that the kind of thing a left wing SJW would say? So much for the meritocracy and hiring people based on their ideas and talent which the right always claims they are for. When they can get several women and minorities on their side as trophies to show that their side isn’t racist. Then ironically they are all for diversity hirings and using black people as trophies just like the left.

Furthermore the fact that these conservatives kept white knighting for Candace when she was found out, and even lied for her, shows how desperate they were not to have their novelty of a black conservative end.

Paul Joseph Watson for instance lied that Social Autopsy was from 4 years ago, and he still promotes her.

In this video here, Tree of Logic, a black conservative talks about how disappointed she was to find out that in some ways her side was really no better in terms of talking down to black people and viewing them as their children.

Sadly this type of thinking will always happen when people become part of little tribes and are desperate to score points against the other.

The great irony is that Candace Owens and Linda Sarsour are two people that no one in their right mind would want to associate with if it wasn’t for their minority status that they shamelessly exploit.

Candace has nothing original or intelligent to say, and she is an arrogant, obnoxious bigot too. Look at her debate with Blaire White on the Rubin Report. She not only shouts over Blaire but resorts to calling Blaire, a trans woman, a man several times.

In fact all of the times she called Blaire a man have been gathered together in a video here.

Linda Sarsour meanwhile aside from saying she wants to cut out women’s vaginas is also a racist against white people (even dismissing a man’s opinion in public because he was white.) And is a terrorist supporter too.

Democrats Revere Linda Sarsour

Why would you want to associate yourself with these people, other than to have a minority trophy to show people how not racist you are.

I understand that it must have been extremely frustrating for Tree, a black woman to learn that both sides didn’t treat her with actual respect because of her skin colour, but again that’s just further proof of why its best not to be a part of either

4/ They Are Both Okay With Censorship And Ruining People’s Reputations

We all know that left wing SJWs are happy to get someone fired from their job and even ruin their life if they disagree with them.

The first thing a feminist will often do if they lose an argument with you is ask to speak to your employer.

Again it kind of reminds me of when people would speak out against religion centuries ago and they would be branded as heretics and ostracised. Just replace heretic with misogynist and that’s pretty much the situation we are in today.

The MeTooMovement meanwhile is a witch hunt.

Obviously there is corruption in Hollywood, but that does not mean that A/ there is a patriarchy designed to oppress women throughout all of western society or that B/ all men are rapists.

People at the top will obviously be able to cover up their sleazy actions and crimes and so its not surprising that we see abuses of power for many different crimes, not just sexual assault in places like Hollywood.

The problem with the MeTooMovement however is that first of all in most cases its advocates adopt a guilty until proven innocent stance as seen recently with Stan Lee.

Also worst of all they are trying to equate things like cat calling, and wolf whistling with actual sexual assault which not only threatens to undermine the real horror of sexual assault, but also further demonize men.

Hell some feminists have even tried to make it impossible for men to approach women as they are so wrapped up in this ridiculous all men are rapists crap.

Bar Where Men Are Not Allowed To Approach Women

The MeTooMovement however doesn’t care about the innocent men who are accused and then instantly treated as though they are guilty’s lives being destroyed.

Teen Vogue Columnist Not Concerned If Innocent Men Go To Prison

Of course the right is no better. Many on the right including Sargon of Akkad and Stefan Molyneaux have defended Joseph McCarthy of all people. Indeed he has become quite the hero among the Pepes for apparently saving America from the evil Commies in the 50s.

The hilarious irony of all this is that McCarthy was the SJWs, Third Wave Feminism and MeTooMovement of his day.

Like them he was against free speech and would try and shut any of his critics down.

Like them he was also such a foaming at the mouth fanatic that he would smear anyone who he even slightly disagreed with as the worst thing he could think of.

A feminist will call a man who cat calls a rapist, a man who makes a stupid joke a promoter of sexual assault or even tell people who say things like “I don’t want a female Doctor Who or I don’t like the new Ghostbusters move” a misogynist.

McCarthy meanwhile was exactly the same. Anyone who even associated with a person that had the most mild left wing views was tarred as a Stalinist. As Humphrey Bogart said “They’ll nail anyone who ever scratched their ass during the national anthem.”

McCarthy also famously not only got people fired from their jobs for expressing political views he didn’t like, but he also blacklisted them to the point where they wouldn’t be able to find any work after.

Many innocent people’s careers and lives were completely ruined.

Modern third wave feminism is of course exactly the same. As we have seen they are quick to try and get people fired simply for expressing political opinions that they don’t like such as Thunderf00t, and just like with McCarthy if you are fired for supposedly espousing “sexist views” like Thunderf00t would have been, then you will be unlikely to get another job afterwards, and you will be made a social pariah, as seen with Tim Hunt a noble prize winner whose career was completely derailed by feminists.

Victims of McCarthyism

Tim Hunt “I’ve been hung out to dry.”

Again at present the left wing censors are more dangerous, but in 50s America, it was the right wing censors that were the threat and I can easily see it swinging back that way in a few decades time. If generation Z is the most conservative generation since World War 2, then yes, thanks to people like Sargon and Stefan Molyneaux who are trying to reassess McCarthy as a hero, and are even saying that they want him back; I can quite easily see the next generation not only smearing anyone with even the slightest left wing or liberal beliefs as a communist, but also wanting to shut them down too.

Don’t let someone like Sargon fool you. He may seem like a champion for free speech now because he is talking against the likes of the MeTooMovement, but the fact that he has said he wants to see McCarthy, one of the biggest threats to free speech in America of the 20th century back, shows that he’s okay with the people he dislikes being shut down for the sake of his greater good, just like an SJW.

It is true that McCarthyism and MeToo will have rooted out genuine threats to Western society and genuine sexual predators, but unfortunately for every actual communist spy or Harvey Weinstein they caught or exposed, about 1000 other innocent people were slimed as communists, sexual predators, misogynists etc until all they really accomplished was to sadly make the public doubt any actual claims of a threat to the west or sexual assault.

McCarthyism and the MeTooMovement do far more harm for the cause they supposedly champion than good as well as ruin the lives of many innocent people, and attack free speech.

5/ They Both Have Utter Contempt For The Working Class

Related image

The left have in the past 30 or so years forgotten what the main thing that divides people in society actually is, class.

The modern left is too hung up on the civil rights movement. The leftists who fought for the rights of black people in the 60s are more revered, than those who simply fought for the rights of workers and the underprivileged in general. John Maclean for instance isn’t as attractive a figure for young University students as say Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, because in order to know what Maclean accomplished you actually have to be political and analyse exactly what it was he was fighting for.

Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, though not to do them down of course, but what they accomplished is a lot easier to understand because they were so obviously in the right. Their main goal was after all to simply want equal rights for everyone.

Unfortunately for the modern day SJWs the civil rights movement has more or less been won. I’m not saying that out modern society is perfect, but the general population are not racist, there are no laws designed to discriminate people based on their skin colour or sexuality or gender. Its illegal in fact to do so, and would make you a social pariah anywhere you go.

Class inequality however is still a pressing issue, but again the modern day so called leftists don’t give a shit about under privileged working class white people, nor do they even care about ethnic minorities if they don’t fit their idea of what they should be.

Worse than that however the modern day SJWs, many of whom come from privileged, upper middle class back grounds themselves, will often sneer at the “plebs” who they think are idiots that are easily duped.

Look at all the “low information voters” crap we see about Brexit. Its the most condescending, “these stupid little Englanders don’t know what was good for them” attitude I have ever seen.

I’m Disappointed About Brexit But The Remainers Snobbery Is Ridiculous

How Brexit Gave Us A Different Class Of Snob

Remainers Sneering and Snobbery Must Stop

GSCE Post Demonstrates Shameful Snob Culture

Now I am not pro Brexit. I actually didn’t vote one way or the other because I couldn’t decide.

On the one hand the EU is a good concept, but it has become corrupt and degenerate in the last few decades. Furthermore I did enjoy watching the mainstream media get an absolute kicking. For once things didn’t go their way and it was glorious.

On the other however I think we might be seeing a change and reformation of the EU, and Britain could very well be leaving at the worst time. Of course this change will only have been motivated by a large country like Britain leaving, but sadly it could have been another country. We I think ended up being the sacrificial lamb.

Don’t think that because of Brexit I never vote or decide one way or another in other situations. I voted yes to Scottish independence and would do so again, even despite my utter loathing for the SNP. I feel that Scotland should be independent simply because when connected to England, a much larger country, it tends to be forced to go along with its decisions about important issues.

For instance the Scottish vote has made 0 difference in any election outcome for the UK since WW2. Remember it was supposed to be a United Kingdom, not a smaller country becoming part of a bigger one.

A lot of people in England voted for Brexit for the same reason of wanting to decide their own future and whilst the situation with Brexit and Scottish independence is obviously not exactly the same, in that respect I completely understood and respected the people in England who were confident enough to want to decide their future.

I also in regards to Trump and Hillary was completely on Trump’s side too. I don’t like Trump. He’s obviously far more to the right than I am in a lot of ways, as his recent attack on the NHS shows.

Still Hillary Clinton was a vicious war monger who was by far a bigger threat to world peace.

Thank god this woman didn’t win!

Trump at the time of his election promised to improve relations with Russia and China.

You may not like Putin, but it would have been foolish to not want to see an improvement to the relationship between the two great nuclear powers.

Now obviously there have been some bumpy moments in Trump’s first year as President such as his attack on Syria. The biggest problem with Trump is that he is a flip flopper and unpredictable. He may very will still provoke Russia, but ultimately back in 2016 he was the one who promised to improve things with them to avoid a war, whilst Hillary openly said she would attack them over suspected cyber attacks!

Trump has actually in his first year already taken the USA further away from a war with Russia in some respects.

Ask yourself this. Would you have rather this woman here

than this man here

Putin Thanks Trump For Intelligence In Foiling Terror Attack

be the President at a time when Russia and America were teetering on the brink of a full scale nuclear war over Syria?

So again don’t think that I am so much of a centrist that I will never come down on one side. Brexit I just simply found to be a bit more of a difficult decision to make, but regardless of whether it was right or wrong, it brought out a lot of the left’s ugly contempt for the working class.

The same applies to Trump’s victory. Trump supporters are often derided as a basket of deplorables and stupid hicks who simply didn’t know the full facts.

Look at this article Stephen King wrote about what he imagines Trump supporters to be like. It has all of the most sneering, arrogant and condescending stereotypes he can conjor up. Apparently Trump supporters in his mind are stupid plebs who voted for Trump because Hillary looked like a lesbian.

Stephen King: How Do Such Men Rise

It never occurs to King that people could have genuine reasons for voting for Trump, or indeed that actual left wing people voted for Trump too because of his anti war stance.

Here’s a video that John Pilger did in 2016 on why it was better to support Trump than Hillary Clinton. Pilger for those of you who don’t know is a left wing journalist, and possibly the most influential left wing journalist of the 20th century.

He has done more to expose the full horrors of western imperialism than anybody else in the media, yet he of all people still wanted Trump to win over Hillary.

Please watch the video if you have time its great.

The lefts class snobbery even extends to more first world issues such as its takeover of certain franchises and series.

Take a look at what Dan Aykroyd said about the racists that attacked Leslie Jones on Twitter. He made a point of saying that they are all people with low income jobs who are probably on benefits, as though someone from a high paying job, with a lot of money can never be a racist asshole (I direct you towards Hillary Clinton who called black people super predators back in the 90s.)

See here Dan Aykroyd Attacks Leslie Jones Haters

Similarly take a look at what Whovian Feminism had to say about those who didn’t want a female Doctor.

Now Whovian Feminism, real name Alyssa Franke, is a blogger who as her name would suggest looks at Doctor Who from a feminist perspective. She is an absolute curse on the Who fandom.

Like Dan Aykroyd before her, Whovian Feminism equates being a horrible sexist to having a low income, and states that we wouldn’t want these people with low incomes to be watching Doctor Who anyway.

“If a misogynistic jerk who disparagingly refers to a woman Doctor as “The Nurse” says he’ll quit watching the show, he’s exactly the type of fan we should be proud to piss off. I promise you more fans (especially ones with disposable income!) are waiting in the wings to take his place.”

Tommy Robinson meanwhile, an outspoken critic of Islam has often been the recipient of the left’s condescending attitude, and outright contempt towards the working class.

In early 2017 Tommy Robinson and Lily Allen clashed on twitter over Islam. Lily having lost the argument with Tommy actually threatened to sue him!

Now I used to be a massive fan of Lily Allen, but sadly she has become a feminist/Islam apologist/SJW in the last few years. Even then though that wouldn’t have been enough to put me off her. It was this particular argument however where sadly I think Lily showed her true colours as a spoiled rich girl and a class snob.

Not only was Lily willing to shut someone down simply for disagreeing with her (like a true feminist), but she also gloated to Tommy Robinson for apparently not having as much money as her, telling Tommy “to get saving HA.”

George Galloway, a famous left wing politician despite claiming to be a socialist and supposed man of the people, also let his ugly attitudes to the working class slip out when debating Tommy Robinson.

Its interesting when you compare Galloways debate with Tommy to his debate with Nigel Farage. Both have pretty much exactly the same views on Islam, but Galloway treats the posh, erudite, well spoken Farage with the utmost respect, whilst with Tommy Robinson he calls him a knuckle scarping moron.

The left as you can see really view the working class as idiots who are all easily led into being racists and Nazis without their superior moral guidance. Also most hilariously of all the left who are critics of capitalism when it suits them, will nevertheless deride their opponents for not making enough money, as seen with the likes of Lily Allen and Whovian Feminism.

The right however once again is not really any better. Many right wingers like Sargon of Akkad and Paul Joseph Watson and Stefan Molyneaux are so tribal about capitalism that they will dismiss all of the poverty it inevitably creates as being simply the people who can’t compete in a fair, free market.

Paul Joseph Watson will often dismiss critics of capitalism as being benefit scroungers, too lazy to get an actual job (often when he has absolutely no idea who they are.) Whilst Sargon had this to say about those living in poverty.

“The only people who are actually oppressed by capitalism are people who either can’t work, people who’ve lost a leg or are morbidly obese or something like that, or people who don’t want to work because they are fucking lazy, or people who don’t have any other skills because they did gender studies degrees. Believe it or not everyone else actually does pretty well out of capitalism, y’know something like a house, a car, holidays, food on the table, entertainment, luxuries.”

These right wing SJWs hate the working class for a different reason. They can’t stand seeing people in western societies like Britain and America who live in genuine poverty because their plight demonstrate the flaws in right wingers beloved political system.

Its like the fundamentalist Christians despising Darwin for disproving their theories about how life developed wrong.

All poverty created by socialism in the right’s eyes is 100 percent proof of how socialism doesn’t work, whilst all poverty created by capitalism is just lazy people not bothering to get off their arses and use a system that works for everybody else.

The only place the working class are likely to find any ounce of sympathy for their problems is among more politically neutral people.

Tommy Robinson for instance has done more for the working class of this country than most others in the media.

Tommy is himself working class and he has been an outspoken critic of Islam, and has as raised other issues affecting those living in poverty in areas of Britain.

Sadly Tommy Robinson has been slimed as a racist by the leftist media because of his views on Islam.

Tommy Robinson as far as I’m concerned doesn’t have a racist bone in his body. I’m not saying he hasn’t made mistakes. Personally I wasn’t keen on the EDL that he founded, and I don’t think street protests are really ever that successful as they do often just lead to clashes with the police.

Still at the same time Tommy is not a racist. He has simply attacked the ideology of Islam. He has never even said that all Muslims are evil. He has gone out of his way to say that isn’t the case, and has worked with Muslim reformers in the past too.

You should definitely watch these two interviews if you have the time. They are both long, but its good to hear from Tommy’s perspective, given how much the media tries to tar him as a Nazi. In the second video meanwhile Tommy and a true Muslim reformer, Imam Tawhidi have a very interesting discussion about dealing with the problems Islam is creating in our society, as well as how Islam can be changed to be more peaceful.

Someone like Tawhidi, who does represent the future for Islam will ironically only ever be given a platform by a supposed racist like Tommy Robinson.

Tommy Robinson isn’t really political. I’m not saying that to do him down. He’s someone who focuses more on social issues affecting people, which yes obviously are linked to politics, but still ultimately I wouldn’t say that Tommy belongs to any political party or side.

The right may use him, and even claim him because they have a mutual enemy in Islam, but it would be wrong to say Tommy is far right, or far left. As a result he actually cares for the working class of this country.

For instance a leftist like Owen Jones, dismisses the problems women like Chelsey Wright , a working class white woman, targeted and violently sexually assaulted for her skin colour go through by saying that “white people don’t suffer racism in the United Kingdom” as would most SJWs on University campus’s such as those who chastised an Asian woman for saying that dark skinned people can be racist too.

Hell white women are now seen as being as privileged as white men by many feminists.

White Women Stop Pretending That We Don’t Benefit From White Privilege

You wouldn’t think that people would write articles like that, right in the middle of things like this going on.

The unprecedented rape and abuse of white girls across the country because of the colour of their skin.

The sad fact is that Chelsey again isn’t as attractive a victim to champion for the left wing SJWs because she is white and in their minds a “pleb”. They will virtue signal about things like there not being enough black superheroes in Marvel, but Chelsey’s plight goes completely un-commented on. I guess she has white privilege.

At the same time however someone like this veteran who, having had a stroke, is now living in poverty, would be dismissed by many right wing SJWs.

This veteran is proof that hey capitalism isn’t perfect. Its a system where someone like this isn’t able to get money he needs for rehabilitation, but 8 people own half the money of the entire world.

World’s 8 Richest People Have Almost The Same Wealth as The Poorest 50 Percent

A right wing SJW either doesn’t want to hear about a situation like the one Tommy Robinson describes, or worse, would dismiss the veteran who is paralysed as just being too lazy to help himself, and playing at being a victim.

Take a look at this video from Candace Owens. I understand if you don’t want to watch it, as its rather cringey, but still its interesting as a display of tribalism and the rights mentality.

Candace talks about her admiration for a disabled person who still goes to work and doesn’t want us to pay for their medical care and says that he is proof that anyone can work hard if need be.

This video from Stefan Molyneux is even worse.

If you can’t be arsed watching that video (and I wouldn’t blame you. Molyneux’s videos are always an ordeal to sit through.) Molyneux basically says that he considers people who work 9-5 jobs, 40 hour weeks to be parasites who are leeching off of the hard working entrepreneurs. He also regards anyone with a low paying job to be a moron, and less hard working than he is.

Molyneaux’s arguments are of course pig ignorant and don’t address wealth that is inherited, or how things in the public sector have been taken over by businessmen, and he does not take into account why wages, hours and conditions for workers even in the most well developed Western countries are worse than they should be.

How Wages Fell In The United Kingdom

The 8 Hour Work Day Doesn’t Work

The 5 Day Work Week Is Bad For Business

Effects of Bedroom Tax On Children In The United Kingdom

Scale of Food Bank Use In The United Kingdom

Construction Fatalities Rise

Work Related Deaths Arising In United Kingdom

Austerity Leads To 120,000 deaths

Molyneaux’s arguments are a straw man. He tries to paint all of those at the top as honest entrepreneurs who got to the top through their own hard work. Obviously I am not saying that there aren’t people who start honest businesses and get to the top because they deserve it.

I just don’t think that wages need to be as low as they are, that working conditions need to be quite so poor, and that basic essentials such as electricity should not be owned by private companies any more than other basic essentials such as water.

That has nothing to do with wanting to take money away from all of those who have earned it. Its also extremely naive just to think that because you are at the top you are automatically the best. There are many talented writers, artists and musicians that died in poverty, whilst talentless cretins like Tracy Emin have spent their entire life farting their arse through silk.

Is Tracy Emin a more talented person than Vincent Van Gough Stefan? She’s at the top, he died at the bottom?

Things like luck, connections and what family you’re born into in most cases are what help people get to the top, hence why the likes of Van Gough, one of the greatest talents who ever lived died in poverty, whilst Justin Bieber was a millionaire by the age of 15.

You can’t just dismiss those at the bottom as not being hard working, or stupid, or even talented, and you certainly can not use the fact that they are at the bottom as proof that they are deserving of the most appalling working and living conditions.

This borderline sociopathic attitude of “me first” that people on the right like Stefan Molyneaux use to excuse the horrors of capitalism stems from Ayn Rand, a woman that many right wingers and even anti SJWs see as a hero.

In reality Ayn Rand was a disgusting person who ironically worshipped a serial killer that hacked young women to death. In fact the ideology that the likes Molyneaux get their free market crap from, comes from her worship of a serial killer.

Trump Praises Ayn Rand

Ayn Rand: Paul Joseph Watson

The Left Attacks Ayn Rand: Stefan Molyneaux

Sargon of Akkad and Yaron Brook on Ayn Rand

THIS is the woman they admire?

Ayn Rand: Sociopath That Admired A Serial Killer

Ayn Rand Loved A Serial Killer.

Stefan Moluyneaux and many other major figures on the rights entire beliefs around the working class stem from a sociopath’s view of clemency being wrong!

The left and the right are never going to comment on class, the single greatest cause of inequality in the western world today.

Only people in the centre like Tommy Robinson are going to try and bring attention to problems faced by those at the bottom of society, because he has no axe to grind against one particular side.

6/ They Both Have Horrible Attitudes Towards One Gender

Image result for Anita Sarkeesian

Image result for anita sarkeesian stefan molyneux

In the lefts case they are obviously bigoted towards white men, whilst among the right I have noticed some sexist attitudes towards women developing.

Feminism has in the last 30 or so years become a sick parody of its former self. Whilst the movement like many others always had its own problems, (mostly idiotic infighting.) It still did a lot of good for women in the past, and produced many admirable people from Sylvia Pankhurst, to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, to Christina Hoff Sommers. Feminism however began to decline for many reasons.

First and foremost it became trendy from round about the 80s on. When that happened we started to get people like Anita Sarkeesian, people who didn’t actually give a shit about women, but wanted the glory that actual champions for women in the past were now getting.

So they picked an easy target, like say video games, or sci fi and they smeared them as sexist for the most petty, ridiculous reasons, and with a little media manipulation they were able to look like they were fighting a worthy cause.

Of course ironically when it came to actual issues affecting women like FGM, these “feminists” were either as silent as ghosts, or worse outright apologists!

Still sadly as the media was on their side, these feminists had a greater influence on the next generation of young men and women, who came to believe their bullshit, than the few genuine feminists who were left like Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

On top of this a lot of women I feel started to use feminism as a way of venting their frustrations against the opposite sex too which led to bigotry against men being legitimised as it was now just seen as complaints from a previously respected movement.

Finally feminism as I have pointed out before kind of replaced religion for a lot of people. It became this holy, sacred thing that must never be criticised. If you dare to even say that you don’t believe in something like the gender wage gap (which is bullshit.) Then you are branded as someone who hates all women and may even be ostracised from people you’ve known for years.

As it couldn’t look in on itself and see where it was going wrong, then feminism became stagnated and out of date and the bigotry towards men was also allowed to foster to the point where it sadly did become a defining feature of modern day feminism.

Feminists love grouping all men together as privileged. They also love to demonise them as being potential rapists, and even ban them from certain events, jobs and activities simply for their gender.

Swedish Music Festival To Be Men Free Until Men Learn How To Behave

Women Only Wonder Woman Screenings Illegal

Banning Men Is Only Way For Women

British Transport Office Bans White Men

Man Hating Feminism Not Just A Myth

23 Quotes That Will Make You Rethink Feminism

Owner of Men’s Rights Abuse Shelter Kills Himself

Anita Sarkeesian “You Can’t Be Sexist Against Men”

Image result for men banned from university male tears

NUS Defends Banning White Men From Positions

As feminists have their talons wrapped around the left now then their anti men bigotry has seeped its way into left wing politics in general.

Labour Bans White Straight Men From Equality Conference

The right meanwhile are in their own way just as sexist towards women. Of course ironically the right has often been accused of being sexist against women for the wrong reasons. Idiots like Rational Wiki will often call right wingers sexist because they criticise feminism.

Feminism does not equal all women. It is a social and political movement and must therefore be judged on its own merits, not the group it claims to be fighting for.

Ironically most women whilst supporting the equality between sexes, do NOT identify as feminists, which is a bloody good thing.

Only 7 Percent Of Britons Consider Themselves Feminists

So no, criticising this movement in principle does not make you a sexist. I’d argue that its actually fewer than 7 percent of women that identify as feminists.

Feminists are intolerant bullies who will often attack any woman that doesn’t identify as a feminist.

Take a look at Kaley Cuoco, Taylor Swift, Lily Allen and Katy Perry ALL of whom merely said initially that they weren’t feminists but were attacked by feminists until they actually apologised for not being a part of this particular political movement, and said they were feminists.

Attacks on Kaley Cuoco Expose More Feminist Hypocrisy

Lily Allen Feminism Shouldn’t Be A Thing Anymore

Lily Allen Tells Feminist Critics To Fuck Off

Lana Del Ray and The Fault Of Our Feminist Stars

Incidentally I feel that when many of these women cave and become feminists, ironically they end up becoming much less empowered, individual and independent.

Take a look at Lily Allen and Katy Perry. Before they were brainwashed/bullied into being feminists, they at the very least regardless of whether you were a fan of them or not, where their own women.

Look at them in these videos from before their feminist days.

They are unique and clearly in charge of everything to do with their music, fashion, look, etc.

Now look at them. You’d be hard pushed to tell them apart. Both have the same hairstyles, looks, both have the same personalities. Spouting vapid, meaningless, first year political student crap that just makes everybody cringe, interspersed with the most vile bigotry against white men.

To me feminists are kind of like the Cybermen from Doctor Who.

The Cybermen for those of you who don’t watch the show were originally a race of organic creatures who slowly transformed themselves into machine creatures with no individual personalities, and who seek to transform any other organic life form they come across. They are a dead race who in order to reproduce have to force themselves on other species, and once they convert you, you loose all individuality.

Feminism similarly is a dying movement, as demonstrated by the fact that women, the people who it claims to be fighting for are turning against it. So in order to survive it needs to force itself on popular culture, the education system and even forms of entertainment, like comic books, video games and even ironically Doctor Who!

Also much like the Cybermen, feminists have no individual personalities. They all follow the group think of ” the wage gap is real, white men are all evil, Islam is a religion of peace etc” and in much the same way as the Cybermen’s main aim is to convert people, the actual main aim of feminists, rather than helping women is “lets get more people to be feminists and ruin the lives of those who refuse.”

The question is of course how many women are there like this in the supposed 7 percent, that have been forced into just going along with the movement out of fear of being ostracised from their social groups or slimed as a sexist or a traitor to their own gender?

Feminism can also be seen as an abusive spouse to all women. It actually demeans them, tells them in society they are worthless, unless they support this movement, tries to make out that all of women’s accomplishments are to do with feminism etc.

In addition to their bullying ways, feminists I feel finally are often able to get people on their side by spreading this bullshit idea that if you support equality between the sexes, then you are a feminist.

No you’re not. You are just a decent person. Again its similar to when religious fanatics used to say that if you didn’t believe in god then you lacked a moral centre.

No group or ideology has a right to claim a trait that all decent humans should have. It would be like if I set up a new ideology called say Burrunjorist, and then said if you don’t think innocent people should be hacked to death by psychopaths then congratulations, you are a Burrunjorist! And then I tried to force you to go along with all of my other beliefs, and if you didn’t agree with them, I accused you of being pro hacking innocent people to death because you were anti Burrunjorist.

Its a slimey tactic and yet more proof that feminists don’t actually care about women, just in forcing more people to be part of their little tribe, and silencing opposition.

So yes with this in mind, I  absolutely do not think that right wingers are sexist for hating feminists. I think hating modern feminism can be seen as a sign of common sense!

Sadly however many on the right have I feel now crossed over into actual woman hating.

Take a look at this video from a popular conservative youtuber Naked Ape to see what I mean. He outright says that he hates the majority of modern women. Not feminists, WOMEN, because he believes that women when they are younger are selfish sluts who reject nice guys, so that they can sleep around with jocks, but when they get older, they get saggy and ugly and no man wants to fuck them. Most revolting of all, he actually compares older women to used meat, and calls them “roasties”

Naked Ape claims that women become bitter rejects when they’re older because they want to settle down and have families but by that time its too late. I might add by older he means 30!

He’s a charmer isn’t he.

This is like something I’d expect a blue haired feminist, the type of people Naked Ape obnoxiously thinks he is a logical alternative too, to say about men. A problem in society comes about simply because the other half of population are all selfish, lazy, privileged, evil etc.

I do agree that modern women are a lot less happy now, but there are many reasons for that. I think that to start with more modern people in general in some ways are less happy now because there are more distractions and the population is more fragmented.

In the 60s for instance there was no internet, no computer games, even tv wasn’t what it is now. There was no netflix, no DVDs, no repeat showings. TV wasn’t even ON during the day. There were also only two channels as well.

As a result of this people obviously wouldn’t feel as tempted to stay in, as there wasn’t as much to do, and they couldn’t chat to their friends online either, so they’d have to go out to socialise with people.

Nowadays however whilst younger people obviously have it better in many ways, they are more tempted to stay in, play video games, and can generally feel more lonely as a result.

Lauren Southern actually did a great video on the subject here.

Now it can be worse for a woman, for her sake, to leave it to start things like settling down and having a family until later in life, simply because there is a time limit for when a woman can have children.

Men can waste the first half of their life playing video games, and still settle down and have a family, but a woman who might just want to bum around, enjoy the many distractions there are for her, could end up coming to regret it when she reaches 40 and realises she wants to have a family but can’t unless she adopts which isn’t always as easy.

Its not fair, but its biology. Also a further problem for women is that I think that women in certain professions have to make a choice between actually having children and having a career, as obviously in order to have children, a woman will need to take lots of time off unlike her husband. Sadly however in professions like say the medical profession, taking lots of time off can derail your entire career.

Females In Medicine

Shared paternity leave and proper accommodations for single mothers would solve a lot of these problems.

This is a pressing issue for women today and it is yet another one that modern day feminists have not really addressed as often as trivial bullshit, like changing the sex of male super heroes on tv, or banning men from things!

Most people want to have children. There is nothing wrong with someone who doesn’t of course, but still I feel that many people today are unhappy because they A/ feel like they are wasting their lives as they are spending too much time on hobbies, are B/ much lonelier because its harder to meet people as more people prefer to stay indoors and the population is fragmented, and C/ in the case of women, not only can they not afford to mess around for as long as men if they want to have children, but also whilst women thankfully have been given more roles and opportunities, sadly society has not taken into account that in some situations, women might need accommodated in a way men don’t simply because they have children.

Sadly however feminists are never going to solve these issues because they’ll just say its because men hate all women, whilst people like Naked Ape won’t either as they’ll just say its because women are lazy whores who want to “ride the chad cock” and never have any responsibility.

Naked Ape isn’t alone in his vile views towards women among the right. A lot of people on the right seem to have this idea that the more opportunities women are given in society the worse it is for them and society as a whole.

The right thinks that a woman’s role is to raise the children, and that they are at their happiest when doing that, and that for a woman to want to do anything else is a woman trying to be a man.

See for yourself.

How To Make Women Happy? MILO

Stefan Molyneux meanwhile not only supports this view that a woman’s place is essentially in the home, but he also holds women responsible for all the ills of the world.

Molyneux claims that men are evil when they are not raised properly by women. He also much like Black Pigeon Speaks and Naked Ape blames women for “choosing assholes”.

“Women who choose assholes will fucking end this race. They will fucking end this human race, if we don’t start holding them a-fucking-countable.

Look women who choose assholes guarantee child abuse. Women who choose assholes guarantee criminality. Sociopathy. Politicians. All the cold hearted jerks who run the world came out of vaginas of women who married assholes. And I don’t know how to make this world a better place without holding women accountable for choosing assholes.

If asshole wasn’t a great reproductive strategy it would have been gone long ago. Women keep that black bastard flame alive. If women choose nice guys over assholes we would have a glorious and peaceful world in one generation. 

Stop fucking monsters, we get a great world. Keep fucking monsters, we get catastrophes. We get war, we get nuclear weapons, we get national debt, we get incarcerations and prison guards and all the other florid assholes who rule the world. 

Women worship at the feet of the devil and wonder why the world is evil? And then you know what they say? We’re victims. Poor us.”

There are disadvantages that both men and women face in the world today. I feel that they stem from the fact that society doesn’t take the differences between men and women into account, rather than because we live in a society designed to oppress women, or because women are all apparently selfish whores.

Men and women are equal, but they are different. That’s not sexist to say that as I am not saying because of those differences one gender is smarter or better. However in certain situations one gender might have an advantage more than the other as a result of those differences.

In the medical profession men have the advantage, as they don’t need to take time off to start a family.

In the education system however women have the advantage as the education system is geared more towards feminine interests, hence why fewer boys are going to university.

Christina Hoff Sommers has done a lot to bring attention to the issues faced by men in modern society. Of course she’s become a pariah among the left as a result. The great irony is if most feminists were like Christina Hoff Sommers then they wouldn’t have to  try and bully people like Kaley Cuoco and Katy Perry into being feminists as most people would be okay with the movement.

We need to try and take the differences between men and women into account and deal with the problems both genders face to stamp out the last traces of inequality in our society.

Becoming part of little tribes and listening to bigoted, bitter, pseudo intellectuals like Stefan Molyneux and chancers like Anita Sarkeesian is not just a dead end. Its fucking toxic!

7/ They Both Ignore Science When It Suits Them

Image result for 56 genders

In yet a further parallel with religious fanatics, both the left and the right will deny scientific facts and even accuse you of some kind of bigotry if you disagree with their consensus.

For the left this is primarily to do with gender, whilst with the right its a variety of things.

Left wingers often claim that there are no real differences between men and women, whilst also somewhat paradoxically claiming that there are hundreds of genders.

Its total nonsense and a misguided attempt to help trans people and women.

Obviously I am not saying trans people don’t exist or that intersex people don’t exist, or that women are inferior to men.

Trans people are proof that there are differences between the genders. If there weren’t why would these people go through long, costly and incredibly painful operations to change?

Gender dysphoria, which trans people suffer from is a serious condition where people feel they were born in the wrong body. There is also a growing body of scientific evidence that trans people are actually born with brains that match the opposite gender to the one they are born in, which is why its better for their well being to change.

Men and women do have different brains, and no that’s not saying that one is smarter.

Being Trans Is Not A Choice

So again being trans is a proper, medical condition, and obviously I have 0 issue with someone changing their gender. Its more or less proven that that’s the best way to treat gender dysphoria, and obviously there’s nothing wrong with it either.

However at the same time gender dysphoria does not prove that trans people are a third gender. In fact it proves the opposite. They are one gender, and then change into another gender. If anything trying to make out that they are neither men, nor women is more offensive to them, as basically you are saying that they aren’t the gender they want to be?

There are only two genders. As always there will be some exceptions to the role. Men born with more feminine brains, people born with both sets of genitals, but these are anomalies. That doesn’t mean these people are freaks, or amoral. Depression is caused by an anamoly in brain chemistry, but again that doesn’t mean people with depression are freaks or amoral.

Still that’s the point intersex isn’t a new gender. You are a woman born with male reproductive organs or traits as well, or vice versa. Nothing wrong with that at all, but that’s all it is.

Similarly if you are a man with more feminine traits, or a Tomboy that doesn’t justify creating a whole new gender either.

Here from a trans person.

A lot of these people who claim to be trans but don’t do anything about it, ie don’t have any surgery, don’t dress in clothing that they opposite gender wears, don’t act like the opposite gender, but just insist that they are somehow trans, in my opinion are merely doing it to be trendy.

I have no issue with them doing this in principle, and if they insist on being called Xe, or whatever then I’ll do it to be polite. However there is no scientific validation for this. At the end of the day it is just self indulgence in my opinion, and wanting to cash in on a craze.

Furthermore I think it trivialises what trans people go through, as it makes it look like being trans is this easy thing. Apparently you can switch from between being a man and a woman by say, not wearing lipstick if you are a woman, or wearing lipstick if you are a man, because gender is fluid.

No gender is not fluid. Changing gender is a big deal, and gender dysphoria is a very difficult condition to live with.

You can’t just say “you are trans”, not do anything to show it, and expect that people will see you as the opposite gender as much as someone like Blaire White who has gone through a full operation and surgery to be the opposite sex. Being a Tomboy or being a an effeminate man is not the same as actually hating the body you were born in and changing it through surgery.

Furthermore, you can’t get someone fired from their job for not seeing you as the opposite sex, when you do NOTHING to look or act like the opposite sex, which has actually happened.

Teacher Fired For Misgendering Pupil By Mistake

I wouldn’t want Candace Owens fired for calling Blaire a man. I think it was pathetic, and a dirty tactic to try and throw Blaire. Also in contrast to the above instance, Candace had to constantly keep reminding herself to call Blaire a man, as when you look at Blaire, you’ll just instinctively think of and refer to her as a woman.

The hilarious thing is that Candace DOES refer to Blaire as she and her, several times throughout the interview, when she obviously isn’t thinking and deliberately trying to rattle Blaire.

However even if you had someone who was more of a “trans trender” than Blaire White, I still wouldn’t go out of my way to deliberately “misgender” them, but if someone however instinctively calls someone who looks, acts, dresses and talks like a man, a man, or calls them it without even knowing that they are transgender, then they do not deserve to be black listed!

Sadly however much like religious fanatics these leftists cannot stand it when reality threatens their delusion.

With the right however meanwhile like I said I find that they tend to deny a broader spectrum of things that don’t suit their agenda.

Paul Joseph Watson did a hilariously ignorant video on depression. He argued that depression doesn’t really exist and that its just a lot of attention seeking millenials.

Sadly this is just the tip of the iceberg for both Paul and the right.

Paul Joseph Watson and many on the right are also climate change deniers. Now I agree that its open for debate as to what is causing climate change, whether its a natural process or man made, I am willing to listen to both sides.

Still Paul and many on the right take it that one step further and deny that there is ANY climate change whatsoever.

I am still a fan of PJW. As Eazy himself says in the video, there are some topics where he gets it spot on like Islam and feminism, but sadly he is a classic example of a right wing SJW in other respects, and is certainly one of the easiest places to go if you want to see how the right comes out with bullshit pseudo science.

His latest was claiming that soy makes men more womanly and left wing.


Soy boy has since become a popular insult to use online (I hate to say I used it once.) To be fair though using it doesn’t mean you believe in Paul’s ridiculous idea that soy turns you into a left wing SJW.

Its more just that a lot of left wing SJWs eat soy, because they are vegans.

Paul Joseph Watson is a Complete Idiot (Re Soy Boys.)

Whatever the case you can see how both sides are willing to buy into the most ridiculous nonsense from that there are billions of genders, to eating soy makes you a cuck, if it suits their agenda.

8/ They Want To Take Over Entertainment

Image result for anita sarkeesian

Now this is a bit more of a first world problem. Obviously compared to the other things on this list this isn’t as important, and I was unsure about including it at first for that reason.

Still I decided to include it as I think this shows how the fanatics on both sides operate. Also they often go after the entertainment industry before anything else, because that’s the easiest to take over. Most people will tell someone that complains “oh stop whining about that its just a tv show, video game, comic book etc”

Still whilst it might seem trivial at first, its an important thing to stand up for in the long run.

Let the SJWs take over a big part of your culture and they won’t stop. After the entertainment industry, then its the media, and after the media its your education system, and then you have a whole generation weaned on nothing but this particular political belief, which obviously then finally spills its way into, and tries to control every aspect of your life.

You should always stop this type of censorship at the start and hopefully the sad fate of the following major forms of entertainment that have been hit the hardest by right wing and left wing SJWs should serve as a warning to the rest of us.

Even if you don’t care for any of these forms of entertainment that have been affected, ask yourself. How long before they come for your hobbies and way of life?

Doctor Who

Image result for TARDIS

The series to suffer the most at the hands of SJWs. Obviously I have commented on this before, and again as a result I wasn’t originally going to talk about it again here, but its needs mentioning as Doctor Who has been hit harder than any other form of entertainment.

Doctor Who for those of you who don’t watch it is the worlds longest running science fiction series. Originally premiering in 1963, the show revolves a mysterious alien called the Doctor who travels through time and space in his magnificent machine called the TARDIS which is also bigger on the inside than the outside.

The Doctor also has the power when he dies, to come back to life, with his appearance and outer personality changing as a result, though all of the Doctors are still meant to be the same person with the same core persona. This power of the Doctors, called regeneration is what has allowed the show to endure for so long, with 13 and counting actors playing the Doctor over its 50 plus year history.

Sadly however despite the shows big international following, throughout its history its had to deal with a few whiny crybabies demanding that it cater entirely to their interests.

We’ll start with Mary Whitehouse. Now to those of you who haven’t heard of her, Mary Whitehouse was a right wing SJW. She was a conservative woman who constantly attempted to censor television series, films and music that she found offensive.

Doctor Who was a particular pet peeve of hers. Whitehouse complained that Doctor Who was far too violent, and frightening. Of course she also admitted that she never watched it, but still she wanted this show, that she had no interest in and really knew nothing about to cater to her, instead of the people who actually did watch it.

Whitehouse also personally slandered and insulted the makers of the series, calling them “dumb” and twisted in interviews.

Sadly the BBC eventually caved to her, and others like hers constant whining about the shows violent nature and the then producer of the series Phillip Hinchcliff was actually dismissed from the show as a result.

There were no other reasons for Hinchcliff’s dismissal. His era is ironically regarded as a golden age for the show, that many feel has still never been surpassed. Furthermore it was also at that point the most successful era in terms of ratings and mainstream critical acclaim too.

To get rid of of someone who had produced the most successful era of a show, with its fans and mainstream viewers, that had been running for over a decade would have seemed ridiculous and it was, but it shows you how the loud minority really can get their own way if they push hard enough.

Graham Williams who was brought in to replace Hinchcliff, was told to make the show lighter and more comedic. Now personally I like the Williams era, and have no problems with the humour he brought to the show as for the most part it didn’t undermine the drama.

Still the point isn’t however whether Williams was good or not. Its that the show should not have gotten rid of its existing producer, whose take on the show at that point was the most successful, simply because of a small group of whiny viewers.

Sadly Whitehouse didn’t stop there. She continued to claim that the show was too violent during producer John Nathan Turner’s era. This was eventually used by Michael Grade, the controller of the BBC as one of the reasons for cancelling the show in 1985, when its viewers were still strong, both in the UK and abroad.

To be fair Grade openly hated Doctor Who and wanted to cancel it anyway. Still Whitehouse’s constant attacks on the show for being too violent gave him the ammunition that he needed, and it also contributed to the shows reputation falling.

Worse the show once again when it came back (after international outrage) was forced to be lighter and more humorous to pander to Whitehouse and her cronies during season 24, Sylvester McCoy’s first season as the Doctor.

Unlike the Williams era this was an utter disaster with fans, critics and mainstream viewers, and contributed to the shows viewers, which had already been hurt by the 1985 cancellation to fall even further.

Whitehouse contributed to the demise of the original 1963-1989 series. There were other factors, such as the BBC’s hatred for it, but Whitehouse still nevertheless contributed her part to its reputation falling.

Sadly however Whitehouse’s actions would pale in comparison to the left wing SJWs in the 2010s.

Feminists began to latch onto the Doctor Who franchise from about 2010 on. Before they had always dismissed it as sexist in the 80s (and even played a role in denting its reputation too.) Doctor Who was never actually sexist of course.

The simple fact that it had a male hero and a female sidekick didn’t make it sexist. By that logic, Xena is misandristic as it has a female hero and a male sidekick.

The female companions in Doctor Who were often strong, brave and resourceful characters in their own right. Yes some of them were wimpy, but there were plenty of wimpy male characters too. Not every male or female character can be an unstoppable badass.

Still from 2010 when the revival was at the peak of its popularity, then feminists latched onto the shows fanbase and in typical fashion, they tried to take it over.

Much like Whitehouse they accused the show of not espousing the correct values, and harming the youth of today. They also tarred its makers as horrible things too.

Steven Moffat the producer of Doctor Who throughout most of the 10s was called a sexist, a racist, a homophobe, a transphobe, an abelist etc by feminists, the same way that Philip Hinchcliff was called a purveyor of violent and degenerate material in the 70s by Mary Whitehouse.

The man’s reputation was completely ruined as a result, as the mainstream media picked up on these stupid “Doctor Who and Steven Moffat are sexist” theories and started printing them as fact.

Here are examples of the smear campaign against Moffat.

Doctor Who Is Racist New Book Claims

Trigger Warning Sexual Assault In Doctor Who

Problematic Posters for Doctor Who

Steven Moffat Is A Classist

Why Does The Man Behind Doctor Who And Sherlock Still Have A Job

Because You Are Not Autistic You Are Not Complaining

Steven Moffat is Ableist

Asylum of the Daleks Is Problematic

Doctor Who Returns New Direction

As you can see these complaints are really no different to Mary Whitehouse. Mary Whitehouse was worried that stories like The Deadly Assassin would convince young boys to become murderers when they grew up, by filling their heads full of violent images.

The feminists and the the left wing SJWs meanwhile actually thought that Matt Smith’s Doctor, of all Doctors, the most childlike, innocent and sweet, would convince young boys to start sexually assaulting young women because of a scene where Matt Smith kisses Rory in a eureka moment and doesn’t get his consent.

The Captain Kirk Problem: How Doctor Who Let Down Matt Smith

Sadly all of these ridiculous complaints evidently bothered Steven Moffat, and the BBC, as much like Mary Whitehouse, the complaints weren’t just a simple critique of the show, but designed to slander it and its makers.

See here.

BBC Responds To Sexist Claims

Karen Gillan: Steven Moffat Is Not Sexist

Peter Capaldi Denies Steven Moffat Is A Misogynist Claims

As a result of this the BBC and Moffat, just like the Beeb did when they fired Phillip Hinchliff to cater to Mary Whitehouse in the 70s, began to pander to these people, and eventually identity politics bullshit not only began to seep its way into Doctor Who, but took it completely over from about 2014 on.

Its worth noting that directors and producers on the series began to speak with and promote Whovian Feminism, a hard line feminist blogger too.

Whovian Feminism Interviews Rachel Talalay

Whovian Feminism Interviews Sarah Dollard

You can see what audience they were going for with this in mind.

To start with there were many anti men, and anti white people remarks throughout Doctor Who and its spin off the short lived, disasterous Class throughout this period.

Master/ Do as she says is the future going to be all girl?

Doctor/ We can only hope.

Tanya/ White people

April/ White people what? 

Tanya/ Always so optimistic. Always so certain things are going to work out for you. Oh, well because they usually do.

April/ My Dad tried to kill me when I was eight.

Tanya/ But you got your mum up walking again. Typical white person happy ending.

Yeah things always work out for white people don’t they?

Newcastle Grooming Victim Suicidal And Sleeps With Knife

I guess this also applies to Van Gough too? Remember when Doctor Who did a very nuanced, sympathetic, and acclaimed episode on Van Gough back in 2010?

The episode, called “Vincent and the Doctor” saw the Time Lord take Van Gough into the future to see what a celebrated artist he will become. Sadly however Van Gough’s long standing mental health problems still cause his death, but the Doctor takes solace in the fact that he at least made Van Gough’s life a bit happier.

The story makes a brilliant point of how when dealing with someone who suffers depression, every single little bit of help matters. People will often blame themselves if they can’t help someone they care for who is suffering from mental health problems, but sometimes a person can be so far gone that nothing could help them, but at the very least you can take comfort that you made their lives happy for even just a short time.

Quite a big comedown for a franchise to go from this, to telling all white people that they are privileged shitlords isn’t it?

I guess Vincent got his white person happy ending didn’t he? Vincent can get to fuck actually. He is white, AND he’s a man! The bastard!

Clara/ Hush. Go, now. Go and find Vikings on other planets. The universe is full of testosterone. Trust me, its unbearable.

River Song/ What’s that face, are you thinking? Stop it, you’re a man. It looks weird. 

Now I wouldn’t mind these remarks if they were both ways, but they aren’t. Furthermore again when you look at the rest of the show, you can see an obvious agenda behind them.

The actual stories of the Peter Capaldi era of Doctor Who (2014-2017) began to cater to what the SJWs wanted too,

Clara the Doctors female companion began to take over the show to an insane degree. Most of the stories during series 8 revolved around her and her place of work.

Also there was a lot of rewriting of the shows history and lore to make her the most important person, and Clara was also shown to emasculate the Doctor too. She even slapped him a few times.

The reason for this was because again SJWs had complained that Doctor Who was sexist simply for having a male lead. So basically until they could turn the Doctor into a woman, Steven Moffat had to undermine the male Doctor for Clara.

The Depressing Disappointing Maleness of Doctor Who

Doctor Who Feminist

To be fair there were elements of undermining the Doctor for his female companion in the Russell T Davies era (2005-10). Russell was a bit of an SJW himself, but still it reached new heights during Clara’s time on the show.

Clara was retconned into being the hero of every Doctor Who story ever made in an adventure called The Name of the Doctor, where an enemy of the Doctors, the Great Intelligence travels in time and rewrites his entire past to make every victory a defeat. Clara goes back however and undoes the Great Intelligence’s actions.

She also goes back in time in another story, meets the Doctor as a boy, and helps him overcome his fear which leads to him becoming a hero.

In yet another episode, another time travelling version of Clara is also revealed to have told him what TARDIS to steal too.

As if that wasn’t enough she was also the one who convinced the Doctor to save the Time Lords, and later convinced the Time Lords to give him more regenerations too.

Worst of all perhaps was in a story called Kill The Moon. In this adventure the Doctor discovers that the moon is about to hatch, as apparently, the moon is an egg for a giant space dragon.

The Doctor for some reason leaves Clara to deal with the dilemma of should they kill the Dragon to stop it hatching and spare humanity, or should they let it live and doom the world when broken bits of moon fall to the earth.

The entire world votes to kill the Dragon, but Clara on nothing more than a hunch spares the Dragon, and so it hatches. The moon harmlessly disintegrates, sparing the earth, after which it lays a second egg/moon (bigger than its whole body.)

Not only that, but the sight of the Dragon hatching is apparently what inspires humanity to exist to the end of time. So Clara is the most important person in the history of the universe.

You can see how the need to pander to people hurt the writing of the series.

At the end of her time on the series, Clara ended up becoming a better Doctor than the Doctor himself, as she became completely indestructable and gained her own TARDIS that she could travel the universe in.

Everything in Capaldi’s first two series was about making Clara more important than the Doctor to prove that the show wasn’t sexist, which undermined the Doctor, caused the writers to ironically make Clara unlikable, caused them to come up with ridiculous, over the top ideas to make her important, like the moon egg, shifted the focus onto her boring school, and finally the rewriting of Doctor Who’s mythology to insert Clara into it both alienated new viewers, with its continuity references, whilst also ironically pissing off the only people who got those constant continuity references too.

The makers of Doctor Who during this time also started to replace all of the male roles in the show with women.

UNIT, a military organisation designed to track aliens and monsters down, was staffed entirely by women in the Capaldi era.

Now this was of course unrealistic as the majority of soldiers are men. Personally though I didn’t mind the all female UNIT in principle, and I even liked one of the characters, Osgood played by Ingrid Oliver.

However again when you look at everything else that is happening in the show, the female UNIT sadly becomes yet another part of an agenda.

Worst of all however was when Steven Moffat brought the Doctors archenemy, the Master back as a woman.

Now The Master had been in the show since the 70s. He was a Time Lord like the Doctor who could regenerate into a different form. All of the Masters however were meant to be the same character underneath their different faces, much like the Doctor.

The Masters three main aims in the original Doctor Who series were to conquer the universe, because he believed that under his rule things would be better, to kill the Doctor his most hated enemy, and to prolong his own miserable life. (In later stories the villain loses the power to regenerate and ends up trapped in a decaying, zombie body, though he does get more regenerations later.)

Moffat however not only brought the Master back as a woman, but had the female version of the Master be in love with the Doctor and try and win him back. Missy, the female Master doesn’t try and conquer the universe like the old male Masters. Instead her plans are spent trying to win her “boyfriend” back and getting rid of women like Osgood and Clara that she sees as rivals for her man.

This was a huge comedown for the villain, and worse made a mockery of his past characterisation for the last 40 years. When you look at old stories where the Master was motivated by his hatred of the Doctor, you laugh now.

Either the Master was a repressed homosexual who couldn’t accept that he was gay for the Doctor, which led to him wanting to kill him, or worse, the Master regenerating into a woman caused him to suddenly notice how much more attractive his archfoe was before.

Are we supposed to expect that a Time Lords sexuality changes when they regenerate? How ridiculous. Does that mean then that Christopher Eccelston could have morphed into Jennifer Lawrence and then fallen in love with Mickey, Rose’s boyfriend? Or that Susan could have morphed into Russell Brand and abandoned the love of her life, David?

Also worst of all Moffat salted the earth for future writers to do something interesting with the Master. You can’t go back to writing the Master as the Master anymore after the drastic change to his and the Doctors relationship. That villain has essentially been written out of the show and replaced with another character.

See for yourself.

This is what the Master was for 40 years. He was the Doctors archfoe. He hated the Doctor more than anything else, and he wanted to rule the universe. His creators had intended for him to be Moriarty to the Doctors Holmes and that’s what he was.

However in order to pander to feminists, Steven Moffat turned the Master into this instead.

Those are just not the same characters, in fact they are the opposite to each other. Why would you bother to make Missy the Master? She could easily have been a new character.

The answer is that Moffat only made her the Master in order to set up a female Doctor to pander to feminists and SJWs who had been pushing for a female Doctor for years.

Sadly despite the failure of Missy, a female Doctor did finally happen in 2017.

Image result for Jodie Whittaker

Now a female Doctor is an idea that the overwhelming majority of Doctor Who fans hate.

It began as a joke by Tom Baker to make then producer John Nathan Turner (who he hated.) Look inept to the press.

It was never contrary to what SJWs always say, been part of the canon of the show until the early 10s when they bullied Steven Moffat into making it canon, with things like the Corsair, Missy and the General.

For the first 50 years we never saw any Time Lord change gender when regenerating. Furthermore we saw Time Lords use up all of their regenerations in many instances and not change gender. A Time Lord can only regenerate 13 times, and characters like Morbius, the Master, Azmahel and even the Doctor himself went through all 13 regenerations as the one gender.

Furthermore its been said many times that Time Lords choose how they are going to look when they regenerate.

With this in mind if they had no preference, why the fuck would they use up all of their lives as the one sex?

All Time Lords and Time Lady’s been written as male characters, and female characters. Some Time Lords have even been in romantic relationships with humans. The Doctors grand daughter Susan went off to live with David a human male, and Leela a human woman went off to live with a Time Lord male.

Their relationship is going to be awkward to say the least if Susan trips and bangs her head and turns into Brian Blessed! And don’t say that Brian Blessed is a ridiculous choice for Susan. If you support the bullshit idea of the Doctor can be absolutely anybody, and there is no template to how the Doctor should be, then okay same applies for every Time Lord character. In that case why can’t Susan regenerate into Brian Blessed?

Also not to get into the details of it, but if Time Lords have no gender, how does that work in the bedroom with a human? Finally I might add that the Master was written as a violent misogynist before in his male incarnations. How the fuck does that work if Time Lords have no concept of gender?

This whole gender bending Time Lords crap doesn’t work because its too late in Time Lords development to introduce it. No one minds a race of gender neutral aliens, but actually come up with a new race like that. At this stage, trying to rewrite it that Susan and Romana can technically regenerate into Brian Blessed and Vinnie Jones and that William Hartnell can turn into Jodie Whittaker is like trying to take a square peg and make it fit a round hole.

All of the Doctors are not meant to be different people. They are the same person whose body has simply changed. Yes his outer persona is a little bit different, but that’s explained in universe as simply being because of the shake up of regeneration, and also because living in a different body would affect your personality too. The Third Doctor for instance is more willing to fight his enemies because he is in the body of a 6 foot 3 guy with a ripped build than the Second Doctor who is in the body of a little overweight, middle aged guy.

The Doctors core personality always remains unchanged, from incarnation to incarnation. This isn’t just my interpretation. The most prominent people involved in Classic Who all said this.

Terrance Dicks the shows longest running script editor said that the single most important thing was not to change the Doctors character too much. Tom Baker the shows longest running and most popular Doctor also said the character was the most limited role he had ever played, as there were so many things he couldn’t do in the role as then he wouldn’t seem like the Doctor anymore.

The character can not change into absolutely anybody. There is a definite template to the character. Now the Doctors gender is a part of this template really by default.

He was never, until the early 2010s written as a genderless character. Even then he wasn’t actually written as a genderless character. It was just mentioned that he was.

The character of the Doctor has always been written as a man, played as a man, all of his relationships have been from a male perspective, he is recognised in popular culture as a man. To act as though he could switch gender and it would be no different is ridiculous.

I’d also argue that rewriting it to be that the Doctor can be genderless and anybody is insulting the makers of Classic Who. Its creating an idea in popular culture that the Doctor could have always been a woman, but they never did it because they were sexist. The makers of Classic Who ironically were often ahead of their time in their portrayals of female characters.

Pretty impressive for a teenager to take on an alien war machine/mini tank with a baseball bat and make it call for reinforcements!

Yet now the makers of Classic Who and its fans will forever be tarred as sexists who were too scared to have a woman as the hero, to future generations who don’t know the show and will think “oh well a female Doctor could have happened, they just didn’t do it,” when that wasn’t the case at all.

The makers and fans clearly had no problems with strong women as seen with characters like Barbara, Ace, Leela, Sarah Jane etc. I might add that there were always series starring female leads that ran concurrently to Doctor Who. The Avengers, Wonder Woman, The Survivors, Alien film series, The Bionic Woman, Xena, Buffy, Once Upon A Time, Ghost Whisperer, so its not even like a female lead would have been seen as unprofitable from a business point of view.

Its just that the makers and fans felt that that the particular character of the Doctor, who had an established history and personality, was set as a man, so it would be awkward to change that, and since there was nothing to suggest that he could turn into a woman (and plenty to contradict it.) Why bother going down that minefield? Particularly when there are so many great female heroes out there like Buffy, Xena and Ripley?

Also within the narrative of the show its going to be a difficult thing to pull off. Its not like a female Doctor is even a female character. She’s a man forced to turn into a woman against his will. She’s not a transexual character either. In fact shes the opposite. Trans people change gender because they feel they were born in the wrong body. The Doctor meanwhile apparently doesn’t care and has been changed in a flash against his will.

Having a character change gender against their will really seems kind of silly. Its like this episode of Futurama, and bogs the show down too much in gender politics as the character will obviously have to comment on those differences. Gender politics isn’t good for any series.

Jodie’s first moment as the Doctor, her gurning “Aw Bwilliant!” at her gender changing, after having been a man for 20000 years, and not feeling uncomfortable at all (apparently gender dysphoria doesn’t exist), already reminds me of this episode of Futurama, as do Missy’s cringey lines about becoming a woman being an upgrade and the Generals about all men being egotists.

Funny how even though Time Lords are supposedly gender neutral we haven’t seen ANY female Time Lords regenerating into men and preferring it? What about Susan, the Doctors grand daughter? Or The Rani a female adversary of the Doctor, or Romana.

When its all the one way, you can’t help but feel there is an agenda here.

I might add that even from the point of view of “I need muh representation” a female Doctor is a terrible idea.

I personally think the need for representation is a lot of self indulgent, narcissistic tripe, but more on that later.

Still if you do think it matters why on earth would you be for a female Doctor? Its not going to do anything for female representation to start with. The character of the Doctor is a man. There have been 13 versions of him as a man, he’s known around the entire world as a man, the longest running and most popular versions of him are men, Tom Baker, Jon Pertwee, David Tennant etc.

One female version after that is not going to cause people to always view him as a female character.

Furthermore by making out that a female Doctor is a milestone you are actually at this stage harming female representation. Jodie Whitaker recently gave an interview where she went on about how groundbreaking she was, simply for being a female lead in a television series. So then Charmed, Xena, Buffy, Once Upon A Time, Nikita, Alias, Dark Angel, Charlies Angels, Wonder Woman, Ghost Whisperer, Star Trek Voyager, Ab Fab, etc were all meaningless.

Its Nice To Be A Milestone, But People Need To Grow Up

Apparently they were according to Jodie. Apparently, all of these original, iconic female characters, mean nothing compared to a male character being turned into a woman? The only way a woman can be iconic is if she was once a he?

Its a terrible message to young women, and at the same time its not giving them a hero of their own.

It would have been better if the makers of Doctor Who had brought back any of the three Time Lady characters from the shows past, Romana the Doctors old companion, Jenny his daughter, or even Susan his grand daughter, made them  popular with new viewers and then given them their own spin off series.

The SJWs didn’t want an original female character however, because they wanted to A/ spite male viewers whom they despise, and B/ impose their agenda on as many people as possible by taking over a beloved character.

Sadly however the SJWs, even though they couldn’t supply one reason for a female Doctor, won and worse they were vicious bullies to those who weren’t happy about the decision including former Doctor Peter Davison, who they eventually chased off of twitter.

Peter Davison Quits Twitter Over Toxicity of Doctor Who Fandom

Finally as if this wasn’t enough, the conventions and the shows fandom have also been completely taken over for the SJWs agendas.

Here’s a Doctor Who convention from the 90s.

Related image

Here is one from this year.

It might as well be a feminist convention now. If you were to show someone the first picture they’d obviously know it was Doctor Who related as there is a Dalek and the TARDIS there, but the second? What the hell does it actually have to do with Doctor Who at all!

Even if you were actually at a convention you’d probably be unaware that it was about Doctor Who.

See here.

A Wonderful MeTooMoment Unfolded At Gallifrey One

Rachel Talalay on MeToo At Gallifrey One

Its hilarious that Rachel Talalay even says in the above article that at the entire panel, there was only ONE short story about Doctor Who.

You might think “well MeToo is more important than a silly sci fi show” but the point is, it was a convention designed to celebrate that silly sci fi show! It would be like if I took over the Buffy fandom and insisted that Buffy conventions all be about Scottish Independence, and that anyone who just wanted to talk about Buffy, was an anti Scots bigot.

Doctor Who is not long for this world. Its viewing figures have decreased every single year since 2014, when the SJW pandering really took hold. Matt Smith’s final episode was seen by over ten million viewers. During the latest Peter Capaldi series, the shows viewers sunk to barely over 2 million at one point. Literally the lowest in the shows entire 50 plus year history.

Doctor Who Ratings Fall To Record Lows

Doctor Who Lowest Ratings

Whovian Feminism and her fellow SJWs have done far more harm to the show than even Mary Whitehouse. They’ve dragged it to literally the lowest point in its history.

And it is solely them, make no mistake. Nobody else wanted a female Doctor. The general public as you can see above, switched off in droves at things like Missy, all the anti men remarks, Clara taking over the show.

The fans have also not only always been historically opposed to a female Doctor, but made it clear just before Jodie was cast that they still didn’t want a female Doctor either.

Woman Do Not Want A Female Doctor

Most Fans Against A Female Doctor

Yet even with all of this the producers still pandered to the Whovian Feminism crowd?

Its quite fascinating in a way. The vast majority who loved Hinchcliffs darker, edgier take on Doctor Who, and who switched off in droves at Steven Moffat’s SJW friendly version, clearly didn’t matter as much to the makers of the show as the tiny, complaining audience of Mary Whitehouse and Whovian Feminism.

Why would anyone who wanted their show to succeed do that? Simple because the Whovian Feminism and Mary Whitehouse minority were bullies who would stop at nothing to get what they wanted.

They made themselves appear as the majority, and also slandered the makers of the show as well. The key is not to ever give in to these people. Mary Whitehouse and Whovian Feminism should have both been told to fuck off. They were spoiled brats used to getting their own way, whose ideas for making the show better were utter crap.

I might add that a lot of the SJWs much like Mary Whitehouse don’t even like Doctor Who. Whovian Feminism claims to be a fan, but truth be told she hasn’t seen that much of the show. She hadn’t even seen any stories featuring Colin Baker, the 6th Doctor until 2015.

Joss Whedon meanwhile who openly mocked those who don’t want a female Doctor, ironically said he hated Doctor Who growing up and openly ridiculed the show too.

See here.

Joss Whedon says he thought Doctor Who was cheesy

Joss Whedon on Female Doctor Who

Why the hell does this guy care about who plays the Doctor with this in mind? He according to his own biography, watched one episode and thought it looked shit!

PS its also ironic that Joss would try and whittle down the only differences between men and women to genitals. By that logic, Blaire White shouldn’t be called a woman, as hey she still has a penis. Same applies to an intersex woman who has a penis too. I guess Joss sees her as a man?

The reason Joss and Mary Whitehouse despite having 0 interest in Doctor Who still want it to fit their vision, is because they are such intolerant people, they literally can’t stand something that doesn’t espouse their views even existing!

Doctor Who isn’t the only sci fi franchise the SJWs have influenced. They seem to have their talons locked around the sci fi and fantasy genres like no other.

The irony is that the sci fi and fantasy genres have often been among the most progressive. Its had plenty of strong black characters like Blade, dozens of strong female characters like Xena, Buffy, Charmed Ones, Wonder Woman, Bionic Woman, and plenty of LGBT characters like Xena, Buffy, Willow, Captain Jack.

In fact the sci fi and fantasy genres have often been ahead of the curve in terms of representation, with things like Star Trek the original series featuring the first ever interracial kiss in an American drama series, and being praised by none other than Martin Luther King who called it important to the civil rights movement.

You won’t find anywhere near as many female, black or LGBT heroes in other genres like spy espionage, crime thriller or westerns. Yet feminists don’t target them?

That’s because like all bullies, SJWs and feminists are pitiful cowards. As I said earlier people like Anita Sarkeesian and Whovian Feminism want to be seen as champions for female empowerment, but they are too scared to go after the single biggest cause of inequality for women in the world today, Islam.

They aren’t going to want to go through what someone like Tommy Robinson does in trying to bring attention to girls like Chelsea Wright who have been raped. They aren’t even going to want to go through what someone like Pat Condell who gets called a racist goes through.

So they pick a target that is completely benign and smear it as sexist, so they can appear to be “fighting the good fight”, and get all the credit for that whilst not doing a bloody thing to help any women.

Sci fi and fantasy are easy genres to bully because their fans are often nerds with low self esteem, and furthermore, sci fi fans in contrast to say western fans won’t want to stand up for their love of the genre quite so passionately, because its looked down on.

Fans of sci fi and fantasy are often seen as sad gits by the media after all, so people like Will Wheaton will not only not want to stand up for their favourite franchises, but may even bully those who do, to show that they are not sad gits whose lives revolve around Doctor Who and Star Trek.

Still even among sci fi franchises Doctor Who has been hit the absolute worst and sadly its turned from a show that was once a global phenomenon, to a show that most people probably aren’t even aware is still on.

Video Games

Image result for anita sarkeesian

Video games are probably the SJWs favourite whipping boy after Doctor Who. Fortunately unlike a lot of other spineless fandoms, gamers have stood up to both right wing and left wing SJWs that tried to take over their industry. (As a result they were tarred as Nazis by the mainstream media, during the whole Gamer Gate fiasco.)

Still I’m proud of video game fans for being about the only group who did stand up to these puritanical bullies.

Video games like many other popular forms of entertainment were derided by right wing SJWs for apparently corrupting the youth of today and encouraging violence.

The most famous example of this was Jack Thompson, who led a decades long campaign to get video games banned for encouraging violence.

His arguments have been debunked time and time again. Studies have shown that there is absolutely no link between playing violent video games and being violent in real life.

Long Term Study Shows No Link Between Violence And Video Games

Yet in spite of this Thompson would continue to trot out the same arguments, never offering any counter claims, and would play the victim by going on about all the death threats he had received from video game fans.

I don’t doubt that Thompson did receive some death threats. That doesn’t prove that video game fans by and large are violent psychopaths however. There are loonies in any group, including feminists.

Look at the death threats Thunderf00t received for speaking out against feminism.

Does that prove that feminists are all psychopaths?

Thompson resorted to these tactics because he couldn’t debunk the gamers arguments against him.

Fortunately in the long run Thompson lost, but he was ultimately replaced by Anita Sarkeesian.

Sarkeesian who was obviously the epitome of a left wing SJW, said she felt that video games were corrupting the youth of today by making them sexist.

Sarkeesian had 0 proof of this and her arguments such as that there are no strong roles for women in video games, or the gaming community is misogynistic overall, were easily debunked.

Of course just like Thompson, rather than try and respond to these reasoned arguments. Sarkeesian went down the pity route by making out that all of her critics were just people sending her death threats.

The great irony was that many of the same liberals who mocked Thompson as being an old fashioned conservative kill joy, were lining up to white knight for Anita Sarkeesian.

Of course the same was true of Doctor Who as well. As much of an influence as she had over the series, at the very least the media and all Doctor Who fans hated Mary Whitehouse and the influence she had on the show, whilst with Whovian Feminism and the people who smeared Moffat as promoting sexual assault, the media were completely on their side.

This video from Chris Ray Gun (one of my favourite youtubers along with ShoeOnHead, Barbara 4U2C and Blaire White) did on the liberals hypocrisy as well as how SJWs are able to take things over is great.

It doesn’t mention Doctor Who, but it does cover how SJWs took over and sunk the New Atheist Movement too. Chris probably won’t appreciate this video being shared however as since he made it, he and Laci Green, who is among the feminists he includes that sunk the Atheist movement, are now dating! Still its a good video anyway.

When you’re part of a tribe you don’t really have any principles or actual beliefs. If your tribe says something you had previously attacked another tribe for, like saying that video games influence people to do bad things, then you’ll be for it.

Comic Books

Image result for comics code authority

Related image

Comic Books have had a long and difficult history with SJWs.

Initially it was the right who tried to censor comics, and even outright ban them. Just like Jack Thompson with video games, and Mary Whitehouse with Doctor Who, many right wing activists saw comic books as being a threat to our values because they were too violent and demanded that their content change and that in some cases they even be banned.

Of course like all whiny, narcissistic, intolerant bullies they got their way, despite not representing the majority viewpoint by constantly attacking comic books in all forms of media they could.

The result of this was several horror comics being banned in the UK, and restrictions being imposed on what Comic Book creators could write about.

The Comics Code Authority was eventually established in the 50s to give Comic Book creators a chance to have a greater freedom, but it sadly ended up leading to even greater censorship.

By the late 50s, the CCA had almost sunk the industry, with almost 75 percent of the industry having gone out of business in 1954.

5 Memorable Moments of Comic Book Censorship

The CCA had a very right wing slant and for decades it prevented there from being stories about things that they thought would corrupt the youth. Sadly as a result of this, there were no LGBT characters in comic books for decades.

How The Code Authority Kept LGBT People Out Of Comic Books

CCA vs LGBT People: Battle of the Century!

Fortunately the CCA’s influence began to die down and comic book writers and creators began to experience more freedom, and could tell the stories they WANTED to tell.

Sadly however just like with Doctor Who and Video Games, left wing bullies would start to take the place of the right wing censors.

Nowadays every comic has to basically be approved by the SJWs first. If not much like with Steven Moffat and video games they’ll tar it as racist, homophobic, and sexist.

Now you might be thinking “well all the SJWs want is more women, LGBT, and black characters so what’s wrong with that?”

Obviously the overwhelming majority of comic book fans don’t have a problem with non white, non straight, and non male characters. As I have said before the sci fi, and comic book fandoms were often among the most progressive in terms of representation.

An SJW comic however is totally different to one that simply has a leading black character like Blade or X-Men.

An SJW comic, or tv show first of all will have negative comments directed towards white men in general, and white men will often be depicted in a negative way because they’re white and men.

Also the female and LGBT and black characters will have to constantly remind us of how they are black, female and LGBT in the most obnoxious way, that’s basically the writer telling the audience “I’m going to teach you plebs watching/reading at home that minorities and women are people too.”

Take a look at Red Dwarf, or Blade. They both feature black leads, but its not mentioned in either case as it shouldn’t be. As a result no one even noticed that they had black leads. When do you ever see Red Dwarf, which is actually the second longest running sci fi show in the UK after Doctor Who, get hailed as this big progressive series? Its main love story between Lister and Kochanski is an interracial one. In fact half of the cast is black! Yet no one noticed!

Compare that to the ridiculous bullshit there has been around the Black Panther movie where people have been told that they shouldn’t be allowed to watch it.

I’m not joking see here.

Image result for white people shouldn't be allowed to see black panther


Image result for black panther representation tweets

I think this is proof that the SJWs have done far more harm for representation than good. In the 90s we got stuff like this.

And nobody gave a shit. Nobody even noticed! Yet here we are in an age where you can’t have a film with a black lead without all of this ridiculous race baiting shit being propped up by those on the left who ironically claim to be fighting racism?

Anita Sarkeesian even said in a recent episode of her Feminist Frequency Radio series (which listening to is a truly stomach churning experience.) That she was angry that there were any sympathetic white characters in Black Panther.

Also the SJWs want to change and even outright replace existing characters just to suit their agenda. Wolverine, Iron Man and Thor have all been replaced with new female characters who have taken up the mantle.

Comic book fans obviously are never happy when their favourite character is written out and replaced with somebody else. Regardless of whether that someone is a white man or not. When Damian Wayne for instance took over from Bruce Wayne as Batman there was fan outrage.

However you didn’t get called a bigot for not wanting Damian Wayne to replace Bruce Wayne the same way you get called a bigot for not wanting a new character, who happens to be a black woman, to take over as Iron Man instead of Tony Stark.

Added to that other characters sexualities have suddenly been changed too.

Whilst no one has a problem with a gay character obviously people don’t like their favourite characters, (whose story that they have followed for years) suddenly being changed in a big way for no reason, and in a way that completely contradicts their established history.

And yes that applies all ways. I for instance wouldn’t want an LGBT character to suddenly say that they aren’t LGBT. Like take Captain Jack Harkness for instance. A big part of his character is that he is bisexual. Imagine if I suddenly came in and rewrote it so that he was actually always asexual and that his previous bisexual tendencies were just complete lies that he made up because?

Retcons to characters histories can sometimes work, but they need to be taken on a case by case basis. You need to take into account how big of a contradiction it is, whether the audience can accept it, and whether it changes the character beyond all recognition, and how good of a story it is.

The SJWs however never want to look at anything in a nuanced way. They just trample over other people’s characters with their size 12s and demand that all characters regardless of their history and characterisation be changed to their liking, and if you don’t like THEIR ideas for other people’s characters you are a sexist, racist, or a homophobe.

There is nothing to stop these people from going out there and creating their own characters. If they are great, then people will love them just like they did Blade, Xena and Buffy.

I acknowledge that this might be harder with DC and Marvel. Not because their fans are racists or sexists, but because its hard to introduce any new character to Marvel and DC that is going to be as popular as the classics like Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, or even the likes of The Flash. As these characters were created in the 30s and 50s and 60s then obviously the bulk of them will be men.

Still that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try if you really are so desperate. After all Wolverine was created much later than most of the X-Men and he is now the most popular.

I think it is also somewhat harder to have a woman occupy all of the same roles a man can in a sci fi and fantasy adventure, not because women are less believable as the hero, or people have problems with a woman being the hero. TBH I think most nerdy comic book guys prefer female heroes to male heroes.

The problem is however that a hero has to obviously get tortured, beaten up, even regularly killed in order for their adventures to be exciting.

Being a hero can be tough sometimes.

I don’t think people are as willing to suspend disbelief and enjoy watching a female hero get tortured, beaten up or killed as much as they would with a male hero.

I’m not saying that’s right of course. A large part of why I always thought Xena the Warrior Princess was so good for women in the genre (aside from just being a great show.) Was because it didn’t hold back in terms of what its female characters, both heroic and villainous went through. Xena got beaten up, tortured, crippled just as much as Batman would, her female enemies like Callisto and Alti got killed in horrific ways like being blown up, impaled, submerged in quicksand the same way any male villain would.

Sadly however I don’t think as many writers and directors are as willing to show women go through it as much, which is why there are fewer roles for women overall, not just heroic roles. Obviously a villain has to get beaten up and killed, men also make up the henchman the hero kills, his sidekicks and the victims too. Look at the Jurassic Park film series for instance. It has far more male characters than female, but that’s because most of its male characters get killed by Dinosaurs. So far only ONE woman has been killed on screen in all 4 Jurassic Park films.

Feminists certainly aren’t making it easier for comic book writers to give women more interesting roles as they complain every time anything even remotely violent happens to a female character as being an example of how misogynistic the writer is, inspiring the young men who read it to go out and kill young women etc.

Fox Apologises For X-Men Poster

DC Comics Forced To Pull Batgirl Poster

With this in mind how are writers supposed to make stories about female characters as exciting as those about male character? Wolverine can be impaled with a massive steal girder and thrown half way across the city and drowned. Mystique in comparison can’t even be grabbed by the throat without it being some kind of violent sexist agenda against women.

If anything feminists are actually standing in the way of women being able to occupy all of the same roles that men are. Much like the CCA before them, they are attempting to police what types of stories people are allowed to tell.

Also much like the CCA, the feminists and SJWs don’t actually care about the quality of the stories, just in A/ pushing their agenda to as many people and B/ making sure that everything, even something they have 0 interest in, behaves in what they believe to be the “correct” way.

The proof of that is the fact that all of these people who are desperate for a female Doctor Who, a female Thor, a female Iron Man etc, always go on about how representation is important, and growing up they just desperately wanted to see a character who was gay/black/a woman etc. Are the people who are most likely to NEVER watch or read anything starring female/black/LGBT heroes.

Look at Claudia Boleyn, a popular youtuber who always goes on about how she wants to see more female heroes, LGBT heroes like her. All of the shows she watches, and talks about star men like Doctor Who, Supernatural, Merlin etc. Furthermore there are actually female counterparts to every single one of her favourite shows.

Merlin, a pseudo historical fantasy series, that is not only completely historically inaccurate, but revels in its inaccuracies in humorous ways and blends hard, gritty drama with the most over the top, broad, camp humour.

The same is also true of Xena the Warrior Princess which stars two bisexual women as the leads, yet Claudia NEVER even comments on Xena? PS Xena was even cited by the makers of Merlin as one of their biggest influences!

Then there is Supernatural, another of Claudia’s favourite series about two brothers who battle Demons and come from a long line of people who battle Demons. The youngest of them however falls in love with a Demon who wavers between good and evil, who the elder sibling despises, and who he is eventually forced to kill. The elder sibling meanwhile develops a really close relationship with a Celestial being.

What about Charmed however? A series about three sisters who battle Demons and who come from a long line of Demon hunters. The youngest of the Charmed sisters also falls for a Demon, that the other two despise, and who wavers between good and evil, before they have to kill him for good, whilst the older one develops a relationship with a celestial being.

Then there is Class the awful Doctor Who Spin off Claudia likes, which revolves around a school where there is a rip in time and space that allows monsters to come through. A group of misfit students have to cover up the rip and save the world. Oh and one of them is a blonde, who used to be an enemy of the main character, but got something stuck in their head which stops them from even hurting someone anybody, and they always whine about how they want to get this out of their head.

Gee where have I head that before? Oh that’s right. Buffy the Vampire Slayer, one of the most celebrated genre series of all time, which stars a female hero, and has a lesbian woman as the most powerful character in the universe, but which Claudia has also never commented on.

With this in mind I can’t exactly take her claims for wanting to see someone like her seriously. There are existing alternatives to series she already adores, that star female heroes, yet she shows non interest in them.

Whovian Feminism is another one who ironically NEVER talks about female led series. Seriously why the fuck does she talk about Doctor Who if she is interested in female led shows?

It would be like if I went on about wanting to explore themes of Scottish independence and nationalism in film and television, and then only ever looked at say Xena, and whined because it wasn’t about that?

Look at the blog, youtube channel of anyone who goes on about representation, from angry feminists like Whovian Feminism to white knights like Mr Tardis Reviews and you will be lucky if they are a fan of even one female led series.

Most of the people in the industry who go on about representation meanwhile are posers like Neil Gaiman and J J Abrams who want to make themselves look better. People like Gene Roddenberry (creator of Star Trek), Frank Hampson (creator of Dan Dare) and Terry Nation (creator of the Daleks) all still receive praise for how progressive their stories were in the 60s and 70s and rightfully so.

They did combat the genuine racism and sexism around them, but again in the modern world, its not edgy or a big deal to have a black or female leading character. So people like Gaiman and Abrams have to try and make out that it is so they can basque in the praise from ignorant SJWs who don’t know any better.

Neil Gaiman On Buffy

Thank you Neil for telling a sexist pleb like me that women are people too! Representation is yet another way for cowards like Anita Sarkeesian and Neil Gaiman to make themselves look like social justice champions, without doing a thing to help women or minorities.

Of course much like Doctor Who, Comic Books sales have begun to sink as a result of pandering to these people.

Comic Book Sales Tanking

Retailers Complain About Collapsing DC and Marvel Sales

The fact that Doctor Who and comic books have nose dived as a result of pandering to these people whilst video games whose fans fought back have remained strong shows why you need to stand up to these bullies.

Yes you will get tarred as bigots like the gamer gators were, but at the end of the day the thing you love will be saved.

I think comic book geeks and Doctor Who fans biggest problem however was in not seeing that the feminists and the SJWs were no different to the likes of the CCA and Mary Whitehouse.

Video game fans saw right away that Anita Sarkeesian was no different to Jack Thompson. All she had done was replace the idea that games are making people violent with games are making people sexist.

With comic book fans a lot of them however I think foolishly came to think that this representation crap was important, because it had been in the 60s, and came to see the feminists as being like the people who fought against the CCA in the 60s and the 70s.

Ironically they had no idea that they were now becoming the new CCA, as they were supporting people who wanted to limit and control what types of stories people could tell like the CCA, and were actually bigots just like the CCA, except rather than against homosexuals, they are bigoted against white people.


Image result for John Cleese political correctness

Much like Doctor Who, video games, and comic books, comedy is something that has historically been limited and censored by right wing SJWs, but in the last few decades its really more the left wing SJWs that have begun to censor comedy.

It was always the conservative Christians that wanted to get outrageous comics they found offensive banned.

Probably the most notorious example of this was the banning of Life of Brian in certain areas of the UK, including Glasgow, as well as the constant attacks on it from the right wing media for supposedly mocking Jesus (which missed the whole point of the movie.)

See here. City Lifts Ban on Life Of Brian

Then of course there was also Terry Rakolta’s famous campaign against classic American 90s comedy Married With Children.

Rakolta was basically the American counterpart to Mary Whitehouse. She was a conservative woman who founded the organisation known as Americans For Responsible Television. Her favourite target was Married With Children which she believed to be obscene.

The campaign she launched against the show caused many of the shows sponsors to pull out. It was also moved to a late slot at her urging, and the content of the show had to be toned down after a public boycott she launched against the series.

Terry Rakolta, The Bitch Who Tried To Get Married With Children Off The Air

Nowadays of course comedy series have to regulated from a more feminist/left wing perspective or outright banned.

So many prominent comedians from Jerry Seinfeld to John Cleese to Stephen Merchant have mentioned how their comedy would not work today because of left wing censors.

Stephen Merchant Says BBC Would Be Too Scared Of Liberal Left To Make The Office

Then of course there are the SJWs recent attacks on Friends of all shows.

Why Friends Is Actually A Super Problematic Show

The One With The Homophobia

Friends is the lightest, most feel good, non offensive comedy imaginable. That was why it had such a mass appeal. It was really good escapism, its main characters though obviously flawed, where basically nice, likable people.

Yet the SJWs are such delicate little snowflakes that they can’t even cope with Friends? How the fuck are they going to cope with genuinely dark comedies like Seinfeld, Bottom, The Young Ones, any iteration of Blackadder, South Park etc?

I honestly never thought that I would see a time when Friends of all shows was the outrageous one! I think with this the left wing SJWs have outdone the right wing SJWs.

But hey who needs Friends, Married With Children and Seinfeld when you have this type of comedy from SJWs.

To be fair a lot of this stuff is funny, but not in the way they had hoped.

I could list may other examples of forms of entertainment that have been taken over, sunk or otherwise limited by these crybullies, but you probably get the point.

The important things to learn here are.

1/ That it makes no difference between left and right. All that matters is whichever one is in power. They’ll both try and take over every aspect of your life, and they are both such intolerant fanatics that they can’t stand any thing that doesn’t agree with them, or espouse their views even existing. Even if its something they have no interest in, or have outright contempt for (like Joss Whedon and Doctor Who.) It doesn’t matter. They’ll still demand that it goes their way and tell people who do love it that they are the intolerant bigots.

2/ That it doesn’t matter whether they are an extreme minority. They ALWAYS get their way, because they are willing to play dirty tricks like smearing a man’s reputation as seen with Steven Moffat.

3/ You should NEVER give in to these people. Not only is what they want often to the detriment of whatever it is they are taking over (because they don’t actually care about it, only in pushing their agenda.) But they also want to take it all over. Like with Doctor Who, it wasn’t even just a female Doctor, they had to have the male Doctor be emasculated, a female Master, an all female UNIT, anti men jokes etc.

4/ They hilariously will often complain about the other side, without realising that they are exactly the same, as seen with the liberals who rightfully criticised Jack Thompson but later went on to white knight for Anita Sarkeesian, or the “edgy” comedians who spent years attacking Mary Whitehouse for being censorious yet now stick up for feminists attempts to police all forms of entertainment from sci fi series to comedy.

5/ If you see this happening to any form of entertainment, call it out. I think that there has been a problem where people won’t comment on it if its not something they like being affected.

Take a look at Doctor Who. Many of the people who defended video games from feminists and SJWs either didn’t care when Doctor Who was taken over in exactly the same way, or were even apologists for it!

ShoeOnHead for instance said that there was no problem with the Doctor having a female body, whilst centrist Youtuber Top Hats and Champagne said that a female Doctor was a good idea. Of course both admitted that they have never even watched a second of Doctor Who.

So with this in mind why comment on it? They both have no idea that the Doctor does have a consistent character and that it is jarring to suddenly change it in such a huge way, or that it only happened because of a calculated smear campaign against the show, its makers and fans.

Just a little bit of research would have shown them that Doctor Who is in the same boat as video games (both of which they admirably stood up for), and that if it gets taken over, then that’s a huge victory for SJWs. Far bigger than them taking over the Atheist Movement, which Shoe commented on many times.

Doctor Who is arguably the most influential British television series of all time. It has a history of over 50 years and is seen in over 150 countries by over 160 million people, yet these bullies were actually able to completely take everything about it over, from its lore (gender neutral Time Lords), to its casting choices (Jodie Whittaker, Michelle Gomez) to its story arcs (Clara being retconed to being the most important person in its history,) to its fandom (like a Doctor Who Convention that only mentions DOCTOR WHO once, because the rest of the time they are talking about feminism and MeToo.)

If the SJWs can take over Doctor Who in such a drastic way, then really no television series is safe, and once they have a monopoly on tv, then other forms of entertainment are in danger, and from there other areas of popular culture, and media too.

Fair enough Shoe and Top Hats are not Who fans, but again a little research before they commented on it wouldn’t have killed them. I’m not the biggest gamer either, but I still comment on what the feminists are doing to video games because I can recognise it is another form of entertainment that is going through what Doctor Who is right now. It would be ridiculous of me to say that what Anita says about video games is just fine, but then criticise Whovian Feminism, when both are exactly the fucking same.

I still like Shoe of course, but I was a little disappointed in her with this, and really it reminds me of that old saying “I didn’t stick up for them when they came after so and so, but then when they came after me there was no one left.

Always call this shit out. Even if its a show you don’t like, even if its your side that is now doing what you always criticised the other side for doing. Call it out for the sake of free speech, and writers, artists, directors and actors basic right to tell the types of stories they want to.

9/ They Both Like Fake News

Image result for you are fake news

He’s talking to both his supporters and critics.

Both sides will distort the facts to suit their own agendas whilst hilariously trying to take the moral high ground against the other.

As the left currently has the media backing, its fake news is obviously a lot more dangerous and noticable.

CNN have been caught lying about so many things, from editing a black woman calling for violence to make it look as though she is objecting to it, to their hilarious in hindsight polls about Clinton having 90 percent of the vote over Trump.

CNN Apologies For Editing Clip

CNN edits Trump Video on Japan

Then of course there is the leftist media’s disgusting attempts to smear individuals they don’t like such as Tommy Robinson as white nationalists and racists.

The lefts most recent attempts to slander Tommy Robinson, attempt to paint him as being in contact with the terrorist behind the Finsbury Mosque attack. See here.

As you can see this isn’t just a lack of research. This is outright lying. Editing clips, trying to connect Tommy to criminals and fanatics that ironically hate him in real life.

Whilst many on the right such as Paul Joseph Watson have rightfully called out the leftist media on their bias, they too have been guilty of peddling lies and mistruths to promote their own agendas

Paul Joseph Watson famously tweeted a parody photo of Antifa (who for the record I despise too.) Holdin a NAMBLA sign. NAMBLA are an infamous pedophile organisation.

When it was later pointed out to Paul that it was a hoax, he actually said “Does it matter if its a false flag or not, given how funny it is?”

Sargon of Akkad is no better. He regularly refers to Hugo Chavez as a dictator. Whilst Chavez was far from perfect, he was most certainly not a dictator.

Jimmy Carter Calls Hugo Chavez Election The Most Fair He Has Ever Seen

Added to that Sargon always leaves out the devastating effect the US has had on Venezuela, because it doesn’t suit his narrative that its all to do with socialism.

US is tearing Venezeula apart

Now I am not saying that this is the whole reason that Venezeula is failing, but it is a valid idea that Sargon completely overlooks. Similarly in his Castro video Sargon cites a picture on Google image as proof that Cuba’s hospitals were all shit. He has no idea where this photo came from or who made it, he literally just said he put Cuban hospital into Google image.

Seriously Sargon? Google image is your source? I can find pictures of Amy Winehouse and Elvis Presley sitting together on Google image.

Image result for Amy Winehouse Elvis Presley

So by Sargon’s logic then Amy and Elvis must have had an affair? I mean hey I got this on Google images after all?

In some ways this compulsive lying ties right into the left and the right’s contempt for the working class. They think that they are idiots, the great unwashed who are so thick they will believe anything they are told. Fortunately however people are waking up to their lies.

10/ They Think That People Can Change Their Sexuality

Image result for Riley Dennis

We all know how the right for years believed that homosexuality was a sign of degeneracy, and tried to “cure” homosexuality through electro conversion therapy or the notorious “Pray the Gay Away”.

Pray The Gay Away

Now obviously its not reached the same extent, but we have incredibly enough, started to a similar attitude from the left of people being attacked for their sexual preferences. Many on the left such as Dennis O’Reilly have called straight men who don’t want to sleep with trans women bigoted.

Now personally I find trans women like Blaire White attractive, however I can understand why a straight man might not want to sleep with a trans woman, as most of them still have male genitals.

Sadly however the left believe that sexual preferences are bigoted if they are straight, and think a straight man should just change his sexual preferences right away.

Blaire White did a great video on the subject here, and even commented on how ironic it was that the left are now trying to police people’s sexual preferences.


Don’t end up like this guy.

Tribalism is the biggest enemy to true progress. We are all supsceptible to it in many areas of life, even if its just what band, football team or tv fandom we are a part of.

Still when it creeps its way into politics then it leads to the current brand of right wing and left wing identity politics that is causing severe problems for both actual left wing and right wing politics.

I feel that this tribalism is being promoted by the people at the top to keep those who could make a positive change fighting among themselves.

George Soros for instance funds things like Black Lives Matter and the 2017 Women’s March. Why do you think billionaire and former Nazi collaborator George Soros supports these movements? Out of the goodness of his heart?

No its because it splinters left wing politics. Rather than work together as a united front, people are instead fighting each other over the most stupid differences, whilst ironically thinking they are fighting for equality.

Women are telling men that they have male privilege, black people hate white people for their supposed white privilege, even among the LGBT community there are divisions.

Identity politics has such a stranglehold on the left that some leftists have actually said that a millionaire who is black is still not as privileged as a white person who is homeless, whilst gay men are viewed as not suffering persecution if they are white, as well as racists because they are white.

NUS Tells LGBT Societies To Abolish Gay Rights Because They Don’t Suffer Persecution

White Students Are Told They Are Born Racist

Added to that because the majority of the critics of capitalism are also wrapped up in rubbish identity politics, I feel more left of centre people are drawn to the right as a result.

Sargon of Akkad is a classic example of this. I don’t think Sargon is a bad guy personally at all, and I used to really like a lot of his videos. I also above all else still respect him for giving people like Tommy Robinson a platform when so few others were willing too.

Sargon also believe it or not used to even say that he was quite a socialist in some ways and he supported a socialised health service and welfare state. He also used to criticise capitalism regularly and even supported Bernie Sanders before he was torpedoed by Hillary. (Though I agree with more of Sanders policies than Trump, I think Sanders still revelled in identity politics too, such as his bullshit comments like “white people don’t know what its like to be poor.”)

Still Sargon I think ended up becoming a right wing SJW because he grew so disgusted with the left and its racism against white people and Islam apologism, that he completely turned towards the right.

Watch any of his recent videos and I’d wager he can’t go 5 minutes without ranting about how much he hates socialists. Then there is his wish to see the Tory party saved, and his ridiculous apologism for capitalism to the point where he outright said furiously that its not causing any problems around the world.

Really Sargon?

5th Of United Kingdom Population Live In Poverty

Child Poverty In Britain Set To Soar To New High

Effects of Agent Orange On Vietnam

What We Lost: 10 Ways The Iraq War Harmed The US

10 Years Later: Death, Disease, Destruction: The Legacy of The Iraq War

The Human Cost Of The War In Iraq

Obama The Butcherer Of Women And Children

Death Toll Of Capitalism

(Note: I don’t agree with all of these figures in the last article, but there is a lot of other interesting bits of information here. The author includes World War 2 as a war caused by capitalism for instance which I absolutely do not agree with. Nazism was a political spectrum beyond either left and right. Still saying the Nazis evil came from capitalism is no more ridiculous than saying that there were communists or socialists which Sargon and other right wingers have done.)

Sargon ignores all of this however and only focuses on socialism’s faults to the point where having once defended socialised health care and welfare, he now has a hatred of all socialists that’s quite frankly comparable to SJWs demonisation of right wingers.

In despising one tribe, Sargon has become part of another. He might refer to himself as a classical liberal, but he is a total right winger now.

The best thing you can do so you don’t end up like Sargon is not think that because you agree with the left or the right on one big issue, that means you have to agree with everything they say.

Political policies should be looked on in a purely practical way, and that’s why I personally favour a mixed economy that takes aspects from both socialism and capitalism.

I’m not saying a mixed economy is perfect as no system is. Human beings aren’t perfect so I doubt we could ever invent a perfect ideology.

12 Pros and Cons Of A Mixed Economy

However a mixed economy can overcome many of the problems inherent in socialism and capitalism and I feel it has a better success rate at getting countries out of poverty.

Take a look at the United Kingdom for instance. We leaned more towards a mixed economy after World War 2 with the introduction of the NHS and the nationalisation of coal, gas and electricity.

Clement Attlee: Our Greatest Post War Prime Minister

It would be wrong to say that Attlee made Britain into a total socialist state however. He still kept certain aspects of a capitalist economy for the United Kingdom and for the next 30 or so years our economy flourished as we continued to function under a mixed economy.

Later when we switched to more of a capitalist economy in the late 70s under Thatcher, then poverty and unemployment increased dramatically. Yes its true we still have the NHS, but Thatcher as well as the current Tory government have done everything they can to attack and undermine the NHS to the point where it is sadly on its last legs, as more Doctors are turning to private practice due to a lack of money and support for the NHS.

Lack of Funding For The NHS

As soon as the NHS, the last semblance of our former mixed economy is dismantled by the current right wing government, then the poorest in this country will suffer even more.

China meanwhile is another example of a mixed economy being a success in terms of lifting people out of poverty. Now don’t get me wrong, I am not saying for one second that that justifies China’s human rights abuses or its censorship, or that the people who have suffered as a result deserved it.

China demonstrates that a mixed economy can still be open to becoming fascist.

The battle for free speech is separate to which economy you think works best, or equal rights for men and women and all ethnic minorities, and for LGBT people too.

This is why you must always fight for freedom of speech regardless of whether you are left or right, and not fall into a “its okay if the people I don’t like are shut down by McCarthy because they are communists, or if they are shut down by feminists because they are sexist.”

Still whilst I am not going to defend the police state in China, at the same time it cannot be denied that the mixed economy has been a success in terms of getting the general population out of poverty.

China Lifts 68 Million People Out Of Poverty In 5 Years

China Lifts 800 Million Out Of Poverty Since 1999

China Lifts 13 Million Out Of Poverty Each Year

All the while our more capitalist economy is floundering and Venezuela is suffering terrible poverty.

Ultimately I think we should eventually move towards a socialist economy, but I don’t think that should be for some time yet (even Sargon has said that he thinks socialism will work, but not for possibly centuries.)

However I don’t think we should stay in a strict capitalist economy. It is demonstrably failing in the UK alone and has been since the 1980s.

A mixed economy is the way to go. I believe in the NHS and the Welfare State. I also think that conditions for workers, hours, money, etc should be greatly improved from what they are now, and essentials such as electricity and gas should be made public sector again.

However at the same time independent businesses should be allowed to thrive. I don’t believe in allowing the government to control every single business.

All of these things I believe will allow more money to come into our economy and provide safety nets for people during dark times.

A final thing you can do to stop becoming tribal is to look at as many sources as you possibly can from both the left and the right.

Even people you hate, as that way you wont just be in your own little echo chamber. Watch as many debates as you can, criticise people you are normally fans of, if you think they say something you disagree with. Hell even if its your friend (though don’t be a condescending asshole about it.)

All of these things in my opinion stop you from feeling as though you are boxxed into one little side and as a result have to defend everything that side says and does.

Image result for the fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists

Thanks for reading.

Sci Fi Classics That I’d Like To See Animated


Animation is a brilliant medium for genre stories. Sadly even with the recent explosion of popularity of franchises like Marvel and DC, sci fi is still really a niche thing.

Ask yourself how much sci fi there is on mainstream television for example, and how many big sci fi films are there right now that aren’t part of established franchises?

Added to that on television and film sci fi and fantasy, more than any other genres can often be severely limited even with the best budgets.

With animation however all of these problems can be overcome. Animated movies obviously are more of a niche thing anyway, and there is already quite a fair bit of overlap in sci fi fans and fans of animated movies. Also its obviously far easier to depict things like giant monsters, strange new planets, and alien invasions in even the cheapest cartoons than it is in the biggest budget movies.

Thus in much the same way as many iconic DC comics storylines have been adapted as animated films as part of the DC Animated Original Movies series. Then I’d like to see classic sci fi novels, comics and even some old sci fi television series be adapted as cartoons for the new generation.

In this article I am going to run through which stories I’d like to see adapted as films and television series.

Some of these stories are sadly a bit more obscure, but again I don’t think that would be a problem if they were part of a line that included more established sci fi characters and films. In fact I think in the long run it could help to bring more attention to many overlooked classics if the line was a big hit.

As for who I’d like to see produce this series, well I’d be happy for anyone as long as they have love and respect for the source material.

Doctor Omega The Animated Series

Doctor Omega is sadly a relatively obscure French novel by Arnould Galopin. Written in 1907, many have speculated that it was the main influence on Doctor Who, as the story does bare a number of remarkable similarities to the later BBC series.

Doctor Omega is mysterious inventor (who is often referred to simply as the Doctor), who comes from an unnamed race of aliens that are said to be the most advanced species in the universe. Omega’s people apparently discovered the secret of time travel through experiments with black holes.

Omega is estranged from his people, and lives on earth with his grand daughter, Suzanne. Omega performs a series of strange experiments which attracts the attention of his neighbour, a sensitive, reclusive, but very creative, musical person named Denis Borel.

Omega takes a liking to Denis and reveals what he is building. A time space craft called the Cosmos which can function on land and water.

Along with his assistant Fred, Omega asks Denis to join him on an expedition to Mars, 3 billion years ago, and Denis eventually agrees.

They journey through the vortex where they are almost destroyed by a gigantic fireball, before landing in the Martian sea. There they encounter various species of giant Martian fish, as well as a hostile race of reptillian Mermen before they escape to the surface.

On the surface they encounter poisonous trees, gnome like creatures with tentacled arms and a giant monster that preys on the gnomes, before escaping to the red valley where they meet giant snake monsters, and bat like men who have fashioned artificial wings to escape from the snakes.

They next encounter a highly advanced city of gnome like aliens who capture them and take the Cosmos apart. After performing experiments on the three travellers, the gnomes come to the conclusion that they are not dangerous and Omega, Fred and Denis are allowed to explore their city.

Unfortunately however just as the Cosmos is rebuilt and ready to go, war breaks out between the Gnomes and their enemies who live on the other side of the planet. During one battle the Gnomes discover that the metal Omega used to build the Cosmos is immune to their enemies death rays, and so they cannibalise it to use as shields.

With their only hope of escape seemingly gone, Doctor Omega is able to build an SOS machine that sends a signal through time to his grand daughter Suzanne. Suzanne then enlists the aid of another renegade from the Doctors people, the mysterious Professor Helvetius who arrives in a similar craft to the Cosmos and takes them all back to earth. The travellers also take a Martian named Tiziraou who helped them escape back as a companion.

Tiziraou stays with Denis and even helps him compose an opera, before Omega builds another Cosmos and asks his companions to join him on another adventure.

Its not hard to see how this novel is a precursor to Doctor Who. Both revolve around a mysterious alien who comes from an advanced race of time travellers, who he is estranged from. In both cases the alien develops an affinity for earth and takes humans on as companions.

Also both Doctor Omega and the Doctor have a grand daughter named Suzanne, who are both about 15 years old.

Even physically and in terms of personality Doctor Omega is strikingly similar to the first Doctor. Both are old men who walk with sticks, have long flowing snow white hair, are grumpy, awkward, and are also shown to be willing to even endanger their friends lives in order to explore.

In the first Dalek story the first Doctor memorably pretends that a vital component of the TARDIS has broken down, the fluid link so that he can explore the city of the Daleks, whilst similarly in Doctor Omega there is a scene where the Doctor reveals that he pretended a part of the Cosmos was missing simply so that he could explore more of Mars.

Yet in spite of this, both Doctor Omega and the Doctor have a very strong moral code and will only ever kill if they have too. Both also are shown underneath their grumpy exterior to be genuinely fond of their human companions too, and to have a very close and loving relationship with their grand daughters.

Doctor Omega has never been acknowledged as an influence on Doctor Who by its creators, but many fans believe that it may have been as the similarities are obviously rather big.

Doctor Omega sadly languished in obscurity for almost 100 years until 2003 when it was discovered by Jean Marc Lofficier and Randy Lofficier who translated, retold and republished the story.

Since then Doctor Omega has developed something of a following among Doctor Who fans and there has even been a number of sequel stories published which were collected in the anthology book, Doctor Omega and the Shadowmen. A second sequel, Doctor Omega and the Electromen is currently planned.

Personally I think that Doctor Omega could be the basis of a fantastic animated film or television series. The original novel alone would be the basis for a fantastic cartoon. So many of the colourful creatures, landscapes, and buildings on Mars would look absolutely fantastic animated.

As for who I’d like to see play the lead characters well. I’d like to see Kelsey Grammar play Borel. Borel is kind of like Frasier in that he is a bit of a snob, very musical, and very sensitive and creative. I could see Grammer bringing the character to life wonderfully, whilst adding a lot of humour to his more cowardly tendencies too.

As for Fred sadly he doesn’t have much of a personality, but Brian Blessed would be a good choice as Brian Blessed is obviously good at playing big, tough guys, and as he has such a big personality himself, then he could overcompensate for the relatively bland character he was given.

Finally for Doctor Omega himself, there are so many actors who would be wonderful for this character, so I’ll just whittle it down to the following two people, Tim Curry and David Warner.

Sadly Curry suffered a stroke in 2012 which rendered him unable to walk and slowed his speech down somewhat.

Still he can act, and has even done quite a lot of voice work since his stroke such as Auntie Whispers in the award winning series, Over the Garden Wall and Emperor Palpatine in Star Wars. He also appeared as the narrator in the 2016 remake of the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

I think he could easily voice the Doctor and give him an unearthly, yet charming persona.

David Warner meanwhile could basically just recycle the persona he used for the alternate version of the Third Doctor in the Unbound Doctor Who audio series (which are set in alternate universes to the main series.)

Warners version of the Doctor even looks like Doctor Omega too.

There’s a lot of scope in a Doctor Omega animated series as much like Doctor Who, the fact that he can travel anywhere obviously allows the writers a chance to have him go on many different types of adventures, which again wouldn’t be hindered by budget constraints in the same way in an animated series.

Star Maker Film 

Star Maker is a classic sci fi novel by Olaf Stapeldon which revolves around an unnamed narrator whose mind is transported out of his body by unexplained means.

His disembodied spirit goes on to explore the entire universe. Along the way he encounters various alien species, the concept of alternate universes, galactic wars and the idea that Stars are actually sentient.

The narrator is also joined by various other minds that detach from their bodies from various other worlds across the universe.

At the end of the book the various minds come into contact with the Star Maker, who is the creator of all things. The Star Maker is revealed to have created almost an infinite number of universes and has created them merely for his own amusement. After learning of some of the other universes the Star Maker has created, the narrator is transported back to his own body at the moment he left to resume his life.

Now Star Maker is one of the greatest works of science fiction ever written. It conteains so many fascinating concepts and ideas, many of which were decades ahead of their time such as the Dyson Sphere.

It would be a very difficult thing to bring to film however, if not impossible which probably explains why, despite its high reputation, no one has even tried.

Still I think it could possibly make an effective animated movie. Personally I think Patrick Stewart would be a fantastic choice for the narrator of the story. His voice is ridiculously brilliant. Its practically not even human its so marvellous! You’d obviously need someone with a strong voice to get us through the exploration of the universe, and Stewart does have experience as far as that’s concerned.

The Martian Chronicles Film

A series of stories written by the late Sci Fi legend, Ray Bradbury about man’s colonisation of Mars and subsequent conflict with the native, telepathic Martians.

The stories were written over the course of a decade and were not originally intended to be linked, but when they were reprinted Bradbury would loosely connect them together.

Some of the stories were adapted as a live action miniseries in the 1980s which starred the likes of Roddy McDowell and Rock Hudson. Sadly though I quite enjoyed it, the series was not that big a success. Ray Bradbury himself even described it as “just boring”.

I think given that the stories aren’t really that strongly connected, The Martian Chronicles would work better as an anthology film. You could collect the very best stories together with a loose narrative being the history of man’s first contact with Mars. I also think it would be cool if they got well known sci fi actors to voice the lead characters in every segment too, such as Mark Hamill, Karen Gillan, William Shatner, Colin Baker, Eliza Dushku etc.

The Lost World Film

Written by Sherlock Holmes creator Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. The Lost World revolves around a group of explores led by the irascible Professor George Challenger who venture to a mysterious plateau where Dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures as well as vicious ape men roam.

Often considered THE Dinosaur novel, The Lost World set down the template that most Dinosaur stories were to follow for the next 100 years, of there being a remote location such as a valley, or island where Dinosaurs still exist.

Now obviously there have been many film and television adaptations of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s classic novel over the years, but I think an animated adaptation that tries to blend various different aspects of all the other versions there have been could be quite interesting.

The Lost World is a novel much like Dracula and Frankenstein, in that whilst its very important in the genre, and still holds up tremendously well as an enjoyable novel in its own right. A lot of what we think about the story in popular culture actually comes from its adaptations.

For instance with Frankenstein the idea of the Professor being evil, the monster being a stupid, lumbering brute, and having green skin, bolts through his neck and a flat top head, all come from the films, whilst with The Lost World, the idea of a spoiled rich woman going on the expedition to the plateau, a friendly native woman who falls in love with one of the team, and various Dinosaur species such as Tyrannosaurus Rex (which was obscure when the original novel was written) all come from the film and tv adaptations, yet they are all completely synonymous with the Lost World.

The intro alone of this show is not faithful to the book. There were no T.Rex’s or main female characters in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s version of The Lost World. 

I think it would also be interesting to show us a version that had Dinosaurs that actually looked more like outdated depictions of Dinosaurs.

I would LOVE to see the animated Lost World draw on the paintings of Charles R Knight (whose work later inspired both Ray Harryhausen and Willis O’Brien.)

Its such a shame that we never see Dinosaurs depicted this way anymore. Obviously I like the way they look in modern films like Jurassic Park too, but its a shame that this style was completely and utterly ditched.

Its not even like people want them to be depicted accurately in films and tv shows (unless of course they are documentarys.) Hence why we didn’t get any feathered Raptors in Jurassic World.

For some reason however things like T.Rex’s standing upright and Brontosaurus’ in swamps are a rarity now, so I think it would be quite a nice throwback to the novels early 20th Century’s roots if we saw more old fashioned Dinosaurs.

As for who I’d like to see play the leads, I think Brian Blessed would make an exceptional Challenger.

Challenger is described as being a mountain of a man, with a huge bushy beard, deep, bellowing voice, and is prone to fits of chronic rage, whilst also at other times being quite witty and charming.

You can see how the illustrator of this book even based Challenger on Brian Blessed. I’m not the only one to make the connection!

Brian Blessed has also named The Lost World as one of his favourite novels. In fact he even explored a part of the mysterious region the book was set in.

Brian Blessed Shares The Books That Mean The Most To Him

Really he has to play the role. He’s practically a real life version of Professor Challenger!

As for Lord Roxton, I think Aidan Turner would be a good choice. I’m not the biggest fan of Roxton. He is a bit of a Gary Stu in that he is the all perfect, brave, dashing hero of the book, but Turner is quite good at being the big strapping  hero, as seen in The Hobbit, and he has a great voice too.

As for Summerlie, Challengers pompous, snobby rival, I think Chris Barrie, best known as Rimmer in Red Dwarf would be a brilliant choice.

Arthur Darvill might be quite a good choice for Malone meanwhile. Malone is a bit bland, but Darvill could probably give him more personality like he did with Rory another fairly bland character.

Finally for the posh, rich girl who thinks it will all be a good laugh, but gets scared, and then finds she is stronger than she thought. Rachel Shelley would be an excellent choice.

You could also produce sequel films based on the later stories that feature Challenger too, The Poison Belt and The Land of the Mist. The Poison Belt is very underrated. I’d rate it as one of Doyle’s best works.

It revolves around the entire earth passing through a poisonous fog in space. Whilst the fog ultimately does nothing more than knock people out for a few hours, until then Challenger believes that the fog will kill all life on earth. Thus our main characters are forced to face not only their own deaths, but the death of all of mankind too.

It’d make a brilliant film and I hope it gets animated along with the other Challenger books.

A Princess of Mars

The first in Edgar Rice Burrough’s classic John Carter series. A Princess of Mars, revolves around John Carter, a confederate veteran from the American civil war who is transported to Mars via unknown means where he battles strange creatures, comes into contact with two warring civilisations and eventually falls in love with a beautiful Martian princess Dejah Thoris.

It was the first in a long series of novels about John Carter, and is often regarded as one of the greatest stories in the genre as well as one of the most influential being arguably the first ever example of planetary romance. I also inspired such big names as Ray Bradbury, and Arthur C Clarke.

The first movie could be the start of a whole new series of animated movies based on the John Carter series.

As for who I’d like to see play Carter and Thoris, I think Nathan Fillion would be excellent as Carter, and Katie McGrath would be brilliant as Thoris.

Fillion is always good for the dashing, lovable rouge, (and has proven to be a talented voice actor too.) Whilst McGrath not only has experience playing Princesses in fantasy lands, but would bring a lot of gravitas and strength to the role too.

Honorverse Film Series

A series of books written by David Weber. The Honorverse series revolves more around humanity’s conflict with one another, with some human beings having been augmented and mutated. The series draws on real life historical events for inspiration, though Weber has also cited the Horatio Hornblower series as his main influence.

There are still some alien species, but for the most part they are no more intelligent than animals.

The theme of the series is that technology has improved, but sadly mankind has found new ways to divide itself. In a way it kind of reminds me of Firefly in this respect.

I think that all of the main novels would be the basis for some fantastic animated movies. There are many actresses who would be excellent as the leading character Honor Harrington.

Famke Janssen would be the best choice in both live action and animation. She is about the same age as the character, and Honor is also said to be about 6 foot 2 inches tall, which is round about Famke’s height. Added to that Famke obviously has experience in sci fi and genre series, is a fantastic actress, and can do action scenes well too.

The perfect choice for Honor Harrington.

Of course Lucy Lawless would be another perfect choice as would Eliza Dushku, both of whom have experience in voice acting too.

Stranger in a Strange Land Film

A classic sci fi novel from Robert A Henlien. Stranger in a Strange Land revolves around a Martian named Valentine Michael Smith who after being raised by Martians comes to spend his his adulthood on earth and ends up having a profound effect on human society as a result.

The novel explores such themes as cannibalism, xenophobia, faith in the afterlife and even the pitfalls of celebrity culture.

It would make a genuinely surreal and interesting movie and I think that Matt Smith would be an excellent choice for the lead role of Valentine. He obviously can do the quirky alien thing brilliantly, so he could get quite a lot of humour out of the story, but at the same time he also would be able to capture the characters shadier and more frightening side superbly too.

The War of the Worlds Film

H.G. Wells classic novel about Martians invading then modern day earth has been filmed and updated as both film and television series a few times over the years. It was also adapted as a musical in the 1970s by Jeff Wayne.

Whilst I enjoyed both the 50s and the 2005 version I have always wanted to see a version that is set in the time it was written in Victorian London and stays completely faithful to the novel.

Obviously the Martians and the scenes of the monsters smashing their way through Victorian buildings would look spectacular animated too.

The Time Machine Film

Another Wells classic. The Time Machine revolves around an eccentric scientist building a machine which enables him to travel to the future.

There he discovers that humanity is destined to split into two sub species. The beautiful, but utterly useless Eloi, and the intelligent, but savage, degenerate ugly Morlocks.

The Time Machine has much like a lot of Wells work, been adapted several times, including as two films in the 50s and the 00s. Whilst I enjoyed both of the film versions they were famously guilty of being a bit too Hollywood in that they gave us a perfect happy ending with the Eloi being freed from the rule of the Morlocks. They also somewhat simplified the story too.

It became good guy Eloi vs evil Morlocks. In the novel whilst the Morlocks are obviously evil, the Eloi are not presented sympathetically either. They are shown to be so useless, that the main character just leaves them to their fate.

I would like to see a version that actually kept the more bleak tone of the novel. Also a sequence from the novel that is always omitted involves the time traveller after his adventure with the Morlocks travel several million years forward into the future where he encounters giant crabs and finally sees the earth itself die.

It would make an absolutely spectacular animated sequence.

20 Thousand Leagues Under The Sea Film

20000 Leagues Under The Sea is a classic novel about a mad scientist named Professor Nemo who plans to wreck vengeance on mankind using his fantastic inventions, including his war ship, the Nautilus.

It has been filmed quite a few times, including most notably in 1954 by Disney and starring Kirk Douglas.

Still I think there would be a lot of scope in animated version. The Nautilus would look spectacular animated, and I think an animated version could perhaps capture the scale and spectacle of the novel better. I would also love to see Charles Dance voice Nemo too.

Edison’s Conquest of Mars/ Crossover Film

Edison’s Conquest of Mars is an unofficial sequel novel to War of the Worlds. It’s set not long after the Martian invasion was repelled and sees Thomas Edison mount a mission to Mars, made up of the worlds greatest geniuses to strike at the invaders first.

The story was the first to explore many ideas that have since become staples of science fiction stories, such as that aliens built the Pyramids, disintegrator rays, space battles, Asteroid mining and space suits.

Its a brilliant and overlooked book, and I would like to see it adapted, but rather than use Thomas Edison (who has become a somewhat controversial figure.) It could use Doctor Omega as the genius who mounts a mission to Mars.

You could also have the geniuses Doctor Omega enlists to help him build the spaceship to Mars and the weapons being characters from other classic sci fi novels, including Captain Nemo (with Charles Dance reprising his role.)

You could link Doctor Omega and War of the Worlds this way. After all in his first adventure Doctor Omega visits Mars at an early point in its history, and the intelligent Martians he encounters are not too dissimilar to Wells’ Martians (Wells was an obvious influence on Doctor Omega.)

Like Wells’ Martians the creatures in Doctor Omega are frail, big headed and somewhat cold, and logical, they also rely entirely on machinery and even have death rays.

It would be a brilliant twist if Doctor Omega discovered that the Martians he helped win against their enemies and gave the metal from the Cosmos, Stellite to, ended up at some point in their future, becoming the Martians who later invaded the earth in War of the Worlds, and it had been because of the Stellite that Doctor Omega gave them that they had been able to become so advanced and deadly.

Thus Doctor Omega by finally crippling their power in this story would be trying to make amends for his earlier mistake. At the end of the film, you’d have the Martians power base be destroyed just as in the novel, but some of the Martians would then escape into space to try and rebuild their power base. They could then become recurring enemies of Doctor Omega in his animated series, with the time traveller encountering them at various points throughout their history when they have later rebuilt and become a force to be reckoned with in the universe.

The Martians from War of the Worlds were among the influences on the Daleks in Doctor Who. Both are horrible slimy, octopus like aliens that house themselves inside powerful machines and seek to invade the earth.

Thus it would be fitting to have the Doctors literary predecessor, Doctor Omega, fight the Daleks literary predecessors, Wells Martians.

Doctor Who The Animated Series

Okay first things first when I say I’d like to see a Doctor Who animated series its not with any actors who have played the Doctor in either old or new who.

All of these actors are continuing their performances in Big Finish audios, and obviously an animated series would be a rival to them. I wouldn’t want to create a threat to Big Finish as I really like the work they are doing and have done for the past 2 decades, also since they are producing stories with old Doctors that are doing really well, then most people would probably think “well what’s the point of doing an animated series anyway?”.

I think that an animated Doctor Who series instead would be better as an alternate sequel to Classic Who rather than just more unseen stories with existing Doctors.

Its no secret that many of us classic era fans have been unhappy with New Who. Even before all of the PC posturing with things like Missy and Jodie Whittaker’s casting, the makers of New Who really rarely tried to actually write the Doctors character properly.

For those of you who haven’t ever seen Doctor Who (though I’m sure most of you had probably heard of it.) I’ll give a brief rundown of the show and why the revival wasn’t really a faithful sequel.

Doctor Who is the worlds longest running sci fi series. It revolves around an alien known as the Doctor, who travels through time and space in his magnificent machine, the TARDIS. The TARDIS is bigger on the inside than the outside, and it can visit any planet, at any point in its history.

The Doctor also has the power when he dies to come back to life, with his body and outer persona changing as a result, though he is still the same man underneath. This power called regeneration, is what has allowed Doctor Who to run for so long as whenever one actor leaves, the Doctor simply regenerates allowing a new actor play the role.

Doctor Who originally ran for 26 years, 1963-1989 with 7 actors playing the role in that time. William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton, Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker, Peter Davison, Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy.

It returned briefly in 1996 for a one off tv movie, before coming back full time in 2005.

The 2005 version of Doctor Who has been very popular (though its viewership has declined in the last few years.) Still it has always provoked controversy from many old school fans to say the least, as it has taken many great liberties with the character of the Doctor, and the shows lore.

Its true that the Doctors outer persona changed when he regenerated, but all of the different Doctors were still meant to be the same person. They all followed a basic template that was laid down by the original Doctor, William Hartnell.

This isn’t just my analysis. All of the actors who played the Doctor as well as the shows script editors and producers have regularly said this too. Tom Baker the longest running and most successful actor in the part, said that the Doctor was the most limited role he had ever played as there were so many things he couldn’t do or else he wouldn’t seem like the Doctor anymore. Terrance Dicks the shows longest running script editor, also said that the Doctors character should never be changed too much.

Basically all of the Doctors personalities must follow this template.

The Doctor is always a mysterious character. We never find out his real name, or much about his history on Gallifrey, and upbringing. The name of the show after all is Doctor Who, so there has to always be a bit of mystery there.

The Doctor always loves to travel and explore the universe. His curiosity often gets him into trouble, but he just can’t help himself.

The Doctor also is someone who prefers to find peaceful solutions to problems, but will kill if need be. He’s quite unique in that on the one hand he is not strictly speaking an action hero like Batman or Superman who just goes in there and beats people up, yet on the other he is probably the most violent hero of all time.

Even James Bond hasn’t killed as many people as the Doctor.

The Doctor is also asexual. Throughout the entirety of the classic era, the Doctor never showed even the tiniest bit of interest in any of his female companions, with the possible exception of Romana (another Time Lady.)

The Doctor just wasn’t a romantic character. Not only was he often played by an actor much older than his companion, but the character was really more of a grandfatherly figure. His first companion was his grand daughter, Susan, who left him to stay on earth. The Doctors later companions were often young women that he would develop a fatherly relationship with, and they were obviously meant to be surrogate replacement figures for Susan.

You can see how in the second clip Victoria is a replacement for Susan, whilst the Doctor in turn is a replacement for Susan’s father Edward Waterfield who was murdered by the Daleks.

Even physically there was something of a template to the Doctor. All of the Doctors tended to dress in more old fashioned, Edwardian/Victorian era clothing. The Doctor was very much created in the mould of popular heroes from that time such as Sherlock Holmes. The old, refined, dashing gentlemanly British hero. All of the Doctors also had long, flowing, big hair too which again was meant to reflect the bohemian, eccentric nature of the character.

Basically regeneration was like an advanced form of healing. The Doctors body broke down and then repaired itself, but in doing so took on a new appearance, which in turn shook up his outer persona to an extent, but didn’t change who he was fundamentally.

Sadly however New Who had the Doctor do things like fall in love with his 19 year old companion, and boast about all the crazy bondagey sex he had with River Song.

You see what I mean? Its hard, if not impossible to imagine any of the first 7 Doctors being in this scene.

They also messed up many other time honoured traits of the character such as his relationship with his enemies and his morality too.

That’s not to say that New Who didn’t carry on ANY characteristics from the first 7 Doctors, but overall they threw out a lot of his key personality traits and worse, from the Tennant era on they actually made out that each Doctor was a totally different person which completely destroyed the point of regeneration.

The female Doctor was the final straw for many, as now the character is so far removed from the original, its impossible to imagine any of the first 7 in the role.

Men and women are different. That’s not sexist to say that. No one is saying because they are different one is better.

Obviously a woman could embody many of the Doctors personality traits, but as the character has been a man for 50 years, all of his relationships have been from a male perspective, he was never written as genderless, and he is set in popular culture thoroughly as a man, then a woman would always seem terribly out of place, and worse ruin the image of all of the Doctors being the same man too, even more so than the previous romantic or anti guns Doctors did.

So with this in mind I’d like to see an animated sequel to the original Doctor Who series that actually tries to carry on the character and style from the classic era in the following ways.

No soap opera mince with the companions home life.

A wide variety of companions from different times and planets.

NO Doctor/companion love stories.

Focus on a wide variety of adventures. Some invasion earth stories, some pure historicals, plenty of stories set on alien planets (which unlike the classic era would not be limited by the budget.)

No PC posturing, no female Doctor or Master. All of the Doctors people the Time Lords have the power to regenerate, and so the new who team in order to lay the groundwork for a female Doctor, had the Master regenerate into a woman. The Master was the Doctor’s archenemy in Classic Who who despised him so much, that even when he was horribly burned his hatred for the Doctor kept him alive!

New Who however had the female Master, Missy, be in love with the Doctor and even try and shag him on many occasions which turned the Master into a joke.

That’s the proper Master and Doctor. Two guys who hate each other and whose feud spans all of time and space.

Not this slash fic, SJW pandering, teenage bullshit.

Absolutely NONE of this crap!

No god moding the Doctor and making him into “the oncoming storm” or any of that crap which I haven’t liked in New Who. Okay the Daleks know of and fear the Doctor, as do the Cybermen, but that should really be it. The Doctor works best as a bit of an underdog that people think is a moron, and even among his people is regarded as a bit of a joke, but who is cleverer and scrappier than people give him credit for.

NONE of this macho, ego porn, bullshit.

Of course at the same time a great irony is that the New Doctor is far more useless than the one from Classic Who.

The New Doctor Who has been pandering to SJWs for quite a while and the SJWs think its sexist for the Doctor to be the hero in his own show, if he is a man of course.

There are dozens of articles complaining about how awful it is to see the Doctor a man save a woman, so the writers of New Who will often undermine the Doctor for his companion.

In the first 4 seasons the Doctor saves the day in just 1 season finale, whilst in the first season he only saves the day in 2 stories overall. The rest of the time its his companion.

Worse than that, companions of his like Donna and Clara gain his powers and abilities and use them better than he ever did, and outright tell the Doctor  he is useless to his face!

Clara is also in a story called Name of the Doctor retconed into being the hero of every single Doctor Who story ever made.

See for yourself.

Now again obviously I have 0 problem with a woman saving a man. The point is that its the Doctors show! He should save the day in most of the stories.

When I watch Xena, which is one of my all time favourite series, I don’t want Xena’s male sidekick Joxer the Mighty to always save the day and tell her she is useless. If that were to happen I’d think “why isn’t this show called Joxer?”

Sadly however because the Doctor was a male character, and the makers of the show were pandering to SJWs and feminists, then he basically had to be undermined for his sidekick until he became a woman of course. I somehow doubt that Jodie’s Doctor is going to have her male companion get all of her powers and save the day whilst two versions of her trail behind like David Tennant, or for that matter regularly slap her into place and threaten to hit her like Clara did to Capaldi.

We get the worst of both worlds in the New Doctor Who. On the one hand the Doctor has to be made the pivot of the universe and constantly boast about “I AM THE DOCTOR I AM THE MOST BADASS, AWESOME, COOL HERO WHO EVER LIVED” in cringey speeches, yet when it actually comes to saving the day and beating the Daleks he is often hopelessly overpowered, until his companion is given some magic super power and completely saves the day.

The animated Doctor would go back to being just a hero, who is smart, scrappy and resourceful, with companions who are smart and resourceful too, but neither are the centre of the universe, and ultimately as its the Doctors show, he saves the day the most.

As for who I would like to see voice the animated Doctor meanwhile, I have a number of suggestions.

Dylan Moran was always one of two people I wanted to see play the Doctor when I was a young boy during the 90s, early 00s and the show was off the air.

Dylan Moran has all the right qualities for an old school Doctor. He is naturally eccentric, and much like William Hartnell, he can be quite grumpy, and arrogant, but never to the point where you actually hate him.


You can see how well he’d fit the part even just from his stand up. Another positive with Moran is that you would NEVER be able to do any romances with his version of the Doctor.

I can just imagine Bernard being given the script for Doomsday and reading the scene on the beach with Rose and screaming “THAT’S RUBBISH! DON’T MAKE ME SICK INTO MY OWN SCORN.”

Tim Curry meanwhile is also someone I have always wanted to see play the Doctor. He was my other big choice for the Doctor growing up. I remember being disappointed when both Eccelston and Tennant were cast. Again nothing against those two guys, but I just really, really, really wanted Tim Curry and Dylan Moran.

I first thought of Tim Curry as the Doctor when I saw him in the cult classic Clue. For those of you who haven’t seen the movie, its based on the board game and is a who dunnit murder mystery with three alternate endings.

Curry plays Wadsworth the butler of the house, who in all endings figures out who the murderers are. The scenes of Wadsworth running around from room to room acting out the entire evening in order to explain how the murderer killed people are hilarious, and you can see how Curry would make an excellent Tom Baker style Doctor from these clips.

Tim Curry obviously has the charisma, eccentric nature, and humour for the role. He can look as though he is smarter than everyone else in the room, yet at other moments come across as quite bumbling too like Patrick Troughton, and Tom Baker.

Sadly Curry’s stroke has prevented him from being able to play the role in live action (though the way the show has gone now he wouldn’t have been considered anyway as he’s a fucking white male!)

Still as he can thankfully still speak and act then he could play the role in animation. His performance due to his condition would still be more subdued than Wadsworth however, but that’s okay, I’m sure there would be a lot of interesting things he could bring to the character.

Also again there’s NO chance you could do any romantic crap with his version of the Doctor

Robert Carlyle would also make a great Doctor. In the past I have suggested him for the Master and I do think he would be an excellent choice for the villain too, but I can also see him giving us a Colin Baker style darker Doctor.

Carlyle did express interest in the role back in 2010. He said he didn’t like to talk about it when another actor was in the role as it was rude, but that now Tennant was leaving Carlyle said he’d love to be Doctor Who and that he would treat the role with respect.

I Would Love To Be Doctor Who

So really if we could get him he’d make a fantastic animated Doctor.

Paterson Joseph would also make an excellent Doctor. Joseph is best known for playing the character of Alan Johnson in Peep Show. He is also a good dramatic actor too however, and even had a serious role in Doctor Who, as the weasly contestant on the weakest link who is exterminated by the Daleks. You can see what a great actor he is from that episode, as his cowardly, snivelling, unlikable character from Doctor Who couldn’t be more different to the larger than life, charismatic, bombastic Alan Johnson.

Much like Curry I can see Joseph give his Doctor a huge personality, but again not to the point of parody as both are serious dramatic actors.

Jason Watkins meanwhile would also make an excellent McCoy, Troughton style Doctor. Much like with Carlyle I have suggested Watkins for the Master in the past as he does make an excellent villain as seen with his performance as Herrick, the main villain in Being Human. Still I can see him giving us a Doctor who is quite impish on the surface, but maybe has a bit more of a dark, manipulative side underneath.

Adrian Lester, best known for starring in Hustle, would make a fantastic, Jon Pertwee style, dashing Doctor too, and he has rich, strong voice which would be great for animation.

Damien Molony is also someone who I’ve always thought would make an excellent Doctor Who. Molony is best known for playing the Vampire Hal in Being Human. He is a bit too young and conventional for the Doctor, but to be fair I don’t mind a younger actor as long as they don’t go down the romantic route.

Damien much like Matt Smith can do the old guy in a young guys body really well, as seen with his performance as Hal a 500 year old plus Vampire. He’s also quite naturally eccentric, and has a fantastic voice too.

Another younger actor who would make an excellent Doctor is Colin Morgan who is best known for playing Merlin.

Whilst there were some problems with Merlin, Colin was always excellent in the role, and Merlin was a fairly similar character to the Doctor in that he was a more cerebral hero, and somewhat eccentric and bumbling on the surface.

Adrian Edmondson would also be a brilliant Doctor Who.

Edmondson if you are not familiar with him is best known for his comedy double act with the late great Rik Mayal.

For 25 years Rik and Ade played 2 sad, repulsive, perverts that regularly beat the shit out of each other in the most cartoonish ways across The Young Ones, Filthy Rich and Catflap and Bottom.

They were never actually meant to be the same characters, but they had the same characterisation to the point where they might as well have been. Ade’s characters like Vyvyian and Eddie would usually be the stronger of the two and would as a result usually beat the absolute shit out of Rik’s characters, though they were both always losers anyway.

Now I’m not saying Ade would be a brilliant Doctor based on his comedy career. I’m a huge fan of all of his and Rik’s work. I’d rate them as my favourite comedy double act.

However I think Ade would be good choice because he is actually a serious, and dramatic actor. He won massive acclaim for his role as Abra on the medical drama Holby City. . Ade has often said that whilst he is very proud of his work with Rik, he does regret not doing more serious acting throughout his career.

He actually trained as and wanted to be a serious actor at first, but he ended up falling into comedy when he met Rik and became typecast thereafter as a comedy actor.

If he were given a role like the Doctor in either animation or live action I think Ade would do all he could to separate it from his comedy characters and would end up actually being one of the most serious and dramatic Doctors.

The same was true of Jon Pertwee who prior to playing the Third Doctor, was much like Ade is now, most well known for playing comedy roles in series like The Navy Lark and the Carry on films. Pertwee much like Ade had also always regretted not doing more serious, “proper” acting and so when given a chance to be the Doctor he ended up being the most serious version of the character there has ever been.

I can see Ade being very like Pertwee in this respect. Rik Mayall also would have made an excellent Doctor for this reason too. Rik much like Ade was actually a very good serious actor, and could play straight roles too, and again like Pertwee I can see Mayall wanting to really use the Doctor to prove to people that he could do more than silly characters.

Johnny Lee Miller who currently stars as Sherlock Holmes in the American series Elementary is also another person that I think would be excellent as the Doctor.

He is an amazing Sherlock Holmes, and Holmes as we all know was one of the main inspirations on the Doctor, with both being the quite eccentric, insufferable genius type, the Doctors companion being the Watson, and the Master being his Moriarty, so he’d really just be able to recycle his Holmes persona and it would be brilliant.

A slightly less original choice would be Sean Pertwee, son of the third Doctor actor Jon Pertwee.

Sean is a very talented actor in his own right, and I think his Doctor based on his performance as Alfred in Gotham would be a lot harder and more gritty than previous incarnations, but not to the point where he’d ditch all of the characters flamboyant traits like Christopher Eccelston’s Doctor.

Sean however has apparently said he isn’t interested in playing the Doctor. I can understand why as he wants to stand apart from his father as an actor, but still he might be more open to the role in animation, and again I don’t think his incarnation would really be like his fathers at all.

Finally another choice for the Doctor that might seem a bit more odd is Bruce Campbell.

Now Campbell is a cult legend who is known for starring in a variety of campy horror, sci fi and fantasy film and tv series. His most famous role is as the lead hero, Ash Williams in the classic Evil Dead trilogy and the sequel series, Ash vs Evil Dead.

Not many people would want Campbell for the role as he is American and most fans I’ve talked to at least, want the Doctor to stay British.

I can understand this level of thinking, as the Doctor is very much the British gentlemanly hero, but I wouldn’t mind the odd American Doctor. I don’t think that it should be a regular thing, but ultimately if an American actor had the right eccentric, offbeat nature I don’t see why you wouldn’t cast him?

Hell lots of British actors have played America’s greatest heroes like Batman, Spider-Man and Superman so why shouldn’t an American get a chance to play the Doctor?

It does annoy me when people say that an American Doctor is out of the question, but a female Doctor is okay like in this article here.

The Depressing Disappointing Maleness of Doctor Who

Seriously? An American Doctor is more out of place than a female Doctor?

Of course the only reason these people are saying that is if you say I don’t want an American Doctor no one is going to jump down your throat and smear you as an anti American racist, where as we all know what were to happen if you said I don’t want a female Doctor, even though your reasons in both cases are exactly the same. You think there IS a template to the Doctors character and that it shouldn’t be broken, but apparently that line of thought becomes sexist when referring to a sex change even though that is a far, far bigger change than giving the Doctor an American accent!

I think some fans get scared at the idea of an American Doctor because they are afraid of Americans getting hold of Doctor Who and changing it too much. However again, the way the British have fucked it up in the last few years, the Americans could hardly do a worse job could they?

So yes I have no problem with the odd American Doctor, and Bruce Campbell I think would be great.

Bruce Campbell is a great actor above all else and has played a number of completely serious roles over the years such as in the first Evil Dead movie which was more of a straight horror film unlike its sequels which blended horror with slapstick, and in Charmed where he played an evil Witchfinder, so I am in no doubt that he could handle the dramatic aspects of the character.

He also however has a naturally eccentric persona, having played some wildly over the top roles and so he could also bring a lot of personality to the part too which is essential.

Campbell’s most famous role of Ash is actually not too dissimilar to the Doctor in that both are blunderers who are good at improvising. Whilst the Doctor is a more cerebral character like Sherlock Holmes it is true that unlike Holmes he often doesn’t think things through as much.

He will usually just bluster in somewhere, get captured, beaten up, tortured and then have to improvise his way out. Ash is the same. Ash is very good at adapting to a crisis like replacing his evil hand that he had to cut off with a chainsaw, but not as much in stopping it in the first place.

Campbell’s Doctor would be very scrappy and like Troughton maybe a bit more bumbling on the surface.

There are so many actors out there that would make wonderful Doctors. I think the two key ingredients are to always get an actor with a naturally quite big and dominating personality, and an actor who is never really going to be a conventional leading man.

I would also like the animated series to make the 13th Doctor the final incarnation.

In hindsight I think it was a mistake to give the Doctor an unlimited supply of regenerations in the Christmas special The Time of the Doctor.

It has long been established that the Doctor (and all Time Lords) can only regenerate 12 times, allowing them to have 13 lives in total. Now obviously the producers of New Who got round this law because they wanted to extend the life of the show.

However they only had to do that because they wasted so many regenerations. Eccelston was there for just 1 year, even Tennant and Smith though doing the standard 3 seasons were actually cheated out of 1 year each, as there were only specials in Tennant’s 4th year, and Matt’s third season was split into two mini series across 2012 and 13.

Furthermore they completely wasted two whole incarnations with the War Doctor who was only in a few episodes and making Tennant’s aborted regeneration in The Stolen Earth count.

In my opinion they should have tried to get all they could out of each Doctor and called it a day when he reached his 13th life. That way the original 13 Doctors would have been a complete story, and then if they wanted to continue the franchise, they could do so in a remake. In a remake they could literally do anything they wanted and I wouldn’t care as it would not actually be Hartnell’s Doctor underneath.

Also I think you could do a great story involving the Doctors final battle with the Daleks and Davros (they’d have to be the villains that finally finished him.) You could have a really dark, Logan style showdown where the Doctor goes out as a hero, which to me would be better than just leaving it lingering on.

The Doctors death wouldn’t even have to be the last story they made either.  Much like Big Finish does, they could release the animated stories with different Doctors at random over the years.

As for who could play other roles in the series such as the Master, well Simon Templeman as always would be an excellent choice for the Master.

Templeman’s performance as Doctor Doom in the classic 90s Fantastic Four Animated series basically is just the Classic era Master. Like the Master he is charming, suave, manipulative, and craves ultimate power because he believes that under his rule things will be better, whilst ironically also being consumed with the most petty and jealous hatred of his former friend, Reed Richards.

Its also doesn’t hurt that the Burned Master looks EXACTLY like Doctor Doom as well.

You can see how the Master is just kind of Doctor Doom mark 2 in some ways. Simon is also a huge Doctor Who fan too. When I tweeted to him that I would love to see him as the Master he said this.

Love the Doctor

So I think its safe to say he would probably be up for playing the Master.

Another actor that would be excellent as the Master is Aiden Gillen. Well known for a wide variety of roles in series as diverse as Queer as Folk, and Game of Thrones, what really made me think he would be an excellent Master was his performance as the smarmy villain in the classic Jackie Chan/Owen Wilson buddy comic movie, Shanghai Knights.

Gillan would be more of an Ainley type Master, IE more needlessly cruel, and smug. I think it would be important not to burn through the Masters as well. Again New Who used up two Masters in just one episode, so whilst I wouldn’t want Simon to be the only Master, at the same time I wouldn’t want to see them go as far as one Master per Doctor.

I would also keep the idea of the Master not being able to regenerate either. The idea of the Master having to steal bodies made him more than just an “evil Doctor” and also far more frightening too.

As for the Rani, the Doctors female archenemy, there are a number of actresses that would be excellent in the role. Juliet Aubrey and Lucy Lawless in particular would be brilliant choices. Aubrey has already played basically the same character in Primeval. Helen Cutter, a snarky, ruthless, cold scientist who prefers Dinosaurs to people and even attempts to erase humanity from existence. Meanwhile Lucy Lawless is brilliant at playing the really vicious villain.

Though best known for playing Xena the Warrior Princess, nearly all of Lucy’s other major performances have been as villains. Lucretia in Spartacus Blood and Sand, Ruby in Ash vs Evil Dead and Number 3 in Battlestar Gallactica.

Hell even Xena herself started out as a villain in Hercules before her heel face turn, so I think Lucy would be good for a really vicious Rani.

I think my favourite choice for the role of the companion meanwhile would be Dana Delorenzo. I recently discovered this brilliant young actress in the series Ash Vs Evil Dead where she plays the leading character of Kelly.

Dana is extremely likable, feisty and has a fantastic voice. The character she plays on Ash Vs Evil Dead is pretty much already the kind of companion I’d like to see in Doctor Who. Strong, capable, but not the most important person who ever lived like Donna or Clara

She would be kind of an Ace style companion.

Of course we’d need more than one companion to span the multiple Doctors, but again there are dozens of actresses both British and American who would be good.

Personally I think Doctor Who the Animated series would be an excellent way of carrying on the spirit of Classic Who which has been tampered with by New Who.

That’s not to say that New Who was all terrible. Up until the PC posturing in the Capaldi era, I did enjoy a lot of the New Doctor Who (as this blog attests) and all of its leads, both Doctor and companion were played by great actors.

Ultimately however not only in the last few years has so much of the lore been trashed, but I think it would be good to actually see the Classic series be properly continued which ultimately I don’t think New Who ever really even tried to do.

Dan Dare The Animated Series

Dan Dare is a long running British sci fi comic book. Originally created by Frank Hampson in 1950, Dan Dare was set in the then future of the 1990s which was depicted as a golden age, with all races of the world living together in peace, and technology having advanced to incredible levels.

Captain Dan Dare is a high ranking pilot in Space fleet, which is essentially like an earlier, British version of the Federation in Star Trek.

Whilst Dan encountered many strange monsters and aliens on his adventures, his most recurring and iconic enemy was the Mekon. The Mekon was the leader of a race of xenophobic reptile men, the Treens who originated from Venus. The Treens had created the Mekon to lead them.

Though the Treens and the Mekon are driven off of their native Venus in the first story (after an unsuccessful attempt to conquer humanity and the other natives of Venus, the human like Therons.)

The Treens and the Mekon continue to be a huge threat to mankind throughout the series, and at one point in the epic “Reign of the Robots” they even manage to conquer the earth for 10 years.

The Treens, and their leader, Dan Dare’s archenemy, the Mekon!

Dan Dare was during its heyday the most popular comic in the United Kingdom, selling over 3 million copies.

Towards the end of the 60s however, after an almost 20 year run its popularity began to dwindle, and eventually the comic that produced the strip, the Eagle folded in 1969.

Nearly ten years later however Dan would be revived by 2000 AD originally as their flagship character.

This version of Dan Dare though a direct sequel to the original was very different in tone. At some point after the events of the original series, Dan has one last battle with the Mekon where he is nearly killed.

Spacefleet puts Dan into suspended animation until medical science will become advanced enough to help him.

200 years later Dan is revived, in his final battle with the Mekon he was also badly disfigured, and thus his face is completely reconstructed when they revive him, which gives Dan a totally new appearance.

Aside from looking completely different, this version of Dan also had a totally different personality. The Dan of the 50s and 60s had been very much a stiff upper lip, pip pip and tally ho chaps, proper British gentleman, whilst the 70s Dan was a violent, anti hero, who was willing to kill his enemies, and was also an anti establishment character, with the future he lived in being a far bleaker and darker one.

The 2000 AD series though controversial among old school fans was still popular when first released and ran for a few years, before 2000 AD lost the rights.

The Eagle would then relaunch in the early 80s with a new version of Dan Dare as its flagship character.

This version of Dan was said to be a descendant of the original, who again battled the original Mekon who had returned after a long absence.

This version proved to be very popular among general audiences and die hard fans of Dan Dare as it was more faithful to the 50s version. It would run for over 10 years into the 90s before it finished its run.

Since then there have been two miniseries based around Dan Dare. The first of these, Dare written by Grant Morrison in the 90s ignored all of the other sequels. In fact it ignored all of the original stories except for the initial Dan Dare serial. Whilst some praised it for its gritty, and dark take on Dan Dare, personally I think it was the worst attempt at reviving the brand.

The second miniseries produced by Virgin comics in the late 00s similarly ignored most of the previous versions, and much like Morrisons take, it depicted the future of Dan Dare as being much worse than we were previously led to believe.

In addition to this a fan made strip, Spaceship Away has been ongoing since 2003. Though it only has a small circulation, Spaceship Away has received praise by fans of the Dan Dare franchise for sticking to the original series’ tone.

Recently it was announced that Titan comics will be reviving Dan Dare as an ongoing series, whilst Big Finish has also recently produced an highly successful, award winning series based on the original 50s strips.

Dan Dare is one of the most influential works of science fiction ever made. Not only did it greatly inspire sci fi series such as Thunderbirds, Doctor Who, and Blake’s 7 (Davros the evil creator of the Daleks, and the Doctors archenemy was directly inspired by the Mekon.)

It also inspired many real life scientists and engineers too. Stephen Hawking actually attributed his career as a scientist to his boyhood love of Dan Dare.

There was already a previous attempt at a Dan Dare animated series in the early 00s. Whilst it was okay, I don’t think it really captured the sheer scale and spectacle of the original comics. The stories were too condensed, and I didn’t like the animation for them either. It was that awful CGI animation they used in early 00s shows that thankfully died out.

I would love to see a version that featured big, long serialised stories like the 50s strips and had drawings that tried to evoke Hampsons style as well.

I wouldn’t just want to to see an adaptation of the original Dan Dare series but also of the sequels too (except for Grant Morrison.)

I’ve always thought the fact that Dan changes his face, much like the Doctor could allow him to have a very long life on tv, in live action, not just animation, as you could obviously change the actor.

I’d like to see them do an animated series that starts out in the time line of the 50s stories, and adapts all of the best stories from the original run, before ending with Dan being disfigured in a final battle with the Mekon.

You’d then adapt the 70s, 2000 AD series after. I’d LOVE to see the Lost World stories from the 70s era adapted (especially the story where Dan lands on a planet of Vampires.) Also a series that tried to recapture the art work from this time would look stunning too.

Another advantage to adapting the 70s era is that you could finally resolve the saga of the 2000 AD Dan Dare.

Sadly the 2000 AD series ended on a cliff hanger. Dan had been framed by the Mekon who was planning something big, but we never found out what. You could finally show us how Dan, Sondar and Morag prove their innocence and reveal what the Mekon was after.

At the same time you could have it lead into the 80s series. You could have Dan have more surgery to change his face to hide from the Mekon and others, which could lead to Dan looking like the way he did in the 80s series.

Furthermore the 80s series begins with the Mekon having conquered the earth, so again you could link the 70s and 80s stories by having the Mekon’s big plan that we never saw at the end of the 2000 AD series result in his invasion of earth in the 80s series.

After Dan repels the Mekon’s invasion of earth, then we would adapt the 80s Dan Dare comics, before doing a story that saw the final showdown between Dan Dare and the Mekon.

I think you could extend the life of the animated series this way and develop Dan and the Mekon across all of the different iterations. We’d see the Mekon start out as a cold, ruthless, conqueror who is motivated by his xenophobic belief that his people should rule the universe, and then slowly watch him learn how to hate because of Dan, and then degenerate into a hateful, insane monster, whose only purpose is to torture and kill Dan.

We’d also see Dan go from an upbeat, idealistic, stiff upper lip gentlemanly hero to a more cynical, violent, ruthless character after having seen countless deaths at the hands of the Mekon, being horribly disfigured and ripped out of his own time and thrown into the future away from everyone he ever cared for.

You could also see society itself go from the golden age of the “90s” to the bleak future of the 2000 AD era Dan.

You’d also regularly change the supporting cast too, (apart from the Mekon.) For the stories based on the 50s and 60s strips you’d have the classic characters, like the good Treen, Sondar, Dan’s loyal batman Digby, and Professor Jocelyn Peabody.

For the 70s series meanwhile there’s a wide range of characters to draw from. Personally I’d like Dan’s main crew that go with him to the Lost Worlds be Dan’s only love interest Professor Rodan (and even then its only implied!) Monday the 5th Generation Martian, and Rok the Wolfman from space, who were all more interesting than the crew he actually had in that story arc.

A Dan Dare series either live action or animated could span so many years, characters and different types of stories. I think if done right it could be one of the greatest animated series of all time.

For the 50s Dan, I think Tom Ellis would be an excellent choice. Ellis is currently starring as Lucifer on the American series of the same name. Now granted his performance as Lucifer couldn’t be more different to Dan, but I think he’d be good for the role, as he is obviously very dashing, but more importantly he can be very light and straight down the middle too.

There are so few actors who can do that type of straight forward good guy anymore which is a real shame. Of course as he can still play darker characters, Tom could show us the character slowly be driven down a darker path the more battles he has against the Mekon.

Tim Curry meanwhile would be excellent as the original 50s Mekon. Whilst better known for playing crazy, over the top characters like Wadsworth, Frank N Furter, and Pennywise, I think Curry would actually be good at the more icey and cold Mekon based on his performance as Auntie Whispers in the award winning animated series Over The Garden Wall.

Auntie Whispers is a sinister Witch (though not to give anything away, but there is more to this character than meets the eye.) Still the voice Curry gave her I think would be excellent for the Mekon.

I always imagined the Mekon’s voice sounding a bit like that. A kind of soft, but unsettling monotone, with brief flashes of anger when he confronts Dare.

For the cartoons based on the 70s comics meanwhile you’d recast Dare due to his surgery. Dan would join the Doctor and James Bond as being a classic British hero that’s played by multiple actors.

John Barrowman I think would be excellent as the 70s/ 2000 AD Dan. Whilst I may have some problems with New Who, I did always love John Barrowman. He’s a great leading man and always brings his all to any part he plays.

John much like Tom Ellis would be an excellent choice for Dan in a live action series as well as an animated one.

See here.

Also like Ellis, John can be light and straight forward, but can also be very dark as both a hero and a villain if need be, so I think he could give us a Dare who was obviously more ruthless, but at the same time not ditch all of the humour from the character completely.

I think it would be good to recast the Mekon for the 70s series too. You could easily have it that he had mutated in the hundreds of years in between. Simon Templeman would be an excellent choice for the 70s era Mekon, as by that point the villain has become more flamboyantly evil and sadistic.

Finally for the cartoons based on the 80s strips, well. I would like to see Michael Fassbender play Dan. I realise that is obviously very unlikely as he is becoming a big film star, but hey he’d be a good choice as he much like John Barrowman and Tom Ellis is good at being the big square jawed hero, but obviously has a lot of gravitas too.

Jason Watkins meanwhile would be a good choice for the third Mekon. I can see him blending the more flamboyant version of the villain, and the cold calculating side together, just like he did with Herrick.

Nick Frost meanwhile would be a brilliant Digby. Digby was Dan’s loyal butler and best friend throughout the 50s and 60s. He appeared to be somewhat slow witted on the surface, but underneath he was very wiley and was even able to outwit the Mekon on some occasions such as in Voyage to Venus and The Reign of the Robots.

Nick Frost has pretty much all the right qualities for Digby. He has made a career out of playing the loyal, somewhat slow on the surface, but resourceful and wiley sidekick for almost his entire career in things like Spaced, Shaun of the Dead, Paul and Hot Fuzz. The only problem is that he isn’t old enough to be Digby, but that obviously wouldn’t be an issue in animation.

Katie McGrath meanwhile would be a good choice for Professor Joecyln Peabody, the only female member of Dan’s team who was also the worlds greatest scientist.

For Rok I’d like to see Mark Hamill voice him. Whilst Hamill is best known for playing either the boyish hero Luke Skywalker, or the effeminate, camp villain, the Joker. Hamill has actually played a number of tough guy roles over the years, such as most notably Wolverine and Christopher Blair.

Also wouldn’t it be great to watch Mark Hamill and John Barrowman fight monsters together across the universe? Yes it would.

For Doctor Rodan meanwhile I think that Ingrid Oliver would be an excellent choice. She’s already had experience playing a brainy girl with Osgood in Doctor Who, though Rodan would have to be a bit harder, but that’s okay she can play stronger characters too like Natalie the rapist in Peep Show (which is my favourite performance of hers.)

For the Dark Lord I would LOVE to see Clancy Brown play that role. The Dark Lord is Dan’s archenemy throughout most of the 70s series. Though he has a pretty lame name, the Dark Lord was a brilliant enemy for Dan, as he was more human than the Mekon. The Dark Lord is presented as being the ruler of the Lost Worlds, with Dan eventually bringing down his empire. Its one of my favourite story arcs and if included in the animated series could help stop it from descending into just constant battles with the Mekon.

I would also like to see the Vampires king be made into a major character. The planet of the Vampires story, sees Dan and his men be lured to a planet with a single heart shaped continent.

Its people are somewhat primitive but seemingly friendly and they welcome Dan and his men at first, though they also force Dan and his team to abandon their weapons. Later however Dan discovers that they are Vampires when two of his men are cornered and have their hearts ripped out.

Dan and his team then have to fight their way back to their ship through a horde or red skinned, bloodthirsty Vampires unarmed.

Not only would this be a spectacular episode, but I think you could do a really interesting story arc from it too. You could have it that after the Dark Lord is overthrown, then the Vampires (whose planet is in the Lost Worlds.) Are able to rise up and become a major power in the Lost Worlds area of space and they are even worse, with ironically the Dark Lord’s empire being the only thing that was stopping them from leaving their planet.

The Dark Lord simply enslaved people, but the Vampires would slaughter whole planets. It could be an interesting metaphor for how sometimes its better not to interfere, even if things are bad as you can just end up unleashing something even worse.

As for who could voice the Vampires King, I think Tony Todd would do a fantastic job. For those of you who might not be familiar with him, Tony Todd is a character actor who is best known for playing the horror movie villain, The Candy Man. He’s also popped up in Xena, Angel, and recently voiced Zoom in The Flash.

He’s got the perfect voice for a villain and I’d love to see what he’d do with a Vampire tyrant from out space who tears people’s hearts out!

Finally another major foe of Dan’s from the 2000 AD series that I’d like to see animated is the Two of Verath. The Two of Verath was actually two separate criminals who had been fused together as a punishment.

One of the criminals was a ruthless scientist who had performed the most horrific experiments on his victims, whilst the other was a serial killer.

The two despise each other and regularly fight and even sometimes try and kill one another, despite the fact that if you kill one, you kill both.

I think that Rik Mayall and Ade Edmondson would have been a fantastic choice for the two, though sadly that’s no longer possible as Rik tragically passed away in 2014. Still imagine how much fun Rik and Ade would have had with those two characters.

As for who I’d like to see voice the character now, I think that David Warner would be excellent for the ruthless scientist, whilst Vinnie Jones would be good for the thuggish member of the two.

Vinnie Jones and David Warner would be an odd two to put together, but that is kind of the point.

There is so much potential in an animated version of Dan Dare, and since there are already two revivals of Dan Dare along the way (with the Big Finish one doing really well.) I hope the greater interest in the brand results in a new animated series sometime soon.

Romana The Animated Series

Romana was a character who originated in Doctor Who. She was a Time Lady who was sent by the high council to assist the Doctor in finding the segments of the Key To Time before the Black Guardian’s minions did.

Romana was much younger and more naive than the Doctor, but she had a far greater scientific mind than he did. She was the golden girl at the Time Lord Academy, whilst the Doctor had only scraped by on the second attempt with barely over 50 percent (this was obviously before all of the crap of the Doctor being the oncoming storm.)

In some ways Romana was more useful than the Doctor due to her greater scientific knowledge but at the same time however she didn’t undermine the Doctor as he still had more experience of the universe and was obviously older and more mature.

Romana was originally played the late Mary Tamm throughout her debut season, after which Lalla Ward took over the role.

At the time Ward was in a somewhat turbulent relationship-with Tom Baker who played the Doctor. This translated somewhat onto the screen, making it the only time there was ever even the hint of a romance between the Doctor and his companion in the classic series. Personally I don’t ever really like romantic stories with the Doctor. The character just isn’t designed to be romantic, and they often get in the way of the story too, but with Romana it was less out of place than it was with Rose as at least she was a member of the same species as the Doctor, and at least it was only ever hinted and not the focus of entire stories either.

Romana eventually left the show after three years to explore E-Space, another universe on her own.

She did return in various audio series which not only saw both Lalla Ward and Mary Tamm reprise their roles, but also a third incarnation of Romana played by Juliet Landau (best known for her role as Drusilla in Buffy and Angel) appear.

Sadly Romana never appeared in the revival, though considering the way they fucked up other icons of the series like the Daleks, the Master and the Brigadier, maybe its just as well.

Personally I’ve always thought Romana could have easily carried her own series. The big argument against this was always “no one knows who Romana is” but that is bullshit. Bring her back to Doctor Who and make her popular with viewers, then give her her own show.

I must admit, though I always liked Romana as a character, I initially came to the idea of a Romana spin off as an alternative to a female Doctor Who, but the more I’ve thought about it, the more I actually think a Romana spin off series would have been a great idea even if this whole female Doctor debate wasn’t around.

On the surface a Romana show would seem like Doctor Who all over again, as both would be about aliens exploring space and time, but that doesn’t mean you couldn’t give it its own identity.

Xena and Hercules on the surface were both pretty much the same show. Both revolve around big muscle bound, dark haired heroes, who in both cases are followed around by a short, blonde haired sidekick. Both also are set in the same time, both even feature much of the same supporting characters and villains like Ares, Callisto and Aphrodite.

Similarly Angel and Buffy are both about people who fight Vampires, Demons and supernatural creatures in big modern cities, in both cases the groups are made out to be a band of misfits who have been rejected by modern society. There are even comparable characters. There’s the book guy who knows all about Vampires, Demons and monsters (Giles and Wesley.) The sarcastic one who mocks the team, but we later see a softer side to them when they fall in love with the hero, (Anya, Spike, Cordelia.) And there is the geeky sweet girl, who starts out as a total wimp, but later ends up going evil and becoming the most powerful and dangerous villain in the whole show (Fred/Illyria, Willow/Dark Willow.)

Yet despite this, both Xena and Angel were able to establish their own identities and followings as they were able to bring something new to the original series premise. The fact that the leading hero was a different gender in both cases allowed them to explore certain themes and stories that the other series couldn’t. Added to that both series were given totally different tones, styles, and even when they did use the same characters, they were portrayed in totally different ways on either show.

Ares and Spike for instance were both much more romantic, conflicted characters on Xena and Buffy, than they were on Angel and Hercules, where they were much more petty and humorous characters.

So with this in mind I think you could easily make Romana her own character, and her show completely distinct from Doctor Who despite having a similar premise.

A key difference between Romana and the Doctor is that you can flesh her backstory and character out a bit more. The Doctor always has to be mysterious and some writers have found it difficult to flesh him out as a result of this.

With Romana however that wouldn’t be a problem as we already know her real name, and she isn’t mysterious at all.

Also the fact that Romana is more naive might make her a bit more fallable and vulnerable than the Doctor ever was at first, which could eventually lead to her becoming harder and more cynical and even perhaps more ruthless than the Doctor as time goes on.

Also you can have Romana explore different parts of the universe. She has no real affection or attachment to earth. In fact they often make a point of that with Romana often being bored when the Doctor takes her around great landmarks, and pieces of art from earth that mean so much to him.

So we could have Romana make a totally different planet her favourite world the way the earth is the Doctors.

This would not only allow the writers to create an entire alien planet, its history, people and customs, but they could also be a bit more bold and have really terrible things happen to this world too.

In Doctor Who as most stories on earth are set on modern day, then you can’t go too far for the sake of future stories that will be set on earth. Everything has to be resolved rather tidily and wrapped up.

With the planet Romana gets attached too however you could actually show the effects of an alien invasion on the planet in the long term with society now knowing how to cope with the knowledge of aliens at first, the alien technology that is left behind being abused etc.

We could also see how Romana’s relationship with this planet and its people changes over time too. Perhaps Romana, being a bit more naive at first than the Doctor would become known to them and seen as a great hero at first, but then it would all turn sour for her for various reasons.

Perhaps she would not be there when they were invaded one time, or when there was a world war, a famine, a problem she could have easily fixed, and they would have come to blame her for not helping them.

Perhaps when they discovered that she could change her face several members of their kind would attempt to pretend to be future incarnations of Romana in order to gain power and influence.

Or perhaps she would find herself in the middle of a civil war with both sides expecting her to help them, whilst she wouldn’t want to help either, and would end up being hated by both and become a wanted woman on the planet for years after.

You could also do an episode where Romana’s favourite aliens are invaded by humanity in the future. After all in the Doctor Who universe it is established that mankind does go on to conquer other alien races.

It would be interesting to see a story where primitive aliens are being invaded war of the worlds style by humans, and we are viewed as the monsters by them, with Romana having to stop the evil humans from harming her favourite species, in much the same way the Doctor would protect humanity from the Daleks.

You’d also have to develop a different dynamic between Romana and her companions than you had with the Doctor and his.

You could also give Romana a whole new rogues gallery too. You could still have her fight the Daleks and the Cybermen too now and again. In the audios Romana was kidnapped and enslaved by the Daleks for several decades of her life, so if you kept that as canon, that could lead to some quite interesting confrontations between Romana and the Daleks.

Still it would be better to give Romana her own enemies, who if popular enough could cross over into Doctor Who.

I’d obviously want this Romana the animated series to be set in the same continuity as the Doctor Who animated series and not New Who.

There are so many actresses who would be amazing as a 21st century Romana.

Sarah Parish would be a fantastic Romana. She would bring a real maturity and eccentricity to the part. I think Sarah is really underrated. Her performance in Merlin as the Troll who bewitches Uther is one of the most gloriously over the top and crazy performances I’ve ever seen. She definitely needs more appreciation.

Dawn Steele meanwhile is another actress that would be good as Romana. I think she would bring a harder edge to the character than other actresses.

Ingrid Oliver is obviously an actress I REALLY like. She is gorgeous, funny, likable and she has a fantastic, smooth and sexy voice.

Ingrid is a very versatile having played all kinds of different character from vapid airheads to shy, nerdy geeky girls, to tomboyish rapists!

She doesn’t even look like the same person in any of those roles. Though she has already played a character in Doctor Who, obviously Osgood, she could easily play Romana in an animated series that was not part of the same canon, and to be honest I think she would be the best.

Finally Rachel Shelley would be another fantastic choice for Romana. I can see her being like Mary Tamm. Very English, very classy, but not in a condescending way or anything.

To me a Romana spin off series is just screaming to be made, and I hope it does as a cartoon alongside a proper sequel to classic who. I personally would LOVE to see Ingrid Oliver’s Romana work alongside Tim Curry’s Doctor Who in a crossover episode.

Quatermass The Animated Series

Quatermass was one of the greatest British sci fi series ever made. Originally conceived by sci fi legend Nigel Kneale, Quatermass was an eccentric British, Holmsian scientist who worked for the organisation British Rocket Group to track down extraterrestrial and paranormal threats.

The stories explored many themes such as alien invasion, ancient astronauts, early myths being inspired by alien invasions, body horror, alien possession and even then contemporary racial tensions and issues, with the story Quatermass and the Pitt being inspired at least partly by the Nottingham race riots of 1958.

Hugely popular in its heyday, and enormously influential on later works. Quatermass was a great influence on Doctor Who in particular, with the Third Doctor Jon Pertwee’s era essentially being modelled on Quatermass.

Of course ironically Nigel Kneale utterly despised Doctor Who, considering it to be the worst idea for a television series he had ever heard.

Quatermass still retains a big following 60 years on, and whilst there are rumours of another live action series, sadly nothing has yet been conformed.

Personally I would love to see an animated version that tried to adapt and update the old classic stories as well as feature new adventures with the character.

As for who I’d like to see play the role of Quatermass, I think Anthony Stewart Head would be excellent.

Head obviously has experience in genre roles, and as seen with Giles he can play the old, scholarly, expert on the paranormal brilliantly.

The new Quatermass hopefully. 

Brave New World Movie

One of the all time greatest and most influential sci fi novels. Brave New World by Aldious Huxley revolves around a future where human beings are grown in laboratories and divided into caste systems based around intelligence.

One member of the society Bernard Marx visits a group of people who live outside the supposed utopia, in what are referred to as the savage reservations.

With Bernard in danger of being exiled, he discovers that the director who planned to exile him has an illegitimate son among the “savages”, John who he takes back to try and discredit the director.

His plan is successful, but sadly John’s outrageous behaviour eventually causes Bernard and his friends to be exiled anyway, whilst John is left behind. Mustapha Mond, the Resident World Controller for Western Europe, tells Bernard and his friend Helmhotz that exile is a reward as only outside of their society will they meet truly individual people. Mond cruelly keeps John around however, despite the fact that he wishes to be exiled too, just to see what will become of him.

Sure enough John is later unable to cope in modern society and after publicly attacking Lenina, a woman he has conflicted feelings for, John hangs himself.

Brave New World if anything is more relevant today than it was when it was first written. The novels dark ending where the crowds gather round John just to watch him deteriorate is terrifying foreshadowing of the way the mainstream media and the public loves to build celebrities and public figures up, only to tear them down in the most vicious ways and then laugh at their suffering and pain.

Brave New World has been adapted as a telemovie two times, and there were plans for another live action film to be directed by Ridley Scott and star Leonardo Dicaprio. Sadly however those plans appear to have fallen through.

An animated movie might be quite interesting, though like a lot of the DC animated movies it would have to be made for a more adult audience due to the darker content of the novel.

Abslom Daak The Animated Series

Abslom Daak for those of you who are unfamiliar with him, was a comic book character from the 1970s.

He was a vicious criminal who agreed rather than face execution for his crimes to help in a war against the most evil creatures in the entire universe, the Daleks!

During his war against them, Daak fell in love with a space princess who was later murdered by the Daleks which made him more determined than ever to destroy the monsters.

Whilst the comic was obviously a spin off of Doctor Who, the Doctor never appeared in the series, but Daak would go on to encounter the 7th and 11th Doctors many years later.

Daak was popular among comic book fans, but sadly he has never been included in the actual series, though there were a few homages to the character in the revival.

The 9th Doctors speech about wiping the Daleks out was based on the one Daak gives after his beloved is exterminated by the monsters.

Daak also did make a tiny cameo in the story Time Heist when the character of Seb is looking through a database of the galaxy’s worst criminals, Daak makes a blink and you’ll miss it cameo.

An Abslom Daak animated series would have a lot potential for many reasons.

First and foremost I have always thought that the Daleks were capable of holding their own tv series. Whilst they obviously work brilliantly against the Doctor, I think it would be interesting to see how species like humanity have to deal with the monsters without the help of the Doctor.

They have already been proven to be capable of carrying their own spin off series in audio, with the Big Finish Dalek Empire series, so I don’t see why they couldn’t in animation?

Abslom Daak meanwhile would be the perfect enemy for the Daleks as he couldn’t be more different than the Doctor. Visually he would be an interesting character for animation too. Daak always used laser chainsaws to kill Daleks.

Scenes like this animated would be exciting to say the least.

A Daak animated series could be aimed at a more mature audience. Doctor Who is not a kids show, its a family show, but obviously there is a limit to the levels of violence you can show in Doctor Who.

With Daak however you could actually show the full extent of the horror of the Daleks. The way they slaughter entire races, round millions of people up into labour camps, torture and experiment on their victims. The Daleks could be made even more terrifying in this series.

I’d love to see a confrontation between Daak and Dalek X. Dalek X is a character from spin off material. He is the most sadistic Dalek of them all, and is feared by every creature in the galaxy, even Dalek bounty hunters. There’d be some scope for great conflict between those two characters.

My main choice for voicing Daak would be James Marsters. Marsters is best known for playing Spike in Buffy the Vampire Slayer and its spin off Angel.

He’d capture the characters swagger, rage and hatred against the Daleks, as well as his vulnerability too. Also who better than Marsters to play a guy that starts out really evil, is redeemed by falling in love with a little blonde woman, and absolutely LOVES fighting and brawling?

I’d also like to see Tony Todd voice Dalek X too. The Zoom voice and persona recycled for Dalek X would be scary.

Finally I’d also like to see a three way crossover where Romana, the Doctor, and Daak have to team up to take on the Daleks who are planning something big.

Tim Curry, Ingrid Oliver, and James Marsters fighting Tony Todd as the most evil Dalek of them all would be brilliant.

The City and the Stars Movie

Arthur C Clarke’s masterpiece about the future of mankind. The City and the Stars is set one billion years into the future in the city of Diaspar, which by this stage is the only city left on the earth.

All of the planets oceans have dried up, and mankind has long since mostly left the earth.

The reason that the humans of Diaspar still live here, is because of an old legend that states that a race of ruthless invaders beat humanity back to this planet and agreed that they could live, only as long as they never leave the city.

All of the humans in the city are created by machines and only a few of them are allowed to live actual lives, with the rest merely being stored in its databanks. Most of the humans are also reborn again and again too, but a few are “unique”.

One such human, the main character of the novel, Alvin is able to find a way out of the city, where he stumbles upon another human settlement named Lys, an agricultural paradise, whose people are all telepathic.

As he continues to explore the outside world, Alvin eventually stumbles upon an alien and its companion, a robot. The robot claims to have been the companion of the Great Master who came to this world many centuries ago.

Alvin takes the robot back to the city and after the central computer that runs the city is able to break the block on the robots mind, they all discover the truth about the history of mankind.

The alien invaders it turns out where a myth, and the real reason only a few humans remained on earth was because of their rejection of the greatest scientific achievement in human history, the creation of an artificial mind. The first such attempt went insane. It even became known as the Mad Mind and ravaged the cosmos before being imprisoned in an artificial star named the Black Sun.

The second attempt at creating an artificial mind, the Vanamonde later left the remains of the Galactic Empire after making contact with another advanced alien race, though it is believed that he will return at the end of the galaxy to battle the Mad Mind.

The novel ends with Alvin planning to rehabilitate the earth, whilst the robot searches for survivors from the galactic empire across the galaxy.

The City and the Stars would make a fantastic animated movie not just because it has a brilliant story, but also because so much of it would look brilliant animated. The city’s, the landscapes, the robots would all look absolutely stunning, and indeed they already do in the illustrations for the novels, as well as a lot of fan art I’ve found online such as the following.

The City and the Stars is a very overlooked classic and I hope it gets more recognition.

War with the Newts Film Series

War with the Newts was written by Karel Capek, the Czech author who famously coined the word robot.

Much like his other more famous work R.U.R, War with Newts is a satirical novel which deals with subjects such as colonialism, fascism, Nazism and the arms race.

At 23 chapters, it is divided into 3 books. Its premise revolves around mankind discovering an intelligent race of amphibian men who are enslaved and exploited by humanity before rising up and exterminating most of the human race. What’s interesting about the novel is at the end of the story the Newts are shown to be no better than humanity, not only in the disgusting way they treat the humans, but the destructive effect they have on their environment too.

War of the Newts is simply too long to be made into one film, so I think it would be better if it were a trilogy of animated films.

I’d love to see how the Newts themselves would look animated.

Slaughter House Five Movie

One of the all time greatest sci fi novels. Slaughterhouse Five helped to propel Kurt Vonnegut to fame.

Its a somewhat surreal novel, which like many of Vonneguts later works blends various different genres and styles together from dark humour to meta fiction to sci fi.

It follows the life of Billy Pilgrim, a soldier who is kidnapped during the Second World War and is forced to endure life in the Dresden slaughterhouse, before his escape, recovery from PTSD, his marriage and raising his children, his later survival of a plane crash in 1968 and finally his death in 1976.

Interspersed throughout his life story, are flashbacks and sometimes flash forwards of Billy being abducted by aliens known as the Tralfamadorians who force him to mate with a famous actress, Montana Wildhack.

The reader is left to wonder whether the aliens are real or just delusions of Billy’s mind.

Slaughterhouse Five would be a difficult book at adapt to film, as its non linear narrative might be more confusing on film. Still I think it could make a brilliant film, and the Tralfamadorians have a lot of potential in animation too. They are described as looking like upright toilet plungers with a hand at the top, and a single green eye on the hand.

I’d love to see how an artist would try and draw that, and it not just look completely silly.

As for who could play Billy meanwhile, I think that Robbie Kay would be good. Kay is best known for playing Peter Pan in the series Once Upon A Time. His version of Peter Pan was portrayed as evil. As a man he gave up his only son, Rumplestiltskin so that he could become a child again and live forever.

It was a brilliant take on the Peter Pan idea, as here we had someone who had never grown up, but in a really terrible way. Malcom (Pan’s adult self) was lazy, selfish, shirked all of his responsibility, and didn’t care for anyone but himself.

You can see how brilliantly Robbie does the old guy in a young guys body. When he and Robert Carlyle talk, you completely believe that Carlyle is actually Robbie’s son as ridiculous as that sounds.

With this in mind Robbie would be brilliant as Billy as he would be able to voice the character during his youth, but could also voice him right up until his death to as he would be able to convincingly play the character in old age, as seen with his performance as Pan.

This would be another benefit to animating the novel rather than just filming it, as you could have the same actor playing Billy right the way through.

Judge Dredd Animated Series

Now I confess I am not the biggest fan of Judge Dredd. I only got into it recently after I read the 70s Dan Dare strips and was interested in reading more 2000 AD series.

So whilst I can’t really talk in detail about which stories I’d like to see animated, I do still think there is a rather obvious potential in an animated version.

Judge Dredd was originally created in the 1970s. He ended up becoming the most popular character in the 2000 AD strip and has remained one of the most iconic fictional British characters of all time.

Judge Dredd is set many centuries in the future after earth has been devastated in many global conflicts. What’s left of humanity now congregate into “mega cities.”

The strip takes place primarily in Mega City One, though other strips are visited. The lead character Dredd is a genetically altered super soldier, designed to curb the rampant crime in the city.

The strip was noted for its violent and pessimistic tone, with Dredd going on to become seen as one of the most iconic anti heroes of the genre.

There are plans for a Judge Dredd live action series, and I wish it well, but personally I think that it might work better as a cartoon, as again there no constraints in terms of what you can show in a cartoon.

As for who I would like to voice Dredd, I’d be more than happy for Karl Urban to reprise his role. Urban was excellent as Dredd in the 2012 film adaptation, and he’s a brilliant actor all around. I’ve been a fan of his since I first saw him in Xena the Warrior Princess as Julius Cesar.


Thank you for reading, and please let me know what sci fi classics you think would make great animated movies or series.

Happy New Year From Burrunjor

Well 2017 is nearly over. Its been a year of highs and some lows for me. I didn’t get nearly as much work done on my own original fiction as I had hoped.

My depression has been particularly bad this year. I’ve had it my whole life and it flares up at certain points, but I had really terrible onset in January and April in 2017 which delayed my work for quite a while.

Still I hope to get more stories finished in 2018 and more work done on this blog too.

I’d also like to pay tribute to a follower of this blog and supporter of my work general who I learned sadly passed away earlier this year.

Michael Thomas Knight, an acclaimed horror author who ran the blog Parlor of Horror sadly lost a long battle with cancer earlier this year.

I didn’t know him that well, but I always really appreciated his comments and opinions on this blog, as well as the support he gave me as a young, aspiring horror author and my heart goes out to his family at this sad time.

Hope all my regular readers have a fantastic new year and I’ll see you in 2018.

Remembrance of the Daleks Review

The final Dalek story of Classic Who. Remembrance of the Daleks also marked a radical change in the character of the 7th Doctor.

Initially at the urging of Michael Grade to supposedly counteract the levels of violence in the Colin Baker era, the 7th Doctor was portrayed as a clown, but from this story on he would be a much darker, more manipulative character.


The Doctor and his companion Ace arrive 1963 London near Coal Hill School where the first Doctor arrived many years ago.

The Doctor claims to have unfinished business that he needs to clear up.

The Doctor soon discovers that two warring Dalek factions are here. One the renegade Daleks who follow a black Dalek, the other the imperial Daleks who follow the Emperor.

The renegades base is on earth, whilst the Imperials is a gigantic mothership hovering the earth.

After a showdown with a renegade drone and some soldiers, the Doctor investigates Coal Hill School and discovers that the Imperials are teleporting their minions to earth via a transmat in the basement of the school. 

The Doctor deduces that the Daleks are after the hand of omega. The hand of omega is the device that omega used to create the eye of harmony, which ultimately gave the Time Lords mastery of time and space. Though both Dalek factions can obviously time travel, the eye of harmony will make the Daleks as powerful as the Time Lords and allow them to decimate all of time and space. 

The Doctor buries the hand of omega in a nearby grave, but the renegade Daleks human servants are able to find it.

The renegade Daleks are served by a former Nazi sympathiser named Mr Ratcliff. Among his followers include a member of Group Captain Gilmore’s platoon Mike, who are helping the Doctor contain the Dalek civil war from spilling out into the streets of London. 

Ace develops feelings for Mike until she discovers his true nature after which she is heartbroken.

The Doctor stops the renegades from leaving with the hand of omega by sabotaging their time vessel.

The Imperial Dalek forces who are greater and have a special weapons Dalek, slaughter all of the Renegades except for the black Dalek who flees the battle. Mr Ratcliff is killed by another of the Daleks human servants, a little girl that they have taken over, whilst Mike escapes with the Dalek time machine.

The Imperials steal the hand of omega and take it back to their shim. The Doctor contacts them and demands that they return it. The Emperor of the Daleks reveals himself to be Davros and tells the Doctor that he intends to use the hand of omega to turn Skaro’s sun into a source of unimaginable power, and that the Daleks will then destroy all earth and Gallifrey.

The Doctor angers Davros and then feigns fear after which the villain puts his plan into action. To Davros’ horror however he discovers that the Doctor has rigged the hand of omega to destroy Skaro’s sun, vaporising the planet into nothing. The feedback then destroys the mother ship, seemingly killing Davros (though unknown to the Doctor he manages to escape.)

The little girl who serves the Daleks kills Mike and confronts Ace, whilst the Doctor faces down the Black Supreme Dalek.

The Doctor tells the Dalek that his home planet is destroyed, and his race is dead. The black Dalek refuses to believe at first but when reality hits home it goes insane and kills itself.

Upon its death the little girl is freed from its control, though sadly she is left emotionally broken by the experience.

After attending Mike’s funeral, the Doctor and Ace leave, with Ace unsure if they did the right thing. The Doctor tells her that “time will tell. It always does.”


Remembrance of the Daleks is a fitting end to the Daleks for the classic series, not only because its a fantastic story to see the monsters out on, but also because in many ways it brings the monsters back to their roots and resolves a lot of loose ends.

First and foremost Remembrance returns the Daleks to being the centre stage again. Though Davros appears and is integral to the plot, its only in the last few minutes.

I liked Davros but it is true that he was overshadowing the monsters a bit too much.

The monsters are also suitably formidable and dangerous here too. Only the most powerful weapons are shown to be capable of taking down a lone Dalek drone, and at one point the Doctor even mentions that the Dalek mothership is capable of cracking the planet open like an egg!

An old weakness is also finally conquered as we see a Dalek ascend a flight of stairs. I must admit I think its done far better here than in the revival. The revival just goes for a full CGI option, whilst Remembrance actually uses a proper Dalek prop and balances it on several poles that they keep hidden.

This story also returns the Daleks to being parallels for the Nazis, by having a former Nazi collaborator work with them.

Mr Ratcliff who is played superbly by former UFO star George Sewell, serves as the Mavic Chen, devious humanoid type of figure for the Daleks to play off of in this story (as Davros is only featured at the end and for once is in a full position of authority.)

He’s not the most complex example of this type of character, but still its good to see the trope being used right to the end, and there are some wonderful little moments where we see how Ratcliff is drawn to the Daleks ideology for much the same reasons, and how his bitterness at being rejected for his beliefs drives him on.

The relationship between Davros and the Daleks also takes a great new turn in this story as well. Davros has finally managed to gain control of the Daleks but its at a cost to his for want of a better term humanity.

Davros knows that the Daleks will never accept him because he is not one of them. However if he creates an army who are simply loyal to him then they won’t be as effective as they will just be mindless drones who can’t think for themselves like the Necrosian Daleks who were destroyed easily.

So Davros changes himself to the point where he now is basically nothing more than a glorified Dalek.

I feel that Remembrance served as a brilliant way of ending both the Daleks and Davros, yet also leaving the door open if they wanted.

At this point it must have been obvious to John Nathan Turner that the show wasn’t long for this world. It was despised by virtually all of the heads of the BBC, sci fi as a mainstream genre in the United Kingdom was on its way out, and the show had been consigned to the graveyard slot.

Thus Remembrance resolves all of the dangling plot threads that have been building up since the 70s.

The Dalek civil war finally comes to an end with Davros at last gaining control of the Daleks, but at a cost to his own self. The Doctor also finally does what he should have done with Davros and the Daleks decades ago.

In Genesis he genuinely thought that he did not have the right to carry out a genocide, even to a race like the Daleks. Now however he feels he has to, as the Daleks are on the cusp of becoming as powerful as the Time Lords themselves. Similarly with Davros we have seen 5 struggle with the decision to kill him as Peter Davison, and be ready from a moral point of view to kill him as Colin Baker, but ultimately still not be prepared from a practical point to dispose Davros.

The 7th Doctor in contrast is ready for Davros in every respect, and we see that superbly in 7’s final showdown with Davros where he not only tricks him with the hand of omega, but plays on his irrational anger and vanity into provoking him into using it without thinking.

The Doctors callousness to Davros as the latter pitifully begs him for mercy is also a brilliant call back to Genesis, except this time its the Doctor ironically, that Davros is begging to show mercy.

Remembrance also resolves the Daleks vs Time Lords theme that has been running throughout many previous Dalek stories too.

Before I always thought that the idea of Daleks fighting the Time Lords in general, and not just the Doctor was mostly a New Who thing, but on a recent rewatch of all the classic era stories, you can see that it was actually quite a big thread throughout many key Classic era stories.

In Planet of the Daleks the Time Lords send the Doctor stop them on Spirodon, in Genesis the Time Lords are terrified of the Daleks to such an extent that they are willing to break their most important law and completely change the history of the entire universe to stop them.

Whilst its true that the Time Lords have sent the Doctor to interfere in the affairs of his other foes like the Cybermen in Attack of the Cybermen. They have never gone to such drastic measures before, and thus you can see how as early as Genesis, that the Daleks are deemed potentially to be the biggest threat to the Time Lords.

Resurrection meanwhile shows the Daleks now be bold enough to take the fight to the Time Lords, albeit in sneaky, underhand ways.

Remembrance finally however shows the Daleks be willing to wage an all out war on the Doctors people. They know they still aren’t quite ready to take them yet, so they steal the hand of omega which will make them powerful enough to in Davros’ words “sweep away Gallifrey.”

It is only thanks to the Doctors actions that either the Renegade or Imperial Daleks are not able to decimate Gallifrey, with the Doctor much like how the Time Lords wanted him to in Genesis finally being prepared to go incredible lengths to end this threat to his people and the rest of the universe once and for all.

Remembrance manages to wrap up all of these dangling plot threads to the point where had it been their last appearance then it would have been a satisfactory ending to the monsters. Yet at the same time Remembrance doesn’t salt the earth for future writers either as it does still leave the door open for future stories with the Daleks and Davros.

Davros is shown to have escaped the Doctors attempt on his life. Its a brilliant twist that ultimately for all his machinations and carefully thought out plans, the Doctor still underestimates Davros.

Furthermore as Davros is still around, then obviously he could easily create a new race of Daleks. Worse as the Doctor thinks they are dead, then they could act in secret, and they still know the secrets of the Time Lords too.

Added to that the 7th Doctor, despite his callous, ruthless facade is still shown to be unsure throughout the story, such as in the famous cafe scene, which is a good sequel to the iconic “Have I that right” moment from Genesis.

Once again the Doctor looks at his decision from all angles, both morally from a does he have the right to wipe out an entire species, and from the practical of what will the ramifications be of removing such a key power, for better or for worse from the universe.

Ultimately however because he is a little older and wiser and been through so much since Tom’s time he makes the opposite decision from the one in Genesis.

Just as with the ending of Genesis however, the Doctor and his companions are not sure if they have done the right thing.

The next Dalek story could have had the Doctor feel guilty at the ruthlessness of his previous selves actions, or maybe he would be devastated to see the Daleks and Davros had survived and be even more determined to destroy them than ever before, knowing how close they came to threatening his people.

Aside from bringing all of the major Dalek storylines together to a fantastic conclusion, as a piece of television on its own Remembrance succeeds on virtually all counts.

Its brilliantly paced, and with plenty of action and wonderful twists along the way. The first time I saw it I did genuinely think it was Davros in the chair, not just because it physically resembles Davros, but also because you’d never expect him to be the one in the position of power against the Daleks either.

Apart from some wobbly Dalek props on location, the stories production values are very strong too with the spaceship effect landing in the playground and the Daleks fights with each other being very well done in particular.

The direction all around for the story is excellent. I always loved the opening where we hear the voices of so many key influential figures throughout the 20th century such as Martin Luther King speaking with each other as the Dalek mothership looms towards the earth. It really shows you how all of the problems we have had with each other is NOTHING compared to what’s about to descend on our planet.

The acting from the leads is also very strong. You can tell that Sylvester McCoy loves playing the darker Doctor. He’s so much more comfortable and confident in the role. He doesn’t jettison all of the humour however which is a good thing as a large part of his Doctors appeal is his quirky humour. There are some wonderfully funny little moments with Ace such as their arguments in the van, but its never to the extent where you aren’t able to take his Doctor seriously.

Sophie Aldred meanwhile makes a very strong debut as Ace. She brings a real physicality to the role of the companion that we haven’t seen before or since, apart from with Leela.

The scene where she smashes the Dalek with a baseball bat before she crashes through a window is a particular highlight and shows how Ace is unlike other companions.

At the same time however Sophie and the script also bring a real vulnerability to the character too such as in her relationship with Mike, the way she cradles and comforts the young girl after she has been freed from the Daleks control, and the final scene of episode 2 where she is overwhelmed by the Daleks.

Finally another notable thing to mention about this story was that it was intended to celebrate the shows 25th anniversary. There are a couple of little clever nods to the past, such as the setting, not only in Coal Hill School, but in 1963, the year the show began.

The characters of Professor Rachel Jensen and Allison are also homages to previous companions Barbara and Liz Shaw, whilst Group Captain Gilmore is an obvious stand in for the Brig.

Still the continuity references are not like the clips in say The Magicians Apprentice. They serve a purpose in the story, are more slight so as not alienate new viewers and the characters who are homages to previous companions are not just distaff counterparts, but characters in their own right.

Rachel Jensen played by Pamela Salem could have been an excellent companion, as she is useful to the Doctor, and her chemistry with Sylvester is brilliant. Of course I’m not saying I would have wanted her to replace Ace or anything, but I would definitely rank her among the one shot characters who could have been companions list.

Overall Remembrance of the Daleks is an exciting, action packed, classic story that manages to round off all of the major Dalek story threads from classic who whilst at the same time taking them back to their roots as Nazi parallels, and leaving the door open for future stories with the monsters.


  • Script editor Andrew Cartmel named this as his favourite story out of all the ones he worked on.
  • Terry Molloy’s final performance as Davros on television, but he would reprise the role many times in Big Finish audios.
  • Davros was originally not to have appeared in this story. Its author Ben Aaronivitch said that he felt the character had undermined the Daleks. It was apparently on the suggestion of a prop designer whilst building the Dalek Emperor prop that Davros be included and JNT agreed to it. Others have disputed this however as JNT has also said in various other interviews that Terry Nation forced him to include Davros in every Dalek story he made.
  • The Daleks have turned the little girl into their servant to overcome their reliance on logic. Children are used to man their battle computers as they have a limitless imagination and with the aid of Dalek tech can conceive scenario’s the logical Daleks could not otherwise. The Daleks in the revival are shown to overcome their reliance on logic through the creation of the Cult of Skaro who are given individual personalities and imaginations.

Revelation of the Daleks Review

The 6th Doctors only outing on tv against the Daleks. Revelation was also the last story to be produced before the show’s initial 18 month cancellation.

Though controversial at the time due to its excessive violence. Revelation of the Daleks has since become regarded as one of the most innovative and intelligent scripts the series ever produced.


The Doctor and Peri arrive on the planet Necros. Necros is a planet where the bodies of the terminally ill are placed in suspended animation until a cure can be found for their condition.

The Doctors old friend Arthur Stengos has placed himself in suspended animation which according to the Doctor isn’t like him at all, so the Doctor wants to investigate.

Along the way to the facility, Tranquil Repose, where the frozen bodies are kept, the Doctor and Peri are attacked by a strange mutant, who Peri is forced to kill to save the Doctor.

With his dying breath the mutant regains control of himself, and actually thanks Peri for freeing him.

He tells the Doctor that the great healer did this to him and that he is using the frozen bodies on this planet for his own experiments. Before he can reveal more however the mutant dies.

Meanwhile Arthur Stengos’ daughter Natasha and her friend Grigory break into Tranquil Repose and discover what has happened to her father.

The Great Healer is actually Davros, and he has been turning the frozen bodies here into his new race of Daleks who are completely loyal to him.

Stengos is half way to becoming a Dalek, but he manages to regain his composure long enough to beg Natasha to kill him before he becomes a monster which she reluctantly agrees too.

Unfortunately Natasha and Grigory are soon captured by two of the staff at Tranquil Repose.

There is descent in Davros’ ranks meanwhile. Kara who owns the company that distributes the food Davros sells to pay for equipment, wants to dispose of Davros to gain all of the profits for herself. She hires a knight named Oricini and his quire bostock to dispose of him. Kara however ultimately intends to betray them once they have killed Davros and gives them both a secret bomb that will go off once they have disposed of Davros.

The Doctor and Peri after discovering a false grave of the Doctors 6th incarnation, encounter a perverse, lecherous man named Jobel and his assistant Tasambeker who is in love with Jobel (despite the fact that he treats her appallingly.)

Peri is sent off to meet the local DJ, whilst the Doctor investigates what’s going on. Unfortunately the Doctor is led into a trap by Tasmebeker and captured by Davros’ Daleks.

The Doctor is placed in a cell with Natasha and Grigory, and all three are freed by Orcini.

Davros however being aware that the Doctor is on the planet and that Kara has sent assassins after him dispatches Daleks to capture Kara and Peri. The DJ attempts to protect Peri, but the Daleks kill him.

Oricni meanwhile fails miserably in his attempts to kill Davros. Kara is then brought before Orcini where Davros reveals that she intended to betray him. Oricini stabs Kara to death as a result.

Davros also monitors Jobel and discovering that he too is planning to betray him. He orders Tasembeker to kill Jobel, but instead she tries to help him escape. Jobel however refuses to believe her that Davros wants him dead and cruelly mocks her, which angers her enough to stab him to death with a syringe.

The Daleks then exterminate Tasembeker, whilst the Doctor is captured yet again. Natasha and Grigory meanwhile are exterminated whilst trying to sabotage the Daleks incubation chambers.

Davros reveals to a captive Doctor that he escaped from the prison ship when they last met, and that he has acquired the equipment to build his new army of Daleks by turning several of the bodies frozen into food and selling them to the outer planets that are starving for a healthy profit..

Those he judges to be the higher intellects he has turned into his new race of Daleks who will soon be ready to wage war against the rest of the galaxy.

Unfortunately for Davros however one of the staff at Tranquil Repose named Teker, realises what Davros is doing and summons the original Daleks from Skaro.

These Daleks exterminate Davros’ new Daleks that are active and before Davros can activate his army they corner him. The Daleks decide to take Davros back to Skaro to stand trial for his crimes against them. Davros vows to the Doctor that he will return, but the Doctor states that he will be waiting for him.

The Doctor manages to destroy the Skaro Dalek on guard. (The Skaro Daleks intend to take control of Davros’ army and use them in their conquest of other planets.)

Oricini however uses his bomb to destroy Davros’ dormant army of Daleks first, sacrificing himself in the process.

The Doctor tells the staff at Tranquil Repose that they need to continue the demand for food this place has created for the starving planets, and gives them an alternate solution of harnessing the flowers that grow on the planet as a food source.


Revelation of the Daleks is more of a Davros story than a Dalek one. Really this story more than any other turns them into Davros’ mooks, and their screen time and interactions with the Doctor are very limited.

Still in spite of this drawback, Revelation is deserving of its status as a classic. Terry Molloy gives an absolutely stellar performance as Davros.

Molloy is able to show a completely new side to Davros through his twisted sense of humour. There are some wonderfully dark, yet genuinely funny lines such as Davros’ “consumer resistance” gag. I never thought I’d giggle at a joke about cannibalism of all things.

In Resurrection whilst Molloy was good his performance was just a retread of Michael Wishers, IE loud and screaming one minute, but then calm and eerie the next.

Here however Molloy completely makes the role his own and instead portrays Davros his own way.

Davros is really at the top of his game in this story. He completely and utterly outsmarts the Doctor throughout it. At no point does the Time Lord have the better of his archenemy. Furthermore its interesting watching how all of these other people like Jobel, Kara and Orcini all completely underestimate Davros, and how Davros is able to turn people against each other such as Orcini and Kara and Tasembeker and Jobel.

We get to see Davros be manipulative in a more complex and detailed way than before. Here he doesn’t just lie or trick people or hypnotise them like in Resurrection. We see Davros get under people’s skin, play on their resentments and emotions and attempt to make them genuinely loyal to him such as with Tasembeker.

Its such a wonderful little insight into how vicious Davros is when he tells Tasembeker that if someone had treated him, the way that Jobel treated her, he would have killed them!

Whilst Davros is the star of the show, the Daleks are not completely overlooked. Saward still does do a number of interesting, new things with them.

The idea of humans being turned into Daleks is a both a fascinating and horrifying concept.

It opens up several new avenues for the Daleks, namely body horror and the fear of being turned into a monster which is brilliantly demonstrated in the sequence where Natasha discovers her father has become a Dalek.

The make up for Stengos is effective. I love the way the rotting and disgusting flesh actually throbs on Stengos’ brain. Its a nice little touch that does genuinely make it seem organic. Its also disturbing watching the Dalek conditioning slowly take over Stengos’ mind, whilst he is still aware of what a monster he is becoming.

The idea of humans being turned into Daleks would resurface many times in New Who and various Big Finish stories, but to be honest I don’t think its ever been as effective as it was in this story. In The Parting of the Ways and Asylum of the Daleks for instance they don’t actually show us the half human, half Dalek hybrids in any detail. We only see Clara as a human, and a tiny fleeting glimpse of a Dalek mutant with two eyes in The Parting of the Ways.

Saward and John Nathan Turner really had more guts to show us the gruesome aspects of the change, much like they did with Cyber conversion in Attack of the Cybermen.

I also like the way that Davros’ Daleks are ultimately shown to be nowhere near as effective as the original Daleks.

The reason for that is because they are literally just mooks who do everything that Davros says and can’t think for themselves.

Ultimately Davros can never win. If he creates a race of Daleks who are merely his slaves like the Necrosian Daleks, then they will be nothing but mindless drones, but if he creates a race of Daleks like the originals then they will eventually realise they don’t need him like at the end of Genesis.

Its also a nice twist to have the Daleks unwittingly save the day for once. They are still as ruthless and evil as ever, but what Davros is doing is so heinous, you don’t care who stops him, even if its the Daleks!

Aside from the Daleks and Davros, Saward’s script benefits from a strong cast of supporting characters.

Jobel played by Clive Swift is a big favourite of mine. I love the way that there is absolutely nothing redeeming about him at all. When Tasembeker is breaking down in absolute distress, he is having a great time.

Of course the brilliant irony is that EVERYBODY despises Jobel apart from Tasembeker. The Doctor and Peri regard him as a filthy little grotesque, whilst even his own co-workers find him repugnant.

Notice how NONE of them come to his aid after Tasembeker stabs him in the chest? They all just carry on as usual. They don’t even try and apprehend Tasembeker for killing someone right in front of them, as hey its Jobel.

Jobels wig falling off his head as he dies is another brilliant moment of dark comedy. Apparently it was on the suggestion of Clive Swift himself that Jobel wear a wig and that if fall off when he dies. He said that he wanted the nasty little man to be humiliated as much as possible in his final moments.

Even Jobel’s actor hated him!

Kara meanwhile is an interesting foil for Davros. In any other story she’d be the main villain. She is a greedy, ruthless, woman who is happy for people to literally eat each other if it can make her a profit.

However she is completely and utterly out of her league when it comes to Davros, and its brilliant watching all of her clever little schemes just completely backfire on her.

Orcini and Bostock are also a brilliant double act too. They are a great new twist on the Don Quixote and Sancho Panza idea. Like Don Quixote and Sancho Panza they are delusional, but rather than just be two idiots who think they are great warriors, they are two men who refuse in spite of what they say, to acknowledge that they are no longer capable of being the great warriors they once were. Their best days are behind them and they suffer a humiliating defeat at Davros’ hands as a result.

Still Orcini redeems himself in more ways than one with his final action in destroying Davros’ new army of Daleks. Oricini clearly knows that he will most likely never get a chance for an honourable kill again, and so rather than live a life of needless violence, he goes out as a hero.

There’s also the fact that his only friend Bostock is gone too, and its somewhat moving watching him hug his lifeless corpse in his last few moments.

Colin Baker also puts in a fine performance here too. Some have criticised the fact that the Doctor doesn’t do much in this story, and I can agree with that complaint to some extent, though I think it has been a bit exaggerated over the years. Critics always seem to forget that the Doctor does fix the famine crisis that is affecting hundreds of planets across the universe.

Still its true that he generally seems to be on the outside to the main action for the most part. Nevertheless Colin does get some great moments that show a softer side to his Doctor such as his compassion for the dying mutant and Orcini.

You can see how this was clearly the beginning of the production team making the 6th Doctor into a softer figure. Its just such a shame that they were never able to complete this story arc properly.

Overall whilst it might have some flaws, Revelation of the Daleks is still a classic adventure and moves the Davros story arc along excellently.


  • At the end of this story the Doctor says he wants to take Peri somewhere nice, but it cuts off before we can find out where he wants to take her. This was intended to lead into the first story next series Nightmare Fair where the Doctor would take Peri to Blackpool and encounter the Celestial Toymaker. Sadly however the 1985 cancellation botched these plans, though Nightmare Fair would later be made as a Big Finish audio story.
  • In the 40th anniversary poll for the fans favourite stories, this was the 3rd highest ranked Dalek story on the list after Genesis of the Daleks and Remembrance of the Daleks, at number 11.
  • Laurence Olivier was originally going to appear in this story. He was a Doctor Who fan and had apparently been annoyed that he had never been asked to guest star in the series. Sadly however his busy schedule prevented this from happening. Olivier would have played the dying mutant.
  • This was the last Doctor Who story produced in the 45 minute format until the shows revival in 2005.
  • Eric Saward said he based this story on the novel The Loved One.

Resurrection of the Daleks Review

The first Dalek story of the 80s. Resurrection of the Daleks was one of the darkest and most violent Doctor Who stories of the decade and provoked controversy from both fans and mainstream viewers.

It marked the only time the 5th Doctor faced the Daleks on screen (though they did appear in a tiny cameo in The Five Doctors, but they did not meet the 5th Doctor in that story.)


On 1980s earth a group of prisoners from the future attempt to escape onto the streets, but they are gunned down by two police men.

In reality the prisoners were Dalek slaves, whilst the police men are human duplicates created by the Daleks. 

Two prisoners manage to escape to a nearby warehouse, though one of them is later killed by Dalek agents.

Back in the future, the Daleks attack a prison ship and slaughter almost all of its crew. The Daleks are planning to rescue Davros who has been kept in cryogenic suspension for 90 years.

The Daleks are served by a group of human mercenaries led by a man named Lytton. Lytton tells Davros that in the 90 years he was frozen, the Dalek and the Movellan war has finished, and that the Movellans defeated the Daleks.

The Movellans were able to create a virus that attacked the Dalek mutants inside the casing, and virtually exterminated their race. 

The Daleks have now finally returned to their creator, hoping that he can find a way to cure them. Davros however is more reluctant at being used this time. 

The Doctor and his two companions, Teegan and Turlough meanwhile are dragged through a time corridor to modern day earth, near the warehouse where the two Dalek prisoners escaped too. 

There the Doctor meets the last surviving prisoner named Stein. As they explore the warehouse, Turlough vanishes, having been abducted by the Dalek time corridor.

The Doctor also discovers the military have arrived at the house to investigate the sighting of some mysterious bomb like objects.

Just then the Daleks having seen that their plan to drag the Doctor to earth using their time corridor has succeeded, send a Dalek to capture him. 

The Doctor however is able to destroy the Dalek with the air of the military, though not before it exterminates a soldier and wounds Teegan.

The Daleks however don’t give up and send more Daleks who not only exterminate the entire military squad, but duplicate them as well.

The duplicate military squad capture Teegan and the last surviving scientist Laird, whilst the Doctor and Stein make their way to the Dalek ship through the Dalek time corridor. There the Doctor discovers that Stein is a Dalek duplicate and double agent.

The Doctor is captured and discovers the reason that the Daleks brought him and his companions to earth was so that they could be duplicated. The Doctor and his companions duplicates will then be sent to Gallifrey to assassinate the high council of the Time Lords, paving the way for a Dalek invasion of Gallifrey.

Turlough meanwhile meets up with the few survivors of the prison ship who try and activate the ships self destruct device to eliminate Davros, but Lytton finds them and slaughters the survivors, with only one, Mercer, escaping with Turlough.

Laird attempts to stall the Dalek duplicates long enough for Teegan to escape, but unfortunately she is captured outside by the Daleks duplicate police officers.

Laird is then killed by the Dalek soldiers when she attempts to flee and Teegan is sent to the Dalek ship. 

Fortunately however Teegan is found by Turlough and Mercer first.

The Doctor meanwhile though almost killed in the slow, torturous process of creating his duplicate is able to escape thanks to Stein, who is able to break free of the Daleks mind control.

The Doctor, Stein, Teegan, Mercer and Turlough reunite and escape to the TARDIS which the Daleks had brought on board.

There the Doctor decides that he must kill Davros as Davros is the only chance the Daleks have of surviving the Movellan virus.

Mercer and Stein who both want revenge agree to help the Doctor, whilst Teegan and Turlough are sent back to earth in the TARDIS.

Davros meanwhile using a mind control device, has taken control of several of the Daleks human servants and two Dalek drones. He plans to use the Movellan virus to exterminate the Daleks who he has realised will never follow him, and then create a new race of Daleks loyal to him.

When the Doctor arrives in his cell he attempts to shoot Davros. Davros attempts to weasel out of it at first, but when he realises that the Doctor doesn’t have it in him to commit cold blooded murder, he starts to taunt him.

The Doctor, Mercer and Stein are distracted by a group of Lytton’s men who arrive. In the fight Mercer is killed, and Davros seals them all out. Stein meanwhile flees, fearing that the Dalek control is taking him over again.

Back on earth Davros’ two Daleks arrive along with his men to try and capture the Doctors TARDIS. The Dalek’s duplicate soldiers attempt to kill them, but the two Daleks slaughter all of the soldiers. The Daleks then dispatch Lytton and his men to deal with them, but once again Davros’ Daleks exterminate them (except for Lytton who feigns death in the battle to escape.)

A squad of Daleks arrive and begin to fight with Davros’ Daleks and human servants, but the Doctor who arrives back through the corridor kills all of the Daleks using a sample of the Movellan virus. During the fighting Lytton attempts to shoot the Doctor a few times, before escaping into the streets in disguise as a policeman.

As both groups of Daleks and all of Lytton’s men are killed, back on the station Davros attempts to leave, but he is cornered by two Daleks who knowing that he is planning to betray him, try to shoot him.

However the Movellan virus that Davros unleashed on the base kills them. Davros declares that the Daleks are dead, long live the new Daleks, but as he attempts to leave the Movellan virus begins to affect him. With his DNA it seems being similar enough to a Dalek for the virus to work, Davros screams out in denial that he cannot die as the virus seemingly engulfs him.

Stein meanwhile having managed to fight off the conditioning again is able to activate the stations self destruct sequence just as the Daleks shoot him.

The prison ship is destroyed, seemingly taking Davros with it.

With the Daleks invasion plans foiled, the Doctor prepares to leave, but sadly his companion Teegan refuses to come with him. Having seen too many good people die, Teegan says she can’t go on anymore and tearfully runs out of the warehouse.

As she watches the TARDIS leave for the last time, her final words are that she will miss the Doctor.


Resurrection of the Daleks is a minor classic in my opinion. Its not quite on the level of Genesis or Day, but its a brilliant story nonetheless.

Its true that Eric Saward perhaps crams it full of too many ideas. The Daleks plan to invade the earth and Gallifrey at the same time, free Davros, make him cure the Movellan plague, whilst Davros similarly plans to turn on the Daleks and wipe them out, and create his own race of Daleks!

Still for the most part Saward is able to weave all of these different strands together and have them all interact with one another into one coherent narrative, rather than just lie, completely unconnected.

Above all else Resurrection makes the Daleks seem like a proper threat again after their bumbling performance in Destiny.

Here the monsters get to exterminate dozens and dozens of people and once again just one Dalek is shown to be a legitimate threat, with a mere two of them slaughtering an entire heavily armed bomb disposal squad.

A lone Dalek should always be portrayed as being capable of taking out at least several humans, as after all a Dalek is meant to essentially be a mini tank.

What’s more effective about the high body count in this story is that the Daleks kill people who are of no threat or importance to them. In almost every other story, whilst the Daleks have shot plenty of unarmed people, its always been someone like a rebel, or a traitor to their cause like say the Controller.

In this story however we see helpless old men just get gunned down in the streets who have no idea who the Daleks even are. One particularly gruesome scene sees the Dalek controlled policemen shoot an old man in the distance after cornering Teegan.

Whilst some have accused these sequences of being gratuitous violence, I think they demonstrate how the Daleks view all life as their enemy brilliantly. As the 5th Doctor himself says, it doesn’t matter how you react, the Daleks will always see other life forms very existence as a threat.

I like the way this story also gives the Daleks a chance to be more manipulative too. The idea of the Daleks using duplicates of their enemies to slowly manipulate and crush them from within is a terrifying concept. For the first time there is really a sense of paranoia around the monsters. Now anyone you know could be one of their duplicates. I love the way that the black Dalek states that the Daleks no longer even need to invade anymore thanks to their duplicates.

Its sad that other than a passing mention in Into the Dalek, the idea of the Daleks duplicates was never picked up on in later stories. I honestly think there is a wealth of more interesting stories to be played with using the idea.

As for Davros well I think he fares better here than in Destiny. Terry Molloy is a better fit for the character than David Gooderson. Granted the script doesn’t give him as much to do as Revelation and later Big Finish audio’s would but he still puts in a great performance and plays well off of Peter Davison.

Just like Michael Wisher there are some wonderful big hysterical rants where Molloy gets to chew the scenery, but also some nice subtle moments in his performance such as when he tells the Daleks quietly that he is very difficult to kill. Its a brilliant call back to Genesis.

This story moves the Davros/Dalek relationship on quite well as we see how Davros begins to resent the Daleks. That’s twice they have betrayed him and so really he’d be a mug to not have a back up plan this time.

Its a brilliant irony the way this time the Daleks are the ones who underestimate Davros. They assume after Destiny that he will always be willing to return to his “children” and it never even occurs to them until its too late that Davros actually wants rid of them this time.

The scene where Davros murders the two Daleks with the virus and they scream and beg for mercy whilst he ruthlessly screams “YOUR LIVES ARE OVER” is a nice little reversal of the ending of Genesis of the Daleks, where Davros having underestimated the Daleks was begging them for mercy before they gunned him down.

This story also marks the real beginning of the power struggle between Davros and the Dalek Supreme which will become a major plot point in subsequent Dalek stories.

Davros’ relationship with the Doctor is also well developed in this story. I never really thought it before, but on a recent rewatch I think that Peter Davison’s Doctor plays brilliantly off of the Daleks and Davros.

The fact that he is so vulnerable and sensitive allows the Daleks and Davros unrelenting cruelty to seem more effective than it did with say Tom in Destiny who tended to laugh in the face of danger.

5 and Davros’ confrontation is one of my favourite moments. I love the way that Davros actually considers the Doctor not being able to shoot an unarmed man in cold blood to be a sign of weakness.

I feel you can also see quite a nice build up to the Sixth Doctor in this story too. Here the 5th Doctor’s mercy causes Davros to escape and he instantly regrets it. He knows that Davros will cause more death, so for his next regeneration he decides to adopt a more ruthless persona.

I’ve often said that you can in most instances see the next Doctor already begin to emerge in the last few stories of the previous Doctor, or that you can see how the next Doctor might appear as a response to the previous one.

The First Doctor for instance becomes more of a direct hero, and warmer and less grotchty, so Troughton’s younger, more altruistic Doctor is a response to this. Troughton meanwhile is exiled to earth against his will, so Pertwee’s Doctor is more anti establishment and rebellious. Pertwee’s Doctor similarly after having spent so much time on earth, begins to want to be free again, which leads into Tom’s Doctor who is desperate to cut all ties with UNIT and be a free agent again.

Tom’s Doctor meanwhile in his last few stories endures incredible losses and defeats. He is the first Doctor to suffer a violent death, he is unable to save the loved ones of many of his friends like Nyssa and Teegan (he is unable to save Nyssa’s entire home planet and countless other worlds from the Master too.)

Thus the 5th Doctor in response is more unsure of himself and more vulnerable and desperate to make up for his mistakes.

This idea is continued in later Doctors eras too incidentally. 10 is a much lighter, more merciful character after seeing how much more ruthless he became after the war in his 9th incarnation (and you can see this in 9’s last few stories when he shows mercy to the last of the Slitheen family for instance.) 11 meanwhile is more sociable and alien, after having become too human and lonely as 10, whilst 12 was meant to be older to represent the Doctor having grown up after having naturally aged into an old man as 11.

Now in 5’s last series you can see the Doctor endure a much greater loss, much like 4 in his last few stories, except in this case it has a different effect on him. It makes him much more ruthless.

He realises that he needs to finally finish his enemies like Davros (who he regrets killing) and the Master who in the next story he attempts to burn to death. Thus when he becomes 6 he is a much more ruthless and confident Doctor to overcompensate for 5’s indecisiveness and vulnerability.

Resurrection of the Daleks I think demonstrates this development better than any other story, with the Doctor failing to save so many innocent people that even Teegan is forced to leave. The Doctors final words after Teegan leaves that he must mend his ways foreshadow his change into a more ruthless character both before and after his regeneration.

Teegan’s departure is one of the most moving as well as one of the most bleak in the shows history. She isn’t killed off like Adric, but she is still left emotionally broken by the horrors that she has witnessed. Its also possibly the only time that the Doctor and a companion end things on bad terms.

The Doctor is never happy to see his companions go, but at the very least he can be happy for them. Even with Rose, he knows she is going on to a happy life in the other universe.

With Teegan however in their final scene together, the Doctor chases after her telling her that their relationship can’t end on this note, only for her to ignore him.

Its a very bold way to end any companions tenure, never mind one of the longest serving in the shows history. Unlike in New Who where the whole last episode has to be devoted to the companions departure like Hellbent, here they only build up to it as a result of the story, rather than taking it over, by having Teegan witness the worst of the Daleks murders such as Laird being shot in the back, and the helpless old man being gunned down by the police.

Aside from its importance in the shows history, Resurrection of the Daleks stands up as a great piece of tv in its own right too.

Its brilliantly directed, the production values are of a very high quality, the sets are well designed, and whilst Sawards many different story strands at times might make the show seem a bit overly complicated, at the same time they also make sure there is never something not going on.

To be honest I’ve always thought that Resurrection of the Daleks was a great story to introduce someone to Doctor Who with. Its fast paced, its special effects are not embarrassing at all, the acting from all the leads is brilliant, the Daleks are vicious and scary, the music is subtle and effective, and its a very dark story.

It instantly betrays a lot of the negative myths that developed about Doctor Who being a silly, slow, series with dreadful effects.

Overall whilst not one of the top 5 Dalek stories, I’d still say that Resurrection is a classic and criminally underrated.

Notes and Trivia

  • Attack of the Cybermen, made the following year is a sequel of sorts to this story. It follows Lytton who was left stranded on earth at the end of this adventure. Lytton is portrayed more sympathetically in Attack than in Resurrection. He claims that he only worked for the Daleks because he had no choice. It should be mentioned that whilst Lytton had no problem with killing people on the Daleks orders, the black Dalek did still consider him untrustworthy and eventually ordered him killed. Lytton later attempts to help the Cryons save humanity from the Cybermen in Attack. Though he is being paid to help the Cyrons, Lytton nevertheless does still genuinely help humanity and the Doctor at the expense of his own life. When the Cybermen capture him, they promise to let him go if he betrays the Cryons whereabouts (which would also doom humanity), but Lytton refuses and not only withstands torture, but also cyber conversion too. His final act is a futile attempt to fight off the Cyber controller to save the Doctors life. All of this causes the Doctor to believe that he may have misjudged Lytton at the end of Attack of the Cybermen.
  • One of the Dalek voice actors for this story, Brian Miller is the husband of Elisabeth Sladen who played Sarah Jane Smith.
  • This story marks the first time that the Daleks are shown to take the fight to the Time Lords. It is regarded as one of the first strikes of the Time War in this respect.
  • A Movellan makes a tiny cameo at the start of the episode as one of the prisoners fleeing down the street who is killed by the Dalek’s duplicates. He is not identified on screen as a Movellan however, but this apparently was the original intention, and there is nothing to suggest that he is not a Movellan.
  • This story marks the first appearance of a black Dalek on tv since The Daleks Masterplan.
  • John Nathan Turner, Doctor Who’s longest running producer contributed a short interview to the DVD release of this story. Sadly it ended up being his only contribution to the DVD range as he passed away just a few months later.
  • This story marks the 8th time the Daleks try and invade the earth. In The Dalek Invasion of Earth and Day of the Daleks they invade and conquer the earth, whilst in Frontier in Space/Planet of the Daleks, Death to the Daleks, The Evil of the Daleks, and the Daleks Master Plan, they plan to destroy humanity through other means, such as a space plague, provoking a war etc.
  • When the Daleks are draining the Doctors mind, archive footage of all of the Doctors companions and previous incarnations appear except for Leela. Ian Levine, the shows continuity adviser admitted this was an oversight on his part.



10 Political Debates I’d Like To See

Its very hard to talk about politics these days. Everybody is so quick to label someone who disagrees with them with a nasty name like “Nazi”  “libtard”, “fascist” or “SJW”.

Of course I’m not trying to take the moral high ground here or anything. I myself have been guilty of this in the past as well.

As a result of this we are all to some extent sealed off in our own little echo chambers and the few times anybody is willing to approach the other side, sadly its usually just to trash them rather than try and hear their argument.

In this article I am going to run through which debates between public figures on the opposite ends of the political spectrum I’d like to see.

I think its very important for people who have large audiences to reach out and debate with each other. Not only does it help to set a good example in the media, that all ideas can and should be debated regardless of how objectionable you may find them. But it also opens up people on the other side of certain key arguments to their opponents ideas in a more fair way.

Of course there have already been a few positive examples of people from opposite ends of the spectrum reaching out and debating with each other.

The most famous example is arguably Laci Green and Chris Ray Gun, who have begun a relationship in the last few months.

“I’m Thankful That I Met This Lunatic”

Kevin Logan meanwhile, though I don’t agree with him on much, I do respect the fact that he has been willing to talk to people like Coach Red Pill, Blaire White, Andy Warski, and Sargon of Akkad in many fair, one on one debates.

Similarly Blaire White has also debated a number of people who are opposed to many of her beliefs, such as Laci Green.

Though of course it hasn’t always gone well. Blaire White’s recent debate with Candace Owens, AKA Red Pill Black was a trainwreck of epic proportions.

I don’t blame Blaire for this. Candace Owens gave an absolutely terrible performance. She shouted over Blaire every time she tried to speak and tried to rattle her by maliciously calling Blaire a man and he all the time.

It doesn’t matter how fair Blaire is, if the other person is just going to shout and scream then the chance to exchange ideas or argue is lost.

A way round this I think is to adopt the “Grapple in the Apple” format.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with it, the “Grapple in the Apple” was a famous debate between the late Christopher Hitchens and George Galloway on the Iraq War.

Its often hailed as one of the greatest debates of the 00s. Undoubtedly a large part of this is due to the fact that Galloway and Hitchens, love them or hate them, were big political figures at that time ( and still are), with huge followings, who were renowned for their aggressive, no holds barred debating styles in particular.

Still a large part of why I think its so great is that it allows Hitch a chance to speak for about 5 minutes, then Galloway a chance to speak for 5 minutes, then Hitch, then Galloway until both had fully laid out their arguments.

Both are completely forbidden to speak whilst the other is talking, though at the end the two are given a proper chance to talk with each other.

This allowed both sides of the argument to be heard clearly, both men a chance to say all they wanted to say, and both men a chance to respond to the others accusations.

Best of all it still allowed them a chance to properly interact at the end after their arguments has been fully stated.

I’d love to see grapple in the apple style debates with the following people. I think all of these debates would be interesting for various reasons. I freely admit that a large part of why I want to see these people debate is for entertainment value as well as the exchange of ideas too.

That’s part of why we love debates too, including “Grapple in the Apple”. Galloway and Hitch always thrived on colourful language and flowery insults.

Still ultimately I think these debates would be very interesting from many perspectives.

1/ Shoe0nHead vs Claudia Boleyn

Claudia Boleyn is a fairly popular feminist youtuber. She talks about forms of entertainment from an SJW, or feminist perspective like Doctor Who, Sherlock and Game of Thrones.

She has also done videos about the feminist movement in general, and other subjects such as Brexit.

Claudia I’ve always found to be a very fair and nice person overall, in both her videos, and in my interactions with her on twitter. Whilst I think her views are misguided on a lot of things, she has always been very polite and reasonable to her critics. She also unlike other feminists doesn’t censor comments, block critics, and has even done videos answering her critics questions.

She has also responded to videos about her in very classy and cool ways too that I honestly can imagine very few youtubers doing. She’s already responded to a video by Shoe0nHead herself.

See here

Claudia Boleyn The Feminist I Responded To In My Video Is A Sweetheart

Shoe0nHead (real name June Lapine) meanwhile is a popular anti feminist youtuber. She is left leaning, and overall has a liberal outlook on things, though I suppose she could also probably be described as a bit of a centrist too. Sadly however because almost all critics of feminism are tarred as “Nazis” many of Shoe’s critics will dismiss her as right wing.

Shoe’s style is humorous, energetic and over the top, but she does make a lot of good points, and has helped to expose a lot of feminists and SJW myths such as the wage gap, and the slew of supposed hate crimes that happened after Trump’s election. Shoe also does many collaboration videos with her boyfriend, another very popular youtuber who goes by the handle of Armoured Skeptic.

Now I think a debate between these two women would be good as neither are really what you would call extreme in their beliefs.

They are obviously strong in their convictions, but still both as you can see are fairly open minded enough that I think that they would really take the others opinions on board. I’m not saying they’d sway the other one necessarily, but their debate would certainly offer up a more nuanced and respectful alternative to many anti SJW vs SJW arguments that we see online and in the media in general.

I have spoken to Claudia about the possibility of debating an anti SJW before and she has said she might be up to it in the future, but sadly her depression and anxiety would make her too nervous right now.

I don’t want Claudia if she’s reading this to think that I am pressuring her into doing a debate with Shoe (not that I have any influence anyway.)

I believe Claudia, as not only has she had problems with her mental health before (which she has been very brave and inspirational in being open about.)

But she has certainly shown herself to not be afraid of arguing or talking with people who disagree with her many, many times, so she has nothing to prove in that respect.

Also to be fair not everyone likes to debate anyway. There’s a difference between just not really being the type of person who likes to debate, and shutting your opponent down.

Personally however I think Claudia vs Shoe would be an interesting, enjoyable debate, and I hope Claudia and Shoe are able to speak with each other in a greater detail at some point.

Who Would I Support?

Shoe. Again I like Claudia a lot personally, and I think she’s a smart woman, if misguided. But I agree with pretty much all of Shoe’s criticisms of feminism and identity politics. Her points are usually very well researched and even handed, so I don’t really see how Claudia could get the better of Shoe, but then again maybe I’m just biased.

2/ Paul Joseph Watson vs George Galloway

The opposite of the Shoe vs Claudia debate.

George Galloway and Paul Joseph Watson are known to be quite confrontational and even outright vicious towards their targets.

As you can see these two in the same room really wouldn’t hold back when arguing with each other.

Galloway is a passionate defender of Fidel Castro. In fact he even claimed to be a close friend of the former dictator. Galloway is also a socialist, and has been accused of courting support from the Muslim communities in areas he’s ran for office in quite controversial ways. The worst such example was when he declared Bradford an Israel free zone.

Pat Condell Slams George Galloway

Though Galloway claims to not be a Muslim himself, he has often blasted famous critics of the Islamic faith such as Tommy Robinson as racist and ignorant.

Paul Joseph Watson meanwhile is a supporter of capitalism, condemned Fidel Castro when he died as one of the worst monsters of the 20th century, and is a high profile critic of Islam.

The two men it should be said do actually overlap on a number of important issues. Both supported Trump in the 2016 election, as both regarded Hillary as the bigger danger as she was a war monger. Both also later criticised Trump’s decision to launch an air strike on Syria. Both utterly despise Tony Blair and have been critics of American foreign policy in countries such as Iraq throughout their entire adult lives, and both were also high profile supporters of Brexit too.

Indeed whilst Paul Joseph Watson has criticised George Galloway on many things, he did also retweet him on Brexit.

Still I suspect that the two men would probably clash over the things they disagree with more than they’d find common ground.

I think this debate would possibly rival Grapple in the Apple. It would obviously need a good moderator to stop it descending into a Candace vs Blaire situation.

Galloway vs Watson would not just be a huge, passionate clash of ideals, but also of egos. Both men I think its fair to say take a lot of pride in their work. I’m not knocking them for it. After all you have to be confident to beat your opponent in a debate, and also even just to deal with the constant accusations of “you’re a racist”, “you’re a bigot” etc.

Still I think its fair to say that PJW and Galloway are quite full of themselves.

With a great moderator this would be a truly spectacular debate. Again it would be the opposite of a respectful, Shoe vs Claudia debate, but that’s okay. There’s a time and a place for the more angry, confrontational debates. Indeed having two men who really don’t like each other, still sit down and talk over their problems if anything is a better representation of free speech, than two people who are fine with each other like Claudia and June.

Who Would I Support?

Well this one is a bit more complicated. I think PJW would absolutely hammer Galloway on the subject of Islam. As always I am not saying that all Muslims are evil. I (along with PJW) recognise that many Muslims who live in the west have abandoned the bad bits of the Quran and integrated.

However the problem is many of them haven’t. Islam as an ideology is far more dangerous than either Christianity or Judaism.

Islam’s holy book, the Quran commands that its followers murder all non believers, that all gay people are to be killed, and that all black people and women are inferior to white men. It also promises a happy afterlife for all those who martyr themselves in conflict too.

Now its true that the old testament is a vile book too, but the Jewish religion is more loose, and tribal overall. Also it has had a reformation, many times too.

Christianity similarly has not only had a reformation, but the Christian holy book, the New Testament is nowhere near as twisted as the Quran, and Jesus overall was portrayed as a more genuinely benevolent figure who forbid violence and encouraged his followers to love their enemies above all else.

This isn’t about race, as anyone of any race can be either a Muslim or a Christian, or convert to Judaism. This is about ideology and the ideology of Islam is currently causing far more problems across western society, never mind on a global scale. Grooming gangs, homophobia, terrorism, religious persecution, anti semitism, all of these things have increased in areas where the influence of Islam has increased.

Here are the facts to back this up.

Yes Violent Crime Has Increased In Sweden

Cologne is Everyday

Grooming Gang Statistics

Easy Meat The Problem With Britain’s Islamic Grooming Gangs

The Quranic Verses of Violence

Top 10 Violent Koran Verses

Can We Finally Talk About Homophobia In Islam

Ten Reasons Islam Is Not A Religion of Peace

Now again obviously I’m not saying that that means we have to kick all Muslims out (and PJW has never argued for anything like that either), but a sensible and reasonable discussion needs to be had about the problems Islam is causing.

Sadly however George Galloway is one of these people who refuses to hear any fair and objective criticism of Islam as anything but racist. Even when presented with the facts he will still just shout “you are a bigot” and whilst he is undoubtedly when he’s good, a brilliant debater, in these instances he just comes across as a total clown.

Imagine this being PJW here. This guy does well obviously, but as you can see his approach is more laid back. Imagine it being someone who is as belligerent as Galloway in a fair environment. Would be quite interesting I think.

Still that said I think Galloway would get the better of Paul when it came to politics. Again I admit this is just pure bias on my part, as I am a socialist.

I don’t think there is no value in capitalism, but I think that PJW overlooks its faults too much. For instance in his “Why Capitalism is Great” video he dismiss all of the problems that have arisen from capitalism such as the invasion of countries like Iraq, and people like George Soros gaining so much influence as being as a result of corprotism and not true capitalism.

Ironically this reminds me of the argument PJW always sneers at that lefties use to gloss over the failures of communism “they just weren’t doing it right”.

There are problems with every system, and so I think its stupid to get so tribal over one and dismiss any faults that can arise from one as “just bad people not doing it right.” Karl Marx himself ironically praised capitalism, whilst simply acknowledging its faults.

I admit there are problems with socialism, which is why I wouldn’t associate myself 100 percent with the ideology. I call myself a socialist for practical reasons as I am currently very sympathetic towards many socialist concepts and ideas such as the welfare state, and the NHS. But I think that the best thing to do is take the best ideas from many different ideologies that work together.

Now fair enough Galloway I feel can be tribal when it comes to his politics too, but ultimately I’ve found his defence of socialism to be more detailed than Watson’s of capitalism. For instance he actually tried to defend Cuba remaining a dictatorship by pointing out that whilst no elections have been held, this is because the country has been under constant attack from US forces, and that the UK similarly abandoned elections during the Second World War too.

Watson also at times I feel buys into some myths about socialism too.

For instance he has called Hugo Chavez a dictator many times. Say what you will about Chavez but he was NOT a dictator. Even Jimmy Carter of all people said that he was a free and democratically elected leader.

Jimmy Carter on Chavez

Added to that Watson has even spoken favourably of Margaret Thatcher (someone who supported ACTUAL dictators like Agusto Pinochet) a few times, which to me further shows how he isn’t prepared to admit that there are faults with the capitalist system.

Is Watson Now Promoting Thatcher?

Needless to say on positions like this, Galloway would absolutely hammer Watson.

So I suppose I would be on PJW’s side when it came to social issues, but Galloways more on political ones.

3/ Tree of Logic vs Abby Martin

Similar to the PJW vs Galloway debate I see this as being a very tense, confrontational encounter.

Abby Martin is a journalist who originally worked for RT, hosting the show Breaking the Set. She has since gone on to produce the documentary series The Empire Files for telesur.

Now Abby is very left leaning. Arguably her greatest moment for me was the work she did on Hillary Clinton. I’d say that Abby and Paul Joseph Watson really exposed to the wider world just how corrupt Hillary was more than anyone else.

Obviously other people including the great Christopher Hitchens had done work on the Clintons, but Abby’s work was really the most extensive. To be honest I can’t imagine any reasonable person not breathing a huge sigh of relief that Trump won when you watch Abby’s videos on Clinton.

Its terrifying to think how close this person came to occupying one of the most powerful positions on earth!

Tree of Logic meanwhile is a youtuber who first rose to prominence in 2016.

She has done comprehensive videos (that I highly recommend) on Islam, Black Lives Matter and gun control among other things.

She is a conservative by her own admission, so I clash with her on some of her political opinions, but she’s still one of my favourite youtubers because of her brilliant style, and because I feel her videos on Islam are among the most insightful. You should check out her Taqqiya video.

Still arguably Tree’s shining moment so far was when she exposed Candace Owens, AKA Red Pill Black.

Candace Owens had originally set up a website called Social Autopsy that was designed to doxx people for saying mean words online. After it was thankfully rejected by the kickstarter, Candace re-emerged as an anti SJW.

Now obviously people change. I myself had some SJW leanings before (I used to believe things like the gender wage gap for instance.)

However the problem with Candace was that she kept the website Social Autopsy, and the information she had gathered on people there. Personally I think that Candace wasn’t necessarily going to launch the website as some claimed (though that was certainly a valid opinion.).

Still in my opinion rather than being a trojan horse SJW, Candace is a chancer who has no real political beliefs, and had jumped ship when it was obvious that the third wave feminism movement was dying.

Social Autopsy however I think was her bolthole in case the conservative fad didn’t last or work out for her.

Still regardless of whatever her true motives were, in making sure that this heinous website was never able to launch, Tree really did everybody on the net a huge favour.

At the same time Tree also interestingly showed how sadly many people on the right have a soft bigotry of low expectations too. We all know how the left talks down to people with dark skin. Their “love”of Islam comes entirely from this. Basically because most Muslims have brown skin, then they have to be the poor victims in the left’s eyes and that’s that.

Sadly however Candace showed that a lot of conservatives are desperate to have a black person on their side that they’ll overlook her faults in comparison to a white person. Its doubtful that a white person with a doxxing website would have been promoted as “the new sensation” by Info Wars.

Now Tree vs Abby would be a great debate for many reasons.

Obviously they are on the opposite side on many things. Really the only area that they overlap on is a mutual loathing of Hillary Clinton. Even then however Abby hates Trump, whilst Tree is a huge supporter of her president.

Abby sadly like many on the left is a bit of an apologist for Islam. She’s clashed with people like Sam Harris, Paul Joseph Watson and even Maajid Nawaz (who claimed that people like her were the reason he coined the term the regressive left.)

Needless to say there could be some interesting conflict between these two.

Tree and Abby also are both known for having very dominant personas and being very alpha.

Of the two of them I must admit, personally I think Tree is more genuinely alpha, as she was a former police officer after all. With Abby not to do her down, as I am overall a fan, but I think a lot of her alpha persona is kind of a bit more for show.

Take a look at this vid to see what I mean.

So yeah of the two I think Abby’s is perhaps more of an act.

Still I think it would be a very interesting debate nonetheless, and I hope Abby goes on Tree’s channel sometime. I would also like to see Abby debate Paul Joseph Watson (properly and not just some bitchy comments to each other on twitter.) And Brigitte Gabriel too.

Who Would I Support

For the most part Tree. Again however as Tree is more right wing than me or Abby, then much like with Galloway vs Watson, on some political issues I’d probably side more with Abby.

However even then with the main political issue of Trump vs Clinton, Tree feels the same way as Abby, so I suspect the debate would most focus around Islam and BLM in which case I think Tree would mop the floor with Abby personally.

4/ Tommy Robinson vs Owen Jones

Now I’ll admit here that this is a little different in that I dislike Owen Jones greatly.

With all of the previous people though I disagree with all of them on some important issues, I still overall like most of their work.

Jones however I have virtually no respect for. To be fair to him its not like he hasn’t said and done great things too. This article here that he wrote recently is brilliant, and very well argued.

We Should All Be Working A Four Day Week

However my big beef with Owen Jones is that he is a threat to free speech.

Jones has famously refused to appear on television with people he disagrees with, and has even got some people fired from their jobs for comments he dislikes.

Owen Jones Tweets About Katie Hopkins Being Fired

Owen Jones Gets Katie Hopkins Fired

As you can see Jones is not just a misguided SJW like say Claudia Boleyn. He is a bully, a coward and someone who needs put in his place for the sake of free speech.

Tommy Robinson meanwhile is someone I have tremendous respect for. I’m not saying he is perfect or anything, but I feel Tommy has done more for the working class of this country than most.

He has brought attention to the problems Islamic immigration has caused to working class communities and helped those whose stories are often side swerved or outright ignored by the mainstream media and sometimes even the authorities.

Over the years Tommy has had to deal with the mainstream media sliming him as a racist (when nothing could be further from the truth) and even attempts by the police and the government themselves to silence him, Tommy has still not given up however and continues to try and help those who need it the most.

In decades to come I honestly do think that Tommy Robinson will be remembered as a true British hero.

Obviously as you can see this would be a bit of a one sided debate from my perspective. Still I think it would be good to have Tommy and Owen actually debate each other properly on the subject of Islam. They’ve said bad things about each other in articles and videos before, and have had a few bitchy confrontations on twitter, but never a proper debate.

If Owen genuinely believes that Tommy is just a racist bigot, who can be easily dismissed and his accusations against Islam are all just caused by him “not liking brown people” then wouldn’t Owen want to finally expose him in a debate to his followers and everyone else once and for all?

Personally I would love to see that happen to Owen Jones. Owen for once in a fair Grapple in the Apple style debate, would not just be able to storm off, or bully people into silence, and would actually be forced to have the courage of his convictions.

Hey if he genuinely thinks that Tommy Robinson is completely in the wrong. What’s he scared of?

Who Would I Support?

Does it need said?

5/ David Wood vs Maajid Nawaz

This is a debate that I think would be interesting as Maajid Nawaz is a figure that I and many people are somewhat unsure of these days.

Initially many people saw Maajid Nawaz as a hero. He was a Muslim reformer who worked with people like Sam Harris and Tommy Robinson to try and bring attention to many of the problems caused by Islamic extremism. He even coined the term regressive left to refer to people like Abby Martin and Owen Jones who silenced all criticism of Islam as racist, and ironically ended up defending the most conservative ideology on the face of the planet as a result.

However in the last year or so a lot of people have begun to doubt Maajid for a number of reasons. To start with whilst he has talked about reforming Islam, he has never actually mentioned HOW he is going to reform it.

Islam is a difficult religion to reform as it is intended to be the definitive word of god and so therefore everything in it has to be taken literally. Maajid hasn’t to this date as far as I am aware offered up any kind of answer to this question.

Added to this he has also become ironically a bit of an SJW recently. He’s quick to shout critics down as racists on LBC, and he also recently begun feuding with Tommy Robinson, who a member of his foundation, the Qulliam foundation tarred as a white supremacist of all things.

Furthermore there is his support for removing President Assad from power in Syria. Now Assad is guilty of many heinous crimes, that much is true, but ultimately he is a secular leader and thus a step forward for the middle east.

Added to that toppling Assad at this stage would lead to absolute chaos in Syria, similar to Iraq and Libya and ironically allow the real Islamic extremists a chance to overtake the country just as they are being crushed.

Some have accused Maajid of being a trojan horse who had simply duped the likes of Harris and Robinson with taqqiya.

Personally however I wouldn’t go this far. I think that what the youtuber Simon Harris said about him being something of a self promoter is probably closer to the truth.

Still I don’t want to give up on Maajid Nawaz just yet as he has done a lot of good work in the past and still continues to do so.

I would like to see David Wood interview him. Wood is one of the greatest experts on Islam. His videos are probably the best overall for learning about the true nature of the Quran, not just because of the extensive research he puts into them, but also because he provides sources to back up every single claim that he makes.

Whenever Maajid appears on an interview I feel that people tend to just take his word when he says that Islam can be reformed, but with David Wood then I think he would have to actually lay down what (if any plans) he has to reform Islam, and I think it would be a much more tense, but interesting interview than his ones with say Sargon, Douglas Murray, or Sam Harris.

Who Would I Support

Well this wouldn’t quite be like the others, in that ultimately I hope both men are on the same page about Islam. It would be more about finding out what Maajid Nawaz’ positions on reform actually are.

6/ Sargon of Akkad vs John Pilger

John Pilger is one of the most respected journalists and documentary makers of the 20th century and a personal hero of mine.

His work focuses mostly on the disasterous effects of American, British and Australian foreign policy, though he has also focused on the Australians treatment of the Aborigines too.

Arguably Pilgers greatest accomplishment was his 1979 documentary “Year Zero: The Silent Death of Cambodia.” which focuses on the devastating after effects of the 1970 bombing of the country by American forces during the Vietnam war, and the subsequent brutality and genocide inflicted by the Paul Pot and the Khmer Rouge, as well as the limited aid from the west.

After the broadcast of the documentary over 45 million pounds was raised from the United Kingdom and donated to Cambodia.

Sargon of Akkad meanwhile is a very popular youtuber who identifies as a classical liberal and has made videos criticising the worst elements of both left wing and right wing politics.

Though he has become more famous for his critiques of left wing politics such as third wave feminism, which has led to many to label him right wing (or even hilariously in some instances a Nazi!) Ultimately I see Sargon as being a liberal, who merely talks about left wing politics like feminism more often simply because it is more dominant in our culture and thus more of a threat.

Ironically however my absolute favourite Sargon videos are on the same subject as much of John Pilgers work, American foreign policy.

“A Tale of Two Narratives” which was about Trump’s strike on Syria, was by far and away the best researched, most balanced and intelligent thing I saw on the subject, in any medium.

See here.

Sargon has also used his position to help promote the careers of many other youtubers including both Shoe0nHead and Chris Ray Gun too, and whilst many have accused him of sealing himself off in an echo chamber, Sargon has still reached out and debated many people on the opposite end of the spectrum to him like Kevin Logan. He has also offered to debate others like Steve Shives, but predictably his offers have been rejected time and time again.

Now the reason I would like to see Sargon and John Pilger debate is that I feel Sargon has become too anti socialist in his recent videos.

He wasn’t always that way. Many of his previous positions were very left wing. He supported socialist Bernie Sanders. Many of his critics liked to call him a Trump supporter, but he only supported Trump as a lesser of two evils approach, which by the way many leftists did too including both George Galloway and John Pilger himself!

Bernie was his actual preferred candidate of choice above all the others. Added to that, Sargon has also in the past even said that he is “quite a socialist in some ways” and that he likes the idea of “socialised healthcare and wealthcare.”

Sadly however nowadays I find his videos to be more tribal and more “ALL SOCIALISM IS BAD”

I’m not saying that some of his criticisms of socialism don’t have merit, but I feel that much like Paul Joseph Watson he overlooks the problems with capitalism too, albeit to an even greater extent than Watson.

I think that Sargon much like the late great Christopher Hitchens before him has come to despise all left wing politics due to the state its in. Left wing politics currently IS a bigger threat to things like free speech, and social liberty. Its also a purveyor of the worst kind of racism and sexism in our society too against white men, and ironically has made the most genuinely backward and conservative ideology, Islam, bullet proof.

Sadly if you meet a socialist these days, then they are likely to support black lives matter, think things like the wage gap, and campus rape culture exist, silence all criticisms of Islam as racist, and think that things like white male privilege exist, which ironically is a complete betrayal to someone who is supposed to think that class is the greatest thing that divides people. An actual socialist shouldn’t think that Beyonce is less privileged than a homeless white guy!

Sadly however because this cancer has infected left wing politics, then its practically dead as anyone who does support genuine old left wing ideas like Sargon, will not want to associate themselves with the left.

Still its not a good idea to dismiss all left wing ideas, which I feel the likes of Hitchens and Sargon sadly are doing, or have done.

There was a popular video of Sargon interviewing some naive, Rik from the Young Ones style communist. During the interview Sargon furiously demands to know where capitalism has caused any deaths only for the young man to draw a blank.

If it was John Pilger however, a proper old school leftie, then I feel he would be able to put Sargon in his place as he would have experience to draw on and a proper socialist analysis.

You can see how Pilger has dealt with the problems caused by capitalism first hand.

Another problem with Sargon is that I feel he will often try and link anything bad he can to socialism too.

For instance he even said that Hitler was a socialist which has been debunked time and time again.

Did Hitler Say Nazis Were Enemies Of Capitalism?

As the article points out, Hitler and the Nazis were really a political spectrum on their own that went beyond left and right, hence why conservatives and communists were united against them.

I also found it ironic when Sargon said that he is perfectly okay with saying anyone who is a communist is a bad person, yet has always been adamant that not all Muslims be tarred as evil. Now obviously I am not saying that Sargon is afraid to criticise Islam, but still it does feel like more soft bigotry of low expectations when he says its okay to say that everyone who is a communist is a bad person, when he is so adamant not to do the same for Islam.

Ultimately I feel that Sargon has become too tribal in terms of some of his politics, and so I think it would be good to see him have a debate with an old proper lefty who has a better understanding of socialist ideas and concepts like John Pilger, rather than stupid, ignorant, teenagers.

Of course at the same time I think there are areas where Sargon would own Pilger too. The problem with Pilger is that he is far too anti western society. His comments about 9/11 being the sign of a revolution were absolutely disgraceful, and he can be a bit too right on at times.

Still it should be mentioned that John Pilger has provided some very interesting and insightful critiques of identity politics and feminism too. He’s certainly not on the level of Owen Jones or even Abby Martin.

He’s definitely more of a proper old school leftie, though I suppose the fact that even he in a very few instances has drunk the SJW Koolade shows that this crap really does permeate the entire left.

Who Would I Support

Mostly John Pilger. I respect Sargon in a lot of ways, but ultimately I think he needs to be put in his place by a proper old school leftie.

7/ Ayaan Hirsi Ali vs Amani Al Khatahtbeh

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a true feminist champion. She is a writer, journalist, activist, former politician, and a longstanding critic of Islam.

She has written many books about Islam that draw on her own experiences growing up in Somalia, and founded the AHA Foundation which tackles problems such as forced marriage, female genital mutilation and honour killings.

Amani runs a popular website called Muslim girl which is designed to help Muslim women and break the stigma around them.

Of course it never tackles problems for Muslim women in actual Islamic countries, and instead focuses on “Islamophobia” in western countries.

Worse still however Amani often tries to write off the problems women endure in Muslim majority countries as having nothing to do with Islam.

In this respect Amani is happy to throw women like Ayaan Hirsi Ali under the bus, just to promote her own career, as ultimately she is covering for the very system that ruins the lives of, and even kills so many women.

I would like to see Amani actually face someone who has suffered as a result of the backward and evil religion that she is promoting as a liberal fantasy, rather than some naive young feminist like Hannah who will buy all the shit she peddles.

Who Would I Support

Again does it need saying?

8/ Dave Cullen vs Paul Cornell

Dave Cullen runs a youtube channel called Computing Forever. Originally it just about tech products, but Dave has branched out into talking about identity politics, feminism, Islam and various other political and social subjects.

I like Dave a lot. He has a great, laid back, even handed style, he supports free speech for absolutely everybody, and there is a lot I agree with him on. However by his own admission he is far more right wing than I am. I see Dave as being genuinely right wing, as opposed to Sargon who I see as being more of a frustrated lefty.

Again I’m not saying that makes Dave a “NAZI” or anything stupid like that, but still I a lefty obviously clash with him on certain things like socialism and gay marriage (with Dave being opposed to gay marriage.)

Dave is also a huge sci fi fan (particularly of Star Trek and Doctor Who) and has commented on them many times. He even has a second channel called the Dave Cullen Show which is mostly devoted to reviewing sci fi films and tv shows.

Now Paul Cornell is an acclaimed sci fi and fantasy writer. He has written for various franchises including DC, Marvel. Vampirella and Doctor Who, with his work for all being very successful. He also runs a successful blog and podcast where he reviews classic sci fi and horror, and finally he has enjoyed success through many of his own creations too, such as most notably The Shadow Police.

Now I have criticised Paul many times in the past, but truth be told I don’t hate him. Paul is really no different to Claudia Boleyn, in that both express opinions I dislike yes, but ultimately neither, unlike Owen Jones, try and shut people down or even block them on twitter and FB. So really in all fairness there is no reason to hate Paul personally.

I admit though to getting more genuinely pissed at Paul than Claudia, but that’s only really because Paul is actually associated with Doctor Who and other franchises I like and so therefore has brought a lot a of this shit into these series themselves and therefore helped to ruin them. Though obviously if Claudia were associated with them then she would be the same.

I’d like to see Dave and Paul debate each other over the influence SJWs and identity politics is having on the sci fi and fantasy genres.

I feel that SJWs have gone after these two genres because they are easy targets. Many modern day feminists and SJWs like Anita Sarkeesian are chancers who want to be seen as feminist champions, and obviously make a little bit of money out of the movement too.

The problem however is that the likes of Sarkeesian aren’t brave enough to take on actual causes of inequality like Islamic countries treatment of women.

Saying anything negative about Islam is obviously a very difficult thing to do from many perspectives. Radical Islamic extremists may kill you, your reputation will be slandered by radical leftists, who will tar you as a racist. Your entire life may be ruined and sabotaged.

We can see this in action with people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Tommy Robinson.

People like Anita however obviously don’t want to live the types of lives that Tommy and Ayaan do, so they will instead pick a battle that has already been won like achieving equality for black people in western societies, or they will invent something like the gender wage gap, or finally they will pick a benign and easy target and smear that as sexist, and then bask in the praise for being supposed feminist champions.

Sci fi and fantasy are of course the easiest genres to bully. They are looked down upon as silly, childish interests. Even with the trendy geek culture that we are exposed too these days, sci fi and fantasy are still looked down on.

Thus if a feminist like Anita Sarkeesian, trashes sci fi, most nerds are not going to want to vigriously defend it out of fear of looking like a sad git whose life revolves around Doctor Who and Star Trek.

Added to that again as the genre is looked down upon, then the mainstream media is obviously going to take the side of the feminists as opposed to the “sad, basement dwelling, smelly nerds.”

Yes I don’t doubt that Anita has received abuse from some anti feminists online, but so what? Everybody gets abuse online, including many anti feminists. That’s hardly the same as what the likes Ali and Robinson get.

Of course many producers and companies like DC and Marvel, and Steven Moffat, the former showrunner of Doctor Who end up pandering to feminists and SJWs who make their voice louder than everyone else.

Now you might think well even if that is the case (which it is) what’s the problem as these people just want more roles for women, LGBT people and black people?

Well to start with that’s NOT simply what they want. Ironically the sci fi and fantasy genres have always been very progressive and have given women, LGBT and black people leading roles when many other genres have not. Why don’t feminists and SJWs go after Westerns and Spy and Espionage genres for instance?

Those two genres combined don’t have anywhere NEAR the same level of strong roles for women and minorities. Again however they aren’t as looked down upon, and thus aren’t as easy to bully, and so the likes of Sarkeesian steer clear of them.

Still at any rate SJWs and feminists want to take roles away from white men, rather than create new characters for women, they also want every single product to be filled with their divisive political agenda regardless, they demand that characters whole histories be changed to their liking, that white men be limited from writing and directing for sci fi series, and worst of all they insult the genre and spread malicious lies about it being a boys only club, which ironically completely overlooks the contributions of many actresses who have created memorable and iconic characters, and forged careers in the sci fi and fantasy genres such as Lucy Lawless.

I have written extensively about the negative impact third wave feminism and SJWs have had on the sci fi and fantasy genres many times before, but I think these two articles were probably the best two that I wrote.

Please check them out if you have the time.

Why Do Geeks And Nerds Hate Feminism

Why A Female Doctor Who Is Anti Men Bigotry And Hate

Now Paul Cornell with this in mind I have always seen as an utter traitor to geek culture. He is happy to see icons like the Doctor and the Master be desecrated for the sake of some PC agenda, he is happy to demonise the very genre that he has made his name in by making out that it was always sexist, and worst of all Paul supports and encourages people like Whovian Feminism.

Whovian Feminism, a blogger is in my opinion as awful as Anita Sarkeesian. She isn’t just a misguided person, she is a bully who always wants to show how she has the power to end people’s careers. She’s never done setting up petitions to try and make sure that only the type of people she wants too get hired, and she’s always threatened to call a public boycott of tv shows and films if someone who she dislikes, an actor, director, producer, writer is involved with them.

She doesn’t give a damn about any of the shows she is a “fan” of. All she cares about is in proving that she has power over them, and in restricting positions in them for white men, who she despises (based on her misandiristic tweets.)

Yet Paul still constantly promotes this person as someone we should be listening too simply because she is a woman.

Dave Cullen meanwhile is someone who I feel actually represents what nerds and sci fi fans in general want.

He actually does care about the things he is a fan of rather in pushing his political agenda on them. Dave doesn’t give a shit about whether or not Doctor Who or Star Trek endorse his conservative political views unlike Cornell and Whovian Feminism. He just wants them to be good, well written and enjoyable for as many people as possible. Ironically he is more inclusive of all audiences than Paul Cornell or Whovian Feminism who want all of these previously politically neutral things to solely endorse their agenda and for anyone who doesn’t like that to be told to fuck off and tarred as a racist, sexist and homophobe.

A debate between Dave Cullen and Paul Cornell over the state of the genre would be very interesting. I know that this in comparison to the other subjects I’d like to see debated this is very much a first world problem, but still I think it is important in some respects in the long run.

Ultimately what Whovian Feminism and others are doing with Doctor Who and video games is what SJWs want to do to other areas of life. From political movements, to the internet, to the education system, IE control them and mould them all to their own ideologies, whilst bullying and shutting down anyone who disagrees.

The SJWs start with forms of entertainment exactly because they are seen as unimportant, but once they have taken control of that, then they can start to slowly spill their poison out into all areas of life, which is exactly what has happened since Doctor Who started going SJW round about 2014 and things like Gamer Gate as well.

Fanatical bullies like the SJWs have to be tackled at the start in my opinion. Thus a video where Dave Cullen who says what most nerds think, but are simply to scared to say, debating Paul Cornell, who is one of the biggest advocates of identity politics into the genres would be very interesting, insightful and I think open a lot of people’s eyes.

Who Would I Support

Dave obviously. Dave has actually already kind of debunked one of Paul’s main arguments, indirectly.

In 2012 Paul Cornell set up a policy for conventions called 50/50 where he would refuse to sit on a convention panel unless there was an exactly equal amount of women on the panel.

See for yourself. Paul Cornell Panel Parity

Dave Cullen already did a great video tearing this stupid obsession with making sure that men and women are always represented 50/50 at events, so I think he would do okay against Paul.

9/ Jordan Peterson vs Brendan O’Neill

Jordan Peterson is a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, who shot to fame in 2016 when he got caught up in a debate over gender pronouns with rabid SJWs on campus.

Since then Peterson has become something of a hero for free speech to many people around the world, and has continued to criticise identity politics, post modernism and feminism.

Brendan O’Neill meanwhile is a Marxist author, but much like John Pilger, he’s one of the few, proper, old school lefties around who actually criticises identity politics.

The likes of Paul Joseph Watson have even retweeted and reposted things written by O’Neill many times.

Now I’d like to see this debate for much the same reasons as Sargon vs John Pilger, in that a problem with Jordan Peterson is that he is too anti socialist.

I’d like to see him have a discussion with more of a reasonable old school leftist like O’Neill. I think there is a danger of the SJWs producing such a backlash against left wing politics that they have taken over, that in ten years or so, people will go the other way and try and silence any kind of left wing politics out of fear that it will lead to SJW crap again.

I’m not saying that Peterson or others like Sargon or Dave Cullen want that at all. They have always championed free speech for all, but the problem is I guess that there aren’t really any old school lefties around to properly defend genuine left wing politics when the likes of Peterson attack it. All there is on the left are stupid SJWs who don’t even understand any proper left wing positions to the point where they can’t name ANY problems caused by capitalism.

So I think it would be better to hear someone like O’Neill debate with Peterson, over the actual merits of socialism rather than some stupid virtue signalling student. Again not that that’s Peterson’s fault as there are very few people like O’Neill left.

Who Would I Support

O’Neill, but Peterson I think would give him a good run for his money.

10/ Christina Hoff Sommers vs Emma Watson

Two feminists with a very different outlook to one another. I’m a big fan of Hoff Sommers. If more feminists were like her, then I think most people would respect the movement, as Sommers does genuinely care about problems that both genders face.

Now Watson I don’t think is a chancer like Sarkeesian. I see her as more of a Claudia Boleyn style feminist, IE a nice, smart person, but just a little bit misguided.

Added to that Sommers has also been fair and even handed in her critique’s of Watson too, so much like with a Shoe vs Claudia debate I don’t see it getting too nasty either.

Ultimately I see Watson as someone who simply wants to learn and use her high profile for good, so I think it would be for her benefit to speak with someone like Hoff Sommers.

Thanks for reading.