Paul Austin Murphy

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
...when Miliband laughs at the idea of him being part of a 'sinister Marxist plot', he must realize that politics has always been full of such plots.
—Paul Austin Murphy[1]

Someone is wrong on
The Internet
Icon internet.svg
Log in:

Paul Austin Murphy ("PAM") is a very small-time and ultra-bitchy British blogger associated with the political hard-right who has apparent delusions of becoming England's answer to Daniel Pipes. His favorite subjects appear to be the following: how virtually all Muslims want to establish a totalitarian state, how far-leftists are actually influential and want to do the same, and how they're working together to accomplish this. Apart from his own blog, he also writes for the American Thinker and has been published by Philosophy Now and the New English Review. (He also runs a blog called [Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy].) [2]

So what's his deal anyways?[edit]

Imagine Jonah Goldberg, but instead of tying all right-wing pet peeves back to Nazism, he shoehorned either communism (preferably Stalin or Cultural Marxism) or Islam instead. There, you've got an idea of his ramblings. He also tends to smugly look down on anyone who isn't as paranoid as he is about the Muslims. He even views David Cameron as being gullible for allowing Muslims to be high-ranking Tories. No, really.[3]

So far, the only things he seems to actually like are Uncyclopedia (Wikipedia appears to have lost his respect after taking a scientific leftist view on global warming. Again, not a joke) and European parties to the right of mainstream conservative ones.

Perhaps some quotes will suffice:

...just as Soviet Communists believed that the Gulag, Show Trials, “class liquidations”, etc. were necessary for X, Y and Z; so warmists believe that their own political actions and words (to silence global-warming heresy) are equally necessary in order to bring about something which is even more important than world communism: “saving the planet”.[4]
Muslims kill and persecute non-Muslims on a massive and systematic scale in Muslim countries. Yet in the U.S. many Muslims take part in ecumenism and talk of 'tolerance' and whatnot. But what if it's all one big deceit on their part? What if U.S. and European Muslims only talk about 'mutual respect' and practice ecumenism because they are a minority? What if they say these things, and practice ecumenism, simply to advance and/or protect Muslims and Islam itself.
—On the Muslims[5]
In addition, there was -- or there still is -- a Wiki “administrator” by the name of William Connolley (who has run for England's Green Party) who was also criticized for his almost Stalin-like editorializing.
—On Wikipedia's global warming stance[6]

Why do you care?[edit]

I've never seen a single piece of “pseudoscience” in American Thinker.

While not even a z-list pundit, he only flew up on Rationalwiki's radar when he wrote a bizarre article that attempted to claim Rationalwiki was being unfair to the American Thinker while saying things that were easily proven to be untrue, such as claiming that we don't pick on Leftists. He also said there was no argument of any kind against the Thinker, while not bringing up the accusations of Birtherism and conspiracy theories linked to in the external links in the article. The article was quite bizarre and contradictory at times. For instance, he denounces Rationalwiki's use of "ad hominem"... right after calling a Rationalwiki writer a "pipsqueak" and repeatedly referencing the editor's possible age (despite PAM himself being fairly young for a political blogger). Some of his claims were outright refutable, such as claiming that we never attack Leftists or name "good" conservatives. He also accuses Rationalwiki of just stealing from Wikipedia (with Uncyclopedia as a source) because, apparently, if two wikis talk about the same subject and there's some overlap then it's clearly just copied and pasted.

He responded to the fact we had literally an entire category devoted to attacking the far-left as not really counting because there was no page specifically attacking left-wing conspiracy theories (no mention that he ALSO said we present Leftists as perfect). Apparently, an editor tried to leave a comment pointing out this was an odd complaint as there was no page specifically devoted to attacking right-wing conspiracy theories, either, but the comment is now gone, either deleted by PAM or his blog is just that poorly designed.

As PAM has an impulsive need to respond to every criticism of him on the internet, we await his whine response to this article.

See also[edit]