The absurd questionnaire Dalrymple was required to complete after his submission of a recent article to an American publication causes him, in the August edition of New English Review, to consider the motivations for and effects of such forms:

During my annual appraisal, itself a procedure of doubtful value, my appraiser asked me whether I had any concerns about my own probity. The appraiser was a colleague for whom I had some regard as a man, and he asked me this question only because it was prescribed for him to do so by the form about me that he had to fill.

‘I will answer the question if you answer two questions first,’ I said, and he asked me what they were.

‘The first is, “What kind of man would answer such a question?” and the second is, “What kind of man would ask it?”’

‘Oh, I know,’ he replied, ‘but just answer it to get it over with.’

Of course it was a formality; no dishonest person would reply, ‘Now that you come to ask, I am a little worried by my own dishonesty.’ But to comply with absurd formalities only because compliance is a condition of continued employment is to lose a little of one’s probity, as is to ask so absurd a question because it is required. Hume said that it is seldom that liberty is lost all at once, and the same might be said of probity. It is eroded rather than exploded: death by a thousand procedures.

2 thoughts on “Forms

  1. Tina May

    In comparison to whom? In comparison to MSM? Rachel Maddow? Trevor Noah?

    Google and Youtube and Gmail Twitter and Facebook and Patreon and Merkel and Germany and Sweden and France and the UK and Trudeau and people he surrounds himself with and Kathleen Wynne of Canada and Soros and the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas and Abbas and Qatar and Saudi Arabia and huge amounts of petrodollars and China, and Sarsour and Odeh and friends, and replacements, new anti -Zionist new wave of burka / habib wearing/pushing feminists, Bob Bland, Carmen Perez, Tamika Mallory, Shakur, and Angela Davis, Farrakhan, Hillary and Obama and Jarrett, and Rhodes and Gruber and the UN and Iran and the Congressional Black Caucus, Diana Buttu, Shabazz, SPLC, Ayers, Dorhn, Wright, Aclu, Ginzburg, Kagan, Sotomayer, Gov Brown, Monsanto and friends, Goldman Sachs, Harvard University, Princeton U etc, Deep State, EPA, FDA, USDA, Fish and Wildlife, Dept of Ed, Dept of Tourism, are trying to kill probity among people on social media and elsewhere. The list is not complete. Those on this list lack probity.

    I would say Dalrymple and a few others still have it.

    Look into the people that the people and countries named above are trying to block and you’ll see who has probity :
    Milo, Michael Savage, Sargon of Akkad, Prager University online, and Ben Shapiro, and Al -Sisi, and Ayaan, Michelle Malkin, and Jordan B Peterson, Mark Steyn, Lauren Summer, Coulter, Spencer and Condell and Geller. I’ll add Caroline Glick, and Dumisani Washington, CUFI, Netanyahu, Naftali Bennett, Stefan Molyneux, Bari Weiss, Douglas Murray, Charles Murray, Sebastian Gorka, Tim Pool, Paul Joseph Watson, Alex Jones, Trump, Pence, Assange, straight white men dead or alive, Zionists, and Ryan Bellerose, and Black Christian Clergy, and Tammi Rossman Benjamin, Trump children, O’Reilly, Hannity, Hillsdale College, Chick -Fil-A, lovers of America the Beautiful, decent, country, and small business, entrepreneurial, inventive, independent responsible, optimistic, families, of Middle America, people of the heartland, working for the American dream, including family oriented women, deplorables; former PM Stephen Harper, the Dalai Lama, Hungary and Poland and Brexit, Israel are on the list for having probity. I am sure there will be more names as heads appear on the chopping block, or should I say names that disappear. Then there are the names of people who mysteriously died.

  2. Mary

    Interesting. I have to point out that the doctor did miss something about the genocide question, namely that by the signature there is a statement that you swear under penalty of perjury that what you said was true. The point of the questions is not to catch the liars, but to ensure we have something to charge them with when we catch them in other ways.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.