What can any subculture, under the rule of a government which oppresses it, finds that one of it’s own has started to write pro-government articles in a popular online newspaper? It is clear that this person is doing so for his own ends – to gain attention and infamy, to stand out from the crowd. To anyone else in his community it is clear that what this person writes has no basis in reality, but it sings to the tune of the government so much that the could cite it as evidence of support for their oppressive actions from within the community. It is akin to a black person in sixties america denouncing Martin Luthour-King as reactionary and singing the praises of segregation, asking ”we have good homes and jobs and masters – what more could we ask for? I prefer the back of the bus!”. Those who favoured that regime would cite him as support from within the black community; attention would be lavished upon him, and he would gain personal fame and power. Meanwhile the efforts of those who strove for equality would be set back years.

Thus such writing is dangerous: written with self-proclaimed authority but falling down under the slightest analysis, to call for it to be taken offline would contravene the concept of freedom of speech; yet to allow it to remain online would only massage the ego of the fool who wrote it, giving him a credibility he does not deserve and hindering the efforts of the rest of the group. Rather like a UKIPper all to eager to hypocritically cry ‘free speech!’ the moment anyone calls them up on their hate-ridden bull, trying to question or debate him only adds to his delusions of persecution, as he seems to think that the rest of the community is trying to silence him for speaking against popular opinion; in turn his adds to his notion of self-importance. This self-proclaimed community leader pronounces himself a consultant on the issues he talks about, when to everyone else within that community he is nothing but an attention-seeking irrelevance with very little understanding of the issues he presumes to speak about.* The problem is, how can members of the subculture make it clear to those outside it that the latter is the case, rather than the former?

*Indeed, although he attempts to write authoritatively, his language use gives one the impression that he employs half-remembered and poorly understood phrases from elsewhere, even implying that he has some degree of learning disability.