Philip Adams, child murderers and paedophilia

Gerard Jackson
BrookesNews.Com
Monday 23 June 2003

Paedophilia is a nasty activity that means the sexual abuse of children. This is something that every ordinary person understands and, with the exception of child molesters, vigorously condemns.

But it takes a rancid socialist like Philip Adams to accuse companies who produce goods and advertising that target the youth market of "corporate paedophilia" (Paedophilia Inc, Murdoch's Australian, 21/6/03). This is not the first time that Adams has made such loathsome accusations. He did the same thing in a speech he gave at Curtain University in October 1996.

According to the deep thinking and ever so caring Mr Adams kids are not only "seduced" by corporations they are also "manipulated" etc. Therefore, Adams believes that creating brand-names and attractive products puts corporations like Nike and Reebok on the same level as "paedophiles". Thus he felt able to argue that "corporate paedophiles have kidnapped an entire generation of kids, holding them for ransom that many parents can't afford to pay."

What are these companies suppose to do? Make unattractive goods? Make inferior goods? Abolish their trade marks? Stop advertising their goods? The more one thinks of what Adams says on this matter the more ridiculous it sounds. Not that he is totally unaware of it. He knows that a good way to attack companies is to accuse them of child abuse. He also knows it diminishes the suffering that children of real abuse undergo and makes a mockery of their plight. But hey! Somebody's got to break the eggs. Right, Phil?

Mind you, he did strike a hit with Kalvin Klein. A pity he didn't mention that Klein is what the Americans call a liberal and what we call a Lefty. He also ignored the role those dreaded right-wingers and religious bigots played in embarrassing Klein into withdrawing his sleazy ads. In fact, he completely ignored the role that American liberals have played in making what he calls the sexual exploitation of children possible.

The truth be told, it was the permissive atmosphere created and maintained by Adams leftwing soul mates that made sleazy advertising aimed at children possible. However, he is not so much concerned with the welfare of children as with bashing corporations.

Ironic, isn't it, that this former advertising executive accuses the advertising industry and corporations of child abuse refuses to condemn socialist regimes for committing genuine crimes against children? Never once did this pompous hypocrite condemn any socialist states for mutilating the lives of their children and poisoning their minds with vicious propaganda, even sometimes torturing and murdering them.

While North Vietnamese communists carried out the systematic murder of infants as part of their program of mass terror against the South, the Saintly Phil gave them unstinting support. Even now, as children are being starved to death in Kim Jong Il's socialist paradise, Phil reminds silent. His concern for the welfare of children is so deep that when on 13 July 1994 that lovable progressive Castro ordered the massacre of a group of children aged 18 months to 11 years Phil uttered not a word of protest. Then we had Saddam systematically torturing and murderering children and dumping their body in a mass grave. So whom did Phil the righteous attack? Why President George Bush of course. Like every true lefty, the humanitarian Phil knows exactly who and what to target.

None of Adams sickening behaviour is surprising given his refusal to apologise for supporting the most murderous regimes in history. No wonder this intellectual buffoon who thinks he should not have to apologise for supporting the Soviet empire, the bloody communist conquest of a good slice of South East Asia, not to mention Mao Tse Tung's homicidal reign, has the gall to moralise to others.

Is it any wonder that this self-righteousness callous liar, oily hypocrite and brazen plagiarist fills decent people with revulsion. So next time you read the moralising Adams, keep a plastic bucket nearby — you are sure to need it.

Gerard Jackson is also Brookes' Economics Editor