comments and the majority of the blog's readers don't read the comments. People who complain to Guido that they are offended really have (a) no right to not be offended (b) no obligation to read the blog.  Some of the comments can be tear-jerkingly funny -- one BBC staffer confided that reading the comments here was "bad for her soul" . Does it really matter that much? I want to propose a new class of haters. Reasonable people who hate people who hate. I think we can drum up plenty of support here, even across the political divide. The hater-haters will harass all these loathsome, mostly coprophagiac, indeterminately sexed, ladies peethings and throw every possible sort of invective at them to destroy their febrile, compulsive obsessive, Hindenburg-sized egos and provide devastating and final solutions and responses to their furious and unfounded assertions and allegations. Thank you for that RM. It depends on how you relate fear to hatred. I do not fear any of these mugwumps (in the true sense that they post on a Libertarian blog whilst themselves being commies*). I certainly hate them as their gross contribution is zero, at best. I enjoy the similarity to Russell's paradox, in as much as one rails against the use of hatred, using hatred itself. Have to say I feel really pleased to know that the Guardian readers employed by the BBC read this site and find it bad for their souls. I.e. they find normal people who dislike being controlled