I have heard it twice in seven days. Twice, at two very interesting events, run by two very respectable think-tanks: Its those dreaded Daily Mail readers who are to blame.
In both cases, that journal was being used as a convenient short-hand – to signify something right-wing, reactionary, and irrational. The implication is that there are all these subscribers out there who are somehow intractable. A block of voters who can be persuaded of nothing.
Continue reading
Tag: Politics (Page 49 of 57)
The Fifth of November is well known for its conspiracies, and another one is hatched today. LiberalConspiracy.org is a place for the progressive left in Britain to gather and debate. It seeks to be a hub where politicians, interest groups, think tanks, writers and bloggers can co-ordinate their campaigns and ideas. There is much to be done.
I am part of the founding cabal of bloggers, and in future some of my posts here will be cross-posted at the Liberal Conspiracy site.
Tory candidate Nigel Hastilow has resigned in a ‘Rivers of Blood’ row. His choice of words in his Express and Star article is noteworthy:
“When you ask most people in the Black Country what the single biggest problem facing the country is, most say immigration,” he wrote. “Many insist: ‘Enoch Powell was right.’
My emphasis. Notice the way in which he attributes rather unpleasant views to other people. Hastilow then goes onto say: “He was right. It has changed dramatically”
No doubt his supporters will claim that he is not actually endorsing Enoch Powell’s views. That he is merely reporting other people endorsing such views. No doubt that his supporters will claim that it is true that Britain has changed dramatically. What’s he done wrong!?
The answer is that he is guilty of a double slieght-of-pen. First, by presenting the arguments of “many” other people, he is citing them approvingly and endorsing them. Its a trick of prose employed precisely to give himself cover, when he raises Powell’s spectre. He does not question the legitimacy of those views, nor make the distinction clear.
Second: The phrase “changed dramatically” When Powell sent out his warning, he saw it in purely negative terms. So “changed dramatically” is incomplete? For the better or worse, Nigel? Or about the same, Nigel? Or just dramatically different, Nigel? (why are all Tory candidates called Nigel?) Either Hastilow is also endorsing Powell’s fear that Britain is dramatically worse because of immigration… Or he is employing a meaningless truism. If the former, then he should rightly be ashamed of himself. If the latter, then he is being disingenuous.
It is an irritating turn of events I wish would never have happened. Hastilow’s dexterity with words, which surely come so easy to former newspaper editor, allow him to conjour up a shield of righteousness. You can bet he is not contrite, and that he will, in time, cite his forced withdrawl of his candidacy as an example of the Politically Correct elite knee-jerking him out the door.
But it is no such thing.
It makes me very uneasy to hear that the government is adapting some prisons for foreign prisoners. The worry is that these new prisons will create a two-tier system, with a harsher justice for those of different citizenship.
Beware the tabloid Right, who will surely advocate this two-tier system. They will ask: Why should foreigners have the same rights and standards as British citizens? The answer is that anything else will hinder integration. Send out the message that the law treats foreigners differently, then surely foreigners will treat the law differently, in return. If we ask foreigners to “integrate” when they come to Britain, the least we can do is ensure that they are “integrated” into our legal system too.
Alternatively, the two-tier system could work in the foreigners favour, with more services and a cushier ride provided for those who do not speak English. We can easily imagine the furore that would surround such a revelation. Either way, this is a policy promotes inequality, and therefore invites trouble.
More journalese:
Not tonight Cecilia: divorce for Sarkozys
Nicolas Sarkozy becomes first French head of state since Napoleon Bonaparte to end his marriage in office
Notice the quadruple-qualification that makes Sarko’s divorce a “first”: “French”; “head of state”; “since Napoleon”; and “in office”.
The journalistic tendency to speak about everything in terms of records broken, and “firsts” achieved has been prevalent in Scotland recently too. Wendy Alexander was apparently noteworthy because she was Scottish Labour’s first woman leader (though Anabel Goldie already leads the Tories). And Jack McConnell was feted as Scotland’s “longest serving” First Minister, a contrived “record” since he had only two predecessors, both of whom left office early in exceptional circumstances.
These “firsts” and “record breakers” are irritating because they are a distraction. They are a lazy hook for journalists to begin the story, eating up word count that could be used to analyse the event itself. Of course there is no precise precedent for Sorkozy’s domestic re-alignment – But is that fact likely to have an impact on how the French will manage the situation? Indeed, does the event have any political significance at all?
Has anyone else noticed any contrived “firsts”?
Update
The Onion: Zambia Elects Black President