A comment or two on the ongoing row about two Labour bloggers putting up a spoof picture of David Cameron, blacked up as a minstrel. (One of them has removed the post from his blog and apologised to everyone who was offended ‘except Tories’. What about black Tories, I wonder)
What I have found really interesting has been the reaction of both Bob Piper and Ministry of Truth (for it is they) to the people who criticised them. Critics were subjected to all manner of abuse, along the lines of ‘you are Tories, so who are you to talk about racism’. In addition to that, there were personal attacks, not to mention a few attempts by Bob Piper to reveal the identity of a Tory blogger who blogs under a pseudonym.
The fact that they were hitting out so vehemently and viciously at anyone who criticised them made me think. Especially when one considers that if a Tory councillor had done the same, these two bloggers would be leading the way with the ‘nasty party’ digs.
I have come to the conclusion that blindness of a sort has befallen these people. They genuinely cannot see how the spoof post they created could have caused offence. As Dizzy puts it, ‘[t]here is something worrying with this intellectual position that many on the Left have which asserts they are not capable of racism because of their ideological purity.’
I agree. Regarding the indignation of the two bloggers, the sub-text seems to be ‘how can anyone accuse us of being racist and offensive? We’re on the Left!!!’
And to my mind, their bafflement is genuine.
Poor souls.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:49 pm
Hopefully this whole debacle will not stop PT from blogging. When we blog, we know we will get criticism, but none of us deserve a tirade of abuse.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:57 pm
Andrew, I share your concern. I have been over to PT’s blog and left a message of support. I really hope he doesn’t feel too down by all the abuse he received from the Labour bloggers. As I remarked on Ministry of Truth’s blog (before I was ‘barred’*), it is typical New Labour tactics to smear people when cornered.
*Not sure if I have been barred for definite. My first two comments were accepted without trouble. When I went back much later to post a third, I got a message saying ‘your comment has been held as spam etc etc’.
Call me suspicious. I will revise my opinion if my quarantined comment eventually appears on his blog.
December 11th, 2006 at 1:54 pm
Precisely, Bel. I was once of the Left until I saw how they operated with this holier than thou untouchable ideological purity which brooks no criticism. I got out fast.
December 11th, 2006 at 9:41 pm
A person’s politics reflect how he thinks the world works - or should work. Whether a person is good or bad depends not on what he says or thinks, but on how he treats other people in practice.
Those on the Left see things differently. They see their political views as moral in themselves. A Leftist has fulfilled all his moral duties to others merely by adopting a “caring” political stance. He no longer has to do anything. He can just call for “the State” or “Society” to do it.
Leftists also see themselves as being in some sort of “communion” with each other, which they call “solidarity.” Whereas a Tory or Liberal does not have to like or even approve of every other Tory or Liberal, Leftists are supposed to stick together against “the enemy”, “the other”, “the heretic”, “the bourgeoisie”, “the Bosses’ Class” or whatever.
The Greens are much the same. They are on a mission from Gaia and all who oppose them are heretics fit only for the flames.
This has dangerous consequences. If you see your politics as a moral stance, you are more likely to hate, less likely to be open minded, more prone to orthodoxy, more inclined to see contrary views as “thought crime” etc. Hence “climate change denial”, “hate speech” and political correctness.
Bel is right. Unity and Bob Piper really do not see why, as morally superior people who have “seen the light”, they should be judged by “the enemy.” They were never going to back down because “Some Tory” said so.
Revealingly, the whole thing only came to an end when a licensed thinker from the CRE issued a diktat. Then it was the “Party Line” to take the image down - and down it came. It’s rather pathetic. Anyone with a smidgen of pride would be embarrassed.
I feel rather sorry for Bob Piper. He’s a simple, sincere soul. It’s great that the blogosphere allows ordinary Labourites like him to have a say. If this incident makes him engage what passes for his brain before posting in future, all the rough charm of his blog will be lost.
As a libertarian, I don’t give a damn about the “offending” image. Anyone actually offended by it needs to get a life. It was a joke that failed. Leftists are screwed from a humour point of view because of their misplaced sense of moral superiority. People who think they are better than others are meant to be the butt of jokes, not to crack them.
The real story here was the chance to hoist Labour by its own priggish petard. I can understand that was almost irresistible, but I think it was a mistake. This was best articulated by the blogger who commented (at Guido’s place, I think) that “the left made the rules so they have to live by them.” The trouble is that concedes their right to make the rules. I don’t buy that.
To be intellectually consistent, Tories should have smiled indulgently at their pathetic attempts and moved on. The impression left both by the image and by Bob Piper’s hamfistedness was of infantile petty-mindedness. What is the problem with Leftists presenting themselves in that way? It was a political gift from boorish, witless opponents.
By engaging Labour on its own ideological terms, the Tories concerned had some fun. But they also descended to Labour’s level and left an impression of being equally obsessed with “thought crime.” Political “civilians” are sick to death of being told how to think. There is a real danger, for example, of engendering racism where there was none by constantly banging on about it. Tempting though it is, when Labour plays the “racist!” card at every opportunity, its opponents should resist.
I feel sorry for PT who came in for some furious abuse. I hope he keeps blogging. I enjoy reading his stuff.
December 11th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
If Bob didn’t see the furore it would cause then he is an idiot, totally out of touch with reality. I’m glad to see his local press have followed up on it too:
http://www.bobpiper.co.uk/2006/12/promoted.php
December 11th, 2006 at 10:39 pm
Ellee, I agree. He has the right to say what he likes but one would have thought that his sense of judgement as a politician would have alerted him to the likely furore.
December 11th, 2006 at 10:44 pm
Tom, an excellent piece. A perfect explanation of the ideology of the Left. Thank you, and well said!
December 14th, 2006 at 4:13 pm
Bel, I should start by saying my sympathies lie with Bob and Unity on this one. I think Unity was able to articulate a good case in support of his image - arguments which I think we need not rehearse here, as he is well able to make them for himself - and I think it is to the detriment of the blogosphere that the subtlety has been lost in claims and counter-claims of “You’re a racist”.
But what I’m more interested in is this categorisation of the Left as some sort of monolith. I would, and correctly, be castigated for lumping big C Conservatives in with BNP knuckle-draggers, yet both are usually placed on the right of the political spectrum. I consider myself left-leaning, but have no time for statist tendencies. There’s more room over this side than you might think
Which brings us nicely round to Matt M, and the discussion he picks up on from Chris Dillow, in view of the decreasing importance of the split between left and right. Isn’t it increasingly an obsolete frame of reference?
December 14th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
Ian, I agree with what you say to an extent. Unity revisited the topic a few days ago and produced a well-argued essay on why he produced the picture. My issue was two-fold.
The first reason is a personal one. Where I originally come from in the Deep South, that image has very painful associations. That was why I was offended.
The second issue was that I felt that if this had been done by the Tories, they would have made political capital out of it. Unity has since written on his blog to say that he wouldn’t have done so, so I accept that. I still insist that Bob would have made a case out of it if a Tory blogger had done it.
Actually, it is a matter of debate whether the BNP is actually on the right. Some would say they are more socialist than anything. But let’s not quibble, I take your general point, and shall be mindful not to generalise in that way. Thank you.
I was meaning to get round to Chris Dillow’s post. Thank you for reminding me. It is something that is of interest to me. We see the evidence of that in America, where it is not uncommon to meet people who are to the left on economic policy, but ultra-conservative socially. We cannot pigeonhole anymore.
December 14th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
Funnily enough, Bel, there’s very little in your reply with which I would disagree. I defer to your experience on the first point, and tend to agree on the second: there seem to have been knee-jerk responses on both sides, and I see no reason to assume things would have been much different: had it been a Tory blogger who first created such an image, whatever their intent, then, yes, I think there would have been shots first and questions, if any, only (much) later. Whether Bob would have been involved, I can’t say, as I’ve only just discovered him, although he seems to be well-thought-of across the spectrum.
There has been a parallel spat on these here interwebs about the standard of political discourse being spoilt by bloggers. It seems a comical premise, and its notable that it’s an argument (poorly) made by the self-describing “Decent Left”, but unfortunately I don’t think the episode under discussion here shows either blogging or standards of political discourse in a good light.