It is not exactly clear where the media is going with the Jacob Rees-Mogg dinnergate story.
It was a weak feature on Newsnight yesterday and an even weaker one on the Today programme this morning.
An example of the hollowness of the story can be seen in an article by Nigel Morris in the Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jacob-reesmoggs-afterdinner-speech-to-group-calling-on-doreen-lawrence-to-go-home-8752995.html
Let us try to unpick this story:
An organisation called Traditional Britain asked a Conservative MP to talk to them about Conservative policy. The speech appears to have been an entirely orthodox view of current Conservatism. Nothing else seems to have been discussed at this dinner.
Subsequently the Traditional Britain group (which apparently espouses an old-fashioned fundamentalist view of British exceptionalism) makes provocative statements on various on-line sites. Radical left-wing organisations which monitor groups such as Traditional Britain seize on these comments and present them in such a way that it appears as if they have been endorsed by Jacob Rees-Mogg. Upon further questioning the left-wing monitors are unable to prove any connection between the speaker and the audience and the story effectively collapses.
What are we left with?
That some people find the British exceptionalism of Traditional Britain objectionable is obvious. But is it any different from say the Jamaican exceptionalism we have seen voiced over the last week by individuals such as Diane Abbott MP and Lee Jasper (Lee Jasper claiming that the global culture of the world was now Jamaican). It might perhaps be preferable to live in a world without loud expressions of cultural aggrandizement but the fact is we don't.
That some people find the idea of repatriation of BME people obnoxious is beyond doubt. But is it any more obnoxious than the arrival here without democratic permission of millions of post-war immigrants (BME people and others, including Australians such as Trenton Oldfield)? Is not the whole issue of immigration and the failed policy of multiculturalism a poisonous quagmire that needs sorting out?
That Doreen Lawrence, recently ennobled to the House of Lords, should be beyond criticism is not practical or desirable. Lady Lawrence is a party politician, and when she takes her seat in the House of Lords will be part of the legislature and paid allowances and expenses drawn from the public purse. That such a person should be scrutinised and where necessary criticised is axiomatic (although it is possible that her political career will be beyond criticism - I am looking forward to Lady Lawrence using her position to advance equal rights for Jamaican gay people in the Jamaican diaspora in the United Kingdom, and indeed in Jamaica itself, widely regarded as the most homophobic nation on earth).
It was a weak feature on Newsnight yesterday and an even weaker one on the Today programme this morning.
An example of the hollowness of the story can be seen in an article by Nigel Morris in the Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jacob-reesmoggs-afterdinner-speech-to-group-calling-on-doreen-lawrence-to-go-home-8752995.html
Let us try to unpick this story:
An organisation called Traditional Britain asked a Conservative MP to talk to them about Conservative policy. The speech appears to have been an entirely orthodox view of current Conservatism. Nothing else seems to have been discussed at this dinner.
Subsequently the Traditional Britain group (which apparently espouses an old-fashioned fundamentalist view of British exceptionalism) makes provocative statements on various on-line sites. Radical left-wing organisations which monitor groups such as Traditional Britain seize on these comments and present them in such a way that it appears as if they have been endorsed by Jacob Rees-Mogg. Upon further questioning the left-wing monitors are unable to prove any connection between the speaker and the audience and the story effectively collapses.
What are we left with?
That some people find the British exceptionalism of Traditional Britain objectionable is obvious. But is it any different from say the Jamaican exceptionalism we have seen voiced over the last week by individuals such as Diane Abbott MP and Lee Jasper (Lee Jasper claiming that the global culture of the world was now Jamaican). It might perhaps be preferable to live in a world without loud expressions of cultural aggrandizement but the fact is we don't.
That some people find the idea of repatriation of BME people obnoxious is beyond doubt. But is it any more obnoxious than the arrival here without democratic permission of millions of post-war immigrants (BME people and others, including Australians such as Trenton Oldfield)? Is not the whole issue of immigration and the failed policy of multiculturalism a poisonous quagmire that needs sorting out?
That Doreen Lawrence, recently ennobled to the House of Lords, should be beyond criticism is not practical or desirable. Lady Lawrence is a party politician, and when she takes her seat in the House of Lords will be part of the legislature and paid allowances and expenses drawn from the public purse. That such a person should be scrutinised and where necessary criticised is axiomatic (although it is possible that her political career will be beyond criticism - I am looking forward to Lady Lawrence using her position to advance equal rights for Jamaican gay people in the Jamaican diaspora in the United Kingdom, and indeed in Jamaica itself, widely regarded as the most homophobic nation on earth).
No comments:
Post a Comment