Reheated (3)
For newcomers, three more items from the archives:
On cowardice in moral drag. Jakob Illeborg touches his toes and hopes no-one takes advantage.
Imperialism, brainwashing and the imminent invasion of China. The wild imaginings of Mr John Pilger.
Professor Carolyn Guertin “inserts bodily fluids and political consciousness into electronic spaces.” Mockery ensues.
Dip a toe in the greatest hits.
David, why are you so preoccupied with bashing the Guardian? It’s not the only paper to print dumb things.
anon,
“It’s not the only paper to print dumb things.”
No, it certainly isn’t. And it does have one or two very good writers – Ben Goldacre, for instance, is usually worth reading.
But the Guardian does, I think, offer the greatest *concentration* of contorted reasoning, factual inaccuracy, staggering hypocrisy and unshakeable smugness, often presented simultaneously. More to the point, the paper is (as Max Hastings famously put it) “read by the new establishment” and its readership is in large part made up of teachers, social workers, educational advisors, broadcasters, bureaucrats, media types, etc. Unlike, say, the Daily Mail, the Guardian is read by people who are supposed to be informed, influential and conspicuously intelligent. The paper’s influence is thus much greater than its limited sales (and perilous commercial status) would suggest. Despite the gestures of radicalism, many of the views propagated by the Guardian are to a significant degree the views of the current political, educational, artistic and media establishment. It therefore distills many of the key dishonesties of the age.
Which makes it a uniquely fitting target, yes?
Yes.
You only need to read the first sentence of Guertin’s ‘Conclusions’ to draw a conclusion about her – “The whole concept of reaching a conclusion or drawing conclusions is of course, antithetical to … my aims…”