I am now listed as being "not a neoconservative, though he is involved in a number of organisations linked to neoconservatives such as Democratiya and the Euston Manifesto".
But there is a further page in which I am said to be "involved in pro-war left organisations" – Democratiya and Euston again, though neither is "pro-war" in fact – and am quoted (more-or-less accurately) on various subjects. Then comes an editorial comment:
Anderson's defence of the neoconservative trope of 'Islamic fascism' ignores the reality that this has not been limited to a caricature of authoritarian movements like Al Qaeda, but in the hands of Douglas Murray and others, it has been used to smear Muslim communities as a whole. Nor has its use been limited to an analysis of ideology and practises. Rather, it has been employed in neoconservative propaganda campaigns that sought to portray Iraq as a military threat analogous to Nazi Germany.I don't mind vigorous criticism, but this is bollocks. So – I'm not a neocon but a fellow-traveller who deserves a listing because my arguments objectively play into the hands of the neocons? Get lost, you cretino-leftist, and stop your blacklisting.
"Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"
16 comments:
I don't know why you even get upset about this shit.
It is internetzzz shite.
Fuck it.
"a fellow-traveller who deserves a listing because my arguments objectively play into the hands of the neocons"
Reminds me of AJP Taylor, on writing 'The Origins of the Second World War' :
"... I have however no sympathy with those in [Britain] who complained that my book had been welcomed, mistakenly or not, by former supporters of Hitler. This seems to me a disgraceful argument to be used against a work of history. A historian must not hesitate even if his books lend aid and comfort to the Queen's enemies (though mine did not), or even to the common enemies of mankind. For my part, I would even record facts which told in favour of the British government, if I found any to record."
'I am said to be "involved in pro-war left organisations" – Democratiya and Euston again, though neither is "pro-war"'
Ha ha ha ha ha ha
Who are you calling a 'cretin'? Clearly you are an irony-free zone.
Anonymous, you are a moron. Both Euston and Democratiya were set up explicitly on the basis that - now the war against Saddam Hussein's kleptocratic police state had, for better or worse, happened - the democratic left had to bury its differences on the decision to go to war and support democratic secularists in Iraq.
'the democratic left had to bury its differences on the decision to go to war and support democratic secularists in Iraq.'
No it didn't.
The pro-war scumbags have abandoned the democratic left for their new friends in the neo-con Policy Exchange wing of the Tory Party. The so-called Labour Friends of Iraq is run by a paid lobbyist for the Islamic Dawa party. The (now defunct) Euston Manifesto and Dictatoriya are neo-con fronts. No more and no less.
Only a moron would fall for your bullshit.
Anonymous - I know very well where Euston and Democratiya came from because I was at a couple of very early meetings with the group that came to be at the core of both initiatives and am friends with several people who subsequently became very active in one or the other (although I did precisely nothing myself apart from signing up for both). Nearly all of the half-dozen in the core group that went on to launch the two projects had been opposed to going to war against Saddam. The idea that Euston or Democratiya were "neo-con fronts" is simply not true.
http://www.newstatesman.com/200604170006
by
Nick Cohen and Norman Geras
both pro war
They name-check
Jane Ashworth
Brian Brivati
Damien Counsell
Eve Garrard
Shalom Lappin
John Lloyd
Paul Berman
Pamela Bone
Anthony Julius
Kanan Makiya
Michael Walzer
and Francis Wheen
The overwhelming majority are pro-war
As for Democratiya not being a neo-con front, what planet are you on? have you ever read it?
Those who doubt the neo-con affiliations of the Eustonites need to read this
http://www.spinwatch.org/-articles-by-category-mainmenu-8/49-propaganda/5018-the-euston-manifesto-made-in-the-usa
The Euston Manifesto: Made in the USA?
Tom Griffin, 13 June 2008
'The Euston Manifesto is a declaration published by a group of British intellectuals in 2006, chiefly notable for its staunch support of American foreign policy. There is little original about this development, except its choice of targets. It represents an application of cold war propaganda techniques to the new circumstances of the war on terror.'
Anonymous, you are talking bollocks, as indeed is Tom Griffin in the piece you link to.
Euston and Democratiya evolved out of Alan and Jane talking to Norm, Norm talking to Nick, Nick to Francis etc etc - and, hey, some of the crew were talking to like-minded journalists and academics in the US. I know because I was involved in some of the conversations - one took place in my office very early on - and I was copied into online exchanges, but was too busy to get involved. The idea that it was some kind of spook-inspired Congress for Cultural Freedom initiative is nothing more or less than puerile conspiracy theory.
'and, hey, some of the crew were talking to like-minded journalists and academics in the US. '
Paul Wolfowitz was neither a journalist nor an academic, but Nick Cohen was set up for a champagne lunch with him by another notorious ne-con Devon Gaffney Cross.
http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2009/03/23/propaganda-and-the-media-counter-jihad-and-the-decent-left/
The Eustonians have been in bed with the American neo-cons from the very beginning.
Here is Democratiya editor Alan (ntm, ntfpm) Johnson at a gruesome tea party with other members of the far right.
http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2008/06/30/a-glittering-gathering-at-my-home-for-alan-johnson-and-democratiya/
Just give up Anonymous. The fact that Nick Cohen had a lunch with Paul Wolfowitz proves nothing more than, er, he had lunch with Paul Wolfowitz - which was such a secret affair that he wrote about it! And as for those pictures of Alan Johnson meeting a handful of intellectuals of a variety of political persuasions, wow, what stunning evidence of a conspiracy, posted for all to see on the internet. You're now barred.
I am confused, is Mr Anderson's argument that the Euston Manifesto group was anti-war? or that it was pro-war?
My point is that the Euston Manifesto group was neither pro-war nor anti-war but post-war (or at least post-invasion). It brought together people who had opposed the invasion of Iraq (for example me and Alan Johnson) and people who had supported it (for example Nick Cohen and Norman Geras). What we agreed on, however, was that, whatever our differences had been in the past, the overwhelming priority now was to support people attempting to create a tolerant secular democratic society in Iraq.
'Euston Manifesto group was neither pro-war nor anti-war but post-war.'
It was at least 95% pro-war and 100% pro-occupation.
By the way, what was the last (or any) thing you did 'to support people attempting to create a tolerant secular democratic society in Iraq'? Because it doesn't seem to have made any difference.
A reminder of the company you keep...
February 08, 2007
NICK COHEN ON THE LEFT - 2
Paul Anderson writes:
I'm just home from a launch party upstairs in a West End boozer for Nick Cohen's What's Left?, one of the best bashes I've been to in years. I met Norm and Pooter Geek for the first time and David Aaronovitch for the first time in 20 years. I touched base with Denis MacShane and Joan Smith and Gary Kent -- where have you been darlings? -- said hello to Martin Bright and Bill Keegan and Paulie, chewed some cud with the crew from Little Atoms, and flirted with ... not telling. And then there were the Tribune mob and the atheists. It was lovely. There's nothing like a party. Regrets come tomorrow.
MacShane and Smith are living in their 'second home' in London at taxpayers' expense. Kent is on the payroll of the Islamic Dawa Party, Cohen writes for the neo-con Standpoint and Bright for the neo-con Spectator. Nice people and politics you 'flirt with'.
Both Euston and Democratiya were set up explicitly on the basis that - now the war against Saddam Hussein's kleptocratic police state had, for better or worse, happened - the democratic left had to bury its differences Paul, come on. "Bury its differences"? Does that really describe what Nick Cohen has spent the last couple of years doing? Or is the term "The democratic left" being used in some sort of specialised way so as to disqualify all sorts of people who would normally be thought to fall within the ordinary language meaning of that term.
Of course the Tom Griffin research "exposing" nefarious neo-con links is all paid for by ... Zac Goldsmith, that well-known socialist: http://spinwatchwatch.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/hello-world/
Post a Comment