James Delingpole says You Know It Makes Sense
From now on, though, I’ve decided, life’s too short. To bother arguing with a left-liberal about ‘social justice’ and the ‘deserving poor’ is like arguing with David Icke about the lizard-headed master race called the Babylonian Brotherhood, or with David Irving about the Holocaust. OK, so you might win on points in the end. But in the process of winning the battle you lose the war by conceding that theirs is a topic of debate even worthy of discussion in the first place.
This is one of the Cameron coalition’s gravest errors. Every economic decision it makes has to be defended according to the impact it might have on all those wonderful imaginary ‘deserving poor’. The workers who actually produce the wealth that supplies the safety net for these ‘deserving poor’ might just as well not exist. It never had to be this way: these were the terms of debate Cameron and his advisers agreed to have set for them when they decided it was more important to please the BBC than their natural supporters.
Hence my impatience — and the impatience of many British conservatives like me. We look with envy at what is happening with the Tea Party movement in America, and wish the same thing could happen over here. As the Conservative MEP Dan Hannan says, it’s time to repatriate the revolution. Unfortunately I don’t see much sign of that revolution being sparked off anywhere within his own party. It will have to come from elsewhere. But from whom? And how?
More articles from: James Delingpole | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
You can’t fight racism by ignoring facts
Was there a ‘racial’ or ‘cultural’ angle to the crimes…
Ancient and modern: The wrong ancient gods
The Royal Mint has just released some gold coins to…
The football fan theory of nationalism
Observing the fealties of football supporters, I’ve been struck by…
How I became a 24-carat goldbug
If you’re at all worried about the current global financial…
Status Anxiety: Parenting is a moral issue
When the government announced its new £5 million parenting project…
1 One man's terrorist... - Rod Liddle
2 10 Pretty Unpersuasive Reasons for Scottish Independence - Alex Massie
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Sue Denum
October 31st, 2010 10:05pm Report this commentAs someone who attended this event, I can honestly testify that Mr. Delingpole has given a completely skewed account of what actually occurred during the Roedean Dinner. First off, there was not only "one real dissenter" who did not raise their hand, but rather half of the people at the dinner openly disagreed with the headmistress's proposition. Secondly, the suggestion that Mr. Delingpole converted the guests with his 'ruthless tact' is laughably inaccurate on more than one account- Mr. Delingpole came across as weak, unable to substantiate his arguments, and easily daunted by the slightest of intelligent probing. Even the most conservative of the attendees noted afterwards the lacklustre of his political arguments and his tendency to contradict himself. True, Mr. Delingpole was not the “chauvinist pig” we anticipated, but only because of his lack of backbone to stand by his sexist argument in a room full of educated and articulate girls. The Roedean Pupils challenged Mr. Delingpole on his environmental views, his dubious journalistic methods, and his thinly-veiled sexist arguments- no ‘magic wand’ was waved over us.
Once again Mr. Delingpole has relied on cheap sensationalism rather than genuine journalism for a cheap and easy commission. Next time, James, patronize the intellect of my peers in the process by portraying us as in agreement with your absurdist opinion. Next time, don’t tell me to blame my womb over chauvinists like yourself for the glass ceiling (oh, a feminist cliché, let the eye rolling commence). If this twisted account of the evening helps you sleep at night, than so be it, but next time but don’t publish it as a win for ‘conservatism with a heart’.
And your call for a UK tea party? Well, I rest my case.
Richard Thoburn
November 2nd, 2010 9:23am Report this commentLife is indeed to short too be nice to Lefties, but it would be misguided to be overly egalitarian about them, and treat Lefties as if they were one homogenous grouping.
Of all the groupings of Lefties, one stands out as the most odious by far: the earnest, worthy, humourless product of privilege, smug in its certainty that it knows what's best for the rest of us and patronising in the extreme. Add a touch of feminism and political correctness and you get something approaching Harriet Harman. If you substitute Roedean for St Paul's and knock off 40 years and add a hint of hysteria, you get Sue Denum - an appalling public school Lefty if ever there was one, and a worthy successor to Harriet.
Maria
November 4th, 2010 9:00am Report this commentLife's too short to waste time arguing with James Delingpole.
His popularity has always mystified me.
Alan Campbell
November 4th, 2010 6:05pm Report this commentDelingpole
You just got owned, beeatch!
Mac
November 4th, 2010 10:43pm Report this commentSue Denum confirmed the subtext that was screaming from this article.
James Delingpole's report of his
all-conquering appearance smacked of Alan Partridge's mantra - "needless to say I had the last laugh." Which the viewer knew meant "I got my arse handed to me and I'm damned if I'm going to admit it, least of all to myself."
To be fair, getting owned by a bunch of schoolgirls would sting, but if it's any consolation James, these are exceptionally smart and articulate girls. Next time maybe do a bit of prep before you engage the educational elite of our nation's youth.
And James, don't spend too long worrying about whether people think you're nice or nasty. Realistically, what are the chances that many people spend time thinking about you at all?
Maria
November 4th, 2010 11:14pm Report this commentAC, Cheers!
Alan Campbell
November 5th, 2010 1:52pm Report this commentMarvellous. Delingpole as Alan Partridge. Perfect comparison.
Neil Craig
November 7th, 2010 2:58pm Report this commentOne of the big differences beyween UK & US politics is that they have a primary s=ystem for selecting candidates whereas here they either have jobs for life or are effectively chosen by party leaders, plus the fact that policy is entirely chosen by leadrs (eg Cameron breaking the policy on "cast iron" referendum, without any of th majority of MPs or vast majority of members who want a referendum having a say.
This in the US the TEA party has been an addition to Republican power & they won their election while in Britain anybody determined to promote market freedom & freedom from the Common Market has to support UKIP - a choice which clearly cost the cionservatives the last election.
In that way UKIP are a very close analog to the TEA party. I think it likely that at the next EU election they will push the Conservatives into 2nd or even third place. If so the long term future of the party is dubious.
James Delingpole
November 7th, 2010 7:26pm Report this commentI think I've learned my lesson here: never try to second guess hormonal, achingly right-on public school chicks.
Tim Footman
November 8th, 2010 9:49am Report this commentMr Delingpole has to make a choice: be hated or be ignored. Another right-wing self-publicist of an earlier vintage, Dr David Starkey, has made a small fortune out of the former and when â“ as seems inevitable â“ someone finally loses patience and strangles him in mid-rant, there may be a vacancy in the git celeberati.
Ralph Perry Robinson
November 8th, 2010 9:30pm Report this commentDear Spectator Editor
Have you considered replacing James Delingpole with Sue Denum? She sounds a lot more articulate and she's certainly posher than he is.
Larry
November 9th, 2010 12:43pm Report this commentI can guarantee you that "Sue Denum" is not who she says she is. She is most definitely not a teenage public schoolgirl, and I'm guessing that she wasn't there when James gave that speech.
She is a troll who posts under the names Sue Denum, Sue Denham, Sue Dunham, etc.
She is also extremely boring, and obviously wrong about everything.
Hermione Shakassoc
November 9th, 2010 8:40pm Report this commentFunny that. I too was at the event where darling Mr Delingpole told us what was what. My recollection is that he was quick witted, charming, funny and uncompromising. I began the evening as a committed Trotskyist, but dear Mr Delingpole soon made me see the error of my ways, and now I am returning, with my eyes opened, to the real world.
I now see that it is wrong for the government to try to do anything other than ensure that we are defended from enemies without and criminals within, to protect our borders, to make sure the roads are kept clear, to ensure that we have abundant supplies of sensibly sourced energy, and to provide a safety net for the very poorest and most helpless in our country to help them out of that state if possible. I have now come to realise the great benefits of an education independent of the state. I have turned my back on political correctness and the man-bear-pig religion.
However, even though Mr Delingpole wouldn't like it, I cannot bring myself to regard him as my god-emperor, but just as a very smart, articulate and persuasive speaker.
And I was sitting at the front.
Stephanie Tohill
November 11th, 2010 8:13am Report this commentShame as I would have loved to have been there to enquire of Mr Delingpole as to why he thinks paternity leave is a bad thing. I don’t think is answer was really sufficient. Particularly when we have the ludicrously lop-sided approach to maternity leave which simply reinforces the notion that mothers are more important to children than fathers.
His argument against paternity leave is also an argument against maternity leave, which is fine. But then taken to the logical conclusion wouldn’t this lead to a situation where fewer women have children and we have an even bigger problem with our replacement rate than at present (or is this a good thing now?)
Likewise whilst Denum is wrong to blame glass ceilings on ‘chauvinism’ it is also just as disingenuous for Delingpole to blame it on ‘wombs’. It’s actually a variety of factors.
Either way I am pretty sure that the end result isn’t exactly as Delingpole has portrayed it to be…
Back to top