The death of public discourse

It is said that since Donald Trump returned to the Oval Office, it is once again possible to use the word ‘retarded’. Or at least to use it without being cancelled by a group of demonic online third parties pretending to be woefully offended by the use of an often-useful term. I don’t know how long this window of opportunity will remain open, so let me note while I can that it is hard to think of a country in the world that has a more retarded public discourse than Britain.

Almost everyone in public life aims to stop any discussion of the issues via obfuscation and misrepresentation

The journalist Andrew Norfolk died this month at the age of 60. For once the term ‘brave’ deserves to be used of a journalist. A gentle-mannered and kindly man, Norfolk was the Times reporter who did some proper reporting. In 2011 he broke front-page after front-page news exposing the truth about what is still called the ‘grooming gangs’ scandal. His work was factual, unbiased and the result of sitting down with multiple victims. He explained in as level and careful a way as possible the distinct racial and religious components that led to Muslim men of mainly Pakistani origin singling out young white working-class girls for systemic abuse.

The care with which Norfolk wrote about this did not protect him from criticism. The usual people and organisations accused him of ‘Islamophobia’ and more.

A smart society might have turned its ire on the people who were hellbent on keeping the story covered up in this manner. After all, who tries to stop the revelation of mass child-rape by attacking the messenger? Still, Norfolk’s reporting had a huge impact. It was thanks to his work that an inquiry was set up into the events in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013 that found that at least 1,400 children had been raped in that area alone.