Douglas Murray does a Rod Liddle


by Sunny
29th June, 2010 at 10:25 pm    

Remember Rod Liddle’s obsession with Mary Seacole? Now Douglas Murray of the oxymoronic Centee for Social Cohesion looks to be following suit.

Richard Spencer at the Telegraph:

I was reminded of it when he asked us the other day to consider whether a West Indian or an Asian is the stupidest woman in Britain. It may be, of course, a coincidence that the candidates, Diane Abbott MP and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, a newspaper columnist, are both from ethnic minorities, and that Murray had gone through the white contenders and assigned them to third, fourth and fifth places without telling us. After all, we were only likely to be interested in the grand, head-to-head final. However, since the topic at issue was race this seems a coincidence too far.

Douglas Murray splutters: Of course I’m not racist and it’s just entirely a coincidence that I’m picking on these women as the “stupidest in Britain”. It’s not racist to accuse others of playing the race card.

Think of the possibilities this rhetorical device offers. From now on, you could just play on any racist stereotype or make any accusation you want. Then, as soon as someone pulls you up on it, just accuse the people you’re hating on of playing the victim card! Genius.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Race politics






38 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. marwan — on 29th June, 2010 at 11:33 pm  

    Murray is notorious for this nazi-like statement
    “”It is late in the day, but Europe still has time to turn around the demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities. It has to. All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop…. Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board: Europe must look like a less attractive proposition.”

    Unsuprisingly Spittoons Houriya Ahmed works for him.

  2. douglas clark — on 30th June, 2010 at 1:06 am  

    Blooming heck Sunny!

    What is with the ’60′s psychedilia?

    This is not an improvement.

    ________________

    Quite what any of the foregoing racist rant has to do with Mary Seacole – who, I for one, find an interesting counterpoint to Florence Nightingale – is also a bit beyond me.

    What has the first paragraph got to do with the rest of the content?

    It is a ridiculous contention in any case. The stupidest woman in Britain is unlikely to be in the media. She, is, god love her, likely to be in a vegetative state in a hospital somewehere.

    What the idiot means is that he disagrees with Dianne Abbott, and that she has a higher media profile than he.

    The wee lamb.

  3. douglas clark — on 30th June, 2010 at 1:24 am  

    Hmm..

    The joyfully liberated comments on your first link are worthy of consideration:

    There is some serious competition for the stupidest, most repulsive woman in Britain. Mary Riddell flies the flag in a truly competitive fashion for this newspaper, but I do think that “that Caroline Lucas is so hot right now.”

    She should definitely be popped into a biodegradable sack and chucked in a river to see whether she sinks or floats.

    Or

    What Richard didn’t seem to be aware of is that there is very heavy competition for the “Stupidest woman in Britain” including Harriet Harman, Polly Toynbee, Claire Short, Madeline Bunting, Mary Riddell, etc. etc.

    Heartwarming that the attitudes of the 1930′s are alive and vibrant today, is it not?

    ___________________________________

    Post preview was a useful feature and should not be abandoned.

  4. bananabrain — on 30th June, 2010 at 8:48 am  

    From now on, you could just play on any racist stereotype or make any accusation you want. Then, as soon as someone pulls you up on it, just accuse the people you’re hating on of playing the victim card! Genius.

    i shall have to tell the rest of the zionist conspiracy about this, because this is going to really screw with our ability to call people anti-semites for being anti-semitic.

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  5. DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells — on 30th June, 2010 at 8:49 am  

    Think of the possibilities this rhetorical device offers. From now on, you could just play on any racist stereotype or make any accusation you want. Then, as soon as someone pulls you up on it, just accuse the people you’re hating on of playing the victim card! Genius.

    Oh do catch up, they’ve been doing that to Scousers for the last five years, at least.

  6. damon — on 30th June, 2010 at 11:08 am  

    You don’t have to be a fan of Douglas Murray to think there is something seriously wrong with the way Richard Spencer puts this:

    I was reminded of it when he asked us the other day to consider whether a West Indian or an Asian is the stupidest woman in Britain.

    And as for saying he ”splutters” in his reply in his second blog post, I think that’s a bit wide of the mark too.

    There are some fair points in his second article.
    Abbott is guilty of some of the things he accuses her of IMO.

    I thought it funny that he used the world ”wearying” too, as someone just used the word about me.

    Abbott has accused white teachers in inner cities of being instatutionally racist. That’s the reason for higer expulsions of black boys from school she says.

    And the reason I have no time for her is not that she would say such a thing, because there might be something in that and it should be looked into.
    But because of the way she and people like her on the left would conduct such a conversation. They would remain ”in charge” of the parameters of such a discussion, and dictate how it could be discussed.

    That’s what I think is getting Douglas Murray’s back up. Not her race – but her way of argument. I think he finds it, like I do, dishonest. And Yasmin AB can be a bit like that sometimes too.

    But I still find Murray to be a bit of a joke. Sunday morning’s Big Questions on BBC 1 is about his level.

    Maybe we could adopt a Daily Mail style of rating posts, to know when other people find what we say is good or wearisome.

  7. BenSix — on 30th June, 2010 at 4:03 pm  

    I doubt that Murray is all that much of a racist. That would suggest that he spends a lot of time thinking about someone other than Douglas Murray.

  8. Ravi Naik — on 30th June, 2010 at 4:32 pm  

    Douglas Murray splutters: Of course I’m not racist and it’s just entirely a coincidence that I’m picking on these women as the “stupidest in Britain”. It’s not racist to accuse others of playing the race card.

    In a previous thread, I wrote that Diane Abbot is not bright, and I get that feeling every time she appears on TV. If Labour feels this is the best they can offer, then good luck with that. I do not feel that pointing this out can be construed as racism.

    I do not think Douglas Murray is a racist, and he is certainly not in Rod Liddle’s league.

  9. Mark T — on 30th June, 2010 at 6:45 pm  

    From now on, you could just play on any racist stereotype or make any accusation you want. Then, as soon as someone pulls you up on it, just accuse the people you’re hating on of playing the victim card!

    What, precisely, is Murray being “pulled up” for here? If Sunny thinks Murray is a racist, he should just come out and say it.

    The facts are that Murray- rightly or wrongly – has a low opinion of two women who happen to be of a different race. Now I don’t really care for him. But to suggest that the only possible reason he could have such a low opinion of them is because of the colour of their skin is undoubtedly playing the race card.

  10. ¬AF — on 30th June, 2010 at 6:59 pm  

    One wonders why Sunny thinks the “Centre for Social Cohesion” is oxymoronic.

    One idea is that Sunny does not know what an oxymoron is: after all how a “centre” is oxymoronic with the notion of “social cohesion” is, to say the least, somewhat puzzling.

    On the other hand, Sunny is probably suggesting that the work of CSC is counter to genuine social cohesion. Let’s unpack that:

    Recently, CSC has written reports on al-Muj’s attempts to convince British Muslims to not vote; CSC has written a report on the neo-Nazi Blood and Honour group; and CSC has written another report on the support network in Britain for the jihadi preacher, Anwar al-Awlaki.

    Surely Sonny is not suggesting that production of these reports was damaging to social cohesion? One would hope not.

    Surely Sonny is not suggesting that these groups, Nazis and jihadi benefit social cohesion? One would hope not.

    So what exactly *are* Sonny’s grounds for dubbing the CSC as “oxymoronic”?

    In the end it rather looks like a failure to grasp the meaning of a nasty word that Sonny wants to use to label a group associated with a person (Douglas Murray) who Sonny doesn’t like – although why, I suspect, will ever remain a mystery.

  11. ¬AF — on 30th June, 2010 at 7:00 pm  

    And I can’t spell “Sunny”. Apologies for that.

  12. ¬AF — on 30th June, 2010 at 7:05 pm  

    Mark T

    Only Brown and Black people are allowed to make critical remarks about other Brown and Black people – and only after their remarks have been passed by Sunny, the Ali G of identity politics.

    Tell us it ain’t so, Sunny.

  13. Sunny — on 30th June, 2010 at 9:14 pm  

    Abu Faris – I know it’s you. I know you’re the same idiot who spends most of his day slagging me off on other blogs. I’m only tolerating you spamming my blog today because I don’t have time to sort things out.

    The answer to your question is rather simple. Would you like me to dig out what Murray said at Pim Fortuyn’s funeral?

    Douglas Murray has also said Geert Wilders was “on trial for telling the truth”. Would you like me to point to what Geert Wilders has said in the past?

    You’re like an annoying fly. Someone with no real knowledge of much, other than crap you get from reading the same blogs. I could spend all day swatting you away but it would be a waste of my time.

  14. Sunny — on 30th June, 2010 at 9:14 pm  

    Also, it’s cute that you and your mates come here under different names pretending to have conversations with each other.

  15. Mark T — on 30th June, 2010 at 9:51 pm  

    Also, it’s cute that you and your mates come here under different names pretending to have conversations with each other.

    What conversation?

  16. turnip — on 1st July, 2010 at 6:41 am  

    Presumably the reason why people have to keep assuming new nicknames is because you ban them the soon after they have disagreed with you, Sunny – and immediately after you have had one of your petulant “last words”.

    It is depressing that you cannot find it in yourself to actually hold any sort of debate with people; but, rather, you seem to want to engage in ad hominem attacks and groundless claims that anyone who disagrees with you knows nothing, or simply gleans their information from the internet.

  17. turnip — on 1st July, 2010 at 6:58 am  

    …and incidentally, Sunny, I write about Islamism and assorted clerical fascisms from behind a computer screen in the Arab world where I live and work.

    Of course I never venture outside, nor do I ever, ever talk to people. Naturally, then, all my information is gleaned from the internet.

    Tit.

  18. turnip — on 1st July, 2010 at 7:11 am  

    Sunny

    I have never pretended to be anyone else. You have persistently blocked me from commenting and where you have responded it has frequently been either borderline defamatory or plain scurrilous.

    I take some umbrage at being described as knowing nothing about the subjects about which I write. Or rather, I might make some objection were it not for the source of such comments.

    You see, Sunny, the thing that really exercises people who regard themselves as liberals, democrats or reformists in the part of the developing world I live in is the contempt, arrogance and plain damage that is done to their struggles against religious intolerance, police states and economic deprivation by idiots in the West (of whatever Colour or identity) who – in some utterly arse-about-backwards manner – insist on making common cause with the agents of all that is wrong and reactionary in the Arab world and the wider developing world.

    I show your articles to my wife, who is an Arab and she cannot believe the utter stupidity of your enabling of such utter shits as Naik, Begg and a wealth of others. You seem to think there is some sort of neo-conservative onslaught on Muslims – yet you seem to be precious unconcerned for the very real onslaught of the religious fascism these people espouse in the Arab world and the Muslim-majority nations.

    But just as it raises you media profile and bigs you up with the chatterati, then – hey – the Brown and Black people in their hovels from Cairo to Mumbai can go fuck themselves, eh Sunny?

  19. turnip — on 1st July, 2010 at 7:38 am  

    …and let’s drop the Fortuyn/Wilders bullcrap.

    Fontuyn was (and Wilders is) not someone with whom I agree. Nor do I think their views on Islam and the Muslims of the West are correct. However, despite their undoubted nastiness, as far as I am aware neither ever advocated the murder of those who left a faith, the oppression of women; nor did they encourage anti-Semitic bigotry, nor yet did either laud terrorism, nor violent attacks on civilians.

    As far as I recall, Fontuyn was murdered by someone who advocated all these things.

    Yet, do not let it detain you for a second the difference between the bollocks spouted by Low Country bigots and the often concrete assistance lent by jihadi preachers to terror and murder. Please do not worry yourself about such matters.

  20. taking notes — on 1st July, 2010 at 7:47 am  

    Oddly, some in the Liberal Democats – you remember them? The party Sunny ordered all Brown people to vote for (before he changed his mind) – think Sunny is an idiot who does not have a clue about that of which he pontificates:

    “I don’t like to be rude, but just how ignorant do you have to be to write a sentence like this?

    Step forward Sunny Hundal:

    ‘Identifying Lib Dem pockets of voters and organising activists to start knocking on doors on polling day to get them out would be another strategy Cowley Street is or should be thinking about.’

    What does he imagine we normally do during election campaigns and on polling day?

    I shall study Mr Hundal’s writings more closely in future. I may have been missing a comic treat.”

    http://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2010/04/sunny-hundal-wins-idiot-of-day.html

    Oh dear.

  21. M Schwartz — on 1st July, 2010 at 7:50 am  

    ***“”It is late in the day, but Europe still has time to turn around the demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities.***

    Marlan,

    What is wrong with identifying a worring trend and seeking to halt it?

  22. Golam Murtaza — on 1st July, 2010 at 9:06 am  

    @ Turnip. I seriously think you’ve got Sunny (and the overall trend of this site) all wrong. Sunny IS against clerical facism and has emphasised this more times than I can remember. To paint him as some kind of apologist for terrorists and other assorted nutcases is unfair and inaccurate

  23. Golam Murtaza — on 1st July, 2010 at 9:10 am  

    @ M Schwartz So I guess that makes me, my family and about half of my friends ‘a worrying trend’. Ah well…

  24. turnip — on 1st July, 2010 at 9:19 am  

    As unfair and as inaccurate as painting anyone with whom he disagrees as ignorant or specially interested, Golam?

    I think you need to re-read what I wrote.

  25. douglas clark — on 1st July, 2010 at 10:38 am  

    Turnip,

    If you disagree with the editorial around here, perhaps you could make some sort of intelligent critique of it? Ad hominem is a waste of everyone’s time.

    I have read this site more or less since it’s inception and to characterise Sunny as a supporter of clerical fascism is nonsense. Would you care to point to a single article that advocated murder on the basis of religion or a lack of it, which is what you appear to be claiming….

  26. Ravi Naik — on 1st July, 2010 at 10:48 am  

    I do agree with Douglas Murray on his basic premise that people should not be criticized because of their skin colour, but also should not be absolved from criticism because of fear that you will be called a racist – which is precisely what happened here. Unlike Liddle, who got upset because his sons knew something about a black woman who showed a lot of merit in her life – something only a racist and possibly a misogynist would feel – Murray actually has provided (video) evidence of his claim: that Dianne Abbot is an intellectual lightweight – the fact that people feel that you should not mention that because she is black and plays out “stereotypes” is depressing and insulting.

    Having said that, Murray’s defence of Geert Wilders, his movie Fitna and Ayaan Hirsi Ali are all disturbing trends. After reading his articles on the subject, I can only agree that he is an Islamophobe.

  27. David O'Keefe — on 1st July, 2010 at 11:47 am  

    Before we get on the subject of playing the race card we should remember that this “spat” was started by a rather gratutitious attack by Murray on Abbot and YAB. Murray was also desperately clutching at straws in an attempt to prove that Abbott is an anti-white racist.

    Remind me whose playing the race card here?

  28. persephone — on 1st July, 2010 at 10:55 pm  

    @ 18

    “I show your articles to my wife, who is an Arab “

    And in the next paragraph:

    “ the Brown and Black people in their hovels from Cairo to Mumbai can go fuck themselves “

    Supposedly, your Arab ‘wife’ would not be too happy about your comments

  29. root vegetable — on 2nd July, 2010 at 3:04 am  

    @Douglas Clark

    (1) Ad hominem is not telling someone how it is and backing that up with evidence. Ad hominem is something like the following from Sunny: telling someone that the only reason why they disagree with him is because they want to suck someone else’s penis.

    (2) Not agreeing with an “editorial line” is perfectly normal and should not be subject to censure

    (3) *enabling* clerical fascism does *not* mean the same thing as *supporting* clerical fascism. I was writing about Sunny *enabling* clerical fascism.

    @persephone

    What a silly comment. My wife is Black – why on earth would she be offended by my pointing out that the rights and liberties of other Black people were being undermined? What an odd point of view!

    If you had actually read what I wrote you would have noted that the meaning of the whole sentence was that it was the inevitable outcome of Sunny’s rank opportunism that led to such a statement being made.

    Some severe reading comprehension issues amongst some people on this site it would seem.

  30. Mark T — on 2nd July, 2010 at 12:34 pm  

    Yes, I don’t think Persephone really grasped what you were suggesting there.

  31. Sunny — on 2nd July, 2010 at 4:32 pm  

    haha!

    Here is turnip/root vegetable:
    It is depressing that you cannot find it in yourself to actually hold any sort of debate with people; but, rather, you seem to want to engage in ad hominem attacks

    and then

    I show your articles to my wife, who is an Arab and she cannot believe the utter stupidity of your enabling of such utter shit…

    Stop wasting my time Faisal/AF and related dickwads. Go back to your own blog and cry. No one’s listening here.

  32. carrot — on 2nd July, 2010 at 7:29 pm  

    Principally because hardly anyone appears to be reading this blog any more, Sunny. Plausibly this is because of your irrational, censorious and abusive responses to any and all criticism of your increasingly odd views.

  33. carrot — on 2nd July, 2010 at 7:32 pm  

    And I love the distortion in order to suggest ad hominem

    You quote me as writing

    I show your articles to my wife, who is an Arab and she cannot believe the utter stupidity of your enabling of such utter shit…

    And excise the continuation, which shows that the “utter shit” are the views of Islamists such as Naik and Begg.

    Rather, through your selective editing you want to suggest that *you* are being called utter shit. This, of course, was not my intention, nor what I wrote.

    All very desperate, Sunny.

  34. carrot — on 2nd July, 2010 at 7:34 pm  

    Note also that once again I have had to change my handle because Sunny has once again made a series of unsustainable and illegitimate criticisms and then banned the contributor who is being smeared so as to make any response near to impossible.

    Sunnym it is exactly this sort of underhand and petty approach which is driving your readership away – that and your bizarre views on a range of issues concerning identity and the enabling (NB, not *support – pace Douglas) of Islamists.

  35. persephone — on 2nd July, 2010 at 11:51 pm  

    29 & 30 You obviously need me to be more literal:

    If you genuinely wanted to make such a point you would not be so denigrating was my point.

  36. Sunny — on 3rd July, 2010 at 2:17 am  

    rincipally because hardly anyone appears to be reading this blog any more, Sunny.

    Oh really? Bizarre that. People keep writing 1000 of words saying why Sunny must be ignored. They keep frothing at the mouth at why everything I write is in support of Hitler and Osama Bin Laden. And then they come here to claim with a straight face, and spend ages writing long comments, on why no one is reading or responding.

    Clearly irony isn’t a strong point of yours. I have an idea. Fuck off. You think I care for what people like you have to say? It actually makes me laugh when idiots like you think you’re actually going to get me to go along with your bigoted agenda.

  37. alex the awesome — on 3rd July, 2010 at 3:37 pm  

    Some people aren’t going to be happy until they’re given reins at the Blogs Committee for Investigating Muslim Activity are they?

  38. joe90 — on 6th July, 2010 at 12:29 pm  

    CSC are comical bunch of right wingers i cannot find an article on their website what actually justifies the name of their organization. They should really change their name to “lets divide britian into them and us society”.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.