Return to: Home | Blogs | Bright's Blog

Bright resurfaces

Ken Livingstone's new interest in world travel leads to a delayed feeling of shellshock

A bit delayed, but I thought I should post my thoughts about Ken Livingstone's World Civilisation or Clash of Civilisations conference last Saturday. I guess participants were supposed to plump for the former, but whose world civilisation I wonder? A world civilisation run by Ken Livingstone or his friends on the Islamic right would be pretty unappetising. But at least Ken's new interest in foreign policy gives him and his staff plenty of excuses to spend Londoners' money on lots of juicy trips abroad.

All in all it was a pretty depressing experience as Oliver Kamm wrote.

I caught the end of Kamm's session with Linda Bellos, Inayat Bunglawala and Ken's adviser Simon Fletcher (travel seems to have shrivelled his mind). Kamm did rather well despite an absurdly hostile audience. I missed the star attractiion, Daniel Pipes, debating with Ken but there is a good account here. Sunny at Pickled Politics was on the spot as ever and took a hostile view of Pipes, while recognising that he bested Livingstone. Sunny is always worth reading, which is why he's guest blogging on Bright's blog.

I spoke on the daft subject "Is there an Islamic Threat?" with Tariq Ramadan and Salma Yaqoob. Of course the answer is no and yes. Islam is not in itself a threat, but there are certain deranged individuals who believe they are driven by Islam to kill people in the West. That is a something of a threat. I argued my usual line about the dangers of courting the Muslim Brotherhood and its front organisations in Europe and America.

I promised myself I would not lose my temper but there were times when I nearly did. Salma accused me of calling her a dangerous Islamist and saying that George W Bush was the lesser of two evils, neither of which I have ever said or written. Ramadan insisted on talking obsessively about Daniel Pipes and then waving his hand towards me, which was baffling.
The conference was entirely misleading in its very conception: ostensibly all-embracing and generous, but, in fact, designed to set people against each other. I went home with a feeling of delayed shellshock.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

3 comments from readers

Frank
30 January 2007 at 21:45

Inayat Bunglaweala agred with Ken Livingstone that the founding of Israel was a misyake. Then after a pause said, "perhaps the greatest mistake of the 20th century." A comment I find ludicrously overblown. This is not concern for the Palestinians. It is an obsession. And a dark one at that. Gioven that many more Kurds than Palestinians are stateless, China occupies Tibet, the Muslim government of Sudan is responsible for the deaths of millions of Christians, animists and Black African Muslims-plus Burma, Congo etc what does this obsession show about IB and others?

Tariq Ramadan was clever but slippery. He always skates over the Muslim Brotherhood. I wonder why.

Banner
03 February 2007 at 10:53

What is Bright doing acting as a left version of the Tory party and the Evening Standard when they attack Ken Livingstone for travelling abroad? Currently Livingstone is in Miami having worked, successfully, to get a major sporting event (the American NFL) to come to London. Presumably this is what Martin Bright regards as a further excuse to spend Londoners' money on lots of 'juicy trips abroad'. Livingstone is right to promote London abroad and bring events like the NFL, the Tour de France, and the Olympics to London. He's right to meet international business and political leaders at Davos or meet Bill Clinton as part of his aim of getting major cities around the world to lead the fight against climate change. I would expect the New Statesman to be presenting a political alternative to the right wing press coverage of all of this, not echoing it.

Bright's dismissal of all this as 'juicy trips abroad' is a depressing echo of the most Little England mentality of the Tories and the right wing press.

radius
04 February 2007 at 22:18

Doesn't Ken have an email account or a telephone? In this day and age he doesn't have to travel the world to talk to war criminals like Bill Clinton.

Please remember that Ken Livingstone is not the definitive 'Left': it is possible to criticise him and not belong to the Tory party.

Post your comment

(Your email address will not be published)

Recent Posts

The horror comes home

22 January 2009 09:58

Ken Clarke's return

19 January 2009 16:10

A New Deal of the mind

15 January 2009 09:31

It's a New New Deal

08 January 2009 09:51

A year of ups and downs

18 December 2008 09:44

Mystic Mart

15 December 2008 13:06

The two-man show

11 December 2008 09:44

Past Entries

Follow this blog

Vote!

Was the government wrong to sack David Nutt?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker