Return to: Home | Blogs | Public Accounts

33 comments from readers

same old same old
19 September 2009 at 09:45

Mehdi Hasan - I am soon to become a member of an ethnic minority.

I am English

Jules Wright
19 September 2009 at 18:30

it really was a rubbish piece james. snide, ill-informed, cheap, smeary. but above all, immature. real simplistic sixth form stuff. if this is your idea of painting the tories as electorally unacceptable then i suggest you go back to the drawing board. all this does is further highlight the left's sad propensity to fling dishonest mud at any opportunity. pathetic: you must try harder.

Matt P
19 September 2009 at 19:39

In the previous comment thread James Macintyre wrote:

“... And while we're at it, can all the bloggers on this thread answer the following questions:

Are you going to vote for David Cameron's Tories?

Do you believe the Opposition should face scrutiny, or just be handed power without a debate?

Do you have jobs?

How often to you surf blogsites posting abuse?

Are you scared of daylight, only come out at night?

Are you real people who engage socially with other individuals in the normal way?”

I think the New Statesman should not have removed James' comment as it helps explain the origin of the post. Another reason not to remove it is that it's hilarious: no, I won't be voting Tory; yes, I'm a vampire.

Henry Wood
19 September 2009 at 21:09

James, if you *really* want to let some cats out of some bags on the subject of racism, you only need meet up with members of almost any Trade Union, *not* at the TUC blah, blah..., but after most local meetings of local committees when said committee men adjourn to the nearest hostelry to refresh their dried mouths, dried out by spouting eternal diatribes just like yours to all of the Brothers present. Meanwhile, most of the fully paid up Brothers will be in the public bar commenting on how out of touch with real life the local committee are.

Just keep brushing it all under the carpet, then wonder why at the next general election our Labour vote has plummeted and a lot of the swapped votes went to the likes of the BNP.

b-b-jack
19 September 2009 at 22:09

If I wanted to discuss immigration, I would encounter difficulties as people like you woul call me racist.

fgnewton
20 September 2009 at 02:33

James:

I understand you don't like Hannan's politics. That's fine, he's a "righty" and your a "lefty". But you read Hannan's article and snip things out and take them out of context then cast the shadow of racism on him and by proxy Cameron.

Using out of context quotes isn't really the problem here. Both sides of the political debate do that regularly.

Daniel Hannan is not a racist and you know it.

The problem with calling someone a racist, without that person clearly being a racist cheapens the word.

He's not racist
20 September 2009 at 07:02

Dan Hannan is a libertarian. He's about as anti-racist as they come. He believes in open-borders for crying out loud!

It's true, there are racists in the Conservative party, but there are also racists in the New Labour and Liberal Democrat parties. It's impossible to throw the real racists out unless they come out and reveal their opinions.

Dan Hannan is not one of those racists. He's the complete opposite of a racist.

David Morrison
20 September 2009 at 07:57

What a dishonest load of smear - I really hope Daniel Hannan does sue! Rather than reading James Macintyre's carefully selected quotes, taken completely out of context, please read the whole of Hannan's article. You'll see that Hannan was actually agreeing that some of the attacks on President Obama are motivated by racism, and that it is foolish for people to deny this. He has always supported President Obama, much to the frustration of many of us who read his blog.

David Morrison
20 September 2009 at 08:16

James, as for Daniel Hannan trying to smear you - rubbish. He was quite right to respond to your article about Michael Kaminski's alleged anti-semitism. In his response, he clearly set out answers to the charges against Kaminski, demonstrating how ridiculous it was for anyone to accuse him of anti-semitism. "Oh, and he said James Macintyre is the only one of the three who is a journalist, and he is widely recognised as, first and foremost, a Labour spin-doctor". If that's smear, it's hardly in the same league as your article here.

Thomas
20 September 2009 at 08:49

I think one only has to read Hannan's first paragraph to realise quite how specious McIntyre's smear job is:

"We should admit something frankly, we conservatives. As the amiable Jimmy Carter says, there IS an element of racism in some of the hostility to Obama. At the extreme end of the spectrum, it can lead to this. But, in a softer and perhaps less conscious form, it leads to some of the vicious personal attacks on him - the ones invariably picked up by Leftist media and presented as typical." [original emphasis]

Ghanimah
20 September 2009 at 09:50

Misquoting Hannan's words and calling him a racist when he's not is libel. Apparently he's thinking of taking this further and I for one hope he does.

Fullabeanz
20 September 2009 at 09:58

I notice a disclaimer has been added at the beginning of the article distancing the New Statesman from the author's smears.

Seems they have little confidence in the article, but why publish it if that's the case. Surely they can't absolve themselves of responsibility as they have published the piece?

Dennis Sewell
20 September 2009 at 12:40

James,

Did it not occur to you that when Daniel Hannan used the phrase "exotic background" in his blog, he might have been alluding to Barack Obama's own famous statement in 2004: ”I have an unusual name and an exotic background, but my values are essentially American values..."?

Political writers frequently make such allusions in their blogs or columns without glossing or explaining them.

For instance, if I were to write:

"Labour politicians may think themselves pretty straight guys and servants of the people, but many have been revealed to be chiselling little crooks. I believe Labour is institutionally dishonest."

Then I'd expect you to recognize all 4 references.

I imagine you will find it difficult to persuade a court that Hannan is any kind of racist, even a closet or 'unconscious' one, based on what he actually wrote in his blog.

That difficulty may be compounded if the court's attention is drawn to the discrepancy between your own account of Barack Obama's judgment of David Cameron as a "lightweight" and the conflicting testimony of Richard Wolffe.

A lot of people (and by no means all of them are "Conservative fanatics") think you simply made that "lightweight" quote up.

I know you stand by it, "know it to be true" and claim to have had it confirmed by "a number of officials".

Impressive. You must have fantastic access, particularly since no-one else on either side of the Atlantic has managed to find anyone to stand it up. So you, with your multiple sources, deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Or, did.

Now, with this unwarranted smear of Hannan, those dark suspicions suddenly seem reasonable after all.

It's like when a clock strikes thirteen - one doesn't just doubt whether it's telling the correct time now; one begins to wonder whether it has ever told the correct time.

joe bloggs
20 September 2009 at 14:06

Hey james,

hope you are not fishing for a job with this government.. you seem to have proved here that you are at about their level. Have you not heard? Labour are going to lose, especially when people like you start spewing tripe like this.

James McCarthy
20 September 2009 at 15:41

Welcome to the dole queue with the rest of us. I'm hoping the Tories cut back dole just to spite you.

Tom Paine
20 September 2009 at 16:15

The new disclaimer is no defence for the New Statesman as publisher of the article. However, I hope Dan Hannan doesn't sue. Every copy on the internet is damaging those for whom name-calling is a routine substitute for debate. Sadly, no-one is upset to be called such bad names any more. From the Left (as both Macintyre and Jimmy Carter have recently proved) they just mean "Shut up, I don't like you".

Benjamin Gray
20 September 2009 at 16:32

Sorry, is your surname Macintyre or McBride? I'm a little confused.

jaybs
20 September 2009 at 18:22

All Hannan is interested in is his self publicity machine, never know anyone who is just an MEP that has a self opinion on any subject that may get him press coverage. It's past time Cameron kicked him out!

beak
20 September 2009 at 20:17

I have had one or two of those sideward glances from James himself.

Michael Smith
20 September 2009 at 21:10

Oh dear James, you really are starting to sound a bit racist. Just as well the New Statesman lawyers took things in hand, eh?

Ross Warren
20 September 2009 at 22:07

Simply a disgraceful article.

UptheTories
20 September 2009 at 23:30

Utter tosh!!!

Freddo41
20 September 2009 at 23:54

This comment, from elsewhere on the blogosphere, really hits the nail on the head:

Before the NS took the piece down, James Macintyre’s colleague Mehdi Hasan leapt into the comments box to defend his chum against widespread contempt. He wondered how many of the commenters were from ethnic minorities because, “I am always amused at the sight of people who are not from an ethnic minority pontificating so confidently on what is and isn't racism?”

So where does that leave Mr Macintyre?

Incidentally, earlier this year, in a speech to fellow Muslims, Mehdi Hasan – the New Statesman’s Senior Editor Politics, remember - described non-Muslims as ‘Kuffar,’ ‘cattle’ and ‘people of no intelligence.’

Now does that mean that Mr Hasan is a racist or that the magazine itself is ‘institutionally racist?’ Well, I’m not from an ethnic minority, so how would I know?

He's Spartacus
21 September 2009 at 02:23

Called out for the second time in 24 hours, James.

Give it up, son. You've lost the argument.

Jimmy
21 September 2009 at 04:00

"Now I know this post will result in howls of fury and clever-stupid ridicule from various partisan Conservatives"

No doubt, but I've been a Labour Party member for 20 years and find Dan Hannan's sub-Oxford Union shtick sets my teeth on edge. Nevertheless I can't see how anyone who read Hannan's piece could characterise it in the way you have unless the intention was deliberately to distort his views. There is enough racism out there without having to invent it. Crying "wolf" ultimately only serves to provide bigots with cover. I think you owe him an apology.

dreamdancer
21 September 2009 at 09:17

good article. 'the conservative party is institutionally racist' - true.

Do some research before opening your mouth
21 September 2009 at 10:32

"Does hailing Enoch Powell amount to closet racism?"

No. If you had bothered to investigate both Powell and Hannan's stance on the EEC/EU, you would realise what they have in common and that racism has nothing whatsoever to do with it. But you either didn't bother or ignored it, assuming your readers are more ignorant than you. What a charming assumption to make.

Hannan's reasons for supporting Obama are easily available for your consideration, making your article no more honest than Nelson Piquet Jr crashing into a wall in Singapore. Not only that, but Hannan discussed the notion of racism and antipathy to Obama very recently. That is available to your readers for their consideration too, so, again, you are assuming they are feckless.

I'm, thankfully, unfamiliar with any other efforts you have submitted for publication, so must judge you on this alone. Poorly researched, dishonestly presented or both. Fail.

Newmania
21 September 2009 at 10:51

35% of Polled Labour voters give their second choice Party as the BNP do you not know any ?

My Conservative voting family is mixed race which is pretty common nowadays ,and we have never encountered anything remotely racist in the Party .Your post is clearly jejune attention seeking in practice but there is an interesting issue about the “Racial “component of the concept of Englishness .

The Conservative Party is wary of current torrential levels of immigration and mindful of the English character of the country being a legitimate concern . That idea of an English People and their interest is one the Labour Party have jettisoned in favour of an internationalist outlook as evidenced by the loss of control of the border and the shenanigans over Lisbon.

I think it might be fair to say that in the imagined community of English there is a vestigial racial component but that is now a historical oddity easily teased out This sort of thing should not be confused with racism by any meaningful ,definition .

In valuing the English ethnicity and preferring its retention you no doubt would say that the Conservative Party is on a spectrum, including the no racial but ethnic final solution , so is any preference or loyalty to a group but this is an absurd and incorrect reading . The English ethnicity is a peculiarly cosmopolitan and exceedingly tolerant ethic identity much more so for example e than any immigrant group settling here.

When asked the question would you be shocked or disgusted if your son/ daughter married a black man/woman members of ethnic communities have been shocking while horizontal integration goes its jolly way amongst the maligned English working classes and this is spreading by sheer proximity through us all .

I fear over all that such is the silliness of your remarks that it will only harm the Labour Party who I take it your support .I would be happy to hear more of this sort of thing

Andy
21 September 2009 at 11:59

James, I'd be a little more careful about what you write, what goes round etc.. I've little more to add except that I thjink you accusation / insinuation / smear attempt is utter balderdash. Are Tories paying you to write tosh like this or what?

McBride tried to smear Guido / Iain Dale, both known non-racists and now tidies up litter in his local school.

For now. He's got that woman scorned Nadine Dorries to contend with yet.

Jason
21 September 2009 at 15:02

You do sound like a petty little man James. Shame in this day and age you cant just go around misleading people and basically lying without everyone finding out in about ...oh...an hour.

Good effort though

Hectagon
23 September 2009 at 12:56

James, I think you've forgotten what "institutionally racist" actually means.

I believe the term was coined by (or at least entered the lexicon via) the Macpherson report, the point of which was that the police were "institutionally racist" because their processes and culture could result in racist outcomes without any individual being proactively or consciously racist in particular decisions or specific actions (and was thus correctly seen as an extremely serious charge that merited wide-scale reform of the police).

Focusing on one individual such as Daniel Hannan, offensive though his views may be, doesn’t prove institutional racism. You do actually have to look at the policies and internal processes of the Conservative party as an organisation. I’m afraid that referencing “sideways looks” doesn’t cut it as journalism, and you shouldn’t patronise your readers by offering this as evidence.

And for the record, I'm a Labour voter and will continue to be at the next election, not one of your "partisan Conservatives".

Also, @Mehdi Hasan, if racism is a societal issue, then I think that anyone in a society is entitled to have views about it, and I don’t think that ethnic minorities do (or should) have a monopoly on defining it.

Robert Smith
28 September 2009 at 05:02

An Interesting read

Earth
08 October 2009 at 15:01

Good article, thank you

If you are interesting 2012 year, by the way, welcome to us :)

http://2012earth.net