Jemima Khan to guest-edit the New Statesman

A free speech special issue featuring contributions from Julian Assange, Anish Kapoor, Oliver Stone,

The human rights campaigner Jemima Khan will be guest-editing the New Statesman this week for a special issue focusing on freedom of information and free speech. Inside the 72-page issue, Khan has interviewed the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, who speaks candidly about life in the coalition government, his relationship with David Cameron and the pain of being hated.

A wide range of writers have been commissioned, from Tony Benn – who outlines how the information age has enabled the Arab revolts – to the Oscar-winning actor Tim Robbins, whose witty and provocative article takes the press to task. Another Oscar winner, Oliver Stone – the director of JFK, Nixon and W – gives his verdict on the US president, Barack Obama.

There's an exclusive article by Julian Assange, who argues that WikiLeaks follows in the best traditions of the radical press. He will also be speaking at the sold-out New Statesman/Frontline Club debate on whistleblowing in London on Saturday 9 April.

Alongside columns by the comedian Russell Brand, the singer Jarvis Cocker and the England cricketer Kevin Pietersen, the issue features reportage on New Orleans from James Fox, a hard-hitting essay on the dangers of foreign "over-intervention" by the Conservative MP Rory Stewart and a condemnation of Pakistan's blasphemy laws by the Lahore-based human rights lawyer Asma Jahangir.

Jason Cowley, editor of the New Statesman, said: "I asked Jemima Khan to guest-edit the New Statesman because I admired her work as a human rights activist in Pakistan and her support for freedom of information.

"We met for a Marmite-and-toast breakfast in January and have been planning the issue ever since. Her enthusiasm and diligence have delighted the whole team. The issue has many surprises and some first-rate journalism, as well as outstanding bespoke artwork, as will be revealed on Thursday."

Jemima Khan, writer and campaigner, said: "I am very grateful to Jason for inviting me to guest-edit this week's issue of the New Statesman. I am a huge fan of the magazine. My task was to bring in new writers – a daunting one, as New Statesman regulars include some of my favourite writers, such as my fellow WikiLeaks supporter John Pilger, my favourite Question Time panellist, Mehdi Hasan, and the philosopher John Gray. I had great fun working with the NS team and enlisting the help of writers who express my own thoughts but with more eloquence, clarity or wit."

Among the contributors in this special issue of the New Statesman are: Simon Pegg, Anish Kapoor, Damien Hirst, Alain de Botton, Helena Kennedy, Daisy Donovan, Mariella Frostrup, John Pilger, A A Gill and Karma Nabulsi.

The issue, cover-dated 11 April, will be on sale in London on Thursday 7 April and in the rest of the country from Friday 8 April. International buyers can obtain copies on our website at newstatesman.com.

Getty
Show Hide image

Don't blame Brexit on working-class anger - it's more worrying than that

White voters who identified as "English not British" backed Brexit.

For those of us who believe that the referendum result in favour of Brexit is an unmitigated disaster, the nominations for culprits are open. Former Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg made a compelling argument in the Financial Times that the blame lies squarely with Cameron and Osborne.

Clegg, who has first-hand experience of Tory duplicity, is scarcely a neutral observer. But that does not make him wrong. No doubt the PM and the Chancellor are the proximate cause, and should be held accountable by their parliamentary constituents, their party, and by the country as a whole - or what’s left of it if Scotland goes its own way.

Yet journalists and historians alike would do well to probe deeper causes of the referendum result. One obvious culprit is the British press, who, at best, failed to scrutinise the Leave Campaign’s claims and at worst actively abetted them. The New York Times has suggested that using the EU as a punching bag has helped sell papers (or at least generate clicks) in what is probably the most challenging climate for traditional journalism in two centuries.  Boris Johnson, it seems, is irresistible clickbait for the fourth estate. And as Nick Cohen has observed on Saturday, Johnson and Gove, both politician-journalists, have elevated mendacity in politics from an occasional vice to a lifestyle choice.

The search for deeper causes of the Brexit vote, however, cannot end with the press. A different electorate could have taken a different view, as they did in Scotland, which voted 2-1 to Remain.  What was the magic sauce?

Too many commentators, especially those on the Left, have blamed working-class anger. It’s all about social class, apparently. Lisa Mckenzie nearly predicted the result on that basis. Others use it simply to criticise Tory austerity politics. Blaming class can be woven into another favourite narrative - this is about lack of educational attainment. Anyone who has lived in Britain for any period of time knows the class system, the town-and-country divide, and intergenerational wealth disparities as important features of British life. 

Another favourite culprit is racism, as the Washington Post wondered on SaturdayOthers had the same thought, and racist attacks are on the rise. Given Nigel Farage’s antics in the weeks before the election, none of this is surprising. Amidst such scary stuff, many have tried to emphasise that most Brexit voters are not racist, but rather disillusioned with the rule of metropolitan elites. Douglas Carswell is one proponent of this argument, but he’s not alone. The Economist, in an effort to avoid talking about race, asserts that this result was about age, region and class.

Still, this kind of analysis is at best naïve and at worst disingenuous. 

As Lord Ashcroft’s polls suggest, it is only the white working class (if by this we mean C2/DE, though many in DE are unemployed) who voted for Brexit. In fact, those describing themselves as "in employment" generally voted to Remain. Those describing themselves as Asian, black or Muslims overwhelmingly voted Remain. By contrast, nearly six in ten white Protestants voted to leave. 

Brexit was a rejection of British multiculturalism. That is the real take-home message of the Ashcroft polls. Of those who see themselves as "English not British", 80 per cent voted to Leave, irrespective of social class. Those who see themselves as "British not English" voted 60 per cent for Remain. Similar patterns (and similar press involvement) can be found in the Quebec referendum of 1995, which failed by a narrower margin than Brexit succeeded.

Of non-Francophone voters in Quebec, 95 per cent voted to remain in Canada. Those who voted to leave, on the other hand, were rejecting Canadian multiculturalism. Quebecois separatism was seen as part of a struggle for cultural survival.  

Whether or not you call those attitudes racist, the advent of white English (and Welsh) nationalism is, for those of us who have taught modern European history, the truly ominous consequence of Brexit. Do not be fooled by the alternatives.

Dr D’Maris Coffman is a Senior Lecturer in Economics of the Built Environment at UCL Bartlett. Before coming to UCL in 2014, she was a Fellow and Director of Studies in History at Newnham College and a holder of a Leverhulme Early Career Fellowship in the Cambridge History Faculty.