Paul T Horgan: The Guardian’s memories of the 1930s are highly selective

According to The Guardian, we are re-living the 1930s. But only because of Donald Trump.

The Left is blaming its serial reverses over the past two years on the rise of 'populism'. It seems to define populism as a form of politics that appeal to the gut and the heart, but not to the head. They do not regard their socialistic, collectivist, bigoted world-view in the same way. Of course, it does not accept that the current crop of left-wing politicians are rather woeful. To the Left, it cannot be that their policies do not have any answers to the current global and political problems. And yet for some reason, voters around the world are rejecting surrender to terrorism, greater state control, and the use of the printing-press to try and buy a way out of economic problems.  For rejecting Ed Miliband, for leaving the EU and for electing Donald Trump, voters are not understood by the Left. Instead they are abused. Democracy, says the Left, is to be blamed..

The Guardian has a longish piece about the 1930s posted today on its site, which draws parallels between the demagogic dictators of the day and Donald Trump. Apparently, 'scholars of the period are still hearing the insistent beep of their early warning systems'.  When they draw this parallel, they conveniently forget that Trump is the head of but one of the three branches of state and is constrained by the checks and balances to power in the American constitution.

However, The Guardian is highly selective in its portrayal of the 1930s. The article makes no mention whatsoever of Stalin's purges which killed hundreds of thousands of innocents and severely weakened his country. Experienced and competent Soviet officers were executed because of Stalin's paranoid imagination. As a result, the USSR was almost knocked out of World War II by its former ally Nazi Germany.  About five months after the Wehrmacht invasion, German soldiers arrived at the outskirts of Moscow. An evacuation of Moscow would likely have resulted in the fall of Stalin and a humiliating armistice.

The Guardian article also makes no mention of the Ukrainian Holocaust, where Stalin engineered a famine that killed millions.  Nor indeed is there coverage of the Soviet system of slave labour.  Further, it does not mention the Japanese invasion of China or the atrocities committed there by a country in thrall to a barbaric martial culture that seems to resemble Daesh. These are as much a part of the 1930s as the blackshirts.

Instead, The Guardian tries to make this all about the rise of fascism, implying that this is happening all over again. But then, this is all the discredited Left can do these days.

Socialism is and always has been the politics of plunder. It is a parasite that thrives in comfortable economic times, as this is the only period that it can feed. It is no surprise that Blair's government prospered during the relatively benign economic climate. New Labour lived off the revenue generated by an under-regulated financial sector that over-lent to create the taxable profits Labour needed. However, as soon as the economic weather soured and the loans turned bad, voters kicked Labour out of office at the first opportunity.

Ed Miliband had no good answers about how to govern in a deep financial crisis. He failed to account for Gordon Brown leaving UK the worst-prepared to deal with the global financial crisis. Miliband has now been replaced by a leader who believes that Marx's oft-prophesied 'crisis of capitalism' has happened and it is now time for communism to take over. No-one, certainly not the voters of Copeland, believes that.

And this perhaps explains why The Guardian and the Left generally are shouting from the rooftops. It is because they style themselves as the sole public defenders against an ever-incipient 'fascism'. Forcibly shorn of any other credibility, it is only this fiction that remains to attract voters.

None of the economic and social policies of the Left hold any attraction to mainstream voters any more, especially those voters the Left persist in denouncing. There is a 'rise of fascism' only because the Left says so, and nothing more. Instead what is being experienced is a popular reaction against the Left's failures to address the growing threat of Islamist terrorism, which the Left failed to do because they believed doing so would be racist, or because Islamists and the Left are in fact natural allies. There is also a public exhaustion over never-ending political correctness that shuts down discourse as racist, sexist, homophobic, and now, transphobic. Freedom of expression is under threat from the Left, not from fascists.

The Guardian's article makes no mention of Islamism. This is despite Islamism being the closest to fascism in our time.

This selective blindness by The Guardian seeks to romanticise politics by making people believe that they are players in the middle of a political drama. They are not. This is real life, not some edited 20th Century fantasy politics. This is not the 1930s all over again. This is the 2010s. The world is different and new. The Guardian and its politics are stuck in the past. And so is the Left.

(Image: Bryantbob)

Paul T Horgan

  • The Guardian is staffed by Communist sympathisers. The idea that these people (apologists for over a hundred-million political murders) could dare to talk about the rise of fascism is a sign of serious mental illness – or of evil.

    • Speedy

      You generally have to be either thick or evil to read the Guardian. Most of it;s readers are both.

    • Reborn

      Sympathisers. Not the Real Thing.
      Many BBC staff have posters of Mao & co on the walls.
      But they know that if even Corbyn came to power, their economic situation would be ruined.
      Genuine Communists live on low wages in social housing & believe that by robbing
      the “rich” (anyone better off than themselves), the poor will automatically become richer.

      • I would add that Communism is simply about power. Having assumed power, the leaders no longer think greatly about money. They have the large central apartments, the countryside dachas, the special schools and shops etc. You see this sort of mentality echoed in the lives of Diane Abbot etc.

        • PianoWireSolutions

          In fairness, she does need her own pie shop.

        • Reborn

          Like me, you are something of an Orwellian.
          Apart from a certain unpleasant anti semitism, I wonder why
          the modern left admire him.
          Today he’d probably be an apolitical observer rather than a supporter
          of any party.

          • Lamia

            Orwell was not immune to the prejudices of his time, but was aware of this and did not fall under the spell of any of them. He wrote an essay on the subject of antisemitism, acknowledging and repudiating his own prejudiced lapses into it. In that, he was a quite different leftist from most of his own contemporaries or from today’s left, who make a point of not seeing, let alone, denouncing it, since today it mostly comes from the left itself or from the left’s Islamist allies.

            I think he is now widely admired across the spectrum, or at least not widely attacked, because he did speak a lot of sense, and wrote very well. Those who do try to do a hatchet job on him tend to make complete fools of themselves (as the ludicrous Will Self did a little while back in the Spectator).

      • AnusRodendum

        Well, we know what kind of people find work at the BBC. A lot of them have had their day in court over the last year or two.

        • Reborn

          But not enough.

  • Sargv

    > According to The Guardian, we are re-living the 1930s.

    In Soviet Russia. So, a second decade of radical Left rule. Sounds about right.

  • Morris Jasper

    I imagine they’re especially looking forward to re-living 1937

    • TheRightToArmBears

      and eliminating other than their own members as Stalin used his elimination of Kirov in 1934 to rub out all his likely successors.

  • Labour_is_bunk

    Communists weren’t exactly spot on in predicting the rise of Fascism, were they?

  • I recall the Forties rather than the the Thirties, but lived with people who did. It was a different planet from that of today. To raise the thirties now is rather like the Generals fighting World War One in the same way that the Crimean War was fought.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      We were English then.
      Yes, it was a different world.
      Do tourists now come to England attracted by the new English – Diane Abbott, the bus-driver’s son who is now Mayor, Jim Vaz, Chukka Mormunni, Shami Whitewash, and the enrichment in dishdashas and burkhas?
      I wonder.
      I’d like the thirties again, if they wouldn’t.

  • Richie P

    Well I know I have platoons of beefy brownshirted thugs marching up and down my street every second Tuesday, smashing all the windows and shouting stuff through megaphones, I don’t get it that no-one else has noticed. It’s a bit of an obvious nuisance.

    • Speedy

      The brownshirts of tomorrow will have Allah Akbar as their battlecry.

      • ethanedwards2002

        Aloha Snackbar I believe.

    • phaasch .

      I have the same problem. I hate recycling day.

  • phaasch .

    There are plenty of fascists abounding today, and more, year by year. They censor, resort to physical violence, and insist by bullying and constant repetition via a controlled media, that we all MUST think and behave like them.
    It’s very like the 1930s, except these people sing “the Red Flag” and are vegans from Islington.
    The only free speech is from a beleaguered Right.
    Plus ca change, plus ca la meme bloody awful chose…

  • CheshireRed

    The Guardian have been stuck in their righteously ideological time-warp since Day One. Wrong on socialism, wrong on Marxism, wrong on anti-capitalism, wrong on achingly right-on political correctness, wrong on Islam, wrong on the Euro and EU, hopelessly wrong on left-leaning government and catastrophically wrong on so-called ‘climate change’. Other than that they’re ok.

    • Tethys

      Don’t listen to the Guardian on Climate Change.
      Take it from Science.

      • Aaron D Highside

        Especially ‘scientists’ from the ‘University’ of East Anglia.

        • Reborn

          I’m surprised that those crooks could not be prosecuted for something
          like misconduct in a public office.

          • Tethys

            By misconduct in public office I first assumed you were speaking about the EU debate.
            However you are wrong on warming in that it’s mostly Cnuts who recklessly ignore even the RISK.

        • Tethys

          Not this old stuff again.
          The so-called climategate thing has been properly debunked and Manns ‘hockey stick’ vindicated.

      • Reborn

        Science, when coupled with the interests of billionaires who
        want either to line their own pockets or achieve world government,
        ceases to be science & becomes “science”

        • Tethys

          The far greater vested interest is anti-Science.

  • Owen_Morgan

    Somebody ought to tell Jonathan Freedland that, when you’re reduced to relying on Paul Krugman and the even more preposterous Timothy Snyder, you are beyond desperate.

    In the Thirties, there were two rival ideologies, with quite a lot in common, threatening the freedom of the world: nazism and communism. Today, we have two rival ideologies, with quite a lot in common, both promising to cut off our heads, and they even quote from the same rule book: sunni islam and shia islam. The governments of the West, with the exception of Israel, have been derelict in their duty in responding to this dual threat.

    Freedland knee-jerkingly invokes Neville Chamberlain as one of the Bad Things from the Thirties, on account of his policy of appeasement. If the policies pursued formerly by Obama, still by Merkel, amount to anything other than appeasement, the voluminous OED doesn’t seem to have found a more precise word for them yet. Chamberlain, at least, used the space between Munich and the 3rd of September to accelerate British preparations for war. He didn’t invite the Grossdeutschland division to come here and make itself at home.

    History never does repeat itself, but one can certainly find approximate parallels. As you’d have to expect from a Guardianista (he would think that’s a compliment), Freedland draws exactly the wrong parallels from the Thirties.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      Freedland also omits to mention that Labour voted against the introduction of conscription in April 1939.
      So much for Labour’s holier than thou attitude about confronting the Nazis.
      Labour was getting its instructions from Moscow at the time, as they always did until Uncle Vlad appeared with a different agenda.

      • Owen_Morgan

        Amazing how many veterans of the Spanish Civil War became conscientious objectors after 23/8/1939.

  • Reborn

    Did the article mention leftist support for Hitler’s National Socialism after the
    the Soviet/German non aggression treaty ?

    • Lamia

      Of course not. In fact communists are only mentioned in the context of resisting Mosley at Cable Street.

      Likewise Muslims are mentioned only as victims of prejudice. Muslim terrorists, rapists, aggressive migrants and Sharia-demanders for some reason don’t figure anywhere in Freedland’s vision of contemporary fascism. Contemporary antisemitism gets a mention, but only as a phenomenon on the alt-right. Thus Jonathan Fredland, writing for the most antisemitic, pro-Islamist (NB not merely pro-Islam, but pro-Islamist) mainstream newspaper in Britain. He is a sick, pathetic man, an eager errand boy for people who despise Jews and would like to wipe them all out. He has his equivalent ‘feminists’ and LGBT ‘activists’ on the left, all working hard for the contemporary left and its Islamist overlords.

      • ethanedwards2002

        These moslem victims of which you speak. Were they the same Bosnian moslems who served in the SS 13th Handschar division? Or some other victims perhaps? Please can you expand on this definition of victim hood espoused by the Grauniad?

        Rewriting historical facts to suit your own prejudices is quite popular with our Socialist chums isn’t it.

        • Lamia

          I meant Freedland’s reference to Muslims in the present. He doesn’t mention them with regard to the 1930s. In Freedland’s present they are the new 1930s-Jews of the west – though he doesn’t explain why these ‘persecuted’ people are raping and murdering vastly larger numbers in western countries alone (leaving out Muslim majority countries) than the other way way round.

          On the Muslim persecution and even genocide of non-Muslims in Muslim-majority countries, Freedland is of course, like the Guardian and BBC generally, stony silent. That sort of fascism is just ‘their culture’, you see.

          An anecdote: Freedland reportedly attends a synagogue in London and was said a few years back by an online acquaintance from that milieu to have been very upset that most of the other attendees cold-shoulder him. They consider him to be an abject stooge for a Guardian paper which so regularly promotes anti-semites. Anyone reading his latest dishonest piece will not be surprised at their low opinion of the man. While purporting to write a warning about fascism, he’s in fact once again engaged in a white-wash of the very group – Islamists – who represent the real fascist threat to western society and to those non-Muslim minorities which Freedland and fellow ‘liberals’ so piously claim to care about.

          Still… Labour are on 25% of the vote and the Lib Dems on 10%. And there they will stay unless and until they get their act together and stop shilling for Islam and the EU. No amount of tired ‘Trump + Brexit = Hitler’ stuff will alter that.

          • Dunlaith

            It’s an often wheeled out and completely fatuous comparison to compare Jews of the thirties with Muslims of today. German Jews were completely integrated in German society and were peaceful and non violent. They were pacifists whose only wish was to be useful members of their communities.

          • itdarestospeak

            Not to mention how many Jews fought very bravely alongside their ethnic German countrymen in the trenches of WW1

      • Reborn

        I wish I could uptick you an infinite number of times.
        Or, at least as many times as a male muslim has votes.

    • gelert

      The French communists were strongly opposed to WW2 in 1939 because of that treaty. As soon as Hitler attacked the USSR they switched positions overnight.

      The left prefer to follow some stupid ideology, irrespective of how it might harm their compatriots. The left’s worship of the undemocratic EU is but the latest example of this mindset.

    • 300 Spartans

      No. It did not. Strangely.

  • Lamia

    The Guardian’s article makes no mention of Islamism. This is despite Islamism being the closest to fascism in our time.

    I suspect this common aversion to mentioning Islamism in mainstream politics (it’s mostly but not by any means solely on the left) is a good part of why the same Wise Monkeys have been so eager to cast Trump as a fascist. It’s whataboutery. “I mean, really, he’s just like the Islamic State, isn’t he? No, in fact, he’s worse! *snigger*”

    This went on under Bush’s rule also: “Okay, Bush may not have actually had gay people executed, but he’d like to.” was a common idiocy in internet ‘debate’ when the actual murder of gay people under Islamic regimes or movements (often favoured by the left themselves) was brought up. ‘Bushitler’ was a common ‘clever’ Democrat phrase. It’s par for the course for the liberal-left to portray the latest right-of-centre politician right as the new Hitler or a fascist. When Cameron came to power in 2010, a usually semi-sane Labour supporter was babbling to me about this being ‘the most right wing government in living memory’.

    The problem for the liberal-left is, this is just crying wolf, and most people have got bored of it. Bush and Cameron, whatever their faults (and they were many) did not bring about WW3, stick their citizens in concentration camps, shoot those who criticised them, or exterminate an ethnic group. And to most people this was not actually a surprise. It’s only a surprise/disappointment to Guardian readers and their fellow nuts. Nor, probably,will Donald Trump.

    Never mind, there will always be another ‘new Hitler’ to come along when Trump, however bad he turns out to be, fails to live up to Islingtonistas’ ‘terrifying’ expectations. You’ll be able to read about it in the Guardian.

    • Reborn

      Islamism is not mentioned by the Guardian for two reasons.
      1. Any adverse comments invite violence, even death from muslims resident in
      the UK, as has been demonstrated by attacks on brave critics of islam on the Continent.
      2. Labour is now the Islamic Party of Britain.
      It could well win many more seats than polls suggest thanks to muslim voting practices.

      • Lamia

        That is part of why we need an end to postal voting on demand, and a return to the previous postal voting parameters. It has become a dangerous farce.

        • Reborn

          Our electoral system is massively flawed & suits only the 2 major parties
          rather than the electorate.
          Add to that the absence of ID cards etc at the ballot box & the license
          to cheat that is postal voting.
          And we bomb other countries because they’re not democratic.
          Hypocrisy is the true British Vice.

  • Well said. And of course, the reason there was no serious attempt to set the 1930s in their correct context, only a load of disingenuous false analogies is because the Guardian aren’t about serious analysis, they’re about playing to the prejudices of their shrinking base of middle-class lefty halfwit readers.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      And giving the party line to their PR department, the BBC.

  • Dunlaith

    It appears they have failed to notice that the “Socialist” countries delivered only poverty and tyranny and its system was overthrown by its oppressed people. How anyone in their right mind can keep harping on like this after the fall of the Berlin Wall is a complete mystery.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      Not to the party hierarchy.

  • Nockian

    The Conservatives are the best new Labour Government that isn’t Labour. Trump shows every inclination towards the new dealism of big government spending. Both Conservatives and Trump favour big Government and soaking the rich. Conservatives created a bubble and Trump has inherited one.

    This left right paradigm no longer exists, if it ever did, parties hog the ‘mixed economy’ centre ground, which, coupled with the socialising principle of democracy, veers ever closer to greater statism and eventually tyranny. If we had remained in the EU we would have been closer to tyranny and it wasn’t by Conservative choice that we are leaving, but through Camerons poor strategy.

    It’s time we began talking about capitalism, the real thing, not this crony half Marxist, half fascist style of ‘free market’. Corbyn and co are useless opposition precisely because the Conservatives have spread themselves liberally across the anti-capitalist middle ground where Labour operate. Real Conservative politics are dead and buried and no one seriously supports unfettered Marxism but a few idealistic nutters. We are being dragged to the collectivist/statist side year by year and would be heading there more quickly had we remained shackled to the Governments favourite EU.

    Conservatives should stop thinking they won and that the opposition has no defence. The Conservative party simply swapped sides and took all the generals positions. Corbyn effectively represents a group of army privates who don’t like the way their army is being run.

  • Fubar2

    Yep, thats a fairly good summation. I’m trying to think of something witty and pithy to say about these wasters that hasnt been said already. Alas, I’m struggling.

  • AnusRodendum

    The only useful purpose of the Guardian is to let the rest of the world know what the Looney Lefties are fantasizing about next.

    • Blowmedown

      You have to read it just to keep up with what the enemy are thinking…..

  • Benthic

    Good piece Paul.

    Ed Miliband, wasn’t he asking the advice of Russell Brand, lol. David is doing his bit for socialism in the US for a paltry $500K per annum.

    POPULISM – another word for “the will of the people” or “democratic rule”.

    • jgm2

      Indeed. ‘Populism’ is Labour’s (and SNP’s) USP. Buying votes with other people’s money. Any old clown can do that, yet they seem to think it’s some high-minded political theory.

      ‘Vote for me. I’ll invent a job that doesn’t need doing and pay you with money I took off that “rich” guy over there’.

      The cheek of them lecturing us on ‘populism’.

  • stanm

    POPULISM – another word for “the will of the people” or “democratic rule” that goes against the msm’s preferred outcome.

    • Dunlaith

      And now they’re peddling the Wilders defeat as a victory over populism when the winning party shifted noticeably to the right to pick up any floating voters contemplating voting for Wilders. Similar to May courting UKIP voters.

  • blingmun

    The BBC/Guardian always refer to Nazis and fascists as “far right”. In fact, of course, from Le Pen and the BNP back to the early days of Hitler and Mussolini, these people are nearly all former communists, but remain statists and left wingers. They believe in a powerful State which dominates life socially and economically. They are on the opposite end of the spectrum to right wingers who believe in limited government.

    The reason the lie took hold in the first place was to spare the blushes of our erstwhile ally, Stalin, who didn’t want his own movement to be tarnished with the same brush as the Nazis. Since then, it has suited lefties to play the mental gymnastics whereby if you “go far enough right you end up meeting the far left”, as if ideas are physical things existing on a globe. (Logically, it would be redundant to speak either far right or far left, rather than just calling them “extremists”).

    The BBC/Guardian love referring to such obvious villains as the far right because it implies that being a little bit right wing means that you are a little bit racist/xenophobic.

    • Andrew Tettenborn

      Quite right. When asked my opinion, as a conservative, on parties like the BNP, my answer is normally the same: “I disapprove of all forms of socialism, but especially the national variety.”

    • ratcatcher11

      The BBC still can’t understand that they are the fascists and the ‘populists’ are in fact democrats who believe the BBC stink of corruption and decadence like a dead polecat.

  • Benthic

    Speaking of Socialism, a 1930’s speech:

    “Socialism as the final concept of duty, the ethical duty of work, not just for oneself but also for one’s fellow man’s sake, and above all the principle: Common good before own good, a struggle against all parasitism and especially against easy and unearned income. And we were aware that in this fight we can rely on no one but our own people. We are convinced that socialism in the right sense will only be possible in nations and races that are Aryan, and there in the first place we hope for our own people and are convinced that socialism is inseparable from nationalism.”

    Guess who?

    • TheRightToArmBears

      if I tell you that will bring this discussion to a close under Godwin’s Law.

  • Colkitto03

    What the Guardian hates most is democracy. Or to be more specific giving the vote to the wrong sort of people. This is no joke.
    When the Remain media and establishment classified Leave and Trump voters as stupid, it was not just name calling, they really really believe it.
    I don’t think we really understand how detached these people are for the rest of the population. The contempt they have for ordinary people is very deep rooted. And its been that way since the thirties. When Orwell wrote that ‘All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others’ line he knew exactly what the Left thinks of the proles.

    • Reborn

      Democracy becomes populism when it comes out wrong for the comfy elite
      who’ve been running things for themselves & their chums for decades.
      Still can’t get over the brass neck of the BBC making a Labour ex minister
      Head of Radio or whatever despite his lack of qualifications.
      And then there’s the wretched Stephen Kinnock & is stinking rich wife.
      Talking of the Kinnocks —
      it’s too much, I need a whisky.

      • Malcolm Marchesi

        Did you see the debate in the House of Lords on monday .
        A Libdem peer seriously complained with a trembling voice that there was a real danger that the “voice of the people” might prevail . Unbelievable !

        • Reborn

          The Lib Dems are neither liberal nor democratic.
          With over 100 peers that represents about one peer for every 100
          Lib Dem party members.

  • Paul Williams

    Why has the Left sold itself, heart, mind and soul, to the appeasement of Islam? Is their hatred of Israel and International Jewry so blinding? Or is this just about the accumulation of votes? People are growing tired of being abused because they do not agree with
    mass Third World immigration, and the Left’s demented prospectus that
    everyone is either with them or a racist.

    The Left’s blind appeasement of Islam will be their eventual death knell all over the Western world.

    • gelert

      Labour need Muslim votes to replace those lost from the “working classes”.

      • TheRightToArmBears

        Shareeza wearing a head-covering at every opportunity shows that the Tories are chasing Muslim votes as well.

      • DaveLeeDozy

        Except most Muslims are self-employed and will abandon Labour when the time is right.

        • gelert

          I believe about 30% are unemployed.

    • Blowmedown

      Islam currently needs the left, but when it is strong enough to exert control the infidels of the left will be as expendable as the rest.

      • Malcolm Marchesi

        Dead right , “first they came for the Jews”………………

    • Reborn

      I hope your last sentence is correct.
      I believe that the decent Labour Party died by the late 1970s when all its
      decent policies had become mainstream.
      Ever seeking new “victims” to champion the left hit a nadir with its championing
      of pedophiles, even getting government cash for the Pedophile Information Exchange.
      Muslims are generally distrusted by Europeans for very sound reasons, after all islam was Hitler’s preferred religion.
      I know & like several muslims, but they are essentially secular. Why risk trouble, up to death by telling the truth.
      The left specialise in cognitive dissonance to a very high level
      If Nazism is the ultimate evil, how come German women had freedoms undreamt of by muslim women including many “british muslims”, and yet the left claims to support
      And as for gays —

      • Lamia

        The main reason I have gone off the western left – indeed the wider liberal-left – in recent years is this cognitive dissonance. They can’t shut up about the most minor or even imaginary instances of misogyny, homophobia and antisemitism, and yet they are deathly silent about these things when they emanate, usually far more lethally, from their Islamist friends – and outraged when anyone else criticises these ‘cultural perspectives’.

        A conservative who does not agree with gay marriage but who would be horrified by gay people being executed will be ‘bravely’ denounced by the liberal-left as an evil bigot. Yet a Muslim who wants gay people put to death, women covered by Burkas, Jews wiped out and criticism of Islam punishable by death, becomes ‘a progressive’ ‘ally’, or at least someone whose barbaric and intolerant ‘culture’ must be defended from ‘Islamophobia’. It is a sick pantomime of inverted standards.

        Today’s liberal-left are traitors to their so-called principles, and false friends to all non-Muslim minorities and indeed to a broader, truly liberal society. They are putrid. Thankfully their support in western countries is evaporating, because if they can’t recognise their own shameful cognitive dissonance, everyone else can.

        • Groan

          “It is a sick pantomime of inverted standards.” And at last people grow weary of the show.

    • Cassandra

      The left supports Islam as a means of destroying Western, Christian Civilisation.

      Because Christian Civilisation is ‘oppressive’. Or at least, that’s what that dangerous idiot Herbert Marcuse taugh leftists.

      It’s a bit like sawing off the branch supporting them.

      Like all leftist social engineering, this one is bringing catastrophe to Britain and the West.

  • John P Hughes

    The Twenties and Thirties were a period when there was very fast technological and social progress. In the 20 years 1919 to 1939 people’s lives changed, and the western world modernised. as fast as in any comparable period of history – the rate of change was if anything faster than today. This is very well set out in the useful Readers’ Digest book on Life in the Twenties and Thirties, by James Cochrane (1999) – easily available on line at
    The focus is on the changes in society, technology, cultural life, fashions, houses and work, in Britain and the United States, with some examples and photos from France, Germany and Australia.
    An excellent introductory chapter starts by describing how a man who had last been in a western city in 1919, just after WW1, would have found it on returning in 1939 – completely transformed, in almost every way.
    No one should disparage the inter-war period. If WW2 had not broken out, the trends towards continuing modernisation were there for all to see – and proven by the rate of further change in the US, not at war, between September 1939 and Pearl Harbour in December 1941. Film, aircraft, motor cars, radio communications all made further gains. A world in which WW2 did not happen would have been a fíner, more attractive one than the world we have experienced.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      No Muzzies.
      If only.

  • Aisla Sinclair

    Orwell DID say that Fascism would return-and when it did, it would be relabelled as anti-fascism.
    So it is today-only the Left prefer rainbow pastel shades and shirts to those uniform brown ones. The black shiny leather overfuhrers however are in uniforms serried ranks of quangos, councils, churches, the BBC and all other good people…as self-defined by themselves. Licensed endless rebellions using the culture, public sector unions and-of course the liberal broadsheet media.
    We`ve clocked it. The Antifada Movement of Soros and the E.U certainly are making the noise and causing all the trouble on the streets. But they`ll not win this time.

    • TheRightToArmBears

      I wouldn’t bet on them not winning.
      The Tories always collude with Labour and the LibDems against us.
      They always have.

      • Blowmedown

        They may not win in the end; but the end may be a long way off.

    • Malcolm Marchesi

      You are absolutely right , the “black shiny oberfuhrers” are indeed in charge but do not forget the schools and colleges , the so-called Universities , where a universal education is the very last thing on offer

  • MrVeryAngry

    1. “To the Left, it cannot be that their policies do not have any answers to the current global and political problems “- Because it’s their policies that caused the problems.

    2.”New Labour lived off the revenue generated by an under-regulated financial sector that over-lent to create the taxable profits Labour needed No. And Yes. The financial sector was not at all under-regulated. It was, and is, massively over- and mis-regulated. Labour’s and Brown’s FSMA 2000 was largely responsible for this when it eviscerated the Bank of England’s and other agencies tried and tested supervisory roles (although in truth they weren’t much good either) and handed it all to a the FSA (the Financial Shambles Authority as so it proved) which was a Fabian gradualism construct to proto nationalise FS by regulation. Their predictable and abject incompetence permitted Brown to wildly expand money and credit – at the wrong price – which in turn eventually precipitated the bust. And along the way lots of banking greed was sated but it was Blair Brown Balls fault. Blair Brown thought that endless credit expansion fueling ever higher land prices was the route to electoral Nirvana. We are still trying to unwind that today. This was not bank or market failure at all . It was and remains massive bureaucratic, government and central bank failure.

    • Blowmedown

      The other factor that needs to be taken into consideration in your response above is that International Socialism requires that the capitalist banking system fails. Putting in place a regulatory and supervisory system that allowed unfettered lending to those least able to afford repayments was an easy way of encouraging the greed of the banking sector to inflict self-harm. From there it is but a step to nationalise and enforce control on a “corrupted” system.

      • MrVeryAngry

        Yes. e.g. Clinton’s ‘anti red lining’ exercise in the USA. OTHI think was too stupid to think of things like that.

  • MrVeryAngry

    BTW fascism is the child of socialism, They are the same thing. Stalin and Hitler both knew and admitted as much.

    • ratcatcher11

      Absolutely they are two sides of the same coin.

    • D J

      Mussolini himself said that he was a socialist.The NAZIs were more complicated with Rohm wanting more socialism and Hitler keener on nationalism after 1933.

    • Tethys

      Labels schmabels…

  • Ravenscar

    I don’t waste my time attempting to analyse the pap pumped out by the grauniad, all of its output is intellectually incontinent ie Marxist drivel written by whelps who’ve never done a stroke in their short miserable existence. The graun talks to no one done in a vacuous vacuum of critical theorists bubble heads.

    Therefore, to Britain, it ‘the graun’ is insignificant and utters endless irrelevance.

    • Dunlaith

      Oxbridge whelps. I can still recall back in the day when the output was of a homely socialist variety and readable until they let themselves be hijacked by SJWS the ultra left and feminasty loons.

    • Cassandra

      I’m afraid the Graun talks to the converted in the BBC and academia and so is is very influential, altho circulation- tiny.

    • Tethys

      A vacuous vacuum?
      Care to list the shining examples for us all?

  • ratcatcher11

    The Guardian is as significant these days as the Beano when it comes to journalism that has a soupcon of balance. To describe the awakening of democracy and the rejection of the left as fascism demonstrates just how out of touch and irrelevant this newspaper has become. It is no wonder they have been reduced to putting out a begging bowl for donations towards their running costs and Polly Toynbee’s Ferrari and home in the South of France.

    • Aaron D Highside

      The funny part of the begging bowl is that one is being asked to support ‘impartial’ journalism! In the Graun!!

      • Dunlaith

        Fearless I think they call it!

        • Cassandra

          ‘The whole picture’. Within the narrow parameters of left liberalism, that is.

    • Tethys

      And precisely what ‘awakening of democracy’ might that be?

      Brexit after 37% voted for lies?
      or Trump after 28% voted for a wacko bankrupt schyster?

      We should be told, and bigly.

  • T.j. Thomas

    By the way, congratulations to Wilders! Oh, wait.

  • Tethys

    ‘The Guardian is highly selective’
    And of course TCW is like the Encyclopaedia Britannica…

  • Scribbling Scribe

    Paul, you must pay greater attention to the Guardian and the BBC.

    Populism is good when it is propagated by Hugo Chávez, Castro and Nichola Sturgeon. And yes, the BBC and Guardian did believe the peoples of Cuba were grateful for Castro. Honest. No, truly.

    Populism is wrong if it doesn’t precisely fit into the BBC/Guardian way of thinking. For example, Trump, like the Labour Party talks of the evils of globalisation, how it makes the rich more wealthy and the underprivileged more poor, how jobs should be safeguarded and a decent minimum wage applied. But of course, Trump is not black, a woman nor even a Democrat, though he appears to have been in the past, thus is bad.

    Hope this helps you understand the tiny world inhabited by those wiser than ourselves.

  • Cassandra

    The Guardian’s failure to mention the 20 millions who died thanks to the fanatics of equality in the Soviet Union, never mind elsewhere, is a reflection of its ongoing tendresse for the blood- soaked Mass murderers, Lenin, Stalin and their henchmen. Trotsky, who has many followers in the British left also, would have had his arms covered in blood up to his armpits if he had had the chance.

    Actually, 20 millions is a conservative estimate. Solzhenitsyn and others put the numbers of unnecessary deaths thanks to the Gulags, mass deportations of peoples, executions etc at around 60 millions.

    When the Stalinist Eric Hobsbawm, a family friend of the Milibands, was asked in a BBC interview if he thought these deaths were justified, he said ‘I think so’. They were casualties in the struggle for the Communist Utopia, much as deaths of the enemy in a war were justified. Hobsbawm, died a year or two ago covered in honours.

    When Jack Straw, the New Labour Cabinet member was accused of being a ‘Trot’ he actually wrote a letter to a national newspaper denying this and proclaiming his admiration for the methods of Stalin. John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor, is on record as saying that socialist progress might mean blood being shed.

    It is simply accepted or forgotten that those like him think the bloody overthrow of the state is not just inevitable, but desirable.

    Imagine the uproar if individuals had made remarks, mutatis mutandi, about the necessity of overthrowing the state and shedding blood in the establishment of a far right regime

    The fact that far left views are not execrated as they deserve but are given the nod by the media is proof of the grip of leftism over the public culture in this country.

  • 300 Spartans

    An illuminating exchange of views from an edition of This Week some time ago.

    Andrew Neil “….why is it right to wear a Maoist t-shirt but obviously wrong, as it is, to wear a Hitler t-shirt?”

    Diane Abbott “I suppose that some people would judge that on balance Mao did more good than harm. We can’t say that about the Nazis.”

    Michael Portillo “What?!”

    Andrew Neil “Remind me what the good was. (pause)….Mao killed tens of millions of people.”

    Michael Portillo “Just tell me what was the good thing that he did that made up for the sixty million people he murdered.”

    Diane Abbott (straight face but clearly irritated) “He led his people from feudalism, he helped to defeat the Japanese, and he left his country on the verge of the great economic success they are having now.”

    Tsk tsk!! Andrew and Michael!! Don’t you know this! You really should read the Guardian!

    • Christ, what on earth is Diane Abbott talking about? Mao killed around 70 million Chinese, virtually enslaved the population, terrorised political prisoners and sunk his country into abject poverty. Oh– and it might interest Abbott to know that Mao ordered the ethnic cleansing of black Chinese by expelling them.

    • Cassandra

      He led his country into a nightmare of a dictatorship and hindered the progress it might have had for many decades.

      As for fighting the Japanese, the Nationalists under General Chiang did that. The Communists efforts were restricted to guerilla tactics and were relatively unimportant.

      Although 1,000,000 Chinese died through 1939 fighting the Japanese, only 3% of these were. Communists.

      • 300 Spartans

        Yes. Diane doesn’t seem to rate the supreme Nationalist war effort against the Japanese. Her Maoists, under comrade Stalin’s orders, didn’t even really become a minor annoyance to the Japanese war machine until after the German invasion of the CCCP. They actually continued their war against the Nationalists!
        But perhaps Diane doesn’t know this. The Guardian won’t have educated her.
        Generous souls might say she was being a teeny bit disingenuous. Many others, and I include myself in this, would prefer to call her wilfully stupid. But wilfully stupid is par for the course for the liberal/left/marxist nexus. Their attitude to the jihadi invasion of Europe amply illustrates this.

        The Chairman most certainly had a freewheeling attitude to nuclear conflagration. But as he had already demonstrated, mass murder never exactly put him off his dinner, so what’s a nuclear firestorm in the name of progress!