Education Secretary Michael “Oiky” Gove is supposedly hot on getting pupils to learn their
history. One wonders if those within the Fourth Estate who are railing against
the outcome of Lord Justice Leveson’s deliberations have been so keen on
learning theirs. Because recent political upheavals show that trying to whip up
apocalyptic visions of lost freedom have a habit of backfiring.
And loss of freedom is the mantra being obediently chanted
throughout the popular press and by its advocates and lobbyists, as a look at
the Newspaper Society (NS) website
confirms. The
prospect of regulation underpinned by statute has set David Newell off: “99.9 per cent of innocent newspapers and
magazines would be dragged into funding and being shackled by the scheme from
day one” he protests.
He then talks of “statutory
fines” (while still, it may be noted, having no idea what will be
proposed): “Ultimately, these would have
to be enforced through judicial mechanisms which could include suspending
publication of the newspaper”. Anyone not in agreement with the NS was “in denial that they are advocating a
government structure of controls”. Frightening stuff.
Let me guide Newell and his clearly less than merry band to
a slice of political history that is still within living memory for the oldest
members of society. After the war in Europe had been won in 1945, the UK had
its first General Election for some ten years. The Tories played on the
personal popularity of Winshton, because the party was not at all popular in
parts of the country that had suffered during the 1930s.
Churchill railed
against the prospect of a Labour Government in terms so apocalyptic that
the NS might recognise their own ranting in his speeches. But he sold the pass
during an electoral broadcast, and I reproduce his exact words here.
“There can be no doubt
that socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the abject
worship of the state. Socialism is in its essence an attack not only upon
British enterprise, but upon the right of the ordinary man or woman to breathe
freely without having a harsh, clumsy tyrannical hand clasped across their
mouth and nostrils. (Labour) would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo,
no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance”.
Even without the use of the pejorative term “Gestapo” – not Winshton’s finest hour,
considering the wide public knowledge at the time of what that arm of the Nazi
security apparatus had been getting up to during the war – the rhetoric was
singularly unfortunate. Clement Attlee seized on the speech as an example of
Churchill being inseparable from, yes, the “nasty
party” of the Thirties.
The Tories lost. Badly. And this despite the UK never having
had a majority Labour Government before. Those
railing against Leveson may be about to lose, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment