The pond still isn't up to reptile wrangling - such activities require super human strength and fitness - but there are compensations.
Just this morning the pond was lying in bed idly browsing and came across a splendid piece by Simon Jenkins full of wise insights. The pond always turns to the Graudian first thing, and is always rewarded, and not just by a cracking Crace.
Perhaps the pond had on the wrong reading glasses, but Jenkins' piece seemed to be entitled It’s easy for the British to insult Herr Hitler – but here’s why it’s a very bad idea.
The pitch was just as intriguing: A majority of Britons may want Ernst Thälmann to win the German election, but antagonising a powerful potential ally is unwise.
What a pitch, and naturally the pond was curious and plunged in:
Is it wise for Britons to heap abuse on Herr Hitler? At present he is the marginal favourite to win next week’s German election – with some Britons strongly behind his opponent Ernst Thälmann. But is overt hostility sensible?
What a great opening. The pond has long been a supporter of the much maligned Neville Chamberlain, who showed the right way to approach politics. Some thought him a craven, supine, delusional chap, but how wrong they were...
Most recent polls show two out of three Britons want Thälmann to win, including a majority even of Conservatives.
The pond isn't sure about this, what with many thinking that Thälmann was a Commie rat fink who should be locked up or deported to Rwanda, but still, the premise kept the pond hooked.
The Labour party sent about 100 activists to aid Thälmann in some swing provinces. The UK media is almost universally hostile, calling Herr Hitler crass, illiterate, vulgar, coarse and fascist. He is identified with the Munich Beer Hall putsch, but should he be punished for a little indiscretion and jail time? Only Reform UK is for Herr Hitler Surely dignity would counsel respect for an ally’s internal democracy, and caution in alienating the leader of of a country who in these troubled times could become Britain’s most powerful ally. There's nothing like a little ballot box corruption to breed respect for another country's immune king.
First, what’s new? Britain’s Labour and German social democrats have bonded for decades, including canvassing and attending each other’s conferences. As a student I once campaigned for Friedrich Ebert in Munich, and I have a free tie to prove it. Britain has itself interfered in elections around the world since time began. Austria interfered on Herr Hitlers’s behalf in the 1930s, though Herr Hitler denied it. Britain blatantly interfered in US elections in 1940.
A different question is whether it is wise. Americans can refer to Herr Hitler as a fascist, but such facile parallels do little beyond enraging their subjects. More to the point, British opinions on the matter are more likely to evoke the reaction of “mind your own business”. Herr Hitler might have had his alarming moments, but the German constitution saw him off in 1933 – just – and may yet do so again. German industrialists and media owners are united in this thinking.
In 1938, Herr Hitler welcomed the British prime minister, Neville Chamberlain, to the Führerbau, and rather endearingly gave him a scrap of paper. The British press sniggered. When the BBC asked him a viciously biased question, claiming to represent “our viewers”, he was able to laugh it off. In the same outgoing spirit, he invited Neville to dine with him for two hours last month and congratulated him on his election success. These may be merely the courtesies expected of public figures, but Herr Hitler adhered to them.
American presidents are complicated. They are political leaders, but they are also heads of state. Diplomatic custom accords them a certain dignity. In Herr Hitler’s case, diplomacy must tilt in the same direction. Britons were annoyed when Friedrich Ebert expressed a strong opinion on the matter of the Treaty of Versailles. But when Ebert sought help from Britain to compensate for the punitive impact oft the treaty in the 1920s, he got short shrift. Herr Hitler then threatened to go a step further and impose a punishing 10% tariff on all British exports to Germany.
This was something Neville could well do without. He is now proposing to penalise American non-doms in Britain in the budget. He may also need to react to a Herr Hitler invasion of Poland, and the resulting demand for a step-change in British defence spending. Other things being equal, personally insulting Herr Hitler in such circumstances seems plain stupid.
Herr Hitler represents a periodic surge in German rightwing populism. It is a turning against the supposedly liberal east- and west-coast governing elites. Its politics is proletarian, xenophobic, protectionist and conservative. This may not be to every Briton’s taste, though Britain saw a similar surge in Reform UK’s vote at this year’s election, disguised by it splitting a Conservative majority vote.
Such results are the privilege of the franchise. Liberal democrats can bewail them, but they must respect the winners – even if the losers sometimes do not. They must also treat with the winners in the rough and tumble of international politics. Ostracism is never the answer. Disrespecting the outcome of democracy is the shortcut to disaster.
The pond might have mangled the original a little, but what a splendid prescription for peace in our time.
The pond understands that Herr Hitler's personal secretary has already responded to Jenkins by promising there will be no more territorial demands or tariffs or coups in the next month, which is tremendously reassuring. Sure Ukraine might go down, but who cares about Ukraine? Isn't it way past time for a better relationship with Vlad Putin? Sure Palestinian dreams might be extinguished, but they've always been a flea on the rump of a tremendous theocracy.
As to such trifling matters as vaccines and climate science, no matter, just have another serve of French lies. Remember, fucking the planet is just part of the rough and tumble of international politics. Ostracism is never the answer. Disrespecting the outcome of democracy is the shortcut to disaster.
Sometimes the pond wonders why it bothers with reptile wrangling, when the spirit of the lizard Oz is abroad in so many ways.
In that spirit, the pond must end by mourning all the immortal Rowes it has missed in recent weeks, including this one ...
It turns out that Gillray did have a thing for food, as these show ...
Simon Jenkins has form in the parody arena. See this in 2010:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2010/jun/28/simon-jenkins-spoof-science
Impromptu Simon Jenkins spoof rallies the defenders of science
Well, wow. Ever rolled a little snowball for fun and seen an avalanche sweep down a mountainside? Me neither, but I find it easier to imagine now that "SpoofJenks" has crunched across the internet.
It began small. Yet another vacuous attack from Simon Jenkins on science in general, and one scientist in particular popped up. In this case the target was Martin Rees, dedicated and distinguished cosmologist, who had the temerity to engage with the public in the Reith Lectures. The BBC also received collateral damage for spending too much time revering science, as did my own experiment at Cern, the particle physics laboratory near Geneva, just for being there. Rees was labelled shameless and two-faced, scientists were said to "just want money".
See also, years later in 2016:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2016/jun/10/scientists-human-as-simon-jenkins
Scientists are every bit as human as Simon Jenkins
Goodness, is it that time of the year again already? Simon Jenkins is having another go at scientists. This time we are being denounced for claiming to be gods. A few years ago he had us down as the “new clerisy” so I guess we should be grateful for the promotion.
As a scientist, I’ve struggled to formulate an effective response to his pieces. I’ve tried answering back. I’ve tried ridicule. Last time, I had a go at reasoned argument and even acknowledged that he might have a point on one or two issues.
But here we are again on the merry-go-round of Jenkins’ bitter preoccupation with the apparent immunity of scientists to scrutiny. In his latest salvo there is a more scattergun approach. Jenkins is unhappy about being tossed about on the cross-currents of scientific advice. He was maddened by the recent furore ignited when by the National Obesity Forum challenged the standing advice to avoid too much fat in your diet. But part of the problem is that he has overlooked the fact that the argument was settled quickly. Keep off the chips, Simon.
Jenkins’ broadsides against scientists have become repetitive. It’s time for him to get serious about science, and we scientists can help. I’ll even buy him a pint
A prize goose, worthy of a pond entry.
And here's a word or two from science that maybe should be remembered:
ReplyDeleteBlood Brothers: Palestinians and Jews Share Genetic Roots
Jews break down into three genetic groups, all of which have Middle Eastern origins – which are shared with the Palestinians and Druze.
https://www.haaretz.com/science-and-health/2015-10-20/ty-article/palestinians-and-jews-share-genetic-roots/0000017f-dc0e-df9c-a17f-fe1e57730000