Daily Mail plays anti-semite card
- This topic has 7 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We know that the editors and some of the journalists on the Daily Wail are nasty people, but in their attack on Ed Miliband's father portraying him as a ungrateful anti-British Jewish immigrant who was a Marxist to boot they have reached a new low:
and their defence today:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2439714/An-evil-legacy-wont-apologise.html
It is not clear what they are playing at but in emphasising Ed Miliband's Jewish background, which will play in the minds of some bigoted voters, they seem to be pulling out all the stops to prevent Labout beating the Tories at the next election. It could backfire as these days many people of Jewish background vote Tory.
The extent to which Ralph Miliband really could be called a Marxist rather than a confused Leftwinger is open to question of course, and we did question is it, as here:
The ironic thing is that, if Ralph Miliband had really been a Marxist he would have been openly not only anti-British, but anti all nationalisms.
Quote:The Labour MP Paul Farrelly said the Mail's "disgraceful smear" was linked to Ed Miliband's backing of an independent press watchdog that would limit the involvement of newspaper owners."The Daily Mail continues to plumb new depths in its attacks on both Labour and Ed Miliband, he said. "People should be under no illusion that this campaign of intimidation is not just political, but highly personal – because Ed has come out strongly for a truly independent press watchdog, not controlled by the likes of Mail editor Paul Dacre."This disgraceful smear of Ed's dead father shows once again what a mockery it is for the Mail's editor to have overseen the code on standards at the discredited Press Complaints Commission. The sooner our media moves on from this sort of behaviour, the better."What with Osborne spewing the usual anti socialist rhetoric, without having a clue what he's on about, (nothing new there then) and the Daily Mail going on about Ed Militants' father being a rabid Marxist. It looks like the right wing are intent on branding the Labour party in their old image.
The hilarious thing about the Daily Mail and their smear campaign against Ed Milibands' father, as an anti British Marxist, is that they claim it is relevant to Eds politics today.They seem to conveniently forget the past when it comes to the fascist sympathies of one of the original founders of the Daily Mail, Viscount Rothermere.
In the original smear article the Daily Wail hack referred to LSE professor and Labour politician Harold Laski who died in 1950, as Ralph Miliband's mentor, describing him as
Quote:a giant of Labour's Left, whom some Tories considered to be a dangerous Marxist revolutionary.Laski is now more or less forgotten, so here's an article from a back issue of the Socialist Standard on him:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1940s/1946/no-502-june-1946/professor-laski%E2%80%99s-secret
Oh what an evil man Ralph Miliband was:
Evil man wrote:This is in no way to suggest that electoral legitimation is all that a socialist party needs to seek or that a socialist party which means business can afford to rely on such legitimation alone. On the contrary, there is no question that an attempt at the radical transformation of the existing social order in socialist directions will require a lot more than this, within a complex and diffuse scenario that must include many different forms of action, pressure and struggle. But it also does need to include the attempt to achieve a measure of electoral legitimation at different levels and the achievement of a measure of representation in existing institutions. In the British context, as in the context of any other bourgeois democratic regime, this is an inescapable requirement for a socialist party, and needs to be treated as such, as a duty and as an opportunity, and not as a distracting and meaningless chore.In The British Road to Socialism, the Communist Party speaks of the creation by the labour movement, and as a result of a many sided struggle, of 'the conditions for the election of a Parliamentary majority and government pledged to a socialist programme';6 and it also suggests that 'when a socialist majority in Parliament is won it will need the support of the mass movement outside Parliament to uphold the decisions it has taken in Parliament. Conversely, the Parliamentary decisions will give legal endorsement to popular aims and popular struggles'.'It is very reasonable to argue that formulas such as these place too great an emphasis on the parliamentary and electoral aspects of a strategy of socialist advance; and also that they offer much too cramped a view of the meaning of socialist democracy. This is what the 'ultra-left' groupings have always claimed. But they have usually tended to spoil a reasonable case by arguing in terms which had little if any relevance to the real conditions at hand. They have rightly been concerned to warn against the dangers of 'parliamentary cretinism'. But they have themselves easily succombed to the temptations of anti-parliamentary cretinism and to the attractions of revolutionary phrase-mongering. There is no reason to think that this will change: it clearly answers the particular needs and wishes of a small and constantly changing but constant minority of militants on the British left.http://socialistregister.com/index.php/srv/article/view/5397/2296#.Uk2G3Fv1D6U
Speaking of men who may or may not have hated Britain. The below snippet is an eye opener, that may go some way to explaining the conservative doctrine of the Daily Mail today, (even if it does come from Wikipedia). In the 1930s Rothermere used his newspapers to try to influence British politics, notably being a strong supporter of appeasement towards Nazi Germany In the 1930s, he urged increased defence spending by Britain; his were the only major newspapers to advocate an alliance with Germany. For a time in 1934, the Rothermere papers championed the British Union of Fascists (BUF), and were again the only major papers that did so. Rothermere infamously wrote a Daily Mail editorial entitled "Hurrah for the Blackshirts", in January 1934, praising Oswald Mosley for his "sound, commonsense, Conservative doctrine".[7]Rothermere visited and corresponded with Hitler.[8] On 1 October 1938, Rothermere sent Hitler a telegram in support of Germany's invasion of the Sudetenland, and expressing the hope that 'Adolf the Great' would become a popular figure in Britain. He was also aware of the military threat from the resurgent Germany, of which he warned J. C. C. Davidson, then Chairman of the Conservative Party.Numerous secret British MI5 papers related to the war years, were declassified and released in 2005. They show that Rothermere wrote to Adolf Hitler in 1938 congratulating him for the annexation of Czechoslovakia, and encouraging him to invade Romania. He described Hitler's work as "great and superhuman".[9][10]The MI5 papers also show that at the time, Rothermere was paying an annual retainer of £5,000 per year to Stephanie von Hohenlohe, suspected by French, British and the Americans of being a German spy, as he wanted her to bring him closer to Hitler's inner circle. He also encouraged her to promote Germany to her circle of influential English contacts. She was known as "London's leading Nazi hostess". The secret services had been monitoring her since she came to Britain in the 1920s and regarded her as "an extremely dangerous person". As World War II loomed, Rothermere stopped the payments and their relationship deteriorated into threats and lawsuits, which she lost.
Young Master Smeet wrote:Oh what an evil man Ralph Miliband was:I think that, if he was still around, he'd be a supporter of the Left Unity project as before he died he'd already seen through the Labour Party.And, if you read the Daily Wail allegations against him, what he hated was not Britain but "Tory Britain" with all its archaic "class" privileges, a view shared by millions of Labour and other voters (and whose abolition would make no difference to capitalism). After all, it was a Labour politician Nye Bevan who once described the Tories as "lower than vermin", since toned down to "the nasty party". But, then, that's what the Daily Wail likes about them.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.