Life on Hannan World (Part 5)

Hannan plays the victim card again

I can always tell when Dan Hannan’s bored because he starts moaning about how “lefties (a word I detest) hate the Tories”. What gets me about his oft-expressed sentiment is how he seems to feel everyone, regardless of their political complexion, should love the Tories – even respect them while they’re being repeatedly kicked in the face. But why should I or anyone else have any respect for them? He doesn’t say. He won’t say.

Today Hannan claims that “some online hatreds are prosecuted, others applauded”.  This blog hangs on the coattails of those which support Mehdi Hasan’s article in which he describes being subjected to Internet abuse (much of it on Telegraph blogs). Representing the Mambo covered Hasan’s article and the handwringing outrage that greeted it in this excellent blog. Hannan opens with,

The Guardian is again agonising over the nasty comments on its online opinion section, Comment is Free, aimed at ethnic minority contributors, especially Muslims. It has a point. You don’t have to be squeamish to be revolted by a great deal of what happens beneath the line. Here are three typical comments, posted within 20 minutes of each other on a single thread:

Jeez, have you even met any Muslims? They’re like a cross between Fagin & Goebbels.

I have always found Muslims to be nasty, selfish, lying, despicable, evil, grasping, ignorant, duplicitous wastes of oxygen.

Muslims are extremist scum. End of story.

Now that seems reasonable until you read the next paragraph.

Actually, I’ve played a little trick on you. These comments were posted on CiF in response to a piece by Tim Montgomerie, editor of ConservativeHome. In each case, I’ve changed a single word, substituting ‘Muslims’ for ‘Tories’.

Intellectually dishonest but did you expect Hannan to be anything else? He’s got plenty of form, guvnor.  But there’s more.

No, what interests me here is why the odium on CiF comment threads is so much more palpable than elsewhere – to the constant bewilderment of that section’s good-natured editors. I’m afraid it’s hard to avoid the politics: socialists, whether of the national or Leninist variety, often enjoy a good hate.

Here Hannan repeats his old saw that the ‘left’ has a monopoly on hatred. While he lays into The Guardian’s Comment is Free (CiF), he wilfully ignores the hatred expressed in the comments of Telegraph blogs. The suggestion here is that people should be prosecuted for expressing their hatred of the Tories, who continue to act as though they have divine sanction to attack the poor and the vulnerable.

As I read through this blog, it gets much worse.

No, what interests me here is why the odium on CiF comment threads is so much more palpable than elsewhere – to the constant bewilderment of that section’s good-natured editors. I’m afraid it’s hard to avoid the politics: socialists, whether of the national or Leninist variety, often enjoy a good hate.

My bold. Here he conflates socialism with Nazis. He’s done this before. Yet he would complain if anyone were to compare the Conservative Party with Mussolini’s fascists.  Furthermore, he also wilfully ignores the numbers of people in his own party who have openly expressed admiration for the Nazis. In his mind, it’s almost as if Aidan Burley and Alan Clark never existed.

I’ve already posted legion examples of some of the racist and anti-Semitic comments that regularly appear on Torygraph blogs, but Hannan seems to feel that such sentiments are worth ignoring so that he can advance his threadbare thesis. Here he tries to ram his point home,

Whenever I point this out, Lefties generally reply: ‘How can you possibly say that? Right-wingers are the biggest haters of all!’ That response is interesting on three levels. First, it’s not true. Second, it concedes the essence of the charge (yeah, we totally hate you, but you deserve it). Third, it’s a form of projection: because we hate you, you must feel the same way about us.

The Lyin’ King seems to think that his brethren don’t hate people on the left. But I could point to countless comments and articles written by right-wingers that do exactly that. Like so many of his ilk, Hannan enjoys playing the victim. He’s white and male and so is unlikely to be subjected to sexism or racism. But he persists in his risible assertion that he and his fellow travellers are being ‘victimized’ because they are Tories. If anyone is being victimized and persecuted it is the poor, the low-waged, the disabled, students, council tenants, the list goes on.

Hannan’s attempt to claim the moral high ground in this way is shamelessly hypocritical. Unable or unwilling to fathom the myriad reasons why people despise his party, he suggests (in not so many words) that any expression of hatred against the Tories should be prosecuted in the same way as other hate crimes. But Hannan has failed to grasp the fact that the Tories are not a minority ethnic group; they are a political party and they form the current government. Parties in power are not victims, they cause others to become victims through the implementation of policies that are designed to consolidate their power and that of their wealthy supporters.

Hannan’s argument, such as it is, is weaker than a day-old kitten but he’s too ignorant to see it.

UPDATE 12/7/12 @ 1350

I’ve just noticed that the Lyin’ King has changed the title of his blog to read “There are some kinds of hate-speech that Lefties openly applaud”.

Speaking of hate speech, a comment from the knuckledragging “danoconnor” has appeared on the thread. I will quote a snippet,

”  I sympathise with Mehdi Hassan ”

You sympathise with an alien, subversive, fifth column, trojan horse , who described Western infidel as ” cattle ”  just to test the waters to see how demoralized we’ve become  ?
And from what I hear ( I threw the TV out )  he is invited on to play Oracle of Truth on the BBC .
Allowed to use your ruse Mr.  Hannan , let’s pretend that a conservative journalist had compared Muslims to cattle .
Would he still be invited on to the BBC or writing for a newspaper ?
Or would he be just finishing a prison stretch ,and getting ready to start a probationary course in multicultural sensitivity indoctrination  ?

The pussyfication of Western civilization .
Islam’s slap-bitch .
There is no question as to who is going to lose this war .
I suppose practising the fine art of being the mental minority today will prepare us for the real McCoy a few decades down the road a way .  Practice makes perfect .
It takes two to make a clash of civilizations and one of them isn’t clashing back .

This comment has 10 likes at the time of writing. It’s also doggerel.



Filed under allegations of bias, Internet, Media

7 responses to “Life on Hannan World (Part 5)

  1. representingthemambo

    Reblogged this on Representing the Mambo and commented:
    Daniel Hannan is a truly dreadful politician. Myopic, intellectually dishonest and by all appearances not terribly bright. He has recently tried to equate hatred of Tories with racism. This ludicrous argument been prompted by Mehdi Hasan’s recent piece in the Guardian that has generated so much comment, including from ourselves.

    Hannan thinks it’s hypocritical for ‘lefties’ (they’re everywhere and they want your children!) to profess hatred for his party but then condemn racist abuse directed at prominent Muslim journalists.

    It’s such a childish argument it’s hardly worth responding to. Conflating ideas and ethnicity is the definition of idiocy. When the online trolls are attacking Hasan, Alibhai-Brown et al they are attempting to intimidate them into silence, belittle them and deny them their democratic right to free expression. When people are attacking the Tories they are attacking a party that governs in the interests of the few and not the many. A party who despises ordinary working people. A party willing to scapegoat the most vulnerable in order to distract attention from the real problems in society, problems that they are usually the authors of. A party willing to hand our public services over to corporations who seek only to make money out of them. A party whose economic strategy has dramatically increased the number of unemployed but who then blame the unemployed for being in that position. A party who over the years has viciously persecuted people on the basis of their race and sexuality. The Conservatives are the party of hatred and bigotry. It’s only right that sometimes we respond in kind. If Hannan doesn’t understand why so many people despise him and his party he’s an even bigger moron than I had him down for. A man who can describe the NHS as ‘a 60 year mistake’, when before healthcare was brought under national, central control, people simply died for want of the funds to pay for their treatment, is not a man blessed with great insight.

    Anyway, in that vein I’m re-blogging another excellent piece from Guy Debord’s cat taking Hannan’s risible arguments apart.

  2. representingthemambo

    Hilariously Hannan tweeted a link to my re-blog today. His mates have been getting in a real lather about it. You’ve clearly got to him!

    • Hi,Yeah, Hannan’s followers (or his Zombie Army as I call them) hate my guts. He often refers to my blog as “unintentionally hilarious”, which is rich coming from him. When I started my blog, I made a point of attacking Hannan, mainly because of his comments about the NHS but also because he’s a sophist. In June 2010, I got over 1200 views thanks to him linking to my blog.
      Solidarity, Buddy

  3. How can you not conflate socialism with Nazis? They were Socialists!

    This has to be the funniest Fisk I’ve ever seen – and not in a good way.

    • Hmmm, maybe you need to read your history. The Strasserist faction, to which you and others allude, was expunged in the Night of the Long Knives (1934). At any rate, Stasserism isn’t scientific socialism nor is it Marxist in character. Real socialism doesn’t make false distinctions between ethnic or social groups as Strasserism does. Furthermore, where was the workers’ control of means of production, distribution and exchange in the Nazi state? It was entirely absent. It’s a schoolboy error on your part, I’m afraid.

      Perhaps you could answer this question: is Russia’s Liberal Democratic Party liberal or democratic in any meaningful sense?

  4. Hey buddyhell The Nazis were as hard up against the left-wing as it’s possible to get. You need to perhaps read your history with an open mind and do some background reading on definitions.

    But let me help you. Left wing = central control examples are Socialism, Monarchy Bolsheviks, the EU, the Labour party, the LIB DIMs and Cameron’s Coalition.

    Fascists are more often left-wing in behaviour than right-wing

    Right-wing = devolved control = personal responsibility, no current examples of this. Anarchy is often the result of Far right-wing government

    Democracy is supposed to deliver the balance between central control and personal responsibility. It should deliver the rule of Law, strong property rights, and in conjunction with capitalism wealth and prosperity for all. But those on the left (see above for the list) have butchered capitalism so that it no longer functions; it no longer protects the individual, but promotes the corporate. The rule of law and property rights, have been given to the ultimate left-wing dictatorship, the EU. Until you grasp this your comments are rubbish.

    And just to correct a point of history, the Nazis being Socialists, were if anything more vehemently opposed to all other socialist parties than any other brand of political party. (Example their hate of the Bolsheviks) This is because they, in common with ALL socialists the world over believed that only they were right and everyone else was wrong. So they had to be sure that first and foremost they were the only Socialists about, and that the people would then follow them without question, because they were right. To them parties of the centre or right were wrong and the people would not follow them.

    • You said

      “But let me help you. Left wing = central control examples are Socialism, Monarchy Bolsheviks, the EU, the Labour party, the LIB DIMs and Cameron’s Coalition”.

      The Tory party has always had centralising tendencies but it would be absurd to describe them as “left-wing”. The monarchy not “left-wing” as you claim and how you can say that with a straight face is beyond me.

      Fascists are more often left-wing in behaviour than right-wing

      I’ll think you’ll find that they’re corporatist. Mussolini may have been a socialist in his youth but people can and do migrate to the other side, so to speak. Under fascism, there is no commonwealth and this is where the right’s ‘economic’ argument falls apart. Furthermore, it allows those on the libertarian right, especially, to claim they it’s only the ‘other side’ that is tyrannical and inclined towards totalitarianism. Just to remind you: a fascist or Nazi state is one in which there is a welding together of corporate and ideological interests. This did not occur under the so-called Communism of the USSR. By the way, you are aware the the Italian futurists were classical liberals, aren’t you? They were absorbed into Mussolini’s fascists.

      This is because they, in common with ALL socialists the world over believed that only they were right and everyone else was wrong

      But this is also true of right libertarians. I guess you sort of forgot that dogmatism transcends the right-left dichotomy.

      Like “Philip”, you have also forgotten about The Night of the Long Knives.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s