Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Has the Daily Mail ever distanced itself from fascism?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Rational Thinker

I'm not supporter of the Daily Mail but I feel obligated to point out that after the Olympia rally the Mail did distance itself from Mosley's acitivites. Furthermore most attempts to restrain the press should be opposed.

Who is proposing to restrain the press?

Reply 21

Rational Thinker

Original post by MostUncivilised

Who is proposing to restrain the press?

Lots of people, there is even an thread on TSR calling for the Daily Mail to be banned. When will people understand that censorship is not the answer.

Reply 22

MostUncivilised

Original post by Fullofsurprises

The headline that it published about Ralph Milliband and the provocative use of the picture of his Jewish gravestone, complete with the allegation that he 'hated Britain', a standard anti-semitic smear, familiar to anyone who studies Nazi propaganda, all suggest that Paul Dacre and Lord Rothermere continue to be willing to play the Jew card.

Well-said. The accusation of dual loyalties is an old anti-semitic canard.

The hypocrisy of Jon Stefal saying that Ralph Miliband's views from 80 years ago are relevant but Lord Rothermere's are not is just breathtaking. I suppose we can take comfort from the fact that Dacre is clearly losing the plot

Reply 23

Fullofsurprises

Original post by MostUncivilised

Who is proposing to restrain the press?

Yes, it isn't a restraint of the press to demand that the Mail behave like civilized people and apologise and agree not to continue to play the anti-semitic card.

One interesting thing about this is that the Mail is running the same kind of campaign that much of the right wing media did in the past against other Labour leaders who were not (like Blair and Brown) actually Conservatives dressed up in Labour clothing. For example, Neil Kinnock, Michael Foot, even moderate John Smith, were all described in different ways as Britain-hating, anti-patriotic, etc. It's a standard smear of the Right that the Left is unpatriotic.

Reply 24

MostUncivilised

Original post by Rational Thinker

Lots of people, there is even an thread on TSR calling for the Daily Mail to be banned. When will people understand that censorship is not the answer.

No serious person in public life has called for the DM to be banned, and you know it.

Bringing up censorship is a desperate attempt to shift the attention from Rothermere/Dacre's putative anti-semitic tendencies.

Reply 25

Kiss

Original post by MostUncivilised

Lol this coming from someone who uses fascism as a catch-all world for authoritarianism. If a communist wanted to ban a fascist newspaper, would that make him a fascist?

Yes

You're still banning something.

I'll be the judge of that.

No, I will since I know myself better than someone over the internet :smile:

Ah yes, the usual cry of right-wingers when they're getting a beatdown is to claim they're being censored. Who is actually trying to censor you and your Nazi mates at the Daily Mail? Show me a single editorial calling for the DM to be shut down

First of all, who says I'm right wing?

Second of all you cannot seem to separate fighting censorship with supporting an ideology. Does my support of free speech mean I am a Nazi because I believe in free speech for all? No it doesn't. You are without doubt one of the most incompetent troglodytes on this forum. You've jumped to rabid conclusions on someone you've never met before to further what small strain of argument you have in a desperate bid to win but in doing so you come across as a moron. Can you procure some evidence of me being a Nazi? Can you procure some evidence of me supporting the Daily Mail?

As for editors wanting the DM to be shut down, Mehdi Hassan's recent debates including the foremost: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy9tNyp03M0 frequently suggest his advocacy of the DM to be suppressed. On top of that you only need to scroll through the comments on articles which pertain to the DM on HP and G to see the readers of said newspapers desire its closure.

Reply 26

Rational Thinker

Original post by MostUncivilised

I regard that as a complete slur, in fact actually libel. I was not shifting attention away from anything, just pointing out that people can get carried away.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 27

MostUncivilised

Original post by Kiss

Yes

You're still banning something

So a communist can simultaneously be a fascist? You're a riot :smile:

I love this mad upside down political spectrum in which you live.

No, I will since I know myself better than someone over the internet :smile:

Of course you will :h:

First of all, who says I'm right wing?

Anyone who talks about heterophobia, defends the DM and tries to then make the issue about the Graun is your common or garden right-winger

Second of all you cannot seem to separate fighting censorship with supporting an ideology. Does my support of free speech mean I am a Nazi because I believe in free speech for all?

This is not a free-speech issue, the issue is about the DM distancing itself from and apologising for its Nazi past. There is no actual censorship issue here, it's simply you wanting to avoid the issue.

Much like deluded right-wingers who claim that the same-sex marriage bill would censor their free speech, it's a canard and no-one buys this crap anymore

Reply 28

MostUncivilised

Original post by Rational Thinker

I regard that as a complete slur, in fact actually libel.

You've never studied tort, have you?

Reply 29

Rational Thinker

Original post by MostUncivilised

You've never studied tort, have you?

You have wrongly accussed me of being a Fascist apologist which is a lie. You implied that the Daily Mail has never once distanced themselves from Fascism, I corrected you and so you made ignorant accusations. I accept your apology and I am glad that you can see you were misinformed.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 30

felamaslen

Well the Guardian actually supports fascists today in the middle east (published the Hamas leader as well as many articles in support of Iraqi insurgents, i.e. the people who you see on the internet cutting innocent people's heads off).

They're both awful papers though.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 31

MostUncivilised

Original post by Rational Thinker

You have wrongly accussed me of being a Fascist apologist which is a lie. You implied that the Daily Mail has never once distanced themselves from Fascism I corrected you and so you made ignorant accusations. I accept your apology and I am glad that you can see you were misinformed.

We can take that as a no.

Reply 32

felamaslen

Original post by Fullofsurprises

Yes, it isn't a restraint of the press to demand that the Mail behave like civilized people and apologise and agree not to continue to play the anti-semitic card.

Wait, wasn't it the people who are criticising the Mail's response the ones who accused the Mail of anti-Semitism? So surely those are the ones playing the anti-Semitic card?

Reply 33

thesabbath

the Daily Mail publishes a story every single day highlighting something negative about WW2, which leads some people who actually hold far right beliefs to refer to it derogatively as the Daily Nazi.

On the other hand, the left tend to call it the Daily Heil because they can't envision a world in which Thatcher, Hitler and the Daily Mail are not to blame for 100% of historical and current evils.

Reply 34

Chief Wiggum

Original post by MostUncivilised

And people have brought up the perfectly valid point that lots of institutions will have supported slavery, opposed giving women the vote etc in the past. I don't really think it's sensible to expect them all to apologise for things like that.

"The Daily Mail" cannot even sensibly apologise, because the person offering the apology wouldn't be the person who made the comments all those years ago. It would be nonsensical.

Reply 35

MostUncivilised

That would all be charmingly sensible, if it weren't the DM who had set the precedent; they're perfectly entitled to claim that we're responsible for what our forbears were doing in the 1930s and 1940s, they should just realise that because of their fascist past, they're going to come out of this worse than anyone else.

Original post by Chief Wiggum

"The Daily Mail" cannot even sensibly apologise, because the person offering the apology wouldn't be the person who made the comments all those years ago. It would be nonsensical.

I disagree. The Daily Mail, like all corporate entities, is a legal (rather than natural) person. The doctrine of perpetual succession in company law means that it is absolutely the same "person" as the one that published support for the fascists 80 years ago. Besides, Rothermere/Dacre are the ones who brought up the idea that we're responsible for what our forbears did in that period.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 36

nulli tertius

Original post by Rational Thinker

The Mail distanced itself from Mosley as the paper was largely run by Rothermere's son, the second lord. Rothermeres's views had not altered.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1484647/When-Rothermere-urged-Hitler-to-invade-Romania.html

Probably only his age (he died in late 1940) prevented him from being put in the next cell to Mosley in Brixton gaol. There would not have been much much compunction about it. Churchill interned one of his own MPs (Archibald Ramsey), his wife's god-daughter (Diana Mosley) and put the son of one of his closest political allies on trial for treason (John Amery--although the trial took place after the change of government in 1945)

Reply 37

flatfishy

guardian still openly supports communism. which is worse than fascism.

Reply 38

nulli tertius

Original post by flatfishy

guardian still openly supports communism. which is worse than fascism.

Could we have a source for that one please?

(ie for the Guardian-not that Communism is worse than Fascism-too many millions dead to make that anything other than an obscene debate)

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 39

Fullofsurprises

Original post by flatfishy

guardian still openly supports communism. which is worse than fascism.

The Guardian typically supports the LibDems (and occasionally Labour - provided the leader is centrist enough) - it has never supported communism, not even a long time ago. It has sometimes carried pieces written by people professing the communist creed, but then again, so have the Times and the Telegraph.