An anarchic, tiny, and elf-like PS to a previous post.

Okay, so, the other day, I moaned at length about missing my Guardian and being forced to read The Daily Torygraph instead.  Though I made the most of things, or at least claimed to, I nevertheless ranted about the latter paper’s shortcomings.  In the course of all this, I praised the Independent.  Well, as it turned out, a few days later I couldn’t get The Observer (the Sunday Guardian, of course) on Sunday, although I was pleased to see that this time I could get an Indie.  But you know what?  It turns out the Indie is a bit rubbish in places too.  Not as rubbish as the Torygraph, not even in the same league when it comes to sheer right-wing nastiness and dissimulation, but very slapdash and irritating nevertheless, and perhaps in at least potentially pernicious ways.  Well, I’ll give it the benefit of the doubt and say that the following had more to do with carelessness, rather than the blatant right-wing spin that is the only possible explanation for the breathtaking narrative gymnastics performed in Vilegraph storytelling.  Anyway, that’s what I think, maybe, but let’s see what you think. 

Headline on page 20: “Fear of anarchist threat grows as countdown to London 2012 begins”.  The first paragraph explains that Olympic organisers “believe there is a greater threat of disruption to the Games from anarchist protesters than Islamist terrorism....”  Pretty scary, huh?  Fortunately, though, “planners are braced for widespread disruption to transport, security and sporting events themselves by groups such as UK Uncut, which led the student-fees protests last year.”  Whoooaaa… now wait a minute, Jane Merrick and Brian Brady, authors of this, this, this ... I can only think of a word to describe this that happens to be an anagram of this.  Switch your brains on for one second, guys, and you’ll see that the clue to your wrongness, your complete and utter wrongness, is the very name of the “anarchist” group you name, and indeed the only “anarchist” group that you name in the whole piece of this that you produced.  “UK Uncut”: a group whose very name clearly indicates that they don’t want cuts in the UK (there are other national groups with very similar names all affiliated to each other and swapping information on the internet, in an anarchic fashion, presumably).  In case you’re in any doubt what that means, Jane and Brain, perhaps a little investigating—and you need do no more than Google to get what you need—would reveal they don’t want cuts in taxes or in state spending.  They therefore believe in the state.  They are therefore, by definition... NOT anarchists.  They are, in fact, the absolute opposite of anarchists.  Also: equivalence?  Even if UK Uncut was in fact an anarchist group, an anarchist group that is cunningly disguising its anarchism by using a name that clearly indicates its support for the state, is there really equivalence between disruption by peaceful protest, or even the kicking in of a Starbucks window or two, and disruption by the means favoured by Islamist terrorists?  Clue: no there isn’t, there really is not, okay, got that?  There is no equivalence. 

On a lighter note, kind of, on page 27 John Lichfield tells us the latest on “DSK”, detailing new developments in the legal campaign of Tristane Banon, who (alleges she) was sexually assaulted some years ago by Dominique Strauss-Kahn.  Lichfield describes this other victim of the evidently misogynistic wrath of Kahn as “a tiny, elf-like journalist and novelist”.  Thanks for that, John.  Thanks very much indeed.  My appreciation of this story is immeasurably enhanced by knowing that Ms Banon is “tiny”.  And “elf-like”. 

My partner, an oracle of reason it has to be admitted, unlike her partner, says that The Observer can be just as bad, at least as the Indie, if not the Twatigraph.  Come to think of it, she’s probably right.  There may be more on this theme in posts to come.