The Return: ATTN Martha Bridegam

Well done on returning to abg-o: after all it is only through dialectic we
reach understanding. Having said precisely that, maybe you'll think about
dialectic itself: when I replied to your email about the BBC giving house
room to fascists I knew you would not reply because I used the word
'Jewish'; used it purely as a description and in no way derogatory (i'm
pretty pro Jewish anyway, it being in my blood)
. This, as well as other areas of debate that you prefer to keep strictly
emotional, seems to me to be an abdication of reason from one so
prodigiously educated; in fact it seems neurotic.
The artical that you sent me was obviously written by a Jewish man.
I was thinking how people use one area of identity or behaviour in
themselves to extrapolate a world view: to Nick Cohen his religion and the
events in the last European war have made him elect to believe, in the face
of a mountain of opposing evidence that can be seen anywhere in the BBC from
its flagship news programmes to the small print on their job adverts in The
Guardian (and the ones that appear exclusively in ethnic minority
newspapers), that the bbc isn't doing enough to combat 'fascism' and
'racism'. It is the same, for example, in the British acting profession
where an enthusiasm for buggery (and I suppose, to a lesser extent, Brecht)
has been extrapolated into a widespread support for socialism and
practically any dissenting idea at all.
Orwell noted that mentioning the word 'jewish' in any context at all got
him into trouble and I can't help but feel you may have a lot to learn from
that. What is it in our John Rennie for example, that will make him take the
side of a psychopathic Hitler-like character who exhausts supply of synonyms
for the word evil, against America and England, the only powers that can
police fascism in the world?
What is it about certain Jews that they can, because of Israel,
extrapolate a hard Right view of everything, endorse quasi fascist behaviour
( the ironies don't need mentioning although maybe they do, every once in a
while) and complain that Mordechai Vanunu was let off lightly?
What is it about you that, in all likelihood on this 60th anniversary of
the invasion of France, your thoughts will be of the interned Japanese
civilians in California rather than the thousands of Americans who died to
restore freedom to the world (I extrapolate this from your various
assertions, not least your famous idea that Concientious Objectors were
braver that soldiers on active service and that remembering the slaughter of
the first world war was an odd and vainglorious thing to do)?
It's what I call the wrong-end-of-the-telescope view that, as the years go
by, seems to grip the western mind.

ROBBIE

Obviously this place isn't my local pub any more. I just dropped in for a pint
and stayed to finish it. Quite the change: there used to be overflowing
ashtrays and lumpy furniture but the room was comfortable and strangers felt
welcome. Now there's spilled beer and broken glass all over, and a group of
thick-necked fellows at the back table are always shouting about politics to
each other and interrupting other conversations with their own favorite
subjects, so it's hard to have a quiet chat.

I have things to say about George Orwell once in a while because I like his
work, have read it, and continue to take an interest in books about his life,
writing and times. If I have something to say about him here I will say it.
Innocent tourists still come in here to look at the notice board because this
place is still in some of the guidebooks -- though if the atmosphere doesn't
improve it likely won't be for long.

/Martha Bridegam