Liam Fox and the English Language
“Now, it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not simply due to the bad influences of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified form, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovernliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts” – George Orwell, ‘Politics and the English Language’, 1945/6.
I don’t give a toss about Liam Fox’s sexuality. Nor do I give a fig about national security. Fox is a Tory, and therefore the enemy and deserving of no mercy. Whether he’s gay or bi-sexual, or simply someone who enjoys the platonic company of younger men, isn’t (or shouldn’t be) the issue. What is the issue is his lying. Not simple, barefaced lying (as far as we know, so far…), but lying by misuse of the English language. Tony Blair was a master of this, with his “apologies” that weren’t apologies at all, but statements of regret for the fact that people had misunderstood him, or that things (through no fault of his own) hadn’t panned out the way he’d intended.
Key to the Blairite non-apology is the use of passive verbs; things happened, and it wasn’t really my fault. Thus:
“I accept it was a mistake to allow distinctions to be blurred between my professional responsibilities and my personal loyalties to a friend” – L Fox , statement, 9/10/11.
Who, exactly “blurred” those distictions? Was it you, Dr Fox? Or did it just happen – an Act of God – and perhaps you were just an eensy-weensy bit at fault in not having stopped it from happening, but no more than that?
Contrast this with John Profumo’s 1963 resignation statement:
“I misled you and my colleagues and the house.”
As for Fox’s answer to the question, did Adam Werrity make any financial profit from his relationship (whatever it was) with him? – the following must be an all-time classic of obfuscation:
“When it comes to the pecuniary interests of Mr Werrity in those conferences, I am absolutely confident that he was not dependent on any transactional behaviour to maintain his income.”
Fox must resign for abuse of the English language, which amounts to insulting the collective intelligence of the British people, which amounts to…lying.
A Hari-hat-tip to: Jonathan Freedland, in today’s Graun.
Rosie said,
October 12, 2011 at 10:15 pm
Good piece by Freedland.
I heard Clare Fox of RCP fame spinning this story as “politicians aren’t allowed to have friends” and “transparency gone mad” on tonight’s Moral Maze. She also complained that people saw dark designs in the fact that she stayed in touch with her political friends, i.e. the whole RCP/Spiked/Furedi mafia.
Theme song:-
Jimmy said,
October 12, 2011 at 10:52 pm
Wee sleeeeeeekitttt cowering beastie whits the panic in yer wee Tory breastie.
Selling arms overseas in the interest of the nation seems tae be the usual game. Labour have done the same for decades. It is amazing that sexual stories are still a surprise as they are irrelevant. If the wee man likes it up him stateside then so what. Just keep the jobs going.
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
October 12, 2011 at 11:27 pm
idiot.
Jimmy said,
October 13, 2011 at 12:29 am
Wee Daftie.
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
October 13, 2011 at 8:03 am
tosser
a regular contributor said,
October 13, 2011 at 2:38 pm
“Nor do I give a fig about national security.”
Nor do I, but I do care that since I’m legally bound to stick to rules on handling classified information that Dr Fox and other who make the laws should be too. If I brought a friend to work and allowed them to observe my work I would be sacked.
DC said,
October 14, 2011 at 9:36 am
“Nor do I give a fig about national security.”
Seriously? You don’t care about protecting people from terrorism? Jeez.
Jim Denham said,
October 14, 2011 at 12:50 pm
DC: I do “give a fig” about protecting working class people from terrorism. But not “national security” in the usually accepted sense of the term – ie protecting the interests of the British ruling class. I should have expressed myself more precisely.
Jimmy said,
October 14, 2011 at 7:53 pm
Cmon Jim you just want to protect working class people from terrorism. Maybe you are old enough to have said that to the IRA ! They had a field day blowing up and maiming the working class and still managed to convince some idiots they were socialists. Bombers just want to kill for a headline and their cause and do not define between classes.
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
October 15, 2011 at 8:50 am
tosspoTT
Very Good Liam Fox article « Representing the Mambo said,
October 14, 2011 at 8:07 pm
[...] Very good article here on Liam Fox’s use, and perversion of the English lanaguage in the days leading up to his resignation is here. [...]
Politics greek said,
January 13, 2012 at 5:03 pm
While cynicism can often be increasingly popular, especially in the political election cycle, the idea is surely not representative of the best inside of people. Idealism will be ! consequently, picking actions, which in turn seems …versicherungsmakler stuttgart