You can read Part 1 here. 

Talking of different rules, the attack on free speech and our culture goes on unabated. True, a few commentators have spoken out about the dangers of revisiting the past and the apparent re-writing of history while supporting some very questionable political organisations. Only last week the BBC, covering a funeral in Northern Ireland, referred to the deceased as an IRA veteran, which even Baroness Hoey, known as Kate Hoey, Northern Irish politician and life peer who served as Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Home Affairs, suggested was ill advised. Older readers with longer memories may remember how in the 1970s the BBC invariably referred to army personnel serving in Northern Ireland as British soldiers.

Many people, particularly older people, may be forgiven in wondering what on earth is going on as they see reports of ‘woke’ demonstrators demanding that words or phrases that they disagree with are removed from public usage, ‘nitty gritty’ being one such phrase, the supposed connection to slavery, without any evidence, first appearing well over a decade ago now.

During last summer we witnessed the speed at which change was forced on the majority by the minority, with the now infamous decision by producers at the BBC not to broadcast the patriotic songs Rule, Britannia! and Land of Hope and Glory. Critics said the words evoked a British colonial, imperialist past that is at odds with the values of modern Britain and the Black Lives Matter movement. Since then, and with very little public consultation, many statues of people linked to the slave trade and empire, have been removed or are scheduled for removal from public areas and institutions in many parts of the U.K. The Enlightenment philosopher David Hume has been classified as a racist, and any reference to ‘empire’ is now designated as offensive.

It’s not only status, literature and place names that are now seen as offensive, pubs have been renamed along with street names of often long forgotten people, now said to have had some sort of connection with slavery. War heroes of the second world war or rather their pets names are deemed offensive. Anyone who has ever seen the film the ‘Dam Busters’ will be aware that Wing Commander Guy Gibson V.C’s dog’s name was edited out long ago but now the dog’s memorial at RAF Scampton has been changed too. Such is the apparent need to remove anything from view that is deemed offensive, by whom though is often quite obscure.

Belatedly and with little publicity and comment the Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has announced new laws to protect our heritage which will go some way to protect historical monuments from removal by requiring due process and planning permission and local consultation in every case. Whether that will be sufficient remains to be seen.

Many are surprised at the speed at which this attack on our history and culture has happened, but the truth is it has been happening for many many years, from the first appearance of political correctness in the early 1980s through the infiltration of the ‘left’ and their views in education, the judiciary, local and central government and the so called charitable and voluntary sections, where obtaining funds often means following the diktats of the establishment.

Point out dissenting views and funding streams will not be forthcoming, and in the case of professional and public figures, as many have found, their professional life may well be ended.

The interesting thing about all this is that most ‘new opinion’ that seeks to impose their version of ‘new morality,’ stems from the opinions of people employed in some way in the predominantly, they think, middle class public sector, residing in their own bubble and meeting socially at dinner parties and social events and developing a sort of group think, just as the ‘Friends’ generation did almost two decades ago. Nothing much changes.

Watching TV these days is a trial of patience and temper, which is why, in our home for example, very little is from live TV. The BBC was banished years ago along with any channel that carries advertisements that double the length of the programme. Thanks to the internet and streaming channels there is a wealth of well-presented political comment, news broadcasts, films which I’m now told I must call movies and even documentaries and travelogues, often as good as if not better than much of the output of the traditional broadcast media.

This week I happened to come across a channel that runs ancient black and white movies and they are very good too. I was a bit dismayed to see that all movies often now carry a ‘trigger warning’ in case one of the permanently offended wishes to take offence  at something said or filmed 50-60-70 years ago by people who in the main died 20 or 30 years ago.

Mostly the films have a story, which is a novel experience these days. They also have actors who can act and are able to speak in a way that means that the audience can hear what is being said, which must also be a surprise to many younger viewers, if they are not bored by the lack of gratuitous sex and graphic violence which is always on display these days.

Ones made during the period 1939 to 1946 are invariably patriotic in tone, and also often uplifting. Propaganda, yes, but used to motivate people to do their best in difficult circumstances, not like the dreary mawkish emotional scenes that have dominated our screens this year as the government sought to frighten the nation into following its health diktats.

By coincidence, the film I watched this week was a well-known war time propaganda film designed to show American audiences Britain’s war effort. In a scene that could have been written last week, two old soldiers were reminiscing that, of course, the youngsters had had life too easy, they had no idea what real soldiering was about, the sort of conversations that old soldiers have had at reunions for years.

The scene changed to new recruits, ‘conscripted men,’ as they settled into army life bemoaning that they had been called up. The stereotypes could really have been a section of the social order of today. Interesting that few of the actors had had any military experience during the war, even though the film was made in early 1944, as they had mostly been excused service for various reasons.

David Niven who played the ‘officer’ attended the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst in 1928 and was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Highland Light Infantry the following year and had extensive war time service as did Leo Genn who apart from being a barrister also served and was eventually promoted to Lieutenant Colonel.

Just how our present government will re-motivate the comfortable section of the public sector workforce who have faced no financial hardship during the past year, or for that matter re-invigorate university students who have received little of the university experience let alone face to face tuition, or children of school age, many of whom may well be suffering anxiety and mental health problems, remains to be seen.

It must be hard to be a school leaver or sixth form student when prospects of getting a reasonable job, let alone a career, would seem to be diminishing day by day; when many in older generations who should be setting an example are often doing the exact opposite, no wonder young people are looking elsewhere, and ignoring the mainstream media and in increasing numbers social media too.

One wonders just how long this phoney ‘we are all in it together’ mantra will last. Will the middle-income middle classes wake up to the fact that their ‘free lunches’ are nearly over? Will the working classes – the ones keeping the country going with little acknowledgement or reward – be happy when they too have to pay increasing taxes and see their standard of living decline as inflation bites? Who knows, maybe Boris is about to appoint a Minister for Motivation. We could certainly do with the prospect of some good news.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email