One of the most peculiar aspects of the culture wars is that while the word ‘fascist’ is deployed more than ever, very few people seem to know what it actually means. To take just one example, the journalist Paul Mason wrote a book called How to Stop Fascism in which he redefined the term so broadly that he was able to incorporate anyone who deviated from his own political worldview. Convenient, isn’t it?
This explains, although it does not excuse, Mason’s recent histrionic thread on “fascism” in the U.K., which culminated in the demand for more state censorship and the suppression of the press. That all fascist regimes in history have enacted such measures is an irony that appears to escape him.
Specifically, Mason argues that in order to curb fascism “we need a militant democracy”. This means that “Ofcom must revoke the licence of GB News”. But why? Does Mason genuinely believe that a news outlet that platforms voices from across the political spectrum is somehow connected to the rise of the far Right? Or is it simply that he hasn’t actually watched GB News and is attacking a phantom of his own imagination?
To be generous to Mason, it’s probably the latter, and he is not alone is being caught up in a hysteria that has fascinated me for quite some time. My weekly show on GB News, Free Speech Nation, has consistently platformed a mixture of Left-wing and Right-wing commentators. The core ethos of the show is the promotion of liberal values: free speech, individual autonomy, equal rights before the law. Only the most deranged fantasist could place any of this in the category of ‘far Right’.
And yet, at the Media Democracy Festival at the University of Sheffield in March, there was a panel discussion entitled “How to solve a problem like GB News”.
In a democratic society, a free press isn’t usually considered a “problem” at all. One of the panellists, the journalist Michael Crick, previously worked for the BBC for over 20 years. Given that the state broadcaster has completely violated its charter by becoming so ideologically captured on matters of gender and identity politics that it now routinely fails to report on key stories in the national interest, as well as openly propagandising for this identity-obsessed new religion, shouldn’t a more pressing topic have been “How to solve a problem like the BBC”?
Many commentators cite Ofcom rulings against GB News as justification for this need to eliminate the channel entirely, in spite of the fact that all news channels have been found to violate these rules from time to time. Last September, BBC’s Newsnight held a debate on GB News in which both panellists – Tory MP Caroline Nokes and former Sky News presenter Adam Boulton – agreed that the channel ought to be shut down. No-one was invited to defend GB News, and in the end it was ruled that Newsnight had breached the BBC’s duty of editorial impartiality.
So what is going on here? Why is there such an endless hysteria around GB News? We can trace all of this back to early 2021. Months before the launch of the channel, activists were insisting it would be “far Right” and would “stoke hate and division”. When the channel aired, and there was no evidence that any of these fears had been realised, somehow the claims persisted. It was almost as though those making the allegations were not interested in whether or not they bore any relation to the facts.
Even mainstream commentators continued to argue that the channel was “hateful” and “far Right” but could never offer any examples. The tendency of many people to hold fast to their views in the face of contradictory evidence is known as “belief perseverance”. According to psychiatric studies, this is a remarkably common phenomenon, one that could perhaps best be overcome through a greater emphasis on critical thinking in schools.
But with the channel freely available to watch, why were so many still falling for this unhinged narrative? It would have taken only a cursory viewing of GB News to realise that even Right-leaning presenters were consistently inviting Left-leaning guests to debate their points of view. Maybe these critics simply hadn’t made the effort to watch the channel before forming opinions. The argument that GB News “stokes hate and division” and is a “far Right echo chamber” cannot be honestly expressed by anyone familiar with the channel’s contents.
I do not use the term “hysteria” lightly. Those who regularly watch GB News can plainly see that there are hundreds of people passionately denouncing a version of a channel they have simply imagined. Or, worse still, one that has been imagined for them. Only last week I saw a post about the show Headliners complaining about the “far Right GB News”, in spite of the fact that all three commentators in that particular episode – including the host – were on the Left.
It is very easy to find clips of Right-wing views on GB News because the majority (although by no means all) of the presenters are inclined to the Right. But it is just as easy to find Left-wing views, even from contributors who are considered by some to fall into the “far Left” category. Cherry-picking to support an ideological agenda is one thing, but what we are seeing here is a general inability to engage with reality and a troubling disregard for the truth. I find myself disagreeing with opinions I hear on the channel on a daily basis. That’s the whole point of its existence; to challenge our certainties and enable discussions that other outlets seek to stifle.
GB News, in other words, exists in two forms. There is the version one can see on television, with a wide range of views represented. Then there is the fantasy version concocted in the minds of activists and commentators which, myth-like, has been sustained through continual repetition.
I suppose all of this is the inevitable consequence of a climate of political and ideological tribalism. It’s precisely the kind of groupthink that I’m keen to challenge, which is why I always want to hear from those who disagree with me on my show. But the hysteria is self-perpetuating. Most of those who oppose my views on identity politics and the importance of free speech refuse to appear on the channel, and this problem is escalated by its many critics. Sadly, claims that GB News is a “far Right echo chamber” act as a disincentive for Left-wing individuals to appear, and so we find ourselves in a vicious circle.
GB News is probably the only news channel where the presenters and guests are free to express their opinions without following an “editorial line”. In over three years of working at the channel I have never once been told to self-censor or to promote a certain viewpoint. And this is precisely why I have been able to cover stories that other news channels simply will not touch, such as the release of the WPATH Files in March, one of the biggest medical scandals of the century that has been ignored entirely by the BBC.
Perhaps the animosity towards GB News from so many establishment figures stems from the fact that they are unaccustomed to hearing views that deviate significantly from their own. Whether in regard to gender identity ideology, climate change, immigration or a whole range of other issues, there is a concentrated elite group who for a long time have enjoyed reinforcement from the media. Suddenly, a media outlet is challenging their prejudices. And they clearly don’t like it.
Or perhaps it is simply an example of group hysteria, of the kind we have seen play out repeatedly in the story of human history. I’m not attempting to offer solutions. Maybe the blinkers of irrational faith are a permanent fixture. Or maybe, in time, reality will prevail over the crazed narratives of social media. In the meantime, GB News will continue to platform guests from across the political and ideological spectrum, even those whose voices make some in the establishment uncomfortable. Eventually, I suppose, the likes of Paul Mason will see that they have been squabbling with a spectre.
Andrew Doyle is a writer, comedian and broadcaster who hosts the GB News show Free Speech Nation. He is the author of Free Speech and Why It Matters and The New Puritans. He created satirical Left-wing activist Titania McGrath, whose two books are Woke: A Guide to Social Justice and My First Little Book of Intersectional Activism. This article was first published on his Substack page. Subscribe here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
One small mercy here in England is that the fine old art of taking the piss hasn’t completely died out yet. It’s the only thing we have left. Orwell remarked in the 1940s that jackbooted fascism would never take hold in England because people would just laugh at it. I think that still holds true.
But Starmer and his cadre are certainly giving it a go
80%of British people queued up to be jabbed. WHO was taking the pee out of who?
Okay, let’s just use “kraut” and leave it at that. I’m happy being called a “rosbif” by the French.
Same problem. Germans must not claim that they have an existence decoupled from administrative acts of the FRG authorities as this would imply that people who are not German also exist and while many of these people who are not German would very much insist that they’re not German, Germans themselves mustn’t claim this.
The Germans have no access to alternative media and are totally propagandised and have been for at least 40 years.
Finally the young have realised they have no chance and are looking to AFD to change their world and their dopey parents and grandparents are just following ze orders.
Japan and Germany can you imagine what they could’ve been. Even the cleverest countries have succumbed to dumbing down in the last few decades. What is this malign force exactly it has so many in its grasp.
Control the words and you control the mind.
I had no idea Germany had ritualised brainwashing.
The German language lends itself particularly to this type of thought control. It really helped a certain Austrian.
Come off it. Don’t you know their history (hint: 1930 – 1945).
That would be 1933 and around that time, fascist regimes existed (probably not an exhaustive list) at least in Poland, Austria, Hungary, Italy and Spain, making this a pretty normal phenomenon. But only small subset of these had so-called “antifascist laws” by them Anglo-Russo-Americo-Saxons force installed onto them of which events like the one described in the article are a direct consequence.
That’s your system and not ours.
Liberal Fascism was alive and well under Roosevelt and Wilson before him.
German industry is interesting. Excellence in a few particular fields without any venture into other fields that you might expect from an industrial power. This is not an accident and it is key to understanding the situation. They gained a lot from being the Yank’s well- fed donkey. Now they get a taste of what their masters really thought of them. Blow up your pipelines, make you miserable, cold and unemployed. With the Anglo-Americans it isn’t a matter of if they will betray you it is always a matter of when.
It’s quite astonishing.
No doubt that good old Uncle Sam shafted Germany – and the EU – by blowing up Nordstream.
So we all buy ultra expensive LPG from – guess who?
That said the EU and us, buy Russian Gas/oil from, er India, – but that ‘s OK.
What a fucking world
Another word the ‘lefties’ frequently use is Deutschtürke to denote someone with a German passport who wouldn’t ever dream of denouncing his roots of being ethnically Turkish¹. In the past, I’ve asked if, provided that German-Turks (Deutschtürken) exist, there are perhaps also German-Germans (Deutschdeutsche) and Turk-Turks (Türktürken) but never got a reply.
The reality is – of course – that the German ruling caste passionately hates Germans and would love nothing better than to wipe them off the face of the earth as this would be the ultimate proof that they’re really not Germans, that is, Nazis, themselves. And that’s despite the German basic law still refers to the ius sanguinis codified during the German empire and that attempts to define ethnic Germans out of existence only started when Gerhard Schröder became chancellor for the first time (1998).
¹ At least a very large minority of these people actually wouldn’t ever dream of referring to themselves as German. They’re using the Turkish word for German, alman, to peioratively denote Germans as something entirely different from their much more worthy community.