Last week a number of people were in shock about the news that James Delingpole had his last column at the Telegraph. It was all rather abrupt. As to why, I have the inside scoop.
I asked James directly, and in a nutshell it was three things.
1. They paid him poorly, ’nuff said.
2. They never seemed to appreciate the kind of traffic and exposure he’d brought. Remember, Delingpole was the first MSM columnist to break Climategate, and I’m pleased to say he got the scoop from WUWT. But, they didn’t really recognize the asset, even though he won an award for his Climategate coverage. When Delingpole’s column won the Bloggie award for “Best Weblog About Politics“, they didn’t even mention it in the print edition or in the online main page. Usually when a columnist or writer wins such an award, the paper crows about it.
3. Often, they didn’t like the content. As we know, James skewers the left and in particular greens. He reports he was getting increasing pressure over his environmental essays.
Usually when people are the most angry at someone for something they’ve said or written, it’s because what they’ve said or written has some truth in it. While Delingpole pulled no punches when it came to describing (with great flourish) the defective nature of some aspects of the environmental movement, some ‘proper’ folks found it hard to stomach.
Of course, then we have this, which I find even harder to stomach:
Andrew Montford cited this as an example of Delingpole’s prescience.
So, now, the Telegraph’s loss is Breitbart’s gain, and just three days later, James has come out swinging:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/02/16/Lefty-Lies-UK-Floods
All in all, quite an exit mirrored by a grand entrance.
Finally, all this leads me to something I’ve been remiss at doing simply because the day to day business of running WUWT often gets in the way, and that’s to recommend James most recent book. He kindly sent me a copy, and while the title admittedly made me cringe, once I started reading it, I found it lighthearted and hilarious. It reads a bit like a dictionary, except every definition has a punch line. Highly recommended, click the cover to have a look.
Also, be sure to add Breitbart London to your bookmarks. Delingpole’s latest is: Whose Life Is More Important? Yours, Or A Shark’s?
Oh, and what essay on Delingpole by yours truly would be complete without this photo courtesy of our friends at “Skeptical Science”?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
MarkW says:
“There never was any science behind the acid rain myth.”
My favorite is the killer bees. Then there’s Y2K, ALAR on apples, and the current mindless scare: “carbon”.
MarkW:
At February 19, 2014 at 10:36 am you say to me
OK. I understand that is your belief. Are you selective in your surreal beliefs or is that your only daft one? For example, do you also believe that Father Christmas exists and he climbs down chimneys to steal toys from children?
Richard
Delingpole is wonderful. His polemics are a gift to the ages. I am glad he is with the Breitbart organizsation. I guess Britain was not ready for a James Dean of journalism.
” MarkW says:
February 19, 2014 at 10:36 am
richardscourtney says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:26 am
—-
Fascism is a form of socialism, there is nothing right wing about it.”
Agreed…. Hitler was NOT Right Wing. That is a very big falsehood the left is always
trying to pass off as truth. He was one of theirs.
Friends:
The series of assertions by representatives of the ultra-right that H1tler was not right-wing are not only daft, they are also completely off-topic. I understand the embarrassment of the ultra-right at the most infamous of right-wingers, but attempts to pretend H1tler was not right wing are mere pollution of this thread and have no place here.
Richard
MarkW says, “Fascism is a form of socialism, there is nothing right wing about it.”
For purposes of clarity, when discussing the National Socialist Party of Germany, it may help to itemize actual policies that most characterize that movement from your perspective. Here is a start:
1. national gun registry and control
2. Nationalized health care
3. Antisemitism
4. Eugenics/Population control
5. Nationalized schools
6. top-down agrarian reforms
7. demands of worker ownership of production
8. nationalized Sunday programs for youth, to replace church
I suggest a list form to avoid the use of meaningless terms such as “right wing,” and I have offered an example to communicate precisely what the policies were. Please feel free to discuss your views, as there is nothing against WUWT site policy in them, and richardscourtney is not a moderator. He does not have any more authority than you do to decide what is on- or off- topic. The site policies are under “About/Policy,” if you think there is a subject that might not be welcome on a thread.
richardscourtney says:
February 19, 2014 at 11:13 am
Mussolini, founder of Fascism, was & always remained a socialist, to mention but one similarity. Socialism, fascism & communism are all statist doctrines stemming from 19th & early 20th century socialism (of both the dialectical materialism & Fabian strains). The opposite of socialism is not anarchism (anti-statism), but libertarianism, ie freedom under law, with power spread as broadly as possible among local, regional & national public regimes & private & volunteer community organizations, families & individuals, with state power also divided among separate branches of government, instead of concentrated in one branch at the national level. This contrasts with the all-powerful parliaments & bureaucracies of socialist Europe, all subject to a supranational authority without appeal.
So I would not dismiss MarkW’s assertion as fantastic. It’s a defensible position with which IMO few historians of socialism would disagree, however much they might dislike Marx´& Mussolini´s brands of socialism.
Richard…. FYI. The National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, otherwise known as the Nazi Party, was indeed socialist, and it had a lot in common with the modern left. Hitler preached class warfare, agitating the working class to resist “exploitation” by capitalists — particularly Jewish capitalists, of course. Their program called for the nationalization of education, health care, transportation, and other major industries. They instituted and vigorously enforced a strict gun control regimen.
@Bob B: climate deniers vs “climate parasites”
They use Orwellian upside down tactics to win an arguments such as:
Down is up and up is down.
1. classical meaning of liberal = freedom. Today it means statism.
2. Classical meaning of progressivism = to move forward. Today it means too slow down.
3. Classical meaning of Climate deniers = Earth Climate doesn’t change classical progressivism creates the change. Today it means Earth climate changes classical progressivism doesn’t. The Orwellian would say, Those that oppose progressivism is what causes the earth to change.
There is a whole list of new definitions to our Orwellian world we live today. My favorite word when Bob Hope was around was the word, Gay.
How can we win against their liberal power to change our language and manipulate the way we think? The whole climate denier statement is gay.
BTW….. Love Delingpole…. will be buying his book 🙂
Friends:
Can anybody explain to me the relevance to this thread of WW1, WW2, H1tler, and right-wing misrepresentations of history and of politics?
Some people clearly think that this thread is about those subjects and I fail to understand why.
Richard
Whether it be global warming or some other falsehood promulgated against people of a more “freedom-loving” persuasion, need to correct these errors when they occur.
Rhys Jagger, So you think our conduct of the war should have been tied to the likes of the treacherous obstreperous Poles, Do you? Your Polish heroes who jumped on the Czechs when they were sole the focus of the fuehrer’s fury in 1938? Too stupid to realize what was coming for them, they thought they’d grab a little more territory while the Czechs were occoppied so to speak.. And when the Jewish ghetto of Warsaw rose in revolt the Poles were no where to be found. The Russians did far more to win the war than the Poles, who ony managed to start it.:]
richardscourtney says:
February 19, 2014 at 12:07 pm
“Can anybody explain to me the relevance to this thread of WW1, WW2, H1tler, and right-wing misrepresentations of history and of politics?
Some people clearly think that this thread is about those subjects and I fail to understand why.”
The problem with a commentator moving from a right wing paper (The Telegraph) into a right wing online paper (Breitbart) I suspect.
People will the bring up other right wing stuff (actually quite inappropriately in some cases).
I try to keep peoples politics out of their science but…..
“1. national gun registry and control
2. Nationalized health care
3. Antisemitism
4. Eugenics/Population control
5. Nationalized schools
6. top-down agrarian reforms
7. demands of worker ownership of production
8. nationalized Sunday programs for youth, to replace church”
Looks more like left wing agenda to me.
Should give Breitbart.com some link juice then by changing the link in the right sidebar.
richardscourtney says:
February 19, 2014 at 12:07 pm
Ask Rhys Jagger & Gamecock why they felt compelled to disparage the US contribution to fighting Fascism, not to mention Communism. One or the other or both Hegelian regimes, the German & Russian varieties, would still be ruling Europe without American intervention. The US is returning to isolationism, so we’ll see how that works out for the world.
Gamecock says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:00 am
The fact that German war efforts were concentrated in the East is because that area was the main interest of their desire for lebensraum. In the West, it was only a matter of a few months to finish off most of Western Europe. There was little need for military ground action in Western Europe from mid 1940 until mid 1944 (with a few exceptions at the fringes like Italy, Africa, Greece, Yugoslavia, it was mostly air war).
Also note that the USSR didn’t bother with Japan until the war was a few days from ending. The USSR would have had little chance of success without Allied war materiel and massive strategic errors on the part of Germany’s fearless leader.
Little Green Eco-Fascists or
Little Brown Eco-Fashites
John Tillman says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:49 am
“But more importantly, it was French & British pacifism (understandable after the horrors of the Great War) & appeasement in 1936-38, plus Soviet collusion with Hitler in 1939-41, that let the war start in the first place. Before that, the punitive terms of the Versailles Treaty insisted upon by France aided Hitler’s rise to power.”
Stalin broke five alliances with other nations and started one up with Hitler to take over Poland and other Baltic states. His help surely made the war far easier for Hitler and the savaging by Stalin’s NKVD must have made the Gestapo proud.
http://uralica.com/eastbalt.htm
I am a little sensitive on this issue…re my handle
OK so judging by the comments Delingpole started WW2. Glad we have sorted that out….
Richard,
Thanks for your post of February 19, 2014 at 9:33 am, and my apologies for appearing to go off topic.
(FWIW, I don’t think I was completely off topic. My point was that Delingpole may speak the truth, but the way he does it really is not calculated to win over those who start out accepting the current orthodoxy. Most people who accept the current orthodoxy on AGW and acid rain, but who are reasonably open minded, would pick up Delingpole’s Little Green Book and after a quick skim, dismiss it as quickly as they would dismiss a Ken Ham creationist tome. However – an open minded observer, who sat down and read Andrew Montfort, on the other hand, would be much more likely to question their own prior assumptions. You and I may take the view that Delingpole knows what he is talking about, but I know several people who would simply dismiss him on the basis of the Little Green Book. And in particular, they would not take his perspective on acid rain seriously because what the standard sources say bears no resemblance to what Delingpole is saying.)
John
Richard,
The comment above was from me.
Lew Skannen says:
February 19, 2014 at 12:45 pm
No, but he has written winningly upon it, as I commented above. I´ve been waiting for Coward in Burma or some such follow on to the first two:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Coward-Bridge-Dick-James-Delingpole/dp/1847393861
Truthseeker says:
February 18, 2014 at 11:04 pm
—————————————–
Much of the msm has crap coverage on almost every article. Maybe I could hire out as a proofreader. The basic mistakes are mind boggling. The other day I gave up on reading at msnbc permanently. Their rag is now pathetic. Every day you can read a new story about the rich getting richer, women getting poorer, what the rich can do that you can’t, etc, etc, etc,etc, ad nauseum.