Main Edition
US
FR
March 9, 2023 - 2:24pm
It’s like clockwork. Every few months the government announces a new plan to tighten immigration policy and then, within seconds, you find ‘1930s Germany’ trending on Twitter. From the moment a picture of the Prime Minister’s flashy ‘Stop the Boats’ podium emerged, it became obvious what the next few days of online discourse would consist of.
It is Match of the Day host Gary Lineker’s belief that the Home Secretary’s language, when setting out her plans for the Government’s asylum policy, was ‘not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s’. Those who make such claims ought to be mocked, aside from anything else, for the apparent shallowness of their arsenal of cultural references.
But why are critics of the government so quick to reach for the rise of Nazism? Such analogies tend to be rooted in what could be described as ‘Holocaust-as-civics-lesson’, as distinct from ‘Holocaust-as-history’. The latter seeks to understand the catastrophes of the twentieth century in their own terms, as complex and contingent historical events, whose underlying causes were specific to their time. ‘Holocaust-as-civics-lesson’, however, reduces the entire point of learning about the Holocaust to ‘Never again’.
According to that view, the story of Hitler is a kind of cautionary tale: one learns about it simply so that one can ‘recognise’ the hallmarks of fascism in one’s everyday life and ‘call them out’. This explains not only why people like Lineker make the analogies they do, but also why they feel so self-satisfied as they do it. In short, there can be no surprise that people use the Holocaust as a blunt rhetorical tool, because they believe that the purpose of learning about the Holocaust is to use it as a blunt rhetorical tool.
To contort the history of 1930s Germany into an analogy for 2020s Britain, one has to do and say some very strange things. It is untrue, for example, that Nazi rhetoric was ‘insidious’ or ‘subtle’, as though they ever bothered to hide their violent hatred of Jews. Likewise, the British press is in no way reminiscent — no matter what Alastair Campbell tells you — of the Nazi press: turn to any page of Der Stürmer and you would have found things much nastier than you’ll ever get in the Daily Mail.
The problem with ‘Holocaust-as-civics-lesson’, like the problem of treating the collapse of Weimar Germany as a parable, is that it means that the Holocaust has to be ‘updated’ to reflect present political concerns.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeYes. And now we have Lineker being paraded all over the media as some kind of martyr who stands up against a neo-Nazi Tory Government. The discussion becomes about whether he should be allowed to make political statements, rather than how stupid and insulting those statements are. And, rather than ridicule being heaped on his musings, he is being held aloft as a beacon of free speech, like some kind of sporting Charlie Hebdo.
Lineker needs to be reminded of Godwin’s Law before he posts his next trite little tweet.
Rishi Sunak will be jumping for joy. Labour are trying to maintain discipline and avoid appearing to be in favour of open borders but their idiot supporters, like Linekar, can’t help but virtue signal.
The British public know what time it is. Linekar is probably worth 10 points in the polls for the Conservatives.
Indeed. I’m not sure the English Channel can be seen as blue, but if the Conservatives were looking for “clear blue water” to set them apart at the next election, the signs that this policy is at least beginning to work in some meaningful sense would achieve that.
On the back of the NI initiative, and also signs that strikes are being brought to a conclusion, suddenly a gap in the clouds may make the water look a bit more blue for Sunak.
As for Lineker, he’s doing a great job of hammering nails into the coffin marked “BBC Licence Fee”.
The differentiation point is valid and clearly part of the policy intent. But if the return rate doesn’t change much it could become a big own goal.
There hasn’t been much yet to assure on that at all.
Yes. The issue has been left for so long that nothing short of results will work.. i do find myself wondering when voters will pick up on the even bigger issue – permited migrstiin running at 504k last year. Housing is becoming a critical issue in our borough.
There are multiple reasons for the housing shortage SG and important we don’t blame all that on legal migrants or asylum seekers. But on the latter were we to be hearing about the rapid construction of detention centres, further investment in high calibre processing staff and formal ‘return’ agreements with other countries we would have a sense of potential competency increasing. Instead we get continual clickbait headlines about ‘illegals’.
I have four years and counting until my rental is demolished. Its been sold to massive developers. If we buy now, negative equity and spiking interest rates are a real danger. We can’t wait much longer. Rents around here are now ridiculous. People like us need solutions NOW. There was a bit on radio two the other day about this issue. So many like us Watson. We can’t just keep building detention centres. That’s not good for anyone.
Why can’t these ngo things and charities that rinse through hundreds of millions of dollars work with government and set these people up back home properly? Or something constructive like that?
Because if you’re not part of the solution, there’s plenty of money to be made out of prolonging the problem.
And plenty of votes from wiping up fear and hatred.
Excuse me. Typical of the Left these days. I want to be able to buy a property in my own country and that is instilling fear and hatred is it? F*ck. Off.
But you are wrongly blaming that on asylum seekers, albeit that is what Braverman et al probably would like you believe.
When Braverman says 100m would be eligible and they are coming now, firstly it’s total tripe, secondly it’s deliberately designed to generate fear (note: across the whole of Europe less than 1m asylum claims were made last year so where the heck does she get 100m coming to Dover now!)
If you think I am stupid enough to believe anything else coming out that tory government you are very much mistaken. They have so much to answer for now this would go to pages.
I do not solely blame asylum seekers, I made it very clear to you the other day the idiots I blame for this. I blame the governments and police that do nothing about the organised crime rings running it all. I blame the likes of bezos and gates who have enormous mines in Africa, preach like f*ck to us, and yet they seem to do nothing for these asylum seekers.
I blame the governments that did not enforce our border laws in the first place.
You missed out the main culprits.. British Empire brutes who looted those countries, ruined their economies and insisted the all speak English! If they’d had any foresight they’d have taught ’em all French and Spanish wouldn’t they!
When you ruin your neighbours’ economy you have to expect them to turn up to your home with a begging bowl it’s payback time! Btw I just built my home for €35k – join the dots on that one!!
Nothing to do with me Mr O Mahony. Many nations have done a bit of imperial conquering at some point. It was just the thing to do.
Nothing to do with me Mr O Mahony. Many nations have done a bit of imperial conquering at some point. It was just the thing to do.
You missed out the main culprits.. British Empire brutes who looted those countries, ruined their economies and insisted the all speak English! If they’d had any foresight they’d have taught ’em all French and Spanish wouldn’t they!
When you ruin your neighbours’ economy you have to expect them to turn up to your home with a begging bowl it’s payback time! Btw I just built my home for €35k – join the dots on that one!!
If you think I am stupid enough to believe anything else coming out that tory government you are very much mistaken. They have so much to answer for now this would go to pages.
I do not solely blame asylum seekers, I made it very clear to you the other day the idiots I blame for this. I blame the governments and police that do nothing about the organised crime rings running it all. I blame the likes of bezos and gates who have enormous mines in Africa, preach like f*ck to us, and yet they seem to do nothing for these asylum seekers.
I blame the governments that did not enforce our border laws in the first place.
22 upticks for a hate speech. All 22 of you should be thoroughly ashamed.
And you Emery need to join the dots! Do you really think it is the migrants that are outbidding you on your failed house buying? Your beloved Tories gave the filthy rich £600bn.. what do you suppose they did, and continue to do, with all that dosh? No? still don’t get it? ..they’re buying all the bloody houses init?
Hi. Oh I have never been directly accused of hate speech before, how exciting. Makes a change.
I explained to Watson the problem with housing the other day and small boats did not come into it.
But I think building housing is a better idea than building detention centres.
See my other posts. The tory government has not escaped my criticism.
Hi. Oh I have never been directly accused of hate speech before, how exciting. Makes a change.
I explained to Watson the problem with housing the other day and small boats did not come into it.
But I think building housing is a better idea than building detention centres.
See my other posts. The tory government has not escaped my criticism.
But you are wrongly blaming that on asylum seekers, albeit that is what Braverman et al probably would like you believe.
When Braverman says 100m would be eligible and they are coming now, firstly it’s total tripe, secondly it’s deliberately designed to generate fear (note: across the whole of Europe less than 1m asylum claims were made last year so where the heck does she get 100m coming to Dover now!)
22 upticks for a hate speech. All 22 of you should be thoroughly ashamed.
And you Emery need to join the dots! Do you really think it is the migrants that are outbidding you on your failed house buying? Your beloved Tories gave the filthy rich £600bn.. what do you suppose they did, and continue to do, with all that dosh? No? still don’t get it? ..they’re buying all the bloody houses init?
I believe that is the whole point. The Tories are hardly going to thrive on their great economic achievements are they? So as in 1930s Germany, scapegoats have to be found. Linekar has a point!
Excuse me. Typical of the Left these days. I want to be able to buy a property in my own country and that is instilling fear and hatred is it? F*ck. Off.
I believe that is the whole point. The Tories are hardly going to thrive on their great economic achievements are they? So as in 1930s Germany, scapegoats have to be found. Linekar has a point!
And plenty of votes from wiping up fear and hatred.
You need to go out to the really massive refugee camps round the world and see the NGOs running those and looking after millions of people. We are getting a trickle.
I still think though we need to manage our trickle effectively and humanely. Most will need to be returned. Currently though we aren’t investing (other than giving the French £480m which’ll make v little difference) in proper facilities and staffing to greatly reduce the numbers here left in limbo round the country. Instead they just want to chuck you a ‘distraction’ and someone to blame.
You need to go out to the really massive refugee camps round the world and see the NGOs running those and looking after millions of people
Sources please.
BBC TV News just for starters! Various Current Affairs on different TV channels.
Yes. Many other ‘news’ outlets and programmes could be mentioned.
Yes. Many other ‘news’ outlets and programmes could be mentioned.
BBC TV News just for starters! Various Current Affairs on different TV channels.
Yes! You’d get a few nice detention centres for €480m wouldn’t you?
The UK takes in far fewer migrants than similar counties around the world. Little Ireland has a million non-Irish born now.. that’s +25% on our indigenous population. If the UK had a similar number that would be 20 million! Other comparable countries take far more migrants than the UK and moan a lot less! Btw our migrants have contributed greatly to Ireland in economic and cultural terms. Of course we too have our small minority of hateful, xenophobic racists but we ignore them!
Sources please.
Does Ireland have a housing crisis like England?
Is Ireland taking small boats from across the Channel?
Sources please.
Does Ireland have a housing crisis like England?
Is Ireland taking small boats from across the Channel?
You need to go out to the really massive refugee camps round the world and see the NGOs running those and looking after millions of people
Sources please.
Yes! You’d get a few nice detention centres for €480m wouldn’t you?
The UK takes in far fewer migrants than similar counties around the world. Little Ireland has a million non-Irish born now.. that’s +25% on our indigenous population. If the UK had a similar number that would be 20 million! Other comparable countries take far more migrants than the UK and moan a lot less! Btw our migrants have contributed greatly to Ireland in economic and cultural terms. Of course we too have our small minority of hateful, xenophobic racists but we ignore them!
Because if you’re not part of the solution, there’s plenty of money to be made out of prolonging the problem.
You need to go out to the really massive refugee camps round the world and see the NGOs running those and looking after millions of people. We are getting a trickle.
I still think though we need to manage our trickle effectively and humanely. Most will need to be returned. Currently though we aren’t investing (other than giving the French £480m which’ll make v little difference) in proper facilities and staffing to greatly reduce the numbers here left in limbo round the country. Instead they just want to chuck you a ‘distraction’ and someone to blame.
Correct! Instead of building detention centres why not get the migrants to build homes? Some years ago an architect designed a simple house that anyone with minimal skills and scant supervision could build. I think it’s called joining the dots!
I have four years and counting until my rental is demolished. Its been sold to massive developers. If we buy now, negative equity and spiking interest rates are a real danger. We can’t wait much longer. Rents around here are now ridiculous. People like us need solutions NOW. There was a bit on radio two the other day about this issue. So many like us Watson. We can’t just keep building detention centres. That’s not good for anyone.
Why can’t these ngo things and charities that rinse through hundreds of millions of dollars work with government and set these people up back home properly? Or something constructive like that?
Correct! Instead of building detention centres why not get the migrants to build homes? Some years ago an architect designed a simple house that anyone with minimal skills and scant supervision could build. I think it’s called joining the dots!
If you conquer other peoples countries, loot their resources impoverish their people and insist they speak English guess what happens? If the British Empire brutes had any foresight they’d have insisted the natives speak French wouldn’tthey!
It’s payback time: suck it up!
There are multiple reasons for the housing shortage SG and important we don’t blame all that on legal migrants or asylum seekers. But on the latter were we to be hearing about the rapid construction of detention centres, further investment in high calibre processing staff and formal ‘return’ agreements with other countries we would have a sense of potential competency increasing. Instead we get continual clickbait headlines about ‘illegals’.
If you conquer other peoples countries, loot their resources impoverish their people and insist they speak English guess what happens? If the British Empire brutes had any foresight they’d have insisted the natives speak French wouldn’tthey!
It’s payback time: suck it up!
Yes. The issue has been left for so long that nothing short of results will work.. i do find myself wondering when voters will pick up on the even bigger issue – permited migrstiin running at 504k last year. Housing is becoming a critical issue in our borough.
Love your final riposte!
The differentiation point is valid and clearly part of the policy intent. But if the return rate doesn’t change much it could become a big own goal.
There hasn’t been much yet to assure on that at all.
Love your final riposte!
Excellent point.
Linekar is no Labour supporter.. if you assume all humanitarian minded people are automatically Left wing that says more about you!
Indeed. I’m not sure the English Channel can be seen as blue, but if the Conservatives were looking for “clear blue water” to set them apart at the next election, the signs that this policy is at least beginning to work in some meaningful sense would achieve that.
On the back of the NI initiative, and also signs that strikes are being brought to a conclusion, suddenly a gap in the clouds may make the water look a bit more blue for Sunak.
As for Lineker, he’s doing a great job of hammering nails into the coffin marked “BBC Licence Fee”.
Excellent point.
Linekar is no Labour supporter.. if you assume all humanitarian minded people are automatically Left wing that says more about you!
Makes you wonder what’s worse about our current culture: the amplification of intellectual mediocrities to positions of socio-political authority, or the contagious vileness of social media?
Indeed. Look at likes of Braverman and Johnson. How do these incompetents get there.?
Right on cue.
What and starmer isn’t a slippery lawyer type. Pro nato. Great. Yeah I look forward to that one. Blair mark two.
Putting particular politics aside, the question is perhaps who’s offering some competency? That’s what we need isn’t it?
No one is offering competency. That’s the problem.
What do you suggest yourself? Apart from King Cnut waves machines I mean?
Lmao. I don’t know. I feel like I should start working on it. Nobody else seems to be.
That’s why we have people in government with ridiculous amounts of qualifications to solve this sh*t. And international bodies like the un to do humanitarian things. And massive charities and NGOs.
Apparently that is too much of an ask of all of them right now though.
Lmao. I don’t know. I feel like I should start working on it. Nobody else seems to be.
That’s why we have people in government with ridiculous amounts of qualifications to solve this sh*t. And international bodies like the un to do humanitarian things. And massive charities and NGOs.
Apparently that is too much of an ask of all of them right now though.
What do you suggest yourself? Apart from King Cnut waves machines I mean?
No one is offering competency. That’s the problem.
Sadly, even a Blair mk2 would be a huge improvement on the current idiots!
Not if he’s as war happy as Blair.
Not if he’s as war happy as Blair.
Putting particular politics aside, the question is perhaps who’s offering some competency? That’s what we need isn’t it?
Sadly, even a Blair mk2 would be a huge improvement on the current idiots!
Right on cue.
What and starmer isn’t a slippery lawyer type. Pro nato. Great. Yeah I look forward to that one. Blair mark two.
Indeed. Look at likes of Braverman and Johnson. How do these incompetents get there.?
He thought that the F1 driver Massa was what Hamilton had to call his bosses!
Godwin’s Law is the salient point – when commentators are reduced to making Nazi comparisons the discussion is over. Its run out of intellectual argument and descended into meaningless insults.
Which I think it the point the article is making in a roundabout way
A follow up comment. I spotted that the Sun reported on Sunday as follows:
“MATCH OF THE DAY last night received its largest audience since November.
The programme was watched by 2.58 million people – up nearly 500,000 from last week’s show.”
It seems Lineker and his fellow pundits are actually of negative value to Match of the Day. Time for the BBC to take a hard line and save themselves a raft of unnecessary payments to these pundits.
They might also consider turning over the news to be read by chat bots and replace opinionated newsreaders.
I disagree. As well as normalising hate speech the government+ is now shutting down opposition.. if that is reminiscent of Germany in the 1930s (long before the Holocaust!) then God knows what is. Slippery slopes must be called out as early as possible, ie before it is too late!
Rishi Sunak will be jumping for joy. Labour are trying to maintain discipline and avoid appearing to be in favour of open borders but their idiot supporters, like Linekar, can’t help but virtue signal.
The British public know what time it is. Linekar is probably worth 10 points in the polls for the Conservatives.
Makes you wonder what’s worse about our current culture: the amplification of intellectual mediocrities to positions of socio-political authority, or the contagious vileness of social media?
He thought that the F1 driver Massa was what Hamilton had to call his bosses!
Godwin’s Law is the salient point – when commentators are reduced to making Nazi comparisons the discussion is over. Its run out of intellectual argument and descended into meaningless insults.
Which I think it the point the article is making in a roundabout way
A follow up comment. I spotted that the Sun reported on Sunday as follows:
“MATCH OF THE DAY last night received its largest audience since November.
The programme was watched by 2.58 million people – up nearly 500,000 from last week’s show.”
It seems Lineker and his fellow pundits are actually of negative value to Match of the Day. Time for the BBC to take a hard line and save themselves a raft of unnecessary payments to these pundits.
They might also consider turning over the news to be read by chat bots and replace opinionated newsreaders.
I disagree. As well as normalising hate speech the government+ is now shutting down opposition.. if that is reminiscent of Germany in the 1930s (long before the Holocaust!) then God knows what is. Slippery slopes must be called out as early as possible, ie before it is too late!
Yes. And now we have Lineker being paraded all over the media as some kind of martyr who stands up against a neo-Nazi Tory Government. The discussion becomes about whether he should be allowed to make political statements, rather than how stupid and insulting those statements are. And, rather than ridicule being heaped on his musings, he is being held aloft as a beacon of free speech, like some kind of sporting Charlie Hebdo.
Lineker needs to be reminded of Godwin’s Law before he posts his next trite little tweet.
I feel that the Holocaust reference merely shows that Mr Lineker is a bit lacking in education and common sense. He could well be rich but it doesn’t mean that he knows anything.
Remember that he has been a mollycoddled footballer for most of his life. He has driven cars and lived in houses that we could never afford. Everything has been done for him apart from the football bit. How could someone without real experience of life know what it means to live in Rochdale, Merthyr, Wakefield, Rotherham etc?
The problem is not Lineker but the BBC. By not stepping in and controlling their presenters they are effectively agreeing with them. This whole fiasco is a test of the BBC. They could drop Lineker like a brick if they wanted to. He only gets away with it because he is supported by his employer, not because he actually knows anything.
While I understand the view that he is a sports presenter rather than a political one, the sheer audacity to compare a Western government (and arguably one of the most ethnically diverse we’ve ever had) to an ideology that was responsible for places like Auschwitz and a wide variety of other horrors, is clearly going too far. For that alone, he should be told to retract that particular bit or resign.
He compared the rubbish about 100 million ending up shortly in Dover with ‘fear of the other’ incendiary language in 30s Germany.
Not a link I’d have made but certainly not unhelpful to make us ponder how important language is. Also fascinating nobody bothering to point out Braverman was talking tripe as usual.
And what an insult to Jews!
He compared the rubbish about 100 million ending up shortly in Dover with ‘fear of the other’ incendiary language in 30s Germany.
Not a link I’d have made but certainly not unhelpful to make us ponder how important language is. Also fascinating nobody bothering to point out Braverman was talking tripe as usual.
And what an insult to Jews!
I agree. It’s a comparatively trivial additional point that I will not willingly buy any Walkers Crisps products until Lineker has no relationship with them. Unfortunately dropping the TV licence is not such an easy choice in my house hold.
What a sacrifice and you thought to share it with us.
What a sacrifice and you thought to share it with us.
“How could someone without real experience of life know what it means to live in Rochdale, Merthyr, Wakefield, Rotherham etc?”
I come from a much more privileged background than Lineker, and find myself in complete sympathy with the people of these places.
Jeez you lot will be complaining about Woke crushing free speech tmoro
If we want to be truly honest, neither side of politics comes out looking especially good when it comes to freedom of speech. “Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences” is the oft heard cry from the left side of politics when the left are calling for censure or cancellation of someone who has said or done something they abhor, yet the right are often just as quick to demand someone is sacked (as we see with Lineker) when it is someone saying something they abhor.
No. Its not about freedom of speech. The BBC is not supposed to be biased. Lineker should not be criticising government policy whichever side it comes from. Unbiased.
I don’t think this specific incident is entirely about freedom of speech, but equally, I gave the BBC up as a bad job years ago, so consider it rather pointless to try to re-instill political neutrality into an organisation that is stuffed full of wannabe activists.
I don’t watch TV though, so the BBC as an organisation means little to me and I don’t pay a penny towards it.
Do you think Sugar should have been suspended when he said ‘Vote Tory’ in 2019? (and thus the Apprentice suspended). Do you think having a BBC Chair who’s help sort out Bojo’s loans means he ought to be suspended for lack of impartiality?
Come on spare us the inconsistency. He’s a sports pundit not presenter of the 6 O’clock News.
Yes. If people are not sticking to the rule that the BBC should not be biased they should be sacked. If he wants to say what he likes he can go work for anyone else that isn’t the BBC and do that.
But if he works for the BBC he should be unbiased.
Yes. If people are not sticking to the rule that the BBC should not be biased they should be sacked. If he wants to say what he likes he can go work for anyone else that isn’t the BBC and do that.
But if he works for the BBC he should be unbiased.
I don’t think this specific incident is entirely about freedom of speech, but equally, I gave the BBC up as a bad job years ago, so consider it rather pointless to try to re-instill political neutrality into an organisation that is stuffed full of wannabe activists.
I don’t watch TV though, so the BBC as an organisation means little to me and I don’t pay a penny towards it.
Do you think Sugar should have been suspended when he said ‘Vote Tory’ in 2019? (and thus the Apprentice suspended). Do you think having a BBC Chair who’s help sort out Bojo’s loans means he ought to be suspended for lack of impartiality?
Come on spare us the inconsistency. He’s a sports pundit not presenter of the 6 O’clock News.
No. Its not about freedom of speech. The BBC is not supposed to be biased. Lineker should not be criticising government policy whichever side it comes from. Unbiased.
If we want to be truly honest, neither side of politics comes out looking especially good when it comes to freedom of speech. “Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences” is the oft heard cry from the left side of politics when the left are calling for censure or cancellation of someone who has said or done something they abhor, yet the right are often just as quick to demand someone is sacked (as we see with Lineker) when it is someone saying something they abhor.
Apparently, only a few of us can see through these “celebrity” commentators. It feels like the jesters have taken over the courts.
His son actually / almost died of leukaemia, I forget which but either way it hasn’t been all wine and roses for Mr Lineker
You’re right.. Lineker knows very little.. but I will say he knows hate speech and diversionary scapegoating when he hears it
It’s something I suppose!
While I understand the view that he is a sports presenter rather than a political one, the sheer audacity to compare a Western government (and arguably one of the most ethnically diverse we’ve ever had) to an ideology that was responsible for places like Auschwitz and a wide variety of other horrors, is clearly going too far. For that alone, he should be told to retract that particular bit or resign.
I agree. It’s a comparatively trivial additional point that I will not willingly buy any Walkers Crisps products until Lineker has no relationship with them. Unfortunately dropping the TV licence is not such an easy choice in my house hold.
“How could someone without real experience of life know what it means to live in Rochdale, Merthyr, Wakefield, Rotherham etc?”
I come from a much more privileged background than Lineker, and find myself in complete sympathy with the people of these places.
Jeez you lot will be complaining about Woke crushing free speech tmoro
Apparently, only a few of us can see through these “celebrity” commentators. It feels like the jesters have taken over the courts.
His son actually / almost died of leukaemia, I forget which but either way it hasn’t been all wine and roses for Mr Lineker
You’re right.. Lineker knows very little.. but I will say he knows hate speech and diversionary scapegoating when he hears it
It’s something I suppose!
I feel that the Holocaust reference merely shows that Mr Lineker is a bit lacking in education and common sense. He could well be rich but it doesn’t mean that he knows anything.
Remember that he has been a mollycoddled footballer for most of his life. He has driven cars and lived in houses that we could never afford. Everything has been done for him apart from the football bit. How could someone without real experience of life know what it means to live in Rochdale, Merthyr, Wakefield, Rotherham etc?
The problem is not Lineker but the BBC. By not stepping in and controlling their presenters they are effectively agreeing with them. This whole fiasco is a test of the BBC. They could drop Lineker like a brick if they wanted to. He only gets away with it because he is supported by his employer, not because he actually knows anything.
If Lineker were a prominent historian that had dredged up stories from Der Sturmer raging against a flood of refugees seeking to get into Germany he would have an analogy with today and a very novel discovery of a previously unknown pre-war event and it might be worth listening to him. However, instead Lineker is a pretty ignorant footballer and football pundit with an exaggerated idea of the importance and value of his own views – views that by reason of his employment by the BBC at an absurd salary, he should not be voicing. He could and should be replaced at a fraction of the cost by any number of footballing motormouths.
The guy is a Dunning Kruger whose ignorance is turbo charged by a salary inversely proportionate to his ability.
Anyone in the UK who wants some form of immigration control has effectively been accused of (or at the very least of being adjacent to*) being a member of a certain national socialist party popular in central Europe 90 years ago.Does anyone want any more good reasons for the license fee being scrapped? I’m sure Lineker’s superiors, although just as ideological driven but probably slightly less stupid than him, have also realised this.
*A term I’m sure Gary likes as I hate it
Some journalists are being replaced by AI chat bots. That may or may not be a good idea but Lineker might consider if his job is as secure as it might be.
but Lineker does chat out of his bot?
“MATCH OF THE DAY last night received its largest audience since November.
The programme was watched by 2.58 million people – up nearly 500,000 from last week’s show.”
It seems Lineker and his fellow pundits are in fact are of negative value to the program and the BBC ought to drop them regardless of this spat.
but Lineker does chat out of his bot?
“MATCH OF THE DAY last night received its largest audience since November.
The programme was watched by 2.58 million people – up nearly 500,000 from last week’s show.”
It seems Lineker and his fellow pundits are in fact are of negative value to the program and the BBC ought to drop them regardless of this spat.
Lineker’s folks ran a market stall in Leicester, one of our most diverse cities. He worked on it as a lad. Clearly that experience stayed with him
I rather think he’s a national Treasure.
There is an issue about the over-use of Holocaust analogy. The worst at that of course have been all the anti-vaxxer nutjobs.
Now putting aside the obvious ‘play the ball not the man’ I think he could have used different phraseology to make his point but the gist of it was v valid and let’s not be having anti-wokers complain about free speech. I know consistency ain’t their strongest asset but please.
That’s right, and as a result he now spends his Saturdays giving out free fruit and veg to the poor and needy of Leicester. Or at least I’m sure he would, if he wasn’t so busy making seven figures a year for talking about football on the telly. And being a gormless, virtue-signalling twerp.
I assume you’re referring to Andrew Bridgen MP as the ‘anti-vaxxer nutjob’. He has been suspended from his party, not for comparing the vaccine scandal to the holocaust, but for quoting someone else’s reference that it was the greatest crime since the holocaust. I’m sure even someone like yourself who toes the BBC line on just about everything can understand the difference.
The use of such a diversionary tactic to avoid focusing on the real issue, the scandal of excess deaths in the under 50s attributable to the bio-weapons developed at warp speed, is classic MSM propaganda.
But in Lineker’s case he’s a ‘national treasure’ and worked on a market stall, so let’s give him a free pass on the holocaust. What a pathetic argument.
I did appreciate the ‘national Treasure’ bit would get the blood running.
Your baiting skills are the best I’ve seen on here. I love it.
Your baiting skills are the best I’ve seen on here. I love it.
I did appreciate the ‘national Treasure’ bit would get the blood running.
That’s right, and as a result he now spends his Saturdays giving out free fruit and veg to the poor and needy of Leicester. Or at least I’m sure he would, if he wasn’t so busy making seven figures a year for talking about football on the telly. And being a gormless, virtue-signalling twerp.
I assume you’re referring to Andrew Bridgen MP as the ‘anti-vaxxer nutjob’. He has been suspended from his party, not for comparing the vaccine scandal to the holocaust, but for quoting someone else’s reference that it was the greatest crime since the holocaust. I’m sure even someone like yourself who toes the BBC line on just about everything can understand the difference.
The use of such a diversionary tactic to avoid focusing on the real issue, the scandal of excess deaths in the under 50s attributable to the bio-weapons developed at warp speed, is classic MSM propaganda.
But in Lineker’s case he’s a ‘national treasure’ and worked on a market stall, so let’s give him a free pass on the holocaust. What a pathetic argument.
The guy is a Dunning Kruger whose ignorance is turbo charged by a salary inversely proportionate to his ability.
Anyone in the UK who wants some form of immigration control has effectively been accused of (or at the very least of being adjacent to*) being a member of a certain national socialist party popular in central Europe 90 years ago.Does anyone want any more good reasons for the license fee being scrapped? I’m sure Lineker’s superiors, although just as ideological driven but probably slightly less stupid than him, have also realised this.
*A term I’m sure Gary likes as I hate it
Some journalists are being replaced by AI chat bots. That may or may not be a good idea but Lineker might consider if his job is as secure as it might be.
Lineker’s folks ran a market stall in Leicester, one of our most diverse cities. He worked on it as a lad. Clearly that experience stayed with him
I rather think he’s a national Treasure.
There is an issue about the over-use of Holocaust analogy. The worst at that of course have been all the anti-vaxxer nutjobs.
Now putting aside the obvious ‘play the ball not the man’ I think he could have used different phraseology to make his point but the gist of it was v valid and let’s not be having anti-wokers complain about free speech. I know consistency ain’t their strongest asset but please.
If Lineker were a prominent historian that had dredged up stories from Der Sturmer raging against a flood of refugees seeking to get into Germany he would have an analogy with today and a very novel discovery of a previously unknown pre-war event and it might be worth listening to him. However, instead Lineker is a pretty ignorant footballer and football pundit with an exaggerated idea of the importance and value of his own views – views that by reason of his employment by the BBC at an absurd salary, he should not be voicing. He could and should be replaced at a fraction of the cost by any number of footballing motormouths.
But why are critics of the government so quick to reach for the rise of Nazism?
The simple answer is that they don’t have an argument, so they reach for their wardrobes, which are fall of coat hangers with slogans hanging on them.
Insightful metaphor.
You mean like Andrew Bridgen? Tory MP, Brexit advocate, conflating vaccine with Holocaust.
Odd you and many others of Unherd commentariat said zilch about that nonsense.
Bridgen was a critic of the government, no?
I believe he quoted what a leading medical professional had told him, whereas Lineker was stating his own opinion. Are you suggesting that people can no longer quote others?
Lineker was referencing a Holocaust survivors view of the language. Bridgen quoted a scientist view on vaccines and then did his v own link to the Holocaust (that the scientists never suggested). So in fact you’ve helpfully drawn further attention to the marked difference, albeit in rather the reverse of your intention I suspect.
Yet Lineker didn’t put that in his tweet, it is just something you’ve assumed. Secondly, Bridgen clearly stated that it was the medical professional made the comparison to the holocaust. Whether the professional actually said that is debatable, neither of them should have made the link. From my perspective both are wrong.
Yet Lineker didn’t put that in his tweet, it is just something you’ve assumed. Secondly, Bridgen clearly stated that it was the medical professional made the comparison to the holocaust. Whether the professional actually said that is debatable, neither of them should have made the link. From my perspective both are wrong.
Lineker was referencing a Holocaust survivors view of the language. Bridgen quoted a scientist view on vaccines and then did his v own link to the Holocaust (that the scientists never suggested). So in fact you’ve helpfully drawn further attention to the marked difference, albeit in rather the reverse of your intention I suspect.
And here’s the real crux of your objection.
It matters not that they both said pretty silly things in positions of power; only who is friend and who is enemy.
As a post-Liberal you understand this implicitly.
I wouldn’t phrase it quite like that – too simplistic I fear, but your point isn’t entirely wrong to be fair. Crux IMO is here’s an article on Lineker’s twitter stuff and poor use of Germany 1930s analogy etc. Where’s similar Unherd Articles when Bridgen or anti-vaxxers make even more explicit Holocaust linkages? And of course one had to point out the Anti-Wokers inconsistency on free speech. Lineker is a sports pundit/presenter not presenter of the Today Programme, and when Sugar announced ‘Vote Tory’ in 2019 election BBC didn’t cancel The Apprentice. BBC currently got a Chairman who’s helped Bojo out with loans and not been suspended, so spare us the self-righteousness etc
The additional crux is one wouldn’t want Unherd comment-group-think to develop too easily. Being challenged important
I wouldn’t phrase it quite like that – too simplistic I fear, but your point isn’t entirely wrong to be fair. Crux IMO is here’s an article on Lineker’s twitter stuff and poor use of Germany 1930s analogy etc. Where’s similar Unherd Articles when Bridgen or anti-vaxxers make even more explicit Holocaust linkages? And of course one had to point out the Anti-Wokers inconsistency on free speech. Lineker is a sports pundit/presenter not presenter of the Today Programme, and when Sugar announced ‘Vote Tory’ in 2019 election BBC didn’t cancel The Apprentice. BBC currently got a Chairman who’s helped Bojo out with loans and not been suspended, so spare us the self-righteousness etc
The additional crux is one wouldn’t want Unherd comment-group-think to develop too easily. Being challenged important
Bridgen got sanctioned for his comment by having the whip withdrawn. Lineker should get the equivalent treatment ie be suspended!!
Bridgen was a critic of the government, no?
I believe he quoted what a leading medical professional had told him, whereas Lineker was stating his own opinion. Are you suggesting that people can no longer quote others?
And here’s the real crux of your objection.
It matters not that they both said pretty silly things in positions of power; only who is friend and who is enemy.
As a post-Liberal you understand this implicitly.
Bridgen got sanctioned for his comment by having the whip withdrawn. Lineker should get the equivalent treatment ie be suspended!!
Insightful metaphor.
You mean like Andrew Bridgen? Tory MP, Brexit advocate, conflating vaccine with Holocaust.
Odd you and many others of Unherd commentariat said zilch about that nonsense.
But why are critics of the government so quick to reach for the rise of Nazism?
The simple answer is that they don’t have an argument, so they reach for their wardrobes, which are fall of coat hangers with slogans hanging on them.
Interesting parallels with Gina Carano. She was fired by Disney for complaining on Twitter that the silencing of conservative voices was reminiscent of 1930s Germany, which was deemed antisemitic.
Using that logic, I fully expect Lineker to be fired for being an antisemite.
Interesting parallels with Gina Carano. She was fired by Disney for complaining on Twitter that the silencing of conservative voices was reminiscent of 1930s Germany, which was deemed antisemitic.
Using that logic, I fully expect Lineker to be fired for being an antisemite.
Lineker’s behaviour rather reminds me of John Lennon sitting in his Ascot mansion with his Roller parked outside and singing ‘imagine no possessions’ in that famous video. Gary can’t really be blamed for his lack of self-awareness. He’s been cossetted by sycophants and showered with easy money since he was a teenager. After all, this is the man who moaned about how difficult it is to get by on £1.75 million pa. Must be even worse now he’s only getting £1.35m.
It’s the people who pay attention to him that I can’t understand: he’s not offering an alternative solution or saying anything very intelligent.
But then neither is the Labour Party. Yesterday Yvette Cooper announced that, under a Labour government, there’d be no boat crossings. No mention of how this was to be achieved.
I think we know very well how it would be achieved. She would just let them all in.
They wouldn’t need rubber boats. Labour would give them ferry tickets.
They wouldn’t need rubber boats. Labour would give them ferry tickets.
I think we know very well how it would be achieved. She would just let them all in.
Lineker’s behaviour rather reminds me of John Lennon sitting in his Ascot mansion with his Roller parked outside and singing ‘imagine no possessions’ in that famous video. Gary can’t really be blamed for his lack of self-awareness. He’s been cossetted by sycophants and showered with easy money since he was a teenager. After all, this is the man who moaned about how difficult it is to get by on £1.75 million pa. Must be even worse now he’s only getting £1.35m.
It’s the people who pay attention to him that I can’t understand: he’s not offering an alternative solution or saying anything very intelligent.
But then neither is the Labour Party. Yesterday Yvette Cooper announced that, under a Labour government, there’d be no boat crossings. No mention of how this was to be achieved.
Anyone who has studied the Nazi’s and the Holocaust knows Lineker’s argument is a load of manure, yet you get many who condemn far less egregious analogies leaping to his defence. These people aren’t stupid by any means, yet they’re very good at making themselves look stupid to stand up for one of their own.
My main fear from this is that Nazism, like the term “far right” will become a meaningless insult and label to try and discredit people they disagree with. Terms that would once outrage me such as “far right” or “fascist” now just make me shrug, adding that level of indifference to Nazism is a road I don’t look forward to seeing us go down, but the scary thing is that the people calling us these terms 100% believe it.
Have you been living under a hedgerow somewhere for much of the last decade? I was under the impression that that particular ship had long sailed, and that Nazi, along with far right, communist, racist, sexist, transphobe and white supremacist had all amalgamated themselves into a single category with little meaning left besides “ad hominems to throw at those whom you disagree with politically”.
Have you been living under a hedgerow somewhere for much of the last decade? I was under the impression that that particular ship had long sailed, and that Nazi, along with far right, communist, racist, sexist, transphobe and white supremacist had all amalgamated themselves into a single category with little meaning left besides “ad hominems to throw at those whom you disagree with politically”.
Anyone who has studied the Nazi’s and the Holocaust knows Lineker’s argument is a load of manure, yet you get many who condemn far less egregious analogies leaping to his defence. These people aren’t stupid by any means, yet they’re very good at making themselves look stupid to stand up for one of their own.
My main fear from this is that Nazism, like the term “far right” will become a meaningless insult and label to try and discredit people they disagree with. Terms that would once outrage me such as “far right” or “fascist” now just make me shrug, adding that level of indifference to Nazism is a road I don’t look forward to seeing us go down, but the scary thing is that the people calling us these terms 100% believe it.
Excellent well argued and very accurate article.
And some very good comments as well.
Yes indeed.
No most of the comments just show fairly standard cognitive bias to which the Author used a standard playbook. Like chucking a bone at the dog. Too easy.
No most of the comments just show fairly standard cognitive bias to which the Author used a standard playbook. Like chucking a bone at the dog. Too easy.
Yes indeed.
Conveniently not mentioning Andrew Bridgen.
Why on earth would we mention Bridgen when we’re discussing Lineker ? That was a completely different case of hysterical ignorance ? Why are you persisting with ‘whataboutery ?
Job done – you had to think about the inconsistency in what generates an Unherd Article, even if only momentarily before rage took over.
Job done – you had to think about the inconsistency in what generates an Unherd Article, even if only momentarily before rage took over.
Why on earth would we mention Bridgen when we’re discussing Lineker ? That was a completely different case of hysterical ignorance ? Why are you persisting with ‘whataboutery ?
And some very good comments as well.
Conveniently not mentioning Andrew Bridgen.
Excellent well argued and very accurate article.
I don’t know why anyone would be surprised. This is the same Gary Lineker who peddled a story about being subject to racist discrimination because of his “dark skin”. I invite anybody to Google his parents, Barry and Margaret Lineker.
You really need to look no further and think no further than that, to know how desperate this poor little rich man seemingly is, to signal his “oppressed background”, and thus, at least in his sad little view, his “virtue”.
I don’t know why anyone would be surprised. This is the same Gary Lineker who peddled a story about being subject to racist discrimination because of his “dark skin”. I invite anybody to Google his parents, Barry and Margaret Lineker.
You really need to look no further and think no further than that, to know how desperate this poor little rich man seemingly is, to signal his “oppressed background”, and thus, at least in his sad little view, his “virtue”.
According to Wikipedia Lineker has 4 O-levels.
I am surprised he has so many.
According to Wikipedia Lineker has 4 O-levels.
I am surprised he has so many.
The only redeeming aspect to this story is that the left are finally being called on their lazy Nazi narrative. To this point they have been allowed to get away with linguistic hyperbole if not arrant nonsense (Isla Bryson). They are be8jg called to account.
The only redeeming aspect to this story is that the left are finally being called on their lazy Nazi narrative. To this point they have been allowed to get away with linguistic hyperbole if not arrant nonsense (Isla Bryson). They are be8jg called to account.
“But why are critics of the government so quick to reach for the rise of Nazism?”
Deployment of the Argumentum ad Hitlerum tends to be the result of intellectual impoverishment.
well, it’s partly because Nazi is a term that in spite of the excessive overuse and application to all kinds of inappropriate and trivial things has managed to retain some kind of punch to it, and it is much easier to spell than Orwellian…
Orwellian has the advantage of not causing posts to go into pre-moderation though.
We are run by people that CAN spell Orwellian.
Yet here we are.
Orwellian has the advantage of not causing posts to go into pre-moderation though.
We are run by people that CAN spell Orwellian.
Yet here we are.
I await an instance of the Argumentum ad Musselinium aimed at those trying to blame the unions for the trains not running to time.
well, it’s partly because Nazi is a term that in spite of the excessive overuse and application to all kinds of inappropriate and trivial things has managed to retain some kind of punch to it, and it is much easier to spell than Orwellian…
I await an instance of the Argumentum ad Musselinium aimed at those trying to blame the unions for the trains not running to time.
“But why are critics of the government so quick to reach for the rise of Nazism?”
Deployment of the Argumentum ad Hitlerum tends to be the result of intellectual impoverishment.
As a Jewish person, can I point out that Braverman was taken to task not so many months ago by a Jewish Holocaust survivor for her use of inflammatory language. She dismissed her to the approval of the audience.
Plus I would like to remind the writer of this article that The Daily Express and The Daily Mail were always owned fascist sympathisers in the 1930s. The language Joseph Goebbels used about jews – eg vermin – focused on status, numbers and infestation. They weren’t migrants but the policy was to make them so in order to hand over their status and achievements to ‘aryans’ and ‘Germans’ Sound familiar? That, of course, was before they decided on extermination.
Projects like the Kindertransport and immigration to the UK during the Nazi period was opposed by these papers in very similar language to that used by Braverman, Farage, The BNP etcetera.
These projects saved Jewish lives during the Holocaust.
Preceding the Rwandan genocide, if you were in the wrong tribe you were referred to as a ‘cockroach’
We do need a debate about and action on migrant numbers. We do not need it in these terms. If you don’t want economic migrants, I suggest you support fair trade, if you don’t want asylum seekers, take yourself to an arms fair and protest. The dictators who create these situations have cosy amounts of dosh in London banks.
As for the housing market, it has been distorted by overpaid lawyers, bankers and the extreme wealthy elite who buy properties they do not live in. It has also been distorted by a right wing politics that makes earning a living wage impossible and chips away at welfare cushioning. It is not surprising that people cling to the value of their houses when they have no other security.
The Holocaust is not even that historical because old school Nazism has never been purely historical. If you look at the figures provided by Hope Not Hate or even the Jewish Board of Deputies, you will see this. It certainly wasn’t historical in my youth – swastikas chalked on our local cemetery, a Nazi salute given to our cortege on my sister’s wedding day, routine security outside Jewish schools, synagogues because of entirely justified fear of attacks.
Some Jewish people have chosen to learn the lessons of genocide and understand that ‘the other’ must be defended if you want to be safe.
Lineker may be naive but he is right. The tone of the responses to this article demonstrates this.
Reducing migration, immigration and asylum seeking will not solve the cost of living crisis, the social care crisis or the housing crisis. The demographic and economic causes of these have nothing whatsoever to do with immigration.
The last thing a Tory government wants is a real debate about the economic mess caused by their policies and the UK’s high risk, high debt society.
Anybody who believes that this lot care about the financial struggles of ordinary people must be delusional.
Thank you for this. He may not be an intellectual but Lineker’s unflinching and unapologetic anti-racist stance is much less nauseating to me than the arrogant comments here about not understanding the Holocaust. The extermination of millions of Jews didn’t occur in a political or economic vacuum. When Priti Patel talked about an ‘invasion’ a while ago she was deliberately playing to the ‘us and them’ prejudices that place the blame for our economic ills on refugees. It’s called scapegoating. Ring any bells?
Many thanks for this.
One of the very few clear sighted and relevant comments to this piece IMHO
Less heat and more light.
Thank you for this. He may not be an intellectual but Lineker’s unflinching and unapologetic anti-racist stance is much less nauseating to me than the arrogant comments here about not understanding the Holocaust. The extermination of millions of Jews didn’t occur in a political or economic vacuum. When Priti Patel talked about an ‘invasion’ a while ago she was deliberately playing to the ‘us and them’ prejudices that place the blame for our economic ills on refugees. It’s called scapegoating. Ring any bells?
Many thanks for this.
One of the very few clear sighted and relevant comments to this piece IMHO
Less heat and more light.
As a Jewish person, can I point out that Braverman was taken to task not so many months ago by a Jewish Holocaust survivor for her use of inflammatory language. She dismissed her to the approval of the audience.
Plus I would like to remind the writer of this article that The Daily Express and The Daily Mail were always owned fascist sympathisers in the 1930s. The language Joseph Goebbels used about jews – eg vermin – focused on status, numbers and infestation. They weren’t migrants but the policy was to make them so in order to hand over their status and achievements to ‘aryans’ and ‘Germans’ Sound familiar? That, of course, was before they decided on extermination.
Projects like the Kindertransport and immigration to the UK during the Nazi period was opposed by these papers in very similar language to that used by Braverman, Farage, The BNP etcetera.
These projects saved Jewish lives during the Holocaust.
Preceding the Rwandan genocide, if you were in the wrong tribe you were referred to as a ‘cockroach’
We do need a debate about and action on migrant numbers. We do not need it in these terms. If you don’t want economic migrants, I suggest you support fair trade, if you don’t want asylum seekers, take yourself to an arms fair and protest. The dictators who create these situations have cosy amounts of dosh in London banks.
As for the housing market, it has been distorted by overpaid lawyers, bankers and the extreme wealthy elite who buy properties they do not live in. It has also been distorted by a right wing politics that makes earning a living wage impossible and chips away at welfare cushioning. It is not surprising that people cling to the value of their houses when they have no other security.
The Holocaust is not even that historical because old school Nazism has never been purely historical. If you look at the figures provided by Hope Not Hate or even the Jewish Board of Deputies, you will see this. It certainly wasn’t historical in my youth – swastikas chalked on our local cemetery, a Nazi salute given to our cortege on my sister’s wedding day, routine security outside Jewish schools, synagogues because of entirely justified fear of attacks.
Some Jewish people have chosen to learn the lessons of genocide and understand that ‘the other’ must be defended if you want to be safe.
Lineker may be naive but he is right. The tone of the responses to this article demonstrates this.
Reducing migration, immigration and asylum seeking will not solve the cost of living crisis, the social care crisis or the housing crisis. The demographic and economic causes of these have nothing whatsoever to do with immigration.
The last thing a Tory government wants is a real debate about the economic mess caused by their policies and the UK’s high risk, high debt society.
Anybody who believes that this lot care about the financial struggles of ordinary people must be delusional.
thick as a whale blubber sandwich…
thick as a whale blubber sandwich…
Many people assume that the Holocaust refers to Hitler’s genocidal campaign, and not to the gradual deterioration of socio-political norms in Germany in the period prior to the Holocaust. Of course,
The early and mid-30s in Germany saw a steady ratcheting up of intolerance, starting with words, progression to repressive laws, book burnings, vandalism etc and ending up with the most systematic genocidal campaign in recorded history.
Lineker is of course not comparing Braverman’s policies to Dachau, but he is saying that they are “not dissimilar” to the earlier degradation of decency which certainly occurred in Germany in the 30s – see:
https://www.jewishgen.org/forgottencamps/general/timeeng.html ,
and which paved away for Hitler’s mass-murder. It’s a wider point about the fragility of standards when politicians start down a mob-pleasing / scapegoating path.
It was a provocative remark, of course, but is the consensus now that anyone who criticises the government should be sacked?
The anti-Lineker pile-on in right-wing circles reminds me, ironically, of the left-wing pile-on in anti-statues circles.
All nuances lost: https://youtu.be/qrcvWiSnvyQ
Many people assume that the Holocaust refers to Hitler’s genocidal campaign, and not to the gradual deterioration of socio-political norms in Germany in the period prior to the Holocaust. Of course,
The early and mid-30s in Germany saw a steady ratcheting up of intolerance, starting with words, progression to repressive laws, book burnings, vandalism etc and ending up with the most systematic genocidal campaign in recorded history.
Lineker is of course not comparing Braverman’s policies to Dachau, but he is saying that they are “not dissimilar” to the earlier degradation of decency which certainly occurred in Germany in the 30s – see:
https://www.jewishgen.org/forgottencamps/general/timeeng.html ,
and which paved away for Hitler’s mass-murder. It’s a wider point about the fragility of standards when politicians start down a mob-pleasing / scapegoating path.
It was a provocative remark, of course, but is the consensus now that anyone who criticises the government should be sacked?
The anti-Lineker pile-on in right-wing circles reminds me, ironically, of the left-wing pile-on in anti-statues circles.
All nuances lost: https://youtu.be/qrcvWiSnvyQ
It’s quite simple really. Lineker has the same right of free speech as anyone else to express his views, however intemperate and puerile these may be. Surely, though, his employer is entitled to suspend or sack him if it considers that his free expression compromises his paid job or the organisation? Millions of public service workers are contractually bound not to make public pronouncements that may bring their organisations into disrepute. Employees have been sacked for far lesser public expressions of opinion. No doubt many similar contracts of employment exist in the private sector.
Lineker enjoys a particularly privileged position given his vast audience, many of whom might be influenced by his views. In a way it is an abuse of privilege (power). If Lineker wishes to use his prominence to communicate his personal views to the nation, he should do the honourable thing and resign. He could then rant publicly ad nauseam without fear of legitimate castigation and thereby exercise his right to free speech. There will be plenty of competent people, attracted by the prospect his monumental salary, to step into his shoes.
The BBC should tighten up its employment contracts so future Linekers are in no doubt about the consequences of abusing their fame and position to impose their worldviews on the general population.
It’s quite simple really. Lineker has the same right of free speech as anyone else to express his views, however intemperate and puerile these may be. Surely, though, his employer is entitled to suspend or sack him if it considers that his free expression compromises his paid job or the organisation? Millions of public service workers are contractually bound not to make public pronouncements that may bring their organisations into disrepute. Employees have been sacked for far lesser public expressions of opinion. No doubt many similar contracts of employment exist in the private sector.
Lineker enjoys a particularly privileged position given his vast audience, many of whom might be influenced by his views. In a way it is an abuse of privilege (power). If Lineker wishes to use his prominence to communicate his personal views to the nation, he should do the honourable thing and resign. He could then rant publicly ad nauseam without fear of legitimate castigation and thereby exercise his right to free speech. There will be plenty of competent people, attracted by the prospect his monumental salary, to step into his shoes.
The BBC should tighten up its employment contracts so future Linekers are in no doubt about the consequences of abusing their fame and position to impose their worldviews on the general population.
Great, he’s gone, with the added bonus of Ian Wright off too!
Great, he’s gone, with the added bonus of Ian Wright off too!
Lineker’s comments comparing the UK to Nazi Germany are offensive and demeaning to all those who suffered under the Nazis. All I can say that he is ignorant of history. I suspect Lineker doesn’t understand what facism means, in theory or practice.
Lineker’s comments comparing the UK to Nazi Germany are offensive and demeaning to all those who suffered under the Nazis. All I can say that he is ignorant of history. I suspect Lineker doesn’t understand what facism means, in theory or practice.
I don’t understand all the outrage myself. Is it an absurd and hyperbolic description? Yes. Is Lineker someone who parrots progressive shibboleths for twitter clout? Yes. But so what? You can just ignore it. People compare ridiculous stuff to Nazi Germany every day. If he made political statements on Match of the Day that’s one thing, but in his private capacity he can say what he likes and others can argue with it.
The most sensible comment I have seen to date with the possible exception of J.Watson’s interventions. It would be interesting to compare the reaction of individual daily newspapers to Gary Lineker’s faux pas to that committed by Andrew Bridgen.
To be honest, Lineker isn’t someone I have been capable of taking seriously for years now, most of his political perspectives are so stereotypical and unimaginative that I can barely muster a raised eyebrow, although I did find it highly comedic when he claimed he had been racially abused for being brown (otherwise known as having a modest sun tan to us mere mortals).
When people take him seriously, they only endow his bland commentary with more weighting than it deserves, and give him attention that he doesn’t merit.
Again. The BBC is not supposed to be BIASED.
and again, if you don’t see my response to your comment above, expecting an organisation whose staff are now mostly political activists of a fairly narrow set of opinions to do more than offer the vaguest lip service to that concept is optimistic to put it mildly.
Groan, unfortunately I feel the need to make this point at multiple points of the comment stream – do you think Sugar/The Apprentice should have been suspended in 2019 when he declared in the Papers ‘Vote Tory’? Do you think BBC chair should be suspended for role in sorting loans for Bojo? Do you think the two examples above pass an impartiality test?
We can criticise Lineker, but jeez we need to be consistent don’t we?
Yes forgive me but 2019 was some time ago and between the pandemic and the war I had other things to worry about. I do not have a TV so I dont know anything about the apprentice. I have answered you above.
Not my argument, and as I’ve said, the BBC is a lost cause in terms of its claims to political neutrality, so I don’t see much point in seeing any of the political virtue signallers as better or worse than any others.
However, B Emery seems to be arguing for consistency rather than cherry picking, which seems a sound argument in theory in my opinion, however futile trying to enforce or maintain them tends to be in reality.
Nobody sticks to the rules any more. That is the problem. Twitter, BBC, likely Facebook etc. all BIASED because they DID NOT STICK TO THEIR POLICY.
Banks – Went tits up and are likely to again because we did not stick to basic economic principles or our own rules when we bailed them out.
Covid – original pandemic Plans were ignored, normal rules and checks were ignored or made less stringent. Again, factual information was censored because people DID NOT STICK TO THE RULES.
Boats – Apparently we have no laws against anyone turning up when they please and just mooching into the country. If we have laws and rules against this. Again. They are not being implemented. Nobody is following them.
Do not even get me started on ukraine or the energy markets. Or the nord stream. Somebody just smashed up the rule book with that one didn’t they.
This is the most basic sh*t.
We can’t even follow or implement our own rules and laws, no wonder we are f*cked.
Nobody sticks to the rules any more. That is the problem. Twitter, BBC, likely Facebook etc. all BIASED because they DID NOT STICK TO THEIR POLICY.
Banks – Went tits up and are likely to again because we did not stick to basic economic principles or our own rules when we bailed them out.
Covid – original pandemic Plans were ignored, normal rules and checks were ignored or made less stringent. Again, factual information was censored because people DID NOT STICK TO THE RULES.
Boats – Apparently we have no laws against anyone turning up when they please and just mooching into the country. If we have laws and rules against this. Again. They are not being implemented. Nobody is following them.
Do not even get me started on ukraine or the energy markets. Or the nord stream. Somebody just smashed up the rule book with that one didn’t they.
This is the most basic sh*t.
We can’t even follow or implement our own rules and laws, no wonder we are f*cked.
Yes forgive me but 2019 was some time ago and between the pandemic and the war I had other things to worry about. I do not have a TV so I dont know anything about the apprentice. I have answered you above.
Not my argument, and as I’ve said, the BBC is a lost cause in terms of its claims to political neutrality, so I don’t see much point in seeing any of the political virtue signallers as better or worse than any others.
However, B Emery seems to be arguing for consistency rather than cherry picking, which seems a sound argument in theory in my opinion, however futile trying to enforce or maintain them tends to be in reality.
Groan, unfortunately I feel the need to make this point at multiple points of the comment stream – do you think Sugar/The Apprentice should have been suspended in 2019 when he declared in the Papers ‘Vote Tory’? Do you think BBC chair should be suspended for role in sorting loans for Bojo? Do you think the two examples above pass an impartiality test?
We can criticise Lineker, but jeez we need to be consistent don’t we?
and again, if you don’t see my response to your comment above, expecting an organisation whose staff are now mostly political activists of a fairly narrow set of opinions to do more than offer the vaguest lip service to that concept is optimistic to put it mildly.
Again. The BBC is not supposed to be BIASED.
The most sensible comment I have seen to date with the possible exception of J.Watson’s interventions. It would be interesting to compare the reaction of individual daily newspapers to Gary Lineker’s faux pas to that committed by Andrew Bridgen.
To be honest, Lineker isn’t someone I have been capable of taking seriously for years now, most of his political perspectives are so stereotypical and unimaginative that I can barely muster a raised eyebrow, although I did find it highly comedic when he claimed he had been racially abused for being brown (otherwise known as having a modest sun tan to us mere mortals).
When people take him seriously, they only endow his bland commentary with more weighting than it deserves, and give him attention that he doesn’t merit.
I don’t understand all the outrage myself. Is it an absurd and hyperbolic description? Yes. Is Lineker someone who parrots progressive shibboleths for twitter clout? Yes. But so what? You can just ignore it. People compare ridiculous stuff to Nazi Germany every day. If he made political statements on Match of the Day that’s one thing, but in his private capacity he can say what he likes and others can argue with it.
BBC declaring ‘Match of the Day in Crisis’ ! Words fail me!
BBC declaring ‘Match of the Day in Crisis’ ! Words fail me!
Absolutely agree that Lineker is a retired footballer and sports celebrity who quite possibly does not a deep knowledge of history. His tweet would probably have gone the way of most of his previous tweets and been regarded as little more than a personal opinion, had it not been blasted all over the front page of the Daily Mail using the emotive word, ‘Nazi’. It is they, the Mail, who are the real culprits in all of this by their attempt at mischief-making. Lineker though seems to be getting a lot of support, it’s looking like the Mail might have shot themselves in the foot over this one, mischief with an outcome opposite to what they thought, as often is the case with opening cans of worms. Serves them right!
Absolutely agree that Lineker is a retired footballer and sports celebrity who quite possibly does not a deep knowledge of history. His tweet would probably have gone the way of most of his previous tweets and been regarded as little more than a personal opinion, had it not been blasted all over the front page of the Daily Mail using the emotive word, ‘Nazi’. It is they, the Mail, who are the real culprits in all of this by their attempt at mischief-making. Lineker though seems to be getting a lot of support, it’s looking like the Mail might have shot themselves in the foot over this one, mischief with an outcome opposite to what they thought, as often is the case with opening cans of worms. Serves them right!
The BBC also has specific rules over the use of social media for all employees, including freelancers.
These are:
“Always behave professionally, treating others with respect and courtesy at all times: follow the BBC’s values. Don’t bring the BBC into disreputeIf your work requires you to maintain your impartiality, don’t express a personal opinion on matters of public policy, politics, or ‘controversial subjects’ (as defined by Ofcom)Don’t criticise your colleagues in public. Respect the privacy of the workplace and the confidentiality of internal announcements”
Does Lineker’s work as a presenter of MOTD really require him to maintain his impartiality or not to express a personal opinion on matters of public policy? Surely not except when on air. As regards the first, he has never shied away from expressing his support of Leicester City and so he should as a lifelong fan like myself.
The BBC also has specific rules over the use of social media for all employees, including freelancers.
These are:
“Always behave professionally, treating others with respect and courtesy at all times: follow the BBC’s values. Don’t bring the BBC into disreputeIf your work requires you to maintain your impartiality, don’t express a personal opinion on matters of public policy, politics, or ‘controversial subjects’ (as defined by Ofcom)Don’t criticise your colleagues in public. Respect the privacy of the workplace and the confidentiality of internal announcements”
Does Lineker’s work as a presenter of MOTD really require him to maintain his impartiality or not to express a personal opinion on matters of public policy? Surely not except when on air. As regards the first, he has never shied away from expressing his support of Leicester City and so he should as a lifelong fan like myself.
Why do people who bleat on about cancel culture always want to cancel other people who they disagree with? Most comments here are not about the article but peak ‘moron Twitter’. Shame, because it’s a good piece.
Why do people who bleat on about cancel culture always want to cancel other people who they disagree with? Most comments here are not about the article but peak ‘moron Twitter’. Shame, because it’s a good piece.
Gary Lineker has done us all a favour by exposing how the international rules we established after 1945 have been manipulated and twisted to become weapons built to destroy the West and its founding peoples.
The madness ends now.
Gary Lineker has done us all a favour by exposing how the international rules we established after 1945 have been manipulated and twisted to become weapons built to destroy the West and its founding peoples.
The madness ends now.
I am new here and rather disappointed. The article is accurate but somewhat pointless. Of course the rise of Nazism has many, many cautionary lessons and abstractions. You don’t have to be an historian to learn from it. Isn’t that the point of teaching & learning about many issues. They are all far more complicated when we get into them. But we can al understand that “othering” of a group is dangerous. I think that is all Lineker was trying to say – or that’s how I read his tweet. Our government is very clearly doing this with the “invasion” and “illegals”.
The whipping up of this so-called issue is all about votes. We need to stop the boats because human beings are dying – not because they are invading or illegal. Everyone can agree that the boat crossings need to be stopped.
As for the many here who say Lineker is thick or not qualified, well how the hell do you know? The man is obviously intelligent and quick witted. He has plenty of time to inform himself about the issues & has taken in two asylum seekers. You don’t have to agree with him but an ad hominem attack is rather weak.
I am new here and rather disappointed. The article is accurate but somewhat pointless. Of course the rise of Nazism has many, many cautionary lessons and abstractions. You don’t have to be an historian to learn from it. Isn’t that the point of teaching & learning about many issues. They are all far more complicated when we get into them. But we can al understand that “othering” of a group is dangerous. I think that is all Lineker was trying to say – or that’s how I read his tweet. Our government is very clearly doing this with the “invasion” and “illegals”.
The whipping up of this so-called issue is all about votes. We need to stop the boats because human beings are dying – not because they are invading or illegal. Everyone can agree that the boat crossings need to be stopped.
As for the many here who say Lineker is thick or not qualified, well how the hell do you know? The man is obviously intelligent and quick witted. He has plenty of time to inform himself about the issues & has taken in two asylum seekers. You don’t have to agree with him but an ad hominem attack is rather weak.
According to the below Independent article Gary left school with two O Levels (or probably three he isn’t sure). He got an ‘Ungraded’ in History which if I recall correctly is less than 5 percent.
So yes he’s not the owner of the sharpest historical mind ever. Somewhat inevitably he refers to his headmaster as a Nazi. His headmaster happens to have been of German descent…
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/passed-failed-an-education-in-the-life-of-gary-lineker-match-of-the-day-presenter-and-former-footballer-1915343.html
Nor do I suppose that he has read much of the extensive literature around 1930’s Germany. I recommend he reads Klemperer’s Diaries if he wants to understand what Nazism and it’s language involved. Just for starters.
Nor do I suppose that he has read much of the extensive literature around 1930’s Germany. I recommend he reads Klemperer’s Diaries if he wants to understand what Nazism and it’s language involved. Just for starters.
According to the below Independent article Gary left school with two O Levels (or probably three he isn’t sure). He got an ‘Ungraded’ in History which if I recall correctly is less than 5 percent.
So yes he’s not the owner of the sharpest historical mind ever. Somewhat inevitably he refers to his headmaster as a Nazi. His headmaster happens to have been of German descent…
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/passed-failed-an-education-in-the-life-of-gary-lineker-match-of-the-day-presenter-and-former-footballer-1915343.html
Somehow I don’t think this conservative government will be sending the illegal immigrants to the gas chambers quite yet!
Somehow I don’t think this conservative government will be sending the illegal immigrants to the gas chambers quite yet!
Well said! I really am sick and tired of hearing these comparisons and am endlessly amazed about the lack of perspective one has to have in order to make them.
Well said! I really am sick and tired of hearing these comparisons and am endlessly amazed about the lack of perspective one has to have in order to make them.
Sure: ‘Holocaust-as-civics-lesson’, as distinct from ‘Holocaust-as-history’ but what about ‘Holocaust-as-me’; or is that a bridge too far?
Presenters should be impartial while presenting on the beeb, but as far as I’m concerned they can say what they like in their own domain. I’m not naive enough to think that everything anyone says on Twitter represents the views of their employer or wage provider. But the BBC has it’s own impartiality rules, Lineker has broken them and now people are calling for him to be sacked. As much as I disagree with pretty much everything Lineker ever says these days, I don’t want him sacked. He’s plainly an idiot. He refuses to acknowledge the difference between a genuine refugee escaping persecution and an economic migrant from Albania. And when the government try (albiet, and will probably fail) to tackle the abuse of our asylum system, he compares them to Nazis. Does anyone actually agree with Lineker on this? For that matter, does anyone believe for one minute that Lineker suffered racial abuse, as he claimed? He’s a clown.
Presenters should be impartial while presenting on the beeb, but as far as I’m concerned they can say what they like in their own domain. I’m not naive enough to think that everything anyone says on Twitter represents the views of their employer or wage provider. But the BBC has it’s own impartiality rules, Lineker has broken them and now people are calling for him to be sacked. As much as I disagree with pretty much everything Lineker ever says these days, I don’t want him sacked. He’s plainly an idiot. He refuses to acknowledge the difference between a genuine refugee escaping persecution and an economic migrant from Albania. And when the government try (albiet, and will probably fail) to tackle the abuse of our asylum system, he compares them to Nazis. Does anyone actually agree with Lineker on this? For that matter, does anyone believe for one minute that Lineker suffered racial abuse, as he claimed? He’s a clown.
The point Lineker was making was that using dehumanising and demonising language has consequences, and you only need to look at history to see the truth of that. It is an irrefutable point, however much politicians and the media try to twist what he said.
Surely, what Gary Lineker said is very much inline with this…
First They Came by Pastor Martin Niemoller
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me.
https://www.hmd.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/First-They-Came-with-new-branding.pdf
If no-one speaks out, then we cannot complain when they turn on us!
just beautifully quoted- Parliament should be made to say this together at the beginning of every sitting!
just beautifully quoted- Parliament should be made to say this together at the beginning of every sitting!
But there hasn’t been any ‘dehumanising’ language. And as far as ‘demonising’ language goes, it’s always been the human traffickers that have been demonised, and possibly the economic migrants (mainly young men, judging by the news footage) who each pay these traffickers several thousands pounds for a ticket to the promised land. Remember, it’s not the genuine refugees who are escaping persecution that this is about. Britain has always welcomed those people and will undoubtedly continue to do so. But let’s put an end to the abuse of our asylum system. Is that such a cruel thing to say? Do we have to be so naive to think that everyone who speeds across the channel from French shores is a victim of persecution? Why is it so wrong to have good, basic border control like most countries? Ask yourself this: why would a genuine asylum seeker pay thousands of pounds to an organised criminal gang to risk their life in a small boat, rather than booking a flight which would be immensely cheaper and safer?
‘Genuine refugees’? You involved in the assessments so that you know the details?
I understand 60% currently having their claims accepted (and remember Braverman, Patel, Johnson etc been in charge during this rate) – albeit that’s partly because they triaged the most likely and did it via an accelerated form filling alone process so slightly distorts in the short term. I think the normal rate is c40%.
Now we can debate whether the threshold for a claim should be harder, but conclusions about who is a ‘genuine’ can’t be fact free.
‘Genuine refugees’? You involved in the assessments so that you know the details?
I understand 60% currently having their claims accepted (and remember Braverman, Patel, Johnson etc been in charge during this rate) – albeit that’s partly because they triaged the most likely and did it via an accelerated form filling alone process so slightly distorts in the short term. I think the normal rate is c40%.
Now we can debate whether the threshold for a claim should be harder, but conclusions about who is a ‘genuine’ can’t be fact free.
But is not Gary Lineker using language purposefully to demonise Conservative Ministers principally Suella Braverman? Whilst also casually and thoughtlessly insulting the memory of those murdered during the Holocaust … who cannot speak for themselves? This insult demands an apology which sadly is not going to come unless he takes some responsibility. I have come to the conclusion that the historical source for the long running debate between the rights of Lefty Lawyers who defend human rights at all costs (ignoring human responsibilities) stems from the European Convention on Human Rights Act 1998. Braverman’s Wikipedia page has some interesting quotes on Rights verses Responsibilities. In Lineker’s case I think he takes his own rights to free speech too seriously without due consideration to the consequences and his responsibilities.
Surely, what Gary Lineker said is very much inline with this…
First They Came by Pastor Martin Niemoller
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me.
https://www.hmd.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/First-They-Came-with-new-branding.pdf
If no-one speaks out, then we cannot complain when they turn on us!
But there hasn’t been any ‘dehumanising’ language. And as far as ‘demonising’ language goes, it’s always been the human traffickers that have been demonised, and possibly the economic migrants (mainly young men, judging by the news footage) who each pay these traffickers several thousands pounds for a ticket to the promised land. Remember, it’s not the genuine refugees who are escaping persecution that this is about. Britain has always welcomed those people and will undoubtedly continue to do so. But let’s put an end to the abuse of our asylum system. Is that such a cruel thing to say? Do we have to be so naive to think that everyone who speeds across the channel from French shores is a victim of persecution? Why is it so wrong to have good, basic border control like most countries? Ask yourself this: why would a genuine asylum seeker pay thousands of pounds to an organised criminal gang to risk their life in a small boat, rather than booking a flight which would be immensely cheaper and safer?
But is not Gary Lineker using language purposefully to demonise Conservative Ministers principally Suella Braverman? Whilst also casually and thoughtlessly insulting the memory of those murdered during the Holocaust … who cannot speak for themselves? This insult demands an apology which sadly is not going to come unless he takes some responsibility. I have come to the conclusion that the historical source for the long running debate between the rights of Lefty Lawyers who defend human rights at all costs (ignoring human responsibilities) stems from the European Convention on Human Rights Act 1998. Braverman’s Wikipedia page has some interesting quotes on Rights verses Responsibilities. In Lineker’s case I think he takes his own rights to free speech too seriously without due consideration to the consequences and his responsibilities.
The point Lineker was making was that using dehumanising and demonising language has consequences, and you only need to look at history to see the truth of that. It is an irrefutable point, however much politicians and the media try to twist what he said.
Mr Rubenstein has introduced a delicate and very painful subject for argument’s sake and has, in fact, offended many people by doing so. This non-story between a truculent BBC that chooses to follow the Home Secretary’s line and a football commentator, by all accounts a reputable one, has no connection to the focus of Mr Rubenstein’s opinion.
Mr Rubenstein has introduced a delicate and very painful subject for argument’s sake and has, in fact, offended many people by doing so. This non-story between a truculent BBC that chooses to follow the Home Secretary’s line and a football commentator, by all accounts a reputable one, has no connection to the focus of Mr Rubenstein’s opinion.
The Holocaust did NOT occur in early 1930s Germany.. what did occur at that time was what is occurring in England today, ie at Government level hate speech against minorities is becoming normalised. Even mentioning the Holocaust is (deliberately?) missing the point.. you might as well blame Chamberlain for WW2!
The Holocaust did NOT occur in early 1930s Germany.. what did occur at that time was what is occurring in England today, ie at Government level hate speech against minorities is becoming normalised. Even mentioning the Holocaust is (deliberately?) missing the point.. you might as well blame Chamberlain for WW2!