Copying almost verbatim from the thoughts, not of Chairman Mao, but another who thinks he is better and more worthy than just about anyone else; Andrew Marr. I give you slices of the wisdom of the BBC commentator and ‘journalist’
“Teachers are the most effective anti-racist campaigners in the country, this means more than education in other religions, it means a form of political education. Only people who understand the economic forces changing their world, threatening them… have a chance of being immune to the old tribal chants.
And the final answer, frankly, is the vigorous use of state power to coerce and repress…
I firmly believe that repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good.
Stamp hard on certain ‘natural’ beliefs for long enough and you can almost kill them off…
A new Race Relations Act will impose the will of the state on millions of other lives too.”
The Head of the Church in England and Wales, which has been mercifully on the sidelines of this story, says that what’s happened is “shameful”; that abuse was
not deliberately covered up. Archbishop Vincent Nichols is with me now. Good morning, Archbishop.
ARCHBISHOP NICHOLS: Good morning to you.
ANDREW MARR: I know you’re off to conduct Palm Sunday Mass shortly. Can I ask you about the persistent allegations and fears that the Pope in his previous job as Head of the Congregation of the Faith was involved in these cover-ups; that there was a strong desire in the church, as somebody put it, not to wash our dirty linen in public?
ARCHBISHOP NICHOLS: Well as far as the role of Cardinal Ratzinger’s concerned, he was not involved in any cover-up. The case of the priest from America, for example, had already been reported to the police in 1975, and it was over 20 years, 25 years before it came to the attention of the Holy See. Because the role of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is to oversee the canonical legal procedures, not …
ANDREW MARR: I understand. The Head of the Church in Ireland, Cardinal Brady, was there when children who had been abused or people who’d been abused were sworn to secrecy. Do you think his position is now untenable?
ARCHBISHOP NICHOLS: But again, it has to be understood. You know the media has a very proper role in invigilating, in looking at what’s going on and bringing things to the surface, and I totally accept that role of the media. But the media also needs to be a bit more attentive to detail, so the secrecy that is concerning … that’s around the cardinal in Ireland was the secrecy for the process of a trial. It’s like giving victims anonymity in the course of a trial. Now they think …
ANDREW MARR: (over) But they then have to swear secrecy forever after …
ARCHBISHOP NICHOLS: Well …
ANDREW MARR: … which is quite something if you’ve been the victim of something like this.
Andrew Marr:—-I found this, from June 3, 1940, by the American journalist H L Mencken: “The function of a newspaper in a democracy is to stand as a sort of chronic opposition to the reigning quacks. The minute it begins to out-whoopthem it forfeits its character and becomes ridiculous.”
Marr on bloggers as “inadequate, pimpled and single”, and citizen journalism as the “spewings and rantings of very drunk people late at night”.
When asked for the secret of being a good reporter, number one rated political reporter Andrew Marr told Press Gazette: “I think as with any kind of journalism, curiosity is essential. You also need a basic fair-mindedness. You have to accept that most of the people in the political game have mixed motives but part of their motives are good ones and they do want to make the world better, whether they are on the right, centre or left.
Andrew the Good:- “A good journalist treats the business of politics, if not everything that happens in politics, with a certain amount of respect – which I try to do.”
Andrew Marr this morning:- “I did not come into journalism to go around gagging journalists. Am I embarrassed by it? Yes. Am I uneasy about it? Yes.” But he added: “I also had my own family to think about, and I believed this story was nobody else’s business. I still believe there was, under those circumstances, no public interest in it.”
But Mr Marr added that the use of injunctions seemed to be “running out of control”. He said: “There is a case for privacy in a limited number of difficult situations, but then you have to move on. They shouldn’t be forever and a proper sense of proportion is required.”