Reading time: 22 minutes.
When I was at university I had a regular column in the student newspaper. Called The Terry Freedman View, the articles in my column were really intended to be a light-hearted take on life, and academic life in particular. Quite a few of them were festooned with pretty impressive-looking (but ultimately meaningless) formulae to help my fellow students navigate the vicissitudes of life at uni.
Like now, I tended to not delve into the murky world of politics. However, I was getting quite fed up with the kind of casual racism, sexism and general (in my view) stupidity in evidence all around us, every day.
With that in mind I invented a character, Derek Blunt, under whose by-line I would write articles that took commonly-espoused views to the extreme, to show how ridiculous they were.
There were two rather disquieting things that happened though. In my first article I railed against foreigners, the lower classes, striking workers and women – in other words, the whole thing was dripping with racism, elitism, and sexism (not to say outright misogyny). Disconcertingly, a few days after the article was published, an article appeared in one of the Sunday newspapers stating almost identical views, but seriously. It had been written by some duke or other. I even thought at first that perhaps it was a spoof, and that the writer had come across my article and ripped it off. But no, it was really meant to be taken seriously.
The other disconcerting event was as follows. When my article came out, a friend of mine was sitting in one of the student cafés. A girl sitting opposite him was reading my article, and came to the bit where I stated that women are inferior to men. She slammed the paper down on the table and walked out, muttering about “not reading any more of this idiot”. Had I known who she was I’d have apologised to her: it hadn’t occurred to me that someone could take this kind of idiocy seriously.
One of the things that strikes me about that now, is that satire is meant to poke fun at ridiculous statements. It’s meant to say: here is the logical (or one logical) extension of what you’re saying. But sometimes the satirical itself becomes the norm, so much so that some people, like the girl I mentioned, mistake satire for the real thing. It’s almost like a perverse version of “Be careful what you wish for.”
It seems to me that for satire to work it has to walk a fine line between being so close to reality that it’s not funny, and so far-fetched that it’s not credible. As for the question posed in the title of this article, satire almost is dead because it’s hard to come up with anything so outlandish that it could never be true. The latest manifestation of this phenomenon is the slapping of a trigger warning on Orwell’s 1984.
Anyway, I thought you might find the following set of satirical articles interesting. Enjoy.
The emergence of Blunt
Letter to student newspaper
I was one of the people Derek Blunt would have referred to as a long-haired layabout. Terry Freedman, circa 1970
Derek Blunt’s first appearance in the public sphere was in a letter to the student newspaper. The newspaper had recently run a series of articles about the various strands of the British Left. The articles were factual rather than partisan. I sent the letter in under the name “Derek Blunt”, without telling the editor (at first) that it was written by me. He thought it was so over-the-top that he published it, not on the Letters page, but right at the very end of the last page of the edition, under the heading “And…”. It’s also worth mentioning, perhaps, that at the time I had long hair and regarded myself as a socialist. Incidentally, the newspaper was free, and didn’t have a subscription model.
Here’s the letter:
Sir,
I should like to protest at the recent articles on the British Left. These articles took a favourable view of the most obnoxious part of the political spectrum, by which I mean those scum who would like to see all the values of our society demolished in a single thrust. I am afraid I cannot share your opinion regarding these subversive, long-haired illiterates, and am therefore cancelling my subscription to your so called "newspaper".
I remain, Sir, your most obedient servant,
Derek Blunt (Mr.)
The Derek Blunt letter
The Terry Freedman View
A short while after the letter had been published, and I had admitted to being its author, I wrote the first Derek Blunt article. Here it is:
I have decided this week to give up my space to Mr. Derek Blunt, leader of the Boshist[i] Party, who I believe has some very workable ideas to get Britain moving again.
Mr. Blunt:
Not many people will have heard of the Boshist Party so allow me to outline some of its policies and its organisation. The Boshist Party, formed in 1969, is a body of liberal-minded men who believe that the time has come for the British people to make a choice between Boshism and the three main parties. All decisions in the Party are taken by myself on a democratic basis, by which I mean that anyone who disagrees with my decisions is free to resign[ii]. My party is dedicated to feudalism, for this was the period in our once great history when the boss was the boss. In those days we did not have leeches on our society striking and having the effrontery to ask for a living wage. There would be no need for people such as Harold "High and Mighty" Wilson[iii], or Edward "Mr. Midshipman" Heath[iv], to pass bills curbing strikes[v] if we lived in a feudalistic society.
But to move on, since I have only enough space to outline our policies without going into depth.
High flown
We have heard high-flown economic arguments about why we should join up with foreigners, by which I mean the Common Market[vi]. What we have not been told is that our great culture will be ruined once we join these illiterates. Our schoolchildren will be subjected to reading such "authors" as Voltaire, Dostoyevsky[vii], and the works as of other such degenerates. The only good point about the Common Market is that prices will increase dramatically, forcing those lethargic members of our society, who hang around shipyards all day doing nothing[viii], to work to maintain their standard of living. Moreover, profits will soar, and we will restore the aristocracy in this fair land.
However, we do not need to join the Common Market to achieve this, sharing our profits with backward countries such as West Germany and the U.S.A. If we did it ourselves, we could set up regional development camps, where lazy "workers" could be employed in Public Works Schemes, living in institutions based on those outlined in the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834[ix], a piece of legislation far ahead of its time.
Education
Education is also a topical issue. Our children are taught of the acts of such ruthless revolutionaries as Oliver Cromwell, and encouraged to read the poetry of Milton[x], which was nothing more than a front behind which he could carry on revolutionary activities. Our children are also taught the sayings of people such as John Stuart Mill, who advocated subversive ideologies such as freedom.
Now, some people may call Boshism "Fascism". This is a gross distortion of the facts, for even the people who are reading this now will have enough intelligence to realise we are liberal-minded, devoted to the cause of Britain and Britain alone, with everything else taking second place.
If anyone wishes to join our Party, we can give him (no females are permitted to join on the basis that they are inferior to men) a prominent post, selling leaflets. In the next edition of this so called "newspaper", I hope, if my colleagues have once again persuaded Mr. Freedman to give up his space, to prove we are not racialists, and to outline our policy on compulsory repatriation[xi].
Mr. Derek Blunt, High President of the Boshist Party of Great Britain.
The Terry Freedman View
Once again, I have the pleasure of handing my space over to the eminent Mr. Derek Blunt, High President of the Boshist Party, Mr. Blunt:
Never having been one to beat about the bush, I'll get down to brass tacks. We often hear long-haired layabouts complaining about the forthcoming exams. "They are not fair", they say. “They are unnecessary".
Now, I will agree with this last statement. In days gone by, when only the top families could send their sons to university, there was no need for exams. The cream of the country was studying at university. We had none of these working class paupers getting in under false pretences. But nowadays, what with the lower classes rising above their station, in spite of warnings by such great men as Pope and Soame Jenyns[xii], exams are necessary for separating the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Exams are the only way whereby we can show these people that they are not intelligent enough to be at university.
I will even agree with the first statement, that exams are unfair. Why should middle class boys be subjected to the humiliation of a progress test? Why should they be examined under the same criteria as these scum which I have mentioned? The Boshist Party has a two-point plan which it will put into practice when it gets into power:
1. No person whose parents earn over £10,000[xiii] p.a. will be examined.
2. No person whose parents earn under £10,000 p.a. will be admitted to university.
Vote Boshism. Remember, Austin Mini good, Rolls Royce better.
While we are on the subject of higher education, I am alarmed at the rise in the number of women students at university. Don't these inferior people realise that their place is in the home? Women were made to be mothers and housewives. If we allow them to educate themselves they will demand more rights and we will be faced with a Women's Lib movement which will do worse damage than burning their undervestments[xiv]. In the old days, women respected men, and knew their place. We must not let future generations look back on men of the 20th century and say, "This was their weakest hour[xv]."
All points mentioned here are expanded in our manifesto entitled "Return to Normalcy[xvi]" (£20.36p[xvii]). Any enquiries regarding membership of the Boshist Party will be considered, provided either a bank statement or a Mensa membership card is enclosed. (N.B. membership is open to men only).
The Terry Freedman View
…
And now, I should like to hand you over to Mr. Derek Blunt, who, you may remember, is the High President of the Boshist Party.
Before I continue with the Boshist Party policy on compulsory repatriation, I should like to say a few words about letters I am receiving. I have received derogatory letters from certain people. I strongly advise these people to desist from these subversive activities, unless they are insured for medical expenses. Those people who have written supporting my party may apply for honorary membership thereof.
To continue from the last issue of "Gazette[xviii]" with no further ado: I am not against foreigners (even though some of them are the modal value of our community[xix]). But what I am against is people who aren't English. These foreigners have totally different cultures from our great English culture, and therefore it is in their own interests to be allowed to go back to their countries of origin, where they will fit in extremely well with no prejudice directed against them.
Unfortunately, as I have said before, I have little space to go into great details about our policies.
I said in the last issue that women are inferior to men, and should like to elaborate upon this. The woman's place is, traditionally, in the home. Housekeeping is the sphere in which women are happiest, and so we would be doing them a favour by forcing them to stay in the home, unlike the breadwinners of the family who would work at least a fifteen hour day to supplement the family's income, which could then be reduced by high taxation in order to keep the poor in their place.
Our views on sex education are equally as liberal, for the Boshist Party believe that children should be free to learn about sex for themselves, thus we are against sex education in any shape of form.
Why is Boshism a better choice than the other parties? Because we are dedicated to freedom, such as the right to make huge profits, the right to sack workers in times of adversity, the right to have Public School[xx] education, and other rights which the man in the street is denied under the present system. Moreover, unlike other would-be dictators, I am not only extremely intelligent, but also completely modest and would not be overcome by megalomania.
Let feudalism get things moving again. Join the Boshist Party now by sending in this coupon[xxi].
The Boshism form
I hoped you enjoyed reading these diatribes articles. Needless to say – I hope – the views expressed by Derek Blunt bear absolutely no relation to my own. — or, rather, they are completely opposite to my own!
Endnotes
[i] The name Boshist is derived from the word “bosh”, which means rubbish or nonsense.
[ii] Twenty five years after I’d written this, the headmaster of a school I’d just joined as Head of Department called me into his office and said “I run a democracy here, by which I mean that you’re free to get a job somewhere else if you don’t agree with my decisions.”
[iii] Harold Wilson was Leader of the Opposition at the time, and had a reputation (I’m not really sure why) of being quite big-headed. At one point, when Macmillan was Prime Minister, Wilson said that when he was young he was so poor that he had to walk to school without boots on. Macmillan replied,
"If Mr Wilson did not have boots to go to school, it is because he was too big for them!"
[iv] Edward Heath was the Prime Minister, and loved sailing. He even had his own yacht.
[v] In 1971 the government created the Industrial Relations Act, intended to make strikes harder to take place.
[vi] The Common Market was the precursor to the European Union.
[vii] Dostoyevsky was Russian, but had travelled widely in Western Europe.
[viii] This is a reference to the Dockers’ Strike of 1972.
[ix] This legislation established workhouses, to which people were sent if they were too poor to stand on their own two feet. The conditions were extremely harsh, intended to deter people who theoretically could work from wanting poor relief.
[x] Milton was a republican (i.e. anti-monarchist) who supported Cromwell (to some extent),.
[xi] The politician Enoch Powell advocated a policy of voluntary repatriation whereby immigrants from the Commonwealth would be given assistance to return to their countries of origin. The statement here about compulsory repatriation was an allusion to the proposal about voluntary repatriation, but Powell did not advocate that, and the Conservative Party manifesto at the time explicitly stated that people would not be forced or harassed to leave the country against their will.
[xii] Both Pope and Soame Jenyns believed, if my memory serves me well, that poverty was OK because it was all part of the great scheme of things.
[xiii] Equivalent to around £145,000 today.
[xiv] See Bra-burning in the 1960s
[xv] Borrowed from Churchill: “Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth[e] last for a thousand years, men will still say, 'This was their finest hour.'”
[xvi] This expression was intended to conjure up an image of an idealised past, as espoused by Harding.
[xvii] Equivalent to around £290 today.
[xviii] The student newspaper was called Guild Gazette.
[xix] One politician said that a particular ethnic group were, or were about to become, the modal value of the community. (I don’t want to be more specific than that because, although I am fairly certain of who said it, and which group he was referring to, I am not 100% sure and I can’t find it on the internet.) It was a statement that seemed designed to sound like there were more of that particular group than native English people. However, all that “modal value” means is that there are more instances of one particular group of whatever it is you’re talking about than any other individual group. For example, if there are 10 English people, 10 Scots, 10 Irish, 10 Welsh and 11 new immigrants, the modal average (or modal value) will be 11, because there are more new immigrants than there are people in any other category. But it’s clear from these figures that they are actually very much in the minority.
[xx] In the UK, public schools are the ones that parents pay for in fees, i.e. they are private schools!
[xxi] The £10,000 income was equivalent to around £145,000 today.