Monthly Archives: December 2011

Snobbery with violence

Dalrymple’s latest BMJ column (subscription required) offers an introduction to H.C. Bailey’s “Reggie Fortune” detective stories:
A hat pin plays an important part in the story “The Archduke’s Tea,” in the collection of stories Call Mr Fortune published in 1933. Reggie Fortune, MA, MB, BCh, FRCS, is the detective hero, “a specialist in the surgery of crime.” He was devised by H C Bailey, whose day job, as it were, was leader writer for the Daily Telegraph. I first heard of H C Bailey and Reggie Fortune when I read Colin Watson’s history of British detective fiction, Snobbery with Violence.
Reggie “was of round and cheerful countenance and a perpetual appetite.” He is so neat that “neither his hair nor anything else of his was ever ruffled.” In general, he disapproves of expressions of emotion, even in the most stressful circumstances, as for example when a maid finds the body of a murder victim. He is ostentatiously cynical, on one occasion telling a policeman that he doesn’t like his patients to be murdered, as only he has the licence to kill them.

Big Anti-Tobacco?


Can defenders of tobacco companies be motivated by money? Of course. But anti-smoking advocates? Never!


When does an interest become vested? Generally, I suppose, when it is an interest in something of which you disapprove. No one would suggest, for example, that an oncologist had a vested interest in cancer merely because cancer was the sine qua non of his calling. Only those who derive an income from the sale of carcinogens have interests that are vested.

Of these, the greatest is tobacco: almost by definition, no one can have a vested interest in the reduction of smoking. Or can he?

Read the rest at Pajamas Media (Hat Tip: Jonathan Levy)

Dalrymple (and Vaclav Havel) on North Korea: The Wilder Shores of Marx, excerpt (1991)

After the recent death of Kim Jong Il, many eyes turned again to North Korea and many heads were scratched as people struggled again to comprehend this strange nation.
Some have noted the irony of Kim Jong Il and Vaclav Havel passing away within 24 hours of each other. Havel, of course, did just as much to end totalitarianism and the cult of personality (or at least one implementation of them) as Kim did to preserve them.
So we found the following excerpt from The Wilder Shores of Marx relevant. Dalrymple’s description of a mass rally addressed by Kim Il Sung offers a glimpse into the nature of the regime, and it seems particularly ironic that he quoted Havel in the process.
The festival was opened a few days after our arrival, at a ceremony in the huge stadium that had been built for the Olympics but had never witnessed an Olympic event. Attendance at the opening ceremony, we were several times reminded, was compulsory. We had each received official invitation cards, but RSVP was not written on them. Moreover, each delegation was to wear its ‘uniform’. In our case, a special shirt had been designed, and by happy coincidence it was coloured storm-trooper brown. About half of us were to take part in the march past Kim Il Sung, and the idea of doing so appealed to me immensely: I should relish relating how I marched past Kim in twenty years’ time. Alas, I was not selected as a marcher. 
The ceremony was prepared with military precision. The buses taking the delegations to the stadium left at thirty second intervals, an impressive organisational feat. We arrived in the stadium two hours before the Great Leader was due to make his entry, leaving plenty of time for tension to mount: a technique well developed by another great leader, Adolf Hitler. 
On the far side of the stadium were 20,000 children, each with a series of coloured cards which, by means of instantaneous and co-ordinated changes, produced patterns, portraits, landscapes, and slogans (the latter in English, French, Spanish, Russian, Arabic and Korean). At the very moment the children changed the colours of the cards they exposed to view, they let out a high pitched yell which pierced the sky. The effect was undoubtedly impressive because of its scale and the perfection of its timing; but it made one’s blood run cold.
Even had I not heard from a diplomat that these children were rehearsing for the opening ceremony for five or six months beforehand; that during that time they did not go to school; that often during that period they were to be seen being driven home in army trucks after rehearsals at two and three o’clock in the morning; that such parades and ceremonies were a constant feature of North Korean life; even had I heard none of these things, I should have still concluded from the spectacle itself that its production involved terrible sacrifices. Here was a perfect demonstration of Man as a means and not an end; of people as tiny cogs in an all-embracing machine. I think it true to say that even if there had been a machine available to do the work of those 20,000 children, the regime would still have chosen the children to do it: for what better training could there be for a life of personal insignificance and subordination to orders than participation in such a spectacle? 
The stadium held 150,000 people, of whom only 15,000 were foreigners attending the festival. The rest were North Koreans. As we awaited the arrival of the GL, storms of applause, obviously co-ordinated, would start in the Korean sections of the crowd, and waves of people would stand up and throw their arms in the air, with an effect like wind rushing through wheat. To my horror, the people around me joined in this mindless activity (mindless, but not purposeless). What were they cheering, what were they celebrating, what emotion, or rather pseudo-emotion, were they feeling? I recalled a passage from Vaclav Havel:

Each person somehow succumbs to a profane trivialisation of his or her inherent humanity. . . In everyone there is some willingness to merge with the anonymous crowd and to flow comfortably along with it down the river of pseudo-life. This is much more than a simple conflict between two identities. It is something far worse: it is a challenge to the very notion of identity itself. 

How right Havel was! There was no external compulsion for these people to behave as they did, to abandon their critical faculties, to lose their identity, to be united in a pseudo-mystical communion with a hundred thousand people of whom they knew nothing, absolutely nothing. Yet they could not wait to do so; in fact they rejoiced in doing it, and they felt fulfilled afterwards. Here was a profound rejection of individual freedom by people who were free, and who gratefully rejected freedom’s corollary: individual responsibility, with all its uncertainties and torments. 
….
The playing field area began to fill with what our programme called ‘performers’….Some of the performers were dressed in blue and white gymnasts’ kit; they goose-stepped and gave the special fascist-style Kim Il Sung salute. They kept up the goose-stepping until my legs grew weary: they were the embodiment of Strength Through Joy, or Strength Through Fear, which of course amounts to the same thing. But they were only a small contingent compared with the dancers. I use the words ‘dancers’ because the English language, fortunately, has no word that more accurately conveys the nature of these untold thousands of people. Can robots dance? For this was no mere corps de ballet. The ‘dances’ were military manoeuvres performed to music (3000 musicians, naturally), by male and female soldiers in a variety of garish nylon costumes.
The ‘dances’ they performed bore titles such as Let’s check and frustrate the imperialist moves towards aggression and nuclear war! and Fly, doves of peace! – the latter with the following programme note: 

Doves of peace, fly high up into the blue sky that is clear of the nuclear clouds. Thousands of doves dance as if to cover the sky of the whole world. 

…. 
With everyone in place, the moment arrived for which we had all been waiting – the entry of the Great Leader. It was an impossibility that everyone in the huge stadium saw this momentous event; yet a kind of controlled pandemonium broke out instantaneously all around the stadium. The 50,000 performers on the pitch threw up their hands in a gesture of true subservience before their Pharaoh, and the Korean spectators did likewise. They roared and howled in unison, and jumped up and down collectively for minutes on end; the foreigners, caught up in the atmosphere of hysterical self-abasement, stood up and applauded as if to save their lives. 
I am not by nature brave, or even unconventional, yet in the moment of Kim Il Sung’s entry I decided that I would not stand, not if everyone in the stadium should hurl abuse at me, not even if I were to be threatened with torture or death itself. I was so appalled by the sight and sound of 200,000 men and women worshipping a fellow mortal, totally abdicating their humanity, that I do not think I am exaggerating when I say I should rather have died than assent to this monstrous evil by standing (my mother was a refugee from Nazi Germany). There I sat; I could do no other. 
The terrible obedience of the crowd, uncoerced at least in the immediate sense, indicated the power of the regime, a power that seemed absolute and limitless, that had entered the very recesses of minds, that had eradicated any countervailing force. Yet the power that was so strong
was also brittle. It would only have taken 10,000 people not to have stood up for Kim Il Sung when he entered the stadium – the omission of one small act of obedience – and his power and mystique would have snapped like a twig, to remain broken and irrecoverable. My refusal to stand was but a feeble, isolated gesture; but a tiny crystal thrown into a sea of saturated solution can cause an immense precipitate, and one day such a thing will happen in North Korea and everyone, wise after the event, will marvel that it didn’t happen sooner. 
I wondered once again what it must be like to receive such adulation, calmly to watch 200,000 people worshipping oneself. After many years of it, does one become blase? Does one come to believe that the tribute is merited, or worse still, that it is freely offered and expresses some real emotion? It would have been interesting to have a chat with Kim Il Sung. I recalled the only object of a political personality cult whom I had ever met, some two years previously: Jonas Savimbi. In his ‘Free Land of Angola’, that part of Angola where his forces held sway, there was a cult as grotesque as any. His picture and words were everywhere; his was the only poetry permitted; and when his name was mentioned in a private conversation, the speaker had to stand up while saying it. I asked Savimbi about his cult (he was claiming at the time to be a liberal democrat). ‘If the people love me,’ he answered, ‘how can I stop them?’ 
The adulation of the Great Leader ceased as suddenly as it had started, as if on a hidden signal, as if a certain precise length of time had been set aside for it. Then came the march past of the delegations, 140 of them. It was a tedious procession, but the tedium was not pointless. The Koreans, who were not allowed so much as to draw breath without the permission of their government, must have concluded that these delegations were in some way official, and that therefore their country, North Korea, was presently the centre of world attention. Not surprisingly, the delegations from Guatemala and El Salvador were from the URNG and FMLN respectively, that is to say the guerrilla coalitions. At that time the Iraqis still had to be kept away from the Iranians, and the Scandinavians, to my great admiration, unfurled two banners, one asking why Amnesty International was not permitted to investigate conditions in North Korea (not a difficult question to answer), and another expressing solidarity with the Chinese pro­democracy students who had not long before been massacred in Tiananmen Square. Later, when the Scandinavian marchers returned to the body of the stadium, scuffles broke out as security men tried to wrest the banners away. A few of the Scandinavians were punched and kicked…
When these scuffles broke out, I overheard some of my fellow delegates, the hard-faced communists, express a willingness, indeed an anxiety, to join in – on the side of the North Koreans, ‘to beat the shit out of them’. Discussing among themselves the famous scene when the single student (since executed) stood in front of the column of tanks in Peking and held them up by moral force alone, one of them remarked that if he had been the tank driver he would have driven ‘straight over the bastard and squashed him’. And his face showed that he meant what he said. 
….
It was time for the Great Leader’s speech. The whole ceremony up till now had been so Hitlerian, so megalomanic, that I assumed the Great Leader was a fiery orator, a man able to rouse his listeners to a frenzy of indignation and other enjoyable emotions. I could not have been more mistaken. He spoke like a retired bank manager recalling cheques he had been obliged to bounce. His voice was monotonous, without modulation or intonation: a real bureaucrat’s voice. It was impossible to make out the content of his speech, which was translated simultaneously into English and broadcast over an echoing public address system. I am unable, therefore, to comment on its other qualities, except to say that it seemed not to be a model of concision. 
The rapture with which the GL’s speech was received had nothing to do with what was said: only with who had said it. If he had recited the Pyongyang telephone directory – assuming such a subversive volume exists – the crowd would still have applauded with tears in its eyes. The contrast between the banality of his delivery and the ecstasy of the response was terrifying. 
It was now time for the guest of honour, Comrade Robert Mugabe, to speak. Part of his Zimbabwean army, the brigade used to terrify the Matabele, was trained by the North Koreans. The public address system, which relayed his speech almost simultaneously in English and Korean, rendered it virtually incomprehensible, but such snatches as were heard were purest platitude – education was a good thing, the future of the world belonged to the youth etc. Of course, the fact that he had nothing to say did not prevent him from speaking for a long time. The twentieth century belongs to windbags. 
The applause he received at the end of his speech was polite but without enthusiasm. I suspect that the Great Leader thinks that a clap for somebody else is one less clap for him. 
There was more military dancing, then some lighting effects and fireworks. It was tedious – kitsch on an unimaginable scale. The departure of the Great Leader was accompanied by the same pandemonium as his arrival, and it continued for several minutes after his motorcade must have sped away. 
As we left the stadium, one of the naive communists asked me what I had thought of the opening ceremony.
‘To tell you the truth,’ I said, ‘I’ve never been very keen on fascism.’
Copyright 1991 Anthony Daniels. Reprinted with permission.

Hard Times Again

Dalrymple has written the cover story for the January edition of The American Conservative, a piece on the continuing relevance of Dickens. Subscription required. I’m pleasantly surprised, as usually publications of this type focus more on contemporary political topics and personalities, rather than the social and literary criticism of writers like Dalrymple. We purchased a subscription specifically to read this piece, but unfortunately two weeks is required for activation of the online component of the subscription. So I can’t say any more about the piece than I already have.

H/t Jackson

Why the Irish giant’s skeleton remains a bone of contention

In a piece picked up in both the Daily Telegraph and the Irish Independent (though the version in the Telegraph is longer), Dalrymple asks, “Is it time to honour the last wishes of Charles Byrne, whose skeleton stands in the Hunterian Museum?”
The Victorians did not conceal their prurience about what they did not hesitate to call freaks; they exhibited them in circuses and fairs (from which they derived an income, sometimes a large income); after their death, they pickled them, or parts of them, in bottles, or boiled them down for their skeletons.
Pathology museums everywhere in the country have their share of the anomalies that nature throws up. The Georgians and Victorians would probably have viewed our squeamishness with regard to these matters as symptomatic of our refusal to face an aspect of reality, a hypocritical desire to avert our eyes from the unpleasant.
The controversy now being stirred up about the skeleton of Charles Byrne, the Irish Giant, on display in the Hunterian Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons, would have struck them as absurd and a sign of over-refinement.
H/t Colin and Damo

Are There Health Effects Due to the Financial Crisis?

At Pajamas Media Dalrymple outlines some of the erroneous conclusions in a Lancet piece that blames the financial crisis for some worsening health outcomes in Greece:
In order to prove that “health outcomes have worsened” the authors did not take the infant mortality rate or the overall life expectancy, but rather the suicide rate (up 17 percent between 2007 and 2009). The authors say that “the inability to repay high levels of personal debt might be a key factor in the increase in suicides”; but only by a very highly, almost totalitarian, definition of health could such an inability to repay be deemed a medical condition which it is the province of doctors to treat.
There has also been an increase in HIV infections, half of them brought about by intravenous heroin abuse, which itself rose by 20 percent in 2009:

The latest data suggest that new infections will rise by 52% in 2011 compared with 2010 (922 cases versus 605).

According to the article, there were reports of people deliberately infecting themselves with HIV in order to receive the monthly benefit of 700 euros. Not surprisingly, perhaps, the possibility, the pros and cons, of withdrawing this perverse incentive is not discussed in the article.
H/t Michael P. and Greg

Dalrymple on the tears for Kim Jong-Il

You’ll need a subscription to the Times to read it, but Dalrymple had a piece in that paper yesterday on the ostensible outpouring of grief among North Koreans at the death of Kim Jong-Il. 
He is also quoted in this BBC story on the same topic:
It’s very difficult to know, says Anthony Daniels, a psychiatrist and writer whose pen name is Theodore Dalrymple. He visited North Korea in 1989 as a member of the British delegation to the International Festival of Youth and Students.
“It’s a terrible mixture of fear, terror and apprehension about the future, mass hysteria and possibly genuine grief as well.
“It’s very difficult to know the reality and I think we’ll never know the reality. There are huge cultural barriers anyway and then you have to remember this is a regime where everything that isn’t forbidden is compulsory, so it’s difficult to know what their state of mind really is.”
No expression of emotion was apparent during that 1989 visit he made, he says, except mass hysteria.
“When I was in the huge stadium and the Great Leader [Kim Il-sung] came in, everyone stood up and started worshipping him, quite literally worshipping him and letting out a roar at the same time.
“It might be that these people would be terrified not to do that but at the same time it’s possible that many of them felt a genuine allegiance to the Great Leader.
“After all, when Stalin died, people wept in the streets, although it was less effusive than in North Korea.”
In a very small way, there have been examples in the West when people have felt compelled to express emotions, says Mr Daniels, author of The Wilder Shores of Marx. After Princess Diana died, some people felt afraid to dissent from the mass grieving, but there is a huge difference with North Korea on the level of compulsion involved.
This is a sidebar in the story:
Competitive crying
It’s not easy to produce tears when you’re not really feeling it but you could fake weeping and wailing and this mass hysteria makes it impossible to tell what is real. There’s a kind of arms race situation in which you have to express yourself more and more extremely in order to demonstrate that you are feeling the orthodox emotions. A lot of it is perfectly compatible with acting. That isn’t to say that it is acting, however.
Anthony Daniels, psychiatrist
H/t Michael P. and Michael G.

The Cellular Telephone and its Discontents

It seems we’ve missed a few of Dalrymple’s Pajamas Media pieces, so we will be catching up on those while trying not to inundate our subscribers’ inboxes.
This piece, on the British Medical Journal study concluding that cell phones do not cause tumors, gets off to a fun start:

When I am a pedestrian I am frequently astonished by the carelessness and selfishness of drivers. When I am driving I am frequently astonished by the carelessness and selfishness of pedestrians. Equally astonishing, of course, is the way I can change the behavior of people so profoundly by the mere act of getting in or out of a car.

H/t Michael P.

The Triumph of Reason? Why bad theories never die (2005)

I find the following statement, from this very short 2005 piece in City Journal, a wonderful encapsulation of the stubborn manner in which politically correct ideas spread:
Why do I spend so much time arguing against such obvious rubbish, which should be both self-refuting and auto-satirizing the moment someone utters it? Why not just go and read a good book?
The problem is that nonsense can and does go by default. It wins the argument by sheer persistence, by inexhaustible re-iteration, by staying at the meeting when everyone else has gone home, by monomania, by boring people into submission and indifference. And the reward of monomania? Power.

Monday Books to republish all Anthony Daniels books

Monday Books has made the following announcement on its blog:

Finally, we’ve just agreed with Theodore Dalrymple that we will republish all of his old work, written as Anthony Daniels, in eBook format. This includes classics such as Monrovia Mon Amour, Zanzibar to Timbuktu and The Wilder Shores of Marx: Journeys in a Vanishing World.

There follows an excerpt from Monrovia, Mon Amour of his visit to the murderous dictator Brigadier General Field Marshall Prince Y. Johnson.