China commentary just took a new turn … well several twists and turns, followed by a rapid descent into a mind-bending ideological vortex. Confused? That’s the point. No, really. That’s the point behind Sp!ked Magazine’s campaign against China-bashing in the media.
The campaign became high profile across the British media following editor Brendan O’Neill’s article And the gold medal for China bashing goes to … Since then he has recently weighed in on Bjork’s Shanghai outburst too. But why should articles attacking “yellow peril mongering” be so controversial. When they are veiled attempts to sabotage critics of environmental pollution, global warming and aggressive foreign policy at home.
Guardian journalist George Monbiot exposed the Sp!ked team in his piece Invasion of the Entryists. He details their start working for far-right think tanks such as the Centre for Policy Studies and their gradual infiltration of the media via writers like O’Neill, Mick Hume and Frank Furedi. O’Neill writes in his usual abrasive style using far right libertarian ideas masked as ‘new left’ ideas to bash his opponents especially on his favourite topic: that global warming from emissions is a scam.
Still confused? The political compass goes a little way towards clarifying the matter. Try it out.
Here’s O’Neill himself:
Here, even the most positive thing about contemporary China – its speedy, inspiring economic development – is discussed as something disgusting. What ought to be celebrated as a wonderful leap forward for mankind is seen as a threat both to the Chinese people and to the West itself. No doubt China is a smelly, smoggy, sooty place right now, but that is because it is experiencing the birth pangs of industrialisation. There is a powerful whiff of double standards when well-off greens in comfortable Western societies that were built on Industrial Revolutions moan about Chinese smog.
So what’s the upshot of Sp!ked magazine’s recent output on China? The immediate aim is to frame critics of policies they support as racist or reactionary by narrowing the discourse on popular current issues, such as China. Will we start to see their material creeping in to other China writing around the web-based media? These are card-carrying professional propagandists and they’ve decided to make China their latest battle.
Kind of like Nanheyangrouchuan, except for real.
Pictured: Sp!ked editor Brendan O'Neill



I'm rooting for Sp!ke on this one. Monbiot means well and I'm sure he's a nice guy but he's just so damn lame. Did anyone read Heat?, he had a chapter about travelling without airplanes called 'Love Miles'......weak.
Monbiot is a good jounalist on the whole. His main problem is that he's now one of a couple of token examples at the Guardian that is used to preserve their 'liberal' image.
His environmental articles are surrounded by huge ads for Easyjet and cars etc.
Although ... given the overall atmosphere at the Guardian these days, O'Neill still gets a bashing on Comment Is Free, where they cross post all his stuff.
Rooting for Sp!ked is taking the stance that 'man-made' global warming is just scaremongering and hearsay.
I read Monbiot's articles but not 'heat' ... EPM, what's it like?
Brendan O’Neill is just another egg sucking, ankle grabbing panda licker who chooses to see only the shiny buildings and shopping malls that the CCP wants the world to focus on instead of the massacres, organ harvesting, slave labor and environmental extermination that occurs in the name of "harmonious development".
Ugly, dirty China and its pom panda lickers.
I agree that many activists in the West have used sound bites and have made weak points. However, balancing it all, I welcome the international attention and strict scrutiny of the Chinese government's conducts brought by the Olympics.
About Darfur, the attitude of all the Chinese government officials that I have talked to, senior or not, is simply indifference. They have exactly the same attitude towards the Chinese citizens who are subject to loss of civil liberty, pollution, or violent political persecution. They only react when there is a nasty backlash.
As to the Chinese athletes, it's more complicated. My heart goes out to the young kids who are forced to attend brutal training camps but I also solute the simple desire to work hard and win. While you may think it is simply sport, the Chinese government uses "Olympic strategy" (奥运战略) to describe a long-term project of raising national profile through gold medals.
I read the Monbiot article but did not see any reference to O'Neill anywhere in the piece. Are you making this up or did you get the link wrong?
I don't get it - are you saying Brendan O'Neill is a closet right-winger? This doesn't sound so right wing to me: "Why are we surprised by war lies?" http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4681/
The piece gives the background to Spk!ked's founding team and their purpose for entering the media. O'Neill is part of the team.
They call themselves 'left' to confuse people on purpose. Their views are right-libertarian - by more modern definitions. In reality they are what I would think of as far-right.
Have you ever been to the site "Harry's Place"?