Delingpole on Friday: Et tu, Caitlin Moran

One of the great things about my Bogpaper column up until now is that I haven’t broached the topic I write about pretty much every day on my Telegraph blog, every other column in the Spectator, and probably one out of every three articles I write elsewhere?

Climate ****ing change.

I would spell out the “fuck” except that my strict, disciplinarian editor Jan doesn’t like it. She thinks it unnecessarily offends certain readers and perhaps she’s right. But that doesn’t stop me thinking that “Climate Change” is a ****ing pain in the arse. Which is why, till now, I’ve reserved my Bogpaper slot for more grabby topics like Jimmy Savile and the BBC, the unutterable wankiness of Graham Linehan, the inevitability of global economic collapse, and so on.

If I could, I’d stop writing about climate change for good. It’s been a complete career killer for me. Once I used to be known as a generalist – one of those freewheeling, free spirit journalists you could rely on to turn his hand to almost any subject. But now I’m known, not just in Britain, but across the world as Mr Denier. Or Mr Totally Evil Denier. Or Mr Baby-Eating Gaia-Raping Scumbag In The Pay Of Big Oil Denier. Or worse.

It has made me much, much more famous than I was. But not necessarily in a good way.

Not only does the Climate Change Ghetto mean I earn less money than I used to but it also means that every day I get bags and bags of hate mail (well, the electronic version thereof: emails or Tweets) from strangers, and almost-strangers, and even friends telling me how loathsome I am.

One Tweet that particularly hurt me the other day was from Caitlin Moran. I like and admire Caitlin, a lot. We have loads of mutual friends; she took me out for an evening’s drinking once and we had a reasonably fun time together; plus, of course, she’s unquestionably one of the funniest, most fluent journalists of her generation.

Caitlin’s speciality – in so far as she has one – is pop culture. No one writes better about the immeasurably trivial. And I mean that as no criticism. A journalist’s first duty is to be read. A journalist you’re dying to read no matter what topic they turn their hand to – even if it’s trash TV programmes you’ve never watched or girlie fashion issues you wouldn’t, as a rule, be remotely interested in – is a mighty journalist indeed. On TV, fashion, music, social mores, celebrities, food, drink, sex and so on, there’s really no other writer who can touch her.

What Caitlin tends not to tackle, though, is the serious stuff – politics, especially. I envy her this. Dearly would I love to be so totally complacent about the state of the economy, the corruption of our political system, the greed and incompetence of our politicians, the ever growing threats to our liberty that I could spend the rest of my life writing nostalgic tributes to the SodaStream or hilarious digressive articles about One Direction’s haircuts.

But I just can’t. I’ve seen too much and I know too much. It’s a red pill, blue pill thing. Caitlin is living in the world at the beginning of the Matrix – the one that looks like the superficial world she writes about so amusingly and comfortingly. I’m living in the one Neo gets to see after he’s taken that pill: the one that reveals it to be merely the illusory construct of a diabolical engine.

I’m making no moral judgement here. As in The Matrix, the choice is ours. Caitlin – and many, many other people, if not most people, which is one reason why her writing appeals to a much larger audience than mine – has gone one way, I’ve gone the other. What I will say, though, is that it ill behoves someone living out the blue pill fantasy to presume they know better than someone who has chosen the more difficult, demanding path of the red pill.

This, though, is what Caitlin did this week. I’m quite sure she didn’t mean to be vindictive. All she did was retweet a link to a New Statesman article accusing me of having got my facts completely and utterly wrong in a piece I’d written about corruption, dishonesty and ineptitude at the Met Office. Which, of course, meant that Caitlin was effectively endorsing the New Statesman’s view – and sharing it with her 352,000-plus followers.

I replied to the New Statesman article – itself a regurgitation of a self-justificatory post the Met Office had put up on its website – in a blogpost at the Telegraph. Did Caitlin retweet it to her 352,000-plus followers for the sake of balance or old acquaintance?

Not as far as I can see from a trawl through her timeline. But then, why should she? It’s clear from her decision to retweet that New Statesman article that she has already made up her mind who’s right on the climate change issue. How does she know? Because it’s just a known fact, isn’t it? James Delingpole is wrong about climate change because a) he’s right wing, b) he’s not a “climate scientist” c) he doesn’t really mean this stuff anyway, he just says it because he’s trolling for hits or because he’s paid by Big Oil.

Now there are lots of different types of people from whom I can more or less tolerate this kind of ill-informed character assassination: junk scientists on the global warming gravy train; green activists; wind farmers; anyone in the “sustainability” industry; celebrities with science degrees who want to flaunt their intellectual credentials. I don’t enjoy the hassle they give me but I accept it as part of that unfortunate phenomenon noted by Upton Sinclair: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

But when it comes from someone like Caitlin Moran it has equivalent effect of being carpet bombed by the enemy during the war. Rather than break your spirit – as it’s supposed to do – it  just makes you more defiant. You think: “Well I can take it from Sir Paul Nurse – he’s a lefty wanker; and I can take it from George Monbiot, he’s a barking mad eco-loon; and I can take it from the Guardian’s environment desk because they’re all going to be out of work soon. But when someone who you’d always thought of as a sweet, good-natured, funny, quintessentially apolitical, and basically on your side joins in the witch hunt, you say to yourself: “That’s the final straw. This is Total War here and I’m fighting to the last man and the last round.”

Caitlin, in case you’re reading this, let me explain where I’m coming from in terms you’d understand. Vajazzle.

Vajazzling – as well you know, because this is fertile Caitlin Moran column territory, is a sparkly way of decorating your vagina with shiny crystals and things.

There’s no doubt about it. That’s what vajazzling is.

But suppose Dara O’Brian were to perform an hilarious topical news comedy item, disputing this. Would it make your known definition of vajazzling incorrect? Of course it wouldn’t.

What, though, if handsome, pouty-mouthed, perma-smiley boy band astronomer Professor Brian Cox were also to dispute your definition on one of his stargazing TV programmes. Suppose he were to declare that Vajazzle was nothing to do with vaginal decoration and never had been – but was in fact the third largest asteroid in the Crab Nebula. Would that invalidate what you know to be true?

Of course it wouldn’t.

Ah, but wait. What if Giles Coren were to pooh-pooh your definition of Vajazzle in a witty column? What if the 10 O’Clock Live team were dispute it? And the president of the Royal Society? And Hugo Rifkind? And every one of your other celebrity mates and drinking partners and Times colleagues – even ones with PhDs and impressive shit like that?

Would that make your definitions of Vajazzle and Vajazzling wrong?

Nope. Despite all this pressure from diverse sources, despite all the mockery and vilification you got on Twitter, you Caitlin Moran I know would remain defiant to the end. You wouldn’t surrender to the opposition, just for a quiet life, because it was a small matter of no importance. You’d fight fight fight to the bitter end because you’d find it so incredibly, utterly, gobsmackingly irritating, would you not, Caitlin, to have a bunch of celebrity wankers bullying you for the crime of failing to fit in with their celebrity groupthink.

Well that’s how it is with me and Climate Change, Caitlin. I’m as right about Climate Change as you are about Vajazzle being a sparkly way of decorating vaginas.

Obviously, for you to be able to see why I’m right would take you rather more reading than I suspect you have the time for.

But just in case you’re interested I’ve written a great, idiot’s guide called Watermelons.

It’s possibly not quite as brilliantly funny as anything you’ve ever written. But it does have its moments. And the science is all bang-on. No, really.

45 Comments on “Delingpole on Friday: Et tu, Caitlin Moran”

  1. Brian the Rhetor
    January 13, 2013 at 2:34 pm #

    Somehow it’s never previously occurred to me that CAGW has an equivalence with vaginal decoration, but now you come to mention it it does often get cited in order to enhance the public image of … well never mind.
    I devote an entire chapter in my book on public speaking (available in e-edition from all good Amazons) to the subject of parallels. I even offer an example or two. If only I’d read this article first.

  2. Losferwords
    January 13, 2013 at 3:53 pm #

    I was going to leave a comment but I don’t have a book to plug.

  3. Masked Rabbit
    January 13, 2013 at 4:19 pm #

    Chin up Big Guy your doing fine. We don’t all hate you and the truth will out in the end.

  4. Andrew
    January 13, 2013 at 5:20 pm #

    Vaginal decoration? Not to be sniffed at, I suppose.

  5. AlecM
    January 13, 2013 at 6:01 pm #

    A prophet is rarely appreciated in his own time. As for the Moron, 10 million such heads filled with intellectual candy-floss do not a new scientific theory make……

  6. Richard Evans (@richarevans1)
    January 13, 2013 at 6:06 pm #

    Excellent article.

    Isn’t it annoying when people who aren’t climate scientists say James can’t be right because he isn’t a climate scientist? All without a trace of irony too.

  7. JeffinLondon
    January 13, 2013 at 6:16 pm #

    Never heard of the woman, but a Google image search revealed many photos, many displaying a massively huge gob. Large enough to insert and eject various objects including feet and perhaps other fleshy appendages as well. Clearly, she can be bought.

    Climate change denying remains socially unacceptable in most circles. Like saying the ‘n’ word in polite company surfacing the globull worming scam at a dinner party relegates one to the corner chair far from the beautiful people hogging the spotlight.

    But hang in their James we’ve got the scamsters on the run. The tipping point is near. Kyoto is finished, China, India and the USA are laughing at the mere idea of crippling their economies, temps have been flat for 16 years and now we hear for at least another 5.

    The wheels are coming off as we speak. So in another few years once it’s well and truly dead, you can enter the witness protection program, get a new identity and go back to writing books and making some proper money, buy some land and be paid millions for erecting wind mills like the filthy rich PM’s farther-in-law!

  8. Gareth
    January 13, 2013 at 6:18 pm #

    The dam is cracking…belief in CAGW is evaporating. Sooner or later, even the mainstream media will notice.

    • Marc Moron (@MarcMoron)
      January 14, 2013 at 1:34 pm #

      That’s what Creationists always say. They’re even building a new Ark in Kentucky getting ready for the flood.

      • Caroline Yull
        February 25, 2013 at 2:38 pm #

        Marc Moron: What a lovely (and very apt!) last name!

  9. Camille
    January 13, 2013 at 6:25 pm #

    I’d call this a rhetorical pimp slap via back-handed compliments. Loved it!

  10. Caitlinblows
    January 13, 2013 at 7:29 pm #

    With friends like Caitlin who needs enemies. Her writing is as shallow as her empty head and shallow personality. She is Vajazzle incarnate.

  11. John Galt
    January 13, 2013 at 7:45 pm #

    This reeks of bitterness on JD’s part that he isn’t very popular

    • Ann H
      January 13, 2013 at 9:45 pm #

      Given that any post on his blog attracts 1000s of comments I don’t think this is true. He’s probably more bitter about the fact that Big Oil have failed to pay him but happily pour money into Global Warming ad campaigns.

    • Jingleballix
      January 14, 2013 at 11:16 am #

      No it doesn’t…………and anyway, he IS popular.

    • Ethan
      January 14, 2013 at 1:25 pm #

      Well he’s popular with me. I think he’s right and quite plucky actually. Huzzah for James!

  12. Leo
    January 13, 2013 at 9:50 pm #

    Stay with it James, you’re right and you and I and many many more non brainwashed people know it so stay strong and eventually you will be vindicated.

    I admire your tenacity…

  13. Colin Miles
    January 14, 2013 at 3:00 am #

    Windfarms are Gaia Vajazzle. Or if, as I suspect, Gaia is a tranny, the windfarms are stubble.

  14. Mac McCubbin
    January 14, 2013 at 3:27 am #

    If you’re waiting for a reasoned response Jimbo, don’t hold your breath…

  15. Peter
    January 14, 2013 at 10:53 am #

    I’m sure Caitlin is well informed about the finer points of climate change having discussed it at length with Kim Kardashian or possibly read it on a Max Clifford press release.

  16. yorksranter
    January 14, 2013 at 11:10 am #

    Shorter: “Waaaahh.” Slightly less shorter: “Bitches ain’t shit.”

  17. Simon Roberts
    January 14, 2013 at 11:34 am #

    Take heart! Your critics will always be vicious towards you because you are challenging their world view. Many people find this very uncomfortable and react violently against it.

    If these people were to be open-minded about the evidence then they would soon reach the conclusion that AGW is a scam perpetrated by vested interests, but that would mean that the Government and the media have been lying to them. This is a leap that most people aren’t prepared to make.

    If you accept that the institutions that you grew up believing have been misleading you about AGW, then what else have they been lying about? Everything that you thought you knew is now open to question.

    Most people would prefer to take the blue pill. Even though deep down they suspect that there is something fishy going on, it isn’t worth turning their whole world upside down over.

    The warmists know this perfectly well. That’s why it’s so important to present one consistent media story to the public. Any suggestion that the matter is open to discussion will move the subject out of people’s “world view” into a realm where they are invited to make up their own minds – and then they will come to the “wrong” conclusion.

    This is why the work of people like yourself is so important. You aren’t winning any popularity contests among the useful idiots, but would you rather be remembered as a friend to the likes of Caitlin Moran and her Vajazzle or someone who did what an honest journalist should do and “speak truth to power” (as our American friends say)?

    • John Richardson
      January 14, 2013 at 10:37 pm #

      Well said.

  18. graham smith
    January 14, 2013 at 11:46 am #

    This article has something about it .Takes me back to the days when being credible was closely connected with being correct as opposed to merely fashionable.Climate change nutters??? Vaginas??? Its possible

  19. therealguyfaux
    January 14, 2013 at 1:53 pm #

    Not perhaps strictly on point, James, but I’ve always seen a curious fact about those who scream loudest on the AGW issue– since what they’re arguing is that THE world is falling apart, they don’t want anyone arguing against them possibly to succeed, because their OWN world would fall apart. Strange, that.

  20. Dave Wright
    January 14, 2013 at 2:44 pm #

    Does James Delingpole’s word processor not auto-correct grammatical errors?

    • James Delingpole
      January 14, 2013 at 5:37 pm #

      Nor, unfortunately, does it edit out obstreperous smart-arses from the comments below, Dave.
      If you’ve a problem, why not spit it out? Quite happy to correct if it’s worth correcting.
      What you’ve got to remember is that this is like a blog post and therefore subject to the cavalier casualness that perhaps you won’t find in old school newspapers, not least because we can’t afford subs and stuff.

    • Robertson
      January 18, 2013 at 11:47 pm #

      English Gramma is an argot invented by the educational aleet, It’s arcane slang whose only purpose is to suppress the free speech of the masses. I really do struggle with it, only to be sneered at by free-speech deniers like you.

    • Dick Droxford
      February 21, 2013 at 10:52 am #

      Well said Sir! ..because grammatical structure was the key thing which James wanted us all to get from this piece.

  21. Chris Enkia
    January 15, 2013 at 4:36 pm #

    Caitlin is actually an extremely political writer. Perhaps you missed her excellent and hugely popular book on feminism: ‘How to be a Woman’? The difference between her book and — say, ‘Watermelons’ — is that her prose is sparkly, witty, and, importantly, intelligent. That is why she has a ton of followers on Twitter. And it’s why you, James, don’t.

    • wersdfzxc
      August 4, 2013 at 12:27 pm #

      Yeah, that’s the idea in this blog that I find really really weird, that Caitlin Moran could ever be described as apolitical. I have read a lot of her stuff and always found a lot of it to be extremely political; she just tends to make her points through humour and anecdotes, but that’s often the most effective way to make a point.

      I don’t have any argument with the other point in the blog – that it’s possible to believe something that’s against the general consensus without being crazy or even wrong.

      But to describe Moran as apolitical just seems a little surreal.

  22. hereticisright
    January 16, 2013 at 8:41 am #

    You’re brilliant as usual James. You said: “A journalist’s first duty is to be read. A journalist you’re dying to read no matter what topic they turn their hand to”. You are such a journalist yourself. Being a hate-figure for lefties isn’t bad either, because it proves your soundness.

    I’d like to add that Simon Roberts’ comment is excellent. Most people have invested lots of their trust in institutions like the BBC or the (unspeakable) WWF, during their whole adult life. They’re not going to throw it all away just like that.

    Finally, I’ve said it before, and Im saying it again: Your Watermelons book is a must-read for everyone.

  23. Robertson
    January 19, 2013 at 12:03 am #

    You are a breath of fresh air James, A bit caustic for your own good on occasions but we realists are glad you’re in there fighting for the truth.
    I suspect Caitlin is chewed to bits at the moment, unsure of what she did wrong. It’s the timing though isn’t it?
    Now is the worst possible time to support the other view when the ‘other view’ is collapsing all around us.

  24. rightwinger
    February 18, 2013 at 6:01 pm #

    What a massive bell-end you are Delingpole. Private Eye are spot on.

    • Dick Droxford
      February 21, 2013 at 10:54 am #

      So clearly “Rightwinger” is a massive misnomer. In what way is he a “bell-end” of whatever proportion?

    • jdseanjd
      February 25, 2013 at 7:40 am #

      Private eye are now a bought & paid for member of the MSM.
      Almost as traitorous as the BBC.

  25. Unconvincing Pseudonym
    August 4, 2013 at 11:15 am #

    What’s the difference between Sir Paul Nurse PRS PhD and a vajazzle? One’s an overdecorated c**t and the other’s…

  26. Daily Nanna (@Nanna_Baps)
    August 4, 2013 at 11:35 am #

    “Vajazzling – as well you know, because this is fertile Caitlin Moran column territory, is a sparkly way of decorating your vagina with shiny crystals and things.

    There’s no doubt about it. That’s what vajazzling is.”

    Sorry to take issue, but in fact “vajazzling” is decoration of the vulva, not the vagina. Shoving the rhinestones out of sight in the vagina would be pointless, as the intended audience would be unable to view them without a speculum, and also injurious, as to the unwary they could prove the equivalent of vagina dentata, Ouch.

    Although it’s a matter of female genital anatomy which I would expect most adults to know, I’m making no moral judgement about you having your facts wrong again, or about you having a free swing at Moran and Linehan on Twitter silence day. Keep taking the pills and if you look in the dictionary you will discover that the matrix is female reproductive anatomy, too

    • Unconvincing Pseudonym
      August 4, 2013 at 12:59 pm #

      Eve Ensler made the same mistake in The Vagina Monologues. It’s hardly Delingpole’s fault that the word is a misnomer, taking as it does its first few letters from “vagina”. The right word would be based on “pudendum” or “mons veneris”.

  27. Leo
    August 4, 2013 at 1:09 pm #

    Vagina, vigazzle, vulva etc etc it’s all just semantics, what James has quite rightly reminded us all of is that Paul Nurse is a lying two-faced, self serving C**T, end of…

  28. jdseanjd
    August 4, 2013 at 2:25 pm #

    James, thanks & keep on slugging. You’re a hero. I know it’s cost you money, but you’ve stuck to the side of right, in the best sense of that word, & coincidentally, politically as well.

    & now you’re winning. There has been no global warming for ~16 – 17 years, & the mad eugenicist control freak cowards who comprise the “warmist” cohorts of, the unspeakable WWF, The Sierra Club & their ilk are struggling to keep their lunatic show on the road.

    Our planet is not cooperating with their lies. :)

    Even our own corrupt, inept & bought & paid for Met office has been, reluctantly, forced to admit this. :)

    Keep slugging James, we’re in the final round & winning.

    Off work ill, I decided to look into global warming, discovered it was a complete scam, dug further & discovered UN Agenda 21, a horrendous plot, & now recommend newcomers to the fray to look first at http://www.thrivemovement.com, a good introduction to the red pill reality of our crazy planetary situation, with particular attention to John Anthony’s expose of Agenda 21.

    First: The Problem. A lengthy essay.
    Then: The movie. 2 hrs 13 mins
    Then: John Anthony.

    We can improve this planet for the benefit of our kids & grandkids. Fcuk the Banksters & bent politicians & corrupt cowardly “scientists” & the crony multinational corporations at present dividing up the global spoils to the detriment of mankind.

    Slug on James, & thanks.

    JD.

    • jdseanjd
      August 4, 2013 at 2:28 pm #

      PS: I will get to your book ” Watermelons” , I promise. :)

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. The Coalition may be a bunch of eco-loons, but amazingly, Labour would be even worse – Telegraph Blogs - January 14, 2013

    [...] I've written elsewhere there are times – many, many times – when I wish I could give up writing about climate change once and for all. But with such widespread idiocy abroad – and with so few of us with either the awareness or [...]

  2. Luvvies for hypocrisy, intellectual dishonesty and lazy groupthink – Telegraph Blogs - August 5, 2013

    […] to launch into one of her increasingly tedious apologiae pro vita sua (Caitlin, Caitlin, you were SO much more fun in the days when you stuck to celebrities and vajazzling) to justify why, like, it's OK for Caitlin Moran to make flip, glib, matey in-jokes about AIDs and […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: