It’s a weird claim

Times change but the Guardian’s values don’t: 200 years, and we’ve only just begun

It started out as a free trading, classically liberal, propaganda sheet. It’s still a propaganda sheet, true enough, but the values it propagandises for seem to have changed more than a bit…..

19 thoughts on “It’s a weird claim”

  1. The Other Bloke in Italy

    Yeah, I am old enough to vaguely recall reading the Manchester Guardian. Changed days…

  2. The Meissen Bison

    The guardian has consistently been perverse and contrarian throughout its history.

  3. The self-awareness of people who write for the Guardian!

    The Guardian’s history is no secret. What stands out is its consistent reluctance to embrace “progressive” causes until the last possible moment. It criticised the Peterloo reformers as dangerous agitators, it was sympathetic to the South in the US Civil War (largely because of its commitment to free trade), it opposed militant suffragettes and Irish nationalists, and it opposed the creation of the NHS.

  4. Diogenes,

    They also expressed sympathy for the Montgomery Bus Company, and the effect of the boycott during the civil rights movement.

    It’s a form of conservatism. Someone else brings about the changes in society and then you join the crowd. It’s LARPing activism, talking about racism and homophobia like this is still the 80s. FFS you have prime ministers going to Pride events.

  5. Part of the April 1865 Guardian editorial on Lincoln’s assassination:

    “Of his rule we can never speak except as a series of acts abhorrent to every true notion of constitutional right and human liberty”

    Strangely enough, they speak about his rule somewhat differently these days.

  6. A lot can be garnered from the name. In literature the “guardian” is so often a malevolent character controls the protagonist against their wishers for it’s own benefit. There’s a great deal to be learned from fiction.

  7. ” … and we’ve only just begun”
    As the torturer said to the victim on the rack.

  8. It’s 1821, and here’s an article celebrating three people who live together and have sex, but in different ways from the way they used to, because two (or it may be all three) of them have had operations to change their sex, and one has changed it back to what it used to be, or so they think. And we’re going to try to get the pronouns right…

  9. “it was an evil day both for America and the world when he [Lincoln] was chosen President of the United States”

    Manchester Guardian, 10th October 1862

    According to Guido (

    …their founder, John Edward Taylor, who made his money in the cotton trade – an industry that prospered on the backs of cotton-picking slaves. After the death of their founder in 1844, the paper continued its relationship with its cotton merchant advertisers, going as far as demanding Manchester’s cotton workers, who refused to touch cotton picked by US slaves, should be forced back into work.

    Let me guess, comments are disabled under that article?

  10. So…They still have the “white supremacist, patriarchal, xenophobic” values that their founder had?

  11. Dennis, Satan's Editor-In-Chief

    Times change but the Guardian’s values don’t: 200 years, and we’ve only just begun

    Nice job of proclaiming just how ineffectual the Guardian has been for all those years. The obvious tone of pride introduces a degree of irony that only a leftist could miss.

  12. The G’s thoughts on appeasement and rearmament? Dunno, for once they might have been right.
    It’s tricky being on the right side of history. I recently read there was a window of opportunity of about 3 months in 1917 to negotiate an honourable peace. It was not taken. What was the G’s stance? Was anyone even aware?

    (Hmm, interesting. your spell check does not recognise peace or piece, Tim. Or is it mine?)

  13. The Tory Party supported slavery. The Tory Party also supported the Empire that killed over 100 million in wars, slavery, and famines.

    The far right see the working class and poor as parasites on the rich.

  14. If the 1917 opportunity was the one I’ve read about then it was scarcely a practical opportunity. The German terms included letting them keep Belgium.

  15. Dearieme,

    The German terms included letting them keep Belgium.”

    A recent book shows that Bethmann was very keen to ensure that Belgian neutrality was restored in any peace settlement – for fear the Entente powers might end up in control of the country if they won the war. He made speeches in the Reichstag on this subject

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *