The Smearing of Roger Scruton: Analysis of the Interview By Douglas Murray
Regular readers may know that I have spent a certain amount of time in recent weeks exercised by a British hack called George Eaton and the left-wing magazine that he is deputy editor at (the New Statesman). I have no personal animus against Mr. Eaton, who I believe I only met briefly once, some years ago, in a radio studio. His editor at the New Statesman, Jason Cowley, has always seemed to me a good person and a good editor in charge of a magazine with some fine writing in it.
But three weeks ago Eaton flagged up an interview he had conducted with Sir Roger Scruton with claims which seemed suspect from the start. Eaton claimed that Scruton had made a succession of “outrageous” remarks during their interview. In addition to anti-Chinese racism, he claimed, Scruton had said awful things about Muslims, Jews, and various other groups of people. All of this had an effect. Believing that what the New Statesman’s deputy editor said was true, Scruton was widely defamed across the British media. He was then swiftly and ignominiously fired (without even being personally informed) from his position heading a government quango. This latter decision was taken by the relevant minister, James Brokenshire MP, within five hours of Eaton’s original tweets.
The malicious intent which Eaton brought to the interview was evidenced not just by the manner in which he announced its alleged contents, but in his posting on Instagram of a photo of himself swigging champagne from a bottle and saying that this was how he was celebrating the sacking of “homophobe and racist” Roger Scruton.While everything about this seemed to me suspect, few other people seemed to think so. Indeed, almost everybody else who had an opportunity to ditch Sir Roger did so. This list included nearly all Conservative party institutions and websites as well as numerous Conservative figures. The list included (though was not limited to) former Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, Danny (Lord) Finkelstein, MP Tom Tugendhat, MP Johnny Mercer, and of course that terrible victim of nominative determinism, Mr. Brokenshire. Like the newspapers, to the best of my knowledge none of these people requested a transcript of the Eaton–Scruton interview. They all decided to leap to judgment, trust George Eaton, trash Sir Roger, and then just move on.
I took a different view, and repeatedly asked the New Statesman, its editor, and George Eaton to release the tape of the interview. Jason Cowley assured me that such a tape existed and then went silent. All of which confirmed what I had guessed. If the tape contained nothing to contradict the New Statesman’s deputy editor’s version of events, then why not release it? I asked and asked for the tape, somewhat relentlessly. And then I stopped asking.
Not because I got bored but because — as it happened — I came into possession of a copy of the recording and had a chance to listen to the Eaton–Scruton interview. It was not as bad as I thought: It was far worse for the scurrilous would-be assassin of Sir Roger. Since I released the tape and transcript of their own interview, the New Statesman joined in, releasing their own transcript of the interview, albeit one with an additional misrepresentation of Scruton perhaps inadvertently included in their original, leading to the following correction:
What the tape showed beyond doubt is that George Eaton misled his readers to try to destroy the reputation of Britain’s foremost conservative thinker. Readers and listeners can listen to — and read — the interview themselves and find their favorite examples of Eaton’s dishonesty. Here are just a few of my favorites:
Comments are closed.
