The Fallout: How a guilty liberal lost his innocence

by Andrew Anthony

From one of the country’s finest journalists, this a major book about broken dreams, darkened illusions and big questions that no longer match their received answers. This is a controversial and humane reality check — an invitation to wake up and smell the cordite


From the Hardcover edition.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction

256 pages, Paperback

First published September 25, 2007

About the author

Andrew Anthony is a journalist who has written for The Guardian since 1990, and The Observer. He is also the author of On Penalties (2000) and The Fall-Out (2007).

Reviews

[Paul Bryant · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fellow travelling leftie explains why he believed then and why he doesn't believe now and why other people still do. I read this because I am also Andrew Anthony, or he is me, and we are all together. Here's a sparkling paragraph:

The problem resides with casual readers or followers, people who adopt second- or third-hand positions for the sake of radical fashion, people who think Benn and Chomsky are somehow, despite their one-eyed obsessions, dedicated to telling the truth, people whose nodding-dog opinions and posturing platitudes form the chorus of complacent leftish-liberal debate, people who sit up and take notice at the mention of the Pavlovian trigger words 'right-wing' and 'America' yet close their ears and eyes to the heinous crimes committed in the name of the 'left'. People, that is, like me, or the person I was content to be.

And yes, he has some more pretty good polemic directed against lefties who have combined to give the left a very bad name in recent years (even worse than it already had!) with their liberal loathing of all things Western and especially all things American, leading to a collective soft-pedalling on the many atrocities of thought and deed committed by Islamist Muslims, including the grotesqueries of the post-9/11 "they had it coming" school of thought which in turn led to the horrible tacit support by some on the left of the "insurgents" (i.e. mass murderers) in Iraq. I could go into a great rant about many aspects of this. No one is innocent here, no political opinion is the "correct" one.

[Marin · Rating 4 out of 5]

the sad thing is that none of his former ideological friends will agree with in anything.
people tend to treat political allegiances as football fans treat their teams - they cannot do anything wrong and the adversaries are never right.

[Philip · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although this book was written a few years ago its relevance has increased. It documents the systematic assault on liberal free thought by elements on the left of the political spectrum and the "management" of the political discourse on key aspects of modern society. Its explores in great detail the role played by key thinkers on the left like Chomsky in justifying human rights abuses and tyranny by a succession of awful genocidal regimes including Stalin and Pol Pot that are "favoured" for subjective and narrow ideological reasons. Andrew Anthony looks closely at the manner in which labeling of debate as "islamophobia" is used to shutdown crucial dialogue about homophobic and misogynistic religious intolerance.

[Kitty Red-Eye · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty well-written, the author makes his cause just fine, but I prefered Nick Cohen's "What's Left", in the subgenre of current affairs/political essay books which one can call "liberal/leftists lose their conviction about whom are really the defenders of the values they hold dear". If you're interested, check also out Christopher Hitchens, Paul Berman, Nick Cohen, Ibn Warraq, and I am sure plenty others.

[Aurélien Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Andrew Anthony is a British and Leftist journalist whose personal journey, by many aspects, reflects the evolution of the Labour Party itself over the past few decades. Flirting with the radical Left when young, and militant for whom 'internationalism' was more than a mere word (he worked for a while in the coffee plantations of Nicaragua, following the Nicaraguan Revolution), he also wrote for 'The Observer' and, at the time of publishing, was working at 'The Guardian'.

Describing himself as a middle class White man, middle age and happy father, he exposes here what appears to be some form of 'life crisis', through a sharp criticism of his leftists ideals. Now, let's be clear! This is not about self-centred pretentiousness. The 'life crisis' in question is not only his personally, but, beyond, that of the Western world too. One is the product of the other, in fact, since two events triggered it: first, the publication of the Mohamad's caricatures in a Danish newspaper back in 2005, when the reactions stemming from the Left ('fear disguised as tolerance, censorship disguised as restraint') led him to write this book; then, and above all, 9/11, another event which caused stunning reactions from the Left too:

'what these reactions had in common weren't their complexity but their simplicity. For all, it was a matter of dispossessed striking the powerful, oppressed striking their oppressors, of rebels against imperialists. It was Han Solo and Luke Skywalker against Darth Vader. There was no serious attempt to try and explain what kind of power they wanted to exert, or upon whom they wanted to exert it, and no one even thought about questioning in the name of what authority these suicidal killers had been designated as the voice of the oppressed.'

Such reactions, coupling anti-imperialism with anti-Americanism to the point of victimising the murderous culprits, turning jihadists into freedom fighters at the complete expense of their victims, let alone their true goals and ideology, were for him symptomatic. He saw it as being the sign of 'a kind of typical atrophy of moral faculties, born out of prolonged use of fixed ideas preventing anyone suffering from it to acknowledge a new paradigm when presented with such'. Does it mean that the Left remained stuck into an obsolete view of the world as it was back during the Cold War era?

He starts indeed by noting that those denouncing the USA and who tried to rationalise jihadism (portraying its adherents as 'victims' of imperialism) are also those among the more willing to ignore crimes which were committed by the Left itself. Noam Chomsky is a case in point, he who defended Pol Pot but has now made out of his criticism against American Imperialism his new battle; as are others who defended then 'communists' regimes, but are now excusing away Human Rights abuses in China in the name of cultural relativism, or, clearly, don't have as much time nor energy to spare denouncing socialist dictatorships (e.g. North Korea) as they have when it comes to condemn the USA's foreign policies. Is that a coincidence?

The world has changed for sure. Yet, as his personal experience reflects, Andrew Anthony sees in here a whole mindset which, from communism to Islamism, has just transferred itself from an era to another, subtly, but no less dangerously:

'Anti-Occidentalism is no longer about pro-communism, but about cultural relativism. It now ignores the abuses perpetrated against women and homosexuals, legitimises superstitions, mocks secularism, despises the values embodied by the Philosophes, and defines religious terrorism as being the simple product of Western brutality. Such form of denial might not be as extreme as the negation of the gulags, but it is rooted in the same instinct -the naive preference for a group or ideas opposed to liberal democracy.'

At the national level, he then denounces such cultural relativism which, in the UK, fed a multicultural society with terrible consequences. He deals for example with 'islamophobia', a concept conveniently protecting extremists while undermining freedom of opinions and freedom of speech. He also criticises the victimhood culture, serving an overall de-responsibilisation toxic for society as a whole.

Beyond the UK, he illustrates his arguments by focusing on key personalities -mocking the clown Michael Moore, retelling the emblematic ordeal of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, or, even, defending Christopher Hitchens. He also delves upon the war in Irak and its controversies, in chapters truly worth a read.

The thing is, if he acknowledges that if some arguments put then forward to oppose it were relevant, the fact remains that most of its opponents were motivated first and foremost by anti-Americanism, leading them to defend even a dictator and/ or dabble with dubious people. Georges Galloway is, here, yet another typical figure used to make a point. Beyond such quarrels, though, one has to reckon:

'the Bush administration can be accused of having betrayed democracy in Irak. The same accusations cannot be thrown against the leading anti-war movements, since they didn't support democracy in the first place.'

It's a fascinating book, impossible to put down, through which the author brilliantly balances his own personal journey with that of the West. Sure, the dangerous and counterproductive nonsense he denounces are not the privilege of the Left. But, since his goal was to target only his political family, such a questioning and reassessment is a great insight. Highly recommended!

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

this was for me a welcome and important book. the writer's reconsideration of his received political views is attached to the 9/11 destruction of new york's twin towers in 2001. for some reason i've always felt wary of over-focus on this telegenic atrocity. but the review which it launches of western liberal ideas about the USA and about some elements of islam struck a chord with me. AA would seem fully within the social community that he criticizes - like edith wharton's critiques of her own world this both provides strong evidence and shows significant courage in risking major ire from close quarters. now a decade and a half old, i wish this book seemed more outdates than it does. instead, with evolving examples and issues, it seems only prescient about how unthinking, unhelpful and uninspiring many strongly and widely-held political views are. for a 5th star, i would have enjoyed more consideration about what makes these views so attractive, our need for groupthink.

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

The subtitle says it all, "how a guilty liberal lost his innocence." A very well argued case for why the left has lost its bearings, written by a former standard bearer. It seems identity and grievance now trumps freedom of speech, freedom from persecution, freedom of religion and everything else. Sad to see how the left has regressed and become totalitarian and full of hate; for when I was growing up in the 1970s it had such limitless promise.

[Yolanda · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book, alongside Nick Cohen's 'What's Left,' were much-needed guiding lights to me in the 00s. I decided to look back on Anthony's work to assess what has worsened and what has improved.

You could summarise it thus:
Better: Many of the corrupt leftist British politicians he mentions have now become persona non grata, alongside the media mouthpieces who used to propagandise for them. This is mostly related to the rise of a certain populist left-wing politician and his personality cult, which isn't really standing up to scrutiny. It's often said that sunlight is the best medicine for decay and that seems to be the case here. I'm not going to name names but it is heartening that if you mentioned your support for one particular character at a party, everyone would immediately stop talking to you. It's like he's radioactive.
The idiotic monomania that our press used to have with Middle East issues has passed or is passing. Reporting on Asia issues, which should really be a key focus, is still dire, though.
Our society is starting to confront the fact it has a problem with anti-Semitism. This could take a while.
The BNP are gone. It's easy to dismiss them now, but they caused a lot of problems in their time. Back in the day, when I was flyering against them, it was difficult to imagine we'd ever get rid of them. So, I guess I won.
The left are less keen on being really vocal about supporting Islamists.
Feminism is back with a vengeance - in the 00s if you were a feminist, you got accused of imperialism. The new generation of women aren't satisfied with the life of hair bleach, boy and girl groups and constant dieting that my agegroup were basically commanded to shut up and take. Unlucky, Pete Waterman and diet industry.
Weirdly, despite Brexit, the atmosphere of dread and despair that characterised the 00s just doesn't exist here right now. I remember it very well and how bad it was. Eventually I had to get away from it.
Socially polite IRA sympathising has suddenly become radioactive as a topic as well.
People have stopped blaming the victim every single time there is an attempted terrorist attack.

Worse:
Identity politics are objectively worse now than they were at the time.
Christopher Hitchens is dead.
There is still apologism for crime etc, which in my view has significantly worsened, possibly because people can allow themselves to blame a nasty Tory in charge now. I speak from experience. There is almost no point in creating new criminal offences like gaslighting, or raising awareness of sexism and abuse, if you are going to let society treat the perp as being a victim and ignore the actual victim or condemn them as an attention seeker. Andrew Anthony's crime chapter needs to be fully read and digested on this count.
Obscure douchey hard left politicians whose identity AA had to explain have become household names.
Western guilt as a mark of being a 'good person,' and letting others off the hook for atrocities, is still very much a factor. A while back I absolutely rinsed the self-justifying perspective that around four American observers could somehow magically have stopped the brutal blue-on-blue Jeju Island Massacre in Korea in the mid 20th c, adding that the killers needed to be adults and take personal ownership of the fact that they had slaughtered their own kith and kin, and that America couldn't be expected to police the world, especially with a supposedly 'moral' ex-partisan in charge of the country (Lee Sung Man, aka Syngman Rhee.) The person I said this to gave me a look as though they had been electrocuted. It was obvious they had never heard anyone make the point that a murderer is responsible for murder before, no matter where they are from. I don't even know what you can do about this.
Europe still has a problem with the hard right, and it's warping our politics.
Some of the predictions about China in it have come true.

This is still a necessary and important book and I'm glad I own a copy.

[Peter K · Rating 3 out of 5]

Written by a journalist and author I have regularly read in the Guardian I find this both an interesting and challenging read that was worth while.

This book was published in 2007 but is still relevant today particularly after a General Election where working class voters in significant numbers turned away from Labour and towards the Tories and even UKIP.

The general theme of this work is both autobiographical and also a political argument that Labour has and is losing touch with its core by focusing too much on areas such as multiculturalism and disenchanting those who not only looked to the party but also originally set it up.

This is an argument that I recognize but not necessarily support but it was good to read an impassioned and heartfelt case made by someone expressing a sense of loss as to what it was to be a British liberal and how society’s changes demand different thinking.

The autobiographical and personal openness of the writing added to the impact of this book and ensured it was not just a dry exercise in political writing.

[Koeeoaddi · Rating 3 out of 5]

According to a review by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown in The Independent, this is "a sorrowful confession", by a "slash and burn apostate" and "fanatic."

Um, ...did we read the same book? Because this is an earnest, sensible book, slightly on the dull side because so many of the points the author makes are so apologetically polite, so well reasoned and, well ...so obvious. This guy is no racist or reactionary in any way I understand the words.

[The chapter on Ayaan Hirsi Ali was excellent.]

[Keen Reader · Rating 5 out of 5]

“There is apparently almost no insult, if aimed at the white working class, that is deemed unacceptable”.
This is just one of the many fine points made in this wonderful piece of current affairs. I have also learned a new useful word in “secularphobia”

Anthony is a bold, eloquent and refreshing voice in a culture of growing cowardice. With a devastating common sense, he successfully challenges liberal sacred cows like Tony Benn, George Galloway, Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky and John Pilger (and I regard myself as a fan of the latter two) for some of their inconsistencies and falsehoods. Muslim convert Cat Stevens simply comes across as silly.

He effortlessly cuts through the dense, dogmatic nonsense with a sweeping sanity, exposing the hypocrisy and silliness of the rhetoric being pushed by misguided and cowardly people. The muted stance taken by all the major UK media outlets with regards to the Danish cartoons must surely rank as one of the modern low points of our so called democracy in recent times.

This work is a refreshing antidote to so much of the mealy mouthed PC madness and positive discrimination that has been allowed to creep in and settle into so much of society that we are in danger of calling black white in order not to be seen by others as racist, with his power of reasoning and balance he shows us where we could be headed if we don’t confront tyranny and stand up for democracy. This is done with a clear precision, devoid of the impenetrable language that less secure or talented writers lapse into when they feel they have nothing real to say.

I’ll finish with another thought provoking quote from the book,

“Islamaphobia is a word that in most cases obscures legitimate and necessary debate. As such, it’s a veil that needs to be lifted”.