StatCounter

Thursday, 12 January 2012

Since when was Ken Loach the fount of all knowledge?

Yesterday I got fed up with hearing Ken Loach's views on the possible govenrnment plans to try and reduce taxpayers money going to non-popular films. Ken Loach was treated as some sort of expert and his political views were not mentioned once; why? Do the BBC no know Ken Loach's political views? Here's the second line of his Wikipedia entry:
'He is known for his naturalistic, social realist directing style and for his socialist beliefs, which are evident in his film treatment of social issues such as homelessness (Cathy Come Home) and labour rights (Riff-Raff).'
If that's not enough then let's look at the very long section of Ken Loach's Wikipedia entry devoted to 'Political Activities' (my emphasis):


 '... In a 2011 interview with the Guardian newspaper he said "It makes you angry, not on your own behalf, but on behalf of the people whose voices weren't allowed to be heard. When you had trade unions, ordinary people, rank and file, never been on television, never been interviewed, and they're not allowed to be heard, that's scandalous. And you see it over and over again. I mean, we heard very little from the kids in the riots. You hear some people being inarticulate in a hood, but very few people were actually allowed to speak".[10] In the same interview his focus on working people's lives is explained thusly: "I think the underlying factors regarding the riots are plain for anyone with eyes to see … It seems to me any economic structure that could give young people a future has been destroyed. Traditionally young people would be drawn into the world of work, and into groups of adults who would send the boys for a lefthanded screwdriver, or a pot of elbow grease, and so they'd be sent up in that way, but they would also learn about responsibilities, and learn a trade, and be defined by their skills. Well, they destroyed that. Thatcher destroyed that. She consciously destroyed the workforces in places like the railways, for example, and the mines, and the steelworks … so that transition from adolescence to adulthood was destroyed, consciously, and knowingly." He argues that working people's struggles are inherently dramatic: "They live life very vividly, and the stakes are very high if you don't have a lot of money to cushion your life. Also, because they're the front line of what we came to call the class war. Either through being workers without work, or through being exploited where they were working. And I guess for a political reason, because we felt, and I still think, that if there is to be change, it will come from below. It won't come from people who have a lot to lose, it will come from people who will have everything to gain."[11] This explains how Loach regards politics and drama as intertwined, rather than existing in separate spheres.
A member of the Labour Party from the early 1960s, Loach left in the mid-1990s.[12] In November 2004, he was elected to the national council of the Respect Coalition[12] He stood for election to the European Parliament on a Respect mandate. He supports the Socialist Resistance organisation. Also, he supports the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of the State of Israel, backed by many intellectuals in Palestinian civil society, including writers, filmmakers, students, trade unions and human rights groups. PACBI is in turn part of a wider global international movement: Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS), that opposes actions by the Israeli State.[13]
...Loach also joined "54 international figures in the literary and cultural fields" in signing a letter that stated, in part, "celebrating 'Israel at 60' is tantamount to dancing on Palestinian graves to the haunting tune of lingering dispossession and multi-faceted injustice". The letter was published in the International Herald Tribune on 8 May 2008."[16]
Responding to a report, which he described as "a red herring", on the growth of antisemitism since the beginning of the Gaza War, he has said: "If there has been a rise I am not surprised. In fact, it is perfectly understandable because Israel feeds feelings of anti-Semitism." He added "no-one can condone violence".[17]
... In an open letter to Ms Shalom Ezer, Ken Loach wrote "From the beginning, Israel and its supporters have attacked their critics as anti-semites or racists. It is a tactic to undermine rational debate. To be crystal clear: as a film maker you will receive a warm welcome in Edinburgh. You are not censored or rejected. The opposition was to the Festival’s taking money from the Israeli state".[21]
...Loach, Laverty and O'Brien subsequently wrote that: "We feel duty bound to take advice from those living at the sharp end inside the occupied territories. We would also encourage other filmmakers and actors invited to festivals to check for Israeli state backing before attending, and if so, to respect the boycott. Israeli filmmakers are not the target. State involvement is. In the grand scale of things it is a tiny contribution to a growing movement, but the example of South Africa should give us heart".[25]
Together with John Pilger and Jemima Khan, Ken Loach was among the six people in court willing to offer surety for Julian Assange when he was arrested in London on 7 December 2010.[29] In a recent interview with ShortList
So we have hatred of Lady Thatcher, belief in social/political revolution coming from below, supporter of cultural and other boycotting of Israel (the only democracy in the Middle East), excuser of a rise in anti-Semitism and supporter of Julian Assange. It's mystifying why the BBC would treat Ken Loach as some sort of guru!

Any person who vehemently expressed deep respect for Lady Thatcher, strong support for Israel & opposition to Palestinian terrorism, opposition to the rise in anti-Semitism & blamed it on the rise of Islamism in the west and called for Julian Assange to face justice, would be labelled as 'right-wing' even if allowed to speak on the BBC.


I don't normally  copy sections wholesale from Wikipedia but I wanted to show that any BBC researcher with an interest in checking for, and identify political bias, in guests could have identified Ken Loach's position in minutes.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

The BBC could have chosen any number of people to offer their opinion on this subject, but it chose Loach because he was bound to articulate the BBC's own views.

Anonymous said...

Sorry but I think there's a mis-spellong in yoiur headline

I think you got that last three letters, unt, correct.

Anonymous said...

I'm not the biggest fan of either Ken Loach's filmmaking or his political views, but he was speaking as a director, expressing his concerns at the Government's ludicrious spoutings. He's made some cracking films, and some duffers. They can be enjoyed without worrying whether or not you agree with his political views.

Do we really want to have more films like Johnny English ahead of, for argument's sake, Submarine? I'd rather give my cash to interesting films that take risks, rather than "blockbusters" which are an affront to good taste.

Anonymous said...

You only have to watch five minutes of any of his films to know where his political allegiances lie. I find all of his films deeply depressing but the intelligentsia of the left love them because they are 'gritty' and 'realistic'.