Is James Delingpole for real?

If you’re familiar with the work of James Delingpole, you’ll know him as the painfully ignorant, eternally inaccurate “journalist” trolling on the Telegraph Blogs. Like a pickled deformed foetus, he is at both repulsive and fascinating. Repulsive because every opinion he has, belief he holds and statement he makes manage to distort reality and normal human decency to such an extent his articles become something like a written manifestation of a Dali masterpiece – if said masterpiece was painted by a brain damaged chimp with stumps for hands. Fascinating because I can not comprehend how someone so devoid of an ability to construct a cogent opinion (let alone honestly report anything factual) is a journalist – and has a regular presence on the website of one of Britain’s biggest daily newspapers. Yes, being an ignorant jerk isn’t exactly uncommon within the British press, but Delingpole is SO consistently bad, it genuinely troubles my mind.

I’ve long suspected Delingpole to be a fake. That the James Delingpole persona is entirely fictional; his blog nothing more than a vessel for other Telegraph writers to vent their most vile and hateful thoughts. Like a columnist ‘river of slime’. However, that doesn’t quite add up as I’ve seen the ‘Pole on the telly and I don’t think they make CGI that ugly. In the past, I’ve termed him a professional troll – a shameless shill paid to discuss issues he doesn’t really care about (and clearly knows very little about) simply to stir up controversy and attract readers. This too isn’t quite right, as Jimmy spends his offline time head-to-head with the world’s brightest, debating issues he knows very little about.

So, even though it hurt my brain to do so, I was forced to accept that Delingpole was genuine. At least, I did until today… (the plot thickens!)

Delingpole’s latest post on the Telegraph is so pointless it’s barely even worth mentioning. I only do so to set the scene. He rants in response to today’s “exclusive” report in The Times about EU plans to adopt a more ambitious target for the reduction of CO2 emissions.

[As an aside, earlier today The Guardian’s George Monbiot wrote a blog post about the same story. It’s interesting to compare the differing approach of the two long-term rivals. When confronted with the news, the first thing Monbiot did was phone the European commission in an attempt to check the validity of the story (for the record, they said it was “totally wrong” – interesting to think that The Times will be charging for such exclusives very soon). Meanwhile, Delingpole smacked his angry face into the keyboard until something resembling an article was vomited forth.]

Towards the end of this stream of non-consciousness, he rages about David Cameron’s commitment to tackling climate change (going so far as to use ALL CAPS – truly the mark of a serious journalist). This is despite telling his readers to vote Conservative pre-election. In the comments, one of his followers, Jacquesarden, points out this inconsistency. Not particular cutting, I feel. It is entirely possible to support one party about others but criticise individual policies. Regardless, the really interesting part of this tale is Delingpole’s enigmatic reply:

@jacquesarden Sorry mate, but I think you may be a bit too stupid to understand the point of any of my blogs. May I suggest the Guardian’s Comment is Free, or similar?

Now, this is unusual for a couple of reasons. For one, Jacquesarden’s is the only comment out of 16 to which Delingpole bothers to reply. It’s odd that a so-called professional journalist would respond to such a harmless comment with such a childish rebuke. More intriguingly is Delingpole’s reference to “the point” of his blogs. He could’ve just said something like: “I still feel voting Conservative was the best option; albeit out of an exceptionally bad bunch. However, just because I supported David Cameron in the general election, this doesn’t mean I’m going to relent when trying to bring some common sense to British politics”.

Instead, he teases us with talk of a “point”, suggesting a grander scheme behind the blog – something only an inner circle of his sycophantic followers know about. Maybe they’re not even in on the secret?

Now, what could this “point” Delingpole refers to be?

It can’t be to inform or educate his readers; his articles mainly consist of misleading claims and tenuous assertions.

It can’t be to further the debate about climate change; he frequently regurgitates long-debunked denialist arguments.

It can’t be to spread doubt and confusion about climate change; he lacks the credibility and knowledge to make much of an impact.

It can’t be to promote the libertarian philosophy; he’s very aggressive towards people whose thoughts differ from his own and is remarkably critical about people making money (admittedly the only people with money he mentions are the ones who also campaign for protecting the environment).

It clearly isn’t to help or support a Conservative government; if his advice for the Tories are anything to go by, he either wants them confined to the political wilderness or understands even less about the British public than he does about climate science (I think it’s the latter).

So, what’s the point?

Possibly there isn’t a point and the James Delingpole blog is nothing more than the earnest writings of an egotistical man-child, overcompensating for his own insecurity and whose privileged upbringing managed to disguise what I suspect is a mild case of autism.

On the other hand, this could be the closest I’ve got to seeing Delingpole admit that the whole thing is a hoax – a parody. Could it be that the “point” of James Delingpole’s blog, and in fact his entire existence, is to act as a twisted reflection of ourselves?* A dark satire, exposing man’s innate instinct to eschew rationality and compassion in favour of bitter, instinctual self-interest? His every assertion is baseless and narrow-minded. Every piece of “evidence” he uses is mercilessly corrupted to fit a predefined conclusion. How then does he differ from the rest of us in our every day lives? When we tell our friends about how unfairly we’ve been treated at work, we don’t stop to fact-check or make sure all quotes are put into proper context. When overhearing a snippet of private conversation between two friends, we don’t seek to establish the full story before leaping to (and passing on) any conclusions. Delingpole’s gift to humanity has been to expose its lack of credibility by sacrificing his own.

Just think: when you’re reading Delingpole, you’re reading yourself telling the people who you want to take you seriously things you think you know stuff about.

Either that or you’re reading the deluded scrawlings of one of the world’s biggest cunts.

*That question was totally an homage to John Rentoul.


19 thoughts on “Is James Delingpole for real?

  1. I am in the terminal stages of posting on Delingpole’s blog. I beg the rest of you – don’t encourage him by visiting his site. He gets paid on the basis of clicks and visitors – it’s how the newspapers sell advertising.

    Some brain-softened elder at teh Torygraph may think Delingpole is ‘down with the kids’ and ‘in the hood’. Visiting his website only makes them think he has some kind of validity.

    The reality is hehas six fanboys. Leave them to it. Don’t sign in, don’t visit, don’t even mention his name – except to tell people not to visit. When it becomes clear that all he has is a circle of sad gits – mostly young, judging by their grammar – who treat the site like a 1980s ‘citizens band’ chatroom, with any luck his bosses will give him the chance to commune with the masses, by firing his pathetic ass.

    1. Ruari – What a sad envious mad pathetic non-entity you are – Ruar! Just can’t resist visiting JD’s site – which does JD no end of good ! You poor confused, deluded soul. Aw- diddums!!

    2. @ Ruari

      “Visiting his website only makes them think he has some kind of validity.”

      How quickly you were proven right!

      I totally agree. I’ll happily join you in starving the troll.

    1. @ Mike J

      You seem to pop up every time I criticise James Delingpole. I guess you’re a fan of his. Why do you feel the need to spend your time searching the internet and attacking people who highlight the epic fails of this prick?

      If you like James Delingpole why don’t you actually defend him against the accusations people throw at him. Unless, of course, you know all the criticisms are correct and James Delingpole is an indefensible wretch. In which case, why don’t you read the posts where people expose him for the idiot that he is and realise he’s not worth your time and effort supporting. He’s really, really not.

      1. “If you like James Delingpole why don’t you actually defend him against the accusations people throw at him”

        Nah – don’t need to! Just leave it to the obvious success of his blogs. Crunkfish = epic log…?

    2. “Nah – don’t need to! Just leave it to the obvious success of his blogs. Crunkfish = epic log…?”

      That he’s managed to build a career out of being wrong all the time genuinely amazes me. Claiming “obvious success” of his blogs when he just rants on the pages of The Telegraph is pretty generous.

      This still doesn’t explain why you bother leaving pointless comments on my blog though. Especially if it’s such un-epic…

      I’m trying to understand what inspires your adulation of James Delingpole. Can you explain?

  2. Mike J – “Nah – don’t need to! Just leave it to the obvious success of his blogs. ”

    Don’t need to? More like ‘incapable of’. The standard ‘defense’ technique of JD’s fanboys is to launch into insult and invective. If in doubt, see Mike J’s comment at 9.22.

    No attempt to defend, justify or support Delingpole and his mendacious ramblings – just the sort of sad and empty drop of spite one comes to expect of his onanist fanboys.

  3. I’ve only read Delingpole once or twice and yes, crunkfish you are absoloutely right. Once or twice was enough. It is however an indicator of how far a once great newspaper like the Telegraph has sunk under the fascist jailbird milord Black and now the Barclay twins that a specimen like Delingpole is given space at all. I have noticed though that many of the posters on Telegraph blogs seem to be on a similar intellectual and articulacy level as Mike J above. They eschew anything approaching rational argument, of which they are plainly incapable, and hurl insults.

  4. Delingpole has been the ‘inspiration’ for my first blog posting. It was cathartic and now I am going to move on with my life and never, ever go back to such a dark place.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s