[The Weeping Angel]

Even The Critic is unimpressed.

https://thecritic.co.uk/suicide-of-an-a ... edibility/

Matt Goodwin’s Suicide of a Nation is a very bad book. It reads like the book of a political operator extending his CV. The left-wing commentator Andy Twelves caused a stir on social media by pointing out various factual mistakes and what appear to be non-existent quotes. Twelves speculates that these “quotes” are the result of AI hallucinations, which is plausible, if not proven, in the light of the fact that two of Mr Goodwin’s sparse footnotes contain source information from ChatGPT.

Inasmuch as Suicide of a Nation makes a form of the argument sketched out the beginning of this article, there is truth to it. But it contains a fundamental problem — it assumes that this argument is so true that there is no requirement to make it well.

“Slop” is an overused term but it feels painfully appropriate for a book that is spoon fed to its audience. Goodwin, who had a long academic career before becoming a successful commentator, is not a man who lacks intelligence. But he writes as if he thinks his audience lacks it. “I did not write this book for the ruling class,” writes Goodwin, “I wrote it for the forgotten majority.” Alas, he seems to think that the average member of the “forgotten majority” has the reading level of a dimwitted 12-year-old. As well as being stylistically simple, the book is full of annoying paternal asides. “In the pages ahead I shall walk you through what is happening to the country …” “In the next chapter we will begin our journey …” Thank you, Mr Goodwin. Can we stop for ice cream?

The book is terribly derivative, with a title that reflects Pat Buchanan’s Suicide of a Superpower and a subtitle — “Immigration, Islam, Identity” — that all but repeats that of Douglas Murray’s The Strange Death of Europe — “Immigration, Identity, Islam”. It is written in the humourless and colourless rhetorical style of AI. I’m not saying it was AI-generated. (Indeed, a brief assessment using AI checkers suggests that it was not.) I’m just saying that it might as well have been.

[Youngian]

“I wrote it for the forgotten majority.” Alas, he seems to think that the average member of the “forgotten majority” has the reading level of a dimwitted 12-year-old.

In practice a minority you never forget because they never shut the fuck up about immigrants and have a national media eco system to amplify their claims.
If Matt assumes his audience has the reading level of a dimwitted 12 year old, I won't question his commercial savvy.

[Bones McCoy]

“I wrote it for the forgotten majority.” Alas, he seems to think that the average member of the “forgotten majority” has the reading level of a dimwitted 12-year-old.

In practice a minority you never forget because they never shut the fuck up about immigrants and have a national media eco system to amplify their claims.
If Matt assumes his audience has the reading level of a dimwitted 12 year old, I won't question his commercial savvy.

It didn't harm Rupert Murdoch's commercial prospects.

I sometimes wonder whether I'm in a tiny minority.
I draw a huge blank with the popular personality archetype: Rylan, Claudia Winkleman, Janet Street-Porter.
I tend to see a cast of people who failed the Blue Peter audition, but can read an autocue - poorly.

But then I look at Goodwin, who just oozes unpleasantness.
Before the man speaks you've got his tipped back sneer.
When he speaks there's not even a pretence at engaging with facts, it's always:

Here are some numbers (which I probably fabricated), I win, convert to my cause.

His ongoing post election tantrum reinforces the early impression.

[Boiler]

I tend to see a cast of people who failed the Blue Peter audition, but can read an autocue - poorly.

I wonder if they still have to talk to camera whilst on a trampoline?

[Watchman]

Does Goodwin see himself as a UK "Charlie Kirk"...............and no, I don't advocate the obvious ending!