Tdawwg,
“None of these sources, cited by Wikipedia, agree with you and Antinous; ditto Timothy Garton Ash. Are they all apologists, too?”
There are those, even in the article you cited, that do agree with Antinous and I (as much as we agree :) ). If I had been named in such a secret list, I might think it was funny and flattering, but I would not think it was benign.
As to the use of “apologist.” I find what Orwell has done here to be reprehensible. If carefully framed, it seems less so. I call that “making apology.”
I don’t necessarily mean it to be an inflammatory phrase (though I certainly understand that it can be). I don’t spit the word at you.
You, I understand, do not find his actions reprehensible. Thus, to you it is not apology. But I think we have to be careful. As Orwell said, “Every saint should be guilty until proven innocent.” (maybe a paraphrase.)
I understand that the list was, from one perspective, just a recommendation that these people would not have been right for that job.
But the job was work as a state supported propagandist. Personal politics being checked as a requisite for that position. Sure, it makes sense from their position, but damn it’s creepy.
Propaganda to me is not information. It’s manipulation. The word hasn’t always meant that, right (see Edward Bernays), but it’s pretty clear (from the article you cite) that the IRD meant it in the sense I understand it. Even to fight totalitarian communism…. The means dictate the ends, and that is not a gig I’d have thought Orwell would have dug.
And we don’t actually know that the list was only ever used for its initial purpose. That also is in the article you linked. We know all too well today that information gathered for one purpose can be put to many other uses by the state.
I’d never hand any info over to a state supported civilian (which IRD was not totally) PR group. I’d assume without even thinking about it that the info would be misused to ends other than my own (and likely nefarious).
Finally: I’m not going to go around condemning the man or his work because of this. But I do think this was a questionable act–at best–and should be called as such.
Thanks for maintaining civility!
Q
