Steve Topple: The media is waging a coordinated war against chronically ill and disabled people

Sorry to be a bore, but it’s perplexing that you wouldn’t see any antisemitism in those articles. Holding all Jews responsible for the “cancer” that is Zionism? Numerous tweets about the Rothschilds? I should say for full disclosure that I am Jewish, and this kind of stuff has become scarily commonplace in some quarters on the left of politics.

To your wider point, I can definitely see that we’d all forgive a publication with a rubbish track record for publishing something good, and agree with you re: the Mail. But isn’t that also because publications aren’t just one person? The overall business can be rotten, but individual journalists can still produce stuff of worth. The same way that not everyone who works at say, Goldman Sachs will be evil, or that everyone who works at a charity would be virtuous.

 

Ok

 

Topple acknowledged and apologised for past anti-semitic conspiracy trash in 2016: https://mrtopple.com/2016/03/20/apology/

I think that he should have learnt of the need to be more cautious and careful with the way he writes, as well as just realising that he shouldn't trust those promoting anti-semitic tropes and conspiracies. I can see how some of the problems I mentioned with his piece could relate to too readily engaging in conspiratorial thinking.

 

Here’s how to begin winning the PACE trial war, https://mrtopple.com/2019/03/19/heres-how-to-begin-winning-the-pace-trial-war/

 

Oh good, a pep talk.

 

Last thing we need is to get roped in to his journalistic in-fighting. It's not all about them. Whilst his writing on ME has been excellent, I have reservations about it being blended with his political views. Not necessarily because I think he's wrong about anything, and there certainly is a bigger picture to consider, but his bigger picture is very big and involves the downfall of capitalism etc, which could make him something of an easy target / liability as an advocate. I have the same reservations about ME advocacy being linked to anyone's particular brand of feminism. Or anyone's particular brand of anything.

An unbiased investigative journalist without an agenda would be great. Is that too much to ask?



Ah yes, @dave30th. Phew.

 

same blog here
http://guerillawire.org/politics/heres-how-to-begin-winning-the-pace-trial-war/

one of the comments:
"But on S4ME I have read some comments about Steve’s involvement that don’t seem very inclusive. It would be a crying shame if ME sufferers/advocates don’t engage with what Steve is trying to do here. He and his partner may have life experiences that some of us don’t share and we should listen to and appreciate other people’s perspectives. His politics should not be a reason to push him to the fringes."

 

I think that comment is a misrepresentation of the discussion here. People have to be able to discuss the merit of different approaches and advocates without being accused of not listening to other perspectives. Also, would be much more helpful if that comment was made here, so it could contribute to the discussion directly.

 

I think that it's always worth trying to criticise one another's work. If we want to effectively challenge people like Wessely then there is no room for claims that go beyond the evidence, or any sort of error. If we're not trying to find and remove any possible criticism of advocacy efforts then those who want to try to undermine us will use it against us. Criticise, criticise, criticise imo.

Saying that, I am sympathetic to the situation of Topple and his partner and appreciate that they're working to try to bring attention to problems. edit: I'm sure I can get my tone wrong when criticising people who are taking a risk by standing up to power sometimes, and seem more adversarial than I intend.

I do think it's good to be looking for possible problems with everything that could influence other people, but this approach can seem unfriendly.

 

In the ME world people turning up and shouting "Tally Ho! Follow me!" are two a penny. We've had it from Sarah Myhill, Valerie Elliot Smith, and now Steve Topple, to name just three that come to mind from recently. Sarah Myhill is into all kinds of stuff I don't agree with, VES has her own brand of feminism and god knows what other axes to grind, and Steve Topple seems to have an anti-capitalist class warfare slant. Going further back, I can remember when there was a clamouring for James Coyne to be our saviour and leader, although to be fair he always said he wasn't going to be.

Although there are many factors that have contributed to our situation, people with strong opinions about any one of them who want to put themselves in the position of leading the charge should expect to be scrutinized carefully by those expected to follow. If they are not dutifully followed, the charge of not showing unity is an easy one to make and is becoming a cliche. "Not very inclusive" is just a variation on that.

At S4ME we examine the science and pick holes in it, and rightly so. I don't see anything wrong with looking at advocacy initiatives critically.

I think Steve Topple is a brilliant writer, but his first article ended with this:

I'm not sure I'm entirely ready to sign up to all of that if that's ok.

From his second article:

His third article is about Rampant Classism.

Well I'm not into alternative medicine (sorry Sarah Myhill), I'm not female (sorry Valerie Elliot Smith) and I'm one of the millions of worldwide ME sufferers who doesn't have to spend every day waging class warfare in the UK (sorry Steve Topple). I just have ME. That's what we all have in common. That is what unites us. It is easy for us to unite and fight on the scientific front, which is where our recent progress has been made. It is easy to unite behind the brilliant researchers, scientists and academic journalists who support us. But bring too much politics into it, and watch us fall apart whilst being outplayed by those with far more experience and cunning than we'll ever have or want to have.

Steve Topple writes:

He can hardly expect to be exempt from such scrutiny himself.

He continues:

If this is a dig at Frances Ryan, it shows what his unity is worth. If it isn't, it's very careless writing.

 

I agree:

There are going to be journalists and advocates come along, writing about ME and supporting you, who are not doing it for the right reasons. Or they will be compromised and won’t really understand why. But they’ll make out that they’re being fully supportive and really understand what’s going on. Don’t be fooled.

My impression is that people on S4ME tend to decide for themselves on these matters.

 

I go with what the cockerel of prophecy advises.

If I hear it erm...make that damn noise, then I go with option A, if I see it's pointing to the east I go with option B, to the west option C etc.

If I hear nothing, and see no cockerel, then I do whatever I like, as the matter clearly is of no consequence to supernatural poultry.

So far I mainly do what I like, I live in a city and haven't seen any cockerels since I was about 5 years old, let alone supernatural ones.

Faith in supernatural cockerels, dead easy - but mainly I just listen to what @TiredSam says on any given subject

 

What Sam said.

Too right! All power to @dave30th God bless him

But the more the better so although I did post this before on the special report thread & fair enough if people have decided against it or no one is able, but i wondered if trying to get Ian Leslie interested might be of use.... re/crossposting here just in case it got missed

Our story is remarkably similar to the one about sugar he has already written.

 

Have had a reply from one who might be persuaded.
I suggested they contact Jon Edwards and David T who's contact details I forwarded.