...By Judah Olanisebee for TDPel Media.
David Starkey’s recent speech at the National Conservatism conference has drawn widespread criticism due to his controversial remarks about left-wing activists, particularly Black Lives Matter.
Starkey accused these groups of attempting to destroy “white culture” and being “jealous” of the Holocaust.
These inflammatory statements have ignited outrage among various individuals and organizations, including former Labour MP John Mann, who called Starkey’s comments “pathetic” and accused him of exploiting the Jewish community and the Holocaust to sow division.
This is not the first time David Starkey has faced backlash for his contentious views.
In the past, he has made controversial statements about slavery, the Black Lives Matter movement, and even Rishi Sunak’s cultural grounding.
His previous remarks have led to the loss of publishing contracts and academic positions.
During his speech at the conference, Starkey continued to criticize Black Lives Matter and dismissed their claims of fighting for black lives as a pretext for undermining Western political and cultural traditions.
He argued that these movements seek to discredit Anglo-American culture and draw parallels between it and the treatment of German culture during the Nazi era.
It is important to note that other speakers at the National Conservatism conference, such as Nigel Biggar, also expressed contentious viewpoints.
Biggar contested the need for reparations to former colonies and criticized Scottish nationalism for perpetuating an inaccurate historical narrative.
These perspectives have added to the ongoing debates and controversies surrounding the conference.
The National Conservatism conference featured prominent figures from politics and academia, including Home Secretary Suella Braverman, Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove, and former Business Secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg, who encountered a protest interruption during his speech.
David Starkey’s recent remarks, along with the other discussions at the conference, have ignited intense public scrutiny and raised important questions about the boundaries of free speech, historical interpretations, and the impact of divisive rhetoric on social and political discourse.