Battle of ideas
A long discussion about an event I am due to be speaking at on Sunday. I get a lot of invitations to speak and, in truth, the yes/no decisions are somewhat hit and miss. Consequently, I frequently make mistakes, passing up opportunities I should accept and ending up, as in this case, committing myself to things which I really didn’t need to on weekend afternoons when I should really be spending time with my kids.
What makes this one even more questionable is that it is something being organised by an outfit called the Institute of Ideas, which appears to be one of the myriad offshoots of the old Living Marxism activist grouping. Which prompts some debate internally: given that people such as George Monbiot and Jon Snow have raised serious doubts about their methods and intentions, what are the risks and benefits of sharing a platform with them? Am I about to be ambushed? By agreeing to appear, are we giving them an aura of respectability?
These are real dangers, of course. It is interesting, for example, that the background material they have circulated involves correspondence rather bemusingly attempting to create a debate about whether bad housing really does impact on children’s health and well-being as we claim. But it is scarcely in tune with Shelter’s values to cut and run at the first sign of controversy. Nor should we be afraid of exposing ourselves to criticism: if we dish it out to others, we should be open to taking it too.
And the important thing is that we should be seeking to spread our message out beyond the usual sympathetic suspects to reach different audiences. It is all too easy just to speak to people who agree with you and spending time with them neither changes minds or exposes our policy positions to healthy challenge. Sure I may be feeling very differently about things on Sunday night. But I have nothing to lose but my dignity and, as those who know me will testify, there’s not much of that to lose.