Barrie Rickards' Angling - The Chattering Classes

THE GREATEST DANGER TO ANGLING - THE CHATTERING CLASSES

Okay, so let's have a go at what I consider to be the greatest danger to angling as we know it in this country. You can forget the labelled anti-angling groups: not only are their numbers small and their arguments idiotic, but we can counter them easily both by reason and by behaviour. They can be a thorn in our sides at times, but not a dagger. No, the real danger to angling lies in the Chattering Classes of this nation.

What or who are they? Well, any definition is likely to be vague, but I'll try my best. One major dictionary refers to the term as a derogatory term covering educated people, operating as a social group and holding liberal opinions. I would modify that slightly by saying that they hold opinions, always, and on everything, from a shallow appraisal of the media, or simply through gossip with like-minded people at their seemingly endless dinner parties. The opinions can reflect great ignorance, as they do at the moment about angling (“Surely fish must feel pain from a sharp hook?” is a refrain I hear repeatedly).

Therein lies the danger to angling. The anti-anglers are not in themselves a danger to the sport, but if they manage, through misinformation, repeated ad nauseum in the media, to persuade the Chattering Classes that fish feel pain, then that gullible group will spread the word and will lobby.

Gullible? How can educated/intelligent people be gullible? Easy. The easiest people in the world to brainwash are the educated and intelligent. If you don't believe me, try reading Simpson's now classic book on brainwashing. It is why, for example, in wartime, intelligent people are 'turned' and why the good old British Tommy remains true. I am generalising, of course, but Simpson will convince you.

So who fits in the Chattering Classes as well as the educated and intelligent? Certainly plenty of middle class professionals. Not the 25 hours a day professionals such as policemen, lawyers or many businessmen and women, but the ones less hooked into the super work ethic. Amongst the media people you'll not find what used to be called the hack journalist involved, but you will find TV people and radio presenters: especially, in my opinion workers for the BBC. Some politicians, naturally, especially in the lower echelons and, quite naturally, liberals (hence that feature of the above definition).

You can get a better idea of who they are by considering some of the other titles under which they are known - again, rather derogatory terms. One is the term Champagne Socialist. Whilst not being exactly synonymous with Chattering Classes, it means those people who espouse socialist ideas whilst at the same time having a privileged background: their social consciences are pricked, they feel a little guilty, and so they pretend to be what they really cannot be. A lot of Labour politicians are embraced by this sobriquet. National politicians, rather than local ones. Or Radio 4 presenters.

Then there is the term Café Society. These are the people who take coffee (tall, thin, café latte) in groups and chat endlessly, putting the world to rights. They have time, not being 25 hours-a-day types, and they have the money, not being real socialists.

None of these terms mean exactly the same thing but the overlap is around ninety percent. Naturally, so-called intellectuals are involved, including many, if not most, University Academics (with some exceptions I hope!). I work with them every day, and I meet many of the other groups socially as part of my job. For the first time in their history - and they go back a long, long way (well beyond the Bloomsbury Set who were typical, and nauseating to boot) - they have actually heard of angling. The reason they even talk about it at all is because it has been drawn to their attention by the antis and by BBC journalists. (In the past, of course, many of the Chattering Classes would have experienced a sort of contact with angling: trust me, ask them if they have ever done any fishing and they will say two things to you: “I used to go tickling trout when I was on holiday in Scotland/Wales/The Lake District etc, etc.” And, “I used to fish for mackerel from my daddy's boat.” Or some similar phrase).

The Chattering Classes do not need to be anti-angling. The anti-angling propaganda they are being fed now could be reversed, and the body/bodies governing angling should be meeting now to determine how best to do this.

It is that important.

The Chattering Classes actually determine what happens in many of the social rules governing our country. And you thought it was politicians and civil servants as I used to do. Example: why did those half-baked gun laws go through parliament so very, very quickly after the Dunblane massacre? (Just think what it has done for the legitimate sport of shooting and international involvement in that sport). Couldn't happen to angling? Don't kid yourself.

Example: what happened when the lead shot issue was raised? Do you think it was science that carried the day against anglers? It wasn't. It was the number of articles and press reports written by the kind of journalists I referred to earlier which opened the flank of angling to the gaze of the Chattering Classes. The Chattering Classes did the rest during the course of their dinner parties with MPs, with the heads of quangos and so on.

(Pause for breath! Don't you think I'd have made a good revolutionary socialist! My father would be proud if I had).

Although in this piece I have seemed to hammer the Chattering Classes, it should also be said that they can be, and often are, a power for good because, with their liberal inclinations, their hearts tend to be in the right place. But it is up to the anglers, not to brainwash them, but to provide them with good information - such as is embraced in the SAAs 'Code of Conduct' for example, or John Wilson's TV series, and so on. Many of the current lot of anti-anglers are themselves Champagne Socialists, so they know the way in intuitively. I think anglers should meet and discuss strategies. I reckon we should hit them with DACE, with the ACA, with Chris Tarrant, with the SAA, and with the schools angling project. Ad infinitum. This is exactly what I do myself when I'm cornered at a dinner party, which is rather frequent.

So there you are. I have tried to point out where in the greatest danger to angling lies, and suggested some of the things we might have to do to combat it. There is also, implicit in what I have said, a political thread, a political component, but I'll leave it implicit. It's down to you how you vote, but a vote in certain directions will empower the Chattering Classes further, and a vote elsewhere will weaken it. You takes yer choice!