Is the British right starting to get sloppy? The row over the latest book by Matthew Goodwin, a former academic–turned—GB News commentator and Reform UK parliamentary candidate, seems to suggest that it is.
Goodwin emerged on Britain’s political scene as a well-respected academic. His books in the 2010s, Revolt on the Right and National Populism, were serious attempts to grapple with the emerging populist revolt, with the rise of UKIP and the Brexit vote in the UK, as well as Trump in the US and the emerging hard right in Europe. They were well received by his fellow academics and in the press.
In contrast, reviews of his new self-published book, Suicide of a Nation: Immigration, Islam, Identity, have not only been universally poor across the political spectrum. They have also accused him of relying on falsely attributed quotes, misinterpreted statistics and “AI hallucinations.” One of the earliest reviewers to suspect AI was behind Goodwin’s research felt moved to ask: “Did Goodwin verify any of his claims? Did he open a single book [while] writing his own? Or did he just accept whatever an AI chatbot spat out because it would make him sound vaguely informed?”
Among the errors to have raised eyebrows is Goodwin’s contention that English-speaking children are a minority in primary schools in London and other major British cities. This would indeed be an extraordinary state of affairs, although it seems to be based on a misunderstanding, either by Goodwin himself or by an AI tool. Statistics about children in British schools who have “English as an additional language” seem to have been taken as meaning children who cannot speak English at all. Similarly, quotes attributed to Cicero, Hayek, and James Burnham appear to have been hallucinated or based on an AI summary of their views. At one point, the book claims that Boris Johnson was “in opposition” when he launched the Conservative Party manifesto in 2019, when Johnson was, in fact, prime minister.
Clearly, there is a case to answer here. Adding to the suspicion is the fact that the book is self-published—despite his earlier books coming through established publishing houses, like Penguin and Routledge—and the timing of its release: just one month after his loss in the Gorton and Denton by-election. Suicide of a Nation seems like it was rushed out to capitalize on Goodwin’s role in one of the most high-profile electoral battles of at least the past year. All of this might explain the apparent shoddiness of the research and fact-checking.
Yet rather than rebut the claims or own up and apologize, Goodwin has doubled down in defending his work. He has accused his critics of being “left-wing trolls” who haven’t read the book. He has boasted about how the backlash has helped to boost sales, pushing it to near the top of the Amazon UK charts. He even came out swinging to defend his book on GB News, in a debate with one of his left-wing critics, Andy Twelves. In an astonishing piece of television, Goodwin states confidently that his book cannot have been written by AI. His proof? He ran it through ChatGPT, and told him, “This does not read like an AI-written book.” So case closed, presumably.
What is most frustrating about the “MattGPT” episode is that the themes raised in Suicide of a Nation are indeed important, and Goodwin’s assessment of the state of 2020s Britain is broadly correct. A compelling book on the malign consequences of unchecked migration, the threat posed by Islamist extremism, and the suicidal empathy of the elites ought not to be too difficult to write without AI’s help. The horrors of the grooming gangs and the Manchester Arena bombing are all too real—as are the attempts by the authorities to silence anyone who dares to notice and linger on these uncomfortable truths. Yet Goodwin’s blunder has provided his critics with yet another excuse to avoid that conversation. And so Britain’s slow suicide continues.
As if anticipating the furor, Goodwin writes in Suicide of a Nation, “The elites will attack me because I wrote this for you. They will call me every name under the sun because I dare to tell you the truth.” Perhaps this would have been true regardless of the AI allegations. No doubt the left would loathe any anti-migration polemic, even one that was impeccably sourced and factually bulletproof. But as Sun Tzu famously said, “Never give your enemy an opening.” Or at least, it’s the kind of thing he might have said, according to ChatGPT.
Read the full article here
