But I think the magazine is heading in the wrong direction by identifying itself as the centre-right alternative to Prospect and trying to hitch a ride on the Cameron express. Nothing against Cameron, but as far as I’m concerned, the rise of New Labour was as irrelevant to the success of Prospect as the rise of Cameron will be to Standpoint’s future. Prospect’s virtue is precisely that it is not ideological. Its readership may be more so, but Goodhart, former arts editor Linklater and many contributors are very far removed from the politically correct ideal cherished in most left wing circles in academe and the media. For good measure, try squeezing Prospect regular Michael Lind into an ideological box.

I just can’t see the kowtowing to multicultural orthodoxy, nor the adherence to a New Labour political project within the magazine’s pages. Maybe Standpoint can make a go of it as an explicitly ideological intellectual magazine. I wish it the best and think it will do the world of ideas a service. But I can’t see it attaining the same penetration within the pool of intellectual consumers as Prospect.