It seems the UK’s Johnson government isn’t the only political organisation copying whole chapters from the Nazi playbook.
US President Donald Trump has announced a plan to set up what critics have already dubbed his own version of the Hitler Youth – the scheme that was used to indoctrinate millions of German youngsters into Nazism in the 1930s and 40s.
The plan was announced in a Constitution Day speech at the White House Conference on American History at the National Archives Museum. Here’s CNN:
“We must clear away the web of twisted lies in our schools and classrooms and teach our children the magnificent truth about our country. We want our sons and daughters to know that they are the citizens of the most exceptional nation in the history of the world,” Trump said.
The President also called The New York Times’ 1619 Project, a Pulitzer Prize-winning project aimed at teaching American students about slavery, “toxic propaganda.”
In an apparent countering of the project’s narrative, Trump announced that he would be establishing a “national commission to promote patriotic education” called the 1776 Commission.
Apparently he said he wanted to counter “the liberal indoctrination” – mark that word – “of America’s youth”. But isn’t “indoctrination” exactly what he’s planning to do to them?
That’s another classic ploy of the Johnson government – doing something questionable but accusing somebody else of the crime.
It didn’t work – as these tweets demonstrate:
I cannot see "trump Youth" without seeing Hitler Youth.
Trump promises to sign an executive order on patriotic education in schools — which is another way of saying that in the future, all of America's youth will be educated, trained, and indoctrinated in Trump ideology.
It seems Trump wants to create a new generation of stormtroopers for his far-right ideology.
Hitler’s version of that was nicknamed the Brown Shirts.
Perhaps we could call anyone who signs up to this the “Brown Shorts”?
In all seriousness, though, this is a terrifying development.
It shows that the most powerful nation on the planet is on the brink of totalitarianism. Will its citizens choose sanity in the election this November?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
The graphic really is like the opening titles of Dad’s Army, but the message is perverse.
Behind graphics reminiscent of the old TV sit-com, that represented the UK’s older (and younger) citizens fending off the Nazi hordes, the Home Office comes across as having been taken over by the Nazis,
“We are working to remove” – take note of that language, remove. It means the Home Office is sending people back to the home countries they fled to seek asylum in the United Kingdom – “migrants with no right to remain in the UK”. Migrants like Mercy Baguma who, rather than being removed, was starved to death in her Glasgow home after the Home Office removed her right to remain but then did nothing, leaving her in limbo without any way of feeding herself?
“But current return regulations” to which the UK signed up “are rigid and open to abuse…” If they’re “rigid”, then it shouldn’t be possible to abuse them; they’d mean one thing only. Is it not more likely that the current regulations simply don’t allow the Home Office (as run by Priti Patel) to just kick people out willy-nilly?
“… Allowing activist lawyers” – activist? Activist? Apparently an “activist” is a person who campaigns to bring about political and social change. The use of the word suggests that this is a bad thing. But if the current regime is keen to expel innocent people to an uncertain future – on the basis of questionable information (what are the facts on which the Home Office seeks to deport these people, anyway?) then it seems to me that political and social change is not only desirable but demanded.
“… to delay and disrupt returns…” Good for them!
Then it starts to get really sinister: “Soon we will no longer be bound by EU laws and can negotiate our own return arrangements.” Doesn’t this suggest that the Tory-run Home Office, overseen by Priti Patel, is looking forward to the freedom to treat Johnny Foreigner with extreme prejudice? To treating migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers as people with no rights at all?
I fear for the future of anyone falling into the clutches of such a regime. Fascism comes very strongly to mind.
Of course, we are British – and the clip is already getting the treatment it deserves:
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
The statue of Nancy Astor at Plymouth Hoe – that was only unveiled last year by Theresa May – has been sprayed with the word “Nazi”.
This Writer can’t understand why that word wasn’t included on the plaque.
I wrote about it when former prime minister Theresa May unveiled the statue, quoting from Joseph Kennedy and the Jews:
“Despite her anti-Catholicism, Nancy Astor was friends with US Ambassador to Britain Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr. Their correspondence is reportedly filled with anti-Semitic language. Edward J. Renehan, Jr. notes:
“As fiercely anti-Communist as they were anti-Semitic, Kennedy and Astor looked upon Adolf Hitler as a welcome solution to both of these “world problems” (Nancy’s phrase). … Kennedy replied that he expected the “Jew media” in the United States to become a problem, that “Jewish pundits in New York and Los Angeles” were already making noises contrived to “set a match to the fuse of the world”.
She may have been the UK’s first female MP but she was an anti-Semite and a supporter of Nazis.
And that makes Theresa May a supporter of Nazism by proxy, of course. She’s the second (current) Conservative Parliamentarian This Writer has had cause to describe as a Nazi – or worse – in 24 hours.
So when people do this…
A statue of Nancy Astor, the first female MP to take her seat in parliament, has become the latest monument to be targeted by vandals.
The word ‘Nazi’ has been spray painted on the plinth of the statue, along with an Antifascist Circle, a political symbol associated with the Social Democratic Party of Germany in the 1930s.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Tebbit’s law: the law of the far-right thug, apparently.
What a confession.
Norman Tebbit, writing in the Daily Telegraph has admitted that he thinks Adolf Hitler’s Nazi government of Germany in the 1930s and 40s was left-wing – because it had the word “socialist” in its title.
It’s an old, and easily-defeated, false argument but let’s all take a moment to enjoy the fact that the skeletal old thug has admitted that his own politics are more extreme even than Hitler’s. We all suspected; now we know.
He wrote: “Churchill was the great wartime leader in the fight to save this country and liberate our friends on the continent from the curse of Hitler’s extreme Left, anti-Semitic, German National Socialist Workers’ Party regime.”
“Extreme Left”? “Extreme Left“?
Reality check, please!
To Norman Tebbit and any so called 'conservative' wanting to propagate the lie that Nazis were socialists, you might want to look here (and countless other places) https://t.co/jugjU2Brk8. If you're too lazy to read it, I'll summarise: 'Nazism was/is extreme right wing fascism'
— Philippe Philoppe (@PhilipePhiloppe) June 24, 2020
There y’go. And if Nazism was “extreme right-wing fascism” but Norman Tebbit considers it to be of the “extreme Left”, then clearly Mr Tebbit is so right-wing he should be quarantined to prevent his own fascism from infecting anybody nearby – and the Torygraph sanctioned for publishing his vile opinions.
The article has produced some sharp responses, which are worth celebrating, though:
When you’re so far right you see Hiltler as a leftie.
I see that Norman Tebbit is spouting the old lie that "The Nazis were called the National Socialist Party, they had Socialist in the name, so therefore the Nazis were Socialist".
I wonder if he's ever eaten Spotted Dick?
— Harry ⚫ "Fallout 76 Collectron" Payne (@murphyslawyer) June 24, 2020
Think we have a joint winner in the great right-wing revisionist competition. Cycling and cricket racist Norman Tebbit and the Telegraph for printing his piece in which he first of all describes Hitler's Nazis as "extreme left"…and then belittles the death of George Floyd… pic.twitter.com/gmbrzckpJH
If you’re not aware of this, the label “cricket racist” arises from his infamous 1990 ‘cricket test’ in which black Britons were invited to pick a side to support when England played the West Indies. The implication was that they were more likely to support the foreign team than their own national side. Some have tried to claim that the comment was not racist but it is very similar to an anti-Semitic trope which suggests that all Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the UK. If the latter is anti-Semitic (and This Writer would certainly say it is, despite a pathetic attempt by the Labour Party to suggest otherwise with an extremely selective quotation) then the former is certainly racist.
Norman Tebbit telling us what most decent people had already suspected. On the political scale, Tories are to the right of nazis pic.twitter.com/cpTXhkFUeJ
Rightwingers are always on the wrong side of history yet they have a habit of rewriting history to cover up that fact. Norman Tebbit being the latest example as he declares Hitler was a Leftie. Let's not forget it was also the tories who conceived the idea of the NHS <rolls eyes>
— Wayne Smith Esq. #FBPE (@waynesmith1971) June 24, 2020
For the surprising number of people who seem to think that the Telegraph / Norman Tebbit assertion that the Nazi party were extreme left wing was correct. pic.twitter.com/nCpl6g4ITQ
Okay, here’s Sean Connery, from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade:
“Goose-stepping morons like [Tebbit] should try reading books instead of burning them!”
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Nazis: it seems Tory MP Henry Smith shares their view.
People often forget that Karl Marx was Jewish.
Isn’t it interesting, then, that among all the clamour for statues of racists across the UK to be removed from positions glorifying them, a Conservative MP thought it was appropriate to have a stab at Marx?
Tories 2015-2020: Let's deflect from all the racism and bigotry in our own party by banging on about how bad antisemitism is.
Tories now: Let's desecrate a Jewish grave because we hate his critique of capitalism. https://t.co/nuLMgVuRPb
The typical claim is that “socialist”* regimes have killed “100 million” people. This always includes famines and other things that are blamed on socialism and its supposed inefficiency, for instance, the 36 million people that died during the Chinese famine.
UNICEF, RESULTS, and Bread for the World estimate that 15 million people die each year from preventable poverty, of whom 11 million are children under the age of five. ( one of many sources)
So in 10 years, capitalism kills more children under the age of 5 than socialism did in 150 years.
“But that’s not capitalism’s fault! That’s just scarcity/underdevelopment!”
So why are you blaming 36 million deaths of the Chinese famine on socialism and its inefficiency?
Has a Communist society ever existed as determined By Karl Marx?
No. Even Marx distanced himself from those who had already began distorting his writings in the late 1870’s. Communism as determined by Karl Marx has never existed and would take centuries post revolution to create.
Henry Smith, Tory MP, has a Union Flag symbol on his Twitter handle – which explains a lot:
Will the Conservative authorities take action against their rogue agent here?
No.
But if they don’t, then we can cheerfully conclude that there is at least a group within the Parliamentary Conservative Party that supports the Nazism we saw on our streets yesterday.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
This story will be full of apparent contradictions. It is, in fact, about betrayal.
It features Nazis making stiff-armed salutes next to the Cenotaph, and claiming to be supporting Churchill.
The same people, who say they love the rule of law, have attacked police.
And while claiming to deplore violence at the Black Lives Matter demonstration in London last week, they flew to it within minutes of starting their own demonstration.
There is sense to it – although it’s hard to see because people in authority would prefer you to remain confused – and the mass media support them in that.
This story is best told from the response to the removal of Edward Colston’s statue in Bristol last week – triggering a movement to remove other statues glorifying slavers and racists including calls for the removal of the statue to World War II prime minister Winston Churchill in London – and its actual defacement. In fact, the story started decades ago, as we will see.
The threat to Churchill’s effigy seems to have brought every far-right-wing lunatic in the United Kingdom out of the woodwork to demand action to protect a man they claim as an inspirational, ideological leader. Figureheads demanded that every “patriot” – take note of the language – should be in London to defend the statue during the next scheduled Black Lives Matter demonstration in London – on June 13 (today).
Black Lives Matter organisers weren’t having any of that; their demos are always intended to be peaceful and there was a clear threat of violence in the so-called “patriots”‘ call to action. They pulled out and left London to the lunatics.
Meanwhile, the authorities boarded up the statue, leaving nothing for the “patriots” to protect.
They went anyway – and caused scenes that have been branded in the mildest possible terms as a “national disgrace”.
To learn why the far right thought it necessary to scandalise the country – possibly the world – we need to go back many decades, to examine the career of their idol Churchill.
The claim is that they are protecting the legacy of the man whose leadership saved us from Nazism and the politics of Hitler. But the people saying that are the same people who, today, threw Nazi salutes at the cenotaph in an insult to everybody who died to protect us in the 1939-45 war.
These people are not celebrating a victory over fascism!
So what are they celebrating?
Churchill was a racist and an oppressor of his own countryfolk. That is the Churchill the far-right revere.
Look at the Tonypandy riots massacre in Wales in 1910. As Home Secretary, Churchill sent first Metropolitan police officers, then the 18th Hussars – who shot down the striking miners. It is widely believed that he ordered the use of live rounds, although he denied it.
Or shall we talk about his actions in Liverpool, the following year?
How in the name of all that is holy is this the first time I have ever heard about this? I knew about the Welsh miners. I had no idea about this whatsoever. https://t.co/6iguOH2efz
— CrémantCommunarde#ActivistLawyer ⚖️ 😷 ✋ (@0Calamity) June 12, 2020
I’m sure there are other examples but let’s look at the racism:
According to his biographer, John Charmley, Churchill believed in a racial hierarchy and eugenics, and that at the top of this were White Protestant Christians.
He said it was ‘alarming and nauseating’ seeing Gandhi ‘striding half-naked up the steps of the vice-regal palace’ in India. He also said ‘I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion’. So it should be no surprise that he allowed three million people to die in the Bengal famine of 1943, in which Churchill refused to deploy food supplies.
The Bengalis starved because their grain had been sequestered as back up supplies to feed British troops. In the end they weren’t needed. Churchill also said that the famine was their fault for having too many children.
I'm not allowed to say Churchill was responsible for the deaths of 3 million people in Bengal without mentioning his leadership in WW2, but I am allowed to mention his leadership in WW2 without mentioning the 3 million deaths he helped cause. Apparently.
— Jessie is so tired. (@TheJessieKirk) June 12, 2020
This racist also said that ‘Keep Britain White’ was a good slogan for the Tories to go into the 1951 general election.
Let’s look at his attitude to World War II. Boris Johnson has claimed that the former prime minister “saved this country and the whole of Europe from a barbaric fascist and racist tyranny, and our debt to him is incalculable”.
But according to historian of fascism Martin Pugh, Churchill wasn’t opposed to fascism in itself; he was simply concerned that Nazi Germany threatened British interests in the North Sea.
And Peter Hitchens has pointed out that Churchill wasn’t interested in saving the Jews; he was simply honouring treaties with Poland and France. He knew about the extermination camps but neither said nor did anything about them until they were liberated during the allied invasions of Germany and Poland.
My 92 year old father is an expert on Jewish history and anti-Semitism. He has never forgiven Winston Churchill for knowing about the Nazi death camps but failing to act on that knowledge. FDR and the Red Cross were similarly grossly negligent.
So it should be unsurprising that people of good conscience have reached the logical conclusions about Churchill:
The way Churchill is remembered in the UK has always been tied up with ideas of white superiority. Why do you think so many people of colour are critical of the way he's celebrated? The way the far-right are behaving today is terrifying but not surprising.
I have already mentioned Boris Johnson’s history-denying defence of Churchill as a fighter against fascism, when he was no such thing. Is it any surprise, then, that after he was told to “grow a pair” and defend the continuance of the statue (by people like the boxer Tyson Fury), he leapt to it?
“The statue of Winston Churchill in Parliament Square is a permanent reminder of his achievement in saving this country – and the whole of Europe – from a fascist and racist tyranny,” he wrote on Twitter yesterday.
“It is absurd and shameful that this national monument should today be at risk of attack by violent protestors. Yes, he sometimes expressed opinions that were and are unacceptable to us today, but he was a hero, and he fully deserves his memorial.
“We cannot now try to edit or censor our past. We cannot pretend to have a different history. The statues in our cities and towns were put up by previous generations.”
Sadly, here he is undermined by the UK government itself, which has indeed edited and censored the UK’s collective past:
British Establishment:
“People cannot just go around erasing British history if they don’t like it!”
The news story refers to the destruction of records detailing crimes committed by the British Empire in its colonies, during its final years. Apparently Mr Johnson thinks it is perfectly acceptable to edit and censor the past when it reveals inconvenient facts.
He has attracted appropriate criticism:
Johnson clearly anxious here that any possible future statue of himself not be immediately thrown in the sea. https://t.co/zX7iWjJRXj
What conclusions may we draw so far? That far-right-wingers in the UK made an issue of defending Churchill’s statue because they are racists, just as he was? That they hoped to disrupt the planned Black Lives Matter demonstration in order to beat up black people? That they relied on Boris Johnson for support because he is a racist (“picaninnies with watermelon smiles”, remember. “Letterboxes” and “bank robbers”, remember)? That the Nazi salutes in London today were as much for Johnson as they were for Churchill?
That they were relying on a rise in racism in the UK caused and promoted by successive Conservative governments since 2010 – most especially around the UK’s membership of the European Union and Brexit?
From ‘legitimate concerns’ about immigration to Nazi salutes at the Cenotaph in four years flat. These goons are just a symptom. The disease begins with media & politicians.
The UK urgently needs to recognise what has been unleashed and normalised by Brexit because that is a vital context for what is happening today. Sure, EDL etc have been around for much longer, but the fact is that the far right has never been more emboldened.
— Prof Tanja Bueltmann (@cliodiaspora) June 13, 2020
We should also take note of another aspect of the far-right-wing malady: exceptionalism. They adopt what it suits them to adopt and ignore the inconvenient facts – such as the fact that their ally in support of Winston Churchill, Boris Johnson, also presided over the ejection of Churchill’s grandson from the Conservative Party:
This exceptionalism is especially strong with regard to statues of slavers, racists and other oppressors who, we are told, made Britain “great”:
The statue obsession is another bit of English exceptionalism. We know all about Communist propaganda statues, about the Nazis – some even know about the history of the Conferederate statues in the US – but don’t see that ours are in any way the same.
See, Katarzyna b-m was saying anyone who is uncomfortable with the way people behave in their home (or indeed, home country) – such as their choice of decoration – is welcome to leave. The comment may be considered dog-whistle racism towards Ash, who is a person of colour. But Ash just batted it away with the pertinent observation that, when the British invaded other people’s homes in the time of Empire, they did the exact opposite; instead of leaving, the British changed those other nations and didn’t give a fig about the feelings of the natives.
With these statues, of course, it is native Britons who want rid, so the argument is nonsense. But that’s right-wing exceptionalism for you.
We’re getting close to the events in London today, but should first consider two more elements in this mix: the police and the press. Both have been put between a rock and a hard place.
The police, you see, were prompted into action last week against Black Lives Matter demonstrators – although members of Avon and Someset Constabulary wisely avoided a confrontation with those who pulled down Edward Colston’s statue, even though it was done illegally. The far-right extremists who planned to challenge any demonstration this weekend were claiming to be upholding the rule of law – but their subsequent actions made it clear that this was not true. What were the police supposed to do with them?
And the news media have been instrumental in supporting the rise of racism in the UK over the last few years – faithfully reporting the Tory governments’ claims that immigrants have been responsible for many of the nation’s ills, among other questionable practices. The extremist demonstration in London today was a logical result and progression of these reports – but what sort of treatment did reporters expect if they pointed their cameras at the violence that happened today?
Right-wingers are doing Nazi salutes in front of the Cenotaph … yet the media want you to believe it's the left who don't respect British history!pic.twitter.com/wzqlDoY1vQ
It tells us that racism is still alive and well in the UK and that most of the people in this video clip are there to stick it to the blacks.
Next thing we knew, these people who claimed to be celebrating Churchill the man who led us to victory over the Nazis were performing Nazi salutes in front of the police (and also in front of the cenotaph in an insult to the people whose deaths that monument represents):
Far right thugs, emboldened by their pin up boy Boris Johnson, attacking police. This is what happens when you vote a man into office who has not only said many racist things, but who has declined any opportunity to apologise for them pic.twitter.com/MpLRj3SLDM
Interestingly, the Nazis doing the saluting were again contradicting themselves; they’re all for police brutality against black people (because they’re racists) – but if the cops turn a heavy hand to them, it’s a different story and they react with violence:
I thought they loved the Police and wanted to protect them?
How are you defending Churchill’s statue on the basis that he defeated the Nazis and then doing Nazi salutes in front of his statue?!? The state of it all.
Just to make this clear #BLM in London was cancelled. So no one try to say the peaceful protests are in anyway connected to this 👇 at all. Ever. https://t.co/RDB9fnt22H
— Юридически привилегированный Londongrad (@LPrivileged) June 13, 2020
Bottles, cans and smoke bombs thrown in the last half hour at police and their horses in Parliament Square by football firms/far-right protesters. Anyone who is thought to be media is also being threatened. pic.twitter.com/m0nv91uAsO
Turns out it's the far-right who are the thugs after all. You'd think the opposite from Britain's media, especially of the last 5 years. https://t.co/QbucIzYWAd
A photographer has just had his nose broken at Parliament Square by far-right anti-BLM protestors. I’ll be waiting for the condemnation from the PM and the media.
Right-wing thugs on their anti-black protest in London have broken a journalist's nose. Others shout "wanker" at him and throw stuff as he moves to safety.
Wow the BBC have not reported the Nazi salutes at all and are even giving Paul Golding a quote….wtaf? They are promoting the far right+ still saying BLM are the violent group.
BBC News – Black Lives Matter: Police impose restrictions on London protests https://t.co/g2ilTL0lPf
The United Kingdom remains a hopelessly racist nation.
It is racist because the history we learn reeks of it. Our monuments venerate it. Our government promotes it. And our (white) people take their cue from all three.
This situation will not change because our government – and the most powerful people in the UK – want to keep it the way it is.
It puts us at each others’ throats instead of at theirs.
And why is it about betrayal?
Simple. This overt racism is a betrayal of everyone who has been led to believe that Britain is better than that.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
All Nazis together: unrepentant Boris Johnson probably doesn’t even wish he hadn’t pulled this pose.
Senior Tories have been working hard to repair the damage Andrew Sabisky has done to their credibility – but it’s hard when their own prime minister is refusing to deny that he holds the same racist opinions.
Grant Shapps was the first to claim that Sabisky did not speak for the Conservative government.
He said over the weekend that Sabisky’s reported opinions were views that “neither I or the government share in any shape or form”.
But when a Downing Street spokesperson was asked whether Mr Shapps was speaking on behalf of the government, he replied that Johnson’s views were “well-documented”, adding: “The transport secretary was speaking as the transport secretary. I have answered the question on behalf of the prime minister.”
Of course it is impossible to deny that Johnson has those views; he has expressed them time and again.
For example, on the subject of black people’s IQs, shall we consider Johnson’s novel Seventy-two Virgins? Consider:
And of course Johnson was forced to apologise in 2008, after he wrote an article in The Spectator saying that black people have lower IQs.
Meanwhile Mr Shapps has been joined in condemning this viewpoint by Kwasi Kwarteng, according to The Independent:
“Kwasi Kwarteng broke with Boris Johnson – who has thus far refused to condemn the departing aide – by branding his [Sabisky’s] past comments “racist”, “offensive” and “reprehensible”.
“Calling for an overhaul of recruitment, Kwarteng said: “I think we should prevent racists from coming into No10 or wherever he was working. I think we do need to look at these processes.”
“On Sabisky’s past writings, Kwarteng said: “It was completely reprehensible – they were racist remarks.””
Mind you, Kwarteng never had a word to say in opposition for the whole of the week that Sabisky was in position. Funny, that.
And Caroline Nokes, who was already on the record about this, attacked the prime minister’s office for being silent over Sabisky’s “abhorrent views”.
Again according to The Independent: “Unfortunately we had 48 hours of almost complete silence and no comment from Downing Street, who could have distanced themselves from his youthful comments at any point, but they chose not to do so.”
Nokes also said: “I think you want to have exciting ideas and energy around policy-making in Downing Street, what you don’t want is racism, sexism and the sort of abhorrent ideas that were present in this young man’s tweets.”
Unfortunately, that’s exactly what is in Downing Street – and will continue to be, for as long as Boris Johnson remains in office as prime minister.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Dominic Cummings did ask for “weirdos” – and that’s exactly what he’s giving us in the former of his fascist advisor Andrew Sabisky.
This maniac was handed a job by Boris Johnson, and has been sitting in on government briefings for a week already. His known beliefs, preferences and pronouncements should tell you everything you need to know about the direction of Mr Cummings’s government.
(Let’s be honest: Boris Johnson is just a figurehead and has been completely sidelined from policy management. The UK is being run by an unelected far-right extremist and now – it seems clear – his fascist helper.)
Consider:
That’s right: Sabisky wanted to sterilise poor people. According to the Huffington Post, he sent that comment to a website run by Cummings – who seems to share the same leanings.
There’s more:
And here are Sabisky's views on race and 'intellectual disabilities' (which have not yet been deleted) pic.twitter.com/KW07AVk3ql
Oh, and he thinks taking an allegedly brain-enhancing drug called Modafinil is “worth a dead kid”. According to the Daily Mail:
“In a 2016 interview Mr Sabisky talks about modafinil – a drug usually used to tackle sleepiness due to narcolepsy but often used as a brain-enhancer.
“Mr Sabisky – who calls himself a ‘super forecaster’ – addressed the drug’s side effects in children which includes a higher risk of Stevens-Johnson syndrome, a life-threatening condition in which a person’s skin dies and falls off.
“He told an interview with School’s Week: ‘From a societal perspective the benefits of giving everyone modafinil once a week are probably worth a dead kid once a year.’
“In the same interview, he said: ‘Eugenics are about selecting “for” good things.”
Eugenics – the policy of selective breeding to enhance some genetic traits and reduce others – was a prominent Nazi policy.
Oh, and he’s a sexist too: “Mr Sabisky Tweeted: ‘I am always straight up in saying that women’s sport is more comparable to the Paralympics than it is to men’s.'”
“It is still unclear to what extent FGM represents a serious risk to young girls, raised in the UK, of certain minority group origins,” he wrote.
“Much of the hue and cry looks more like a moral panic.”
This is the direction of your government.
Fortunately, someone in the train-wreck that we still call the Labour Party has got their act together enough to call for Sabisky’s removal – before he can do serious harm.
According to the Huffington Post (again): “Shadow Cabinet Office minister Jon Trickett said: “There are really no words to describe Boris Johnson’s appointment as one of his senior advisers a man who is on record as supporting the forced sterilisation of people he considers not worthy. He must of course be removed from this position immediately.”
“Number 10 has declined to comment.”
And there’s your problem.
Number 10 doesn’t have to comment – or do anything at all about this – because the UK electorate voted the Conservatives back into power with a thumping great majority, so the Conservatives are going to use it to give us a great big thumping.
With Cummings and Sabisky in the driving seat, you’d better get ready for perverse levels of oppression.
And if any Tory voter turns to you and complains, just remind them:
Labour: is it becoming a party of intolerance and bigotry under the misguidance of those at the top.
This is ugly and Labour’s leadership candidates need to own it.
You will all be aware, already, of the illegal behaviour of Labour’s leadership in “tackling” (their word) anti-Semitism, whereby the party faked evidence to make it appear that I was an anti-Semite, broadcast the lies to the newspapers in order to induce people to believe them, and then used them as an excuse to expel me from the party.
I believe the current plan is to change the rules so even an accusation will be enough to justify expulsion.
Today, it seems at least one leadership candidate has announced that she is keen to spread the bigotry around, with a plan to expel people accused of being transphobic.
Wouldn’t it be better to talk to them instead? What happened to the art of discussion and explanation?
I have trans friends. I recently supported a person who – originally female – spent some time determined to become a man. Now she has had second thoughts and has decided not to go through with it, and that’s okay too. I supported her throughout, because that’s what friends do.
But I know that some people have a problem with that and I have talked some of them through. Sometimes it’s simply a matter of showing them a way of thinking that they haven’t considered before.
So when I saw on Facebook Rebecca Long-Bailey advocating the immediate expulsion of “transphobes” (I put the word in quotation marks because her interpretation of it and mine are likely to be very different), I couldn’t help but react with the “Ha ha” icon.
“What happened to the idea of Labour being inclusive?” I asked.
The initial response gave me a moment’s hope. James Waterhouse stated: “It should be mate. The amount of transphobia by some people whether members or supporters is depressing.”
But then the conversation went downhill:
Let’s have a look at this:
Lianne Powell: “I don’t think he’s being supportive considering he laughed at the post. Mike probably thinks we should be inclusive and allow transphobes to stay…”
According to whose definition are people to be tarred as “transphobes”, now? Is it to be on the same lines as Labour’s definition of “anti-Semite” – anybody who is accused of it?
That’s not acceptable and it isn’t inclusive. Hence my answer: “Don’t be silly, now.”
Lianne responded: “Says the person who thought it appropriate to laugh at this post…”
But it was appropriate. Labour’s record in dealing with anti-Semitism accusations is a disgrace, and now a leadership candidate is planning to eject anybody accused of something else? Ridiculous! Who will they be throwing out next – people with freckles?
I have to admit that my response – repeating “Don’t be silly, now,” wasn’t the best I could possibly have devised. I was disappointed that this person was so determined to see the matter in black and white, refusing to accept that it is possible for people to make mistakes and to learn from them. To be honest, I didn’t see the point in trying to reason with that kind of bigotry.
But worse was to follow:
In Lou Kilmartin we see a genuine, gold-plated bigot:
“What’s funny about the original post?”
I replied: “The idea that that is any way for an inclusive leadership candidate to behave.”
The response: “Seems pretty inclusive to me. No tolerance for intolerance is a pretty good jumping off point.”
No, it is not.
It is an opportunity for unscrupulous people to attack people they don’t like, tar them as something they aren’t, and ban them from a group – as we have seen with the anti-Semitism fiasco. The instant you start banning anyone for even questioning the wisdom of a course of action, you have left the progressive path and joined the fascists.
Who’s right?
I said: “Not at all. You don’t leap to expulsion. You discuss and you educate. This is just an attempt to find an excuse to purge the party of “people we don’t like”. Or didn’t you think of that?”
The response: “If you genuinely believe that the terf movement [it means Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminst] in the Labour Party is open to discussion or education, then you’re either incredibly naive or a flat out moron.”
Really? It seems to me that Lou Kilmartin is the one who isn’t open to discussion or education. But Lou Kilmartin does seem very keen, on the other hand, to engage in accusation and vilification. That encourages me to suggest that Lou Kilmartin is on the wrong side of this argument.
“Why do you expect trans people to constantly justify and debate our existence?”
I don’t. I never suggested that they should. And falsely attributing that attitude to me is a false argument.
“Would you be so accommodating to racist or homophobic factions within the party?”
I think readers of This Site know its author well enough to know that I would not – but nor would I be willing to accept someone else’s word on it. Who says they’re racist? Who says their homophobes. And why are they saying it?
Now look at this:
“Or DiDnT yOu ThInK oF tHaT?”
What is this? Was this person trying to belittle me with alternate caps? What’s that all about?
It seemed very silly to me, so I ignored it and focused on the accusation and vilification I noticed at the start of the comment:
“That is an intolerant attitude. Shame on you.”
No response to that, notice.
Then I added: “For the record, I have trans friends.” This is true, as I have explained above. I should admit that I wrote it to see how the bigot would respond.
I wasn’t disappointed: Ridicule. “i HaVe TrAnS fWeNdS”
The bigot was incapable of accepting the possibility and had to try to belittle me instead. What do you think of that?
Then Lianne re-entered the conversation. Clearly a follower, rather than a leader, this person had seized on Lou Kilmartin’s lead, and had also apparently done a minimal amount of research into me:
“Weren’t you accused of AS and suspended with the offer of being allowed back if you took the education course offered to you??? Bit rich to preach about education if that’s the case.”
It’s an interesting comment for what it omits. I was accused and suspended – on the basis of lies. I was offered “education” with the Jewish Labour Movement, that had secretly recorded another person at one of its courses, edited the recording to create a false impression, and handed it to the press and the Labour Party as proof of anti-Semitism. That is not education. It is despicable. And if Leanne wants to use that as justification for attacking me, then Leanne is on the side of the demons.
Still, Lou Kilmartin seemed pleased: “Lianne Powell Holy shit I love you.”
I made a brief response: “No – because the accusation was false and I have taken the Labour Party to court over it. Labour is expected to lose.”
Now look at this from Lou Kilmartin: “Mike Sivier you’re right on one count, I am intolerant to intolerance. Sounds like you’re a fucking gem all round. No room for bigots in the party.”
Looking at all of the above, is this person intolerant to intolerance? Or are we seeing intolerance to differing viewpoints? That’s just intolerance. I’m big enough to shrug off the flat-out insult – although anyone reduced to ad hominem insults automatically loses any argument; if that’s all they can say, then they don’t have anything to say. As for the last line, here’s my response:
“In that case I hope you are not a member. You seem intolerant of anybody who does not agree with anything you say. Perhaps you would be more comfortable with the fascists.”
It is a fascist attitude to demand that other people agree with the pronouncements of a leader-figure, no matter how insane they are.
“That’s very rich coming from the guy suspended for accusations of antisemitism.” This person didn’t have anywhere to go. I had already pointed out that the accusations were false but, hey, let’s go back to that if it’s all we’ve got!
I figured it was time to point out the obvious: “Shocking behaviour by some people on this thread. Desperate to kick out people they don’t like. Try talking. It doesn’t cost anything.”
But I couldn’t resist responding to that last jab: “Did you not read my response to that? I think you did and I think you need to grow up.”
And what witty gem did Lou Kilmartin grace me with by way of reply? “Okay, boomer.”
Ageism.
It’s a response to people born in the baby boom of the 1940s and 1950s (I wasn’t): “Oh, you’re old and you don’t understand.”
So there you have it. This is the kind of Labour Party Rebecca Long-Bailey (and, presumably, the other leader candidates because none of them have distinguished themselves in these matters) wants to lead.
A party of intolerance, bigotry, liars, ageism, and fascism.
If you’re still a member of the Labour Party, is that the kind of organisation you want associated with you?
Because I don’t.
I’m staggered that a membership of half a million has allowed the situation to degenerate this far.
There is only one answer to the kind of attack I experienced on Facebook today.
Rejection. These people, along with everybody who agrees with them, can – and I don’t say this often – FUCK OFF.
Postscript: In a move typical of those exposed as bigots, those responsible for the disgraceful display chronicled above have removed it from Facebook. Draw your own conclusions.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
He THINKS he’s the law: Dominic Cummings, the Leave campaigner now seen as Boris Johnson’s top henchman, warns Tory rebels including David Gauke, Philip Hammond and – is that Theresa May or Ken Clarke? Michael Gove cheers him on while Dictator Johnson, wrapped in a Union Flag like a good ultra-nationalist fascist, watches from the background in this cartoon by Morton Morland.
Tory MPs who say they will not support Boris Johnson’s “no deal” Brexit may stand as independent Conservatives if he goes through with his threat to withdraw the whip from them – effectively expelling them from his party in Parliament.
The Dictator’s warning is already seen as an empty threat by many, as he would lose his majority in Parliament if he goes through with it.
And if BoJob’s government falls as a result, then he will not be leader and will be unable to follow through his threat to stop them standing as Tory election candidates.
So it could be crippling to him that as many as 20 Tory MPs are preparing to defy him:
“Reports suggest 20 Tory former ministers are prepared to stand as independent Conservatives at the next election if they are cast out. That would be a historic split for the Conservatives and the country”
The Mirror report, to which the tweet links, states that potential rebel MPs had been expecting to attend a meeting with Mr Johnson today (September 2), but this was cancelled after David Gauke appeared on a TV interview and said he was prepared to stand as an independent candidate in a future election, in the “national interest”.
BoJob said he would hold a “summit” meeting with Philip Hammond instead, but it seems unlikely that this will mollify the potential rebels.
The Dictator’s ultimatum means MPs who were cabinet ministers just six weeks ago may find themselves ejected from the party they used to lead in a matter of days – including, possibly, former prime minister Theresa May.
So what does @theresa_may do ? Is she now a rebel ? Will she be booted out of the Tory Party……. #justasking
Also in the firing line are Philip Hammond, David Gauke and Dominic Grieve.
Some leading members of the Johnson camp have – astonishingly – claimed that nobody will be deselected at all, in what seems a transparent attempt to deflect attention away from what’s going on – particularly with reference to the apparent rebel ringleader, David Gauke:
THERE IS NO DESELECTION MECHANISM IN THE @CONSERVATIVES PARTY
We have had these Leave EU stories amplified by the press for months and no Conservative MP has been deselected.@DavidGauke is a great MP and a huge asset to our party. https://t.co/dY4hHj0rVZ
It has been suggested that James Cleverly’s tweet may be deleted soon, so let’s just repeat its claim: “THERE IS NO DESELECTION MECHANISM IN THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY. We have had these Leave EU stories amplified by the press for months and no Conservative MP has been deselected. David Gauke is a great MP and a huge asset to our party.”
The threat from the Johnson camp has already been likened to a Stalinist purge, with some commentators pointing out that the only reason the mass media aren’t using those words is because it is happening in the Conservative Party and not Labour:
If Jeremy Corbyn threatened "mass deselections" & said he'd "block any rebel" from standing for the party again, the media would print the words "purge" & "Stalin" before he'd even finished his sentence.
Indeed, the fact that Labour has not purged any MPs is being used against the Johnson regime:
For 4 years the Tories have used deselection of non-ideologically pure MPs as an attack line against Corbyn’s Labour. And now, before any MPs have been deselected by Labour, a Tory PM is about to deselect a load of MPs who were in the cabinet until weeks ago
This Writer would not go that far. Conservatives are resilient and seem to have the survival instinct of the mythical hydra; cut off their head and two more will take its place.
And they are wily, too. Where the stick seems ineffective, Johnson and Cummings may try to apply the carrot and bribe their wayward colleagues back into line.
But the possible loss of his majority could represent a quantum leap forward in the battle against Boris Johnson’s bid to become the UK’s dictator.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
