Political incorrectness gone mad

When meaningful is meaningless
And meaningless is meaningful,
Political incorrectness has gone mad;
When the Government is synonymous
With conquering ignoramuses
Why are these Brexits still so fucking sad?

***

‘David Davis is still denying MPs a “meaningful vote” on Brexit’ – “Things can only get bitter.

Why are Brexits so unhappy? They won. Scrutiny and accountability are fundamental to Sovereignty and Democracy. Well, it might be rather late in the Brexit day but that is exactly what is happening. Brexits said they were fighting to take back control but they are busily trying to give it away with no discernment, whatsoever. And they say it is the remoaners who are not patriotic…

Other words for people doing their jobs:
Saboteurs
Enemies of the people
Mutineers (£)

On Twitter, @ LeaveEUOfficial even précis a link to a ‘Westmonster’ post, today (I won’t dignify it with a direct link), with “The 15 Tory MPs who voted against enshrining the Brexit date into UK law are the cancer within their party and traitors to their country. Total disregard for the people’s democratic choice”

It’s that kind of crazy-arsed paranoia that started all this catastrophic crap.

Advertisements

The value in the tale

In pride of place
That cut your nose to spite your face
And say you did not recognise it, anyway

Of all the scapegoats in your myth
Did make yourselves its greatest gift
To value in the tale

***

At the heart of all this is the political irony that defines our times: that the very thing so many places voted for makes any attempt at their area’s revival even less likely.” – John Harris (Guardian)

So having advised investors to remove their money from the UK, the Rt. Hon. John [Brexiteer] Redwood told the UK government to go for ‘hard Brexit’”. – Frances Coppola (Forbes)

Brexiteer James Dyson says he wants to make it “easier to hire and fire” people and for the government to scrap corporation tax (Metro) – Then “warns government not to cut farm subsidies”, his total farming estate – Beeswax Dyson Farming – is the biggest in the UK (Farmers Weekly)

[”100 reasons why Brexit was a good thing” (Telegraph)] 🤷🏻‍♀️

The way the Tories roll

The principle that’s principal
Is risible
Dirigible
The higher ones invisible
The way the Tories roll

Integrity neglected
Law and ethics disrespected
Fact and fiction self-selective
That’s the way the Tories roll

The gap in credibility
Is sizeable
Revisable
And utterly derivable
The way the Tories roll

Logic magic’ly fragmented
Half the party looks demented
Even sound as though they meant it
It’s a leading Tory role

Can’t tell their elbows from their arses
All hot air and whoopsie farces
Sinister, the stink that passes
Whereabouts the Tories roll

Crony ring of tooth and claw
Surviving on revolving doors
And carousels of dizzy poor
Sees Tories on a roll

With patronising platitudes
And breathtaking ineptitude
They then expect our gratitude
Oh, how the Tories roll!

Avoiding liability
Financial incivility
So hostile to humility
There’s no deniability
That Tory heads must roll

For the slope of plausibility
Grows slippery
With trickery
And, trip! There goes fuckwittery
How fast can Tories roll?

 

[November, 2015 – plus ça change…]

People can make-believe of anything

People can make-believe of anything: an idea; a time/place; a person; the worth of Brexit. It might be founded on sheer strength of feeling or on the perception that a logical position is providing a complete picture. Checks on reasoning are subsumed into the comfort of confirmation bias. It becomes a feedback-loop of superiority and victimhood, working as a shield against all opposition.

The greater the investment in a position, the greater the requirement for its justification and, the more one justifies an investment, the more one becomes consumed by the need to. This is an ideological dependency developing a religious-like zeal for its own protection. Seeing is believing where believing is seeing: these are now the same thing. Chicken and egg. It doesn’t lead to truths, except by virtue of coincidental overlap – luck – or by lessons learned through the observation of its example – judgement.

And because the cold, hard truths of Brexit are self-evident, either you admit your error, to yourself, at the very least, or you double down and brazen it out, in the hope that denial will buy time and yet save your face. Thus, through fear or cynicism, you set yourself to the mission of converting and recruiting others because, well, safety and righteous correctness in evangelical numbers, right?

Wasting wisdom

Just when you think Labour couldn’t be any more two-dimensional in its imagination, centrist dads “are middle-aged men who cannot come to terms with the world and politics changing”. “He’s white, middle-class, wears a leather jacket and probably watches Top Gear on Amazon Prime.”

1) Well, derr, of course they can’t when they can see how risky it is. It is not the changing but the manner of the changing. And 2) Is he, though? Does he, really?

What looks quite funny and almost clever, at first glance, is actually a bit sinister. Corbyn disciples seem to think that any opposition to their ideas for change is opposition to all change. That to advise caution, whether based on experience or evidence is merely to defend the status quo.

Maybe those currently being so casually labelled as centrist dads just do not approve of rebellion that blindly throws out the babies with the bath water. They need to be convinced. This is a reason why they did not all vote for Brexit. This is a reason why variants of “national” and “socialism” raise alarm bells when they keep appearing together. This is why they respond with ‘why?’ and ‘how?’ to the utopian manifestos of populists riding in on fake unicorns.

And by any chance, are those slagging off centrists and conflating them with dinosaurs in a fresh sweep of generalisation the very same people who hated the mainstream until Corbyn declared that his Labour had taken the centre ground and gone mainstream? ‬Isn’t Jeremy a centrist dad, now? Or does having no rhythm, taking pride in his allotment and a love of drain-spotting in an anorak not count? And are these people the very same who rail against the expedient stereotyping and demonising of whole demographics? Why, yes they are.‬

Not only have they inappropriately neologised an already subjective and relative term but, in so doing, increase divisiveness by a) undermining the tangible cause they have against real ageist/sexist patriarchal condescension in return for indiscriminately insulting reasonable men over some arbitrary age, who cannot object, lest it prove their point in a when did you stop beating your wife sort of way. And b) distorting the substance of party-political arguments through an ever-convoluted defensiveness against people who cannot help but challenge current Labour thinking and do not much rate Jeremy Corbyn – of which, ironically there are many women. Go moderate mums, you still invisible angels…

Perhaps it is easier to imagine that you are on “the right side of history” when you’re hell-bent on reintroducing the past and literally rewriting its meaning.

Oh, snowflake

Oh, snowflake, how unique your delicate heart
That glistens in communal blizzards
Of parched intellect

Whose crystalline shards
And feathered spaces
Shape imperfect synecdoches

And bring your frozen deserts
Into sharp relief against the dust
Of desiccated humours

And confusion of
Unfathomable hatred, until
All is powder; like and like

Steal nuance and lay waste
To inconvenient subtleties
On platforms, uniform, attend,

As granular as common sand
And no one is that special
In the end.

 

Nothing very “centrist” about that.

Laissez-faire
Less fair
Fewer fare
Welfare

Nothing very “centrist” about that. I remember when the common complaint of the Left was that Labour had moved to the right; that it was ‘Blue Labour’ and I remember how the Conservatives had the nerve to claim that they held the Centre when it had clearly shifted the country to the Right. Those were the days when the idea of a middle/the centre, though politically subjective, was understood to be relative; a moveable feast, eagerly sought and fought for – when to be moderate was not condemned as wishy-washy and most certainly was not used as a euphemism for ‘neoliberal’.

I wrote loads, here and on twitter, about the centre and the middle. Some of it was creative mischief or naive reactionary hyperbole, of course (just scroll up and type “middle” or “centre” into the search box) but the connective thread through my arguments was not and the topic was ripe in the Press and on social media. Back then, I was tweeting such sentiments as: “Labour stop fuss-assing with this insipid centre ground tosh. Take us Left & call it “The Centre” like Thatcher & Blair taught us 😉 #bbcsp” [April, 2013]

Those were the days when the middle/the centre was a desirable direction for those who are now calling anti-Brexit and not-keen-on-Corbyn people “centrists”, as though to hold such a position were right-wing and, therefore, anathema to Reason and decency. They forget that, like austerity, moderation is more than just a socio-economic philosophy. It is also an attitude; a reflection of an inner worldview response, mindful of extremism and hysteria, constantly taking responsibility for checking itself. There is nothing Thatcherite, neoliberal, Blairite or any other lazy labelling about that. There is little about our current political climate that is.