Apologies for an angry political post:
With the UK elections coming up, I am TIRED of people who view "not voting" as the major problem, rather than the actual problem (decades of "left-wing" leadership capitulating to the right over and over again). Harm reduction, "lesser evil"-ism, strategic voting etc... all couched in demanding, moralistic terms when it is precisely this attitude that has led us to where we are today.
It may or may not be true that Labour winning the election will mean improvements for some poor and oppressed people. It definitely isn't certain, either in the short term or the long term, that they will not also do massive amounts of further damage. Sure the Tories would probably be worse, but by moving so far to the right, they open up space for another massive right shift in the Tories, similar to the Biden Presidency laying the basis for the return of Trump, while also backing genocide, failing to protect abortion rights etc...
Labour have already thrown queer people under the bus and totally capitulated to terfs like Rosie Duffield, they're singing to Farage's tune on immigration and demonising migrants, they have played an APPALLING role in supporting the genocide in Palestine, all while Lammy has been cosying up to Republicans in the US. Natalie Elphicke has been welcomed into the party, while Diane Abbot and other leftwingers (often also women of colour) have been treated horrendously. You've got Tories like Anna Soubry falling over themselves to endorse a Starmer government.
I trust the Lib Dems as far as I can throw them, and I know from personal experience there are some really reactionary elements of the Green party who are obsessed with population (i.e. hate poor people, especially those from developing countries). I will not go into why I hate Reform or the Tories, this should be fairly self explanatory.
So please, if you have a good MP or a worthwhile local candidate to vote for, by all means do so. HOWEVER, this does not mean that you get to pretend that anyone who does not want to participate in this election is somehow responsible for the lives destroyed by the British government. I will not be voting for a party that supports genocide and imperialist warmongering, and if you consider yourself of the left I hope those are red lines for you too.
You ESPECIALLY do not get to make this kind of moralistic argument if you are not actively organising in your communities, schools, universities, or workplaces to try and hold this next government accountable and build some kind of alternative. And, sorry, but that work does not start with moaning about people not voting on tumblr.com (I am aware I am also moaning on tumblr.com so idk maybe ignore me too)
Rant over.
0 notes
The BBC's political flagship program, Question Time, was filmed in Birmingham, where an audience member questioned the panel about the monarchy, including defence minister Alex Chalk MP, Labour's Bridget Phillipson, former politician and practising barrister Anna Soubry, journalist Ash Sarkar, and historian and author Tim Stanley. The panel discussed the question, "Have the allegations in Prince Harry's book damaged the royal family?"
Mr. Stanley denied that the monarchy has been damaged, an opinion supported by a recent YouGov survey about the popularity of the royals versus that of the Sussexes. The first poll after this concluded that the King and Prince William have gained public favour, while Harry's popularity has plummeted to its lowest level ever.
Despite his harsh criticisms of the monarchy, Mr Stanley accused the 38-year-old prince of "perversely" wanting to return to it. The commentator said, "Perversely, he wants to come back." He called the family hierarchical. It's a monarchy, hello? Of course, it is hierarchical.
Much of the criticism launched at the duke has been around his double standards of behaviour for himself compared to that of the royals and the press. Left-wing journalist and activist Ash Sarkar voiced her anger at the Sussexes' refusal to relinquish their titles amid their attacks on the Firm.
Ms. Sarkar, a self-described Republican, told the panel: "I think he should give up his titles." That is what leaves me cold.
The royal bluntly replied: "What difference would that make?" The comments come as Tory MPs pile on the pressure by demanding that Meghan and Harry be stripped of their titles via a Private Member's Bill, a vote to amend the 1917 Titles Deprivation Act.
This act was last used to remove the UK titles from German members of the Royal Family during the First World War. Mr. Stanley concluded that the book has not caused any damage to the monarchy, which has seen many of these dramas before.
He said, "In a better age, Harry and William would have resolved this with pistols at dawn, but now it is done through Netflix."
0 notes
Soubry and the Nazi Slur – An Offence? Was it an offence to accuse Anna Soubry of being a Nazi whilst she was broadcasting on Sky News? Potentially, is the answer. The Public Order Act 1986 contains the most likely candidates for any prosecution, in sections 4, 4A, and 5....
0 notes
These 3 (former) Tories each voted against the motion of no confidence in this government last month, yet they have so little confidence in the governing party that they left a month later. Strange behaviour for people who have confidence in their government!
6 notes
·
View notes