I’ve read a few hoarse-voiced postmortems regarding the Grendelian routing of Labour (UK Elections) but haven’t seen anyone mention the obvious. Beyond the thin wedge of “informed” voters who voted “issues,” and beyond the wider wedge of the voters who were quite earnestly involved in judging a personality contest, there was a broader swathe of passionately-uneducated people who have internet connections and watch daytime talkshows and read the Daily Mail (et al)… who decisively and predictably cast their votes against (including but not restricted to) Greta Thunberg, Extreme and Frightening Scandinavian PC Practices, “knife-crime,” Stormzy, gender reassignment treatments for 6-year-olds, beefy men in heels (with nice tits), Trans track stars and wrestlers, Mutant Pronouns, refugees, Burkinis, The Sharia Patrol, Grime (the genre), UK Drill (the genre), the Kardashians, Lizzo, the spectre of a Black James Bond, Prince Harry’s mulatto Wife… and so forth. “I’m no racist but what’s next, Alf, a Negro HRM?”
That’s how it works. Obviously, many of those listed “issues” aren’t (or shouldn’t be) issues at all, and they certainly don’t all fit together… and yet they are and they do. Because the Wonky stuff (eg trade deficits and minimum wage and gerrymandering and health care and all that horse-trading, sausage-making, arcana) is not really “Politics” in Anglophonia. “Politics” in Anglophonia is whatever Duh Masses seethe, or coo, about, en masse, all day long. Those (occasionally Zionist) Right Wing Media Moguls ain’t, as we say, dumb. You thought we were living through an unprecedentedly, and far-reachingly, progressive era? Nah.
The percentage of Trans-identifying people in the US is given as .6 ( “between 200k and 500k in the UK”), which means that the general concerns and dramatic life-stories of diabetic bass-players of Germanic extraction are probably more statistically relevant than those of Trans people in the Anglophone world. Yet, stories about Trans people saturate the Media (calling it “The Right Wing Media” is redundant; if Lefties own National Media outlets I’ve yet to hear of any; remember, we live in a world in which blatantly plutocratic Right Wingers Hillary Clinton and Arianna Huffington identify, officially, as “grass roots progressives”). Because Right Wingers love Trans people? Let’s just say that Somebody is giving the “Left” enough rope to hang itself with.
(Never forget the crucial function of the cancel culture cudgel, threatening all non-Right Wingers to toe whatever “woke” line, no matter how grotesque/ irrational, permanently marginalizing for the “Left” and muting the sanest non-Right voices; the Right must be laughing its aggregate arse off, @Useful Twittiots)
As I wrote, in April, after noticing graphic references to cannibalism in mainstream pop culture:
Anyone who’s read more than a handful of my essays here will know that I believe that the Media Octopussies in charge of force-feeding us crappy “entertainment” are, above all, running dozens of parallel, overlapping and, often, coordinated social engineering campaigns. But the first logical question to ask regarding a suspected campaign should always be: Why?
We can guess why TFIC are pushing the Gender Wars (cut Serfy reproduction; same old divide and conquer); we can guess why insects are now being pushed as trendy snacks (to wean us off of steaks: more golf courses for TFIC and more delicious exclusivity in steak-eating and further-subliminally-demoralized Serfs); we can guess why things are going Cashless (total Control)… but why would TFIC be pushing to “normalize” cannibalism?
Well, other than the ongoing effort to make people feel that Human Life is less than Sacred (greasing the wheels for more War and bearing in mind that future generations less in love with the notion of Humanity are less likely to fight for it), what would TFIC get out of “normalizing” cannibalism? Do we really think they want to contend with possibly cannibalistic maids, nannies, jockies, prostitutes and shoe shine boys in the near future? No, what TFIC are pushing, with media bilge of this repulsive nature, is a “grassroots” backlash.
Forget your old assumptions and Welcome to Neo-Politics. Once you see things for what they are, you will never again be surprised by the results of an election.
ADDENDUM: Lurking around various post-election, eyes-rubbing, wound-licking Leftish UK platforms and forums, I see that a popular option for scapegoating, re: Corbyn’s obliteration, is those pesky “60-pluses on Facebook”! Which is sort of an extension of the “Okay, Boomer!” riff. The theory seems to be that the doddery old fucks believe that Corbyn is some sort of turris. Really? Or were/are they frightened by something bigger than Corbyn? Like, you know, the (apparent) Culture Itself? Ditto everyone older than 29 (no one is more fearful, of the surroundings, than a parent of a two-year old… followed closely, on the Fear Index, by a grandparent of a two-year-old… but most poll-reading, uni-educated 20-somethings don’t have anything more fragile than a dead house plant to worry for). Every actually non-Right Wing candidate is running on a much bigger, self-demonizing subliminal platform, of non-starter “issues,” that has been forced on them. It’s very hard to shake and a very small and loud and hysterical young subset of “The Left” makes sure of that.
ADDENDUM 2: For students of Irony that’s so ironic it isn’t ironic at all, from certain angles: try parsing THIS
PS From the Spectator (a week before the election): “Michael Foot fought the 1983 general election on a hard-left manifesto famously dubbed ‘the longest suicide note in history’ and saw his party’s worst result since the first world war.” In the Guardian, in Sept. 2018, they wrote “Senior Labour figures and the family of former party leader Michael Foot have reacted with anger over the re-emergence of the explosive claim that he was a paid Soviet informant.” But did anyone think to ask if Foot was working for the Tories?
PPS: (heroically unlikely and un-autotuned and sort of crap, nobly) BALM IN YOUR WOUNDS: