What the Boris landslide means for the climate debate

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

The fasmunist haters of democracy in Antifa have been rioting in London in protest at the landslide that the voters accorded to Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party in Thursday’s general election.

Like the election of Donald Trump in 2016, the election of Boris Johnson in 2019 demonstrates just how far the totalitarians in the “Democratic” and “Labor” parties have departed from their working-class roots, and how much they hate and fear democracy itself, and how much good reason they have to fear the common sense of the voters – especially those in the working class.

Johnson, like Trump, concentrated his campaign on rust-belt constituencies deserted by the now-metropolitan-illiberal hard Left and, worse still, laid waste by official global-warming policies – ironically, by the very global-warming policies that Johnson, unlike Trump, slobberingly endorses. Johnson’s current partner – the First Squeeze, as the tabloid newspapers call her – is a climate fanatic, and his father Stan has joined the violent urban terrorist mob Extinction Rebellion.

clip_image002

A Communist cartoon from the general election campaign

The 80-seat majority won by the Conservatives is remarkable given that the now openly hard-Left BBC, ITV, Sky News and Channel 4 were scandalously, in-your-face prejudiced against the Conservatives throughout the campaign.

The usual fake news techniques were deployed. When Boris Johnson refused to take part in a Channel 4 leaders’ debate, on the ground that the channel was so prejudiced, it demonstrated his point by replacing him on air with an ice-sculpture intended to look like him.

A mother put her four-year-old son on a pile of coats on the floor of a hospital emergency ward. He was photographed, and the photo was circulated to these propagandists, who duly made them headline news.

clip_image004

Note the chair in which the child had been sitting before this photo was staged

The truth was that the child had already been seen by the emergency team and had been assessed as low-risk. He had been sitting quietly in a chair next to his mother, waiting for a CT scan. It had been she, not the hospital, who had put her little son on the floor, presumably because he found it hard to sleep in the chair one of whose legs can be seen in the photo.

The media, of course, did not bother to check the story. They rushed to interview Boris Johnson, giving him no time to verify the facts. Here is an image of a journalist showing the photo to him. The image appeared in The Guardian (inevitably):

clip_image006

A few years ago I was taken gravely ill and was rushed to hospital in Maidstone, Kent, one busy evening. I was hours from death. But no bed could be found. I was laid on a trolley and spent the night in a corridor, wired up to stabilizing medication that saved my life.

Did I complain? Did I clamber on to the floor? Did I have photos taken? Did I circulate them to the media? No and no and no and no: I was profoundly grateful that, on a busy evening for the emergency team, they had nevertheless found the time, the compassion and the competence to improvise and save my life.

The truth is that net immigration to Britain is running at about 1 million a year – four times the officially-disclosed rate. One can easily work this out by noticing the number of national insurance numbercards issued to foreigners – no numbercard, no job, and nearly all immigrants are economic migrants aged under 35, so the first thing they do when they’ve paid off the smugglers who get them into Britain is apply for a numbercard.

But the public-service planners – in both parties – have based all their projections on the obviously wrong official figures – just as with climate change. Result: not enough hospital beds to cope with about 15 million more people than the bureaucrats had planned for.

Not that you’d have learned any of that from the Marxstream media. To point out truths of this kind is to be excoriated as “racist”. For the Left are desperate to increase the rate of net immigration to Britain, because the first two generations of immigrants tend to vote Left. After that, they learn wisdom and don’t do that.

There is another reason why Boris’ landslide (the BBC refused to call it that, of course) is remarkable. According to the opinion polls, some 72% of students voted Labor, and only 9% voted Conservative. An imbalance as frighteningly wide as this is a testament to the completeness of the Marxist capture of the schools and universities, and to the thoroughness and one-sidedness of the relentless indoctrination to which young people are subjected.

It is this systemic indoctrination in the schools and universities that has allowed the climate nonsense to persist for as long as it has. Nearly all young people in Britain have absolutely no idea that there is any case against the totalitarian Party Line on the climate question – let alone that the Party Line is flat-out wrong.

In the short term, the Conservative victory will make little difference to the monumentally stupid and egregiously expensive climate policies on which all parties are fatuously agreed. Even the Brexit Party, to its eternal shame, abandoned the working class and issued a briefing ordering its supporters to toe the line on the climate question. It did not win a single seat.

Parliament has already voted to preserve the daft, crippling global-warming policies insisted upon by the unelected Kommissars who wield all real power in the Brussels tyranny-by-clerk even after we have left the EU. If the current draft of the arrangement with the EU survives Parliamentary scrutiny – and it probably will – Britain will foolishly lock herself by treaty into continuing with the climate madness.

Then, even when the truth emerges, as it will, we shall not be free to decontaminate our economy and bring back the numerous businesses – coal, steel, aluminium smelting, motor manufacture and soon beef farming – that are going or gone because global warming.

The sheer insanity of transferring these and countless suchlike necessary industries to jurisdictions such as China and occupied Tibet is that the CO2 emissions per ton of steel are far higher there than here. The net effect of Europe’s insane climate policies is thus to increase global emissions, not to reduce them. But then, the aim was never to reduce emissions: it was to reduce the Western economies to ruin.

However, the fasmunists are not rioting for nothing. They know that the back benches of the Conservative party are more prone to ask tiresome, skeptical questions than the Communist – er, “Labor” – party. As the world continues to fail to warm at anything remotely resembling the originally-predicted rate, and as the cost in jobs lost and industries transferred to China and occupied Tibet mounts, common sense is far more likely to break through in the Conservative party than among the various fasmunist parties that took such a drubbing at the hands of the voters.

In one crucial respect, Boris Johnson’s victory may yet turn out to be decisive for the cause of objective truth on scientific questions such as the climate. During the campaign, he said he was thinking of ending the cruel poll tax that is the $200 annual compulsory licence-fee paid to the unspeakable BBC by everyone who has a television.

If he is as good as his word – and it is very much in the interest of all who care about democracy that he should be – he will make the abolition of the Bolshevik Broadcasting Commisariat’s licence fee his first priority.

clip_image008

Margaret Thatcher thought of abolishing the BBC tax. She appointed an amiable, other-worldly academic from Scotland to examine the question. He approached all the other major broadcasters, who told him the BBC was “special”, a “national treasure”, etc., etc. Taken in by this waffle, he recommended against abolition.

Some years later, when he told me his reasoning, I told him that the other broadcasters had opposed ending the licence fee – just as they would today – because they did not want to have to compete with the BBC for advertising revenue. He slapped his hand to his forehead and said that if he had realized that he’d have recommended abolition.

I shall be taking steps to make sure that Downing Street does not make the same mistake a second time. Effectively, all the major broadcasters are subsidized by the fact that they don’t have to share the advertising-revenue cake with the BBC. Like all subsidized entities, they hate and resent the taxpayers who subsidize them, and tend to take a far more hard-Left line than they would if they were made to earn their living rather than rent-seeking via the BBC licence fee.

Finally, Boris Johnson, now that he has been subjected to the most prejudiced media campaign I’ve ever seen and has nevertheless triumphed, may well think of bringing in a Freedom of Speech Bill to guarantee that all sides are fairly heard, particularly in the schools and universities.

In the long run, democracy cannot survive unless there is open debate – a debate that the Left has striven for decades to suppress. One of the two principles of natural justice recognized in English law is audiatur et altera pars – let both sides be fully and fairly heard. On climate, that is not happening. It’s high time it did.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

238 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 15, 2019 1:41 pm

Finally, Boris Johnson, now that he has been subjected to the most prejudiced media campaign I’ve ever seen and has nevertheless triumphed, may well think of bringing in a Freedom of Speech Bill to guarantee that all sides are fairly heard, particularly in the schools and universities..

Sounds like the UK has its own “deplorable” voters. 😎

Dan
December 15, 2019 1:53 pm

This article is very uninformed. It was cost that drove heavy industry away. A simple reading of history proves this. With raw material mines, costs are higher. So the sentances below are utter make believe. And I can be pretty sure the author has not got much clue on those industries because of what is written.

“The net effect of Europe’s insane climate policies is thus to increase global emissions, not to reduce them. But then, the aim was never to reduce emissions: it was to reduce the Western economies to ruin.”

Reply to  Dan
December 16, 2019 3:10 pm

Huh? Green policies have driven up cost. “Green” policies include more than just reducing CO2 but also stuff like, using CA as an example, forbidding clearing dead brush because a critter that hasn’t been seen in 50 years used to live in dead brush (Hence increased wild fires in CA.).
I don’t know the UK equivalent of such nonsense regulations that limit development and/or increase the cost.
And then there’s the cost of labor. Here in the US they want to increase the minimum wage nationally.
I’m skilled labor. I’ve never gotten an automatic raise every time the minimum wage has been increased.
What I do has been devalued each and every time.
So, what you quoted is true. But it’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Dan
December 16, 2019 6:46 pm

“It was cost that drove heavy industry away. ”

And part of the reason was higher electricity costs, and continuing projected increases, the resullt of climate change legislation.

December 15, 2019 3:31 pm

Regarding how ones political beliefs change over time the following of my life may be of interest.

Born 13.3.1027, so now almost 93, the first years of my life were away from the UK. My Father was regular army so in 1932 aged just 5 years I was in India, later by 1937 I was in Egypt.

So I am my s sister and brothers missed out of the misery and hard times of the depression of the 1930 tees.

We returned to the UK in 1938, Dad still in the Army, so we were still on the countries payroll.

Now compared to today”s youth we had very little, , but life in the countryside, the city of Salisbury in Wiltshire was pleasant. No risk from sex mad males back then, they must have all been n jail, so we kids went wherever we wanted. We did what today would be considered to be dangerous things like climbing trees, taking birds eggs, only one per nest. , and climbing cliffs, no
one died as a result.

In common with most kids of my age we wanted things, in my case it was a second hand telescope. some 3 shillings and six pence.

So I became a paperboy, back then one had to get off the bicycle and fold the paper and insert it into the letter box. I also delivered foodstuffs on a Saturday morning, a bicycle with a large basket on the front. As Salisbury is very hilly it was hard work. It took about a month or more to make the needed money, but my joy at having earned it myself was far more than much bigger purchases in the future. It was a strong lesson of the benefit of the Free Enterprise system.

But during the war when the Russians joined in, we were told what a good guy Uncle Joe really was , Hollywood even made a film about how good Russia was, “”Mission to Moscow”” so politically I was a bit left wing.

Now following the end of the war, the UK had a election and Labor won, now it was the
worst possible time for any political party, so Labor with some very good ideas simply ran out of money.

By 1949 my younger brother had migrated to Australia and I followed one year later, becoming a Boundry rider, “”Cowboy”” on a sheep station.

Politics in Australia had gone Conservative and slowly so did I. While I did vote Labor Hawke and Keating, they were really Conservative by todays standard standard and did a good job, but since then its been Conservative all the way. Even with the very lefty wing Turnbull, now replaced by Morrison.

I hope that is of some interest

MJE VK5ELL

Then came WW2, now I was

Reply to  Michael
December 16, 2019 3:27 pm

I found it of interest.
My step-granddad emigrated from Germany between the wars.
I remember him telling me how the price of a glass of increased from 4,000 marks to 8,000 marks overnight. (maybe it was 2,000 to 4,000?)
That was the environment he (legally) emigrated from. Also the environment that gave rise to the start of an infamous totalitarian.

Kyle in Upstate NY
December 15, 2019 3:34 pm

I still can’t believe that the folks in the UK have to pay a damned TAX to finance the BBC. Such a thing just sounds so utterly alien here in America. Yeah, I could imagine people’s reaction to the government saying, “You will pay a tax to subsidize a government-run national TV station.” It almost sounds comical, except it isn’t. I could perhaps understand if the BBC was paid for out of general tax revenues, but a BBC-specific tax, jeez.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Kyle in Upstate NY
December 15, 2019 4:10 pm

Courts in the UK are clogged with 10’s of thousands of people being convicted for non-payment of the TV Tax. Some even go to prison. The BBC does not conduct collection of the tax anymore, it employs thugs that think, because they have a bit of paper in their hands, they have a statutory right of entry in to your home. They don’t. It’s why the police are usually called in to assist however, the police are only there if there is a criminal incident, not a civil one.

tonyb
Editor
Reply to  Kyle in Upstate NY
December 15, 2019 11:11 pm

kyle

The BBC is an independent organisation. If it were funded by the state it would become a state broadcaster.

tonyb

shortus cynicus
Reply to  tonyb
December 16, 2019 12:59 am

They are founded by government because people calling themselves to be government are providing guns and jails needed to proceed with the scam.

tonyb
Editor
Reply to  shortus cynicus
December 16, 2019 1:49 am

It is a criminal offence so, just as with any theft would be dealt with by the state funded police and if necessary go through the courts. If someone stole from Sainsburys or other large supermarket would they be considered a part of govt if the police arrested the thief?

Guns?

Boris has said he intends to decriminalise paying the fee which sounds sensible.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  tonyb
December 16, 2019 2:34 am

People, in the UK, were, effectively, forced to give away their rights to defend themselves from the state in the 80’s (IIRC?). Since then knife crime has gone up, esp in London (Who knew?). In Australia that happened in the early 1990’s, lauded as “great policy”. Since then, individual gun crime (Not mas shootings) has gone up.

John Endicott
Reply to  tonyb
December 16, 2019 12:21 pm

Apples and oranges tonyb, the government doesn’t have, by force of law, a “retailers license fee” the purpose of which is to funds Sainsburys. It does, however have by force of law a tv license fee the purpose of which is to fund the BBC. so yes “funded by the government” is an apt description of the BBC, like it or not.

John Endicott
Reply to  tonyb
December 18, 2019 5:31 am

Patrick MJD, when you criminalize guns, only criminals will have guns.

John Tillman
December 15, 2019 4:09 pm

This is discouraging:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7795483/Boris-Johnson-plans-new-department-battle-against-climate-change.html

Trump should send a delegation of the most qualified American CACA skeptics to have a talk with his new BFF.

Maybe Piers Corbyn could join them.

Surfer Dave
December 15, 2019 5:19 pm

Strange. It seemed to me that the BBC, the Guardian, etc, pilloried and slandered Corbyn non-stop, the slimey anti-semite slur was never left alone. I saw somewhere that on basic simple raw majority of voters, the Tories were millions of vote shy of an absolute majority, the ancient gerrymandered electoral boundaries still working in Tory favour. The most amazing thing is the end of the Union as we knew it, North Ireland did not vote Tory, nor did Scotland, and both seem to be on the verge of leaving the failed Union. Scots feel they are more European than British.
Of course, what the election showed is, it is far easier to use fear (of EU bureaucrats, of foreigners) than to use hope to influence people.

niceguy
Reply to  Surfer Dave
December 15, 2019 9:41 pm

There is a push for Frexit, Grexit… The anti UE (not anti-Europe) movement (which is also an anti-xenophobia movement(1)) is strong in many member states.

(1) Advocates of independent nation-states want peace and harmony with their neighbors and Nigel Farage was even somehow criticized by Europhile and accused of hypocrisy for NOT being a xenophobe.

The europhiles have been insisting on the risks of X-exit for any X, as demonstrated by the hard issues of Brexit.

Now they point to the danger looming on the integrity of that monarchic union. It’s a terribly bad argument:

– people in mainland Europe don’t care much about the long term integrity of the union of either “Europe” or the UK;
– the integrity of the EU member states that leave, and the risk that their member nations might split doesn’t apply to many other member states, which have regions with a culture and some form of “nationalist” identity but which don’t exist legally as nations and are not trying to leave;
– nationalist movements sometimes don’t exist in a single member state (f.ex. the Basque nationalism) so a split of the UE could not make their demand for a nation state more likely to be met (on the contrary).

The anti-Brexit people in the UK might insist on existential danger for the integrity of the UK, but from the POV of the rest of Europe, that’s a terribly weak argument.

Also, many people in Europe feel that Ireland needs to be, deserves to be, or will be reunited one day. So the argument goes against the status quo and against opposing Brexit.

Not only that, but Brexit was described as a future economic catastrophe, because the EU is an economic powerhouse (lol) not because of North Ireland issues. Saying that Brexit is bad because of Ireland specific issues is a way to admit that X-exit isn’t inherently that bad.

tonyb
Editor
Reply to  niceguy
December 15, 2019 11:08 pm

niceguy

‘Also, many people in Europe feel that Ireland needs to be, deserves to be, or will be reunited one day.’

Reunited? When has Ireland ever been a single united country in the sense of a sovereign independent state. Right from the Normans it has always been a fractured state.

niceguy
Reply to  tonyb
December 16, 2019 10:32 am

It’s matter of feeling and public relations, not facts.

The feeling I see from most people here is “Ireland” belongs together. So Brexit is viewed even more positively!

The anti Brexit propaganda is in a pretty bad state. I saw a “debate” on Brexit on French TV channel “France 5”, they even had someone that wasn’t anti-Brexit in the panel – after tens of “debates” between anti Brexit people, haters of Brexit, enthusiast europhiles and pro-EU people.

In the debate after the Tories landslide, the europhile journalist clearly was about to cry for the whole debate. I was unsettling.

I have seen parents on TV, of a dead child (murdered by serial rapists or other horrible tragedies) with more composure.

tonyb
Editor
Reply to  Surfer Dave
December 15, 2019 11:05 pm

surfer

The boundaries actually favour the labour party. If the sizes of seats were more equal the Tories would have got another dozen seats. It was intended to change this in line with the suggestions of the Electoral commission but this was shelved when the liberals threw their toys out of the pram when the referendum on P.R. went against them.

Scotland is wildly over represented by MP’s. Proportionally they should have 10 fewer.

BTW can you tell me when any Euro Mp was ever voted in with over 50% of the vote?

tonyb

Patrick MJD
December 15, 2019 5:36 pm

Riots on the streets of London, clear sign the left do not like democracy.

December 15, 2019 9:50 pm

The vote in Scotland does not mean a thing. Scotland is really legally now a State, with London , i.e. Westminister , being the boss.

Look at history, Scotland was always leaning towards Europe, or rather France. They had assistance from the French during the numerous wars with England, and Mary Queen of Scots was before that a Queen of France.

I would not consider the voting system to e be a Gerrymander, although its not truly a democrancy. The first past the pose system as against the Australian system of proporatatioat represeentative is is the same as the USA, the cities are more left wing, the countryside more to the right.

The cities seem to thin that all meat comes from a supermarket, the country folk live in the real world, but that is not a Gerrymander.

MJE VK5ELL

Patrick MJD
December 16, 2019 1:00 am

Channel 4 in the UK are asking what went wrong for Jeremy “I loved the IRA in 1983” Corbyn? The left are just melting…

Ed Zuiderwijk
December 16, 2019 1:37 am

Boris’ landslide was a great result. But not so much as a surprise to those who by now know that the ‘polls’ are increasingly getting it totally wrong. However, if you look at the percentages of the vote for the various parties it is clear that the election was not so much won by the Tories, who increased their share by 1%, but rather lost by Labour who lost almost 10% of the voters. It was Corbyn who won the election …. for the Tories.

December 16, 2019 5:44 am

Re. the previous one by Ed. The UK election was in my opinion the second referendum about the EU, should they stay or leave.

Now Boris who despite his background I do not consider him to be a Tory in the older meaning of the word.

If the new government does a reasonable job of looking after the previous Labor voters, they may well have more than the one 5 year term.

But he in common with other leaders will have to kill the myth of CC. The UK will not be able
to afford this cost as leaving the EU may well result in at least the short term a lower standard
of living.

MJE VK5ELL

George Lawson
December 16, 2019 7:07 am

“Johnson, unlike Trump, slobberingly endorses. Johnson’s current partner – the First Squeeze, as the tabloid newspapers call her – is a climate fanatic, and his father Stan has joined the violent urban terrorist mob Extinction Rebellion.”

.What hope have we that the PM will join the realists on the subject of global warming when he sleeps with a fanatical supporter of the lies, and that unbelievably his father shows every opposition to democracy in this country by joining the disgraceful organisation Extinction Rebellion. Johnson senior must be going round the bend following his decision to participate in that ludicrous TV programme The Jungle where, amongst other things he is happy to join a group of drop outs and eat worms and other revolting insects in order to make a living when he is clearly incapable of doing so in the manner most of us do. I suppose he will now join the mob that will close the bridges in London and stop ambulances getting through to hospitals. Is it too much to ask that the media now cast him into obscurity after he was featured too much in the media before the election. He should take a leaf out of Dennis Thatcher’s book and keep his mouth shut at all times and his face hidden so as not to embarrass his son.

PaulinaUS
December 16, 2019 3:51 pm

“In the short term, the Conservative victory will make little difference to the monumentally stupid and egregiously expensive climate policies on which all parties are fatuously agreed. Even the Brexit Party, to its eternal shame, abandoned the working class and issued a briefing ordering its supporters to toe the line on the climate question. It did not win a single seat.”

A quick reading of the Brexit Party Contract does not quite look like that.

I watched every Brexit Party campaign speech in the north of England I could find, and Nigel Farage clearly said that “it would be hard to reach these carbon reduction targets without de-industrializing the country.” He actually launched the Brexit Party in a manufacturing plant. His offer to the environmental/youth vote as well as the Labour vote was global initiatives to “plant trees” rather than closing industry.

Boris Johnson visited the same manufacturing plants in the North as the Brexit Party, and adopted exactly the same language regarding planting trees.

At least Nigel Farage and Christopher Monckton use the D word, “de-industrialization”, which I wish we would all agree is the real point of all of this.

Steve Z
December 16, 2019 4:57 pm

Boris Johnson ran his campaign on “getting Brexit done”, and with an absolute Tory majority in Parliament, he has the opportunity to do it, within the next six weeks.

The whole idea behind Brexit was to reclaim British sovereignty over their own laws, rather than having to bend to the unelected bureaucrats of the European Commission, which has much more power in the EU than the European parliament.

After Brexit is done, what will Boris Johnson and his Tories do with the rest of their five years in power? The European Union may want to punish the UK on trade, but there’s a huge trading partner and ally across the Atlantic with a booming economy, and Johnson may want to use the rest of his first year as PM negotiating a
trade deal with the USA, unshackled by EU regulations, which President Trump would welcome, and Trump might be able to convince Johnson of the folly of decarbonization, since the UK does get significant revenue from North Sea oil.

Interestingly enough, the other major country whose leadership is against decarbonization is Australia, another former colony of the UK, and the UK after Brexit may want to expand trade with Australia, which could also help against Chinese expansionism.

Then there is India, with a growing economy, which is not worried about “global warming”, preferring to bring its huge population into the 21st century by improving technology, which also requires increased energy use. Also a former British colony.

It is very possible that the old British empire–the UK, the USA, Australia, India, and possibly Canada–could unite to form a new axis of increased energy development, resisting the suicidal tendencies of most of Europe (except France) to convert to “renewables” in the fight against the phantom foe of “global warming”.

The election of Boris Johnson and Brexit might be just the beginning.

Roger Knights
December 16, 2019 6:59 pm

“It is very possible that the old British empire–the UK, the USA, Australia, India, and possibly Canada–could unite to form a new axis of increased energy development, resisting the suicidal tendencies of most of Europe (except France) to convert to “renewables” in the fight against the phantom foe of “global warming”.”

There used to be a group called the English-Speaking Union, or something like that. What’s happened to it, does anyone know?

B d Clark
Reply to  Roger Knights
December 16, 2019 7:10 pm

They all went Dutch.

Adrian Mann
December 18, 2019 12:39 am

Sorry Christopher, but you’ve got this one wrong. When you state facts, use mathematics and physics, then I agree with your cogently put, rational arguments. However, what you have written here is merely opinion, and wrong. If you honestly believe that anything involving this second coiffured buffoon that now holds high office is a Good Thing, then I despair. In fact, I despair of much of the horrendously right-wing rhetoric that has taken over what was previously a civilised and intelligent forum for debate and reduced it to the level of those we oppose. It’s depressingly predictable, I suppose.
The Conservative victory was not, by any means, a landslide. That they gained so many seats is mainly to the failure of Labour and the rabid Leavers who would vote for Pol Pot if they thought it would give them “their Brexit”. That you applaud the Tories and paint all that oppose or disagree with them as Communists or your new favourite oxymoron ‘Fasmunist’ demonstrates that you either do not know how or why the Tory party operates in the way it does, the fundamental beliefs that drive them to do what they do, and how they perceive and treat those who are not “one of us”, i.e. dyed-in-the-wool, blue blood, entitled, righteous Tories who think that they, and only they, can govern as if by the Divine Right of Kings. I am not one of you, or one of them, I’m just an ordinary bloke from Birmingham who put up with being shafted by them for too long.
I don’t know how much time you’ve spent with the working classes – precious little if the evidence is anything to go by – but the one thing that the majority of them are not overly burdened with is ‘common sense’ – whatever that may be. Common ignorance, pig-headedness, stubbornness, resistance to change, small mindedness, bigotry and racism, egocentrism, yes – and I should know, those are the people that I come from and got away from. That’s who the Tories rely on to get into power. Short memories, shorter attention spans.

As for Communists, it seems you have no idea what a Communist actually is. I live in an East European ex-Communist country. They know all about what real Communism actually is and how it worked, and what it was like to live under it. The thing you describe as Communism is as far from that as it is possible to be. Yes, it makes catchy headlines, and nice logos with the hammer and sickle on the BBC logo, the EU flag, all red and green, but that’s just plain silly and beneath you. Not being rabidly right-wing does not make you a Communist. Being of the opinion that the state has some role to play in the care of it’s citizens, provision of services and regulation of businesses does not make you a Communist. Again, you’re wrong on this and it’s beneath you.
So it’s hardly surprising to find that with this sort of argument behind it, the sceptical perspective gets dismissed as ignorant right wing, pro-Trump ranting with nothing behind it. There used to be a time when we could argue against AGW with facts and logic. Instead we have this, and it’s a shame that you are a part of it. But, I suppose you’re entitled to to your opinion, even though it’s wrong.

Andy Mansell
Reply to  Adrian Mann
December 18, 2019 10:12 pm

I think this post says everything about why Labour lost- and as a working class thicko it’s good to know that my betters will always be there to tell me what I should do, say and think.

Adrian Mann
Reply to  Andy Mansell
December 19, 2019 4:32 pm

Oh Andy, I’m a working class thicko too, as are all my family and everyone I grew up with. Thick as pigshit, the lot of ’em, and proud of it. None of that fancy book-learning in this house! And that’s why the Tories win, because they can convince enough of them that they are on their side, will lift them out of misery and drudgery by allowing them to buy their council houses with money they don’t have, systematically dismantling the NHS and their communities, and more promises of jam… tomorrow. Thatcher understood it. Cameron understood it. Boris understands it. Sorry you didn’t get the point, but perhaps the fact that you didn’t is actually the point. How depressingly predictable.

Andy Mansell
December 19, 2019 9:39 pm

You’re seriously comparing the great Mrs T with the chinless wonder Cameron?