[1/4] In March, my own general secretary, @MattWrack, rushed out a public statement condemning me, @KateHoeyMP and others on the Left as a ‘disgrace to the traditions of the labour movement’ because we shared a stage with political opponents at a pro-Brexit rally…
@MattWrack@KateHoeyMP [2/4] ‘There's no place in the labour movement for lining up with the Tories’ he said. Since then, there have been several examples of labour movement figures on the other side of the debate (inc some of Matt’s close allies, e.g. John McDonnell) doing precisely the same thing…
@MattWrack@KateHoeyMP [3/4] Yet, on these occasions, Matt has said not a single solitary word. He has remained utterly silent. This shows that his original public statement was driven not by principle, but by prejudice. If you are going to condemn people with whom you have stood on picket lines…
@MattWrack@KateHoeyMP 4/4] and who have dedicated their lives to trade unionism as ‘a disgrace to the traditions of the labour movement’, you had better damn well be consistent when your political allies do the same thing. @MattWrack wasn’t. That says a lot.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵 Fascinating conversation with my cousin today. He told of how he recently called in to the @NickyAACampbell show on @bbc5live during a debate about Ukraine...
He wanted to put a nuanced position – not supporting Putin, but just stressing the historical perspective: that the conflict had actually been raging since 2014 and that elements of the West had helped to overthrow Yanukovych, the democratically-elected leader.
He spoke to a production assistant, who began to interrogate and then berate him for his position. She said Yanukovych was a “puppet of Moscow” and friends of hers had died. He merely wanted to express his personal view on the show, but she ended up putting the phone down on him.
Age-old social and cultural norms are being overturned at a rapid rate in our country, leaving many bewildered and disorientated. Standpoints that, as recently as a decade ago, were accepted as entirely mainstream now get you the sack. This is chilling. ⬇️ thecritic.co.uk/sacked-for-chr…
The woman lost her job simply for stating, as part of an election campaign, her belief in the traditional form of marriage between man and woman. This view was entirely uncontroversial until very recently. Disagree with it, by all means. But sacking someone for it is tyrannical.
Here is Maureen's election leaflet, with the "offending" passage. It is appalling that a woman such as this, committed to improving her community, has lost her livelihood at the hands of the thought-police.
🧵 Why do big companies peddle wokery? Is it because they are genuine supporters of it? No. We know that isn’t the case. See, for example, the refusal of these organisations to promote LGBT rights to their Middle East markets. The “principles” are dumped when profits are at risk.
Rather, it is because they think it gives them social standing among a particular demographic of customer – young, politically aware, social justice warrior – which has the potential to create real trouble for them if they don’t play along.
This demographic isn’t the majority. And the companies know it. But they also know that the majority demographic – older, less organised, less radical – is unlikely to do much more than tut and roll their eyes at the wokery. Ultimately, this demographic won’t create trouble.
[1/5] Imagine an employer fined a worker 40% of his wages for something that at the time was not *either explicitly or implicitly* a breach of policy…
[2/5] Then imagine this employer, when later realising it was on shaky ground, hastily created such a policy out of thin air – without consulting staff or considering the impact on the organisation – and then tried to claim the policy had “self-evidently” always been in force...
[3/5] Then imagine this employer, when questioned, was unable to provide any credible explanation to support its assertion that the policy had “self-evidently” always been in force...