In awe of Priyamvada who continues to read, and transcribe, and tweet the river of filth from literally the worst human beings on the planet.
Those of us who are white, and men, and who can share our views freely, will never really understand what our privilege gives us. But if you want to try, please read her timeline.

I find her conduct incredibly moving, actually. Satyagraha adapted to today.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Jo Maugham

Jo Maugham Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JolyonMaugham

Mar 21
Our understanding is, there are good public law and freedom of expression arguments against Suella Braverman's decision to exclude certain media outlets from her trip to Rwanda BUT...
The arguments are best brought by a journalist from a banned media outlet. But media outlets have all sorts of incentives not to bring a challenge, including the fear of sanction from Government if they do bring a challenge AND...
Because Courts have, including after a very explicit public threat from Rishi Sunak to change the rules if they don't adopt a new strict approach to standing, adopted a new strict approach to standing, it is hard for anyone else to bring that challenge SO...
Read 6 tweets
Mar 13
Hitherto, John has bravely defended the notion that the BBC is independent. Feels significant for him now to acknowledged the BBC does have problems and is unable to defend itself against politicians who want to impose their control over it.
The combination of the BBC's dominance of news coverage - and good (albeit fast declining) levels of public trust - means that what the BBC says really matters. And for it to shrink in the face of Executive power is a consequential betrayal of its role of keeping power honest.
So the BBC's failure to tell the truth on eg climate change and Brexit means it bears a high level of responsibility for environmental destruction and national economic decline with profound consequences for eg millions of families whose children now don't have enough to eat.
Read 4 tweets
Mar 12
It takes Trumpian levels of front to frame this as impartiality v free speech.

From who leads the BBC, to the guests they have on, and how they kowtow to power - what infuriates is the double standards. The BBC only talks "impartiality" to progressives.…
Tim Davie's appointment doesn't looks like impartiality - given his well rehearsed history of Conservative Party activism - nor (on the evidence) is impartial.
He became DG on 1 September 2020. It didn't take long for him to start banging the Conservative Party drum.

Here's what he said sixteen days later: a very 'modern Conservative Party' sounding attack on how the BBC over-serves metropolitan elites.
Read 4 tweets
Mar 2
Sadly, the law does not allow us to appeal Mr Justice Swift's decision on Boris Johnson and Partygate.
I should say - for reasons I explain in the post - I think this is a really bad outcome. Hugely damaging to things we should all really care about.
Here's what the Privileges Committee Report records about two of the three parties Boris Johnson attended; parties the Met didn't fine him for attending; a stance the High Court endorsed.

13 November 2020.
Read 5 tweets
Feb 28
Summary of the judgment in Arron Banks', partially successful, appeal against the dismissal of his libel claim against Carole Cadwalladr.
It's a complex judgment but this passage seems to be the heart of why the appeal was allowed in part: the TED organisation left the talk up despite it becoming clear it contained (on the evidence) a serious error about Banks.
It's not clear to me - it may not be clear to the Court of Appeal - what moral culpability Ms Cadwalladr has for the actions of the TED organisation which she does not control.
Read 5 tweets
Feb 22
If you see read-across from how judges treat legal challenges to the Government to how judges treat protest challenges to the Government you are thinking what much of the legal profession is thinking.
The main problems - which I discuss in detail in my book - are twofold.

First, at a formal level there is no constitutional protection for the independence of the judiciary. So when eg Sunak threatens them unless they do what he wants they listen.
Second, at an informal level, the structure of English public life, and the fact that the social corridors to power are walked by senior judges and senior civil servants together, has led to an unhealthy judicial complacency about the 'goodness' of the chaps that run things.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!