Before I begin this thread, let me make it clear that I do not in any way blame Dominic Cummings or Dido Harding for their antecedents. What interests me is the way power is acquired, transmitted and sustained in the United Kingdom.
1/13
2. This is Field Marshall Sir John Harding. In 1949, he was sent to Malaya to suppress the insurgency. British actions were notoriously brutal, using Agent Orange, scorched earth campaigns, hunger as a weapon and concentration camps. It’s not clear how much of this he did.
3. From 1952, as Chief of the Imperial General Staff, he advised the British government on suppressing the Kikuyu revolt in Kenya. This involved the mass murder of civilians, torture, mutilation and mass imprisonment in concentration camps and fortified villages.
4. In 1955, he was appointed Governor of Cyprus, where he sought to stamp out the insurgency against British colonial rule. Under his command, rebels and civilians were detained in concentration camps. Torture was widespread. Rebel leaders were summarily executed.
5. In 1958, for his services to empire, he was created 1st Baron Harding of Petherton. He is Dido Harding’s grandfather.
6. This is Sir Evelyn Baring. He was governor of Kenya from 1952-59. Perhaps drawing on Sir John Harding’s advice, he set up a system of concentration and slave labour camps, in which tens of thousands of Kikuyu people were tortured and mutilated, beaten and burnt to death.
7. In 1960, for his services to empire, he was created 1st Baron Howick of Glendale. He is Dominic Cummings’s grandfather-in-law.
8. Dominic Cummings and Dido Harding occupy crucial, and highly controversial, positions with the government. Neither were elected, but owe their positions to appointments made within a tight circle of acquaintances.
9. It is this chumocracy, which has replaced professional, competent civil servants with people drawn from a highly entitled (and titled) elite, that is responsible for the fiascos surrounding the pandemic, and is now driving us towards a possible no deal Brexit.
10. I reiterate: I don’t blame anyone for their ancestors or in-laws. But what we see here are lineages that achieved great power and status, including hereditary peerages, through committing crimes against humanity.
11. Inherited power and status helped secure the social position of their descendants and in-laws. This social position secured their place within the current chumocracy. It also buffers them, professionally and socially, against criticism and public complaint.
12. The misrule of this elite has resulted, among other impacts, in the unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands, through the mishandling of the pandemic. They don't seem to care.
In other words, this seems like a vignette of everything that’s wrong with the way we are governed.
13. There is more on this theme in a previous thread:
1. People are objecting to my lashing of academics and intellectuals in today's column. I understand this. Here’s my reasoning. I chose examples of topics that are endlessly circled by researchers with ever diminishing returns, while huge and existential questions are ignored.🧵
2. I see the obsession with the Bloomsbury Group etc as highfalutin celebrity culture. The effort and attention spent on it, in scholarship, publishing and reviews, seems to me to signal a deep sickness at the heart of intellectual endeavour. It has a name. Denial.
3. It reminds me of Eliot’s comparison of the mindless gossip in the pub with the mindless gossip in the high society salon in Part II of The Wasteland:
"‘Are you alive, or not? Is there nothing in your head?’
But O O O O that Shakespeherian Rag -
It’s so elegant
So intelligent"
1. A few days ago, I wrote a thread about the pros and cons of staying on this platform and asked for your views. They were very helpful. As a result, I’ve decided to stop using X from January 20. Already I’m mostly posting now on BlueSky (@georgemonbiot.bsky.social) instead.🧵
2. I won’t delete this account, as I don’t want to lose the archive. But I won’t post anything here after then. Will you join me in setting January 20th (a significant date) for the Xodus?
3. I thought for a while that the best alternative would be Threads. But Meta’s deliberate downgrading of political content and suspension of journalists on Threads rules it out as a prime platform for people like me. .theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
1. Who really won the US election? The fossil fuel companies and other polluting industries. We scarcely heard about them during the election campaign, which is just how they like it. Almost everything we *did* hear about was a distraction from the real agenda. 🧵
2. Trump’s campaign was an economic war against the interests of almost everyone on Earth, on behalf of the planet’s most powerful and destructive industries. But it was dressed up, as always, as a culture war: a trick that has been used to great effect for more than a century.
3. It’s not as if Biden/Harris were seriously curtailing polluting industries, especially oil and gas. It’s shocking how little Harris even mentioned the existential threat to humanity that climate breakdown presents. But now? It’s a free-for-all.
1. Here are my thoughts on the pros and cons of staying on this platform.
Pro: We were here long before Musk took it over. We built this.
Con: He has used our creation to help elect a far-right autocrat, and build his own grim political career.
🧵
2. Pro: We should never cede any space, real or virtual, to the far right. Fascist trolls are trying to drive us out. Don't give them the satisfaction.
Con: Our presence could be used to legitimise a far-right hellsite.
3. Pro: It remains, amid the viciousness, a good place to share information, ideas and opinions.
Con: It is also an abysmal, dispiriting place to inhabit, the humour, lightness and kindness crushed by bots and trolls.
1. My column on what happened, what comes next, and just how easy our fake democracies are to overthrow. + short thread on where our remaining hopes lie. theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
2. People seek to destroy what they feel excluded from. Centralised “democracies” exclude all but a rarefied circle from genuine power. Centralised democracy is a contradiction in terms.
3. Disempowered people tend to be profoundly unimpressed by “rational arguments” for this faction or for that one: they have an entirely reasonable desire – however unreasonable its expression may be – to kick the system over.
1. Trump’s preposterous claim that a “savage Venezuelan prison gang” has “taken over Times Square” is a reminder that people like him actually know nothing about the world, because they never step out of their suites and chauffered cars, offices and private planes.🧵
2. The ruling class doesn’t do its own shopping, or wander around town, or use public transport, or walk into an ordinary café or bar, or join a queue or wait for anything.
3. They are totally reliant on other people – or their own lurid imaginations – to tell them what the world outside their air-conditioned bubble is like. And they appear to imagine a festering pit of humanity. Everyone outside the bubble is perceived as a threat.