Plenty of seeds before that of course. Most critically the absolute destruction of parliamentary norms in August 2019, which I wrote about at the time with reference to A Man For All Seasons.
But December was the point he realised his voters didn't care.
This is, ultimately, the problem with electing a sociopath.
They only follow norms when norms demonstrably matter.
And right now, for a WHOLE bunch of political and societal reasons in this country, they don't.
We'll pay for that in future, much more than it's costing us now.
I don't just blame Johnson for this, of course. I blame the broken mess that is the current Conservative Party.
There are plenty of Conservatives (big and little c) current and historical who I disagree with politically, but can see they were trying to make the country better.
This is NOT true of the bulk of the Tory Party now.
It's performative, self-serving Conservatism at its worst.
And they'll sit there and bray for the populist, without any respect for the party (and politics) they are meant to represent, let alone the country.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Every now and again I remember that Mass Effect has a whole lurking subplot about the importance of using "Synthetic Intelligence" rather than "Artificial Intelligence" if you accept everyone as 'alive'.
Easy to miss it, but it's there. One of the reasons I love the series.
To which it THEN throws in the concept of Virtual Intelligences, which are specifically manufactured not to be self-aware, which then opens up ANOTHER can of worms.
Specifically once you demonstrably have VIs that seem to exhibit self-awareness.
Throw in the whole issues of the galaxy's treatment of the Rachni and Krogan for "the greater good" (genocide in the first instance, biological alterations to reduce birth survival rates in the second) and ain't NO ONE in those games without historical blood on their hands.
There's a cat snoozing somewhere in this house but I've given up trying to find him.
He'll no doubt make his presence known to me at about 3am.
NARRATOR: The head boops came at 2:30am
CAT: head boop!
ME: I was sleeping
CAT: hence the head boop
ME: Fine. I'll let you out.
CAT: Scritch me first
ME: No.
CAT: Wait... this duvet is warm
ME: You're going out
CAT: ignore head boop. Gonna snooze here for a bit first.
ME: *picks up cat*
CAT: HALP! I'M BEING OPPRESSED!
Just because I didn't over-explain it doesn't mean I didn't know it and consider it.
It just means it wasn't relevant to a broader narrative which has been caveated as BEING a broader narrative.
Or, to give a more specific example, not everyone gives a shit which exact unit was where, or the precise order of battle, before understanding the totality of what happened.
This is not to say that there are not PLENTY of good academics on Twitter. I know and follow many.
They are not, however, "academic twitter"
Because they understand that Twitter is about engaging with people on equal terms, not expecting engagement as some kind of right.
Academic Twitter (capitalised) is the ones who refuse to Tweet anything because they're outraged they only have thirteen followers, despite the fact that they've written seven original tweets in the last four years.