Mirror mirror on the wall
Who's the wokest of them all?
The UK Govt & its Ministers are hypocrites when it comes to upholding their own stated "fundamental British values" which they, & swathes of the UK press, ignore & contradict through their policies & rhetoric. 🇬🇧
In 2014, the Govt published its "Guidance on promoting British Values" in schools - values codified in official guidance on "improving the spiritual, moral, social & cultural development of pupils to ensure young people leave school prepared for life in modern Britain."
The official "guidance" compels schools to "actively promote" the "fundamental British values of democracy, *the rule of law*, individual liberty, & *mutual respect & tolerance of those of different faiths & beliefs*", which #Ofsted must take into account during inspections. 🤔
So how does the rhetoric of Govt Ministers, along with swathes of the UK's press & broadcast news media, align with the "fundamental British values" of "mutual respect & tolerance of those of different beliefs"?
SPOILER ALERT: it doesn't.
Does this mean they're anti-British? 🇬🇧
The Govt's plan is "to ensure children become valuable & fully rounded members of society, who TREAT OTHERS WITH RESPECT & TOLERANCE, regardless of background".
Ministers & right-wing news media do not consider a growing list of 'others' worthy of either respect, or tolerance.
Examples of the understanding & knowledge pupils MUST learn include: "an acceptance that people having DIFFERENT BELIEFS to oneself ("which is protected in law") SHOULD BE ACCEPTED & TOLERATED, & should NOT be the cause of PREJUDICIAL or DISCRIMINATORY behaviour".
Other examples of the understanding & knowledge of "fundamental British values" pupils MUST learn include: "an understanding of the importance of identifying & COMBATTING DISCRIMINATION" - although actively promoting & justifying discrimination appears fine IF you're the UK Govt.
So how does all this fit with 'wokeness'?
It's clear that the Government, the billionaire-owned or funded right-wing news media, including GB "News", & TalkTV are all explicitly 'anti-woke' - but what do *they* actually mean when they mobilise 'woke' & 'wokeness' as pejoratives?
Used as a pejorative, according to the Right 'woke' has THREE main attributes & meanings that they take exception to:
(1) imposed conformity to a particular ideology;
(2) over-sensitivity to particular cultural issues (eg race);
(3) intolerance of opposing ideologies.
Govt Ministers, the right-wing media & others on the right all agree these three components are antithetical to 'free speech' & the "fundamental British values" of "individual liberty, & mutual respect & tolerance of those of different beliefs". Fine. It's a view I'll tolerate.😉
But the Right's OWN intolerant rhetoric conforms PRECISELY to what THEY find objectionable in THEIR understanding of the term 'woke': imposed conformity to a particular ideology; over-sensitivity to particular cultural issues (eg wokeness); & intolerance of opposing ideologies.
But which intolerance came first?
The 'overly sensitive Left', who want to impose conformity to eg tolerating & respecting asylum seekers & minorities?
Or the 'overly sensitive Right', who want to impose conformity to eg demonising & scapegoating asylum seekers & minorities?
We appear to be locked into a very harmful, divisive, & polarising 'intolerance spiral', which is not just antithetical to the Govt's own stated "fundamental British values", but is also threatening the very fabric of society, & democracy itself.
And most MPs don't seem to care.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A few thoughts on Bob Vylan leading the #GlastonburyFestival crowd in chants of "Death to the IDF" (Israeli Defence Force), livestreamed by the @BBC, and the mischaracterisation of the chant by some MPs, news media, and activists.
In England, where #GlastonburyFestival is located, all of us have the right to freely express our criticism of anyone or anything - as long as there is no intent to provoke immediate unlawful violence or there is a reasonable likelihood it will occur as a consequence.
In England, free speech is protected under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998. However, inciting violence is a criminal offence under several laws which attempt to balance public safety with free expression rights.
In many countries, especially since Musk bought Twitter/@X, underregulated online extreme content has been used to groom and radicalise vulnerable people.
Too many cowardly politicians are scared to speak up for fear of being branded 'anti-free speech'.
Some MPs who have been in parliament for many years NEVER appear on any of the @BBC's "flagship" politics shows - but Reform's privately educated shit-stirring 'anti-elite' former Tory Sarah Pochin - an MP for FIVE WEEKS - gets her own special introduction on #PoliticsLive.
Politicians using dangerously irresponsible anti-Muslim rhetoric know their comments are normalising Islamophobia and endanger British Muslim women. Islamophobic incidents rose by 375% in the week after Boris Johnson called veiled Muslim women “letterboxes” in 2018.
#PolitcsLive
Britain prides itself in NOT being the sort of country that tells women how to dress. States that do dictate women’s clothing (eg Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia) are vilified as misogynistic & ultra-controlling: the antithesis of the enlightened, liberal west. theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
"Foreigners" DO NOT claim £1BILLION/month in benefits.
This disgusting anti-migrant dogwhistle by shameless liar and former Head of Policy Exchange, Neil O'Brien MP, is just one of several recent dispicable divisive Telegraph front page lies.
WTAF @IpsoNews? @HoCStandards?
The claims that the UK spends £1bn/month "on UC benefits for overseas nationals" (O'Brien) and "Foreigners claim £1bn a month in benefits" (Telegraph) are revealed to be lies in the article: the£1bn relates to "Benefits claims by HOUSEHOLDS with AT LEAST ONE FOREIGN NATIONAL."
The Telegraph claims that (unnamed) "experts suggested the increase reflected a SURGE in the number of asylum seekers being granted refugee status and in net migration."
To evaluate/make sense of this sensational unsourced claim, additional context is needed (but not provided).
Chase Herro, co-founder of Trump’s main crypto venture, World Liberty Financial, on crypto:
“You can literally sell shit in a can, wrapped in piss, covered in human skin, for a billion dollars if the story’s right, because people will buy it.”
Despite crypto being bullshit, & memecoins being consciously bullshit, many – especially angry young gullible men – still invest: 42% of men & 17% of women aged 18-29 have invested in, traded or used crypto (2024 Pew Research), compared to only 11% of men & 5% of women over 50.
“It’s no accident that memecoins are such a phenomenon among young people who have grown immensely frustrated with a financial system that, I think it’s fair to say, has failed them” - Sander Lutz, the first crypto-focused White House correspondent.
🧵In January, Farage said Musk was justified in calling Starmer complicit in failures to prosecute grooming gangs: “In 2008 Keir Starmer had just been appointed as DPP & there was a case brought before them of alleged mass rape of young girls that did not lead to a prosecution.”
The allegation that Starmer was complicit in failures to prosecute grooming gangs is often repeated. But how true is it?
Two Facebook posts, originally appearing in April/May 2020, claimed Starmer told police when he was working for the CPS not to pursue cases against Muslim men accused of rape due to fears it would stir up anti-Islamic sentiment.
In 2022 the posts and allegations saw a resurgence online with hundreds of new shares. They said: “From 2004 onwards the director of public prosecutions told the police not to prosecute Muslim rape gangs to prevent ‘Islamophobia’.