A great article on Boris Johnson's resignation, by German journalist @annettedittert - who since 2008 has worked in London as senior correspondent & bureau chief for ARD German TV, & in 2019 was awarded "political journalist of the year" for her reporting on #Brexit.
Johnson's departure is a victory for democracy over Britain's declining political culture. And it shows that even a prime minister must not lie to parliament.
A commentary by Annette Dittert.
Johnson's political career ends as it began: with brazen lies.
In his farewell statement, which is more like the heated tantrum of a five-year-old than that of a former PM, Johnson explained his departure as the result of a "witch hunt" called for by anti-Brexit, pro-Europeans & other members of the "establishment". None of this is true.
He is solely to blame for his case. The parliamentary committee of inquiry, which after months of deliberations has now clearly come to the conclusion that Johnson lied to parliament, consists of a majority of Tories, the chairman, Bernard Jenkin, is even an arch-Brexiteer.
And even if Johnson leaves open a possible return to politics in his statement, the truth is different. Even if he'll definitely continue to haunt behind the political stage and occasionally set fire to one or the other backdrop - the party's over for him. And that's good.
The so-called Privileges Committee, the parliamentary investigative committee whose report is expected to be published in the next few days, has restored one of the essential principles of parliamentary democracy, that the parliament must not be lied to, even by its PM.
The exact text is not yet known, but it is clear from Johnson's statement that the report does not let him get off as a minor case. The consequence of such a finding would have been a ten-day expulsion from the House of Commons, followed by a by-election, which he may have lost.
Johnson's resignation is nothing more than a last-ditch effort to make the headlines again.
At least in Great Britain he should succeed in the next few days. But that shouldn't detract from what the Privileges Committee has achieved here:
a victory for democracy over Britain's increasingly deteriorating political culture. Even a prime minister is not allowed to lie to parliament, so the factual truth remains a valuable asset and the crucial foundation for holding politicians accountable in a democracy.
The extraordinarily strong position of the executive in the British parliamentary system has often been criticized in the past, & rightly so. A PM with a clear majority can do more or less whatever he wants on the island - if necessary, even disregard basic rules of parliament.
Johnson repeatedly took this to the extreme during his time as prime minister, the most extreme case being the illegal suspension of parliament in the middle of the legislative period in 2019 because Johnson did not like its attitude critical of Brexit.
But there are checks & balances in the British system. Weeks after overturning Parliament, the Supreme Court reinstated it in autumn 2019. The current decision of the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee is a similarly important event for British political culture in this respect.
It is not surprising that in his statement Johnson angrily insulted this committee as ridiculous and denounced it as an undemocratic "kangaroo court".
He leaves the political arena exactly as he came: with a lot of noise and full of contempt for the democratic institutions of Great Britain, which he used for a while but just couldn't completely destroy.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
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’.
Decades of research shows that parroting or appeasing the far-right simply legitimises their framing, and further normalises illiberal exclusionary discourse and politics.
Starmer's speech is more evidence that the far-right has been mainstreamed.
Cas Mudde, a Dutch political scientist who focuses on political extremism and populism in Europe and the US, is, imho, one of the most important voices on the Left today.
Allow me to briefly summarise some of his work.
In a 2023 lecture, Mudde emphasizes the importance of precise terminology in discussing the far-right, distinguishing between extreme right (anti-democracy) and radical right (accepts elections but rejects liberal democratic principles like minority rights and rule of law).
He argues we're in a "fourth wave" of postwar far-right politics, characterized by the mainstreaming & normalization of the far-right - what Linguist Prof Ruth Wodak in a related concept refers to as the 'shameless normalization of far-right discourse'.