Sajid Javid is totally unfit to be Chancellor of the Exchequer

Boris Johnson's cabinet is full of extraordinarily inappropriate people like Priti Patel, Dominic Raab, Gavin Williamson, and Liz Truss, but perhaps the most egregious appointment of all is Sajid Javid as Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Before his move into politics Javid was a banker at Deutsche Bank, where he sold complex financial derivatives called Collateralised Debt Obligations (CDOs).

In order to have any coherent understanding of what caused the 2008-09 global financial sector insolvency crisis, you need to know what CDOs are, otherwise you could end up believing any old economically illiterate shit (like "Labour bankrupted Britain" for example).

CDOs were economic alchemy schemes designed to turn toxic bad debts into fake gold-plated investments.

The way they worked was to collect together thousands of bad mortgages (the kind of mortgages people are highly likely to default on if there's any kind of economic downturn) then grade them into bands from worst to least bad.

The lower ranked bad mortgages remained risky investments, but the top tranche of "least bad" sub-prime mortgages were packaged up together and sent to the Credit Ratings Agencies to be classified as AAA rated investment grade financial products, meaning that major banks, insurance funds, national and local governments, and pension funds bought them up in their £billions believing them to be safe investments rather than carefully repackaged junk.

The whole thing defied economic logic: High return investments are riskier, low return investments are safer.

But Sajid Javid and the other financial sector alchemists selling these toxic products convinced their customers that they'd managed to rewrite the basic laws of investment to create these high return + supposedly low risk investments.

But while they were singing their praises to their customers, loads of CDO merchants were secretly referring to them in the most derogatory of terms, like "shit breather" and "piece of shit" in private chats, because they knew they were junk investments that were bound to implode sooner or later.

Furthermore, several of the banks selling these ticking time bomb CDO "investments" were secretly buying up £billions worth of financial insurance on the products they'd just sold, looking for huge payouts when the junk products they were selling finally exploded (this special insurance is called CDS and you can find out more in this article).

So given that it was an open secret amongst CDO merchants that they were selling toxic junk that's bound to fail, and that several of the banks selling this stuff were opportunistically speculating on the inevitable failure of the junk products that they were selling to unsuspecting customers, what was Sajid Javid playing at?

There are only two explanations, neither of them good.

If we're charitable to Javid, then we could argue that he was a clueless dupe, naively selling a load of toxic junk in good faith simply because he was too stupid to investigate the products he was actually selling, and so poorly connected within the CDO industry that he was unaware of the open secret amongst his peers that the products he was selling as safe investments were actually bound-to-fail financial Weapons of Mass Destruction.

So what on earth is Boris Johnson doing promoting a clueless idiot like this to the most important economic job in British politics just a decade later?

The other explanation is, of course, much worse. If Javid was smart enough to realise that the CDOs he was selling were bound-to-fail junk, and he was in on the open secret within the trade that they were certain to implode one day, yet he carried on selling them as safe investments to oblivious customers like other banks, pension funds, local and national governments, and insurance funds as low-risk investment opportunities, then he's a cynical and duplicitous fraudster.

If he didn't know, he was an idiot and certainly shouldn't be running the UK economy, but if he did know, then he's a fraudster and should probably be in jail for wilfully selling toxic junk to unsuspecting customers, rather than running the UK economy.

It's absolutely extraordinary that Boris Johnson and the Tories have promoted one of the shady derivatives traders who caused the economic crisis to the top economic job in British politics, and whichever way you look at it, his damning history clearly indicates his unfitness to hold such a crucial role.

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.

OR

Sajid Javid is making technologically impossible demands

If you ever needed more proof that the Tory party is riddled with idiocy, consider the Tory Home Secretary Sajid Javid's latest demand that social media sites block child sex abuse images and videos before they've even been uploaded.

The problem here is obvious to anyone with even the most rudimentary understanding of how the Internet actually works. Unless a file has been uploaded before, it's technologically impossible to know exactly what's being uploaded until it's actually uploaded, so threatening social media companies with fines and even shutdowns if they refuse to comply, is threatening to punish them for being incapable of doing the impossible.

This is the actual Home Secretary of the United Kingdom threatening sanctions against tech giants for refusal to comply with his technologically impossible demands!

If an image or file has been uploaded before, it is possible for social media sites to identify them by their SHA hash numbers, but this only works for images that have been previously uploaded and added to a database of forbidden content, and social media sites are already doing this kind of thing already os this can't be what Javid is on about.
 

Of course it would be possible for Javid to demand that the social media sites screen all uploaded content before it's published, but there a major issues with this interpretation because this post-upload pre-publication screening idea is clearly at odds with what Javid demanded, which is clearly screening before/during upload.

The only way it's possible to argue that he was calling for screening before publication, rather than screening before/during upload is to assume that he's so ignorant about the subject matter he's threatening to legislate on, that he literally doesn't understand the difference between uploading data, and publishing data.

Problems with pre-moderation

Even if we adopt the "good faith" interpretation of Javid's demand (that he's an ignorant buffoon who wants pre-screening of content before publication, but is too intellectually lazy to distinguish between the concept of uploading data to a server, and the concept of publishing data on a website) then there are still massive problems with what he's proposing.

Collective punishment

Is it really fair to collectively punish all UK citizens by subjecting them to lengthy pre-moderation of their Internet pictures, videos, and comments in an effort to clamp down on a small minority of criminals?

Why should people with no history of uploading criminal content be subjected to potentilly time-consuming screening procedures on all of their social media uploads?

Function creep

Once the infrastructure is in place to pre-moderate all social media uploads for criminality, surely those systems could be open to abuse.

Once you've established the principle that everything uploaded to the Internet needs to be pre-moderated before it gets published, surely it's only a matter of time before the state begins using these checks to screen for undesirable content such as critiques of government policy?

Even if function creep somehow doesn't occur in the UK, forcing the social media sites to develop pre-screening technology would surely hasten the decline of online freedoms elsewhere in the world. 

If Britain sets the precedent that social media companies can be forced to put the infrastructure in place to pre-moderate all social media uploads, surely tyrannical and authoritarian governments elsewhere would use this as a precedent to clamp down on what they define to be criminality (stuff like homosexuality, criticism of the government, discussion of forbidden topics, non-violent protest, calls for more democracy ...).

Time-lag

If UK-based journalists and political commentators are subjected to potentially time-consuming checks into the social media content they've uploaded, while journalists and commentators abroad are free to upload things automatically, surely this puts British people at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to leading the ever more rapid news cycle?

Should a political commentator based abroad really be given an artificial time advantage as political commentators based in Britain are subjected to pre-moderation of the content they've uploaded?

Algorithms

The idea that the social media giants could manually screen every single upload to their sites for elicit content before publication is almost the same scale of absurdity as the idea of screening content before it's even been uploaded.

Unless we envisage social media sites with tens of thousands of moderators manually trawling through everyone's uploads, it's clear that the vast bulk of Javid's pre-screenings would have to be undertaken by automated processes, which leaves us with the question of how much we trust algorithms to correctly identify child abuse text, images, videos. And how much we trust automatic processes when it comes to false positives.

How many completely innocent people getting censored, blocked, or banned from social media and falsely flagged as paedophiles would Javid consider acceptable?

What are Javid's proposals for redress and compensation for people who get falsely flagged as paedophiles because an algorithm mistook their children playing in the paddling pool or their beach pictures for child sex abuse images?

The Dark Web

Only the most incompetent of criminals would consider using social media netwerks like Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram to share child sex abuse images, or conduct criminal transactions.

Most of this illicit online behaviour happens on the Dark Web, so in seeking to clamp down on the social media giants Sajid Javid is either so incompetent that he's going after the wrong targets, or he's well aware that they're the wrong targets, but he's just cynically using the issue of child sex abuse as an excuse to assert right-wing authoritarian control systems over the major social media platforms.

Live streams

One of the other demands Sajid Javid made in his speech addresses the problem of live-streamed abuse, which is a serious issue. 

But instead of offering anything resembling an actual policy to deal with it, he says he wants social media companies to shut down the abuse live streams (without explaining how they're supposed to detect them) and offers a paltry £250,000 in funding to "support new ideas on how to detect and disrupt live streamed abuse".

So one of his "demands" is more like an idle wish that something be done about the problem than an actual demand.

Conclusion

Of course the government and social media sites should be working to combat child sex abuse and other online criminality, but such blatant Internet illiteracy from the Tory Home Secretary is deeply concerning.

If he doesn't even understand the absolute basics of how the Internet works, like the difference between uploading data to a website's servers and the website publishing that data, then how on earth can we expect him to do a competent job of policing the Internet?

Even if we try to ignore the Internet illiteracy of what Javid is proposing and try to make some sense of it, it's still either a display of abject incompetence (pretty much ignoring the Dark Web to focus resources on the wrong targets, and his pitiful wishful thinking when it comes to the live streaming of abuse) or it's the sickening use of child sex abuse as a smokescreen to obscure a right-wing authoritarian power grab aimed at installing the means of censoring the British public through pre-moderation of all uploaded content.

Whatever the case, one thing shines through more clearly than anything else. Sajid Javid is badly unsuited to the extremely important job he's been charged with.

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.

OR

Theresa May's weak leadership is a danger to Britain

Over the weekend the new Tory Home Secretary Sajid Javid decided to tear up the longstanding British convention that our government opposes the death penalty in all circumstances. He apparently made this decision entirely on his own, without any cabinet discussion, legal advice, or permission from the Prime Minister.

Theresa May is such a weak and incompetent leader that she's absolutely failed to correct or discipline Javid for making up government policy on the hoof, and ended up eventually agreeing with him in order to minimise the scandal, which is a very dangerous green light to all of her other ministers to just completely make things up as they go along without fear of repercussions.

It's possible to imagine that May's lackadaisical attitude to Javid inventing policy on the hoof could stem from the extraordinarily weak political position she's in (very few remaining allies, razor thin majority in parliament, under constant threat of a "no confidence" vote triggered by Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG Brextremists) but this incompetence isn't actually new.

Back during the 2017 General Election campaign her (now resigned in disgrace) Defence Secretary Michael Fallon made the shocking announcement that Britain would consider using nuclear weapons as attack weapons, which amounted to a sudden declaration that the UK is abandoning the long-established "no first strike" policy, and endangering the "Mutually Assured Destruction" deterrence compromise that has existed between the nuclear powers since the 1950s (by giving other nuclear powers a clear incentive to get their strike in first before Theresa May does).

Amazingly Fallon made this seismic change to Britain's nuclear weapons policy without cabinet discussion, legal advice, or permission from the Prime Minister. But Theresa May decided not to discipline him or put the record straight on Britain's actual nuclear weapons policy for fear of making one of her ministers look like a fool during an election campaign.

Even more amazing was the way the media (and especially the BBC) completely ignored this extraordinary on the hoof abandonment of Britain's longstanding nuclear weapons strategy in favour of a certifiably insane "yes first strike" policy, and instead focused all of their nuclear weapons political questions on relentlessly attacking Jeremy Corbyn for sticking with the traditional "no first strike" policy!

If Theresa May allows her ministers to just make up new policies on issues as important as nuclear weapons and the death penalty with no discussion, legal advice or permission, her incompetence and weak leadership is clearly and obviously a danger to Britain, British standards, and the British way of life.

And the fact that she actually ends up agreeing with them in order to save face, even though they went behind her back to announce these new policies has set a dangerous precedent. It doesn't matter how dangerous, regressive, un-British, or downright insane the new policy, she'll probably end up green lighting it just to avoid the fuss of disciplining them and putting the record straight.

Even if you somehow agree with the Fallon's crackpot "yes first strike" strategy or Javid's efforts to undermine Britain's longstanding opposition to the death penalty, there's absolutely no way that you can agree that the correct way to introduce these wild new policies was to do it behind Theresa May's back, safe in the knowledge that she's such a weak and directionless leader that she'd simply agree to them after the fact to avoid a fuss.

And if the non-reaction of the bulk of the mainstream media to Theresa May letting her ministers go unpunished for repeatedly going behind her back to announce wild new policies this is anything to go by, then she's not going to be held to account for this dangerously weak and incompetent attitude either.

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.

OR

The Tories are actually trying to spin their anti-Muslim bigotry scandal as a vote winner!

After the Muslim Council of Britain and several senior Conservatives demanded an investigation into anti-Muslim prejudice in the Tory party, many on the left have been quick to point out the tiny flicker of mainstream media coverage on the issue in relation to the massive Labour anti-Semitism furore before the local elections.

The discrepancy in coverage is obvious, but it should come as no surprise at all given the relentless pro-Tory anti-Corbyn bias that not only dominates the print media, but also thrives on the supposedly neutral BBC too.

The allegations of widespread Islamophobia in the Tory ranks and specific accusations of anti-Muslim discrimination against Michael Gove and the Tory leadership should surely be getting more media coverage, but the reason these stories aren't getting much traction are obvious.

Of course mainstream media journalists don't want to scrutinise Tory Islamophobia to the same extent they attacked Labour over allegations of anti-Semitism. Firstly such scrutiny would run entirely counter to the mainstream media groupthink objective of protecting the neoliberal status quo by working to oust Jeremy Corbyn, and secondly "the Tory party is over-run with bigots" is really more of a common sense assertion rather than a groundbreaking news story anyway, isn't it? 

For me the huge disparity between mainstream media coverage of the Labour anti-Semitsm row and the Tory anti-Muslim allegations is actually secondary to another issue, the shockingly cynical Tory response to these allegations of widespread anti-Muslim bigotry in their own party.

While Labour took the position that anti-Semitism is wrong, and that it should be stamped out in all of society, including when it arises in the Labour ranks (the correct response), the Tories have signalled that they're absolutely fine with the allegations and have no intention of investigating them, or dealing with anti-Muslim bigots in their ranks.

The refusal to take the allegations seriously was exemplified by the new Tory Home Secretary Sajid Javid when he attempted to publicly delegitimise the Muslim Council of Britain rather than deal with their concerns over Tory anti-Muslim bigotry.

Labour admitted that they had a problem and proposed to take action to combat it and mainstream media hacks hounded them for weeks over it, and the Tories have basically said "fuck you, we're fine with it" and the mainstream press have largely left them alone.

The interesting thing here is that the Tory response to these allegations has been clearly calculated. They're not just adopting this "fuck you, we're fine with it" attitude because they expect to be allowed to get away with it by their chums in the mainstream media, they will also have considered the public opinion consequences too.

Given that the Tories are only clinging onto power at all because they managed to absorb the majority of the hard-right ultranationalist voters who fled the wreckage of UKIP, a belligerent "fuck you" response to accusations of widespread anti-Muslim bigotry in their ranks is likely to resonate a lot more strongly with this crucial demographic than an admission that anti-Muslim attitudes are wrong, and the launch of an investigation into the problem.

The Tories seem to have calculated that their "fuck you, we're fine with it" attitude will play so well with the large extreme-right ultranationalist demographic they're so desperate to appease, that it will easily mitigate any fallout amongst Tory voting Muslims.

The logic being that any Muslim who still votes Tory after the outrageous BNP stype anti-Muslim fearmongering campaign they ran for Zac Goldsmith's London mayoral campaign in 2015, is clearly also likely to tolerate their refusal to investigate widespread accusations of anti-Muslim bigotry in the Tory ranks too.

An admission of the problem and the launch of an inquiry into it would infuriate the crucial blue-kip demographic the Tory party has rendered itself utterly reliant upon, whilst their belligerent refusal to engage with the criticisms creates the impression that they're exactly the kind of bigoted extreme-right anti-Muslim party this hard right blue-kip demographic are looking for.

just think about it. British society has not yet drifted so far to the extreme-right that the Tories can come out and explicitly position themselves as an anti-Muslim party, but what's the next best thing to appeal to the extreme-right - ultranationalist - white-supremacist - anti-Muslim demographic?

Publicly attacking and delegitimising the Muslim Council of Britain, and clearly signalling that they have no intention of rooting out anti-Muslim bigots from their party would seem ideal for the purpose don't you think?

The Tories are actually playing their anti-Muslim bigotry scandal as a vote winner, knowing that to a significant swathe of right-wing people, rampant anti-Muslim prejudice is actually an attractive quality!

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.

OR

Playing 'good Jew - bad Jew' to delegitimise Jewish people you disagree with is blatant anti-Semitism

One of the most extraordinary things about the anti-Semitism furore is the way that Jeremy Corbyn's right-wing opponents are prepared to issue blatantly anti-Semitic statements in order to attack him as an anti-Semite, but they repeatedly get a total free pass from the mainstream media.

First we had Theresa May using the grotesque "self-hating Jew" trope to attack every single Jewish member of the Labour Party as tolerant of anti-Semitism, then we had the Tory government minister Sajid Javid hiding behind parliamentary privilege to smear hundreds of Jewish Labour activists as supporters of the fascist ideology that resulted in the genocide of their forefathers!

Incredibly, right-wingers have tried to argue that silencing and delegitimising Jewish voices you don't agree with by smearing left-wing Jewish people as "self-hating Jews" and "neo-fascists" is somehow not anti-Semitic behaviour!

Now the right-wing (and non-Jewish) Labour MP John Woodcock has gone even further by slamming Jeremy Corbyn for celebrating the Jewish Seder festival with a left-wing Jewish group called Jewdas.

Apparently Corbyn is still an anti-Semite for attending and participating in a Jewish festival, because the people there are somehow the wrong kind of Jews.

Using grotesquely divisive 'good Jew - bad Jew' shit to delegitimise and dismiss Jewish voices you disagree with is about as clear an example of anti-Semitism as it's possible to see. But Woodcock didn't just get a free pass on it, his vile comments were uncritically repeated all over the mainstream media, including the oh-so-impartial BBC.

It's difficult not to resort to anger when you see a person resorting to spectacularly divisive anti-Semitism in order to smear one of their political opponents as anti-Semitic, but perhaps the best response to this kind of sick hypocrisy is humour.

One of the most telling responses to Woodcock's vile effort to delegitimise and silence left-wing Jews came from the poet and children's laureate Michael Rosen, who wrote him a poem (see picture).

Not only did Woodcock resort to the anti-Semitic game of dismissing Jews who don't agree with him as illegitimate Jews, he also attached a link to the filthy extreme-right Guido Fawkes hate chamber to his Tweet.

If anyone has any doubt about why politicians (and especially Labour MPs) should not be giving free publicity to Guido, just find any Guido article about Sadiq Khan or Diane Abbott and take a look through the disgusting tidal wave of bigoted and abusive filth in the comments section.

Not only has Woodcock resorted to the anti-Semitic 'good Jew - bad Jew' game in order to smear Jeremy Corbyn as anti-Semitic for actually attending and participating in a Jewish religious festival in his spare time ... he's also posted a link to one of the most outrageously bigoted extreme-right hate chambers in British politics whilst pretending to oppose bigotry!

Here are a selection of Guido comments about Sadiq Khan and Diane Abbott for you to consider as you evaluate John Woodcock's decision to support this site whilst simultaneously posturing as someone who is opposed to bigotry!

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.

OR

Why I'm giving up on Jeremy Corbyn

Have you read the newspapers recently? It turns out that we may have missed a trick and that Jeremy Corbyn isn't quite the guy his supporters have been trying to fool us into believing he is.

I've tried to remain loyal to Jeremy Corbyn, but it's totally impossible given the way he's been stooging for Putin's Russia. I mean how could anyone trust a man who has been pushing for Magnitisky economic sanctions against Russian oligarchs and Putin cronies since way before the Skripal poisoning. If  Corbyn had any integrity at all then surely he'd take £800,000+ in donations from these oligarchs and Putin cronies and then obstruct Magnitsky powers at every turn like Theresa May has been doing?

It also turns out that back in the 1980s Jeremy Corbyn was a spy for the communists in Czechoslovakia! Some people have tried to cast doubt on the source of the claims and point out that there is no documentary proof of the claims whatever in the Czech archives, but who could possibly doubt the testimony of a man who personally founded Live Aid as a communist plot to overthrow the West?

Then there's the fact that Corbyn met members of Sinn Féin during the 1980s. Yes his supporters will point out that the Thatcher government was having secret negotiations with the actual IRA terrorists at the time, whilst telling the public "we don't negotiate with terrorists", but who on earth would want a politician who is open and honest about his actions when we could have politicians who do in secret exactly what they repeatedly promise the public that they are not doing?

And what's all this crap about Jeremy Corbyn wanting to return British infrastructure and services to British ownership? Surely everyone knows that our railways, power stations, national grid, water supplies, mail system, NHS, police services, and criminal justice system are obviously best off owned by a bunch of profit-seeking corporations and foreign governments.

What kind of ideologically driven fool would actually believe that British infrastructure and services are best run by Britain for the benefit of the British people?

Isn't it obvious that Jeremy Corbyn is a Stalinist? I mean his manifesto was actually the kind of centre-left democratic socialism that's commonplace across Europe and the developed world, but why look at his actual policies when you could rely on interpretation of his stance by trustworthy sources like the Sun, the Daily Telegraph, the Express, the Daily Mail, and the oh-so-impartial BBC Politics team?

And he's a neo-Nazi too as proven by the Tory minister Sajid Javid who bravely called out Momentum as a neo-fascist organisation from behind parliamentary privilege rules that say politicians can't be sued for defamation for the stuff they say in the houses of parliament. Of course the pro-Corbyn campaign group Momentum are Nazis, because there's nothing anti-Semitic at all about describing an organisation led by a Jewish man as being adherents of the ideology that resulted in the mass genocide of Jewish people is there?

And why is Corbyn such a weakling? When the Tories and their supporters in the mainstream media hurl abuse at him, he never slings abuse and insults back at them.

Surely a strong politician would leap down into the political sewer, sling shit around, and actively fuel the hate, rather than banging on boringly about the need for respectful discourse and honest political debate. 

Another example of his weakness is his refusal to say that he'd use nuclear bombs as attack weapons. I mean what kind of idiot thinks that Britain shouldn't be the nation that's responsible for triggering nuclear Armageddon by using nuclear weapons to attack other nations. I mean surely everyone knows the whole problem with the Cold War is that the United States and the Soviet Union didn't attack each other with nuclear missiles. Had they adopted Theresa May's sensible "first strike" approach to the confrontation I'm sure we all agree the whole thing would have been over so much more quickly.

And aside from being a weakling, there's the fact that he's a terrifyingly powerful bully too.

Remember the way he bullied the Labour right-wingers who plotted against him in 2016 by beating them in a democratic leadership election? 

And remember the time he bullied Owen Smith by competently sticking to the principle of collective responsibility. What he should do is just allow all of his ministers to just make up any shit they like on the hoof like Theresa May does. Surely everyone knows that in modern Britain any kind of competent leadership skills are forbidden, and that unless you allow your ministers to do whatever they like and never correct or discipline them for talking rubbish or defying the party line, you're obviously a Stalinist monster.

And then there's Corbyn's lack of moral flexibility. How dare he criticise Saudi Arabia for being a brutal Islamist tyranny where they crucify and behead people for "crimes" like being gay, rejecting Islam, attending pro-democracy protests, and atheism. 

Surely Corbyn knows that it takes a lot of effort to simultaneously believe that ISIS are a bunch of disgusting terrorists who make Al Qaida look moderate in comparison, whilst continually sucking up to and selling weapons to the Saudi tyrants who arm them, fund them, propagandise for them on social media, and supply them with more fighters than any other nation.

And what about his ridiculous stance of actually opposing Tory austerity? Surely it makes more sense for Labour to meekly imitate right-wing Tory economics, rather than proposing their own ridiculous idea of actually investing in Britain and its people in order to grow the economy. 

Surely everyone knows the natural home of the Labour Party is to hover ever so slightly to the left of the Tory party, no matter how far the Tories keep tracking off towards the extreme-right.

One of the most disgusting things about Jeremy Corbyn is his insistence on attending big rallies and meeting members of the public as if he genuinely likes it. Surely we all know that it's so much better when our political leaders shuttle between one "safe space" and another, hide from any form of scrutiny and debate, and prefer to wander around empty factories or give press conferences in front of a shed full of cows.

What kind of person would want their political leaders to be willing to talk to and empathise with ordinary members of the public?

Doesn't Corbyn even care that the "lower orders" are common people with vulgar language and impertinent questions who could be riddled with diseases too?

Who cares that Corbyn achieved the biggest increase in the Labour vote since 1945 by doing two things that were considered politically impossible (bringing out the youth vote and appealing to non-voters) in order to counteract the newly combined force of the Tory vote and the Ukip vote?

Who cares that Corbyn's policies have attracted hundreds of thousands of new energised Labour members and millions of young voters?
 

What kind of idiot thinks politics is about reaching out to people with policies they actually like, rather than scamming as much as possible in expenses, imposing policies that benefit the very wealthy at the expense of everyone else in society, and lying so much and so often that it becomes second nature to coat everything you say in a veneer of dishonesty?

One of the worst things about Corbyn's supporters (Corbynites as I like to call them) is the way they actually defend the man when the mainstream media call him out for being a Czech spy, a Russian stooge, a communist, a fascist, an inadequate bower, a disrespectful dancer, a weakling, and a bully.

How dare they question the judgement of their superiors and actually defend the man that we're all supposed to spit bile at on command like a pack of salivating Pavlov's dogs?

Why won't they just do as they're told and never question their superiors eh? This impertinent refusal to bow to authority and mindlessly accept what they're told is disgusting cult-like behaviour.

Anyone who turns to reliable sources like the S*n, Daily Mail and the BBC Politics team couldn't possibly conclude anything other than the fact that Jeremy Corbyn is an absolute monster, and that voting Tory is the only way to stop this incredibly weak and cowardly powerful fascist-communist bully from inflicting the absolute nightmare of workers earning enough to provide for their families, publicly owned railways and postal services, and a nation where health care and education are treated as rights, rather than profitable commodities to be traded by the rich.

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.

OR

Sajid Javid just baselessly called hundreds of Jewish Labour Party members "neo-fascists"

The Tory government minister Sajid Javid has just stood up in parliament and accused the Labour activist group Momentum of being "neo-fascists". 

Aside from the fact that it's the political left who have always stood in solidarity with the Jewish people to fight against actual fascists from the political right (as at Cable Street where they beat the British Union of Fascists in the 1930s, when they beat back the rise of the National Front in Lewisham in the '70s, and the regular criticism of modern neo-Fascist hate groups like Britain First from the political left), there's also the well-known fact that the leader of Momentum is a Jewish guy called Jon Lansman.

Now if we know anything at all about anti-Semitism then surely we know that it's deeply anti-Semitic to baselessly resort to calling Jewish people Nazis just because you disagree with their political views.

So where is the tide of outrage about this hard-right government minister deliberately and offensively tarring hundreds of peaceful anti-fascist left-leaning Jewish people with the vile ideology that resulted in the mass genocide against their ancestors?

Aside from the blatantly anti-Semitic nature of his revolting smear-tactics, there's another thing to realise about Sajid Javid:

When Zac Goldsmith and the Tories used vile extreme-right propaganda tactics copied straight out of the BNP playbook to attack Sadiq Khan during the London Mayoral election in 2016, guess who remained absolutely silent on these disgusting tactics?

Then there was the blind eye that Javid turned when the actual fascist Britain First leader Paul Golding recently threatened to violently intimidate anyone who dares to oppose or criticise right-wing politicians like Rees-Mogg.

Then there's the fact that Javid refused to criticise his fellow Tory MP Bob Blackman after he shared extreme-right Islamophobic propaganda on his Facebook page just a few days before he hid behind parliamentary privilege to shout his offensive slurs at Jewish Momentum members.

When his own political party used neo-fascist tactics copied straight from the BNP, Sajid Javid remained silent; when the Britain First neo-Nazi thugs threatened to act as a violent enforcement militia for the Tories, Sajid Javid remained silent; when his fellow Tory MP shared disgusting fascist propaganda on Facebook, Sajid Javid remained silent.

And then after all of that silence he resorts to full bore anti-Semitism by slurring every single Jewish member of Momentum as neo-Nazis.

Will Theresa May do anything to discipline her own government minister for debasing parliament by resorting to anti-Semitic smear-mongering? Doubtful

Will the Tories like Brandon Lewis who was promoting his "respect pledges" on social media just a few weeks ago call his fellow Tory out on his hyperbolic and offensive slurs? Doubtful

Will the mainstream media call Sajid Javid out for baselessly smearing hundreds of Jewish Labour Party members as Nazis just days after the whole anti-Semitism furore? Doubtful

Just like Javid's own personal attitude to Zac Goldsmith's disgusting use of neo-Nazi propaganda tactics, his fellow Tories will doubtless turn a blind eye and refuse to hold their own to account.

And given the blind eye the mainstream media have turned to half a dozen other bigotry and bullying scandals within the Tory ranks this week, few would expect mainstream journalists to call him out either.

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.

OR