Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think there’s little point vilifying Boris when he’s only echoing what millions want to hear?

255 replies

dameofdilemma · 26/09/2019 20:47

Boris (I had to stop myself prefacing that with ‘that twat ‘) seems to have become some sort of pantomime villain but isn’t that a bit pointless?
He (and his cronies) are only voicing the opinions that they think will get them elected, the opinions probably held by millions of voters.

The right wing tabloid press are only printing the (vile) stories that their millions of readers agree with.

Much as Trump isn’t the problem, it’s the millions of voters who support him, who agree with his views, that are the real issue.

We’re entering a new era of fear, violence and division. There will be very few winners. Homelessness, poverty and job insecurity is on the rise. Public services are crippled by underfunding and underresourcing.

Personally we’re getting our ducks in a row to be as financially resilient as possible and to live in the most tolerant part of the country. Good luck everyone!

OP posts:
WellButterMyArse · 28/09/2019 10:32

Give over sgb. I think bringing trans into this was unhelpful, but grabbing every opportunity to do the waah alt right routine makes about as much sense as saying the more dick pandering end of the feminist spectrum are allies of the Iranian regime.

PierreBezukov · 28/09/2019 11:06

The amount of people on social media agreeing that the courts shouldn’t get involved in politics is insane

Why is that insane? The courts shouldn’t get involved in politics.

PierreBezukov · 28/09/2019 11:11

If anyone’s out of touch with the country it’s the snarling opposition.

I agree. At some level they know this, which is why they are terrified of a general election. At another level they don't care about being 'out of touch' because they are so arrogant to think that they know better than the 'proles' - - especially those up north--

Brexit has simply highlighted divisions that already existed between the liberal elite and the general population.

Really222 · 28/09/2019 11:30

Why is that insane? The courts shouldn’t get involved in politics.

They didn’t, they made a ruling on a question they were asked.

Luckily the separation of powers still exists. For now.

Brexit has simply highlighted divisions that already existed between the liberal elite and the general population.

Would that be the general population that Boris, Farage and Cummings are part of and so eager to represent the interests of?

The opposition are waiting to make sure Boris does not lead us off the no deal cliff. Everyone knows that all that Corbyn has ever wanted is a general election, yet it is now convenient to say that he is scared of one.

Not everyone will fall for the slogans.

HappyHammy · 28/09/2019 11:35

It's ok for Jess to tell Diane Abbott to eff off then?

MellowBird85 · 28/09/2019 11:43

@BeardedMum

Yes it is frightening. They keep interviewing people from towns up north where the majority voted for Brexit and they seem to love BJ. They think he is the man of the people and working class

Ah yes, because us up north are low intellect, knuckle dragging racists who shouldn’t have been allowed to vote because we don’t know any better. Stop being so bloody patronising

WellButterMyArse · 28/09/2019 11:45

The opposition aren't currently supporting a General Election, because to do so risks allowing Johnson to crash us out with No Deal. He could potentially change the date to after Halloween once agreed.

It really is very credulous to think Corbyn's running scared. What's actually happened is that he's finally worked out that the Labour vote leans primarily Remain, often even in Leave areas, so what he's actually afraid of is doing something that will lose him the Labour Remain bloc. Which, inconveniently enough for Brexiteers, includes large swathes of northern English cities. I think perhaps we only count as northern when we live below a certain population density though.

TulipsInAJug · 28/09/2019 13:03

to pull this off, there will have to be some form of brake applied to the rightwing media.

Chilling.

TulipsInAJug · 28/09/2019 13:05

Who will decide what’s “harmful and untrue”, in this utopian future of which you speak

The Ministry of Truth will.

WAR IS PEACE
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

Limitedsimba123 · 28/09/2019 13:53

Pierre, what I mean is they don’t understand the SC judgement. The SC didn’t get involved in politics - they simply ensured that parliament could continue to challenge the work of the executive.

Reading many (mostly leavers) posts shocks me that people don’t understand that there is a difference between parliament and executive (ie government), especially as they all state they want to leave the EU because sovereignty Hmm. Parliament (all elected MPs, not just those making up the government) is sovereign. The government only have power to pass laws etc if they command a majority in Parliament. Boris does not currently command a majority. Just because the PM is the PM doesn’t mean that he has carte Blanche, he still has to have support for whatever law he is trying to pass by the majority of parliament.

WellButterMyArse · 28/09/2019 14:09

Yes, there is a general lack of understanding of those points. You can be a Leaver and get that the court acted appropriately, and you can also be a Remainer and not have any understanding of the principles or law. I personally know people in both camps.

But there has definitely been an onslaught of people who think that an executive with no majority and a leader who barely anybody was able to choose is somehow being unfairly treated by the legislature and the judiciary, that checks and balances are some kind of outrage. Too often, these people simply think this because they want Brexit.

Jillyhilly · 28/09/2019 14:10

The Ministry of Truth will.

WAR IS PEACE
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

Quite, TulipsInAJug. Full steam ahead to Reanimated’s glorious future!

Limitedsimba123 · 28/09/2019 14:28

What is concerning to me is that some Tory MPs are using this general lack of knowledge to try and garner support for the abolishment of the independent Judiciary. I’m mostly a lurker but have banged on about this a lot over the past few days as the fact that the point is even being mooted is astonishing to me. No one else seems to be concerned about this though. I used to work in the legal profession before a career change so follow a lot of lawyers on twitter and they are similarly outraged.

With regards to WC people in poor northern towns, well I am one of them, and unfortunately among my friends and family not many people know of/understand the importance of the separation of powers which is saddening. A lot of them seem to think Boris should just be allowed to let us crash out because he’s the PM, and that the SC overstepped the mark.

Jillyhilly · 28/09/2019 15:43

When someone is talking about the threats that people receive, the dail abuse and the fear, he dismissed that with the word 'humbug'.

Oh. Is “humbug” so very offensive to you? Should I pull out the fainting couch?

On the other side, it seems to have been ok for Soubry to call Leavers fascists and racists and for Lammy to call the ERG “worse than Nazis” for years.

He said he’d never heard such humbug in his life. And he was right - the Labour Party was invoking Jo Cox for political capital, and “humbug” was actually quite a restrained word for that level of cynicism. Paula Sherriff, Laila Moran, Jess Phillips - all with their snarling speeches with a view to using the Twitter clips later - using Jo cox’s name and trying to link her death to Boris Johnson. It was an incredibly low move, and a lot of people can see that.

Using words like “Surrender” and “humbug” do not actually incite the unwashed masses to violence - the general public is actually a bit more sensible than that. What’s happening is that these ant-Brexit MPs are trying to insulate themselves from criticism by calling everyone who disagrees with them a monster. Good on Boris for not capitulating to them.

WellButterMyArse · 28/09/2019 16:03

Johnson's humbug remark was disgusting, but then it was intended to be.

He'd rather the headlines be about whether it was offensive or not than about his failed proroguing attempt, his links with Jennifer Arcuri, his inability to obtain a better deal etc etc. It was done on purpose. Tactics.

chomalungma · 28/09/2019 16:10

Paula Sherriff, Laila Moran, Jess Phillips - all with their snarling speeches with a view to using the Twitter clips later - using Jo cox’s name and trying to link her death to Boris Johnson. It was an incredibly low move, and a lot of people can see tha

They DID NOT try and link her death to Boris Johnson.

They asked for Johnson to tone down the rhetoric.Because of the death threats out there.

And Johnson does exactly the same for his twitter clips as well.

ScreamingLadySutch · 28/09/2019 16:19

What a woke, luvvie lefty place Mumsnet is! Do you honestly believe the righteous things you are saying??

First point: Jo Cox was not the first person killed. The first person killed was a Brexit supporter, who was beaten to death by a Remainer. How many people know that? Not many, it seems.

Jo Cox was killed by a mentally ill Labour supporter. It was very low for that Labour woman to use her death to score political points.

The aggressive language has come from REMAINERS (stupid, racist, bigoted etc). Now they are whining? Why? Political point scoring:

ScreamingLadySutch · 28/09/2019 16:19

"The signs were clear when the Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, at one stage referred to a question as being like a ‘When did you stop beating your wife’ question. Emma Hardy, an MP for Hull, swiftly contrived to squeeze some offence out of that. Soon she was on her feet objecting that such a phrase was horrifically, wildly inappropriate and somehow made light of a domestic abuse bill due to go through the Commons. In the armoury of modern British political warfare being able to disingenuously or otherwise accuse someone else of making light of domestic violence is almost as good as claiming that they have used a ‘dog-whistle’ racist term.

The fact that Hardy had herself used the phrase she had complained of in the recent past was a reminder – if reminder was needed – that much of this is now performance. People pretend to be offended in order to win an actual political point. As Hardy made her intervention the Labour benches around her supported her horror with ‘disgusting’ and the like.

All that turned out only to be the warm-up for the main offence taking however. Paula Sherriff MP chose to go for the nuclear offence taking option by claiming that in saying things like ‘surrender’ the Prime Minister was using ‘dangerous’ words. Sherriff claimed that the Prime Minister should lead the way in moderating his language and tied her objection to the murder of the Labour MP Jo Cox. ‘We stand here under the shield of our departed friend with many of us in this place subject to death threats and abuse every single day.’ When the Prime Minister dismissed this intervention as ‘humbug’ the Labour MPs had their moment. And the media had its story.

As it happens I am intensely suspicious of this sort of game. For it is true that political language can be febrile and that it certainly can deteriorate. But just as there is such a thing as honest offence taking, so there is also dishonest offence taking. And if there is a political advantage to gained by behaving dishonestly then is it possible that some people might seize that opportunity?

I was on Newsnight last night to comment on matters to do with Brexit and Trump, but it had by then become clear that language was the real issue once again. This is perhaps what becomes an issue in a society and Parliament absolutely riven by a lack of action. It was interesting to watch the resulting game play out in real time. MPs from all parties gathered on Newsnight to express their horror and outrage and affect real, serious concern that the term ‘humbug’ could have been used in such close proximity to Paula Sherriff’s furious intervention.

Just one point that cannot be made often enough is that Her Majesty’s Opposition is currently led by a man who repeatedly stood for, entertained and honoured the murderers of British soldiers and other subjects. To my knowledge no MP on the government benches has ever stood up and honoured the murderer of Jo Cox. Nor would they ever have even dreamt of doing so. So a little perspective might be in order. But perspective is what is severely lacking at present.

The former Newsnight journalist Paul Mason attempted to express shock about the language Boris Johnson had used and then presented nearly all of his political opponents as ‘fascists’. But it was something that Emily Maitlis said that interested me more. For in the discussion before mine Maitlis carried out a typically forthright interrogation of four MPs, each in turn. To the Liberal Democrat MP Layla Moran (who happens to know something about domestic abuse) Maitlis asked whether Moran and other Liberal Democrat MPs were willing to ‘pull the trigger’ and call an election on the Prime Minister.

And here is the thing. At no stage did anybody think or pretend to think that in using this commonplace phrase Maitlis was in some way calling for people to shoot the Prime Minister. They could have done so, in the same way that Emma Hardy and co. had done only hours earlier. But in the BBC studio nobody even raised an eyebrow or said ‘Steady on Emily, didn’t we all just agree to moderate our language?’ That is because this mouse-trap is sprung to catch people in only one particular direction. It is plainly not primed in order to go off in any and every direction. Rather, the Prime Minister’s parliamentary and media opposition sits primed – led by a life-long supporter of terrorism – waiting for the slightest phrase which it can present as incitement.

This used to be a serious country. If we are intending to be one again at any time soon then we might start by stopping such language games. " - Douglas Murray

ScreamingLadySutch · 28/09/2019 16:21

"Rarely has there been such a flagrant display of hypocrisy and cant as there was in the House of Commons last night. Opposition MPs stood up one after the other to denounce Boris Johnson for his use of apparently toxic and dangerous words like ‘surrender’ and ‘sabotage’. Such language is polluting the public sphere and making life hell for politicians, they claimed.

Their ostentatious offence-taking would be a tad more convincing if they had ever said anything about the bile heaped on Brexit voters these past three years.

Where were these people when it became positively vogue to refer to lower middle-class Brexit blokes as ‘gammon’? Where were they when Brexit voters were being branded xenophobes, fascists, the facilitators of the most hateful period in Western Europe since the 1930s?

Where were they when Lord Adonis compared seeking a clean Brexit to appeasing the Nazis, or when David Lammy said the ERG are as bad as Nazis? When asked to retract that comment, Lammy said that, if anything, his comment had not been ‘strong enough’. So the ERG are worse than Nazis? That was the mad implication. Boris has never, not once, said anything as toxic as that about his fellow human beings.

Yes, that’s where these overnight smelling-salts offence-takers over Boris’s bad language were when incredibly toxic comments were being made about anyone who thinks we should leave the EU — they were making some of the comments.

If you think Boris Johnson’s perfectly reasonable use of the phrase ‘surrender bill’ to describe the Benn Bill was an act of far-right provocation that will lead to violence and death, then you must have been really shocked when Brexiteers were being branded useless lumps of meat (gammon). And when the Guardian recently asked, in its review of Ian McEwan’s novel The Cockroach, if Brexit was dreamt up by ‘a cabal of nefarious, lie-spewing insects’.

You weren’t shocked by any of that? Oh well, I guess hypocrisy is thy name.

Perhaps the worst aspect of the cynical, concocted fury over the PM’s words was the deployment of the horrific murder of Jo Cox as part of the argument. I’ve seen some cynical things in politics in my time, but this felt like a new low. It was an attempt to brand Boris a fellow traveller of the deranged far-right lunatic who murdered Cox. That accusation in itself is more toxic than anything Boris said.

This is an explicit effort to criminalise political opinion. To paint those who think that sections of the establishment are sabotaging Brexit as far-right ideologues. To depict anyone who says we should not surrender to the EU as the unwitting stirrer of fascistic violence on the streets.

There is a low, borderline Stalinist aim in all this: to push certain ideas and beliefs beyond the pale; to brand one’s opponents not simply wrongheaded or ill-informed, but positively evil and dangerous. The suggestion that uttering the words ‘surrender’ or ‘betrayal’ or ‘sabotage’ will unleash violence of the kind that was visited so horrifically upon Jo Cox is a straight-up attempt to stifle opinion and criminalise certain beliefs.

I knew parliament was out of touch; I didn’t know it was this out of touch. Across the country there are people who feel betrayed by MPs who promised to enact the referendum result but are now refusing to do so. Imagine their fury, or their simple bewilderment, when they now hear those same MPs saying it is fascistic to accuse them of betrayal. They must hold this parliament in contempt." - Brendan O'Neill

ScreamingLadySutch · 28/09/2019 16:32

To sum up, I really think Remainers are playing a dangerous game here. The whole point of democracy is that the losers consent. BOTH sides said they would respect the results of the referendum - and now the losing side it not? This is a bad trend that is not going to end well.

People are watching these badly behaved people howling and screeching in parliament and elsewhere(for example, Emily Thornberry and that Scottish guy constantly interrupting and making ad hominem slurs on Question Time, being allowed to by Fiona Bruce who interrupted their opponents), and going to the courts because they don't like the results like we are some kind of banana republic (this is what happens in South Africa whenever a Comrade is found corrupt and is fired. They never go quietly) and I don't think they like it.

I think there are a lot more 'shy leavers' (who don't state their opinions) than Remain supporters realise. Several people have said 'I voted Remain but [after their undemocratic behaviour] I would now vote Leave'.

Really222 · 28/09/2019 16:33

Some of the MPs who voted down the WA were Leave MPs who want no deal. Somehow this point always gets missed. I wouldn’t be surprised if those same leave MPs are blaming their colleagues for not enacting Brexit.

Jillyhilly · 28/09/2019 16:33

They DID NOT try and link her death to Boris Johnson.

Actually Jess Phillips went out of her way to misinterpret what Johnson said.

She said, “He called my friend’s death humbug”. He explicitly and unequivocally did not do that.

She lied to make a political point, and so that she could put it on twitter later.

chomalungma · 28/09/2019 16:34

BOTH sides said they would respect the results of the referendum - and now the losing side it not

Once again - it was close and Leave had many different versions.

The 'winning' side in Parliament failed to respect the referendum result because they did not vote for Theresa May's deal.

Really222 · 28/09/2019 16:35

And many remain MPs did vote for the WA. But because they don’t want to leave with no deal, they are being branded as “anti-democratic”. It’s a ploy.

Lyingonthesofainthedark · 28/09/2019 16:36

And Boris is doing a Trump-manipulating opinion rather than reflecting it

Swipe left for the next trending thread