The Afterword

Musings on the byways of popular culture

Menu

Navigation

You are here: Home / Forum / Dom v Boris

Dom v Boris

by 253 Comments

I have to admit that, whenever I hear the words “Dominic Cummings”, a little bit of me dies.

However, his blog piece denying being a leak for anything and accusing Boris of being “mad”, “incompetent” and acting “illegally” has brought out the very best in Marina Hyde. Her opinion piece made me laugh at loud several times.

BoJo will, of course, brazen it out. Like Adam Ant, he is not afraid of ridicule. There will be no parliamentary enquiry, despite Cummings’ suggestion, and all the sleaze business will be resolutely ignored, regardless of Labour’s best efforts to keep it alive.

The sun is shining and the virus is under control. I predict Tory gains in the upcoming local elections.

In the meantime, there is no fury like a spad scorned. Let’s make the most of it, join in the lolz with Marina and dream of BoJo rolling in deep doo doo.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/23/boris-johnsons-text-addiction-dominic-cummings

0

Comments

  1. I know that planning for consequences isn’t exactly Johnson’s strong suit, but it’s a very strange decision to try and distract the press by throwing Cummings under the bus when he a) is a total weasel, b) knows where the bodies are buried, c) doesn’t give a shit. Let’s hope the result is nothing trivial.

  2. This is what happens when Labour has it’s worst leader in years, it enables the worst PM in history to get a 80 seat majority.

    PS I vowed not post about politics on here, sorry.

    • The current Labour Party are a disgrace as an Opposition.

      Starmer can’t give an opinion on anything apart from bitching and nay saying, they have no policies on anything.

      Politics is dead. The Lib Dems are pointless now (and I have voted for them at every election).

      Green gets my vote next time.

      • It’s very difficult to land punches on a sack of shit. It’s not just bitching and naysaying to bang on about incompetence and sleaze. As for policies “we would have a proper test and trace system including compensation to stay off work for the self-employed on zero contracts that actually costs less” is one, but no-one is listening. BoJo being a sack of shit is factored into everyone’s expectations, especially the voters.

  4. The PM appears to be actually skint. The funds given to his former girlfriend for get IT startup (was it?) should be well within his reach and also we see him now trying to get donors to directly fund his flat renovations.

    • Maybe he should say it’s to be a ‘communications’ room, then change his mind as when more than £2.5m has been paid for it because he’s asked a question about using public money to get his leg over. That’s how he would act with utmost integrity anyway.

    • Follow the money.

      He was £58k short for the bill from renovating Downing Street. Somehow, somewhere, that money has been found. This is broke Boris unable to manage on the PM income.

      • Have you seen the renovations? There’s an upmarket Victorian opium den vibe from the pictures I’ve seen. Red and gold flock wallpaper with matching lampshades. I suppose this is how people behave when getting the top job in the land just isn’t enough. Forget about running the country. There’s colour schemes and exotic fabrics to choose.

      • @tiggerlion – absolutely. Johnson is a man whose appetites remain unchecked – fame, food, finance and fucking. The public don’t seem to care much about any of these, but if Cummings has the documents he suggests he has on the £58k Johnson could really struggle brush that off.

  6. The great general public. Such a disappointment. So easily manipulated, so predictable. Not prepared to do the reading and thinking. Same as it ever was. We of course know better, being superior, as is our want.

  7. It used to be said that the eldest son inherited the land, the next went into the navy and the simple one went into the clergy. These days, I wonder if politics is the new religion, in that there seems to be nobody with any intelligence, integrity or ability in government. It’s almost like it doesn’t matter who governs the UK, as those with real abilities are in big tech or hedge funds where the power lies. Nobody seems to have a good word to say about any of the current cabinet (with good reason) – and yet they seem a permanent fixture for at least the next 3 years and the country just has to live with their mediocrity, greed and (insert third word here, I can’t be bothered, oh yes) laziness.

    • Given that no opposition yet has managed to bounce back from such a resounding defeat (thanks, Jezza) to achievethe sort of swing needed to
      win the next election, I fear it will be a lot longer than that.

      Enoch Powell famously said that all political careers end in failure.

      In Jonson’s case, the hing that will bring Him down eventually will surely be his arrogance in playing fast and loose with the power that comes from being PM.

      He seems convinced that everyone loves him so much (people apparently “don’t give a monkey’s” about Flatgate/Carrigate/Whatevergate), he can take the most egregious liberties.

      One day of course, he will take one liberty too many.. Be interesting to see if Cummings is holding back on some juicy tidbit on that particular score.

    • Perceptive post @salwarpe

      Polly Toynbee writing in The Guardian the other day highlighted a couple of interesting statistics. Only about 1 in 3 people in the UK follow politics in any kind of serious way, and an interest in politics correlates with increased unhappiness. I yearn for a more evidence-based politics. There is plenty of evidence out there that shows that more equal societies tend to be happier ones, and yet we continue to plough on with a version of politics and society that favours the hyper-aspirational over all others. Why do people who are comfortably off feel the need to make more money? Why does Cameron need to dabble in the whole Greensill business? What motivates him, and millions like him to pursue this self-entitled path? Where is the drive for the greater good – from both politicians and the public – surely the most patriotic of all causes?

      I have no answers. Evidence from the covid pandemic suggests that populists (Johnson, Modi, Trump, Bolsonaro etc) are useless in times of international crises. Bolsonaro made environmental pledges to the virtual climate summit the other day, which he instantly reneged on. There is no future for anybody in this kind of politics.

      • Thanks, Martin. It’s mainly a sense I get that the real power plays are not happening in the halls of Westminster, a place where ministers avoid being held accountable, and just treat it as a subsidized debating club where they can score cheap points and enjoy the sound of their own voices.

        The inequality issue is a narrative I hold close to, because there is evidence to support it, thus sidestepping the tedious left/right slanging match. Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, many years ago raised this in their book The Spirit Level, but I’d you want to really feel empowered by somebody who knows what he is talking about and is passionate about change to greater equality, look up Danny Dorling, ceaselessly active in his writing and his public speaking, his social geography maps and charts are a thing to behold.

        Why does Cameron do what he does? Fear, I would say. Yes, he’s probably very comfortably off. But others have more. He could lose everything he has, like anyone could. Neoliberalism makes everything into a zero sum competition and cuts out the safety net of support from below – so you have to be like a shark – swim or drown. Takes courage to step off that conveyor belt.

        Nature loves rapid growth. But only after collapse, as pioneer species (those nasty weeds we don’t like) recover first, and then other plants succeed, and eventually you get a mature, stable, biodiverse ecosystem, with canopy plants and interdependent life at every level. Think of all that lovely biomass if you clear cut everything and start again. Don’t worry about natural assets or long term sustainability, or soil loss.

        That’s growth-led economics and it’s killing our life support system.

        • As the stakes get higher there is an increasing sense of game theory/prisoner’s dilemma in all of this. I was disappointed to see Starmer decline to join a cross party consensus on reforming the UK’s FPTP voting system. The sense of urgency I feel doesn’t seem to be reflected in our current political class, although Biden, at least, seems to have grasped the magnitude of the task. But a populist politics based on division seems not only deeply cynical but, at this late stage in the game, verging on the criminal.

          • Given that the FPTP system has guaranteed the two big parties power for the last century or so, Starmer’s reluctance to sign up for reform is understandable.

            The real question is, of course is what happens if Scotland gets and gains independence after a second referendum.

            The way things stand now, Labour will almost certainly need a good showing north of the border if it’s to stand any chance of overturning an 80-odd seat majority and winning in 2024. Sadly, their share of seats in Scotland has gone over a cliff in the last three elections.

            As a result will be interesting to see if Starmer changes his views on electoral reform if independence happens and FPTP no longer benefits labour to the extent it has in the past.

              • There are socialist parties. But the British public have been offered socialism time and time again, and rejected it time and time again. Centre-left social democracy, we tend to quite like, on the other hand.

                The standard hard Left narrative is that people are too stupid and easily hoodwinked by the big bad meeja to vote in their own interests, which is an illuminating stand to take for the ones who claim to be on the side of “the people”. The Bennites and Corbynistas and SWP and communists have been in love with the idea of false consciousness for decades, the patronising tools. It’s one of the main reasons people don’t vote for them, if they could but see it. (But if they could see it, they wouldn’t be Bennites and Corbynistas and SWP and communists.)

                • So you think the Corbynistas, Bennites etc. are all incapable of seeing the truth, and are “patronising tools” because they think other people are incapable of seeing the truth? Righty-ho.

                    • Believing in the power and influence of media propoganda is not the same thing as calling people stupid.

                    • I don’t think petty left/right squabbles are helpful here. Party politics is really an irrelevant sideshow in the face of global environmental crises and that is why I hoped Starmer would see the bigger picture. He’s still clinging to a 20th century script. Hartlepool might be submerged by the time Labour wins its next outright majority.

                      Voters are not stupid but the majority is scientifically illiterate and therefore vulnerable to media manipulation by those for whom environmental concerns are an inconvenience to growing their wealth. Populist governments around the world have promoted climate change scepticsm as a means to maintain power. Call me a bunny hugger but this kind of cynicism is utterly toxic and will end up ruining the planet for everybody.

                      Still, Corbyn eh?

                    • No it isn’t. There are many reasons why media propaganda is effective. Personally, I would imagine that apathy, lack of interest and other priorities are more determining factors than stupidity.
                      Do I think Noam Chomsky or Malcom X or Umberto Eco see through the media’s bias and influence to a considerably greater degree than my barber? Yep, I do. But I don’t think that’s insulting my barber or being patronising towards him. He just doesn’t have any interest at all in examining the issue. (He’s too busy worrying about how to pay his mortgage, for one thing.)

                      And I haven’t seen Noam or Malcom or Umberto referring to anyone as “stupid” in their analysis of media influence.

                      (that was a reply to Chiz.)

                    • I think you have to absolutely say people are open to media manipulation and are not as free thinking as they like to believe. Most people want to belong somewhere where they have a sense of being with sympathetic, like-minded types. Our views are often not much more than the accumulated articles and ideas of those we have read, regurgitated. Original thoughts are pretty rare. What kind of person am I? I am what I wear, what I read (or not read) or what my group says. Et tu Afterword. Easy to stay in that comfort zone and switch from the rest and that just got easier to do with social media sadly. Apathy and stupidity is a thing too though.

                      I don’t know who this is a reply to.

                    • Start a fresh comment and cut out the middle man.
                      While you’re waiting for the great leap of logic forwards.

      • “1 in 3 people follow politics in any kind of serious way”! Really? 1 in 3 don’t even vote at general elections, which means 1 in every 2 voters follow politics in a serious way. That sounds to me like a made up statistic. She must be referring to her own group of acquaintances. Evidence based journalism would be an improvement.

        • Can’t imagine Polly Toynbee would make things up. *sideways look to camera*

          I know pundits and commentators are one of the few things that sell newspapers these days but Christ I wish they’d all lose their bloody jobs.

          • Incredibly enough for a professional opinion-haver, Toynbee doesn’t reference this claim, and it’s hard to find references for it if you Google. Admittedly I haven’t tried for long, but this is the problem with the Toynbees of the world: they can say what they like, sound plausible, and rely on nobody checking. Somebody should make these people supply footnotes.

            • Not sure why you’re jumping on this point as it was only tangentially germane to the wider point I was making up thread. I threw it out there because I thought it was an interesting statistic. Nothing more.

              You’ve written a lot of words to illustrate your dislike of Toynbee.

          • My logic is that this figure is a guess and a wild one. Look at the numbers of people who watch TV news, political programmes or read newspapers, it is nowhere near a third of the population. The wider point I had in mind was that if politicians are not subject to scrutiny by journalists who know the facts, then they will continue to do, say and get away with what the hell they like.

            • I really wish I’d never quoted Toynbee now. I quoted that figure because I thought it illustrated the general indifference and lack of political engagement among UK voters. If the actual number is lower it enhances my point. Now you ask me to look at the numbers of folks who read papers without quoting any figures at all. But can we both agree that it is a low number and move on? I can’t help feeling that Toynbee has become a convenient distraction in this discussion. My wider point about global crises being poorly served by the current political power structures remains, irrespective of anything Toynbee says.

              The logic I was querying was you extrapolating from 1 out of 3 to 1 out of 2. There are lots of reasons why people who have an interest in politics might not vote. Labour voters in Tory strongholds or vice versa, for example. I wasn’t allowed to vote in the Brexit referendum because I’d been out of the country too long, but I’m still a British citizen with an interest in politics.

      • For “following politics in any serious way”, one in three seems rather high to me.
        I would put it at about one in five, currently.
        In good times when unemployment is low and everything appears to be going OK, I’d say it would be even lower than that.

    • Picking a fight with Cummings was never going to end well, considering how much he knows. The conspiracy theorist in me reckons Johnson might have just done it on purpose in the hope that any revelations would make his position untenable, so he can leave a job he is ill- equipped to do.
      Then we get malevolent Micheal Gove. . .

      • My assumption was always that Johnson was being held prisoner in the position until he ‘got Brexit done’ which is what he was elected to do with his ill considered boosterism. In consequence I’m quite surprised that he hasn’t been shuffled off-stage already with the excuse of poor health following his bout of Covid.

        A key strength of the Conservatives which Labour would do very well to learn from is the ability to throw a leader under the bus and forget about them. Corbyn isn’t coming back so it’s useless tearing the party apart arguing about him instead of fighting the government.

    • “The eldest son inherited the land, the next went into the navy and the simple one went into the clergy.” The unscrupulous one goes into politics, these days.

  8. It’s Gove, isn’t it? You just know that right now he’s standing in front of a mirror practicing what he’s going to say when he sweeps majestically into Number 10. He’ll be wearing a long leather coat and trilby like the nazi in Raiders of the Lost Ark. He’ll slowly remove his gloves and hand them to his henchman Dom, and then say – he hasn’t quite decided yet – either “Gentlemen; permit me to offer my assistance,” or “Thank you, Mr Johnson, that will be all.”

    He’ll fuck it up on the day, of course. His hands will be sweaty so Dom will have to help him get the gloves off. Then he’ll say “Gentlemen; permit me to offer you my Johnson,” and go all red.

  9. I’m faintly amused by all the people who screamed about Dom being a liar who can’t be trusted any further than you could spit him, now realising that he’s completely reliable when he’s putting the boot into Boris Johnson.

    • It’s like one of those football matches where you want both sides to lose.

      The pair of them are caricatures and I can visualise them in a pantomime with Cummings as the chief Villain (‘Oh no you didn’t!’) and Johnson, who has never needed any excuse to head for the dressing up box like a malignant Lucy Worsley, as Dame Doris (‘He’s behind you! In the fridge!’) Gove can be the principle boy who wins the leading lady (can’t think of any prominent enough personalities apart from Patel so:she will have to do).

      Wouldn’t it be nice to have politicians whom we could take seriously?

    • Dom’s points about incompetence, illegality and sleaze occurred when he was in Number 10, apparently in charge. He said nothing then about the country deserving better. He is due in front of the select committee soon. Last time, he described the Department of Health as a shit show. I suspect he’ll have a few more juicy revelations up his sleeve for the next one.

      I notice BoJo’s denials are partial. “I have never intervened in a leak enquiry” is not the same as “I was prevented from intervening in a leak enquiry”. Plus “I have always stuck to the ministerial code” means “I followed the letter of the rules not their spirit.”

  10. @chiz and @gary I’m always happy to serve myself up as the ill informed voter of the blog. Do I feel manipulated by the media? Absolutely. Do I feel disconnected from all political parties? Yep. Do I trust any political leader? No. Was Corbyn poorly treated? No I don’t think so. Came across as a dull, ex teacher, fence sitting, oddball. I was able to draw that conclusion myself as I don’t read the fancy papers. Johnson? A liar who knows how to play politics better than anyone since Tony Blair. 3 word catchphrases to appeal to those with the attention span of gnats. He’s currently unbeatable in an election. Starmer? Bloody hell. What does he represent? Do I care about Cummings and Johnson? No, because nothing will change. Theft, cronyism, lies, corruption, murder or at least manslaughter go on in plain sight and the opposition don’t, wont, can’t oppose. We’re just making the best of it where we can. Your conversation may go above our heads but ultimately makes not a jot of difference to our every day lives. So we crack on with our football, soaps, GMB, Holly and Phil, Ant and Dec and Gogglebox cos at least we understand them. We dont feel patronised just not really involved. Until Boris ruffles his hair, mumbles shite, grins to camera and drives a tractor through a sign that screams “GET BREXIT DONE” while Corbyn stayed on his fence. That’s why he wasn’t electable. Rant over. Nice thread….

            • His opinion that Corbyn wasn’t unfairly treated is wrong. (But as he said, he doesn’t read the papers, so he wouldn’t have seen all the ridiculously OTT vilification.)

              • And yet he came to the conclusion that this “dull, ex teacher, fence sitting oddball” wasn’t right for him, despite not reading the papers. What does that tell you, Gary?

                • That he came to the conclusion that this “dull, ex teacher, fence sitting oddball” wasn’t right for him, despite not reading the papers.

                    • Yep, the Beeb were as guilty as the rest of the media. I found his position on Brexit very clear. He promised a second referendum. I thought (and still think) that would have been the best thing to do, problematic though it would have been.

                    • But you don’t have to look very far (the same source, the same month) for equal and opposite coverage. If one of these news items is evidence of bias, surely the other is too.

                      “He can’t even call an election because the LOTO won’t let him.”

                    • As discussed before, I’ve never seen a party leader as constantly vilified in the media as Corbyn was.
                      As discussed before, I believe it’s because Murdoch, Rothmere, Barclay et al were so scared of Corbyn’s politics.
                      And as discussed before, I agree with Chomsky et al about how powerful the influence of the media is.

                      We’ve discussed all this and we’re clearly never going to agree. (But I’m afraid I still can’t resist commenting when I read comments about Corbyn that I don’t think are true.)

                • I can see why people might not warm to Corbyn. A more interesting question – and one perhaps that gets to the heart of the British psyche – is why more voters preferred a lying, self-entitled Etonian narcissist to a dull oddball.

                  I don’t think Corbyn would have missed five COBRA meetings at the start of the pandemic, or spaffed billions of taxpayers money on his mates. And those two things are not unrelated.

                    • Perhaps if more people were engaged with politics, crass PR stunts like this would be less effective. Which kind of relates to that statistic up thread from the heretic Toynbee about widespread disinterest in politics. But what is the answer? Greater accountability through local government? Peoples assemblies? Do you think people should be more engaged in politics? Your post up there presented quite a passive stance.

  11. Someone, can’t remember who, came up with a test of candidates’ likelihood of becoming PM.

    The test involved picturing candidates standing on the doorstep at 10 Downing Street.

    Jeremy Corbyn? Was never going to happen.

  14. If these revelations from Cummings are being timed to give the Government a bloody nose in the local council elections then that’s all well and good – but the PM will always respond that sitting government parties always perform badly mid-term, so it’s nothing to worry about.

    The Cummings allegations are damaging but not fatal. I think the tactic is to draw out some further lies from the PM as he scrambles to defend himself. And then Cummings follows it up with more heavy duty material a week later which he imagines will seal his fate. We shall see.

  15. But will the Tories do that badly in the local elections?

    They should be on track for a trouncing in the upcoming by-election in one of the red wall seats they won in Bojo’s 2019 landslide but last time I heard the Tories were several points ahead

    • If it’s anything like where I live then everything is the council’s fault.
      For example the old art college is up for sale “oh the council will make a lot of money from that” No it’s not owned by the council.
      “Why has the council paid money for that Anthony Gormley statue on the new art college building?” Because they haven’t!
      Why don’t they do something about the town centre? When money is put in and updates are made “that’s not what we wanted”
      “Why don’t they do something about the car park design and layout?” Because it’s privately owned.
      There’s always a harking back to the good old days Why can’t they get M and S back?”

      • The great one is litter and fly-tipping- which for some reason is rarely blamed on the people who actually leave it there. Someone leaves a mattress propped and everyone goes “Fkin council!”

        The council are going around leaving mattresses everywhere? Fkin trendy lefties and their art installations!

      • Lots of people living in Housing Association properties still refer to their landlord as “the council”.
        Lots of people think that MPs have something to do with the running of their local council.
        Very few people actively want to get involved in what local councils actually do. Can’t say I blame them, because I limit it and I know several local councilors.
        I think most people have not actually noticed that Local Authorities have been hollowed out in the past decade.
        I actually think most people’s understanding of political and economic landscape is still rooted in the 60s and 80s – which were a very long time ago. But there those times have become memes or tropes that resist reality.
        (e.g. councils aren’t giving immigrants council houses because most councils have handed their properties to Housing Associations – still social housing, but not the council)

        • Do children in the UK get any kind of compulsory civics lessons at school, where they learn about the structure and organisation of government and political institutions? I know they do in the US. Seems like it should be a basic part of the curriculum. I don’t recall being taught much when I was a school kid in the UK. I do vaguely remember a school trip to London long ago when we visited the Houses of Parliament. But beyond that not much.

          • I can’t recall anything along those lines being taught at my school.
            It would certainly be a good idea to have such education as part of the curriculum, though I suspect the Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph etc. would say it was some kind of left-wing plot if they did.

          • Excuse me, ex-Citizenship teacher here, before Thatcher and Keith Joseph and co. butchered secondary education in the early eighties, and the subject vanished, poof, in a little cloud of smoke. Basic part of the curriculum? It damn well ought to be.

            • I genuinely didn’t know such a thing had ever existed in English schools. Its absence explains a lot.

              This stuff is standard in schools not just in the US, but most countries in the developed world.

              • We used to do Civics on a Thursday afternoon in Lower Sixth. I’m ashamed to say I bunked off to the local Snooker Hall, though it was owned by the bass player from Splodgenessabounds.

              • It may be taught in the US, but that doesn’t mean a great deal.

                My son is bright. He’s doing 4 AP classes, including US History. His other classes are Honours classes (broadly, first year of University level)

                I still have to explain the interrelationships between Federal and State agencies, as well as what the DoJ does (as a result of several arguments about just how good Grant was as President)

                Civics is not always taught by the better teachers.

              • There’s something called NCS (National Citizenship Scheme) which is a 2-week sort of DoE-lite for 16-year-olds during the summer after their GCSEs. Offspring The Elder went on it. Some of this stuff is covered, along with basic cooking and so on, but nothing of depth.

                A voluntary scheme with a £50 charge. In my experience, most of those who go on it are the ones who need it least, and view it as a cheap holiday with their mates.

              • There is a course defined within the UK National Curriculum today, but I have no idea how many schools offer it; to my mind it should be delivered across the board, but there you go.

                Where I used to work (largest comp in the South West) an earlier iteration was offered to a large subset of the school as a matter of course. It covered pretty much everything that @paulwright and @martin-hairnet mention up there a bit.

  16. @martin-hairnet it works both ways. Johnson is the worst, I want to make that clear, I hope he goes to prison, an absolute crook. But by driving that JCB through that symbolic Brexit and giving people a way out of the constant blah, blah, blah of the sort in the Corbyn clip he engaged people in politics in that 21st century way. Its TikTok politics. He understands that. I vote Green because that way my conscience is clear. The answer? Labour need someone who understands the game and sadly the mindset of huge swathes of the population in the way Johnson does. Ed Balls maybe? I don’t know. I used the word tragic earlier. That’s what it is. Tragic.

    @gary I admire your single mindedness over JC and I’d never try to change your opinion on the man. I really don’t think politics in 2019 were fir him and the people that vote were ever going to vote for him especially against Johnson and especially during Brexit. He’d have had a better chance against Major or May. Oh wait a minute….

    • I suspect that without the intense media campaign against him he might have stood a chance. I think it was Salwarpe who mentioned here that when people on the doorstep were informed of Corbyn’s policies but without them being attributed to him -the man they’d read nasty things about daily in the press- they were very popular.

      • Yes it was me and here’s Gyles Brandreth in all his glory, for once not looking quite so irritating

        I liked the idea of Corbyn at first, because he seemed so open-minded and refreshingly unpartisan in the leadership elections against Cooper et al. I thought he might manage to break his party (never mine) away from the copycat, Tory-lite version that Miliband was pushing with his charisma-free approach. The early rallies had an air of optimism and empowerment, but it soon became clear why he’d languished so long on the back benches. He just isn’t leadership material, and that openness soon closed up into a humourless refusal to engage with the media at all.

        Yes, the media mostly hated him and his (actually quite moderate) policies to address some of the inequalities in one of the most unequal countries in the world. But, like it or lump it, that’s the platform you have to use if your want to reach out beyond your base (however enlarged (with Tory jokers fixing the ballot)) and do more than preach to the core from the pyramid stage or a union rally. Those crowds might look big and reassuring, but the sea looks big from the shore, when in reality there’s an ocean out there, where the waters are a lot less calm.

        Nevertheless, you have to venture out – and if your ship isn’t seaworthy, if the crew don’t trust the captain and are actually mutinying, if you won’t even come out of your cabin, you won’t get very far.

        The Labour Party’s natural base of working class voters has dissipated, and it seems to be floundering around for meaning and substance beneath their policies. The Green Party, at least, has a clear message of climate justice – tackle the environmental and social challenges together, move away from a growth-based to a sustainable economy and bring everyone with you. Seriously, there isn’t any alternative unless we want to keep on working ourselves and the planet to death for the benefit of the billionaires and oligarchs.

        • To run a little further with your analogy, I do so hope that Boris is up in the flock bedecked flat this afternoon, sweating and rolling some ball-bearings over and over in his pappy little fist while his guts broil.

    • The Tories do seem much more wise to changes in the political landscape brought about by the rise of social media. But some of the tricks they got up to in the 2019 election – setting up fake accounts and so on to deliberately misinform – seemed sinister and completely unethical. Is this the kind of political future we want? An online competitive arms race of dubious claims and misinformation? IMO social media is a disaster for politics and much else besides. A win at all costs mentality seems at odds with genuine social progress.

      I wish the Greens could establish more of a bridgehead in the UK. They are much more successful in mainland Europe, but I fear any kind of Green ascendancy in the UK would be met with huge resistance in the current climate.

      • It doesn’t seem to matter whether we want the kind of political future the Tories are pointing us towards. We’ve seen that those kind of politics are effective and the old model appears not to be working against them.

  17. Here’s rather a strange coincidence; here’s me banging on in this thread about Chomsky and Corbyn and then just now a friend sent me this report of an interview with Chomsky, just yesterday, in which he talks about Corbyn! Synochronicity galore! I’m probably like telepathic or something.

    Chomsky says:

    “I think if Corbyn had been elected, Britain would be pursuing a much more sane course. I think his general positions were very reasonable. And I think that’s probably the reason for the extraordinary attack on him pretty much across the spectrum, with mostly fabricated charges of antisemitism. Anything that could be thrown at him was, it was a major assault. Again, pretty much across the spectrum, The Guardian, right-wing press, ‘we got to get rid of this guy’.”

    https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/chomsky-if-corbyn-had-been-elected-britain-would-be-pursuing-a-much-more-sane-course-266056/

    • I’ve read the article, thanks, Gary.

      Chomsky, of course, describes himself as a liberal anarchist, so that’s the viewpoint he comes from. The Labour Party manifesto undoubtedly had some good policies. However, to win elections in this country, with its first-past-the-post system, you have to appeal to the centre. Tony Blair is vilified for making the party Tory-lite but you cannot implement any policies if you don’t win power. Jeremy Corbyn came across as a weak, indecisive leader to my lifelong Labour voting friends and family in the North West, none of whom hold journalists of any kind in great regard. The main issue was Brexit, not mentioned by Chomsky. A promise of a second referendum just made them, collectively, lose the will to live. The charge of anti-Semitism was also more to do with dithering. He wasn’t condemning anti-Semitism nor punishing it strongly enough. Organising an enquiry just looked like playing down the issue or attempting to kick it into the long grass. Staying true to the far left cause narrowed his and Labour’s appeal. He came close against May, another weak, ineffective leader, but, tellingly, did not win. Up against Boris, he was an embarrassment. The party is well rid of him. It’s a long, long way back from here.

      I think Chomsky has a good intellect and a great turn of phrase but he has no real idea how to make things happen in the real world.

      • However, to win elections in this country, with its first-past-the-post system, you have to appeal to the centre.

        Unless you’re Conservative, in which case you can be as right-wing as you like.

        • Right wing, yes, but not as incompetent as you like. That was, I think, the failing that led to Blair winning in 1997. Major’s disunited team, marked by sleaze, just didn’t look like it was up to the job. I bet Johnson is glad he’s got 3 more years to put 2020 behind him.

          • His 2021 isn’t shaping up that well either. But he’s got nothing to worry about. Look at the unstoppable popularity of the current government and think about whether the public are that bothered about incompetence.

            • Well I don’t know then. Maybe the shit will hit the fan when austerity 2.0 kicks in? Maybe I should think about that rock star career – but Damon and Thom have that market sewn up between them for my birth year.

            • For now the vaccine success is covering his incompetence.

              This morning I am reading that Johnson had ‘a conversation in the corridor’ with the Manchester United chief executive Ed Woodward before the announcement of the European Super League. In other words Johnson was probably aware of the plan. That he came out against the idea after seeing the public outrage chimes with Heseltine’s view that he waits to see which way the crowd is running before jumping in front and shouting “Follow me!”

              I think the best approach with Johnson is don’t believe a word he says.

      • “A promise of a second referendum just made them, collectively, lose the will to live. ” That’s interesting. Why was that? Brexit fatigue? It seemed to me by far the least worst option.

      • Now the dust has settled a bit, I think the crucial problem with Corbyn was that a lot of his supporters confused having good politics with being a good politician. The 2017 manifesto was great, and could have been a springboard to good years in Britain. But I don’t think Corbyn ever had the skills and qualities needed to execute it. Whatever else he was, he wasn’t a leader – just look at the constant moaning on the left about the PLP, which all conveniently ignores Corbyn’s inability to inspire them and take them along with him. He seems like a good egg, and his policies were largely very good, but he was promoted way past the level of his talent. John McDonell made a much better fist of his time in power. It’s a shame he wasn’t leader. I’m sure he would have been equally attacked by the press, but I doubt if his reaction would have been a peevish sulk.

        Ultimately, when the British public are presented with some nice left-ish social democratic policies they may well like them, but Corbyn was never the man to deliver that platform. Sadly, I don’t know who is now. Rebecca Long-Bailey was the heir apparent, but her leadership challenge was one long gaffe. It would have been interesting to see what Laura Pidcock would be doing now, but she lost her seat thanks to her leader’s incompetence. I hope she will be back next time round.

  18. I notice the footage of Cummings on TV reports has pictures of him forlornly leaving Number 10 carrying a cardboard box, like in the films when someone is fired abruptly. An intentional move so that the casual viewer can make an instant association when he reveals what he knows.

  20. It’s all getting pretty a lot more serious than getting someone else to pay for your home decoration. The phrasing and the sentiment certainly sound like him,

      • Why bother to clear the bodies?

        When I spent three miserable months in Dubai twenty years ago, barely a week went by without a couple of safety-savvy-free Indian slaves the Maktoums had corralled into adding to the skyline had fallen to their deaths. Why waste money on safety training and equipment when you could have another planeload of wretches on site by the start of the next shift?

    • It’s the Al Capone tactic, innit. We can’t get him for incompetence, being a serial liar, adulterer, (I could continue). But the tax man might be able to take him down for that expensive wallpaper.

      • Watching Liz Truss on Andrew Marr yesterday, ignoring pertinent questions, reminded me of why I don’t watch or listen to politicians when their lips are moving. It’s not good for my blood pressure.

      • It’s not a tax issue but a breach of the Ministerial Code. When Tory party funds fell short of what Johnson needed to cover the cost of his wallpaper, he looked for other ways to have the money donated. The possibility of a trust was explored headed by Lord Brownlow, former Tory party vice chair. Brownlow also made a donation to Johnson of almost exactly the amount required.

        Donations are supposed to be declared twice a year – even if they are returned – but there’s been nothing since July 2020. Alex Allan was the independent adviser who oversaw the declarations but he resigned when Johnson refused to sack Patel. Which suited Johnson nicely, as the last thing he wants is someone he can’t control sniffing around all the graft that COVID has provided cover for. Allan’s been gone 6 months and a replacement isn’t being sought.

        The Electoral Commission are investigating – Johnson’s tactic seems to be to insist there’s nothing to see and hope everyone moves on. Unfortunately for him, Hancock and Cameron’s sleaze is keeping the whole issue in the limelight, for now at least.If – and it’s a big if – Cummings has anything to support the Tory moves to suppress the declaration, and create a trust which Johnson would be the primary beneficiary, Johnson may be on a sticky wicket. Truss’s refusal to answer Marr’s direct questions on the donation suggest the Tories know they are in difficulty here.

        As Tigg said above – follow the money.

  21. Gove fidgeted nervously as he peeked round the door of his cupboard. “Can I come out now, Dommy?” he trilled. “Rupert’s turned on Boris and I could burst into the Cabinet Room and take over! I’ve got my own briefcase and everything!”

    “Patience, Little One,” said The Dom, wiping Gove’s spittle from his immaculately-distressed shirt. “Let the big boys do their work. We’ll let you know when you can be Prime Minister.”

  22. Someone on the news the other night got into a bit of a tangle and referred to them as Boris and Doris. And that’s how I’ll think of them now – a perpetually squabbling seventies sitcom couple. Not sure about Keir Starmer’s role but Nicola Sturgeon is definitely the sanctimonious neighbour who pops in every episode to complain about something – and never leaves, even though her catchphrase is “I really must be going.”

    • Keir and Victoria are the stylish perfect-life neighbours on the other side. Keir and Victoria are impeccably dressed, debonair, well spoken and Keir makes Doris giggle sometimes, which enrages Boris. When rattled, Keir lapses into a full Danny Dyer accent before he collects himself.

      This happens when Boris has his frequent accidental encounters with Victoria: For example, one morning she disrobes in her bathroom, pulls back the shower curtain and for some pre-established innocent comedy knockabout reason Boris is in there naked, with only a loofah to protect his modesty. Victoria screams – Keir bundles in “BOR-ISS!” he shouts, rolling up his sleeves. Doris arrives, surveys the scene “Oh! Boris!”. Boris looks to camera, gulps, and says “Looks like I’m in trouble again!” and they all chase Boris around the bathroom as credits roll.

  23. Can Michael. Gove play the vicar in the one where the be-collared idiot son
    of the local landed gentry comes to tea?

    He has previous in roles of this type. Check out his divine performance
    at 58 secs onward.

    Given that he’s atypically silent, it’s hard to believe it’s him, but it most
    certainly is.

  24. From today’s UK newspaper headlines I’m really starting to think his number is up. Now the vaccine rollout is taking hold and the cautious roadmap is playing out nicely people might be wondering what do we need him for? After all, his hero Churchill was voted out by a grateful public at the first post-war election

    • @VInce-Black

      Hard to see him calling an election.

      Worryingly for Bojo, the Tory party rarely gives the electorate the chance to get shot of leaders they see as outliving their usefulness.

      They simply turn on and defenestrate the past-his/her-sell-by-date leader themselves – as Mrs T found out to her cost.

      • I didn’t explain my thinking very well earlier. I’m not expecting an election, and was using the post-war election as an example of how, once the prevailing hardship eases, the public stop giving the Johnny-on-the-spot the benefit of the doubt. I think someone will suggest that if poor Boris can’t live an honest life on the PMs salary, it would be for the best if he buggered off and let someone else do it

    • What is the procedure for ousting him if he won’t go voluntarily? You can’t shame the shameless, and if he continues to brazenly lie about not lying can he front it out against the wishes of those who might want him to to retreat to his study with a bottle of whisky and a service revolver?

      • 1922 committee will do him in when they think he is an electoral liability. It is well known that he is not personally popular with Tory MPs (mainly because he doesn’t regard them any higher than he does the rest of the population, i.e. he thinks they are dirt) but they do like his ability to win elections. When that changes, he will go.

        You can see it now “Boris got Brexit done, he got Covid done, but now it is time for a new approach to build on what he has have created – time for a softer, more caring Conservatism (or a harder, more pragmatic Conservatism, depending on circumstances)”

    • This has been the plan all along, hasn’t it? Blame Johnson for the sleaze, the deaths and the Brexit mess, declare a new dawn, and carry on exactly as before.

      Trouble is, I think the great British public like him, in a soap opera villain sort of way. He may be an awful Bullingdon toff who has cheated, spaffed and blustered his way though life, but he’s good old Boris, isn’t he? They won’t take to Gove the same way.

      • Sounds like good trouble to me. Put a grown-up like Keir Starmer next to Michael “Why Yes I Probably Would Auction My Children If I Thought It Might Net Me An Infinitesimal Selfish Benefit” Gove, and he starts to look more like a contender.

        It’s hard to be a solid, decent, social democrat adult when your opposite number is a big stupid cartoon. The cartoon will always win.

        Gove and Johnson are very similar in all but exterior. The public overlook Johnson’s venality, lack of principle, incontinence and entitlement because – like it or not – he’s got personality. He’s a leader. He just is. A terrible one, but he is. Whatever “it” is, he’s got it. It’s just there’s nothing beneath.

        Gove hasn’t got anything beneath either, except for being more cunning. But he definitely hasn’t got the “it”.

        Starmer also hasn’t got the “it”, but he does have the depth, the intellect, the decency and the maturity. So I think he beats Gove, if only the idiot wing of his own party doesn’t knife him before he gets the chance.

      • The great British public doesn’t have to take to Gove – just give him a majority and he will be in for 5 years to wreak havoc and retire to wealth harvesting.
        These are not public servants. We haven’t had one of those since Brown (I’ll make a partial exception for May, who did seem to have some recognition of the importance of the job and did seem to think that her style of relentless racism was actually good for the country. Cameron, Johnson, Gove are just chancers)

      • Gove in charge will massively level the playing field, overnight. However unbelievable it is if the Tories dump Johnson its game on for Starmer instantly. I’m not sure we’ll ever see another politician like Johnson in terms of X Factor. Whatever “it” is he has it in spades something that may need Desmond Morris to explain. Gove definitely doesn’t have “it”
        Edit: Sorry @Hedgepig I see you’ve written virtualy the same thing above

        • I think the “it” is in the eye of the beholder. Con-artists tend to be very popular until they are found out, and his popularity reflects poorly on the UK. I certainly don’t view him as a natural leader, although he could probably find you a fridge door in seconds. I think a sizeable contingent are drawn to him because his class and buffoonery gives their xenophobia a veneer of respectabilty.

  25. “Trouble is, I think the great British public like him, in a soap opera villain sort of way. He may be an awful Bullingdon toff who has cheated, spaffed and blustered his way though life, but he’s good old Boris, isn’t he?”
    “The public overlook Johnson’s venality, lack of principle, incontinence and entitlement because – like it or not – he’s got personality”.

    I think he’s a nasty thug and nobody wants to see that mask slip – let him be a clown for fear of facing something worse.

    What he has is a newspaper columnist’s ability to sniff out the Bacchanalean (and worse) impulses of people and appeal to that. What is needed is somebody with integrity and self-knowledge, who can understand, draw on and appeal to people’s better selves. Ironically, in spite of his narcissism, I don’t think Johnson has enough self belief to do that (he craves positive feedback).

    • Give me a boring Barnier or Biden type any day of the week. Someone with a history of honesty and integrity in public service who understands the job description and governs for the country, not their own self-interest or that of their party. Celebrity or ‘X-factor’ should have nothing to do with it, and it’s no surprise that when it does, chaos ensues.

    • Ironically, in spite of his narcissism, I don’t think Johnson has enough self belief to do that (he craves positive feedback).

      Spot on. A factor in my gravitating towards the mental health workplace was encountering too many people in TV (not just ‘the talent’, but some behind the cameras, too) for whom any, and god I mean any, reaction from others was meat and drink. One odious producer had a huge blown up newspaper cutting on his office door in which Victor Lewis Smith, writing in the Standard, described him as a wanker. I had to physically defend this same character from the irate manager of a band after he’d put an offensive caption onscreen during their live performance. He giggled as I suggested to the manager that lamping him mightn’t be a good idea. Johnson is indeed of a different narcissistic stripe. It’s not simply measure it don’t read it; there’s a craving for some sort of positive response, but as so often with these folks, he looks in the wrong places for the approval; false refuge. It’s inexhaustible, of course, hence, likely as not, all the children and relationships.

      • Watching that clip again (seen it many times), and seeing him flounder beneath Eddie Mair’s questions doesn’t exactly make me sympathise with him. (I still think he’s a nasty piece of work, out to get what he can for himself, who, like any other narcissist, regards everyone else as someone to use, step on, laugh at or ignore).

        But it helps to understand him. He doesn’t like being seen in a negative light, but did what he did to please (the latest girlfriend, Darius, whoever).

        I think he had a wild, free chaotic childhood, and then at some point in his school life he was badly bullied, I mean, really made to feel worthless and frightened (and I speak as someone who’s experienced that).

        I don’t think he’s bred from the same material as the Eton toffs and they sniffed that out. I think he’s never confronted their quashing of who he really is and has internalized a fear of mockery, clinging and acquiescing to the powerful, while kicking down at those beneath him on the social ladder. Hence, his flipping over Brexit, his tossing of coins and calling heads and tails. He’s a populist because he needs to be popular.

        A very dangerous person to have in charge of a country in a time of pandemic.

          • I never denied he was a prick. I think he’s the worst thing to happen to Britain in decades. I just was just interested in wondering what might have made him one.

            • Sonia Purnell’s book “Just Boris – Blonde Ambition”has some insights, based on some extensive research. It was written before he became PM but gives a number of spooky / prescient indicators of what was ahead.

              He’s his father’s son – two adults but still really boys without morals or remorse, financially irresponsible and totally unreliable. Alleged serial adulterous. Each set back was taken as just a nudge towards the next escapade, where the only thing that mattered was that you got what you wanted, not how you got it, or at what cost, where risk taking was second nature because there little concern for the consequences.

              Johnson Jnr has few friends because relationships are what he has for things he needs and takes. A man with a sharp mind but a weak work ethic, who found a shock of blonde hair and a the mask of shambolic buffoon has given him an edge he’s exploited ever since.

      • I think it is worth reading the exchange in full:

        Question: “Did the prime minister say he would rather have ‘bodies pile high, than implement another lockdown’ in late October?

        No, Mr Speaker. And the right honourable gentleman is a lawyer, I’m given to understand, and I think that, if he’s going to repeat allegations like that, he should come to this house and substantiate those allegations and say, and say, where he heard them and who exactly is supposed to have said those things.

        Question: “Somebody here isn’t telling the truth. I’ll leave it there for now … Who initially – and ‘initially’ is the key word here – paid for the redecoration of his Downing Street flat?”

        Mr Speaker, when it comes to misleading parliament, he may recollect it was only a few weeks ago that he said he didn’t oppose this country leaving the European Medicines Agency; a fact that he was then forced to retract. And leaving the European Medicines Agency was absolutely invaluable for our vaccine rollout …

        Question: “Normally when people don’t want to incriminate themselves, they go: ‘no comment’. Either the taxpayer paid the initial invoice, or it was the Conservative party, or it was a private donor or it was the prime minister.
        Who paid the initial invoice?”

        Mr Speaker, I’ve given him the answer. And the answer is: I have, I have, covered the cost. And, of course, [the] Electoral Commission [is] investigating this and I can tell him I conformed in full with the ministerial code and officials who have been advising me throughout this whole thing.
        But I think people will think it absolutely bizarre that he is focusing on this issue, when what people want to know is: what plans a Labour government might have to improve the life of people in this country …

        Question: “It has been widely reported that Lord Brownlow was asked to donate £58,000 to help pay for the cost of this refurbishment. Can the prime minister confirm … Did Lord Brownlow make that payment for that purpose?”

        Mr Speaker, I think I’ve answered this question several times now. And the answer is that I have covered the cost. I have met the requirements that I’ve been advised to meet in full.
        And, when it comes to the taxpayer and the costs of 10 Downing Street, it was the previous Labour government – I think Tony Blair racked up a bill of £350,000…
        And I think what the people of this country want to see is minimising taxpayer expense …

        Question: “The Electoral Commission now thinks that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. That’s incredibly serious. Can the prime minister tell the house: does he believe that any rules or laws have been broken in relation to the refurbishment of the prime minister’s flat?”

        Mr Speaker, what I believe has been strained to breaking point is the credulity of the public.
        He has half an hour every week to put serious and sensible questions to me about the state of the pandemic, about the vaccine rollout, about what we’re doing to support our NHS, about what we’re doing to fight crime, about what we’re doing to bounce back from this pandemic, about economic recovery, about jobs for the people of this country. And he goes on and on, Mr Speaker, about wallpaper when, as I’ve told him umpteen times now, I paid for it …

        • Politicians are slippery. As James O Brien said yesterday, what Starmer actually asked was:

          “Can the Prime Minister tell the House categorically, yes or no, did he make those remarks or remarks to that effect?”

          To answer ‘no’ to that question leaves room for manoeuvre.

  27. A small confession: the main thing I take away from this story is that I’ve constantly got this on my mind:

    Mr Brownlow’s off to work on the 8.21
    But he comes home each evening and he’s ready with his gun

      • I know you’re right because of a thread I saw recently on Twitter but (in common with a lot of others it seems) I always heard it as A21. And ‘revving with his gun’ too come to that.

        • Poor form to recycle one’s own work I know, but I have done some research in this area:

          I’m fascinated by this 8:21 / A21 thing, and when I say fascinated I mean, vaguely diverted in an it’s-this-or-washing-the-car sort of way.

          The fictional Warmington-on-Sea, where the series was set, is widely believed to be a based on Bexhill-on-Sea, although Warmington is in Kent rather than Sussex. References in Dad’s Army to Hastings and Eastbourne suggest it’s between the two, which Bexhill is. If we take ‘town’ to mean London, then Mr Brown would indeed take the A21 to work. But did anyone drive a 150-mile round trip during wartime? What about petrol rationing?

          However, if he’s getting the 8:21 train, he’s got to change at St Leonard’s Warrior Square, then trawl up through Battle, Tunbridge Wells and Orpington to Cannon Street before a brisk, umbrella-toting stroll into the city. Trains in the Forties were more efficient, faster, more frequent, more comfortable and stank less of piss than they do now, but still, conservative estimate, he’s not going to get to the office until getting on for 10.00am. Not much contribution to the war effort there, Mr Brown.

          He could get the 7:21, but of course that doesn’t scan right for the song. 6:21 does, but that would get him into the office before the cleaners. No help there. So perhaps we have to assume that Brown doesn’t work in London at all. Town could be Eastbourne or Hastings, although you’d be a fool to go anywhere near the A21 at that time of the morning, the A259 coast road being your best bet either West or East.

          However, the 8:21 train via Cooden Beach and Pevensey would get you into Eastbourne with time to spare to pick up a fresh carnation from the florist at the station before ambling down to ‘bankers’ corner’ in Terminus Road, and the same departure time could get you right through to Ore, let alone Hastings, well before 9.00am.

          So my conclusion is this: who the hell cares? Lunch is ready.

      • Because of that slight change and the gun reference – and perhaps because of my slightly befuddled early morning state – I didn’t get the Dad’s Army but somehow saw it as a Beatles Bungalow Bill parody. The words scan perfectly with the verse cadence of Bungalow Bill:

        Mis-ter-Brown-goes-off-to-town-on-the-eight-twen-ty onennnnn
        But he-comes-home-each-eve-ning-and-he’s-rea-dy-with-his-gunnnnnn

        He’s the all-American bullet headed Saxon mother’s son
        All the children sing etc

  28. DC will be firing a few “Dom Dom” bullets at Bojo in the Commons Select Committee this afternoon, but given he’s probably the least liked and trusted political figure in the UK will any hit home?

  29. Boris could probably grab a semi-automatic, slip on an unconvincing Keir Starmer mask and riddle Dom with a magazine of hollow-points in front of the TV cameras and the fat fuck’s approval ratings would just soar even higher

  30. The trailer was better than the movie, in my view. Those endless teasers dating back many weeks were more pithy and entertaining.

    Dom has his retrospectoscope fully operational and set to full bitch. He was right along, about everything, he says, but couldn’t actually implement anything tangible because of the chaos and incompetents around him. He was the most powerful Cassandra in the UK who is now having to resort to bleating about liars, cheats and thieves. He made his own bed.

    In a poll, 14% trust Dom and 29% trust Boris. I think you are right, hedgepig. Nobody cares.

Leave a Reply