"I WAS AN EDITOR FOR THE LEFT-WING BLOG 'EVOLVE POLITICS'. NOW LET ME TELL YOU WHY YOU CAN'T TRUST THEM AN INCH."

I talk about a lot of stuff frankly on social media, but I do try to avoid discussing my own dirty laundry. I try to focus on general, more widely effectual subject matter. But this one time I'm gonna make an exception, because as ever, I would like truth to be out there somewhere. And it may well be my last 'piece' for a while - I have truly had enough.

Until very recently, I was a writer and Assistant Editor for a left-wing publication called 'Evolve Politics'. I'd written for them since February, and after making a positive impact, I was asked to be an Editor in May. I worked for the publication tirelessly, often through the day and night, and for very little financial reward. In fact, it was me raising the issue of remuneration that resulted in Evolve seeking out sponsorship so they could begin paying their writers a vaguely feasible wage. Something they subsequently got - in part - off the back of a piece I wrote that went viral to more than a quarter of a million people and was listed in several newspapers.

Then out of the blue I was sacked a couple of weeks ago.

Why? Allegedly because I was frank, and used bad language on a Facebook thread under a pseudonym: a deliberately comic and 'potty-mouth' satire account I run based on the character 'Malcolm Tucker'. In fact, only the guy in charge at Evolve even knew it was me because I'd told him: it was in no way connected or affiliated to the publication. I simply took on a 'troll'. It honestly never occurred to me that the boss would be 'holier than thou' as to reprimand me for bad language (that wasn't particularly offensive any way) from a private account, let alone an anonymous comment in defence of our own team. In fact, he went a step further.

He wrote a post effectively outing my pseudonym, dramatically apologising for my "appalling" behaviour. In other words he played the hero to parade his own 'integrity', and sold out someone working for him simply to court the praise of trolls - who mostly didn't know or even care what it was about.

Yep, I do enjoy the odd expletive, and I take few prisoners - I'll freely admit it. But I do know 'integrity': it's something I strive for. And it's something this organisation definitely doesn't have. I was extremely alarmed to read today that Evolve Politics have applied for an official parliamentary lobby. I found it very disturbing - the idea that such an organisation might garner that much influence, whilst simultaneously lacking any journalistic integrity whatsoever.

For me, that was the final straw. Let me say a few things about Evolve Politics' supposed 'integrity'.

The Man Behind The Curtain

When I told the 'Editor-in-Chief' that his reaction was unnecessary and actually very disrespectful, he behaved like the worst kind of man-child I've experienced in 38 years. He just blocked me on Facebook - my only method of contact. Removed me from website admin, closed down my Evolve Wordpress account, including locking me out of all my articles; he virtually spat in the face of six month's work. Refused to speak to me, terminated my income without a second's thought - when I was only just beginning to make ends meet after more than a year of writing. (With a four year old child to support, for the record.)

What a great example of 'socialist ethics'. What a truly remarkable way to demonstrate how things should be 'fair', how people at the top shouldn't abuse their power, or behave irresponsibly without accountability. Evolve's owners take the lion's share of all revenue from all articles, leaving their writers with pitiful fees - and then preach of 'socialism'. They are frankly everything they claim to oppose.

But my demise within the organisation stemmed from previous run-ins. See, there is a dark secret concerning this 'influential' left-wing news outlet. Unlike The Canary, which is run by experienced journalist Kerry-Anne Mendoza, or even publications like SkwawkBox and AnotherAngryVoice, which are run by knowledgeable individuals with worldly perspectives, Evolve Politics is run by a young couple who basically know bugger all about anything outside their own very limited life experience. They are simply two hypocritical and petulant kids, who've become experts at grumbling and whipping up viral memes.

To be more specific, Evolve Politics is run by a chap named Tom Rogers.

I never met Tom, nor would he speak to me on the phone - he remains entirely anonymous for 'official' purposes regarding Evolve. He says it's due to debilitating illness. Out of respect and sympathy for this condition, whatever it is, I gave the issue a wide berth - letting a lot of his weird behaviour go. Including his sleeping all day/being up all night, his drinking binges, his forgetting of entire conversations, his frequent hypocrisy, not to mention his completely 'Jekyll and Hyde' temperament. But frankly, being ill doesn't give you the right to behave like an asshole. Or assume you can get away with it.

Integrity

Ironically, even the slogan Evolve Politics have coined on their header is 'fake':

Jim Waterson never said that referring specifically to Evolve. He referred to a string of left-wing websites, among which Evolve were one. Tom took the comment of of context, twisting it to boost his own publicity. (Oh the irony.)

Bottom line? Tom does not stand by any of his work. He instead hides behind his girlfriend Jess - who's officially in charge, but actually does little. (If anything.) Her qualification is she's apparently got an English degree (something she often liked to remind me, like I was supposed to bow in awe) whereas Tom has no qualification at all, as far as I'm aware. But his anonymity allows him to share Evolve's pieces as a supposed 'neutral' reader all over social media, and ironically, comment anonymously whenever he sees fit. He also argues with readers all the time, but just deletes the comments if they're too clever and/or show him up - I saw it for myself.

Tom writes for Evolve under several pseudonyms, including 'Summer Winterbottom', 'John Corr', and 'J.D McGregor' - basically to make the coverage and contributions seem more than predominantly one disgruntled guy in his bedroom. And now he wants access to Westminster... it's almost funny. But certainly, for Tom to chastise (let alone sack) anyone else for commenting behind a pseudonym, is more than a bit rich.

It's the tip of the iceberg though.

Only days before, I'd been contacted by a former colleague at The Canary who informed me (out of courtesy) they were running a story directly calling out something we - and a few in the MSM - had covered concerning an alleged 'suicide bomber' and threats made by the 'Cornish Republican Army':

It was apparently hyperbole nonsense: something more than a few of our readers had responded to say:

I myself wrote the piece. But here's the crucial detail: I was actively INSTRUCTED to write it - by Tom. Literally given the sources to use, and Tom chose the wording of the headline down to the very last detail. (That's pretty much his main involvement at Evolve: to make memes, and decide which angles get plugged/how they'll be spun.) At the time of publishing, I was actually told off for trying to reduce the scandal/click-bait factor.

But I did take the claim by The Canary seriously. I believe in truth, and accountability. So I advised we should investigate, and issue a retraction/apology if necessary. The Editor's response? That it 'didn't matter'. That The Canary's story probably wouldn't gain any traction:

It was a shameless and quite appalling reaction.

Journalistic integrity matters. Especially for those who would report from Parliament.

Mistakes happen, but no-one with any sense of ethic should recoil from retracting them, or owning up to mistakes. In a nutshell, their hypocritical and self-styled intention to 'Evolve Politics' is a complete sham. Evolve are, in fact, no better than the worst of the manipulative right-wing MSM publications they spend so much energy decrying.

Those publications at least have to follow some level of due process though - both in terms of journalistic accountability, and employment practice. Another final straw for me, was recently seeing Tom post an article under one of his pseudonyms, haranguing The Sun for an article they'd retracted:

At the absolute peak of his pomposity, Tom postures over how noble his organisation is... yet again. Jeers at the tabloid for having to retract their mistake - eg: something he certainly didn't have the decency to do himself. I found it pretty sickening. You know when The Sun show up another organisation's lack of ethics, it's in trouble.

Tom was also outraged by supposed 'slander' when Evolve were accused by Media Guido of sharing an incorrect 'D-notice' story regarding Grenfell Tower. He put grand gestures all over social media, asking lawyers to get in touch, saying Evolve were going to sue for defamation etc. Trouble is, the claims were NOT wrong. Team members at Evolve HAD in fact shared the false 'D-notice' story. They'd just deleted it before anyone noticed. Yet again, Tom just wanted to look far nobler than he actually was, even if it meant taking hypocrisy to a whole new level.

Apparently for Tom, his team member's free speech and bad language were worth apologising for, even from an unconnected source. Even due a 'grand gesture' of apology. But researching and/or apologising for his own categorical misinformation and manipulation of news was not. Says it all really. Tom prizes his own sense of 'offence' as being more important than actual truth - the very definition of a 'snowflake', for all intents and purposes.

Warped Priorities

My impressions of these young 'socialists' admittedly became skewed quite early on, when in a three-way chat with Tom and Jess on Facebook, one of them glibly mentioned "hating their dad and waiting for him to die, at which point they'd be rich." Again, ethics at their very finest.

Regarding that same 'Cornish Republican Army' story - and more specifically Tom's intention to tell it the way he wanted - the same guy who supposedly fired me out of  'decency and integrity' also casually ASKED ME TO LIE. Days before, he'd asked me to throw in a made-up source/quote to justify his desired headline - to literally invent one out of thin air:

It was a request I categorically refused. See I actually do have a sense of ethics, and common decency.

Hard left VS hard right = a bloody mess

I've had a fair bit of unfortunate stuff happen in the past few years. Everyone has their cross to bear of course, but certainly, it's been no picnic. Changing careers dramatically from touring musician to writer, I put my heart and soul into my work for Evolve - hoping to make a difference. And I think I was beginning to. I was making waves in all the right directions, and a lot of people seemed to enjoy my style and candour. To have it all whipped away and to be back to square one in a heartbeat - simply down to the petulance of one unhinged guy? Well, it's actually pretty painful to be honest.

But in truth, writing for an organisation constantly looking to whip up scandal and/or a one-sided narrative was also pretty painful.

Things went wrong when I started to challenge the 'click-bait' direction and the megalomania of the young chief. I'd supposedly been invited on board at Evolve specifically because of my desire to seek a 'middle-ground', to look at both sides of any argument. And also - ironically - my fairly frank writing style. But like the 'snowflake' he sadly is, Evolve's Editor-in-Chief Tom Rogers can't handle any scrutiny or 'independent thought' whatsoever. His glorified blog caters for very little more than a howling 'Corbynista crowd': there is no nuanced or balanced reporting to be found. And I do say that as someone who actively supports Jeremy Corbyn (on most issues, if not Brexit).

In fact, I see how people like Tom (and even myself, to a degree) have been responsible for growing levels of intolerance in this country too. Perhaps not on the same level as the tabloids, or the right-wing menace that currently blights us. But part of the problem nonetheless. It's not even that there aren't a couple of decent writers at Evolve. For example, the other Assistant Editor, Matt Turner - a recently graduated politics student - is a very intelligent and reasoned individual, and he writes regularly for The Independent. But he too is young. And he certainly doesn't pull the strings at Evolve. He's frankly just a name to give Tom and Jess' pet project a level of 'legitimacy' - and he gets pocket money in return. And sadly, however competent Matt is, when the top of the tree is rotten, most of the fruit falling off it is pretty rotten too. The idea that Evolve are now posturing to be taken seriously as a legitimate outlet, I find utterly jaw-dropping. Yes, this piece may seem like 'sour grapes', but frankly I don't care. I want anyone and everyone to know the truth and what this new breed of 'hard leftist' actually looks like. Because wanting people to know the truth, and fighting for the underdog is why I got into this writing malarkey in the first place. Not so yet more dishonest individuals can exploit hard-working, principled ones.

I'm very tired of all the arguing, the division and dishonour. So much shameless and unapologetic hypocrisy. Hard leftists are almost as bad as the far right - it's sadly true, I can't deny it. No-one's listening to anyone any more. The art of compromise, weighing the value of what someone says (as opposed to which team they support) - even free speech and humour are being entirely lost. Political writing has led me down quite a bleak road, I must say.  I've engaged with hundreds of thousands of readers in the past year, but still I doubt most respectable outlets would employ me: I am stained by the association. So a year of work has - ironically - just been to put money in other people's pockets. 'Socialists' like Tom and Jess.

If the likes of Evolve Politics are given access to Westminster, it will truly be the death of any sort of journalistic standard in this country. I'm not saying that new voices and representations aren't desperately needed... but let's just make sure they're vaguely competent and vaguely ethical, eh?

A pecking order in all things

In closing, I would like to offer a paragraph from a piece I wrote for Evolve - again, now quite ironically - referring to The Daily Mail, and the 'regime' of Paul Dacre:

"There is a pecking order in all things. The people at the top always call the shots: their will is the ultimate goal, and everyone below them fears for their livelihood. Feudalism becomes the natural order, unless legislation prevents it. “Fairness and accuracy” don’t come from those lower down the food-chain following directives blindly. Those ethics only arise when lowlier people dare to question the autonomy and agendas of their superiors, even if it’s to their detriment."

I kinda proved my own case in point.

What's next for me? Who knows. Maybe I'll give the music another go, however old and ugly I happen to be. It's perhaps a tall order to find a paid job working for 'the machine' when much of your writing has criticised the mechanics! All I know is trying to be a 'voice for good' has got me absolutely nowhere - the world is a bloody mess, and I personally feel more disillusioned than ever.

I just never thought it would be with people supposedly on the same 'team'.

CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR: DON'T WISH AWAY THE BBC, IT'S STILL SOMETHING BRITS SHOULD BE PROUD OF

Both the Left AND Right are presently going nuts over the 'scandal' of the BBC's top paid talent. It's a witch-hunt, and it concerns me.

I agree the salaries are grotesque. Most of them could earn under half or even a quarter of what they do, and still live more comfortably than most people ever will. It is very unjust, I don't dispute it in the slightest. But you cannot blame people working at the top of their field for accepting the generous salaries offered to them - that too is ridiculous.

Such blind opposition to the notion of enterprise, and apparent 'sour grapes' that some people earn good salaries is ultimately what so many distrust about left-wing politics. Those who might seem to want 'everyone to be poor'. Make no mistake, that is where and how fears of Communism take root among middle-class and high earning people; it's exactly why that slice of the electorate are so bitterly opposed. And perhaps not entirely without reason. The answer - as always in my opinion - lies in finding an equitable middle ground.

As for the Right moaning about it - ha. They can bugger off. Led by the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Paul Dacre, moguls with vast financial empires, the Right stands for people and corporations who make these salaries seem like chub change. Not to mention establishment politics that enslave the poor and vulnerable. As ever, they have no moral authority, in any respect.

As Newsthump suggest, DON'T be distracted. Know your enemy. These guys'n'gals at the BBC are not the enemy - they're just people working at the top of their field trying to make the best of life, like the rest of us. They're certainly not the ones taking money AWAY from other people, or making the decisions that make everyday lives impossible. That is all the Tory government. (Not to mention most MPs earn these sums too - topped up by ridiculously well paid work they do over and above their MP salaries.)

The real story, which even the left-leaning Mirror demoted to the top-right of their front page, is that the Tories just casually ruled millions and millions of British citizens must now toil and languish in servitude for yet another year of their lives. Now, people will have to be nearly 70 years old before they can feasibly start to take it easy in the twilight of their days. 'Work work work'. And guess what? Millions of those same people will die in that additional year. They'll have worked their lives for pensions they never even survived to receive. Who reaps that benefit? Where does that cash go? We all know the answer, it's government coffers. So they can give themselves pay-rises. It's appalling.

But by all means, do have a go and focus on a handful of high-earning people who simply entertain us.

You don't burn down an entire house because big parts of it desperately need renovation. While the BBC news departments admittedly ARE in the pockets of their Tory bosses (an issue requiring redress), the institution itself is a marvellous thing that we should all be proud of. It's simply been stained, like much else in our country.

The BBC certainly continue to provide a platform for culture/drama/comedy for millions... you know, that 'little' stuff that makes life vaguely liveable. As someone who was brought up and works in the Arts, I could never hate the BBC, or wish them away.　

I fear for the day the BBC dies. What replaces it will be even worse, and more on par with something far more insidious. Like Fox News.

#KnowYourEnemy
#BBCpay

BREXIT NEGOTIATIONS: THE MOVIE... "DUFUS DAVIS GETS SCHOOLED" (SCENE ONE)

BREXIT NEGOTIATIONS SO FAR....

DAVID DAVIS:
We have a firm mandate for Brexit!

EU:
Ha. No you don't. Your government just lost its majority spectacularly, and you're having to deal with fringe hate groups even to cling to power. Your leader is a joke.

DAVID DAVIS:
We want to be able to control and vet our immigrants!

EU:
You already can. Germany have been monitoring all immigrants for years, it's just that previous Labour and Tory governments didn't want to spend the cash.

DAVID DAVIS:
We want to be able to make our own laws!

EU:
You already can, and do. That's why Germany have laws in place to protect citizens from things like cheap flammable building cladding, and Britain don't. As always, for you Tories, it's always just about money.

DAVID DAVIS:
OK. Well we want to do a deal with Germany. They're the only country that counts any way, and we really like their cars. Like Trump said, come on Germany? Let's do a deal?

GERMANY:
Hop it. We are part of the EU. We're wouldn't sell out the other states for you, even if we could. Which we can't. They're called rules for a reason.

DAVID DAVIS:
But Brit....

EU:
We warned you.

DAVID DAVIS:
Oh bugger. OK, well the absolute minimum Britain will accept, is if we can arrange the new trade deals at the same time as arranging the divorce. Non-negotiable!

EU:
Nope. Not gonna happen. Never was. We've said that from the beginning. You've been feeding your citizens false promises and nonsense, now you're gonna have to pay the piper.

DAVID DAVIS:
Sh*t. What are our options?

EU:
Well, you can either sling your hook and totally tank your economy, or you can be like one of the other trading nations that aren't full members.

DAVID DAVIS:
Erm (scratching head)... what does that mean?

EU:
It means you'd keep your trading rights like you had before. But have absolutely zero say in EU legislation and negotiations, no seat at the table, no rebate, and you'd still have to pay an exit bill. AND you'd have to abide by EU trade laws, including free movement.

DAVID DAVIS:
(loosening tie) I need water.

EU:
You need your head tested.

YET ANOTHER TURKEY VOTES FOR CHRISTMAS (SERIOUSLY, WHO'S BUYING THIS?)

So, a Turkey really can vote for Christmas.

Honestly. A dictator who's locked up anyone and everyone who opposes him holds a "referendum" - to determine whether or not he should be allowed to be an even bigger dictator. Then he changes the rules DURING the final hours of the election, allowing votes to be accepted on non-official (eg: easily faked) ballots. And EVEN THEN, the vote still only came back at just over 50%. Probably because if Erdogan had rigged it any more obviously, there'd have been no point even pretending.

Who the hell is actually buying this?!?

So... Turkey will be subjected to something awful and probably become an authoritarian state under a dictator who wants to bring back the death penalty, because just over half of the votes were placed by 'straw men' or apparent idiots.

Sounds familiar.

Dear God, I'm so tired of calling out "conspiracies". To many people I must just seem like a complete nutcase. I worry about the parable of "crying wolf" too. I seem to be calling it so often these days, even I recognise the frequency seems unlikely. However, then I remind myself, that is the whole point. The whole idea behind subterfuge is to make those who call it out look like they're bonkers, like they're jumping at shadows. To make them question their own sanity. Quite literally the exact point. Think about that.

Let's assume you do think I'm nuts. But now imagine for one second that the "crazy" conspiracies ARE taking place. (Humour me.) Subjectively, do you think these ruses would be made obvious to the public? Or do you think efforts would be made to make the accusations look baseless, like they were flights of fancy? If you can acknowledge that much, you should then also be able to acknowledge the possibility such grand deceptions have already taken place, AND that you were probably fooled by them.

If you want to steal something in a room full of people, you don't wear a balaclava and dress like a burglar, with a jump rope and shotgun strapped to your back. You act like everyone else, you dress like everyone else. You laugh, you smile, you commit the crime nonchalantly. You don't make a run for it. You act like what you're doing is entirely legal and above board.

This is really not good. Not good at all.

#Erdogan #Turkey

BEHOLD THE POLITICAL WILDERNESS OF BRITAIN TODAY...THERE'S SIMPLY NO-ONE WORTH VOTING FOR AT ALL

I'll be honest with you, I am confounded.

For the first time really in my adult life, I have absolutely positively no clue who to vote for, or support politically. They've finally done it. I've become so grotesquely disappointed and disenfranchised from all of the main political parties in one respect or another, that I feel like just giving up, spiritually curling into a ball on the floor.

Let's take it as read that UKIP and the Conservatives are the parties of dangerous and nationalistic populism, leading this country to hell. Many might disagree, but you can often distract such people with a colouring book and/or lollipop. The Greens? Nice idea, they're the party of hope maybe, but a vote for them really IS a vote for the Tories in most instances. Realpolitik, sadly.

At one time I believed Jeremy Corbyn and The Labour Party were our only hope. In fact I still do believe Corbyn is one of the very few honest/decent politicians working in Westminster, and the outright media and Blairite war on the man from day one should really tell anyone with an iota of subjectivity what's really going on. But that aside, the simple unavoidable truth is Corbyn then bandied with the populists over Brexit. His fear of losing the working class vote overrode any genuine principles of ethical liberal/socialist values, and I cannot forgive that. Plus in actuality, sorry, whether it deepens the wound and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy by saying it or not, the Labour Party simply seems to be finished. Eating itself alive. The cancerous elements of Blair's legacy have been so determined to hold on to the reins of power, that they've watched the whole party burn rather than abandon their own self-interest. It's a tragedy this country may never recover from.

So I turned back to the Liberal Democrats, who I've actually supported for most of my adult life any way. Mainly because I think Nick Clegg has been talking more sense than anyone of late. (Sadly, not so much Tim Farron - who I fear falls short in many of the same ways Corbyn does, eg: he just doesn't make enough of an impact.) But ethically, the Lib Dems seemed to embody the "middle ground" - which is what I fear has been irreparably lost in Britain today. They acknowledge a house must be renovated, not burned to ashes with all inside. I wasn't phased by the slurs of "betrayal" and the bitter resentment so many have shown for their alliance with the Tories in 2010: "never to be trusted again" etc. On the contrary, whereas many only see the pledges that were broken, I in contrast see how much they reined in the Tories from 2010-2015, before the real demon was unleashed. If Brexit has proved anything, it's that being the minority group (however slightly) can basically equate as your political beliefs being entirely sidelined and ignored. I imagine the coalition was somewhat similar.

But then there came Syria #2. And the Lib Dems now seem to follow suit, falling into the very same trap so many have accused them of previously. The Tories, predictably, stood up to ignobly pursue their unequivocally financially-motivated warmongering (any excuse to drop bombs that will need replenishing, after all), which was entirely expected. The military-industrial complex is alive and well in Britain... we're probably leading the way in fact.

And the supposed "liberals" then backed them up.

Once again, the liberals swallow an obvious narrative, hook line and sinker. They have seemingly learned no lessons from Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya, or indeed even Syria #1. It's rocked me to my core. I'm not someone who changes allegiance all the time, but these are fundamental beliefs I cannot ignore. I personally have vehemently defended the Liberal Democrats, even suggested they wouldn't do a deal with the devil again; arguing they'd surely learned their lesson. Now I'm not so sure.

So that's it now. I have absolutely no political voice that speaks for me. Nowhere to turn. I am lost. I cannot be alone, can I?? Which could in turn explain how it's even physically f**king possible Theresa May and the Conservatives have any approval rating and support whatsoever: something I simply cannot fathom! Every time I think there's hope, another flipping Tory councillor gets voted in.

Even I am now losing faith this iron shackle the Tories have on our proud nation, can ever be broken. And I think I'm pretty tenacious, all things considered.

I really do wish I could start up a new political party. Or that someone would. Simply put, a party of decency. Of egalitarianism, and fairness. A party that tells the truth and doesn't play games or score points, that doesn't engage in playground banter that should really be beneath them. A party that can admit it's made mistakes, that sticks by its principles, that doesn't change like the direction of the wind. A party that recognises there are two sides to an argument, and that sometimes a majority can be wrong. A party that acknowledges this country is rotten, and needs a major re-balancing of financial equality. Because THAT is the root behind all of this.

It's a nice dream. But they'd be as sidelined as the Greens any way, a non-starter. No-one cares about decency when there's profit to be made.

WHY THEY'RE WRONG TO HATE THE SNOWFLAKES

I just came across this most interesting meme. Man, it's deep.

It strikes like an arrow directly at the heart of a major issue, in a way only good satirical cartoons can. It neatly sums up the very essence of where we are today.

I do acknowledge that's a broad statement, but it gets right to the crux of the huge societal divide we are currently experiencing. And it does so more viscerally and more honestly than I've seen elsewhere, almost quite nonchalantly.

At first glance, the woman who puts the snobbish parent with her "liberal arts degree" in her place seems justified. Morally superior even. The snobbery exuded by the liberal parent invites it, and the smart retort might seem a moral victory to almost anyone reading. I must add, as one of those very people with a "liberal arts degree", the irony and harsh truth of the retort is not wasted either. I'd say there's more than a smack of truth to it. Now, heading towards 40 with a child to support, it's a painful reality I cannot escape.

But more importantly, what I think the meme does is go a long way to explain why so many working class/low income families have come to despise us, the supposed "libtards" and "snowflakes" (as we're now less than affectionately known).

They believe we, virtually without exception, look down on those who lack education or means. If you exercise some empathy, it's quite understandable why if they believe this, they have rebelled against all notions of middle and upper class "superiority". Even reason itself. In this reality, they're perhaps entirely justified. The meme hits the nail right on the head.

Here's the thing though: it's completely wrong. 

It's actually quite a dire misinterpretation, identifying the wrong 'enemy' (if we're going to work in such black and white terminology). And the meme's populist attitude questionably sits at the core of exactly why society is currently sabotaging itself, almost beyond recognition.

Liberal values

For a start, very few people go into the arts if accumulation of money and luxury is their priority. The minority who get rich off the arts are so so relatively small, the truth is the average supermarket worker or road-sweeper probably is better off than your average 'artist'. A point this meme makes rather well.

But even if such an odious snobbery is entertained by any among the liberal classes, perhaps even subconsciously and non-intentionally, by very definition a true liberal would never say such a thing. Certainly not aloud or in earshot. They would not teach such ethics to their children. To do so would go against any notion of liberalism; such a flippant and derisory comment flies in the face of egalitarianism. Something which should, at least in theory, be the very guiding principle of an ethical left.

What the meme does is confuse and blur the lines between educated liberal/arts-types, and financial elitist/gentry-types. It happens a lot, and there's a colossal difference. The two latter groups are the ones who'd come out with stuff like that, and it's also they who are true enemies of honest working class people everywhere. Not those with "liberal arts degrees". 

It's definitely not teachers, historians, architects, designers, artists, therapists and musicians. It's not people who've striven to expand their knowledge and understanding of the world, to better it, or reflect upon it in some way. Eg: the people who in some respects, make the world worth living in. Are liberal/artistic types not the reason Western societies have progressed beyond medieval thinking? Yes is of course the answer. It was called 'The Enlightenment'.

It's certainly not judges, ethical journalists, or professionals who've often dedicated their lives and careers to the pursuit of justice, or doing what's right. That's a disastrous misdirection. And by the gods, I fear where it may lead.

Enemies of the People

No, the enemies are established 'money'. It's your Boris Johnsons, your Jacob Rees-Moggs, your David Camerons and your George Osbornes. The Eton and Oxbridge cronies who believe their 'divine right' by birth is a model worth preserving (more often than not, the average Tory politician fits this mould). Above them, providing even more extreme example, it's youngsters like the 25 year old Duke of Westminster - who recently inherited half of London to the tune of a £9bn fortune, and didn't pay a penny in tax due to legal loopholes. It's the families and individuals born into extreme wealth and privilege, who've never known anything but. Their bloated fortunes only trickle down to a small group of sycophants and highly paid employees, who naturally, also defend them tenaciously.

But the enemies also sadly include 'new money' too. Those who've come from modest means initially, who now believe their financial advancement and (let's face it) 'luck' in many cases somehow sets them above 'little people'. It's a skewed and entirely self-congratulatory ethos that because they were successful, anyone who isn't has nothing and no-one to blame but their own lack of enterprise. Again, a very Tory mantra.

This group includes your Philip Greens, your Rob Terrys, your Richard Desmonds, your Rupert Murdochs. People who've come to loathe the background from whence they came. And they can often become all-the-more brazen in their lack of respect for those lower down the food chain. 'Old money', by contrast, often tries to observe basic convention on what's commonly viewed as 'decent'. They hide ignominious plans, going to great lengths to disguise them. Whereas the antics of evil bastards like Philip Green handsomely demonstrate how those people quite frankly don't give a f**k at all.

Like 'old money', 'new money' will often do absolutely anything to avoid re-balancing of the status quo, perhaps even more so. And they have simply immense resources to deceive, misconstrue, and even manipulate entire populations.

Anyone who genuinely thinks they don't use those resources to first and foremost ensure the continuation of their position is, quite frankly, off their proverbial rocker. It's inane naivety. It's also why anyone with even the vaguest hint of intelligence understands the political agendas pioneered in The Daily Mail, The Express and The Sun etc are quite literally not worth the paper they're printed on. 

It's a detail that leaves many 'libtards' foaming at the mouth with frustration. Ultimately, because so many from working class backgrounds actively support these populist rags. They rarely question motive. They believe every word spooled, even cite them as 'proof' on occasion. (Trump's doing the same thing on a much bigger scale over in America.) They just do not grasp that the proprietors concerned don't give a fig about them, or see how the only concern for billionaire moguls is to remain rich, influential and powerful at all costs.

When you accept that, everything else falls into place.

Trying to avoid the B-word

I could of course, be referring to the word "bitch". Its use in the meme goes some way to demonstrate what the left fears so much about the aggressive attitudes of the right. Yes, the supposedly liberal woman is horrid. That doesn't mean it's OK to call her a bitch, and least of all encourage such language and antagonism in front of children. A minor detail, and one which many who identify with this meme might skip right past.

But no, I do mean Brexit.

I almost got through a whole diatribe without mentioning the 'B-word' once.

Unfortunately, the arguments explored here are exactly why the issue of Brexit is so critical today. You absolutely categorically have to look at who among the political/powerful classes are pushing hardest for it, and question why. To not do so, is folly.

Hard working, average British people are concerned by the erosion of their culture, and perhaps more significantly, they blame their lack of opportunities, amenities and a poor quality of life on foreigners they believe are 'taking' what should be their assets: overriding the inherent benefits of being born British. And yes, liberals and 'remoaners' do tend to take issue with that. Because firstly, we appreciate how someone's financial situation, ethnicity, and/or geographical location at birth should not be the deciding factors in the opportunities and rights they are afforded.

But secondly, because it's complete bullsh*t.

Even if the odd family are, in the face of economic hardship, claiming more than they're entitled to from the state. Even if some of the state's resources are spent on foreign nationals as opposed to those homegrown, irrespective of the possible reasons why. Even if someone on benefits has a newer iPhone than you, it's all quite literally 'small-fry'. The amounts spent on social welfare are so paltry, so pathetic and meaningless in comparison to the sums squandered by our government on nefarious activities and selective wealth distribution among their own, it's a downright insult. In short,

angry British people everywhere are arguing over pennies tossed on the floor, ignoring the vast wads of cash the mighty are flaunting in their faces.

That's also why impending nationwide increases to council tax to fund the social care crisis are so deplorable. If MPs can afford to reward themselves yet another pay rise from the public kitty; if Britain can afford to be a veritable tax haven post-Brexit, we shouldn't be simultaneously making everyone, including the very poorest in an already austerity-whipped society, foot the bill. Not in a state that claims to care for its people, or respects the perils of old-age are felt more keenly by those financially insolvent and insecure.

If Brexit brings about a collapse of the NHS and other public services, if all the foreign nurses and workers are tossed out, the financial elites won't care. They have private medical insurance. If the funding for public schools dries up, and there's a crisis caused by the shortage of qualified teachers, again they won't care. They send their kids to expensive private schools. 

If there's no longer such thing as a public library, playground or swimming pool, the rich will pay for their kids to go to pricey and exclusive ones. If the price of a babysitter/gardener/cleaner/builder etc goes through the roof, absent of those pesky Europeans undercutting our wages, it won't touch them. They can pay top whack to get a 'good British equivalent'.

If the price of bread/milk and basic provisions skyrocket, the rich won't break a sweat. They might simply order three cases of the Dom Perignon instead of four, or at worst, rent out a holiday home they'd normally keep vacant. 

If lowly workers and employees have to endure a "gig economy", are denied basic working rights and exist on low pay/zero-hour contracts etc, financial elites won't be concerned. Their wages are tied to capitalist enterprise, property, and the private sector: the vast sums earned by CEOs/Directors and stake shareholders of large companies. They have more than they'll ever need, so the logistics of menial living are totally irrelevant.

In the same way, which groups actually benefit from making it easier to sack an employee, or renege on employer responsibilities? (Small details Tories refer to as "red tape".) Yep, it's the same wealthy elites. Elites who now rub their hands together at the prospect of Brexit, and the unrestrained corporate autocracy it might allow to take root.

Employers in Brexit Britain may well get to work you through your lunch hour, and not pay you a penny extra, for example. Or rather, there may simply be nothing you'll be able to do to stop them. Or you may be sacked for objecting, without a right to appeal. It all depends what Theresa May and her dictatorial government decide; what they define as acceptable.

Considering we're speaking of an unelected and pretty far-right government that emerged virtually by coup, that's been condemned for human rights violations, that oversees one of the highest wealth inequalities in a developed nation anywhere in the world, that tried to bypass the sovereignty of parliament? I certainly wouldn't hold out much hope for the little guy in post-Brexit Britain.

In defence of 'liberal snobbery'

Earlier in this article, I alluded to the fact some liberals actually may take a less than positive attitude towards working class jobs, subconsciously or otherwise. Or may, as the meme suggests, encourage their children to aspire to more intellectual vocations.

In fairness, as someone whose career highs and lows have varied from being a well paid singer performing for thousands all over the world, to working for minimum wage in pubs/fast food chains and more recently car sales, I can squarely say this 'liberal aversion', if there is one, can also be nothing to do with anyone believing themselves "too good" for a job. It's sometimes because intelligence is ridiculed and labelled effeminate; intellectual and artistic interests beyond sports and drinking are sometimes belittled in such industries. The liberal's standards of courtesy and inclusion do not apply. And thinking/liberal types are sometimes made to feel about as welcome as a bout of scurvy.

There's also a big difference between not wanting to do a job, and looking down on a job. I for one definitely do not want to be a road-sweeper. That doesn't mean I have no respect for those who empty my bins and keep my local streets clean. On the contrary, I have a very healthy respect for those who do jobs I could not/would not want to do. But I shan't apologise for believing my abilities and talents lie elsewhere either. Nor does it mean I'd wish for manual labourers to receive anything other than fair remuneration, and a decent rate of pay.

What 'Average Joe' and those on the right often accuse as being "liberal snobbery" is often no such thing at all. Commonly conceived notions of "snobbery" are based on concepts of class or money - normally defined by familial wealth, education, and opportunities afforded by virtue of birth. But people on the left hail from both rich and poor backgrounds. It's nothing to do with money: a liberal's idea of being 'classy' stems from attitude.

So what some might define as "liberal snobbery" is often just snowflake insistence that values such as decency, courtesy, and respect are morally superior to those of bigotry, absolutism, and intimidation. And you know what? In that, there can be no compromise. They are. 

I make no apology for that either.

HEIL BREXIT! THE BATTLE LINES ARE DRAWN, THE DESCENT INTO FASCISM BEGINS

That's it then. The battle-lines are drawn; the die is cast. 'Heil Trump', and 'Heil Brexit'.

I like many held out hope that our MPs would prioritise the good of our nation over their desire to pander to populists in parliament yesterday. They let all of us down in spectacular fashion. Essentially, they just gave in to fear for their own jobs and positions: because we all know the majority of parliament were opposed to this inane, geopolitical 'scorched-earth' act of self-sabotage.

What amazes me is that so many misinterpret what this 'Brexit' from Europe is all really about. My heart is so, so heavy that vast and increasing swathes are seemingly blind to the rise of fascism taking place all around us, or actively want it to be the case.

The number of people who kid themselves it's only 'coincidence' they now share goals and values with white supremacists and Christian extremists, is quite simply staggering.

Same too of those Brexiteers who now seem so repulsed by Trump. He's a different side of the same coin.

Lack of respect for the lessons of history might well be our undoing in years to come. Britain lit a fuse. It encouraged, if not directly led to the coronation of 'King' Trump. Our new alliances in this brave new world now say it all. Our best buds are dictator Trump, and equally unscrupulous dictators in Turkey and Saudi Arabia. But damn those horrible Europeans, eh?

We allowed a political coup to take place. An already right-wing Tory government was replaced with something far worse: UKIP in disguise. Whereas a couple of years ago, UKIP were widely condemned as fringe hate-peddlers that only those openly racist supported. Farage was rightly derided as a bigot, and a dangerous man - now he's everyone's pal, with a show on LBC, just "saying it how it is". The change was sudden, very deliberate, and very much manipulated by forces in big business and the media. Forces who wanted this to happen. And many in Britain, poor naive Lemmings that they are, thought a vote for Brexit was a vote against the Tories and David Cameron: a vote AGAINST elitism and corporate oppression. Nope. They let a far more dangerous and insidious wing of the Tory party into power, who are now running amok. Their misguided backlash was against the wrong bloody 'elites'.

Instead of multi-billionaires and corporate swindlers, the people who pillage our world and run our very lives, the 'elites' who've been condemned by all this madness are now simply those who are educated. Those who've grown up with liberal attitudes. Or those who've dedicated their lives to humanitarian causes, scientific discovery, the pursuit of knowledge etc. In short, to knowing what they're talking about.

We have quite literally made the pursuit of wisdom a crime. And we've simultaneously volunteered to load ourselves onto our own slave ships.

Britain was (is) in an unprecedented and unique position within the EU, without any of the same rules the other mainland countries have to adhere to. Like the Schengen free-movement clause, for example. We already control our own borders, and our own laws, it's complete bluster. The laws the EU hold up concern pesky things like workers rights, air quality, consumer rights... all those terrible things that Tory 'Little England' will hack to pieces with an enormous machete. The common currency? We don't even share the common currency?!? We very specifically held onto GBP through thick and thin for decades due to those reservations, and we're already virtually independent on that front.

It's all just a smokescreen to distract from the fact we don't like foreigners, particularly Muslims, and we don't like all those pesky refugees that horrible sorts like Angela Merkel keep allowing in.

That's what the 'men and women with pitchforks' voted for any way. Politicians and businesses, perhaps not so much. They have their own motives. But this is certainly not all just about what's effectively little more than bits of paper with pictures printed on. Britain was a net recipient of EU funds: what we mostly provided Europe was military security. Our supremacy in this area was why we were afforded such privilege, why we were allowed to pick and choose, to a certain degree. But it wasn't enough for those clinging to the coattails of the once 'Great British Empire'.

What the EU really stood for was unity and friendship within Europe, cooperation, acceptance that peoples of Eurasia should look to themselves as 'one people'. It is the most successful peace project the world has ever known, and has prevented hostilities between the main powers of Europe for THE LONGEST PERIOD IN HISTORY. Europe has quite literally been a melting pot of warring and competing cultures for centuries, and these tribal squabbles, one way or another, have caused (or at least traced back to) virtually every international war that's ever occurred in documented world history too. Fact. The EU even made friends/allies of people we were only years before, bombing the hell out of. Today, German businesses and technologies thrive as part of our own economy, like BMW, Volkswagen etc. All of us in the UK have grown up with the security and opportunities that ties and openness with Europe provided. Not to mention a far far better quality of produce on our supermarket shelves! (Trust me, the majority of widely sold American food is absolutely not good.)

But it's all been flushed away.

Gods, I felt strongly about all this BEFORE the rise of Trump. Now, it's beyond critical. Instead we've thrown our lot in with unapologetic monsters like Trump and Erdogan, dictators who persecute teachers, scientists and journalists whose reports contradict their agenda. We've turned our back on friends and neighbours we've enjoyed a shared culture with for decades. It is heart-breaking. Yes, of course the EU has problems, and of course it has endemic corruption. Can anyone claim Westminster doesn't?? Does anyone even care that our own political system is clogged with financial autocracy?? However many problems, you just don't work out differences with someone by walking out of the room, trashing the joint on the way out.

The EU promoted security, inclusion. Finding diplomatic answers. It made war unthinkable because member states were tied so closely economically. That was the exact f**king point. You're less likely to set fire to someone else's tent if yours will definitely catch fire too.

Quite simply, nothing else had worked in Europe since the time of the Roman Empire. 'Superstates' are only inherently bad if they are oppressive and violent, and being part of a larger union strengthens all within it: a principle I will cling to til my dying day. If economic ties and common markets kept my daughter from ever knowing the barbarity of war on the doorstep of her own continent, then I, and many others, felt it was a small price to pay.

One day, we may all be very sorry that those who clamoured against this colonial sabre-rattling were belittled and ignored.

That we didn't listen to the 'snowflakes'.

#Brexit #Snowflakes #Trump #Fascism
#EU #Europe