Has Boris blown it? Or is he a step closer to Number 10? Boris, being Johnson of course — BoJo, the shambling blond Etonian, Tory rat, and serial incompetent whose appeal to large sections of the British middle and working-class (“well, he’s a bit of a lad, innee? Says what he thinks! Not stuck up like the rest of ’em, arrgghhhhhhh.”) — is a cause of everlasting despair to everyone trying to defend the idea of democracy, least not from their own dark thoughts.
For a couple of years Boris has been rising Brexit, as part of his relentless campaign to make it to Number 10. But Brexit has finally, finally, become a net negative, as the scale of the disaster that will befall the UK when it leaves the EU in 2019 becomes apparent. Dozens of constituencies that voted “leave”, now poll as preferring to remain. The surge of manic energy that accompanied the “leave” vote has now all but exhausted itself. So Boris has switched back to, of course, the burqa. Having been recently playing foreign minister in the panto that is British politics, and now openly gunning for PM Theresa May, Johnson wrote a column for the UK Daily Telegraph ruminating on the burqa ban operative in half a dozen European countries, and decided that he was against it on good old-fashioned liberal grounds — but not before he had done a round of jokes about burqa’d women looking like post-boxes, etc, etc.
Outrage ensued, as Johnson presumably hoped it would, because it’s the perfect squeeze play. In one hit, he gets to 1) dog-whistle to the hard right about hating Islam, 2) outrage progressives and the Tory centre into denunciation, thus winning hero status with the “middle-hard” right, who hate “political correctness gone mad” etc, 3) then point out that he was against the burqa ban — that progressives like French President Emmanuel Macron have left in place — and that people should focus on the substance, etc.
But we’re in an age where the progressive transformation of the public sphere is moving quite rapidly. So what worked a couple of years ago, might be subject to shifting terrain. That appears to have happened now, with a level of denunciation coming from within the Tory party drowning out the left-progressive chorus. That won’t matter to the right within the Tories. It was thought that the elevation of Jeremy Corbyn to the Labour leadership would have held their fire for a while; they would have been happy to lose to a Blairite, the logic went, if that was the price of winning the party. But they would stop short of helping elect a genuine socialist. Not so it seems. Corbyn and Labour have now opened up a three-point lead over the Tories in polling, despite a largely confected and wholly hysterical campaign about anti-Semitism in Labour launched at Corbyn.
Half the Tory right believe that the party would triumph if it could be an unashamedly nationalist and chauvinist party, and hell, they may be right. Labour benefited from the Brexit decision; Corbyn could have a de facto anti-immigration policy popular in regional working-class areas simply by saying that Labour would abide by the referendum decision. So too Brexit allows the Tories to embrace economic nationalism. They can talk about the virtues of free trade, even as they’re leaving a free trade area, and without a single free trade agreement in place. It’s hilarious. Boris has spoken before of his admiration for the “dead cat” strategy — throw a dead cat on the table, and no one can think about anything else — and the burqabox imbroglio is that with a twist.
Nevertheless, it’s a measure of the trouble the Tory right are in — that they must return to peekaboo Islamophobia to stir a jaded base. There’s not many places left to go after this. Boris would appear to believe that the clock is running out, and for once he may be not only right, but right.
Boris the boofhead again. A very observant woman wrote that the trouble with the Tories is that they all went to expensive private schools and learned to bully and game the system. This she said made them great politicians and bloody useless leaders. Brexit boys. Let’s go there without thought of how to get there or what to do.
“All right. I’ve got this tiger by the tail, what do I do now. Mumsy?”
So many worse things get said than Boris Johnson’s burqa joke, especially since made in the context of actually opposing a burqa ban.
Boris has stuck his foot in his mouth many times and is a complete BS merchant, but in the scheme of things joking that a burqa makes the wearer look like a post box or a bank robber – seriously, that’s just taking professional offence. It’s an observation about the appearance of the garment. So what? That is what the garment looks like. It’s black and covers the entire face and body except for a slit. Are we meant to treat all things connected with religions as sacred cows which are not allowed to be the topic of jokes? (whether they are good jokes is not important)
I’m sure Boris was baiting people with that comment and is positively thrilled that people bit on it.
Sic! “treat all things connected with religions as sacred cows“… umm, yeah, hence the origin of the phrase, in English.
Bozo knows what he is doing, even if those whom he is gulling do not.
‘A Truth told, with bad Intent, does more harm than Lies can invent’.
I think most of us commenting here would see nothing wrong about mocking the Catholic Church over their treatment of women, cover ups of child sexual abuse or flat earth-ism, so I’m not sure why joking about an Islamic garment is somehow shocking and beyond the pale.
A nice piece of ad homenism to commence the article or is it the tone of the artice. As to Brexit there
has been a good deal of FUD. The Times (a few days ago) claimed that UK police would no longer obtain cooperation from police in the EU; a but like the police (Federal or State) in Oz not (ever) obtaining cooperation
from the police in the EU.
Yet your article contain damn-all about burqas! You MIGHT have mentioned that NOWHERE in the Quaran is the
burqa (as such) mentioned. Dress codes (for males and females) are expressed in sura 5. Combined with the
Hadith there is some (very basic) argument for a hijab but it is not that clear.
With a bit of research you MIGHT have determined that hair (and face) covering were initially a Christian practices that the Muslims adopted; the Quaran is about 60% the Torah and 40% the Bible; i.e. nothing original.
By way of illustration there are any number of claims by Christians (then and now) that have no authority
from the Bible. Lastly you MIGHT have mentioned that Boris has a each-way bet on this matter (but I’ll leave
the details to you as an exercise).
As an aside, a few references to your assertions (e.g. “half the Tory right …” would not go astray.
You are really slapping below your weight, Kyle.
It will cause fingers in ears & la-la-laing for so many readers.
Grundle is becoming a real worry, talk about a pen for hire.
Pity the price is so, apparently, low.
Cheap at half the price.
I’m on the threshold of declaring, when the opportunity permits, that the inclination of a (i.e. any) readership to fundamentally fall into line with the “given view” is a function of (1) wanting to be a team player or (2) a form of tribalism or (3) simply an example of herd mentality. The comments of late to topics of ethos and world view refer on Crikey to a considerable extent.
The punch line is that Bolt et al are lampooned on this pages but the content of the articles from Crikey, in the main, are about two rungs up the ladder from Bolt – with about the same amount of detail .
even Boris’s old man reckons the Russians tipped brexit..