Alpha 
Post by fretslider on Sept 27, 2019 4:15:12 GMT -5
Much has been made of Boris Johnson's language in parliament. He has used downright hateful words like 'surrender' and 'betrayal' and as usual the hypocrisy in parliament is mammoth in scale.
The House of Commons completely lost the plot last night, as Remainer MPs blasted Boris Johnson for using the word ‘surrender’, in relation to the Benn Act that aims to stop Britain leaving the EU without a deal. Hysterical MP after hysterical MP stood up and said Johnson’s language of ‘betrayal’ and ‘surrender’ was putting their lives at risk.
But a cursory Google search, or a memory longer than the last week, reveals that many of these people have said far worse things about their political opponents. Take Labour MP Jess Phillips, who today will ask an urgent question in parliament about the PM’s ‘toxic’ language. In 2015, she said that, when the time came to oust Jeremy Corbyn as leader, she would knife him ‘in the front not the back’.
Sky News
✔
@skynews
Labour MP Jess Phillips says she would "knife" Jeremy Corbyn "in the front not the back"
Lib Dem Ed Davey also led the condemnation of Johnson’s language last night. Well, in June, he said Remainer parties should unite to ‘decapitate that blond head in Uxbridge and South Ruislip’ – a pretty violent metaphor, you might say, for an electoral pact aimed at beating Boris Johnson, who is MP there, at the next election.
Davey later apologised. But others have been less contrite about using, or being seen to endorse, violent language against their opponents. Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell has long refused to recant a speech he gave in 2014, in which he repeated calls from activists to have then DWP minister Esther McVey ‘lynched’, to big laughs.
John Stevens
✔
@johnestevens
Here's the Daily Mail's recording of John McDonnell joking about lynching Esther McVey: pic.twitter.com/w0SD0WoHob
There was a lot of talk last night about the unfair portrayal of one’s opponents as ‘traitors’ (even though Johnson has never used such language). But what then should we think about this chestnut from David Lammy MP. When asked on The Andrew Marr Show if he wanted to take back a comparison he had made between the pro-Brexit Tory European Research Group and the Nazis, he said that, if anything, his comments were ‘not strong enough’.
The Guardian
✔
@guardian
Comparing ERG to Nazis 'not strong enough', says David Lammy
So, in sum, using the word ‘surrender’ to describe an act of parliament is apparently mad and dangerous. But talking about knifing, decapitating and lynching one’s opponents is fine. Suggesting that Remainers are enemies of democracy when they try to, er, thwart democracy is inflammatory and toxic. But saying that pro-Brexit MPs are actual fascists is, if anything, a little on the cautious side. Gotcha.
Shaming politicians, whatever their position or party, for using colourful language is ridiculous and censorious. You have to have a pretty low view of ordinary people to think that a few fighting words from MPs is enough to turn voters to political violence and murder. We should argue back, not take offence. But it’s hard not to come to the conclusion that many of the MPs saying Johnson’s language is dangerous don’t actually believe it.
How could they? Many of them have said far worse things themselves.
www.spiked-online.com/2019/09/26/four-times-remainers-used-toxic-language/
A fitting fate for what has become an elitist and anti-democratic parliamentary dictatorship.
The House of Commons completely lost the plot last night, as Remainer MPs blasted Boris Johnson for using the word ‘surrender’, in relation to the Benn Act that aims to stop Britain leaving the EU without a deal. Hysterical MP after hysterical MP stood up and said Johnson’s language of ‘betrayal’ and ‘surrender’ was putting their lives at risk.
But a cursory Google search, or a memory longer than the last week, reveals that many of these people have said far worse things about their political opponents. Take Labour MP Jess Phillips, who today will ask an urgent question in parliament about the PM’s ‘toxic’ language. In 2015, she said that, when the time came to oust Jeremy Corbyn as leader, she would knife him ‘in the front not the back’.
Sky News
✔
@skynews
Labour MP Jess Phillips says she would "knife" Jeremy Corbyn "in the front not the back"
Lib Dem Ed Davey also led the condemnation of Johnson’s language last night. Well, in June, he said Remainer parties should unite to ‘decapitate that blond head in Uxbridge and South Ruislip’ – a pretty violent metaphor, you might say, for an electoral pact aimed at beating Boris Johnson, who is MP there, at the next election.
Davey later apologised. But others have been less contrite about using, or being seen to endorse, violent language against their opponents. Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell has long refused to recant a speech he gave in 2014, in which he repeated calls from activists to have then DWP minister Esther McVey ‘lynched’, to big laughs.
John Stevens
✔
@johnestevens
Here's the Daily Mail's recording of John McDonnell joking about lynching Esther McVey: pic.twitter.com/w0SD0WoHob
There was a lot of talk last night about the unfair portrayal of one’s opponents as ‘traitors’ (even though Johnson has never used such language). But what then should we think about this chestnut from David Lammy MP. When asked on The Andrew Marr Show if he wanted to take back a comparison he had made between the pro-Brexit Tory European Research Group and the Nazis, he said that, if anything, his comments were ‘not strong enough’.
The Guardian
✔
@guardian
Comparing ERG to Nazis 'not strong enough', says David Lammy
So, in sum, using the word ‘surrender’ to describe an act of parliament is apparently mad and dangerous. But talking about knifing, decapitating and lynching one’s opponents is fine. Suggesting that Remainers are enemies of democracy when they try to, er, thwart democracy is inflammatory and toxic. But saying that pro-Brexit MPs are actual fascists is, if anything, a little on the cautious side. Gotcha.
Shaming politicians, whatever their position or party, for using colourful language is ridiculous and censorious. You have to have a pretty low view of ordinary people to think that a few fighting words from MPs is enough to turn voters to political violence and murder. We should argue back, not take offence. But it’s hard not to come to the conclusion that many of the MPs saying Johnson’s language is dangerous don’t actually believe it.
How could they? Many of them have said far worse things themselves.
www.spiked-online.com/2019/09/26/four-times-remainers-used-toxic-language/
A fitting fate for what has become an elitist and anti-democratic parliamentary dictatorship.
