Home Secretary Suella Braverman has dramatically resigned, doubtless to the loud cheers of every progressive, forward-looking person out there.
Mrs Braverman’s views disqualify her from any government post, especially that in one of the great offices of state. And they certainly disqualify her from admission to any cocktail party held by progressive, forward-looking people.
Judge for yourself and be ready: some readers may find everything Mrs Braverman stands for to be deeply upsetting.
When she took over the job a little over a month ago, Mrs Braverman told the police to concentrate on fighting real crimes, not those that are only perceived as such by progressive, forward-looking people.
How dare she! As if some trivial burglary or mugging come anywhere near using a wrong pronoun or insisting on keeping the number of known sexes down to two. Doesn’t she realise that a burglary only hurts one victim, whereas a wrong pronoun attacks every progressive, forward-looking person in Britain? No, apparently she doesn’t.
Mrs Braverman’s response to our roads and bridges being blocked by eco-fanatics would have been to order the police to get rid of the nuisances. But she was prevented from committing that outrage by those same progressive, forward-looking people who control our mass media and therefore the consciences of most Tory MPs.
So did she understand the error of her ways and shut up? Did she hell. During the ensuing Commons debate on the Public Order Bill, Mrs Braverman had the gall to say: “I’m afraid it’s the Labour Party, it’s the LibDems, it’s the coalition of chaos, it’s the Guardian-reading, tofu-eating wokerati – dare I say, the anti-growth coalition – that we have to thank for the disruption we are seeing on our roads today.”
You see what I see? She is an enemy of progressive, forward-looking people everywhere. Why, she may even be a Tory! Clearly, the parliamentary Conservative Party is no place for airing such seditious views. This regardless of whether or not she is right.
Not only that, but Mrs Braverman has also shown herself to be an enemy of progress in any number of other ways as well. For example, she objected to the 45p rate of income tax.
Surely, any progressive, forward-looking person knows that high taxes bespeak high virtue (unless he is the one who has to pay them). She doesn’t, so she isn’t.
Then, unlike such persons, Mrs Braverman seems to take Brexit seriously. How gauche can one get? Just because hoi polloi voted for it in the greatest numbers they’ve ever voted for anything, that doesn’t mean progressive, forward-looking people who self-evidently know better must abide by vox populi.
Why, she even wanted Britain to leave the European Convention on Human Rights! My inference is that Mrs Braverman thinks Britain has nothing to learn about human rights from Germany, which refined the concept no end as far back as 80 years ago.
Xenophobia or what? Of course it is. And also doubtless global warming denial, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny (although this one requires further research) – and racism, that awful crime than which nothing fouler has ever existed.
For it was racism boosted by little-England chauvinism that made Mrs Braverman campaign against relaxing the rules on visas for Indian nationals. She must hate Indians and all other off-white races so dear to the hearts of all progressive, forward-looking people.
What, she herself is a daughter of Indian immigrants? Well, let me paraphrase that great orator Joe Biden: If she disagrees with progressive, forward-looking people, she ain’t Indian.
I hope you’ll agree with me that we don’t need ministers like Mrs Braverman. Nor do we really need a multi-party system either. De facto, we already have a single party, that of progressive, forward-looking people.
It’s time we stopped being coy about it and turned de facto into de jure. May I suggest Jeremy Corbyn as leader and Peter Mandelson as his deputy?
That may be jumping the gun a bit. But ridding our government of the likes of Mrs Braverman is a good step in that direction. Fancy a real Tory in the Tory cabinet!
I wonder, what percentage of the British populace do you imagine to be genuinely conservative? I reckon I could find more Holocaust deniers among us than true-blue-Tories. The British public have never been interested in meta-narratives. Whilst many subscribe to Marxist tenets, that is only because they were subtly, nay brilliantly, engineered to. What people who vote Conservative want is to keep a bit more of their money, and that is all. What you say about Braverman is believed by most people, if perhaps never voiced, “not very Indian, is she really?”
Regardless of Isaac Thompson remarks,I am with Ms Braverman 100%. She speaks for me, whether that is considered conservative or not.
You are right about meta-narratives: most Britons, in my observation, aren’t just uninterested in them, but find them suspicious, foreign. And you are also right about them voting Conservative because they want to keep a bit more of their money. But surely not only that? They also like to have their rubbish taken out, their neighbourhood to be free of crime, their local doctor to be available when they are ill, their children not pushed into a life of crime and drugs. Britons (in stark contrast to the French, for example) tend to be pragmatic people with few intellectual pretensions. Their lapidary question isn’t ‘Why or why?’ but ‘What are we going to do about it?’ That’s why they desperately need to have real conservatives to vote for. For conservatism — unlike socialism — isn’t about meta- (or mega-) narratives. It’s about common sense, decency, keeping the house in order. The problem is that, in the absence of real conservatives, Britons do indeed fall for the meta-narratives, all based on phony equality, shouted at them by the other side. As for conservatives meta-narratives, or rather philosophical postulates, they do exist, at a level beyond most people’s reach. If they didn’t, I’d have nothing to write about.
Wow! Is there one MP who will stand up and support her? Anyone? Hello?