Suella Braverman wages a new war on woke as she vows only the Tories can stop political correctness strangling Britain
Suella Braverman ignited a new war on woke yesterday – vowing that only the Tories could stop political correctness strangling Britain.
The Home Secretary told the Tory party conference the country would 'go properly woke' under a Labour government.
To a packed auditorium in Manchester, she mocked 'Keir 'take the knee' Starmer', predicting that wokery would 'run riot' if he won the keys to No 10.
She also launched attacks on the 'luxury beliefs brigade in their ivory towers', a stinging reference to those in privileged positions, such as Sir Elton John, who have taken her to task over her strong language on migration.
In a speech that ranged far beyond the scope of her Home Office role, and won a minute-long standing ovation, Mrs Braverman called political correctness 'pernicious nonsense'.
She told the gathering of party activists that whole institutions – including parts of government – had been 'distorted' by wokery. 'Things are bad enough already,' the Home Secretary said. 'We see it in Whitehall, in museums and galleries, in the police, and even in leading companies in the City.
'Under the banner of diversity, equity, and inclusion, official policies have been embedded that distort the whole purpose of these institutions. Highly controversial ideas are presented to workforces and the public as if they are motherhood and apple pie.
'Gender ideology, white privilege, anti-British history. The evidence demonstrates that if you don't challenge this poison, things just get worse. Whole institutions become captured.'
It had already led to people being 'chased out of their jobs for saying that a man can't be a woman' and 'disciplined for using the wrong words'.
Mrs Braverman said Sir Keir was the Tories' secret weapon because he 'believes in nothing' and 'will say anything to anyone'.
'Imagine what would happen if he became prime minister,' the Home Secretary said. 'Britain would go properly woke.
'This Conservative Government has begun the task of clearing out this pernicious nonsense. The British people will get to decide if they want to curb woke with Rishi Sunak, or let it run riot with Keir 'take the knee' Starmer.'
**************************************************
The hypocritical mindset of the woke elite that exposes the huge ideological gulf between Labour and the Tories
At the eleventh hour, with the General Election perhaps less than a year away, the Tory leadership seems to have regained some fighting spirit.
That mood of determination is embodied by Home Secretary Suella Braverman, who almost daily bravely dares to attack the entire destructive ethos of the progressive elite.
Through its dominance of the public realm, she warned, this upper echelon of society has been able to impose its enthusiasm for soft penalties for criminals, for open borders, gender fluidity, EU control and net zero environmental policies against the wishes of the majority of the public.
For his part, Rishi Sunak is now stressing the need to challenge the failing consensus that has had a stranglehold on British politics for the last three decades.
Already a hate figure on the Left for her outspoken attacks on doctrinaire multiculturalism and uncontrolled immigration, Braverman last week denounced the smug ranks of virtue-signallers who, cocooned by affluence, are personally protected from the disastrous consequences of the policies they advocate, such as the abandonment of robust policing in inner-cities, the disintegration of the traditional family structure or the refusal to deport illegal migrants.
Braverman said the elite's policies are not driven by any real desire to bring improvements in British society but by an eagerness to display moral superiority over the 'bigoted' mass of working people. She declared of these woke elitists: 'The migrants won't be taking their jobs. In fact, they are likely to have them mowing their lawns or cleaning their homes.'
And in a compelling phrase – which could determine the result of the next General Election if drilled home repeatedly – Braverman went on to say: 'The luxury beliefs brigade sit in their ivory towers telling ordinary people that they are morally deficient because they dare to get upset about the impact of illegal migration, net zero, or habitual criminals.'
For me, the impact was all the greater because as a political academic I have written extensively about the chasm between mainstream public opinion, with its emphasis on traditional, patriotic common sense, and the narrow outlook of the progressive elite, with its attachment to deluded theorising. It is a division that I analyse in my latest book, Values, Voice And Virtue, which interested Braverman so much that she asked to meet me after reading it.
A world where hashtags and use of pronouns show which side you're on
One of the concepts I cover in the book is that of 'luxury beliefs' –defined as ideas or values that confer status on the wealthy, but are not fully embraced or practised by them. The influence of 'luxury beliefs' as a means of winning social esteem has been charted by a number of academics, led by Rob Henderson, formerly of Cambridge University. Their fascinating research shows that in the past, members of the old elite derived their sense of status from physical manifestations of wealth, such as fine clothes, jewellery, foreign travel, servants, private carriages and large properties. But today, with prosperity spread across society, such ostentatious displays of riches have less significance. So, instead, the quest for social status now focuses more on 'cultural capital' than 'economic capital'.
For the sophisticated, urban-dwelling, university-educated class that is overwhelmingly in the ascendancy across the media, the civil service, public management, quangoland, the voluntary sector and the arts, a certain set of fashionable beliefs has become the new signifier of a higher rank in society.
Adherence to the values of the progressive orthodoxy is now the surest way to win acceptance into the elite and gain applause from its other members.
Alongside these 'luxury beliefs' are slogans such as 'diversity is our strength' as virtue-signallers spout jargon such as 'intersectionality' or peddle bogus concepts such as 'heteronormativity', 'gender spectrum' and 'white privilege'.
This is a world in which social media hashtags or the use of pronouns show which side you are on in the culture wars.
Yet as the phrase infers, 'luxury beliefs' impose few costs on those who espouse them – even though the price paid by everyone else can be heavy. A classic example, as Braverman highlighted, is mass immigration.
The affluent Left loves to trumpet its commitment to open borders, 'safe routes' for asylum-seekers and multiculturalism as a badge of moral superiority, while portraying opponents of uncontrolled immigration as xenophobes.
The affluent Left loves to trumpet its commitment to open borders
But as research shows, the wealthy elitists are the least likely to suffer the financial and social costs of surging mass immigration.
They don't have to compete with mainly low-skilled migrants for jobs and housing.
They don't live in deprived neighbourhoods where rapid demographic change is eroding social solidarity and mutual trust.
The truth is that it is the working-class, the non-graduate majority, who are most likely to see their pay cut or have their rents pushed up by accelerating demand.
The same disastrous results from the elite's posturing can be seen on a host of other fronts. Its determination to uphold the narrative of multiculturalism's success led to a vast cover-up of sex-grooming gangs, often involving men from the Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Indian communities in towns such as Rotherham and Rochdale, while it was often vulnerable, white, working-class girls who paid a savage price for this deceit.
Similarly, residents of disadvantaged housing estates, not those of gated communities, suffer most from the elite's 'luxury belief' that criminals are actually victims of society who need support rather than punishment.
Meanwhile, women prisoners are the ones in danger from the grotesque belief that a double rapist with a penis should be housed in a women's jail because he 'identifies' as a woman.
There is also a huge amount of hypocrisy about the elite's stance, especially on the issue of the family. Liberals dismiss attempts to uphold traditional, married family life as the best way to provide stability for child-rearing.
'Families come in all shapes and sizes,' they cry as they extol hybrid arrangements and sneer at monogamy. Yet for all their ideological disdain for the traditional family structure, the new elite are the most likely to get married and have children within marriage.
A study by the Marriage Foundation discovered that 87 per cent of mothers from higher income groups are married, compared with just 24 per cent at the other end of the social scale. Once again, it is the working-class, non-graduate majority who are the most likely to suffer the effects of the breakdown in family values that the new elite condones but rarely practises.
But there is a danger for these 'luxury believers'.
The lesson from America is that even wealthy ideologues risk being caught up in the turmoil that is fanned by their own misguided theories.
In the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests, there were widespread demands from the Left to 'defund' the police. The result? A cataclysmic rise in violent crime and several Left-wing campaigners are among the roll-call of the dead.
In Britain, people are already profoundly concerned about the effect of luxury dogma. One survey showed that 66 per cent of voters support Braverman's view that uncontrolled immigration is 'an existential threat' to the West. Support, too, for transgender rights has collapsed.
As so often has been proved by history, the mainstream majority has more common sense and pragmatism than their ruling elites.
Over the coming months, the Tories have a great opportunity to expose the 'luxury belief' class as hypocrites who shamelessly try to garner status among their fellow elites without having to live, like the rest of us, with the pernicious effects of their virtue-signalling.
*************************************************
You Didn’t Really Think Democrats Cared, Did You?
It’s nice to see some residents of cities like New York and Chicago protest against their governments, shocked that their elected officials would divert so many resources from citizens to non-citizens. I’m reminded of the scene in Die Hard where Bruce Willis yells at the cop after he tosses the body of a terrorist onto his car – “Welcome to the party, pal!” It’s about damn time. But, honestly, it won’t matter. Voters in these cities are lumped into two groups: the wealthy, largely unaffected, and brainwashed people suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. Both are afflicted with the same disease, one in which they all believe Democrats genuinely give a damn about them. Suckers.
That it’s taken this many years – years of carnage, murder, crime, and drug overdoses – for residents to push back on any kind of large enough scale to notice is a testament to the ability of progressives to simply ignore the obvious, be it human suffering or human evil.
What do I mean by that? Well, thousands upon thousands of people have been murdered in Chicago, particularly on the city’s predominantly black south side. The vast majority of those murder victims and perpetrators were black, and it barely rated a mention in polite progressive circles. Residents in the area of the city where Oprah lived didn’t give a damn; that was “those other people killing each other,” not the civilized residents. As long as it was contained to the poor zip codes, they did not care.
Unemployment, economic depression, and an education system everyone involved should be ashamed of did nothing to upset the apple cart. No one was “happy” with it, per se, but they weren’t upset enough to rally on a mass scale. Every once in a while, the great unwashed would venture into the rich area, loot some stores, then retreat to their residences with a bunch of shoes, feeling like they’d stuck it to “the man.” Meanwhile, the actual man – the rich liberals who control the city – sat in their luxury apartments on Lakeshore Drive laughing. While people stole footwear and some sporting goods, billions of dollars in jewelry, art, precious metals, and cash sat twenty stories above, unmolested.
If you think these people cared about the riots, you haven’t been paying attention. Their valuables were secure; Apple and Footlocker have insurance, so who cares?
The riots weren’t against the people who empowered the city’s failed leadership; it wasn’t against anything. It was opportunism organized through social media and inspired by the same Democrat leaders who told those kids they didn’t stand a chance of success in life because of the color of their skin and definitely NOT because of the horrible education system they’d created.
It’s a hell of a racket, and the blind voting loyalty is truly just this side of Stockholm Syndrome.
But then the illegals came.
These Americans appear to be genuinely surprised that resources would be diverted from them toward people with no business being in the country. They’re shocked their absolute loyalty would be rewarded with indifference, without realizing that the decades-long pouring of government resources to numb the stagnation, that oppression in the name of “social justice” to “compensate” for a union-controlled education system better suited for the 4th world, were the reward. Just enough to get by with the constant threat of it being pulled keeps people loyal. It's not oppression, exactly, but it’s closer to that than freedom.
Now they’re pushing back, some. Seeing buildings, schools, parks, and other resources taken away and given to the illegal alien invaders. When was the last time the south side rose up? They’re now angry.
It likely won’t mean much of anything. Voters in the city had a chance last year to vote for a more sane candidate for Mayor and sided with an extremist progressive, so it’s hard to feel sorry for them. But it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Will Chicagoans eat it again, or will they say “enough”? I’m not sure they’re truly hungry anymore, but time will tell.
Until then, these upset people are going to have to go without. They’re going to have to suffer more. They elected these people. Without major cities voting for ultra-left-wing, anti-American progressive Democrats, they wouldn’t win anything. We wouldn’t be in this mess. Americans losing resources wouldn’t be suffering because they’d be better off in the first place.
As you watch these communities wrestle with the indifference and, actually, animosity Democrats hold toward them, hope they connect the last few dots in their head and realize this indifference is not new; it’s policy. It is, in fact, “progressive” to make people dependent on the government and then control them through it. It was never a concern that motivated them; it was always their own grip on power. The voting loyalty amounts to nothing; a more numerous and desirous voting bloc is moving in. I mean, you didn’t really think Democrats cared, did you?
************************************************
'Trans Women' Taking Hormones Are More Likely to Suffer ‘Severe’ Health Conditions
People who believe they are “transgender” and take so-called “gender-affirming” hormones are more likely to suffer from serious conditions, such as heart disease, compared to “cisgender” individuals,” according to a new study.
The study published in the European Journal of Endocrinology found that people who identify as “transgender” had a “significantly” higher risk of heart attacks, strokes, and a slew of other serious health conditions (via the New York Post):
The authors used health data from 2,671 trans people in their early to mid-20s living in Denmark.
They then compared the rate of heart disease seen in the trans patients to a control group of 26,700 people.
The increased risk of any type of heart disease was higher in both transgender men and women as compared with the control group, the study found.
Transgender women taking estrogen had a 93% increased risk of heart problems versus control men, and a 73% higher risk when measured against control women.
Transgender men taking testosterone had a 2.2 times increased risk of cardiovascular ailments compared with control men, and a 63% increased risk compared with control women.
High blood pressure and abnormal blood fats were the most common cardiovascular problems observed in the trans study subjects.
The study also found that biological males who believe they are transgender women are up to 95 percent more likely to suffer from heart disease.
“For trans women, hormone treatments such as estrogen will increase fat mass and lower lean body mass, and increased estrogen is usually associated with increased risk of autoimmune disease and inflammation,” Dr. Dorte Glintborg, the lead study author from Denmark’s Odense University Hospital, reportedly wrote.
Townhall previously reported how many left-wing organizations and lawmakers have expressed support for allowing children to undergo this type of so-called “gender affirming care.” One organization in particular, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, was exposed for providing irreversible, experimental transgender surgeries for children because it’s profitable.
Following these shocking revelations, GOP Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance announced legislation that would outlaw transgender surgeries for minors completely.
“Under no circumstances should doctors be allowed to perform these gruesome, irreversible operations on underage children. With this legislation, we have an opportunity to save countless young Americans from a lifetime of suffering and regret,” Vance said of the legislation.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/madelineleesman/2023/10/07/trans-women-heart-disease-n2629471
****************************************My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See 
No comments:
Post a Comment