Friday, 15 September 2017

The new Nazis in the British asylum

Watching, rather than commenting, on the fascist takeover of the Tory party has been an attempt at preserving sanity in recent weeks.  Theresa May, a disgusting amalgam of Imelda Marcos, Adolf Hitler and the kind of suburban curtain-twitcher who should be burned in effigy on a regular basis, is not even prepared to defend the seditious coup that she has deemed necessary to implement what she, or her puppet-masters, define as the "will of the people".

As with Hitler, the power grab emerged after an election reverse.  The arrogance and hubris with which the Tories went into the campaign earlier in the year becomes more monstrous and hilarious with time; assuming that the divine right to govern would be bestowed upon the shower of criminals, traitors and ignoramuses that make up most of her Parliamentary conspirators was a miscalculation that she now regards as a minor inconvenience.  A Prime Minister that assumes that the response to a divisive election is to subvert representation is unfit to hold office.  She should be driven from it. 

To propose legislation that removes scrutiny, consolidates power in the hands of Ministers and which is then gerrymandered through a usurpation of the Standing Committee process is treasonable. If her Enabling Act is not thrown out or mangled through amendment, her administration becomes seditious.  No other representative or constitutional body in the formerly United Kingdom need feel bound by it, and should obstruct, impede and challenge what amounts to a fascist takeover.  This is not the action of a governing party, more a desperate junta afraid of the consequences of its actions.

The most salient point that has been made about the May seizure of power is that had this been carried out in reverse, for example by a Labour government, the very cheerleaders who try to face down all resistance as the work of saboteurs and wreckers would have been up in arms.  May knows that her ability to control and influence the situation is negligible, caused by her own inadequacy both personally and political, and that she has nothing to gain beyond personal vanity and discounts at fashion shops, while allowing the country to be sold out to interests who have no desire to be either accountable or identified.

This is the route to fascism.  We are now heading there faster than even the most pessimistic would have considered plausible.  Resisting and opposing are necessary now, but the time is coming where frustration and outright non-compliance may become the imperative - moving into the illegitimate norms that she seems content to inflict as part of her complete inability either to lead or to recognise the damage that her coterie and paymasters want to inflict. 

Tuesday, 25 July 2017

Kicking the Tories when they're down

Despite the venomous ectoplasm emanating from the disgraced, odious Liam Fox, the principal driver of objective media coverage of the Brexit treachery is the reality of its treacherous imbecility.  A government, seeking to lead and promote the national interest, would, after persistent economic damage and political humiliation, would, were it not composed of the inadequate, the treacherous and the criminal, be seeking both to change course and to explain and shape public opinion.

Instead, about the only spectacle that the sorry ordure that passes for government presents to us is that of venal infighting.  A Prime Minister, wounded by hubris, incompetence and the prospect of defenestration at a time not of her choosing, who cannot provide a definition of either the national interest or articulate how her administration is capable of delivering any policy, and who is personally responsible for much of the ugly English particularism that defines her government, should be on the ropes - being mercilessly hounded for her failings and fearing the wrath of the betrayed electorate rather than her own party.

From the moment that the grubby deal with the DUP was signed, in what passes for Tory blood, May has demonstrated neither respect for constitution or the national interest.  Blatant bribery, collusion with sectarian throwbacks and a rickety Parliamentary position should have pointed the way to an opposition breakthrough.  The rage and despair that the current suspended animation provokes is an invitation for political tacticians to peel off those Tories who are appalled by the right-wing, authoritarian drift of their own party, and who would be capable of defeating May on issues where even ten seconds' inductive reasoning would suggest that the national interest trumps partisan posturing.

Perhaps the lack of political memory and education is a problem.  From the rhetoric emanating from the Corbyn cheerleaders, they would appear to consider that "one more heave" is the only political strategy, and they would rather pursue sectarian battles with others opposed to the Tories than provide leadership and consensus.   This does not increase credibility, as the key function of opposition is to harry the government out of office - and, where there is no Commons majority, this is as important as maintaining and promoting their hatred for those in their own party and outside who do not share their particular road to salvation.

As Parliament is now taking its summer break, May does not consider her position to be vulnerable from that angle.  Far more concerned about the febrile, simmering atmosphere in her own vile bunch of chancers, she will be hoping that plotting will be unreported.  As the current Tory party resembles a bizarre conflation of a chimpanzee's tea party, the 1980s Albanian Communists and a sieve, this is about as likely as a coherent European negotiating strategy awaiting.  For each Tory saviour being promoted, be it Davies, Johnson, Fox, Leadsom or even Amber Rudd, the desperation is palpable, and the damage each would do could be exploited by an Opposition determined to seize the initiative.

For those coalescing around the need for opposition, there are tentative signs of encouragement.  The coherence of positions being set out by the Liberal Democrats, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens is such that their adoption does not need to be partisan.  In a time of national crisis there are Labour and Tory figures who could adopt these without blinking or the accusation of partisan betrayal.  There is no time for purity, or the constant mantric idiocy of berating the Liberal Democrats for their participation in Cameron's Coalition - which was a mistake, but which prevented much of the whole sorry, meretricious mess that we are now enduring.

The decline and fall of the UK is accelerating, and there is no good news on the horizon.  This should be the moment at which there is a clear push to name the guilty and prepare for a cold, hard reckoning of what needs to be done to restore sanity and promote the national interests.  Labour leaders are drifting into complicity with the Tories, and should calculate the risks - as frustrating the "will of the people" is a facile soundbite now, but collusion brings the risk of being the scapegoats when the Tories turn looking for someone to blame when the further reality hits home.

A summer of discontent and incompetence, leavened by national humiliation and a government sustained by bigotry, is hardly the picture that May painted for herself three months ago.  Time to keep up the pressure, and prepare to bring down the traitors.  Tumbrils and lampposts need to be on the agenda, at least metaphorically, to avoid the inevitable consequence of not taking action before the breakdown of economy, politics and society that the Tories appear to regard as acceptable collateral damage when holding onto illusory power.  Engage and destroy - the patriotic outcome.

Thursday, 6 July 2017

The paradoxical coalition

A wounded administration is still a dangerous beast.  Impotent, illegitimate and corrupt, the Conservative/DUP bastard provides Theresa May with political cover if and when Labour extricate themselves from the morbid engagement that makes them far more valuable to the Tories than any shady deal, being played as the Tories take further steps towards the cliff-edge and the abyss that awaits them as the consequences of their policies hit home.

There is a much more upbeat tone around those of us who believe that the referendum settled nothing - inadequately executed for internal Tory consumption and then debate constricted in the fascist tones of populism and the inevitability of an outcome that the serial liars and traitors (Daniel Hannan is merely one of the most egregious of this sub-species) portrayed as entirely unthinkable - the summary ejection and the realisation that the European project can proceed to impose its own terms, while music to the ears of Trump and Putin, is already impacting on the economy, the psychology and the viability of the nation.

No time for triumphalism, though, because the debate is not rational.  There has been not one attempt to articulate what the purported benefits of implementing a suicidal strategy would be, principally because there is nothing in the cupboard beyond dribbling propaganda and a feebly-articulated desire for a simpler, nastier world.  In the face of challenge, all the fools and captured charlatans can come up with is that the referendum was a democratic vote, and that therefore it remains immutable.  If that is the case, can we please return to 1975 and apply the same logic?

Most rational people, and representatives, can see the folly and stupidity of a blind pursuing of a reckless policy.  The General Election provided a freshly-elected Commons, with MPs who are not bound by the decisions of the previous House, and who should, if they are discharging non-partisan responsibility that their oath implies, be looking out for the interests of the British nations.  Where a political position is both superseded and insane, then there should be no shame in rowing back from the brink - and, as has been demonstrated by the recent election, the power of the hard right plutocrats is diminishing.

This does need new thinking - and to reflect that there is no settled faction within the Commons.  MPs are representatives not delegates, both of their constituency and their parties.  Given that, despite the apparent acquiescence of the party, much of the Momentum machine is now issuing threats of deselection to anyone who dares question the Coalition of Dishonour that Corbyn is leading alongside the far right Brexit loons in the Tories and DUP, this will require a change of approach, and the kind of cross-party bloc that has not been seen before in Westminster politics.

We have moved beyond the phase of second referendums and procedural debates at the centre into the existential crisis of a bankrupt policy and an amoral, seditious administration.  There is a solid phalanx of pro-European engagement represented in Parliament, the SNP, Liberal Democrats, Plaid, Greens are in a pole position to focus as a bloc to attract dissenters from the main parties, without obligating support on every issue.  Having a clear, disruptive and challenging strategy to bring forward an alternative course on Brexit, and peeling off both Tory and Labour votes when necessary, would be a genuine act of opposition in a legislature where, on the central issue, there is a monolith thwarting debate and claiming a mandate that does not exist either in constitutional theory or the rapidly-changing base of public opinion.

This is not a time to assume that rationality will prevail, even in the face of evidence.  If there is a face-saving climbdown to be had, that would be, in the short-term, better than rubbing the May nose in the ordure that her behaviour deserves - revenge and realignment need to wait as part of a long game.  The meretricious and the downright criminal will get their comeuppance, but we cannot afford either hubris or triumph in the near future.  Until Labour recognises the opposition role is there for the taking, it is quite possible that Corbyn and May can thwart the changing will of the people.

Sunday, 2 July 2017

If Labour is the answer, then what is the question?

For all the rhetoric, Labour is still in denial.  The pathetic mewling of Emily Thornberry, justifying the sacking of three front-bench politicians would be ironic if the charge of "virtue signalling" were not much more closely identified with the tendency to assume that you can turn the political clock back half a century to a world where certainty and Labour vanguardism could still be projected without a sense of participating in one of the interminable television compilations that pad out uninspiring schedules.

Labour's support is brittle and may become increasingly grudging.  Evidence from recent polling suggests that their voters are sceptical of the leadership's gavotte of idiocy with Theresa May on Europe - the paradox is that this chimes with an instinctive grasp that rebalancing the economy and society cannot proceed in parallel with the destructive idiocy that Corbyn and his acolytes parade as the "will of the people".  The new Stalinists parade their single interpretation of truth, pushing the trope that dissent or recognition that the world moves on will undermine the coming revolution, with much the same unevidenced fervour demonstrated by the snivelling Brexit right.

In a more febrile political world, where old loyalties are mutable and where the urgency is to resist a right-wing, corporatist coup and rolling back conservatism, Labour's tactics may well turn out to be delusional.  The advance of insurgency politics provided the upset that was inflicted on conventional politics by the General Election, but it could equally result in a further shift when it becomes clear that the emotional punch packed by Labour's articulation of the grievance and frustration after forty years of Thatcherite lunacy is not matched by adaptability, empathy or the ability to build wider coalitions.

The Westminster electoral system punishes insurgency from outside its hegemony.  Labour's rise in 2017 may be pushing the limits, but there is no likelihood of a British En Marche emerging in the near future at national level within these confines.  However it is equally unlikely that the "one more heave" scenario will propel Labour into power without a further collapse in the SNP and Tory votes - the latter are doing their utmost to avoid the former through their bribery of the DUP and the vacuous exclusion of the devolved nations from discussions of the common future.  Peak Tory decline does not automatically translate into the forward march of Labour.

Politicians are, generally correctly, distrusted.  Blair and Cameron epitomised the sense of entitlement  - rigid party discipline and control of messaging worked where you had majorities that would permit the Corbyns of this world to rebel and maintain your control.  Cameron and May, in thrall to the cretinous, sub-normal fascists of the DUP and the Peter Bone tendency, have demonstrated that the limits of party boundaries and party wrangling betray the national interest to the extent where arraigning them for treason is more than just a debating proposition.

Corbyn does not appear to have learned this lesson, with his attack-dog apologists spewing out more venom over 49 MPs who voted against the whip than they do against the Tories.  Easy targets go largely ignored - the corruption and venality of Tory councils and their outsourcing, blame-ducking should have been the single dominant story this week.  While we all want to see the end of this squatting, squalid maladministration, a march on Kensington and Chelsea Town Hall and the defenestration not merely of the Cabinet but the entire putrid horde of Tories would have resonated much more than an internal spat.  Sadiq Khan's call for Commissioners to run the council, and any others found to have negligently endangered their citizens, would have resonated even more if it had been embraced by the national leadership.

When you have a squatting government, without a mandate or a policy, the aim should be to harry them at all costs.  It is not virtue-signalling to test the water on the convictions of those within the Tories who watch in impotent rage as the lunatics sell out our future.  It is the act of an irresponsible egotism to assume that cross-party and pluralistic approaches are somehow a sign of weakness, and that the only legitimate expression of opposition comes from Labour - where other parties and opinions are subsumed within a single, intolerant narrative where dissent is punished.  This is not strength, but an insecurity that threatens the future.

Adapting to the next eighteen months, where, as the folly and consequences of its misinterpretation of the referendum result unfold, is a challenge that Labour needs to rise to - rather than hoping that the blame will fall solely on the Tories.  Every time that the leadership permits the Tories an uncontested victory will make this even harder than it is already.  Labour is already assuming that its dominance will perpetuate the holding of noses and continued support from those who oppose the evil of the current government.  In six months' time, as the consequences of this approach become clearer, this will be a much harder sell.

This depressing prospect could undermine all the good that the opposition parties achieved in the wider context - shifting debate away from competitive tax cuts towards the definition of society and its obligations.  More people voted for parties of hope, rather than nihilism - and unless there is a recognition that Labour's future prospects depend on both mobilisation and generosity, as well as honesty around the consequences of economic catastrophe, the fragmentation and regrouping may hand the Tories not just 2022 but the next decade on a plate.  Complicity in this does not require uncritical rallying around Labour, but an honest acceptance of debate.  Three weeks after a great success, Labour is already stuttering.

Wednesday, 28 June 2017

The Corbyn conundrum

The power of the cult in British politics is growing.  The adherents of immolation who promote the myth of Tory Brexit, usually distinguishable by a monobrowed rejection of any sentence that contains more than one clause and words with more than one syllable, continue their selfish path to destruction, now supported by a peace-threatening bribe to a tribe of Neanderthal thugs.  At the same time, there remain a core of Jeremy Corbyn's followers who have a messianic urge to both claim the right to govern and to dismiss the concerns and plurality that has led to his current near-success.

My views on the Tories would remain constant, were they not continually finding new depths of amoral cupidity into which they can descend.  It is a sad reflection of the corruption of discourse that Philip Hammond now seems like a reasonable, well-adjusted paragon of the centre-right, although his liberation by May's monumental blunder is at least resulting in some subtle, well-argued baiting of the fascists, lunatics and dribblers epitomised by the quisling tendency.  Yet when even defenders of the right find it necessary to distance themselves from the blatant blackmail being foisted on May by the DUP, there is a febrility and uncertainty that renders the path ahead remarkably interesting but deeply unnerving.

One of the most satisfying elements of the General Election result is the extent to which the hubris and arrogance on all sides did not result in a decisive outcome.  You would be forgiven, however, for assuming that Labour had, by not winning, marched to victory on a level not seen since 1945.  There is also very little reflection taking place, at least by the Labour leadership, as to the various reasons that secured a vote for them and the avoidance of the annihilation that May and Crosby had sketched out for them.  Unless this is taken on board, then this support is not a plateau for garnering votes but a peak with an equally unappealing precipice.

Even with the apparent reinforcement of a two-party system, the Commons remains unrepresentative and totally unsuitable for a modern democratic chamber.  The only viable combinations of MPs to form a party-based administration are the DUP/Tory coalition of bigotry, or a grand coalition involving Tory and Labour.  Hardly flexible, or reflective of the advance of the centre-left at the expense of UKIP, which is the under-reported analysis of this election.  Labour cannot assume that "one more heave" will secure a majority, nor that this is a desirable outcome without commitment to causes that reach beyond tribal boundaries.

The psephologists will research the extent to which Labour's support was bolstered by those who shared two imperatives - stopping May from having a free ride for five years, and creating the possibility for a contemplation of how to minimise or eliminate the damage from the European folly.  The extent to which this group of voters is engaged and prepared to continue to support Labour will be critical, as it contains people who would, in a preferential world, choose them over the Tories but would otherwise support other parties.  This may be a substantial percentage of voters, whose support was not based around enthusiasm but a recognition that in a screwed-up system the needs of the hour had to dominate.

Corbyn is popular and playing an effective outsider card at the moment.  However, this does not necessarily translate into a simple path to power.  Scotland's snubbing through the DUP deal, and the tainting of Labour's brand through its complicity in anti-SNP propaganda may well play badly in the weeks and months to come.  Anger about austerity and perpetuation of the status quo could easily tip against Labour once it becomes clear that their endorsing of the Tory Brexit line will reduce any incoming government's room for manoeuvre.  Whether Labour can position itself around a more sensible and pragmatic position that allows for rowing back from their complicity in causing the mess is a key test - and galvanising and encouraging backbench revolt in the Tory ranks has to be a priority alongside continuing to campaign - the echo chamber's adulation may not be enough if there is a bitter second election in the near future.

Much of what was in the Labour manifesto was mainstream social democracy, and should be welcomed as such.  It is why support remains high, and needs to be built on - although there is part of me that considers it significantly less adventurous than the SDP/Liberal Alliance platform of 1983, the potential to reset the political centre slightly to the left of Tony Blair would be a welcome achievement.  Political reform and internationalism cannot be forgotten as ideas that underpin a continued level of support for Labour from beyond its core base, nor should the concept of informal collaboration to undermine the Tories.  I want Labour, and by extension Corbyn, to succeed.  At this stage I am still not convinced that a heroic failure will provide the basis on which the final destruction of the Tory hegemony can be achieved.  It would be ironic if they achieve it themselves, which seems as plausible at the moment as the determinist momentum that some of the more starry-eyed on the left seem to think sufficient.

Sunday, 25 June 2017

The patriotic road to Tory Downfall

Whenever Andrea Leadsom is inflicted on the public, the Tories are in trouble.  Her sole function appears to be that of making Theresa May look as though there might have once been a flicker of humanity and common decency.  That this is at least partially successful demonstrates what a disgusting travesty of a politician Leadsom is.  A year ago, she was pretending that she was a suitable leader because someone (alas) had impregnated her - now she was seen to emerge from her sewer to berate the media for not being sufficiently uncritical about the rapid unravelling of her lies and false prospectus on Britain's future.

Far right lunatics such as Leadsom do not like the concept of free speech.  In a world where their agenda is dictated by a mixture of off-shore oligarchs, foreign powers and a self-interest that will prove suicidal, the idea that the press and the public have not just a right but a duty to challenge them is anathema.  Bread and circuses would be too much of an indulgence of the plebs, so hectoring and contempt become the staple currencies.

This hysteria demonstrates a regime that knows it is on the cusp of being found out.  From the hubris two months ago, where May's all-conquering authoritarianism would drive out all dissent and kill off parliamentary opposition for ever, there is now an impotent husk - humiliated by its own arrogance and now a laughing-stock beyond the comprehension of even the most pessimistic of the Project Fear alumni.  A Queen's Speech which, for two years, demonstrates the extent to which the Tories are now trapped at the mercy of events, and which will haunt their hopefully-troubled dreams, and the ongoing revelations of the extent to which public safety has been compromised over the last three decades, are both manifestations of a regime in denial.

Patriotism and responsibility go hand in hand.  MPs declare allegiance to the Crown and, by extension, the citizenry on whom the existence of a government machine depends.  Their duty is not to act as facilitators of a national immolation - and to provide leadership.  This goes beyond party boundaries - and especially where there is no overarching expression of public opinion.  Politicians cannot abdicate their duties, and will be found out if they do so.  Nor can they lie - as May has been doing consistently to claim that the election result gives her and her henchpeople an unfettered mandate to pursue their ends without either complaint or scrutiny.

It is difficult to envisage a nation committing such an act of egregious folly and self-destruction without external events conspiring against it.  With the exception of a few rogue states, there is not one of the UK's erstwhile allies that would have wished such a farrago of destruction and incompetence upon it.   A rational administration would be looking to mitigate and row back from inflicting damage upon its citizens, especially now that the normal processes of representative government have yielded not even a qualified consent to the course that the Tories are hell-bent on navigating the nations towards.

There may be closer analogies between the last days of the Third Reich and the Tories than is comfortable for anyone to contemplate.  For the avoidance of doubt, I am not claiming that there are many in the Conservative camp who are out-and-out Nazis, but that the behaviour patterns encouraging and abetting needless national destruction are sadly aligning themselves.  At least we still have freedom to challenge and to express dissent, which is why Leadsom's bilge and bile are such an alarming manifestation.

For most of the last eighteen months of the Second World War in Europe, it was clear that the forces lined up against Germany would prevail.  There is a similar, albeit less sinister, imbalance today in the farce that David Davis presides over.  The denial of the realities and the consequences of actions, for fear of displeasing and upsetting the leadership bunker, and the destruction of the basic pillars of civilisation proceeds regardless, and without any apparent rationality.  Working to Theresa is not in the national interests.

Leadsom's vileness at least provides confirmation that there is some form of collective cultism ongoing.  The Tories, squatting, impotent and hostage to both internal and external defenestration, are a symbol of the extent to which the darkness and evil of a regime that believes itself to be both superior and unchallengeable can fall.  It is to be hoped that the consequences of this sedition and treachery form the basis for action, and that the liars, scoundrels and thieves will be kicked out without the social and material destruction that has often accompanied the will of the people finally being unleashed.

Friday, 23 June 2017

Dacre, May and the legitimisation of terrorism

I am ashamed to hold a British passport.  A year after the referendum, Theresa May has turned the United Kingdom into a vile object of derision.  A major, albeit declining economy, and the enabler of much of the Enlightenment is now a horrible place to live, embarrassing to admit to citizenship of, and heading for a self-inflicted catastrophe that arrogance and ignorance from a government with no authority and a leadership of fourth-rate, self-serving, corrupt narcissists will exacerbate rather than turn round.  What a time this is to be alive.

A country like this needs scapegoats.  I am proud to be a saboteur, a wrecker, an enemy of the people and a citizen of nowhere - all epithets freely bestowed upon those who dare to challenge the illegitimate and idiotic direction of government.  I cannot, along with millions of others, give up the essential optimism that civilisation and intelligence have some weight against the oncoming fascist storm, or that the elusive "will of the people" requires me to modify my views, or to refrain from engagement.  It is tempting, to watch the cretins and the vandals at play, to leave the field to them - but the knowledge that when the chickens return to roost they will turn on those who either failed to warn them or who warned them only too clearly requires, at least for self-respect, to challenge and to resist the hegemony of darkness.

This week has seen the failure of government to protect its citizens, and a spineless, patronising and totally inadequate response by our alleged Prime Minister.  In order to provide relief to those who survived an inferno, hundreds of frightened, dispossessed people, an aid package is announced that amounts to two-thirds of the money given to the stoat-like fascist Jacob Rees-Mogg to refurbish his ancestral home.  In the aftermath of an event that defines the social and political divide, May goes to visit the top brass of the fire service, not the heroic rank-and-file who will reek of smoke, death and proletarian outrage.

The leader of the council responsible for the building where the inferno took place, a Nick Paget-Brown, remains in post.  He claims he offered his resignation to the borough's Tory cabinet, but they refused to accept it - the rats and vermin that infest the modern municipal Conservative party would not wish to set a precedent for accepting that with power, inflated allowances and the potential for endless graft comes the obligation to take responsibility.  Across London, from Westminster to Barnet, the leaderships ,whose usually-undeclared aim of social cleansing and the privatisation of essential services is now glaringly apparent, must be quaking at the possibility that they may not be able to hide behind officers for much longer.

When political tectonics shift, as they do, those whose vested interests defend the existing order are upset.  The disgusting tactics of the Tories (which appear to be moving towards yet another criminal investigation for electoral malpractice, even before the 2015 prosecution is concluded) have created the legitimisation of fascist mob rule that is expressed in every slavering excretion from the orifices of the Daily Mail.  Paul Dacre, who, in self-awareness constantly bandies the "c" word around his playpen, would, in a decent world, be arraigned for incitement and seditious libel.  Instead he is feted by the Tories and allowed to ride rampant over any ethics or honesty.

Dacre and his rag are part of the fatwa culture that provides far right extremists with their pseudo-justification.  Last weekend's terrorist attack on people returning from a mosque is the logical culmination of a long and dishonourable road to normalising hatred.  Over the past decade, Dacre has presided over a coarsening and deliberate degradation of journalism - identified alongside his even more uncouth comrades at the Scum for hate speech - and acting as an unelectable tribune that encourages demonisation and targeting of groups who are both minorities and vulnerable.  Over the last year he has crossed the line from being a skilful, far right propagandist to the position of caliph for the fascist minority.

The far right, as Dacre epitomises, are frightened.  What they are unleashing is on a scale that they cannot control, and threatens both their legitimacy and their hegemony.  Their apologia for the Finsbury Park terrorist was that he was "self-radicalised" - whereas in the case of the equally vile Islamist terrorists they suggest that there is something wrong with all adherents of that faith and all those who are part of the Muslim community.  He is desperately hoping that this solecism is not identified - as the legacy of a year of vilification may not be that his enemies are routed but that we turn on his evil empire.

When the Guardian published a provocative, but pertinent cartoon on Tuesday, pointing out the potential connections between right wing media outlets and the motivations of a terrorist murderer, Dacre lost his rag in public.  A bizarre "editorial" attacked the paper for its temerity in questioning the impact of the Daily Blackshirt on creating and legitimising the far right's entitlement, based on lies and half-truths that would make Goebbels blush.  Dacre lied about his links to Mail Online, probably because it continues to use the idiot Katie Hopkins to spread racist, ignorant bile and have not even had the grace to sack her for a constant parade of incitement, lies and sedition.  For a man whose organ has attempted to stifle the rule of law and to create the Poujadist equivalent of Sharia law, this is a depth of stupidity that suggests that the rat might finally be cornered.

Meanwhile, his grip is loosening.  May and Davis are now facing up to the fact that the European Union now holds all the cards, and that over the summer whatever English hubris remains will be deflated.  A government with no majority, so that its legislative programme is as limp and flaccid as its moral compass, has yet, two weeks on, to do a deal with the flat-earth dinosaurs of the Democratic Unionist Party, at the same time as its arrogance destroys the Good Friday agreement.  Hardly a great advertisement for the right - even before its stumbling, pathetic response to an avoidable disaster.

Britain desperately needs a break - and whenever one thinks that the darkest hour has come a new form of immolation emerges.  May, Dacre, Johnson and others are all scrapings from the bottom of the same septic tank, and the nations are crying out for leadership.  A British Macron is required - or at least the conditions for a break from tribal politics.  That is what Dacre and his scummy cohorts fear - a genuine reform of politics where their vested interests are given appropriate weight before being ignored.  The darkness we are now enduring might, with appropriate direction, lead to a realisation that power is achieved through citizen consent and engagement, and a revolution that turns out the hypocrites and hate-mongers that May and Dacre now represent.