There’s nothing the British media love more than to destroy someone, then build them back up.
Just as you can be utterly annihilated by the fairly trivial, you can be rehabilitated from the borderline heinous.
This process is now beginning with Keir Starmer, and it is already very annoying. Tim Farron claimed “the vitriol and hatred towards him is just weird”. Matthew Syed came out with the bizarre assertion “Starmer was hated. Says far more about the electorate than the man”, and concluded “Starmer was a good man leading an ungovernable country”.
And you can find many more examples currently stinking up X.
All of it, of course, is nonsense. Starmer was not a good man. And to those of us with our moral compass still intact, this was immediately clear following the horror of the Southport murders.
Starmer’s total lack of empathy for a nation stunned and disgusted by what had taken place was striking. He seemed furious that not everyone was following ‘the process’. And, with an efficiency seldom seen when it comes to actually improving people’s lives, had as many people locked up as possible.
This is not to say, of course, that rioting is the answer. But his lack of understanding of, if not outright hatred for, the British people only encouraged the unrest. Where he needed to say ‘I get it, but let’s be calm’, he went with ‘far-Right thuggery’.
But it’s not just me saying this. Tim Shipman confirms in the Spectator that: “His second foundational error, according to voters in focus groups, was his handling of the Southport killings of three young girls… it still comes up to this day, unprompted.”
At the time, various MSM goons claimed Starmer had handled it well. But that’s because they exist in the same bubble as Starmer, and, like him, barely acknowledge the existence of the British people, particularly the white working class, unless it is with a passing disgust, like something you have to wipe off your shoe.
But, although the current slow-moving coup happening in our Government shows we barely live in a democracy, you still can’t quite get away with that level of open contempt for the people who put you in power.
Shipman calls this the “second foundational error”. The first was winter fuel. In a poll I annoyingly can’t find now, this was shown to be the policy voters were both most aware of and hated the most (Southport, pace the Starmer sycophants, also scored highly on both metrics).
Then of course we have the Mandelson fiasco, which was entirely predictable to absolutely everyone in the country except Starmer and his football mates.
Syed doesn’t mention any of this, because the “ungovernable” memo has gone out, just as the ‘handled it well’ memo went out over Southport, and the ‘decent man’ memo has been deployed with increasingly desperate frequency. Such clichés make clever people sound very stupid, and it is left to the gammony thugs not allowed in the mainstream media (at your service) to set the record straight.
Starmer was not and is not decent. As his perfectly apt nickname implies, he was flagrantly two-tier. Just three days ago he was commenting on a violent incident in a way he would have urged everyone not to if it had been done by one of his precious ‘communities’, rather than a white man. “The suspect appears to be motivated by anti-Muslim hatred,” he posted. Ah, so we’re doing speculation now? What happened to the ‘process’?
The post has 47 thousand replies, and I’m sure you can guess the tone of them. Starmer has driven everyone to the edge of their collective tether, and pushed the country further towards civil unrest. This could have been avoided or at least tempered by a sensitive approach. Instead, he doubled down on blatant unfairness, either through stupidity, or sheer hatred of the native British.
Of course it’s true that the state of our state makes governing extremely difficult. Not so much for the reasons Syed et al. cite regarding the unrealistic expectations of voters (though there is that) but due to the bureaucratic quagmire of Whitehall that Dominic Cummings spoke out about (again) the other day.
Cummings claims:
That is why you see two things happening on the Left now: one, the plan to change the electoral system to PR (proportional representation), and then, secondly, discussions about how you encode protections for the civil service to make it extremely difficult to actually do what I’m talking about. What they’re thinking is — and it’s actually logical from their point of view — that if you pass certain kinds of legislation defending the current Whitehall system, and then you do PR, you make it extremely hard for anybody coming in to actually change anything. You completely embed the current catastrophic situation, which is what they want to do.
Thus the trouble with using the byzantine nightmare of the system as a defence of Starmer is that, while he may have struggled to get certain policies through (probably more with his own backbench than the Civil Service) Starmer is very much on the side of the Blob.
He was the latest attempt by the Regime to prevent real change, or do anything that voters actually want. In a way he felt like the last attempt, but the spawning of Burnham proves that they will never stop pumping out these people and their drab policies, in a kind of endless, infuriating meme-based bartering. ‘What’s that, you want lower immigration? Best I can do is breakfast clubs. Okay, okay, I hear you — how about jogging to the Stone Roses and an improved bus system in the North? Wow, you’re a hard man to please…’
Burnham will soon end up hated, and his already irritating selfie with the strategically-placed Labour Fembots (whom they still don’t quite trust to lead) will age about as well as the dancing nurses of the Covid era.
But he still probably won’t be quite as hated as Starmer, who managed to combine a soulless, jobsworth vibe with a lack of effectiveness, thus leaving the entire country wondering what the point of him was. In the end, even his own party concluded that there wasn’t one.
At least Starmer will now have time to write his autobiography. Though it’s hard to imagine what will actually be in it. This is a man, remember, who resolutely claimed he didn’t dream at night, and appeared to have very little inner life during the day either.
I have suggested a selection of titles for the prospective book, the most popular of which seems to be I, Keir. For a man as forgiving and charismatic as a plank of wood, and as deep as a set of flatpack furniture instructions, it is not a bad shout.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I’m on countdown. It’s 1148 days to the last date by which they must have a General Election
Starmers autobiography will be up there with the best-
Megan’s best self
Andrew Mountbatten’s – I have no recollection
Peter Mandelson’s – what did you expect?
Nicola Sturgeon’s- jewellery? Where did that come from?
And don’t forget Starver the Dicktaker and the Ginger Reiver taking the knee.
Says it all! Except I think Burnham will be worse, full of nonsense and self belief
“I Kier” will fly off the shelf.
Both terms are singular. One book will fly off of one shelf, once.
No, it will be bought to be given as Christmas presents for people not liked, who might otherwise not get the hint, like the collected speeches of Gordon Brown.
Its simple, burn the evidence burnham is already hated, he’s not even PM yet and acting like we are his personal servants, he’s corrupt, clearly hates young white british girls, and has plans to bring more unwanted illegals in, Starmer on steroids, well done Makerfield……
Of course it could all be his undoing, if he is challenged?????
May be brutal but I have very little sympathy for his wife – I cannot for the life of me think his robotic personality was a reason for her choice of men – but I do feel sad for the children, who have him as a father and will learn to know how thoroughly despised their father is throughout the land…and he does not seem well liked in foreign climes, either.
She has a choice to walk away, they are tied to him forever.
And Starver boasted about his children watching the sordid anti white TV show with an age restriction.
Typical 2Tier behaviour we have come to expect from him.
His legacy to me will always be killing off free speech. By jailing Lucy Connelly for an angry tweet that would have been normal pub banter anywhere across the country. And then doubling down by proposing Landlords monitor conversations in public bars! That’s unacceptable in any democracy, except ours apparently!
Remember that he told Hermer to put pressure on Lucy and get her into clook as quick as possible.
An utterly evil little weasel’
clink
Thanks for the article that describes the soulless automaton that is Starmer. He perfectly represented the class of people that govern us, they do not see us as a country or a people, just a managed piece of the jigsaw of the globalist system. Unfortunately replacement with a more superficially likeable person in Burham but with no fundamental change, will just feel like gaslighting of the British people and will be equally infuriating.
Brilliant epitaph!
and same traits going back.
Starmer is the Marxist traitor that has accelerated the systematic destruction of my country, my culture, and my people. The only good thing he can do is die. And if that’s what he sets his sights on I wish him all the luck in the world.
only if the method of demise is painful though.
It is unacceptable to refer to “unrealistic expectations of voters”. While most readers on this site are well aware of it most of the public still believe politicians. They still believe the failure to deliver is caused by some super natural power, rather than the two real reasons.
The real reasons political promises are not kept is the speaker never intended to deliver and many of them cannot be delivered.
Stop insinuating that voters are at fault over the failures of the self regarding elites.
I, Keir……. what a brilliant title for his biography. Not only does it resonate with the woodenness of the man, but it also recalls Asimov’s brilliant novel, ‘I, Robot’, which picks up on Starmer’s robotic qualities.
The stifled sobs of self pity gave the game away.
He has never loved this country, only himself.
The lives of service personnel overseas defending this country at risk due to inadequate/scarce equipment? Couldn’t care less. Let’s spend the money on net zero/welfare/train drivers. That’s where the votes are…
What insouciance. What self indulgent pap. What a dreadful specimen of Blair’s Britain neo-aristocracy.
Wouldn’t it be great if we never heard another peep out of the frightful little bovril ever again…
well said. He deserves nothing.
… and as useful as yet another spare allen key.
My son has just pointed out that that would indicate he is a tool.
Why so Wan, Keir
This is becoming quite a chant with the liberal left, that the British electorate are a horrible group, with a few wondrous exceptions, and it is the fault of the horrible British electorate that this useless individual failed (ignore, of course, his constant battles with the left wing of his own party, who are part of the wondrous group). Well, here’s a thing that Starmer, Hermer, Hope Not Hate etc etc seem to have totally failed to understand about the British. We are a tolerant group, we are a caring group, we maintain our stiff upper lips and don’t go easily to the streets to protest (unlike our Gallic cousins, whom the liberal class seem much more enamoured with). But, keep calling us racist and you know what, eventually we’ll just say, sod it, you want me to be racist, how’s this for a response. Call our mild protest extreme right wing thuggery every time and you know what, eventually we’ll become thuggish. Stop our ability to speak our minds, read what our fellow ordinary Brits want to say and we will protest even louder and harder. Keep trying to screw the lid down on the pressure cooker that you… Read more »
I was astounded when we met up with friends recently when they claimed to still like Keir Starmer. They are not default lefty bots either. But they had been members of the lanyard class.
I chose not to have a ten minute argument, which would have spoiled our meet-up, although I did mention Stumblers many U-turns and relaunches. Fell on deaf ears.
I have come to the conclusion that people hold different views of the world and are mostly happy to exist within those views without much analysis – and reflexively maintain them against contrary opinions.
But not so clear to those already convinced he is ‘one of us’.
Yes, there is such a thing as a lost cause.
“ungovernable” – reminiscent of Hilary Clinton’s “deplorables” and the Keiser’s “contemptibles”.
The “ungovernables” in current context are “the Far Right”.
Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD),
Does that describe a Kier Starmer?
And if it does, does it describe a “good” man?
But he only exhibits these characteristics selectively. So I would diagnose prejudiced and nasty.
The banality of incompetence perhaps?
Lets not forget the Inheritance Tax crime against farmers.
Pretty predictable and easy to explain.
The eatablishment is at war with the general popilation. They want a set of things that the population don’t want and are resisting.
When the figurehead they put to corral the plebs into submission looks to be failing, the establishment mercilessly deposes the figurehead and gets a replacement.
But ultimately he is one of them and so needs to be picked up from his beating, nursed and rehabilitated back into some position within the establishment machinery.
Not new. A recurring pattern..