Andrew Naughtie

Sultana and Corbyn act like they were put together in a competition by Simon Cowell and now they're contractually obliged to go on tour

Party For You (Corbynite Continuity (Socialist))

Trump in a room with a very charismatic person results in like half a day of Trump agreeing with everything that person said, so this has the potential to be very, very funny.

Clutching other people's pearls, more like.

Quite. Stay tuned for an upcoming panic about “anchor babies”, à la USA circa George W Bush.

The Starmer-Mahmood asylum/refugee policy is basically legislating to weaponise the Windrush deportations nightmare into a deliberate legal process. And for what? To close a polling gap?

“Give me your poor, your tired, your hungry, and any of their accessories that I might be able to shift on Vinted.”

Asylum system in UK ‘out of control’ and dividing country, home secretary says Shabana Mahmood to unveil new proposals modelled on Denmark’s controversial system

The Prime Minister said in September that we are at a fork in the road. These asylum proposals suggest we have taken the wrong turning.

The idea that recognised refugees need to be deported is wrong.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025...

"What is certain, and felt instinctively by almost everybody, is that things cannot go on in their present way" – The Times, May 1975

“It is difficult to imagine a previous period when such an all-pervasive hopelessness was exhibited at all levels of British life” – Professor Stephen Haseler, 1975

This is now outside the paywall, please do read and share

London Centric: Always on the Käse.

The Hardline Conservatives = Belle and Sebastian twee indie

Working Right = sub-Madness forgotten twotone band

Reluctant Reformers = falsely claimed to have done the original version of The Living Years but lost a lawsuit about it

the newly released Epstein emails are getting coverage on Fox News 👀

The worst you can accuse Panorama of doing is making a misleading edit – and I’d dispute that! – to make *a point that was true*.

The programme aired without anyone seeing any issues with the edit. It was on iPlayer for a year without complaints. Donald Trump *did* incite Jan 6th.

On a constant loop. Radio 7.

A great point. If you read the UK press, spend time on X and fall prey to elite radicalisation, you can very easily fool yourself into thinking you represent the silent majority when in fact you are an increasingly extreme minority. It's funny when conservatives scold liberals about their "bubbles"

“ENOUGH OF THIS WOKERY - MORE ASBESTOS!”

“All that is solid melts into goo”

The question that *should* trip them up is of course: “How many generations does a line [or whatever] need to interbreed with locals for its descendants to become local?”

The measure of their nastiness (and their confidence) will be how they handle that question, and where their answers take them.

Lucy White, Lowe et al are still *just* this side of race “science”. The reaction to Sarah Pochin’s remarks (which weren’t even pro-eugenics, just a nasty gut reaction to black faces) showed that that barrier is still just about holding on the mainstream hard right, at least in public. 2/

These people are at the pupal stage of full-blown biological racism.

At the moment, they’re using genealogy as the measure of belonging. That’s a strategic way of distancing themselves from the one-drop rule and the vocabulary of eugenics – the same taboo that did for Keith Joseph in 1974. 1/

There’ll be a Claudia Winkleman nexus revival show one day called Come Traitor Piano Strictly, with an attached mini-show called Come Traitor’s Casio Jive. And we will all melt into air.

Ban X in the UK. It's a misinformation factory.

Anyone who will lie unapologetically about mass violent attacks to push their own profile and political cause is beneath contempt.

There’s no need to book such people, to platform them, or to listen to them. That’s not because of their politics, or their views: it’s because of their dishonesty.

To be clear: I think the empathy part of this is shaky. On a moral basis, electorates shouldn’t be treated like Lassie “trying to tell us something”. For the people who voted for Trump in 2016, his gleeful vileness was at minimum not a dealbreaker. Same in 2020 and 2024. THAT’s the story.

End/🧵

There are three underexplored angles here: 1) Did she go too far using the word “half”? 2) Why did so many people supporting Trump assume what she meant *them*? 3) Why do people like Klein, who know better, insist nine years on that this speech proves something it doesn’t? 3/🧵

The most cynical read on it would be that it was a way of responding to Bernie without going meaningfully left, but I don’t buy it – mainly because HRC began her 2007 campaign with a call to look after “invisible Americans” whose government had left them behind. NYT coverage below. 2/🧵

Of all my 2016 analysis bugbears, this is the hair trigger. It’s inane to analyse this section of the speech without including the *immediate next section* in which she comes out with almost exactly the “unheard anxiety” thesis Klein et al have been pushing ever since. 1/🧵

Top 10, easily.

Deliverance

Always thought the Bullshit Jobs thesis failed to fully unpick the differences between jobs of no direct social value, depressing jobs that burn you out, and jobs Graeber would just have hated to do himself.

Its lack of empathy for people who just enjoy different things to him is striking.