Some things are better left unsaid
Following Sir Keir Starmer's encounter with protestors
For those who follow my Facebook page, obviously, many would have read this before but I’ll post it here for the purposes of record.
I reiterate the words of another article on my page in response to the video of Sir Keir Starmer being abused by protestors in London.
However -
What I'm going to say about this might be controversial in the sense that while many are apportioning complete blame to Boris Johnson, I'm not sure I can.
At least not entirely.
The fundamental question is - surrounding Johnson’s comments - have more people been radicalised by his language into using the Savile slur than if he didn't say it?
We will probably never know the true answer.
What I do know, however, is that this slur has been used against Sir Keir Starmer for at least the last two years - anecdotally, it goes farther back than this Politicalite article.
In the beginning stages of his leadership campaign, it was a claim that I saw and heard - oddly - being shared by friends of mine in fellow radical Left-wing groups, and being muttered at hustings I attended in February 2020.
To this day, and even despite the abuse suffered by Sir Keir Starmer, some - like The Canary’s Kerry-Anne Mendoza - remain unapologetic.
When this page became more popular, I saw it more often being used in the comments - it was so frequent and so continuous, actually, that I wrote an article addressing it in September 2020.
As Covid took shape in the UK, I noticed many of those who chittered this slur against Sir Keir Starmer were also lockdown and/or Covid sceptics; some of them, indeed, were Neo-Nazis and White supremacists, although not exclusively.
Most, however, were anti-establishment types espousing decades old conspiracy theories explored at some great length by Jon Ronson in his book ‘Them: Adventures with Extremists’ and its accompanying series, ‘Secret Rulers of the World’.
Many of these same people combined a myriad of different conspiracies involving Starmer, Savile, Covid, climate change denial, David Icke’s concept of “Agenda 21”, Zionism, the Trilateral Commission and the New World Order.
It was so odd - to see such a convergence of polarising and contrasting political views - that I looked into it for myself [obviously, I wrote an article on the Savile slur specifically] and found myself traipsing through the dark recesses of the Internet into some really strange and obscure Tor/Dark Web chat forums.
NATB Note: You, readers, must never do this - and I say this as a warning because if you find yourself taking a trip down that rabbit hole of your own volition, you may not likely return.
It's a truly dark and chasmic place I’d never advise anybody to visit - and often full of some very lost, confused, and frankly extremely vulnerable people.
But.
Where Johnson is concerned - he tapped into this sentiment like it was a spring of dark energy, which, by the way, has not abated in two years since Starmer launched his leadership bid.
It has always been there; it’s just that the mainstream media did not really notice it - save for a few recently unearthed articles on Reuters [October 2021] and Full Fact [June 2020] disputing its veracity.
When Johnson tapped it however, it raised eyebrows - obviously, it’s an incendiary claim; it was a proverbial ‘dead cat’ that Johnson had thrown on the table albeit this one has back-fired tremendously.
But - as a result of the prominence given to the slur by Johnson, more people caught a glimpse of what was previously relegated to a marginal and forgotten corner of the Internet.
This is where Johnson went wrong - he opened that pandora's box.
For sake of reasonable, calm, rational political discourse - he should not have.
Will more gravitate towards this slur as a result of Johnson giving it greater prominence? Maybe, but it might be erroneous to suggest that he ‘owns’ this. [This is where this article might be controversial - because others with greater platforms think he does ‘own’ it]
On the other hand, it casts eyes on Sir Keir Starmer’s record in the CPS and as Director of Public Prosecutions - this, in itself, is not a terribly bad thing, nor is it without its faults or should evade criticism and should be subject to scrutiny.
But Johnson’s intention - to divide - is playing with fire; more dangerous. More impulsive. Though nonetheless, totally deliberate.
The people Johnson was trying to get ‘on-side’ by way of divide and rule were already there prior to his comments so it’s not accurate to say he owns this abuse Sir Keir Starmer received.
As noted above, these people already existed in and among the extreme Left and extreme Right communities, and the ‘Darkweb’ community of conspiracy enthusiasts - Johnson merely tapped into that convergence of forces.
Indeed, if you watch PoliticsJoe's video of the abuse, with subtitles, you'll see utterances such as:
"Don’t take the vaccine"
"How do you enjoy working for the New World Order"
“You're protecting paedophiles"
But the key is that these people were saying this long before Johnson said what he said.
My argument, though, is that even if Johnson hadn't said it - even if the cameras were not there to capture the abuse directed at Starmer, those same people, emerging from the dark recesses of the Internet, would likely have still been saying it to Sir Keir Starmer.
Although it is a hypothetical, this claim is made based on the knowledge that it’s because they always have.
Some people offer very lazy, hyperbolic responses on occasion in describing why Boris Johnson is like Britain's Trump - and often without much analysis - but this time, they would not be wrong; even if they couldn’t completely assess why.
What is said here isn't offering Boris Johnson absolution, however.
Boris Johnson should not have opened that box, and now in some way - however small - this marginalised group of people now feel emboldened, and where they may have existed before in some dark, forgotten chasm of the internet, they are now in the mainstream media cycle.
This is where Johnson’s guilt rests. As does the use of Savile’s victims for sake of political expediency.
He either distances himself from it and apologises, or he does what Trump did and 'boost' it to fever pitch. The latter carries potentially far greater consequences - but ultimately, it’s worth remembering those consequences were not designed by Johnson to include himself.
Rather distract from himself.
If, however, you’re talking about Sir Keir Starmer, or scrutinising his record as DPP or in the CPS rather than Boris Johnson’s transgressions, that is the point, though it’s worth remembering whatever side of the political spectrum you sit on, nothing, ultimately, should detract from the abuse suffered by Savile’s victims who have been forgotten throughout this.
Sadly.