cherokoffdotcom

Dear Theresa May, and all those honourable members of your honourable Cabinet, and the wider honourable members of the Tory Party, NO.

How stupid do you really think we are?

Surprisingly enough, not all of us are UKIP voters who now see you as the torch-bearer for their regressive and racist policies.

Out here in the real world, peopled by all those you really don’t want to talk to, we can see the truth behind the ‘inclusive’ blather resulting from your presidential power grab.

You can pinch as many policies as you like from previous Labour Party offerings – derided by you at the time – but the truth is that the results will keep us heading in exactly the same direction.

Any minor tweaks to appeal to those hoping for the richest to get hit, will merely return them to the state they were in before, as rich as ever.

And for the rest of us, less provision, more pain, and endless failed promises.

And the holy writ of the Manifesto? Not so sacrosanct any more. The changes to Social Care funding in the previous Manifesto has been reversed, and this time to ensure that, apart from the richest who won’t even notice, the rest pay more. And deplete any legacy they wished to leave to future generations.

And they can’t even get their stories straight. Dear Jeremy Hunt, probably the most loved of all government ministers, stated this morning that the intention was to help those who wanted to protect their children’s inheritance.  Dear Theresa says the costs will be taken out of the estate.

Now, I would never want to make any sort of spurious hay out of message inconsistencies, whether the sun is shining or not, but come on guys. If you are going to try to steal money from those who can least afford it, try and do it without looking too stupid.

The one element in the current Manifesto that doesn’t surprise is Theresa’s own grab for her version of the Thatcher legacy – cancelling the provision of free primary school meals. Maggie would be proud of you.

Now hear this Theresa May. You can repeat the manta about Corbyn not being fit to govern as often as you like. The proof of your justification to say this is in your political history.

If you are so concerned about those that are struggling, where has been your voice for the last 7 years whilst the Tories were squeezing the life out of all but the rich and powerful.

You can claim whatever you like about your desire to help the many, but you have supported their suffering. Jeremy Corbyn has consistently argued against every measure that hurt the majority, during both Tory and the pseudo-tory Blair years.

Consistency is a good measure of honesty, and in that you lose, hands down.

So, to all of it Theresa, and to you, and your presidential aspirations, and the duplicity or crassness of your cabinet cohorts, the answer is NO.

So, here is the problem. Theresa May and the Tories have got to go. Not completely, not in a majority, not in power. Always good to keep a few around to scare the children with if they misbehave.

So, with that as the aim, how to achieve it.

Accepting that we don’t actually have a democratic electoral system in the UK – first past the post is always going to be a minority ruling the majority – we need to use what we have to get the right people into power.

And that brings us to tactical voting.  And that is where some of the tribalism still hinders a real alternative to the Tories.

There are three parties – Labour, Liberal Democrats and Green – who have a sufficient commonality of purpose and compassion to produce a strong alternative to the heartless self-servers we have in power at present.

And credit to the Green Party, who have actually stood down candidates to enhance the chances of defeating the Tory incumbent. But they have stood down for a Lib Dem candidate.

Now, the Greens and Lib Dems may not like it but, numerically, the Labour Party is the country’s best bet to remove the Tories and stop the slide.

So, why not do what politicians have always done and make some deals. And it doesn’t have to be secret, unless the prospect of cooperative government – mustn’t use the ‘c’ word – is going to be too hard a sell to their supporters in public.

A progressive alliance government, putting people first, with division of representation based on an agreed proportional formula, is a clear and simple solution.

But the divisions between the parties – shouted loudly by their leaders – makes that a virtual impossibility so close to the election, which means the opposition vote is split.

And that makes the choice easier, and starker, and one that many will find hard to do.

But Labour is the best bet to oust the Tories, and that is the bottom line.

The ONLY bottom line.

Notwithstanding the worthy efforts of ‘The Last Leg’, and the less than stirling approach of ‘Have I Got News for You’ and ‘Mock the Week’, and ‘The News Quiz’, we are in desperate need of some astute satirical criticism of the political machinations away from the ‘serious’ news media.

Because they are failing miserably, and with a bias in approach and attitude that may not be intentional, but is definitely there.

A few weeks ago, Keir Starmer put forward, clearly and concisely, the Labour Party’s approach and targets for the negotiations to leave the EU. Subsequently dismissed as lacking clarity by any umber of Tory ministers, these statements of factual inaccuracy where never challenged by the various interviewers.

Diane Abbott, exhausted and in her 7th interview in a row, messed up the presentation of figures relating to police recruitment. But hey, it’s much more newsworthy to use this as a low and mean-spirited stick to beat her with, rather than look for some clarity.

Emily Thornberry calls out Michael Fallon, in no uncertain terms, for stretching any vague element of truth beyond rational acceptance. And yet he is permitted to carry on, without the ramshackle descriptions attached to him that Diane Abbott received.

The draft Labour Party manifesto was leaked, and rather than insisting that the Tories addressed it content, the media allowed them to hijack any discussions with incompetence slurs.

Now, I appreciate that the Tory manifesto cannot be leaked, because there is only one copy, and that is ‘The World According to Theresa May’, with any idea she can beg, borrow or steal from other parties in the hope it will somehow humanise her and fool a disillusioned electorate that the Tories care.

But I would have hoped, and it was always a weak and feeble hope, that the news media, and especially those that purport to be impartial, would actually question and test and hold to account the blatherings of the Tories.

But then again, why should they? Sound bites hold the airwaves, or the e-waves I suppose, and let’s not upset those that you seemed to have decided are going to be your masters after June 8th.

Instead, you continue the ridiculous mantra of ‘Back to the 1970’s’, with no particular evidence of its validity. Whilst accepting that more grammar schools and the return of fox-hunting is progressive and forward-looking.

Can we please get a grip. Call the Labour Party to account on its policies, fine. Question and test as firmly as you like. But do the same for both sides.

I have listened to more interviews with government and opposition representatives over the years than is probably good for my health, but I cannot remember a time when the attitude and approach of a wide cross-section of interviewers has been so markedly different in the level of subservience in one direction and aggression in the other.

And the vox pops are equally as uneven. Where is the follow-up question of ‘Can you give me an example?’ when the person in the street says they do not like / do not trust Jeremy Corbyn. Where is the ‘Didn’t Theresa May lie about calling an election?’ question?

I am not asking any of you to canvas for one side or the other, but at least questions both sides equally. This is, after all, a democracy.

And, moving on from the two sides mentioned, can you please explain the very uneven approach to the other, smaller parties. UKIP, with no parliamentary representation, gets copious airtime, the Green Party, with parliamentary representation, gets diddly squat.

There was a time when, even if the news media couldn’t get their act together, satire in its varied forms would shine the uncomfortable light on those in power.

Unfortunately, these days the only place you can find real political satire is in the US, and that is with Trump at the helm.

So what is our excuse? Stop going for the easy joke, because all that does is emphasise that the Tory machine is working.

Repeat a falsehood often enough and it becomes the truth.

So, for any that aspire to a satirical tag, stop playing their game for them. And the news media, report and question, but do it fairly and equally.

Or take full responsibility for the distortion of a democratic process

 

Due to some fairly serious ‘stuff’ going on this week which I have not been able to comment on, I have been a little frustrated with saying what I really wanted to.

And then I heard the sad news of the much too early death of someone I held in extremely high regard, and a broader consideration occurred to me.

I have, in my life, been fortunate to know some exceptional women. Some are still in my life, in one way or another, some I have lost, and at least one I have re-established contact with after too much personal prevarication.

The first will always be my mother. Sometimes singularly frustrating, she was one of the strongest people I have ever known, and for better or worse, laid the groundwork for the person I am. And still each day I hear her voice in the choices I make.

Similarly, the impact and lasting influence on the person I am, and the life I now have, come from the two distinctly different women who, for their own particular reasons, agreed to be my wife.

The first clarified for me the true value of the clear and independent thinking that a woman can bring to every aspect of life. the second proved it in spades by her professional and educational ambition and achievement. And by giving me the best man I know as a son.

She also introduced me to a singular bright, brave and engaging spirit, who has so recently been taken from the world, far too soon. She had a unique and razor view of the world, and for that, and her totality, will be missed by all who knew her.

In more recent times there have been more astonishing, astounding, and gloriously singular women who have come into my life; each creating a unique presence in the world.

The most impactful met me at my rawest, wrapped me in a hug, and gave me a whole new family. Her acceptance has been total, her understanding scary in its astuteness, her compassion bottomless, and her intellect a stimulating joy.

And through her I have met a wider and wonderful collection of stars that are bringing a wider and deeper understanding, appreciation and awe into my world of the huge diversity, individuality and joy that are embodied in women today.

Each day it becomes clearer to me that, if we want the world to be a better place, we need, indeed must, remove the reins from the grip of the patriarchy that has done nothing but lead us down a cul-de-sac of fear, division and desperation.

And if anyone wants some candidates for those who should be holding the reins, then I can give you a few names that would be perfect exemplars for future leaders.

These are the best of people, ones I am proud, honoured and humbled to know. And the ones who should be examined closely by at least one ‘leading’ woman who could really do with some remedial lessons in compassion and understanding.

 

Firstly, a declaration. I am a member of the Labour Party. I was a member up to the era of Tony Blair. I am now back, because the Labour Party leader is a man of principle.

He is not a performer. He is not a political ‘celebrity’. He is, however, a man who has adhered to his core philosophy for years, with honesty and integrity.

Bloody annoying that, isn’t it?

And that is the fundamental choice that we now have.

However hard the Tories try to establish it as the only item on the agenda, and they are trying REALLY hard, this is not an election about Brexit.

And the proof is listening to the words that actually emerge from them. Not the interpretations put on them by news outlets, commentators, and especially previous Tory and Labour ministers and prime ministers.

And so far, if you ignore the ridiculous repetition – which will not be happening here – then already the difference is starkly clear.

Jeremy Corbyn is interviewed by Andrew Marr, refuses to reduce himself to meaningless soundbites, and provides detailed responses. He is informed, informative and clear as to his overall, long-term aims, as well as the strategy to reach them, the stages that need to be gone through.

Meanwhile, Theresa May refuses to talk to the public, in fact does everything to avoid contact in fear of some feared contagion. She is also incapable of answering anything except with soundbites and repetition, a campaign of fear, and a demand for personal power.

It’s almost like she is taking lessons from the Turkish political system.

Kier Starmer, in less than ten minutes, presents a clear, precise, thoughtful, rational and, above all, positive roadmap for the Labour Party’s approach to the Brexit negotiations. Dismissed by Tory ‘grandees’ for being vague, the only reason they could provide for this conclusion was ….. none.

Boris Johnson, the UK’s principal figure facing all the nations of the world – yes, think about that again – can only produce public school play ground insults, name calling and avoidance of answers.

So, the choice IS simple. Honesty over evasion. Integrity over dishonesty. Not ‘changing my mind’ but dishonesty, Theresa, bare-faced lying.

I am not interested in elections as the choice of personality. An election is what a party has done, and what they will do.

We know what the Tories have done, and what their future intentions are. And they do not help the people, not all the people, not that many of them at all.

Simple really.

And Tony Blair.  Shut the fuck up!!

This was a question I was asked last night, over pizza, gin and wine – and not necessarily in that order.

Or, more precisely, where on the male – female spectrum did I think I was? It was never something that I had considered previously, and I wasn’t, at the time, able to give what I felt was a definitive answer.

After some thought, I am still not sure. I have never been sexually attracted by a man, so theoretically I am right at the male end, especially adorned as I am with a pretty good beard.

However, I have always been more comfortable in the company of women, Never been particularly interested in the standard banter that seems to be the accepted veneer of masculinity, and would always consider women to be more suited to the management of power than men – the present incumbant being the exception that proves the rule.

However, this is a much bigger question than a spot on a continuum. And also much bigger than whether wages, working practices, access to facilities, opportunities and other pragmatic measures display equality between the sexes.

The evolution that is happening across the globe regarding gender neutrality is exciting, fascinating, and potentially revolutionary in its outcome. Where once it was easy to deny the existence of more than two clearly defined groups, with the mobility of people, and of information, denial is harder.

But, when faced with stronger opposition, the established consensus also becomes more entrenched, more extreme, more reactionary, more divisive and destructive.

This can be seen more and more clearly in the separations appearing across the world.

And, although the splits are not explicitly along gender lines, the driving force behind the denials is rooted in the established patriarchal power framework, and the revolution is rooted in the denial of the patriarchy’s right to that power.

The power is justified by the accepted concept of the genetic imperative, but the genus man evolved past that centuries ago. Unfortunately, significant numbers of men have not.

And before this is dismissed as middle class metro meanderings around an intellectual idea, let us look at the world as it is now.

Divided, divisive, destructive, and decisions dominated by men.

If that is not a good enough reason to change, to move along the continuum, at least in thought and attitude, then humanity stands little hope in the long-term.

It is, in the end, a stark choice between peace and war, humanity and inhumanity.

And the fundamental question is how long it will take, and how it will happen.

There is, thankfully, a fundamental optimism in the generation leading the demonstration of gender fluidity, and its potential to bring about fundamental change.

Because, as a jaded old cynic, I am less optimistic. Not that there will be change, because that will be inevitable, but that it will come at a huge cost. The proxy battles are already being played out in a variety of forms, and the denial mongers have the big guns.

The word is out there, and it is spreading. But there is a long way to go to get to the tipping point. And the accessible world, the developed world, will be easier. There are huge swathes yet untapped.

And the answer to the question at the beginning? Left of centre, in more ways than one!

Whilst I am more than happy to offensive regarding Tory behaviour in all its predictably offensive forms, I do try to be polite to those who are, or seem to be, of a similar persuasion to myself.

However, perhaps I should try to be a little more forceful in my request to consider the effect of your words, both spoken and written.

To illustrate my point I will take two examples from recent history.

1. Brexit. Although now widely acknowledged as a referendum based on misinformation, because the bullshit was repeated so often, and not argued against and denied in equal measure, cow poo became the reality.
2. Donald Trump. The perfect example that continuous repetition of any vague blather, as long as it appeals to a base instinct, will become truth.

And my point?

Jeremy Corbyn has been painted as a leader unable to lead. Dismissed because some Labour MPs found his democratic election unpalatable. Interesting, by the way, that they can’t back that, but are happy to go along with an undemocratic referendum.

Because he doesn’t fit the mould that is expected by the media, and doesn’t play the game by the rules they wrote, the inference, even in what should be unbiased media coverage, is edged and coloured by the shade of incompetence.

And, on so many occasions, the ‘honourable, honest but …..’ seems to be the standard description.

As has been proved, if you say it often enough, anything becomes the truth.

So, if you do want to get rid of the Tories, if you do want a government that has the interest of the majority at its core, then support, be positive.

Or shut up. Please. Politely.

Well I am glad that has been cleared up. Because I was thinking for a moment there that a U-turn as quick as this can only mean that dear Ms May is playing politics for all she is worth – which isn’t much.

Sorry, I was going to wait before I said anything remotely offensive, but what the hell!

She has obviously decided – never mind what she said before – that it is time to extend her authority in her party. This has nothing to do with strengthening her bargaining stance, and everything to strengthening her position among the Tory rank and file.

And I choose ‘rank’ for all its meanings!

Neither is this the legitimising of the Brexit referendum outcome. For the moment that boat has sailed, and apart from the Lib Dems I would be surprised if there is too much ‘Reverse Brexit’ rhetoric to be heard on the stump.

This should be about the Tory government. This should be about their determination to drive down and punish the worst off, for being the worst off. This should be about their destruction of the NHS, and the fracturing and fragmenting of the education provision – based on outdated and élitist concepts even the Victorians would now be ashamed of.

This may be Theresa being opportunistic, but what it does mean is that we have a chance to change the future, or face what the Tories would leave of the UK by 2020.

And the choice is remarkably simple. It is between a government that really doesn’t care about the majority, and a prospective one that does.

So, put the sound-bite character assassinations to one side, and accept that this is not about the cult of personality. This is about policies – policies that heal against policies that harm.

And, to all the pillocks in the Parliamentary Labour Party who are still sulking about who the party leader is – get over it!

This is too serious, too important for you to do anything else but unite around the aim of removing the Tories. And if you can’t do that, shut up and sod off!

This is now. People are suffering now. Your personal whingeing comes a very poor second, unless your beliefs and principles are not those of the party you represent.

We have a chance to change things for the better. The choice is easy.

This is very personal. Hard on the heels of an emotional and difficult bank holiday weekend. And will not be appreciated by the person concerned.

But then if you can’t cause your own child a bit of embarrassment then what is the point?

Firstly, I don’t think it will come as too much of a surprise to most people who know me that I was never overly fond of children – as a concept, in reality, and certainly not in groups.

And then my son arrived – eternal thanks for that Di – and I was sold. Well, sold on him anyway. Everyone else’s children, still not so much.

It was instant, deep, life-changing, and the most joyful pain I have ever felt. From the first minute I was attached to someone who I could never not care about, could never ignore, could never not think about every day.

Whether by fluke, or good parenting – at least by his mother – he has turned into an adult, a man of real value. I would like to claim some credit, but from wherever, he has arrived at the person he is.

Over the years he has been ridiculously honest, honourable, deeply caring of both friends and justice, and exceedingly good company.

For most of the time life progresses, he has grown, developed, evolved, and the years pass. It has been at those moments of joyous success, and emotional crisis, that the stages have been marked.

And at those times I am tempted to see some of my traits in him. An unwillingness to voice personal concerns so as not to hurt. And not the greatest of financial acumen.

But throughout, honest and honourable and caring. That’s all him.

In more recent times it has been interesting to see the roles reversed. From me worrying about him – which I will always do – he has worried about me. From cared for to caring for.

And now it moves round again.

To be a part of a good life is a blessing. And whatever the future holds for that life, it will always be a blessing.

I am not a fool. Besotted, but not a fool.

He isn’t perfect. Thankfully. But he is the best person I know, I will always be grateful that I have the chance to love him, and the opportunity to show it.

As a wise woman said to me yesterday, we are part of the parents club. It is what we do.

So, to every member of the club, however hard it is in each circumstance to show that love, to feel the pain of that love, my respect to you all.

He is mine, and he is yours. And each of yours is mine.

The sun is shining, a long bank holiday weekend looms ever nearer, and the potential for a break from the treadmill should elicit a lightness of spirit.

And then the news comes on the radio, and each new individual or military atrocity dims the sunshine, and questions the possibility of a better tomorrow.

Much as I would like to see the progress made over the years for those groups, those sections of society that suffered because of who they were, as an example of man’s strides towards a better way; much as I hope that the lack of animosity between old adversaries is an example that will be carried forward by those in the midst of current strife; much as there should always be a peaceful solution to the destruction and dislocation in the world – I don’t see it.

For every small step forward, every painful advance away from previous suffering, oppression, denigration, there are those determined to push back, retrace those steps, bring back the darkness.

I used to hold to the concept that the main difference between man and the rest of the animal kingdom was that, along with the baser instincts for survival and the genetic imperative, there was a wider sense of commonality, community, society.

And as the distances between nations shrank, that the idea of society and a common aim would spread. That humanity would become the driving force.

And there is so much humanity in the world, but it is delivered by ones and twos, by tens and twenties. And the destruction, the devaluation of humanity is driven by the thousands, the millions – or at least in their name.

And when it is done in their name, in our name, too few, far, far too few say that it is not their wish, their aim, their inclination to deplete the lives of others for their own selfish needs.

Too often the majority is silent, and allows the perversity of Yemen, Syria, Crimea, Palestine, to continue. Because they accept the bullet point statements of the leaders, don’t question the repercussions.

The acceptance of a generalised, generated fear as the base for our view of the world will cause whatever humanity there is to wither, to wilt, to fade away.

The world we now have is splintering, separating, pulling apart along fault-lines of prejudice and the jingoistic hysteria of the extremes. They shout the loudest, because humanity works with a gentle voice.

It is becoming harder to hear each day, because the leaders are afraid to show gentleness, because power is fearful of empathy, and therefore looks to diminish it.

The acknowledgement that every life is of equal value, that every situation has two sides, that to save life is a more powerful sign of strength than to take one, that is where we need to be.

We are so far from that in so many places, I despair that we will ever get close to even where we used to be.

The sun still shines, but there seems less warmth.