Laurence Fox represents for some of us the best of the English.
He didn’t choose this fight, he was forced into it by being called a racist simply for saying what he believed in- that England is a lovely county.
Like many unassuming English men, he avoided confrontation till he was backed into a corner.
I respect the man. I wish more English men would take pride in their country, culture and community. And take a stand.
I have not seen anything that proves that Laurence is anything but the decent English kind, pushed beyond his limit. To call him racist or right wing is to abuse language.
I would love to have a drink with him in a pub.
Go Laurence.
Oooh! You asked a naughty question too. The hivemind is displeased with you.
I suspect NH is extrapolating wildly from some Labour politician’s remarks about “white van man” and English flags, to conclude than anyone who flies the cross of St George is thereby accused of racism.
He might just be assuming bad faith on the part of these who see the country differently than he does. Just as well he’s not a left wing millennial, or he’d be labelled as a snowflake on top of everything else.
Hypothetically, one could fly a flag because one was a racist, or one could fly a flag for perfectly good reasons – even patriotism. The idea that flying a flag makes one a racist – or shows that one is racist – is absurd. Unless it’s an actual Nazj flag of course.
It’s like conservative press conferences – I may think politicians draping themselves in flags makes them look like plonkers, but I defend their right to do it. Probably not to the death though. that would be taking it a bit far.
Silly objection, the context is that Fox is defending Britain in general from a series of claims and views attempting to condemn it as backward, benighted and racist. The OP has merely paraphrased Fox’s position in a single sentence as opposed to rehearsing it at length.
The problem with Vikram’s “summary” of why Mr Fox was accused of racism is that it reduces it to an absurdity. Nobody would accuse someone of racism for saying “what he believed in” if it actually was simply “that England is a lovely county”.
If you don’t take the trouble to understand the criticism (or even state it accurately), how can you possibly know that it is not valid?
And, from the Telegraph clip kindly linked by Liam, you can see that Mr Fox’s bit about England being lovely (which of course it is) came after he was accused of racism – so it can’t possibly have been the reason.
I saw him on Question time. He was a breath of fresh air. I was thrilled at his chutzpah. Maybe THAT is what Harrow gives you ? It looks as if he peaked too early. Sad.
Thanks for engaging, and for the evidence of what actually happened. I vastly prefer your honest disagreement to the 30+ people who downvoted the question but actually had nothing to say on the issue.
My reading of that clip is that Mr Fox said how lovely and tolerant England is after the lady called out what she saw as racism. However right or wrong her original accusation was, and the Telegraph did not include that, he was not (as Vikram claimed) “being called a racist simply for saying… that England is a lovely county“. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
You are missing the point entirely, and deliberately, as usual. Fox may well be a privileged white male, but he was told that as a white privileged male he had no right to comment. And denying him the right to comment or speak out on the basis of his colour is indeed racist.
He was not told he had no right to comment. He was told that he might not be the best placed person to identify where racism existed. This is a good example of people claiming that they are being silenced for being white when no such thing occurred.
Mr Bridgeford
If you really believe you are a privileged white male, please get down on your knees next time you see a non-White and ask for forgiveness.
Meanwhile I will tell the poor white pensioner I saw in my clinic yesterday to stop whining and watch his privilege.
You sound both foolish and sinister. Quite an achievement
The colour tone of a person’s skin is irrelevant. Its something you are born with the same as eye colour or length of big toe. To suggest that he is not allowed to comment on a subject due to some immutable characteristic is inherently racist. We can test this argument by replacing Mr Fox in the argument with say … Ian Wright (the footballer) if we then say because Mr Wright has a darker skin tone he cannot comment… that wod be “racist” wouldn’t it. Therefore, the comment to Mr Fox is also racist. Alternatively, neither is. You cannot have it both ways mate…and that’s the point really.
Khan’s Record of Not condemning ”Terror’Incidents As ‘Part *&parcel of living in London” 2) Record Knife deaths 3) Chopping londons Roads into Cycle lanes is NOT popular ..Time EU regional Assembly was closed…
I think Chris C is a Labour pollster,he believes in phrasing Questions which Give Answer people want, Like lib-dems on ”rejoining EU” or tories on ”Building homes in Countryside”.. ie Fixed polls have All validity of ”Scientific SARS2 data & climate ”
We know what Fox stands against, and that’s perfectly enough to stand WITH Fox. As long as he stands against wokery, that’s all i need to know to support him.
Well, he says, and I quote: “I want to reclaim your freedom to speak. To cherish your history rather than rewrite it. And to teach our children to be confident, not ashamed of who they are and where they come from.”
You’d be wiser about what Mr Fox stood for by listening to what he says.
Who cares? He’s definitely made of the “right stuff”!
Elizabeth Hart
3 years ago
Thank goodness for people like Laurence Fox, willing to stick his neck out and challenge the current destruction of our free societies.
He’s literally put his career on the line, and is risking all sorts of antagonism, it’s a lonely place taking on the status quo.
Just by standing for this political position Fox is providing an essential alternative view to the appalling oppressive political situation prevailing now.
But let Fox speak for himself, here’s a summary of his platform: A year ago we locked down London for three weeks. We gave our liberty to the government for three weeks to flatten the curve. Instead of giving us our freedom back, the government is considering even more authoritarian measures. We need to get London open and moving. Bring back tourists to this great city and bring people back to work. The biggest problem facing Londoners is lack of optimism, lack of hope. They’ve been frightened to death, essentially. We need to give people hope and optimism to get back out there. Get back working and get a small business up and running. You need to give people an incentive to get back on the Tubes, trains and buses and get back to work and play. We can slowly get back to normal. Give people permission to enjoy their life again. It’s time to get London back to work with some free transport and get the small business open, and pubs, bars and restaurants, and get people to enjoy their lives again. This is the greatest city on earth.
Elizabeth, unless my memory is misleading me (which is possible), weren’t you on Unherd a few months ago claiming that all we needed to defeat the virus was Vitamin D?
I can’t say who said this, but Vitamin D certainly is a key component in the fight against the disease. Pity that more governments don’t ventilate this.
Medical control trails have shown conclusively that it makes very little difference to Covid-despite this I still take it! However, this study shows why it is NOT recommended by Health authorities
There have been some trials (as opposed to trails) which have been designed by pharmaceutical industry employees to show that Vitamin D is not effective. The doses of Vitamin D have been too small and given too late to be effective in improving the outcomes of a Covid-19 infection.
So you’ve researched the possible effects of previously untested MRNA vaccines and are satisfied that there are no medium or long term risks have you? How did you acquire the long term data given that they have never been tried before? Do you have access to a private research programme. Could you provide me with a link to the data showing that they have no risks over a say, three to ten year time scale?
The risks of SarsCoV2 are comparable to flu for those under 70. 2020 mortality the same as 2008. And Ivermectin is the medicine of choice. 22 April 2021 – HART (hartgroup.org)
The best cure is to get vaccinated and not catch the disease at all – and not pass it on to others during the asymptomatic phase.
If you end up with it, by all means use drugs which have been found by trials to reduce the severity.
Incidentally, long-Covid is not limited to the over 70s. But in order to push the idea that Covid doesn’t matter for most people, as the Hart group does, it’s necessary to ignore long-Covid.
Being vaccinated does not prevent you catching the disease. It mitigates the effects of the virus. You can still be infected and develop the illness but it is probable that the effects would be much less severe.
I don’t think this is true: the AZ trial used PCR testing rather than just severe illness and the vaccinated do catch the virus in reduced numbers (source).
No, Olga, there isn’t the evidence base for ivermectin yet, and the risks are worse than flu for all ages groups (mbevand/covid19-age-stratified-ifr at Github collects the evidence, notice that graph has a log scale).
Finally, HART is a motley collection of denialists of various stripes, including anti-vaxers like Joel Smalley and homeopath Anna Rayner. It’s a project of the same people who started the Michael “soon may the Muslim come” Yeadon campaign website and PCRclaims.
@aw_what on Twitter is a good source for working out the connections between these groups: https://twitter.com/Aw_what/status/1381652679861108738 is a good thread.
They are re-assuringly thick, though I do worry that some MPs are thicker. That said, if you look on Twitter, occasionally you’ll find their followers lamenting that all their talk of influencing politicians behind the scenes has come to nothing, so maybe I shouldn’t worry too much. Their latest wheeze of encouraging followers to join the LibDems to support a “liberal spring” is particularly hilarious.
Silly. 32 million vaccinated and Covid deaths reduced from 1000 a day to around 15 (by a mixture of lockdown and vaccination, but the latter increasingly important). Compared with how many people with side effects from vaccination?
And the vaccines aren’t ‘previously untested’, the first trial started a year ago in mid-April 2020.
How many would die while we conducted the decade of research on vaccines which you apparently want?
So that’s a “no” then. I didn’t say untested. I said no medium to long term tests. And that’s a fact whether you like it or not. No other vaccines have previously been released for mass use without testing for typically at least two to four years. The longer period would be normal in a vaccine which employs previously untried technology as MNRA vaccines do. Since you feel entitled to dismiss my point as “silly” I would have expected you to know this, but that is clearly not the case. I have made no claim that people were dying in any significant numbers from the short term effects of vaccination. I have simply pointed out that this is technology that has not been tested to anything remotely resembling the standards that have up till now been mandatory for new vaccines. Your patronising comments like “any sensible person” and “silly” add no weight to your argument but rather demonstrate your lack of ability to either understand or refute my point.
Then what is your argument?
Is it that we should go on with Covid while refusing to vaccinate people, until studies lasting many years are completed? That would not be a sensible course of action.
What would you do, if you were Health Minister?
Develop and use vaccines that are delivered by traditional well tested methods. i.e. vaccines that use dead or inactivated virus to produce antibodies, not MRNA delivery. The inactivated virus method has been used in vaccines for over a century, is well understood, and is used in the Chinese Sinovac vaccine and I believe the Russian vaccine. Tried and tested technology is available. There is absolutely no need to use experimental techniques in this case. So that’s what I’d do “if I were Health Minister”.
You’d prefer the unknown risks I take it?
You do realise that the Oxford/AZ vaccine is not an mRNA vaccine but an adenoviral vector one? The technology has been around for about 30 years and is a perfectly safe delivery system. The only problem prior to the O/AZ vaccine being developed was outcome efficacy. By all means continue to post your nonsense.
Yes I do realise that and I have myself received the Astra vaccine. The fact remains that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use mRNA technology that has not previously been used for vaccine delivery and has not been subjected to the length of testing that is standard for such new technologies. I made clear that my concerns were with mRNA vaccines. What part of that did you not understand? And how is that nonsense?
What I do understand from a variety of your posts is that you are unnecessarily adversarial. Also, like myself, you are almost certainly not qualified to pontificate on vaccine development, their safety, studies, trials, efficacy or whatever. All you do is sow the seeds of doubt in people who need encouragement to get vaccinated rather than being fed a diet of negativity.
I agree that I respond adversarialy when insulted and patronised as both Chris C and you have done. “By all means continue to post your nonsense” is a direct quote from you. “Silly” and “no sensible person” are direct quotes from Chris C’s posts. So it’s OK for you to dish it out but we’re not allowed to respond in kind? You do not need to be a vaccine researcher to know that mRNA vaccines are untried technology and there are plenty of people better qualified than you or I who make that same point. People need encouragement to think carefully about the balance of risks for them personally and equating mRNA vaccines with non mRNA vaccines is dishonest and does not aid them in making that assessment. Pointing that out is not sowing seeds of doubt. It’s sowing seeds of reason, something that is notably absent from most of the debate.
COVID’s been around for long enough to know its effects, and it’s not over. So what’s your solution? Let it tear through the population for 5 or 10 years till you’re happy, then vaccinate the survivors?
Nasty, spiteful attempt to undermine what was a thoughtful comment. So what about Vitamin D? Many scientists have suggested it could be helpful. Other scientists claim different measures should be used. Some (scientists) say lockdown is essential (and are given much media coverage) while others say it is pointless and destructive (and are given little if any media coverage.) We live in a time of fake news and manipulation. I should take some Vitamin D if you live in the UK. It won’t protect you from our media or make you less snide, but it might strengthen your defences against all manner of other nasty symptoms.
I take Vitamin D each day for my bones, following my GP’s suggestion based on a blood test for other things which showed a Vitamin D deficiency.
But claiming that Vitamin D is going to save you from Covid has been discredited by a trial. Do you accept that?
Given that fact, those who claim that we don’t need vaccines and we didn’t need lockdowns because we just need Vitamin D are delusional.
All this stuff about “some scientists suggest X, others claim Y…” is just attempting to muddy the water. You could use the same technique with “some scientists claim the Earth is [almost] spherical, others claim it’s flat”. The reality is that the informed state that the Earth is [almost] spherical, and the ignorant believe what they read on fringe websites claiming that the Earth is flat.
No, I don’t accept it. I don’t have your blind acceptance of trial results – nor would you if you regularly read medical journals, as I do. The point is that scientists disagree about how the pandemic should be managed. You know that because you’ve read about SAGE and (to a lesser degree because of our manipulative media) The Great Barrington Declaration and possibly a whole lot else. With regard to Vitamin D, trials are ongoing concerning numerous applications which have nothing to do with CV-19 but it is already evident that it can benefit immune function. And that, I suspect, is why people wonder whether it might boost protection against virus infection. That is not the same as suggesting it is a preventative or a cure for CV-19, which I doubt Elizabeth did. So, wind your neck back in and stop trying to hold someone up to ridicule on this platform simply because they don’t share your political opinion. That, I have to say, is the most pernicious disease of our time.
If Elizabeth said that she was much more correct than the ones who said colsing all schools for a year, turning all non-covid patients away from medical care, shutting all small businesses down, stopping all commerce, spending trillions of printed money, and basically freeing the prisoners and locking up the innocent for a year was the way to fight it.
That’s not what the lockdown has done. It’s fair enough to question the lockdown policy, but not on the basis of falsifications: schooling was done from home for several months, then in schools again; a lot of NHS treatments were disrupted, but not all; all small businesses and all commerce clearly were not stopped – the GDP numbers suggest c5-7% reduction in economic activity, depending on how it’s measured; I don’t think any prisoners were freed on account of covid and anyone sent to jail was almost certainly doing something nobody really would think a good idea during a pandemic (maybe even you).
I’d be interested in your counter-factual model of a non-lockdown world. A lot of the things banned under lockdown would end up happening anyway because people took steps to protect themselves, including minimising social contacts and working from home whenever possible. I’d have liked a lot more freedom for people to make up their minds, based on much better scientific evidence on transmission. But there is not some libertarian, risk-free, all-benefits ideal out there that was denied us by a combination of the evil Bill Gates and corrupt politicians and ‘MSM’.
I read the medical advice that vitamin D offered some help against C 19 back in the spring of last year when it first arrived here, and I’ve been taking it daily ever since. Anything that even might be of help can’t be bad, surely?
ID Cards are backed by Authoratarian Remainers in Tory,Labour (Lockdown earlier) Lib-dem ,Green ,SNP….VOTE INDEPENDENT ,SDP or Reform on may 6….You have been warned
I did not relate at all to this piece. Badly written, rambling, wordy and did not capture the essence of the man, nor the main issue at hand (wokeness). I have watched him being interviewed and he is certainly thoughtful, intelligent and presents well. A note to the author: almost everyone is different on the short sound bites of Twitter to real life.
Last edited 3 years ago by Lesley van Reenen
Francis MacGabhann
3 years ago
The Sikh soldier in “1917” was presented as though he was a member of an English platoon. That would not have been the case in the actual year 1917. To say that is not racist. The fact needs to be addressed that 99% of accusations of racism are made in the full acceptance on the part of those making them that the people they’re calling racist are not. It is done with complete cynicism, particularly by the political left, the home of racism.
I think he is a light weight & shifty, even though I am anti lockdown and anti virus pp . As Binface is even with him, I am going for Binface. – he has no disguises or masquerades , even through technically he has a costume.
If you know South Harrow, West Harrow, Harrow on the Hill, you know what a mess London has become. I hope he knows his old place and is suitably aware of what has been done to West London.
Wow reading this article has negatively affected my opinion of UnHerd. Of course all lives do matter and yes the woman on QT who questioned him was being racist.
But of course in the current climate you cannot be racist against white people only POC. The world is spiralling out of control into a quagmire of woke insanity – they dictate “diversity” but not diversity of opinion. A very sad state of affairs.
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago
Well this is a refreshingly unbiased report about Laurence Fox isn’t it! Not.
Personally, I don’t expect him to be some Tony Blair-esque orator, doing that thing with his thumb that they all do when they point, spouting a lot of words but saying nothing. People complain about politicians who are fake, who can’t just say what they mean and mean what they say, but when you get one, they are hammered for NOT being a polished, word-perfect clone with every well-rehearsed non-answer at their finger tips. I am sick of it. I am quite forgiving of people if they have good intentions and are willing to admit when they are wrong and willing to change their minds. I don’t mind if they don’t have all the answers, I want to see them formulating answers through talking and learning. I just want to see them do their best and LISTEN as much as talk. Rees-Mogg, much as some people hate him, is always unfailingly polite, civilised, informed and listens to people. Watch his videos with Jess Philips to see how. Kemi Badenoch does not give into race-baiting bullies on the left and expresses herself clearly (I just love her!). There is nothing wrong with being posh or well-educated if you are doing the job you are supposed to be doing, but if we want more ‘ordinary’ and genuinely diverse people to go into politics we need to allow them to be human.
Ian Smith
3 years ago
Tanya Gold doesn’t much like Laurence Fox. That’s a shame. Personally, I find him persuasive and honest and just the sort of person i want to lead me and my clan. After 4+ years of lying politicians over Brexit and another 15 months of lying politicians over fake pandemic, this bloke is a real breath of fresh air. A human, not a parliamentary robot.
That would be the “fake pandemic” which saw 30,000 people in hospital at one point, gasping for breath and often dying, and over 100,000 dead cumulatively? Ah, I get it…. they were brainwashed into dying by the MSM! There was nothing really wrong with them.
Oh come on, Chris; you’re more intelligent than that. You must know that there have been successful treatment regimes which have been suppressed. And that the excess mortality figures for 2020 are undramatic.
And just what have those suppressed treatment regimes been? I see the nutters have moved from hydroxychloroquine to ivermectin, the latter being an anti-parasitic veterinary drug commonly intended for use on horses. This is despite many reports of patients who have been hospitalised in the US after self-medicating despite the potent and common side effects.
It would appear from the comments that we’ve all learned something from this interesting piece Tanya, for me it’s your preconceived notions of Fox.
Last edited 3 years ago by Matt Coffey
kathleen carr
3 years ago
The system and its print-wing the media really don’t like anyone who is different, so just as Trump wasn’t a politician , yet still managed to win and didn’t they hate him for it? So out with the knives for Laurence , yet no profile on Khan and why he’s so unsuitable as mayor.
That is not true – The Guardian and many others were anti Corbyn because of his alleged anti Semitism – the Guardian was always Blairite and centrist – during the Labour leader campaign they supported Burnham
You basically confirm what I wrote, and what Ms Carr is saying. The media cannot abide people from outside the narrow window, hence cancel culture, wokery, the lot. Corbyn was outside the system and therefore attacked ruthlessly. Some conservatives saw this, like Fox here, like Oborne. Others were just gleeful that the left were getting a kicking…but now that same media is coming for people on the right. Enjoy.
“Always” is a bit much, the paper is 200 years old! Not sure it had a centrist position in the 1950s, unless “Not-radical Soviet” is ‘centrist’. Also the early 2015-2016 Guardian articles, that were indeed less-than-glowing about Corbyn but still pro-Labour generally, were subtley opposed to the violent paranoid agressive bullying by Momentum (remember them?) that was likely suffered by journalists and anyone who put their head above the parapet for a terrifying few years until the anti-semitism claims cut the legs from the group.
Would that be the system and its print-wing the media who give massive backing to the right wing of the Tory party at every election, and propelled the Brexit campaign?
The only paper I can think that vaguely supported Brexit was the daily mail. They are not the system-being populist and selling a lot of copies doesn’t mean anything. The newspaper of choice for the system is the guardian and thats probably why they didn’t like Corbyn as he is an individual with his own point of view -not a machine like most of them
If they are so influential why has it taken the Conservative party 5 years & 3 Prime Ministers to get a botched brexit deal together ? Shouldn’t they be jumping to their master’s command?
Also which political spectrum is likely to be keenest on green policies-left or right , so why is a Conservative gov with 80 seat majority ( so don’t need any other MPS votes ) pushing through these policies? Probably why the voters need someone else to vote for.
Off topic I know but the Daily Mail has broadly changed its stance – albeit after the referendum. When Geordie Greig took over from Paul Dacre in September 2018, the former was already a rabid remainer and unhinged Boris-hater. It’s taken Grieg a while to weed out the non-conformists but the Mail looks very different today. Other than Andrew Pierce not many true believers (in Brexit) remain.
Your Lack of Knowledge is staggeringly Ignorant..I voted Leave EUSSR. 4th reich, for Freedom of thought, the Globalist Press i.Independent,.Guardian,Financial Times;,The Times,The observer,The new statemen,Private Eye ALL thought ”They”knew best….Half Tory party like Lib-dem,Labour ,Greens tried to reverse Referendum, They shouldn’t be anywhere near being elected, ..Foxtrot oscar..
Calling the EU the 4th Reich displays a staggering level of ignorance (to use your expression) of what the 3rd Reich was like. The 3rd Reich organised genocide of Jews and Gypsies, it wasn’t a treaty organisation that followed the rule of law, and you couldn’t vote to leave it. So not a good comparison.
By Godwin’s law, your Nazj analogy has just lost you the argument.
Really You plank .The founders of 1952 Iron*Steel Community,were members of Germany’s Third reich,;see ”The Tainted Source” or is reading Too much for you..
We’ve discussed the Iron and Steel Community already on UnHerd. I pointed out that Germany was fairly intensively de-nazjfied and that the post-war German government was clearly not a continuation of the former regime. European cooperation is NOT a Nazj plot.
You seem very quick to resort to personal insult. Be careful – people may start to think think you are insecure about your… theories.
They are NOT theories, Paul Monnet & his acolytes admitted as much, In July 1961.1963 Macmillan,Geoffrey Rippon ,and edward Heath tried to hide their real motives.
See Professor Alan Sked’s excellent ”The real aims of Superstate& World Governance”
Nick Wright
3 years ago
I don’t know what’s more chaotic here: Fox’s politics (as described, without any attempt at being understood) or Gold’s narrative.
Thank you! It is a very poorly structured article — and as you say, the author seems to make no attempt to understand the thought and passion behind Fox’s ideas, chaotic or not.
Agree totally with your conclusion re. ‘author’. I am seriously disappointed that Unherd considers T Gold anything other than a self-obsessed (opinion-wise) food critic. This rambling, uninformed, and rather vicious diatribe is NOT why I became a member.
Zhirayr Nersessian
3 years ago
What does he stand for? Common sense, logic and true conservatism. He has my vote this year. His fight is against a deliberate agenda to break people apart
Last edited 3 years ago by Zhirayr Nersessian
Dean Rutzen
3 years ago
So, James Fox left acting to for years “join a Christian cult?” I like James Fox, so I looked up which cult he had joined. It was The Navigators, which is not a cult by any reasonable definition. It’s just an Evangelical Christian group doing what Christians have done since, well, the time of Christ. I’m an American, so I can’t comment on English politics; but I will say that you might do well to wonder how much more of this article is false.
Yes..but Archbishop Welby of Woke Don’t help,if They don’t believe why should we ?..however after Trendy1980 speech at york cathedral ,it was struck by lightning,fittingly
Elizabeth Hart
3 years ago
Yes CC, it’s a snide piece of journalism, with the author choosing to ignore the big picture at stake, i.e. the slide of our societies into authoritarianism…
Consider some examples of little digs in the article intended to tarnish Laurence Fox’s reputation:
“He was recently present at an anti-lockdown protest where policemen were injured.” Which lockdown protest would that be? The one last Saturday, where thousands of people participated in a largely peaceful protest? Was this scene of police confrontation against the public necessary?
“He suffered at Harrow School, where he was expelled before his A levels for a sexual misdemeanour, which ended his chances of university.” Crikey, that sounds sinister doesn’t it, what could that be about?! But an interview in The Guardian reports Laurence Fox “claims to have been expelled from Harrow after being discovered by a PE teacher having sex during the sixth form ball”. Why not just say that in this article, rather than sly innuendo?
So all in all, a biased article by an author who took little effort to understand the difficulties facing a person, such as Laurence Fox, taking a courageous stand against the prevailing authoritarianism in what was previously a free society.
It was certainly a strange article, and I’m not sure I have a much better picture of Mr Fox as a result. But if you agree with everything a man stands for it’s unlikely you have understood everything he stands for. I suspect we’re all wrong about something, but it might be a bit of a coincidence if (in addition to all the stuff you’re both right about) you and he also happened to be mistaken about exactly the same things too.
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
I suppose it is easy to be dismissive of the unusual candidate, especially since the professional political class is without fault. It must be a shock to some in the chattering class that a lot of us have watched professional politicians make a mess of most things they touch. And when a candidate has a five-point plan for addressing any and every issue, that smacks of a sociopathic control freak who should be nowhere near power.
Calling out “white privilege” as racist is accurate. What else can it be? An immutable characteristic is used to indict an entire group. He calls his enemies “race baiters” but what is he? Considering this article offered up exactly zero evidence for calling him such, it appears he’s not a race-baiter. Teaching kids about their country’s history and saying they not be ashamed of it hardly qualifies. Nor does his affinity for free speech, which raises a curious point: when did people who make a living off of free speech become so hostile to it when used by others?
‘White privilege’ is not an indictment of an entire group. It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people.
Whether you agree with the theory that a society is racist or not is up to you but that doesn’t make the theory itself racist or the description of the impact racist.
Many people who are most vocal about the existence of white privilege, such a Robin D’Angelo, believe that white people are innately and unavoidably racist. She also said: “To be less white is to: be less oppressive, less arrogant, less certain, less defensive, less ignorant, more humble”
That is racist.
OK. So you think Robin D’Angelo has racist views. I haven’t read her stuff. I’ve read lots of other stuff on the subject that makes sense to me and doesn’t portray white people as innately and unavoidably racist. That’s why it’s so important to be clear about what we’re talking about.
Do you think my description of what I understand ‘white privilege’ to be is racist? (It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people.)
Do you think my description of what I understand ‘white privilege’ to be is racist? (It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people.)
I often find this statement being repeated by people who don’t travel a lot. Once you leave the comforts of the West you can see real racism in action. It makes all talk of white privilege seem very parochial and naive. Compared to the rest of the world, Western nations do a formidable job of welcoming foreigners to their shores.
What privileges / advantages do the white working class have compared with others from the same school/neighbourhood? I ask as someone who grew up in SE London. Pray tell
To claim seriously that white people are innately and unavoidably racist is indeed racist. If she does that, then she is what she protests against. No group is “innately” more racist than another. Racism is learned (or perhaps taught) behaviour – cultural rather than innate.
The term “whiteness” (as in “to be less white”) encompasses a vaguely defined set of factors that blend from overt racism through to a lack of awareness all the way to a stubborn denial that there is any racism in the white community. It also includes varying shades of perfectly reasonable cultural phenomena, and ways that society operates (some fine, some less so). They are not saying “become actually coloured”. But it’s a dreadful term.
In a way it’s the mirror image of “woke” – and is useless for much the same reasons. Both sides of any debate end up talking past each other, using different definitions of the term.
‘White privilege’ is not an indictment of an entire group.It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people. Nice job of undercutting your own argument. By the way, if whites are so favored, why do Asians outperform all other groups in education? How do immigrants from Ghana outperform native-born black people, and why are Latinos still streaming this way? Whether you agree with the theory that a society is racist or not is up to you but that doesn’t make the theory itself racist or the description of the impact racist. Western societies are among the least racist on the planet. And again, a “theory” founded on the premise of white = bad is the textbook definition of racist.
This is why CRT came up with the rather splendid checkmate assertion that, only if you are ‘white’ mind, simply by claiming that you aren’t racist is a blatant and oppressive act of denial, ergo a tacit admission that you are.
I’d turn your first question around. Why do Asians perform better than white people in education? Is it because white people are inherently less intelligent? Or inherently lazy? Or is it something in white culture that makes them less respectful of education? Is it because they expect handouts from the government so don’t need to try so hard? Is it that Asian people have a natural affinity with their teachers that white people don’t? Is it because white people are more likely to come from a single parent family? Why do foreign born white people in the US do better than native born white people in education?
I don’t know why Asian people do better in education than white people but I’m not going to blame white or Asian people for it.
Educational attainment closely correlates with income and income closely correlates with race.
The median income of Asian households in the US is more than twice that of a black household and a third more than white households. The median income of a white household is 40% greater than a black household.
Critical Race Theories suggest that the reasons for these discrepancies in things like income and educational attainment are related to historical and contemporary racism.
At a societal level, the single biggest determinant of an individual’s wealth is the wealth of their parents and this trend goes back generations. Less than sixty years ago the USA had racial discrimination written into its law and this is just the most obvious example of how racism was embedded into the US society and economy. Critical Race Theories state that this historical racism has an impact on the way different races fare in the US today.
It doesn’t mean white = bad.
Why do Asians perform better than white people in education? Asian culture values education. High-achieving black kids, meanwhile, are accused of ‘acting white.’ At some point, you have to stop playing the victim and take advantage of the freedoms that past generations fought to secure. It doesn’t mean white = bad. That is exactly how it is presented and it is a cultural poison. Whiteness is treated as a condition to be eradicated, and people are tarred for no more than existing. Done with kids, it rises to the level of abuse and it does black kids no favors, either. Before the civil rights era, black children grew up mostly in two-parent homes, understood that education was their best way out of poverty, and pregnant teens were a rarity. None of that is true today and it results from the foreseeable consequences of misguided ideas.
You didn’t answer the question of why Asians do better than white people in education. Unless, your implied answer is white people don’t value education?
I presume you mean East Asians (ie Chinese etc.). Cultural differences. Self-discipline, more collectivist (less individualist) mindset, deference to elders (parents – “tiger mothers”), that sort of thing.
Does this racial ‘privilege’ apply in majority brown/black countries where there is a wealth gap between different ethnic/tribal groups? Are these racist societies too?
> It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people.
It is a racist theory because it uses race as the discriminator. That is the definition of racist theories, like blacks and IQ on the right. Now using a race as discriminator does not make it false by definition, but if a theory has such humongously huge glaring holes, like designating Oboma being more privileged than a poor orphan Appalachian, than it can only be of use by actual unadulterated racists.
Second, study after study shows that colorblind class is a much better discriminator for the effects that these racist try to ‘explain’. If you than keep preferring the racist theory it is hard not to see this as a racist practice?
No, Bridgeford. A society which favours its members, as any society should, per definition of being a society. And a society in Europe is per definition a white society. Same as a society in Africa is a black society. Et cætera. If that’s a “racist” concept for you, then nothing is wrong with racism.
“White privilege” is a politically correct term for ‘black ineptitude’.
Last edited 3 years ago by Johannes Kreisler
Simon Latham
3 years ago
This really confirms all I thought about Tanya Gold: still a Guardianista at heart, something of a misandrist and conservative (small c) baiter. There are perhaps too many candidates in the Mayoral elections but being white and male didn’t stop BJ winning.
Joanna S
3 years ago
He isn’t a ‘third rate rejected actor and failed musician’. The acting world closed ranks against him and denied him his job for no other reason than his political views – that’s totalitarianism on a scale last imposed in 1930s Germany (by so-called Socialists). How’s that for ‘predictability of the spiel’ of our craven times. How’s that for the so-called Liberalism of the arts?
Nick Faulks
3 years ago
After reading this piece, and discovering how much Ms Gold dislikes him, I am even more determined to vote for Laurence Fox than I was before.
Helena Rose
3 years ago
The ‘correction’ that had to be made tells you everything you need to know – this is a disingenuous article by yet another middle class journalist who’s got it in for Mr Fox for daring to challenge the mainstream narrative and calling out the actual racists (who call themselves anti-racists). I admire him for standing up to all the lockdown and woke BS – it’s not easy not to follow the crowd. We need more like him. Best of luck to you lozza, unfortunately I don’t live in London any more but many of my friends and family are behind you.
”Today’s Anti-Fascists,Will be Tomorrows Fascists” George Orwell,after his being on Marxist death list in 1938,after joining republicans then PoUM..
David Hartlin
3 years ago
Well for me after reading the article I wished I had spent 7 minutes listening to a cat cough up a fur ball instead of reading the literary equivalent.
Joanna S
3 years ago
Well, most black or brown people have moved to the West in search of opportunities and sophistication often unavailable or denied them in their own countries. Why is it fashionable to denigrate the West so much. It’s not, nor has it ever been Utopia – but it has given the world a great deal in both practical and cultural terms. It is also a great deal more tolerant and open to new ideas than elsewhere. If celebrating and teaching that is ‘race-baiting’ then those who object might stay away.
G Harris
3 years ago
I sometimes like what Tanya Gold writes and sometimes I don’t.
When it’s good it’s often really good like the beautifully written piece she did on the ‘left behinds’ of Cornwall recently, but I find it more than a little ironic given the blatant and deliberately nasty hatchet job above vaguely masquerading as campaign trail journalism that a comment I made highlighting this obvious variability in quality was presumably removed as it was perceived as an ‘ad hominem’, or perhaps that should be ‘ad womanem’?
The ‘amendment’ at the end of this piece speaks volumes I’m afraid and tells you all you need to know about what the underlying narrative of this piece was going to be before the first letter even hit the page.
Yes, she occasionally writes something worth reading. Ironically, the left-behinds of Cornwall are the very people that Fox, and certainly Reform, might appeal to. Yet Fox and Reform et al are the people on whom she has done a hatched job here.
Outside m25 ,after living in london for 40 years, I find people outside metropolis,More willing to listen to Non-conformists,leavers, etc….It just shows london is up its own woke trendy rubbish backend…
Likewise. During the past few months in Kent I’ve had lots of dealings with many Builders /Landscapers. It’s been a hoot. It was refreshing to hear people speak openly – about anything. They see woke for what it is – nonsense. It has restored my faith in the sanity of most people – for now.
Lan Tran
3 years ago
Dear Tanya Gold,
I truly adhere to Laurence Fox’s ideas, however clumsy they might sound to the so-called intellectuals of this world. Laurence Fox was thrown into this fight unexpectedly. But being true to himself, he stands by his views, ideas that many people adhere to without the possibility to say them out loud. He is honest and brave, and that makes him rare in the world of politics. I’m not born British, only naturalised British. But I do defend Britain’s values and British culture, that many people take for granted. I’m not a Londoner to vote for Laurence but would urge all around me to.
ps: ‘decriminalise’ and not ‘decrimalise’ in your text.
S A
3 years ago
I think it show that the label “childlike” applies to the author is she thinks that history is made up of people that tried an idea once and succeeded rather then we remember the small number who stood on the work of so many who first failed.
Failure is the first step to success, it doesn’t always lead to success but I can’t think of someone or some idea that succeeded with out at some point failing.
De Blasio is a similar Mayor to Khan, both have destroyed their cities.
Chauncey Gardiner
3 years ago
Sheesh. We get it. The author doesn’t like Fox. “Sad and silly.” Expecting your reader to mindlessly go along that is just that: sad and silly, cringe-inducing, almost pathetic.
Lesley van Reenen
3 years ago
I have had a few perfectly reasonable and polite comments removed from this thread.
My comment was also removed, I had the audacity to say that I read this article because I actually wanted to know what Laurence Fox stood for and it was a waste of time as it turned out to be just an attempt to smear the man. I said something about how sad it was that opinion and snide comments have replaced facts or any attempt at objectivity and that this sort of ‘journalism’ was puerile and pointless as most people see right through it.
I made a similar comment and likewise mine was removed.
Vikram Sharma
3 years ago
Spoken like the truly amoral. Things are not good or bad, right or wrong. They are to be judged only on whether they appear int eh Telegraph so you can march in the opposite direction, feeling better and superior
steve horsley
3 years ago
i think if he ran a more professional campaign he might do better because surely most white londoners will agree with his statements.of course khan has the thing stitched up which will surely sicken any right thinking londoner.
“of course khan has the thing stitched up which will surely sicken any right thinking londoner” Translation: Londoners will vote by a large majority for Khan to continue running their city. They know his track record over several years and they broadly approve of it.
Your translation is entirely risible. You obviously don’t live in London.
Joanna S
3 years ago
Actually, it is widely held amongst the woke that the flag is redolent of all that is wrong about Britain. And as for ‘attention seeker,’ there are many better candidates for that description amongst those who damage public property and bait the police for a photo opportunity.
Or, maybe, the anti-lockdown extremists who injured two police officers in Saturday’s march?
Seb Dakin
3 years ago
A typical stump speech is: “I want to reclaim your freedom to speak. To cherish your history rather than rewrite it. And to teach our children to be confident, not ashamed of who they are and where they come from.” Well he’s got my vote.
David B
3 years ago
Freedom is slavery etc. The “progressive” left projects all day long.
William Harvey
3 years ago
I liked the article despite it being poorly written and researched. It pays to consider all sides ..to look with both eyes rather than just using the left or right. Yes it was more like a Guardian hatchet jib ..but then a lot of other pieces on here are Tegraph hatchet jobs.
Fair play to Unherd for publishing it.
Ian Smith
3 years ago
“fled drama for a decade for a Christian cult.” Tanya, which cult did James Fox join?
Any self-effacing practising heathen such as myself may well describe the Navigators as a cult in its purest definition. It’s hardly a point worth hanging your hat on.
James Hamilton
3 years ago
This is frustrating because he too enables hatred. He calls his enemies “race baiters” but what is he? A typical stump speech is: “I want to reclaim your freedom to speak. To cherish your history rather than rewrite it. And to teach our children to be confident, not ashamed of who they are and where they come from.”
Can someone explain the link between hate and his stump speech? I get the race-baiters bit, but what’s hateful (or race baiting) about cherishing history, free speech, and confident children?
Short answer: none of that conforms to the absolutist, self-aggrandising, opinions of this ghastly, unformed, bigoted author.
S A
3 years ago
It could also publish articles advocating flat earth ideas, but would that be worthy of commendation? The issue isn’t the criticism of an idea or person (there is room for that in everything) the issue is: was there something new or interesting in understanding to take away?
I can’t see it. An actor who isn’t good on details of law and public policy? Wow I’s so surprised! An anecdote about his school matron? fine. But what is there here that adds to anything?
Anna Bramwell
3 years ago
I think they found one Sikh soldier who may have fought with a Midlands regiment,but nobody was,sure. Of course, vast numbers of troops from,India fought in Europe during the 1st World War, but they had their own regiments.
in WW2 A lot of Indians fought with Japanese, Chandra bose, does that make them ”Fascists” ..
p kirkman
3 years ago
This is a terrible ill informed rant by Tanya Gold ..What a relief that others think the same
David Platzer
3 years ago
Laurence Fox may be an English answer to James Stewart’s Mr Smith goes to Washington. He is not an ideologue and he fell into politics in the way Alice went through the looking glass. He spokes from instinct rather than following any party line.
Hosias Kermode
3 years ago
If this article and the discussion that follows suggest one thing, it is that we should scrap the whole idea of a Mayor for London. Let’s have less of the politics of personality. The booklet with briefings on all the candidates hit my mailbox at the weekend. What a thin and unimpressive lot! Where is any vision for this great city of ours. We are being offered a vote to scrap the Mayor of Tower Hamlets in favour of a committee with a range of views. I shall vote for that. As for the GLA circus, it looks like being another spoiled ballot paper from me.
Last edited 3 years ago by Hosias Kermode
Sharon Overy
3 years ago
As he’s running for Mayor of London, I should imagine he’s speaking to Londoners. If they’re from immigrant backgrounds, why did they (or their parents/grandparents) come here if it’s so terrible, or why haven’t they returned or gone elsewhere?
Brigitte Lechner
3 years ago
A rambling article for a rambling political candidate. Very creative. I think the best actors anong the Foxes are Emilia and what I suspect is Freddy, her son (?) who plays the narcissistic murderer in The White House. Many view his father as a National Treasure but I don’t; he only ever plays himself. The woke establishment, particularly the Arts, banished Laurence for his unwoke views (thought he ought to ramp up their epistemological foundations) and I commend him for choosing the world (or at least Blighty) as his stage instead. If I lived in London I would vote for him, if only because he is the only unwoke candidate, excepting Binface who is unwoke by default. Politics ain’t what it used to be.
moishe dodson
3 years ago
More than 100 years ago a journalist and writer wrote a letter to his government. A national newspaper had the courage to print it on the front page. It is what inspired many of my generation to attempt to communicate important issues to the ‘public’ – the people. Zola still had in mind that there was a forum for this democratic debate and discussion, and he felt confident that he could communicate through the media. He began his letter, “J’Accuse!…” and excoriated one of the most famous cases of institutional racism of modern times. The so-called media today too often, it seems to me, to treat these issues with trivialising anecdotes overlain with clumsy attempts at sarcasm, underpinned by unexamined and simplistic attitudes and prejudices dressed up as political wisdom. I ask each new cohort of my Journalist Students what is meant by the term The Fourth Estate, and they have not a clue. I ask them if they have heard of the Dreyfus Affair and Zola’s letter. Not a clue. Laurence Fox may be wrong, for all I know, about many important issues, but this article says nothing substantial about any issue of importance, let alone what Fox thinks about it. Luckily, Fox has access to social media, so we can judge for ourselves. And though many of us on the Left may disagree with some of his politics, what he is saying needs to be debated seriously as he is attempting to be serious about a serious subject, – something the ‘journalist’ here does not seem to remember is the proper function of the Fourth Estate. Perhaps they remember this quote,”The supposed right of intolerance is absurd and barbaric. It is the right of the tiger; nay, it is far worse, for tigers do but tear in order to have food, while we rend each other for paragraphs.”?
L Fox is a bit Naive,if he stood for A Non-Job Overpaid mayor of A Kent City or surrey he might get in..but Khan’s london looks increasingly, like 1981 sci-fic classic ”Escape from New York” ??
Fintan Power
3 years ago
Tanya Gold’s efforts seem more like a hit job on Laurence Fox than a real effort to understand him. I wish him well.
James Moss
3 years ago
What does Laurence Fox stand for? Bizarrely he seems to think he has not yet sufficient of an idiot of himself and this will do the trick? Or is it an attempt to make Brian Rose look credible? Who knows – but he is an easy target for ridicule. Not that impressed by his acting.
Here’s an interesting point someone raised elsewhere:
“I also understand he was expelled from Harrow. As someone who went to a public school in the late 99s/early 00s I would like to point out it’s quite difficult to achieve this. One is normally asked to leave by consent.
Things at my school which DIDN’T warrant expulsion included: i) dealing class A drugs as a 15 year old to 13 year olds (suspension), ii) 18 year olds selling weapons to 13 year olds (suspension), iii) 18 year old helping 15 year old carry out suicide attempt (asked to leave), iv) cheating in GCSEs/A-levels (detention) v) punching fellow student in face (detention) and vi) bullying fellow student to the point that he tried to kill himself (detention).
Interestingly an instance of consensual sexual activity between boys DID lead to expulsion. Of the older boy – the younger boy got told if he repented and said the older boy led him on then he could stay and do his GCSEs.
So I am genuinely curious to know what Mr Fox did to get expelled. Did he kill a teacher or something?”
In fact, had PLF been the sort of boy that towed the line at school rather than kissing girls in town, he might never have been the man who would later walk across Europe and then kidnap a German general (with whom he exchanged lines from Virgil).
My money would be on the second to last speculation.
mike otter
3 years ago
The hack that wrote this has had a spell at the graun… and all the other MSM “broadsheets” IIRC. Pretty sure she plays the alcy card too like mitchellnwebb was the other say. I do not believe either have been addicts because survivors of addiction are most often generous, humble and not given to the snide nastiness of the wokist MSM.
No. Because it is badly written. It’s full of hopeless attempts at verbal flourish which obscure rather than illuminate or entertain- and it’s deliberately misleading. It is, in fact, more damaging to its author than its subject.
Zach Thornton
3 years ago
How have the rights gay people to exist, marry and work ever impacted you?
Most anti-woke people are not against gay and trans rights. After all many gay people are anti-woke. However the trans rights movement is now too extreme – to the extent that they are on a collision course with both feminists and gays. Figure it out?
It seems that too many movements are eventually hijacked by extremists. Feminism is a good case in point where the more extreme elements expound on what women should say, do and think. All this ultimately does is scare people off and many now simply avoid the term.
Gay rights means rights for gay people. If you say you’re anti-gay rights then that could mean you’re against gay people’s right to marry or work. I disagree with trans-women moving into hard won female spaces but what does that have to do with gay rights? Words matter!
Anjela Kewell
3 years ago
Unherd is Guardian friendly. I come here to get a jist of what the Guardian is saying. I refuse to give the Guardian (BBC) clickbait. I very rarely agree with the articles. They like sneering
Whereas you know that it’s The Guardian that represents the centrist point of view eh Chris?
Russ Littler
3 years ago
Same here.
Joanna S
3 years ago
That certainly was the inference. But, I think you know that. Your comment is disingenuous.
David Platzer
3 years ago
Laurence Fox may be a kind of English version of the James Stewart Mr Smith goes to Washington in the 1930s.
Meghan Kathleen Jamieson
3 years ago
I didn’t find this article very interesting or enlightening. I think it was supposed to create a mood but I’m not sure what I am meant to take from it. I can easily imagine a good article that was very positive about Fox, or one that was negative about him, or one that was mixed. This was not any of those articles.
Francis MacGabhann
3 years ago
Indeed. By now, everyone of any intelligence believes in an ineffable spirit of the ages moving through history and advancing us to the sunlit uplands of sweet reason. Don’t they?
Paul Wright
3 years ago
Hardly a hit piece. It conveyed a certain sadness, didn’t mock. What is your (and everyone else’s) problem with it?
William Harvey
3 years ago
I liked the article.. but she should also do one on Khan… to keep the balance.but she won’t.. because she’d lose any opportunity for a lucrative “communications” role inside Khan’s empire intje next year or two. In.tne context… not a bad resume piece.
Geraint Williams
3 years ago
‘the others’ …. oh dear
robert scheetz
3 years ago
“Racist, sexist, homophobe, anti-Semite” and the plethora of identitarian and politically correct newspeak is a tyranny. And politics is a thoroughgoing speciousness as we are governed by an imperial corporatocracy. So it appears James Hathaway has written himself into a rather pointed play. Thank you.
Clive Hambly
3 years ago
Surely it’s his very amateurishness that makes him unsuitable to be mayor?
I don’t think he expects to be mayor, I think he just wants the conversation to be had and being in politics allows him to express that as part of a political manifesto, with some protection.
“People should be able to have control over their own bodies” but I don’t know if we should decriminalise drugs basically sums Fox up.
Damian Hern
3 years ago
A good article. Perfectly sums up his lacklustre campaign by not answering the question posed at the beginning, who knows what he actually stands for. His campaign also lacks reach and will only appeal to a very small minority. I’m disappointed with the negative comments on here about the article and really do highlight that many don’t like to hear from any journalist with a different point of view. The main reason I read and subscribe to Unherd is to broaden my understanding of topics/issues from writers of all sides. I don’t think name calling or discrediting someone because of their stance is befitting a debate at all.
And yours is the establishment media. Good job Chris.
Val Colic-Peisker
3 years ago
An excellent article Tanya – you’re a talented writer & keen observer – a very nuanced and well written analysis. I watched some Laurence Fox on YouTube interviews and he is not too sophisticated with his ideology, to say the least – quite underwhelming actually. A politician? I hope not! He should stick to what he knows, and perhaps that’s acting. I’m neither English nor living in England, but I have many English and British friends and colleagues in Australia, and Fox is most certainly not ‘the best of the English’. He is not at all ‘unassuming’ either, as per the comment immediately below. And what on earth does ‘Tanya Gold stand for’ as per comment by J. Redman below??
mac mahmood
3 years ago
When I first became aware of him, he appeared to be someone desperately striving to be the British William F Buckley Jr but without his panache or facility with the language.
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Go to the Telegraph, then. The point of being here is that is neither Guardian or Telegraph.
Mark.. as I have said before. You read with just one eye. Unherd has a wide range of views ( as evidenced by today’s spectrum of articles) but you only see one side… though fair play for giving it a go at defending your slanted viewpoint in the comments on a regular basis.
Paul N
3 years ago
It was certainly a strange article, and I’m not sure I have a much better picture of Mr Fox as a result.
But if you agree with everything a man stands for it’s unlikely you have understood everything he stands for. I suspect we’re all wrong about something, but it might be a bit of a coincidence if (in addition to all the stuff you’re both right about) you and he also happened to be mistaken about exactly the same things too.
Joanna S
3 years ago
Childish. Why not use Twitter, if that’s the kind of comment you want to make?
Paul N
3 years ago
You deserve an award for services to wokeness, Clem. You’ve just disproved the Foxian claim that “you can’t say what you think about Race any more.” It seem you can, even if it’s borderline r*cist, or worse.
You may not be aware that the Right Honourable Sadiq Aman Khan was born in London, and is British. His family are of Pakistani extraction, but he has every right to be here.
Do you have any evidence at all that he wants Sharia law in the UK? You described him as a Sharia Lawyer – his specialism was in fact human rights, which is (I’m sure you’ll agree) not the same thing.
his specialism was in fact human rights, which is (I’m sure you’ll agree) not the same thing.
Indeed not the same thing, but a comparably irrational belief system. There’s no such thing as “human rights” – they are a make-believe set of arbitrary dogmata, much like sharia.
There is a Human Rights Document that defines the Human Rights , which we studied at school. It was so long ago I can’t remember what it was called or who put it together.
Yes, there is such a document. Which does not mean that Human Rights as a concept exists any more than the Loch Ness Monster or the Lizard People, even though there are a number of publications printed about them.
Human Rights are a make-believe dogma.
Chris C
3 years ago
Laurence Fox would be better advised to drop the anti-lockdown nonsense and stick to defending statues and opposing wokery. While endorsing anti-lockdown may have appeared politically clever by addressing a demographic which doesn’t have a well-established player representing it, it saddles him with every variety of fruitloopery ranging from the vaccine deniers and the we-just-need-Vitamin-D crowd to those who just won’t accept scientific facts.about the transmission of infectious diseases….. taking in en route those who believe the vaccines are a way for Bill Gates to microchip them, those who believe the Bilderberg group created the virus as part of a plan to take over the world, and those who believe that it’s all a conspiracy by a three-headed green lizard If Fox stuck to opposing wokery, he would have most people agreeing with him (though probably still not voting for him – it’s too narrow an issue especially considering the London electorate). As it is, he is damaging the anti-woke cause by tying it in with the loony fringe.
When is someone with clout going to address the elephant in the room? That is, questioning the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s domination of global vaccination policy. It’s Bill Gates who has led the race for Covid-19 vaccines, to vaccinate the global population against a virus which isn’t a serious threat for most people, see for example his article on GatesNotes: What you need to know about the COVID-19 vaccine, 30 April 2020. It’s way past time that ‘philanthropists’ such as Gates were subject to investigation for the enormous power they are wielding over global policy. For instance, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the top funder of the WHO, along with the BMGF-founded Gavi Alliance, and vaccine producing countries such as the UK, US and Germany and the European Commission. In other words, the WHO is a front for the vaccine industry. And according to this September 2020 report, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is a major investor in vaccine companies, i.e. Pfizer, BioNTech, CureVac and Vir Biotechnology. People such as myself and others have been trying to raise the alarm about the influence of Gates for years, but we have been ridiculed and marginalised by the mainstream media, and on comments forums such as UnHerd. And now here we are, with the Gates running the show, and buying the unquestioning support of media such as the Telegraph, BBC and the Guardian and others. We are in a really bad situation, and with no effective fourth estate to blow the whistle…
For example, Neil Ferguson, the architect of society and economy destroying lockdowns around the world, with his Imperial College Report 9, is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, as noted in the SAGE COVID-19 Register of Participants’ Interests. There’s a massive web of influence to investigate… The disproportionate and ill-targeted response to SARS-CoV2/COVID-19, and it being used as a Trojan Horse to destroy liberal democracies, is the biggest scandal in history! When is the lid going to blow off this thing?!
Marvellous.
You are still pushing the discredited Vitamin D line about preventing Covid. (Though that doesn’t stop me taking it each day – for my bones.)
You are still pushing Bill Gates conspiracy theories.
And you support Laurence Fox.
Bingo!
Clearly your Vit D knowledge only extends to the constipated info coming out of the gov/NHS and the BBC. I am truly sorry you have failed to update your knowledge.
Yes, Bill Gates is running the show.
Gates has world leaders at his beck and call, meeting with UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson in November 2020 to discuss rolling out coronavirus vaccination[1], and pursuing vaccine financing with other world leaders such as French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission, and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayued of the United Arab Emirates[2].
References:
1. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson meets Bill Gates to discuss COVID-19 vaccine. WION, 12 November 2020.
2. Inside Bill Gates’ high-stakes quest to vaccinate the world against COVID-19. The Seattle Times, 23 November 2020
You are not alone. I too have thoroughly researched and investigated this whole scam, and the mind boggles at just how stupid the majority of the public are. I cannot understand why so-called intelligent people believe the lies being spouted by this government, and the media. however, there is light at the end of the tunnel because their false narrative is falling apart fast.
Think it was more like 75-100k but brilliant turn out nontheless. And yes they want all the main media watchers to think that everyone is behind their narrative.
Although Each cause has ”nutjobs,” SARS2 pandemic,iS Not fake but ineptitude,croneyism for contracts,Not acknowledging Kate Bingham’s success &Army Logistics,fans the flames of Conspiracy
To be fair, as with all these things conspiracy of type there is often more than a grain of truth about them plus a few Chinese whispers thrown in for good measure.
The Gates foundation was heavily involved in funding the rightly highly controversial so called Gain of Function viral research at The University of Wisconsin in 2012 that eventually led to a moratorium on it under the Obama administration and that ended in 2017.
Upon restarting, some of that widely acknowledged potentially highly risky research was ‘farmed out’ to the very few disease research centres with optimal safety clearance across the globe by the US, including to one specialising in bats located in a little known place called Wuhan in China.
I agree, this was what has been long feared and there were regular doubts voiced about the bio-security measures taken at the Wuhan laboratory prior to this..
Not only that, it helps to tick some of the boxes in terms of the names that keep cropping up in the conspiracy theories.
Finally, and it’s purely anecdotal granted, a customer of mine who works for Surrey University was in China in September 2019 on business and she noted that state security personnel were testing everybody at the airports with Infrared thermometers three months before the country officially told the world about covid 19.
I wish Someone other than Paul James Watson, would address Bill&melinda Gates,Carbon hypocrisy, 24GT cars,private jets, grass reared” Steak’ cows’.Jeff bezos,George soros equally guilty…Carbon is life giving,necessary for farmlands,grass growth,Forests etc…
Spot on with some omissions – there are several other globalists on the make in this and on the ‘idealist’ mission front – which BTW will backfire badly on them. It’s a complex web – ideals and vested interests coalesced (or rather planned) on the back of a not very fatal virus (in most countries). Our own gov and advisors (four horsemen of the apocalyse) have made and stand to make more millions out of this while improverishing the UK – spending tax payers money. Thank goodness there are on-going international criminal cases happening – lets hope they succeed or there will be a civil war.
I think that is a fair criticism. But so few people speak out anyone who does becomes a magnet for all the crazies – that is another reason why we need MORE people like him not fewer. We can’t leave it to Laurence Fox, Charlie Hebdo and a few others to hold the line for the rest of us.
Well stand like myself as An Independent or join ”Reform ”Right of Centre or ”SDP ”Left of centre on economics parties? Moaning Wont get it done..remember UKIP, Brexit Party were ridiculed when they were formed in 1993,2018
They are standing in many places..Unfortunately SDP or Reform are not standing near me..I also Cant vote for myself (Different Ward) so I may get Null point!
Wake up. It’s not nonsense. I’ve been investigating everything to do with this “rona” crap for the last year. There is not a single piece of scientific evidence (anywhere) that supports this criminal hoax. The whole thing is a lie from start to finish, and people like you are going to wonder how you could be so easily hoodwinked, and duped, when the truth comes out. I promise you Chris, you will have a lot of egg on your face. You read it here first Chris.
I can’t even work out what you mean by stating “There is not a single piece of scientific evidence (anywhere) that supports this criminal hoax“. Which “criminal hoax” exactly?
I think he’s talking about the hoaxers who claim that vaccines have microchips in them, and that Covid is caused by 5G radio waves. There is no evidence for that – worse, there is no plausible mechanism by which it could even happen.
Isn’t it!
Interesting article, Jeannette – but applying a dye pattern to someone’s skin via a vaccine patch (so you can scan the spot later to detect whether they were vaccinated) is not the same as putting microchips into an injection, and ensuring they remain powered for an indefinite period, and being able to track the people at a distance via these fictional microchips.
The criminal hoax that has international lawyers on the myriad arms of this humanitarian crime. If you had told me this 2 years ago I would have said you were crazy- but like others starting with the gut feeling of ‘something not right’ good research makes it clear. Many professionals in health and other fields being silenced. If you have nothing to hide you don’t have to silence people.
Hope so,but Not J shyster Flywheel,Pricipled barrister, if there is such a thing?..Remember Courts refused to even entertain,Restauranteur who tgook Government Lockdowns illegal?..
it is NOT a hoax,the Draconian measures ”Lockdowns” Forbidden to gossip meet in Pubs,Theatres,Cinemas etc fans the flames of Conspiracy,see my other posts.. Ineptitude seems like Conspiracy but it isn’t..
Whether rightfully or wrongfully, it’s certainly been an opportunity for governments to propose ever stringent measures and controls over their constituents with no end in sight.
Sadly, you are right regarding Fox widening his message beyond anti-woke to include Covid and vaccination regulations. We start to assume he feels more comfortable with non-conformists for non-conformists sake.
nick harman
3 years ago
A Poundshop Lord Haw Haw, someone described him as. Which I think is generous.
I’m trying to work out whether it would be more embarrassing for you not to know who Lord Haw Haw was or to know who he was and still think the analogy fits.
We know Mr Fox voted for Corbyn and we also know he was, and probably still is, a fervent remainer. He also has strong views on the pervasive woke and cancel culture. Anyone who followed him on Twitter also know him as anti-lockdown, anti-mask and a vaccine-sceptic. I blocked him when I couldn’t take any more. He talks about race-baiters, freedom of speech, the right to choose blah blah blah yet would appear to be a socialist and a supporter of a party with, shall we say, a few problems around anti-Semitism and race-baiting MP’s itself.
Confused?
London needs a can-do mayor with a range of talents across a broad spectrum not a nightmare hamming it up at City Hall, making policy on the hoof. Fortunately he has zero chance of office.
Shame on the Tories though for putting up a lightweight in Shaun Bailey.
As far as I’m aware, Shaun Bailey is still the Tory candidate for mayor. Fox’s party has comes to some sort of accommodation Reform UK, but the anti-Khan vote is still split and he will romp home and given free rein to do more damage to London,
Fox’s belief system is, as you suggest, and as I point put below, somewhat inchoate. This is only to be expected of someone who hadn’t really thought about things until about 18 months ago. I would imagine he is now very much pro-Brexit, and very much embarrassed by his vote for Corbyn.
My own belief is that Fox would be much more effective as a public face and PR outrider for Reform UK, or for David Kurten in the London mayoral race.
That would be the David Kurten who opposes vaccination?
How irresponsible and ignorant do you have to be to take a position like that? Oh, sorry, this is the fringe right, ’nuff said.
but Kurten is caribbean descent,ex UKIP ,surely you are ”Racist” for calling him out, if caribbean people have blood disorders,like leukaemia or Anaemia,they would be right to be dubious of vaccination
I’ve only heard of Mr Fox relatively recently. But I suspect that actors, much like journalists/writers only really ever ‘stand for’ their own egos, and whatever it is that buoys that ego. It always seems to be them telling us that someone or something is dreadful or foolish, or worthy of being mocked, merely because they do not think like them. Whatever it is that they really think is, perhaps, irrelevant. Thoughtful people who like to consider all aspects of a problem before not applying an ideological solution seem to never take up those trades.
But I suspect that actors, much like journalists/writers only really ever ‘stand for’ their own egos. You forgot politicians in your rather superficial analysis.
Perhaps people objecting to ‘woke tyranny’ appear aimless because they are tilting at windmills? Perhaps Khan will win in London because people in London thinking he is doing the best he can for them?
When Boris won London, one of his first acts as Mayor was to cut the scheme giving cheap/free travel on public transport to people on low incomes.
When Sadiq Khan won London, one of his first acts as Mayor was to ensure that when people who take multiple buses to get to work (such as cleaners) buy a ticket, it covers all their journeys within an hour, rather than them having to buy two or three tickets.
That’s the difference between an entitled Old Etonian who described the £275,000 pa he received for writing a weekly column in the Torygraph as ‘chickenfeed’, and the son of a bus driver. No wonder Sadiq Khan is cruising it.
You are clearly not a resident of London. To write what you have here is preposterous. It simply reveals that you are woefully ignorant of the deterioration in all areas of mayoral responsibility where Kahn has failed abysmally.
Laurence Fox represents for some of us the best of the English.
He didn’t choose this fight, he was forced into it by being called a racist simply for saying what he believed in- that England is a lovely county.
Like many unassuming English men, he avoided confrontation till he was backed into a corner.
I respect the man. I wish more English men would take pride in their country, culture and community. And take a stand.
I have not seen anything that proves that Laurence is anything but the decent English kind, pushed beyond his limit. To call him racist or right wing is to abuse language.
I would love to have a drink with him in a pub.
Go Laurence.
Has anyone ever really been called a racist for saying that England is a lovely country? Are you sure that’s what he said?
Apparently I am “racist” for flying the English flag on St George’s Day – so yes many people are being called such things.
Who called you racist for doing that?
Is it pedantic to ask people to back up assertions with some evidence?
No, she didn’t call New Heathen a racist. Facts are important.
‘White Van Man’ in Strood Kent wasn’t it?
Just like Dianne Abbot or whatever she is called.
Hypocrisy runs deep in the Labour Party. It is perhaps its most odious characteristic.
Oooh! You asked a naughty question too. The hivemind is displeased with you.
I suspect NH is extrapolating wildly from some Labour politician’s remarks about “white van man” and English flags, to conclude than anyone who flies the cross of St George is thereby accused of racism.
He might just be assuming bad faith on the part of these who see the country differently than he does. Just as well he’s not a left wing millennial, or he’d be labelled as a snowflake on top of everything else.
I didn’t fly a flag but I have heard criticism of people who do. I was so out of touch I thought it was just football supporters 🙂
Hypothetically, one could fly a flag because one was a racist, or one could fly a flag for perfectly good reasons – even patriotism. The idea that flying a flag makes one a racist – or shows that one is racist – is absurd. Unless it’s an actual Nazj flag of course.
It’s like conservative press conferences – I may think politicians draping themselves in flags makes them look like plonkers, but I defend their right to do it. Probably not to the death though. that would be taking it a bit far.
Are you trying to say that “racism” cannot be a perfectly good reason?
If so, then you need to define what you mean by “racism” first.
St George was Turkish/Greek – ironic that the flag is synonymous with chest thumping “This is England” types.
There was no Turkey in St George’s time.
By your “logic”, Noah was soviet.
“He has the glass of milk emoji next to his Twitter handle which represents the alt-right / white supremacy apparently.”
No, it’s a meme dreamt up on 4chan to ridicule the credulous. Sorry to say…
What is ‘boarding school syndrome’?
See if you can find the film “If” circa 1968.
Something thought up by someone who wasn’t educated in one.
How very perceptive, well done Sir!
Thank you.
Silly objection, the context is that Fox is defending Britain in general from a series of claims and views attempting to condemn it as backward, benighted and racist. The OP has merely paraphrased Fox’s position in a single sentence as opposed to rehearsing it at length.
The problem with Vikram’s “summary” of why Mr Fox was accused of racism is that it reduces it to an absurdity. Nobody would accuse someone of racism for saying “what he believed in” if it actually was simply “that England is a lovely county”.
If you don’t take the trouble to understand the criticism (or even state it accurately), how can you possibly know that it is not valid?
And, from the Telegraph clip kindly linked by Liam, you can see that Mr Fox’s bit about England being lovely (which of course it is) came after he was accused of racism – so it can’t possibly have been the reason.
I saw him on Question time. He was a breath of fresh air. I was thrilled at his chutzpah. Maybe THAT is what Harrow gives you ? It looks as if he peaked too early. Sad.
No relation to Vera I suppose?
Mmm yep. She did.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jhQsp4Ow0A
Thanks for engaging, and for the evidence of what actually happened. I vastly prefer your honest disagreement to the 30+ people who downvoted the question but actually had nothing to say on the issue.
My reading of that clip is that Mr Fox said how lovely and tolerant England is after the lady called out what she saw as racism. However right or wrong her original accusation was, and the Telegraph did not include that, he was not (as Vikram claimed) “being called a racist simply for saying… that England is a lovely county“.
Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
You are missing the point entirely, and deliberately, as usual. Fox may well be a privileged white male, but he was told that as a white privileged male he had no right to comment. And denying him the right to comment or speak out on the basis of his colour is indeed racist.
He was not told he had no right to comment. He was told that he might not be the best placed person to identify where racism existed. This is a good example of people claiming that they are being silenced for being white when no such thing occurred.
Mr Bridgeford
If you really believe you are a privileged white male, please get down on your knees next time you see a non-White and ask for forgiveness.
Meanwhile I will tell the poor white pensioner I saw in my clinic yesterday to stop whining and watch his privilege.
You sound both foolish and sinister. Quite an achievement
Careful with your condescension, Mr Bridgeford. Your comments are beginning to sound a lot like white-splaining!
Fair point. Condescension is never a good look.
The colour tone of a person’s skin is irrelevant. Its something you are born with the same as eye colour or length of big toe. To suggest that he is not allowed to comment on a subject due to some immutable characteristic is inherently racist. We can test this argument by replacing Mr Fox in the argument with say … Ian Wright (the footballer) if we then say because Mr Wright has a darker skin tone he cannot comment… that wod be “racist” wouldn’t it. Therefore, the comment to Mr Fox is also racist. Alternatively, neither is. You cannot have it both ways mate…and that’s the point really.
And I with you.
Well, those 2,000 words left me none the wiser as to what Laurence Fox stands for, but fairly clear about what Tanya Gold stands for.
Maybe we all would be wiser if Mr Fox knew what he stood for.
Anybody is better than can’t Khan.
Londoners clearly disagree with you. But, hey, what would Londoners know about it?
Don’t lump all Londoners in please. I’d rather have nobody than Khan.
Khan’s Record of Not condemning ”Terror’Incidents As ‘Part *&parcel of living in London” 2) Record Knife deaths 3) Chopping londons Roads into Cycle lanes is NOT popular ..Time EU regional Assembly was closed…
As you well know, nothing.
I think Chris C is a Labour pollster,he believes in phrasing Questions which Give Answer people want, Like lib-dems on ”rejoining EU” or tories on ”Building homes in Countryside”.. ie Fixed polls have All validity of ”Scientific SARS2 data & climate ”
I`m sure you miss spelled cant
Including Mr Fox himself
We know what Fox stands against, and that’s perfectly enough to stand WITH Fox. As long as he stands against wokery, that’s all i need to know to support him.
Well, he says, and I quote:
“I want to reclaim your freedom to speak. To cherish your history rather than rewrite it. And to teach our children to be confident, not ashamed of who they are and where they come from.”
You’d be wiser about what Mr Fox stood for by listening to what he says.
I doubt it
Who cares? He’s definitely made of the “right stuff”!
Thank goodness for people like Laurence Fox, willing to stick his neck out and challenge the current destruction of our free societies.
He’s literally put his career on the line, and is risking all sorts of antagonism, it’s a lonely place taking on the status quo.
Just by standing for this political position Fox is providing an essential alternative view to the appalling oppressive political situation prevailing now.
But let Fox speak for himself, here’s a summary of his platform:
A year ago we locked down London for three weeks.
We gave our liberty to the government for three weeks to flatten the curve. Instead of giving us our freedom back, the government is considering even more authoritarian measures.
We need to get London open and moving. Bring back tourists to this great city and bring people back to work.
The biggest problem facing Londoners is lack of optimism, lack of hope. They’ve been frightened to death, essentially.
We need to give people hope and optimism to get back out there. Get back working and get a small business up and running.
You need to give people an incentive to get back on the Tubes, trains and buses and get back to work and play.
We can slowly get back to normal. Give people permission to enjoy their life again.
It’s time to get London back to work with some free transport and get the small business open, and pubs, bars and restaurants, and get people to enjoy their lives again. This is the greatest city on earth.
Elizabeth, unless my memory is misleading me (which is possible), weren’t you on Unherd a few months ago claiming that all we needed to defeat the virus was Vitamin D?
I can’t say who said this, but Vitamin D certainly is a key component in the fight against the disease. Pity that more governments don’t ventilate this.
Medical control trails have shown conclusively that it makes very little difference to Covid-despite this I still take it! However, this study shows why it is NOT recommended by Health authorities
What study?
Show us the study and make sure it can be validated ie not bluster from the WHO
There have been some trials (as opposed to trails) which have been designed by pharmaceutical industry employees to show that Vitamin D is not effective. The doses of Vitamin D have been too small and given too late to be effective in improving the outcomes of a Covid-19 infection.
What’s your remedy Dr. Chris?
Vaccination. Like any sensible person.
Self praise is no recommendation.
Agree, but I seem to be in good company, with 32 million vaccinated and the scientists in agreement.
So you’ve researched the possible effects of previously untested MRNA vaccines and are satisfied that there are no medium or long term risks have you? How did you acquire the long term data given that they have never been tried before? Do you have access to a private research programme. Could you provide me with a link to the data showing that they have no risks over a say, three to ten year time scale?
The risks of SarsCoV2 are comparable to flu for those under 70. 2020 mortality the same as 2008. And Ivermectin is the medicine of choice.
22 April 2021 – HART (hartgroup.org)
The best cure is to get vaccinated and not catch the disease at all – and not pass it on to others during the asymptomatic phase.
If you end up with it, by all means use drugs which have been found by trials to reduce the severity.
Incidentally, long-Covid is not limited to the over 70s. But in order to push the idea that Covid doesn’t matter for most people, as the Hart group does, it’s necessary to ignore long-Covid.
Being vaccinated does not prevent you catching the disease. It mitigates the effects of the virus. You can still be infected and develop the illness but it is probable that the effects would be much less severe.
I don’t think this is true: the AZ trial used PCR testing rather than just severe illness and the vaccinated do catch the virus in reduced numbers (source).
No, Olga, there isn’t the evidence base for ivermectin yet, and the risks are worse than flu for all ages groups (mbevand/covid19-age-stratified-ifr at Github collects the evidence, notice that graph has a log scale).
Finally, HART is a motley collection of denialists of various stripes, including anti-vaxers like Joel Smalley and homeopath Anna Rayner. It’s a project of the same people who started the Michael “soon may the Muslim come” Yeadon campaign website and PCRclaims.
@aw_what on Twitter is a good source for working out the connections between these groups: https://twitter.com/Aw_what/status/1381652679861108738 is a good thread.
They are re-assuringly thick, though I do worry that some MPs are thicker. That said, if you look on Twitter, occasionally you’ll find their followers lamenting that all their talk of influencing politicians behind the scenes has come to nothing, so maybe I shouldn’t worry too much. Their latest wheeze of encouraging followers to join the LibDems to support a “liberal spring” is particularly hilarious.
Silly. 32 million vaccinated and Covid deaths reduced from 1000 a day to around 15 (by a mixture of lockdown and vaccination, but the latter increasingly important). Compared with how many people with side effects from vaccination?
And the vaccines aren’t ‘previously untested’, the first trial started a year ago in mid-April 2020.
How many would die while we conducted the decade of research on vaccines which you apparently want?
So that’s a “no” then. I didn’t say untested. I said no medium to long term tests. And that’s a fact whether you like it or not. No other vaccines have previously been released for mass use without testing for typically at least two to four years. The longer period would be normal in a vaccine which employs previously untried technology as MNRA vaccines do. Since you feel entitled to dismiss my point as “silly” I would have expected you to know this, but that is clearly not the case. I have made no claim that people were dying in any significant numbers from the short term effects of vaccination. I have simply pointed out that this is technology that has not been tested to anything remotely resembling the standards that have up till now been mandatory for new vaccines. Your patronising comments like “any sensible person” and “silly” add no weight to your argument but rather demonstrate your lack of ability to either understand or refute my point.
Then what is your argument?
Is it that we should go on with Covid while refusing to vaccinate people, until studies lasting many years are completed? That would not be a sensible course of action.
What would you do, if you were Health Minister?
Develop and use vaccines that are delivered by traditional well tested methods. i.e. vaccines that use dead or inactivated virus to produce antibodies, not MRNA delivery. The inactivated virus method has been used in vaccines for over a century, is well understood, and is used in the Chinese Sinovac vaccine and I believe the Russian vaccine. Tried and tested technology is available. There is absolutely no need to use experimental techniques in this case. So that’s what I’d do “if I were Health Minister”.
You’d prefer the unknown risks I take it?
You do realise that the Oxford/AZ vaccine is not an mRNA vaccine but an adenoviral vector one? The technology has been around for about 30 years and is a perfectly safe delivery system. The only problem prior to the O/AZ vaccine being developed was outcome efficacy. By all means continue to post your nonsense.
Yes I do realise that and I have myself received the Astra vaccine. The fact remains that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use mRNA technology that has not previously been used for vaccine delivery and has not been subjected to the length of testing that is standard for such new technologies. I made clear that my concerns were with mRNA vaccines. What part of that did you not understand? And how is that nonsense?
What I do understand from a variety of your posts is that you are unnecessarily adversarial. Also, like myself, you are almost certainly not qualified to pontificate on vaccine development, their safety, studies, trials, efficacy or whatever. All you do is sow the seeds of doubt in people who need encouragement to get vaccinated rather than being fed a diet of negativity.
I agree that I respond adversarialy when insulted and patronised as both Chris C and you have done. “By all means continue to post your nonsense” is a direct quote from you. “Silly” and “no sensible person” are direct quotes from Chris C’s posts. So it’s OK for you to dish it out but we’re not allowed to respond in kind? You do not need to be a vaccine researcher to know that mRNA vaccines are untried technology and there are plenty of people better qualified than you or I who make that same point. People need encouragement to think carefully about the balance of risks for them personally and equating mRNA vaccines with non mRNA vaccines is dishonest and does not aid them in making that assessment. Pointing that out is not sowing seeds of doubt. It’s sowing seeds of reason, something that is notably absent from most of the debate.
Fact. The mRNA vaccines haven‘t been around long enough to know about any long term effects.
COVID’s been around for long enough to know its effects, and it’s not over. So what’s your solution? Let it tear through the population for 5 or 10 years till you’re happy, then vaccinate the survivors?
Not nonsense. It was very clear to me he wasn‘t talking about the AZ virus. You just chose to misunderstand.
Nearly 70, I have had both my AZ innoculations with No ill effects,but I am allergic to Pfizer Albumin based Vaccines….
Due to warmer weather, SARS2 will return in Winter and then be less severe each Winter….
“Due to warmer weather ?” Obviously you haven’t ventured outside lately.
Could we just talk about Fox on this thread? Thank you.
If Ebola,Smallpox ever reared their diseases in UK you would want draconian measures…
Government sent me a big packet of vitamin D through the post!!! Really.
Nasty, spiteful attempt to undermine what was a thoughtful comment. So what about Vitamin D? Many scientists have suggested it could be helpful. Other scientists claim different measures should be used. Some (scientists) say lockdown is essential (and are given much media coverage) while others say it is pointless and destructive (and are given little if any media coverage.) We live in a time of fake news and manipulation. I should take some Vitamin D if you live in the UK. It won’t protect you from our media or make you less snide, but it might strengthen your defences against all manner of other nasty symptoms.
I take Vitamin D each day for my bones, following my GP’s suggestion based on a blood test for other things which showed a Vitamin D deficiency.
But claiming that Vitamin D is going to save you from Covid has been discredited by a trial. Do you accept that?
Given that fact, those who claim that we don’t need vaccines and we didn’t need lockdowns because we just need Vitamin D are delusional.
All this stuff about “some scientists suggest X, others claim Y…” is just attempting to muddy the water. You could use the same technique with “some scientists claim the Earth is [almost] spherical, others claim it’s flat”. The reality is that the informed state that the Earth is [almost] spherical, and the ignorant believe what they read on fringe websites claiming that the Earth is flat.
Can you name a scientist who claims that the earth is flat? If not, then your analogy fails.
Dr Mark Bridgeford.
No, I don’t accept it. I don’t have your blind acceptance of trial results – nor would you if you regularly read medical journals, as I do. The point is that scientists disagree about how the pandemic should be managed. You know that because you’ve read about SAGE and (to a lesser degree because of our manipulative media) The Great Barrington Declaration and possibly a whole lot else. With regard to Vitamin D, trials are ongoing concerning numerous applications which have nothing to do with CV-19 but it is already evident that it can benefit immune function. And that, I suspect, is why people wonder whether it might boost protection against virus infection. That is not the same as suggesting it is a preventative or a cure for CV-19, which I doubt Elizabeth did. So, wind your neck back in and stop trying to hold someone up to ridicule on this platform simply because they don’t share your political opinion. That, I have to say, is the most pernicious disease of our time.
If Elizabeth said that she was much more correct than the ones who said colsing all schools for a year, turning all non-covid patients away from medical care, shutting all small businesses down, stopping all commerce, spending trillions of printed money, and basically freeing the prisoners and locking up the innocent for a year was the way to fight it.
That’s not what the lockdown has done. It’s fair enough to question the lockdown policy, but not on the basis of falsifications: schooling was done from home for several months, then in schools again; a lot of NHS treatments were disrupted, but not all; all small businesses and all commerce clearly were not stopped – the GDP numbers suggest c5-7% reduction in economic activity, depending on how it’s measured; I don’t think any prisoners were freed on account of covid and anyone sent to jail was almost certainly doing something nobody really would think a good idea during a pandemic (maybe even you).
I’d be interested in your counter-factual model of a non-lockdown world. A lot of the things banned under lockdown would end up happening anyway because people took steps to protect themselves, including minimising social contacts and working from home whenever possible. I’d have liked a lot more freedom for people to make up their minds, based on much better scientific evidence on transmission. But there is not some libertarian, risk-free, all-benefits ideal out there that was denied us by a combination of the evil Bill Gates and corrupt politicians and ‘MSM’.
I read the medical advice that vitamin D offered some help against C 19 back in the spring of last year when it first arrived here, and I’ve been taking it daily ever since. Anything that even might be of help can’t be bad, surely?
ID Cards are backed by Authoratarian Remainers in Tory,Labour (Lockdown earlier) Lib-dem ,Green ,SNP….VOTE INDEPENDENT ,SDP or Reform on may 6….You have been warned
Agree with most of your post – then you wander into the realms of fantasy “This is the greatest city on earth” – it really isn’t
I did not relate at all to this piece. Badly written, rambling, wordy and did not capture the essence of the man, nor the main issue at hand (wokeness). I have watched him being interviewed and he is certainly thoughtful, intelligent and presents well. A note to the author: almost everyone is different on the short sound bites of Twitter to real life.
The Sikh soldier in “1917” was presented as though he was a member of an English platoon. That would not have been the case in the actual year 1917. To say that is not racist. The fact needs to be addressed that 99% of accusations of racism are made in the full acceptance on the part of those making them that the people they’re calling racist are not. It is done with complete cynicism, particularly by the political left, the home of racism.
I like him. Hope he becomes mayor.
I think he is a light weight & shifty, even though I am anti lockdown and anti virus pp . As Binface is even with him, I am going for Binface. – he has no disguises or masquerades , even through technically he has a costume.
Then, you deserve him.
If you know South Harrow, West Harrow, Harrow on the Hill, you know what a mess London has become. I hope he knows his old place and is suitably aware of what has been done to West London.
Spoken like an Etonian, well said Sir!
Wow reading this article has negatively affected my opinion of UnHerd. Of course all lives do matter and yes the woman on QT who questioned him was being racist.
But of course in the current climate you cannot be racist against white people only POC. The world is spiralling out of control into a quagmire of woke insanity – they dictate “diversity” but not diversity of opinion. A very sad state of affairs.
Well this is a refreshingly unbiased report about Laurence Fox isn’t it! Not.
Personally, I don’t expect him to be some Tony Blair-esque orator, doing that thing with his thumb that they all do when they point, spouting a lot of words but saying nothing. People complain about politicians who are fake, who can’t just say what they mean and mean what they say, but when you get one, they are hammered for NOT being a polished, word-perfect clone with every well-rehearsed non-answer at their finger tips. I am sick of it. I am quite forgiving of people if they have good intentions and are willing to admit when they are wrong and willing to change their minds. I don’t mind if they don’t have all the answers, I want to see them formulating answers through talking and learning. I just want to see them do their best and LISTEN as much as talk. Rees-Mogg, much as some people hate him, is always unfailingly polite, civilised, informed and listens to people. Watch his videos with Jess Philips to see how. Kemi Badenoch does not give into race-baiting bullies on the left and expresses herself clearly (I just love her!). There is nothing wrong with being posh or well-educated if you are doing the job you are supposed to be doing, but if we want more ‘ordinary’ and genuinely diverse people to go into politics we need to allow them to be human.
Tanya Gold doesn’t much like Laurence Fox. That’s a shame.
Personally, I find him persuasive and honest and just the sort of person i want to lead me and my clan.
After 4+ years of lying politicians over Brexit and another 15 months of lying politicians over fake pandemic, this bloke is a real breath of fresh air. A human, not a parliamentary robot.
That would be the “fake pandemic” which saw 30,000 people in hospital at one point, gasping for breath and often dying, and over 100,000 dead cumulatively? Ah, I get it…. they were brainwashed into dying by the MSM! There was nothing really wrong with them.
Oh come on, Chris; you’re more intelligent than that. You must know that there have been successful treatment regimes which have been suppressed. And that the excess mortality figures for 2020 are undramatic.
And just what have those suppressed treatment regimes been? I see the nutters have moved from hydroxychloroquine to ivermectin, the latter being an anti-parasitic veterinary drug commonly intended for use on horses. This is despite many reports of patients who have been hospitalised in the US after self-medicating despite the potent and common side effects.
Well said Sir!
It would appear from the comments that we’ve all learned something from this interesting piece Tanya, for me it’s your preconceived notions of Fox.
The system and its print-wing the media really don’t like anyone who is different, so just as Trump wasn’t a politician , yet still managed to win and didn’t they hate him for it? So out with the knives for Laurence , yet no profile on Khan and why he’s so unsuitable as mayor.
You might not want to admit it, but the very same media went for Corbyn too. Particularly the Guardian.
Imposter! 😉
I was here first! Or perhaps not. Nice to meet you.
That is not true – The Guardian and many others were anti Corbyn because of his alleged anti Semitism – the Guardian was always Blairite and centrist – during the Labour leader campaign they supported Burnham
You basically confirm what I wrote, and what Ms Carr is saying. The media cannot abide people from outside the narrow window, hence cancel culture, wokery, the lot. Corbyn was outside the system and therefore attacked ruthlessly. Some conservatives saw this, like Fox here, like Oborne. Others were just gleeful that the left were getting a kicking…but now that same media is coming for people on the right. Enjoy.
Corbyn was attacked, fairly, for being a terrorist-supporting anti-Semite.
“Always” is a bit much, the paper is 200 years old! Not sure it had a centrist position in the 1950s, unless “Not-radical Soviet” is ‘centrist’. Also the early 2015-2016 Guardian articles, that were indeed less-than-glowing about Corbyn but still pro-Labour generally, were subtley opposed to the violent paranoid agressive bullying by Momentum (remember them?) that was likely suffered by journalists and anyone who put their head above the parapet for a terrifying few years until the anti-semitism claims cut the legs from the group.
Would that be the system and its print-wing the media who give massive backing to the right wing of the Tory party at every election, and propelled the Brexit campaign?
The only paper I can think that vaguely supported Brexit was the daily mail. They are not the system-being populist and selling a lot of copies doesn’t mean anything. The newspaper of choice for the system is the guardian and thats probably why they didn’t like Corbyn as he is an individual with his own point of view -not a machine like most of them
You’re kidding. The Sun, the Express and the Telegraph were all calling for Brexit alongside the Daily Mail.
If they are so influential why has it taken the Conservative party 5 years & 3 Prime Ministers to get a botched brexit deal together ? Shouldn’t they be jumping to their master’s command?
Also which political spectrum is likely to be keenest on green policies-left or right , so why is a Conservative gov with 80 seat majority ( so don’t need any other MPS votes ) pushing through these policies? Probably why the voters need someone else to vote for.
Possibly because changing political and economic reality across the EU is harder than influencing voters in the state where they are published?
Name TV Channels that were calling for Brexit
Off topic I know but the Daily Mail has broadly changed its stance – albeit after the referendum. When Geordie Greig took over from Paul Dacre in September 2018, the former was already a rabid remainer and unhinged Boris-hater. It’s taken Grieg a while to weed out the non-conformists but the Mail looks very different today. Other than Andrew Pierce not many true believers (in Brexit) remain.
Your Lack of Knowledge is staggeringly Ignorant..I voted Leave EUSSR. 4th reich, for Freedom of thought, the Globalist Press i.Independent,.Guardian,Financial Times;,The Times,The observer,The new statemen,Private Eye ALL thought ”They”knew best….Half Tory party like Lib-dem,Labour ,Greens tried to reverse Referendum, They shouldn’t be anywhere near being elected, ..Foxtrot oscar..
Calling the EU the 4th Reich displays a staggering level of ignorance (to use your expression) of what the 3rd Reich was like. The 3rd Reich organised genocide of Jews and Gypsies, it wasn’t a treaty organisation that followed the rule of law, and you couldn’t vote to leave it. So not a good comparison.
By Godwin’s law, your Nazj analogy has just lost you the argument.
Really You plank .The founders of 1952 Iron*Steel Community,were members of Germany’s Third reich,;see ”The Tainted Source” or is reading Too much for you..
We’ve discussed the Iron and Steel Community already on UnHerd. I pointed out that Germany was fairly intensively de-nazjfied and that the post-war German government was clearly not a continuation of the former regime. European cooperation is NOT a Nazj plot.
You seem very quick to resort to personal insult. Be careful – people may start to think think you are insecure about your… theories.
They are NOT theories, Paul Monnet & his acolytes admitted as much, In July 1961.1963 Macmillan,Geoffrey Rippon ,and edward Heath tried to hide their real motives.
See Professor Alan Sked’s excellent ”The real aims of Superstate& World Governance”
I don’t know what’s more chaotic here: Fox’s politics (as described, without any attempt at being understood) or Gold’s narrative.
Thank you! It is a very poorly structured article — and as you say, the author seems to make no attempt to understand the thought and passion behind Fox’s ideas, chaotic or not.
Agree totally with your conclusion re. ‘author’. I am seriously disappointed that Unherd considers T Gold anything other than a self-obsessed (opinion-wise) food critic. This rambling, uninformed, and rather vicious diatribe is NOT why I became a member.
What does he stand for? Common sense, logic and true conservatism. He has my vote this year. His fight is against a deliberate agenda to break people apart
So, James Fox left acting to for years “join a Christian cult?” I like James Fox, so I looked up which cult he had joined. It was The Navigators, which is not a cult by any reasonable definition. It’s just an Evangelical Christian group doing what Christians have done since, well, the time of Christ. I’m an American, so I can’t comment on English politics; but I will say that you might do well to wonder how much more of this article is false.
Yes..but Archbishop Welby of Woke Don’t help,if They don’t believe why should we ?..however after Trendy1980 speech at york cathedral ,it was struck by lightning,fittingly
Yes CC, it’s a snide piece of journalism, with the author choosing to ignore the big picture at stake, i.e. the slide of our societies into authoritarianism…
Consider some examples of little digs in the article intended to tarnish Laurence Fox’s reputation:
So all in all, a biased article by an author who took little effort to understand the difficulties facing a person, such as Laurence Fox, taking a courageous stand against the prevailing authoritarianism in what was previously a free society.
It was certainly a strange article, and I’m not sure I have a much better picture of Mr Fox as a result.
But if you agree with everything a man stands for it’s unlikely you have understood everything he stands for. I suspect we’re all wrong about something, but it might be a bit of a coincidence if (in addition to all the stuff you’re both right about) you and he also happened to be mistaken about exactly the same things too.
I suppose it is easy to be dismissive of the unusual candidate, especially since the professional political class is without fault. It must be a shock to some in the chattering class that a lot of us have watched professional politicians make a mess of most things they touch. And when a candidate has a five-point plan for addressing any and every issue, that smacks of a sociopathic control freak who should be nowhere near power.
Calling out “white privilege” as racist is accurate. What else can it be? An immutable characteristic is used to indict an entire group.
He calls his enemies “race baiters” but what is he?
Considering this article offered up exactly zero evidence for calling him such, it appears he’s not a race-baiter. Teaching kids about their country’s history and saying they not be ashamed of it hardly qualifies. Nor does his affinity for free speech, which raises a curious point: when did people who make a living off of free speech become so hostile to it when used by others?
‘White privilege’ is not an indictment of an entire group. It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people.
Whether you agree with the theory that a society is racist or not is up to you but that doesn’t make the theory itself racist or the description of the impact racist.
Many people who are most vocal about the existence of white privilege, such a Robin D’Angelo, believe that white people are innately and unavoidably racist. She also said: “To be less white is to: be less oppressive, less arrogant, less certain, less defensive, less ignorant, more humble”
That is racist.
OK. So you think Robin D’Angelo has racist views. I haven’t read her stuff. I’ve read lots of other stuff on the subject that makes sense to me and doesn’t portray white people as innately and unavoidably racist. That’s why it’s so important to be clear about what we’re talking about.
Do you think my description of what I understand ‘white privilege’ to be is racist? (It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people.)
I do know it’s nonsense
D’Angelo has actually admitted that she has racist views.
I often find this statement being repeated by people who don’t travel a lot. Once you leave the comforts of the West you can see real racism in action. It makes all talk of white privilege seem very parochial and naive. Compared to the rest of the world, Western nations do a formidable job of welcoming foreigners to their shores.
I don’t disagree. I think countries like the UK and the US are in the enviable position of being able to do more, however.
What privileges / advantages do the white working class have compared with others from the same school/neighbourhood? I ask as someone who grew up in SE London. Pray tell
Drive in London in a decent car without getting pulled over.
Of course black people can drive in London in a decent car without being pulled over. Thousands do it every day.
To claim seriously that white people are innately and unavoidably racist is indeed racist. If she does that, then she is what she protests against. No group is “innately” more racist than another. Racism is learned (or perhaps taught) behaviour – cultural rather than innate.
The term “whiteness” (as in “to be less white”) encompasses a vaguely defined set of factors that blend from overt racism through to a lack of awareness all the way to a stubborn denial that there is any racism in the white community. It also includes varying shades of perfectly reasonable cultural phenomena, and ways that society operates (some fine, some less so). They are not saying “become actually coloured”. But it’s a dreadful term.
In a way it’s the mirror image of “woke” – and is useless for much the same reasons. Both sides of any debate end up talking past each other, using different definitions of the term.
‘White privilege’ is not an indictment of an entire group.It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people.
Nice job of undercutting your own argument. By the way, if whites are so favored, why do Asians outperform all other groups in education? How do immigrants from Ghana outperform native-born black people, and why are Latinos still streaming this way?
Whether you agree with the theory that a society is racist or not is up to you but that doesn’t make the theory itself racist or the description of the impact racist.
Western societies are among the least racist on the planet. And again, a “theory” founded on the premise of white = bad is the textbook definition of racist.
This is why CRT came up with the rather splendid checkmate assertion that, only if you are ‘white’ mind, simply by claiming that you aren’t racist is a blatant and oppressive act of denial, ergo a tacit admission that you are.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Genius!!
I’d turn your first question around. Why do Asians perform better than white people in education? Is it because white people are inherently less intelligent? Or inherently lazy? Or is it something in white culture that makes them less respectful of education? Is it because they expect handouts from the government so don’t need to try so hard? Is it that Asian people have a natural affinity with their teachers that white people don’t? Is it because white people are more likely to come from a single parent family? Why do foreign born white people in the US do better than native born white people in education?
I don’t know why Asian people do better in education than white people but I’m not going to blame white or Asian people for it.
Educational attainment closely correlates with income and income closely correlates with race.
The median income of Asian households in the US is more than twice that of a black household and a third more than white households. The median income of a white household is 40% greater than a black household.
Critical Race Theories suggest that the reasons for these discrepancies in things like income and educational attainment are related to historical and contemporary racism.
At a societal level, the single biggest determinant of an individual’s wealth is the wealth of their parents and this trend goes back generations. Less than sixty years ago the USA had racial discrimination written into its law and this is just the most obvious example of how racism was embedded into the US society and economy. Critical Race Theories state that this historical racism has an impact on the way different races fare in the US today.
It doesn’t mean white = bad.
Why do Asians perform better than white people in education? Asian culture values education. High-achieving black kids, meanwhile, are accused of ‘acting white.’ At some point, you have to stop playing the victim and take advantage of the freedoms that past generations fought to secure.
It doesn’t mean white = bad. That is exactly how it is presented and it is a cultural poison. Whiteness is treated as a condition to be eradicated, and people are tarred for no more than existing. Done with kids, it rises to the level of abuse and it does black kids no favors, either.
Before the civil rights era, black children grew up mostly in two-parent homes, understood that education was their best way out of poverty, and pregnant teens were a rarity. None of that is true today and it results from the foreseeable consequences of misguided ideas.
You didn’t answer the question of why Asians do better than white people in education. Unless, your implied answer is white people don’t value education?
I presume you mean East Asians (ie Chinese etc.). Cultural differences. Self-discipline, more collectivist (less individualist) mindset, deference to elders (parents – “tiger mothers”), that sort of thing.
Does this racial ‘privilege’ apply in majority brown/black countries where there is a wealth gap between different ethnic/tribal groups? Are these racist societies too?
> It is a description of one of the impacts of a racist society that favours white people.
It is a racist theory because it uses race as the discriminator. That is the definition of racist theories, like blacks and IQ on the right. Now using a race as discriminator does not make it false by definition, but if a theory has such humongously huge glaring holes, like designating Oboma being more privileged than a poor orphan Appalachian, than it can only be of use by actual unadulterated racists.
Second, study after study shows that colorblind class is a much better discriminator for the effects that these racist try to ‘explain’. If you than keep preferring the racist theory it is hard not to see this as a racist practice?
Whether something is racism or not depends on the race of the racist.
No, Bridgeford. A society which favours its members, as any society should, per definition of being a society. And a society in Europe is per definition a white society. Same as a society in Africa is a black society. Et cætera. If that’s a “racist” concept for you, then nothing is wrong with racism.
“White privilege” is a politically correct term for ‘black ineptitude’.
This really confirms all I thought about Tanya Gold: still a Guardianista at heart, something of a misandrist and conservative (small c) baiter. There are perhaps too many candidates in the Mayoral elections but being white and male didn’t stop BJ winning.
He isn’t a ‘third rate rejected actor and failed musician’. The acting world closed ranks against him and denied him his job for no other reason than his political views – that’s totalitarianism on a scale last imposed in 1930s Germany (by so-called Socialists). How’s that for ‘predictability of the spiel’ of our craven times. How’s that for the so-called Liberalism of the arts?
After reading this piece, and discovering how much Ms Gold dislikes him, I am even more determined to vote for Laurence Fox than I was before.
The ‘correction’ that had to be made tells you everything you need to know – this is a disingenuous article by yet another middle class journalist who’s got it in for Mr Fox for daring to challenge the mainstream narrative and calling out the actual racists (who call themselves anti-racists). I admire him for standing up to all the lockdown and woke BS – it’s not easy not to follow the crowd. We need more like him. Best of luck to you lozza, unfortunately I don’t live in London any more but many of my friends and family are behind you.
”Today’s Anti-Fascists,Will be Tomorrows Fascists” George Orwell,after his being on Marxist death list in 1938,after joining republicans then PoUM..
Well for me after reading the article I wished I had spent 7 minutes listening to a cat cough up a fur ball instead of reading the literary equivalent.
Well, most black or brown people have moved to the West in search of opportunities and sophistication often unavailable or denied them in their own countries. Why is it fashionable to denigrate the West so much. It’s not, nor has it ever been Utopia – but it has given the world a great deal in both practical and cultural terms. It is also a great deal more tolerant and open to new ideas than elsewhere. If celebrating and teaching that is ‘race-baiting’ then those who object might stay away.
I sometimes like what Tanya Gold writes and sometimes I don’t.
When it’s good it’s often really good like the beautifully written piece she did on the ‘left behinds’ of Cornwall recently, but I find it more than a little ironic given the blatant and deliberately nasty hatchet job above vaguely masquerading as campaign trail journalism that a comment I made highlighting this obvious variability in quality was presumably removed as it was perceived as an ‘ad hominem’, or perhaps that should be ‘ad womanem’?
The ‘amendment’ at the end of this piece speaks volumes I’m afraid and tells you all you need to know about what the underlying narrative of this piece was going to be before the first letter even hit the page.
Yes, she occasionally writes something worth reading. Ironically, the left-behinds of Cornwall are the very people that Fox, and certainly Reform, might appeal to. Yet Fox and Reform et al are the people on whom she has done a hatched job here.
Outside m25 ,after living in london for 40 years, I find people outside metropolis,More willing to listen to Non-conformists,leavers, etc….It just shows london is up its own woke trendy rubbish backend…
Likewise. During the past few months in Kent I’ve had lots of dealings with many Builders /Landscapers. It’s been a hoot. It was refreshing to hear people speak openly – about anything. They see woke for what it is – nonsense. It has restored my faith in the sanity of most people – for now.
Dear Tanya Gold,
I truly adhere to Laurence Fox’s ideas, however clumsy they might sound to the so-called intellectuals of this world. Laurence Fox was thrown into this fight unexpectedly. But being true to himself, he stands by his views, ideas that many people adhere to without the possibility to say them out loud. He is honest and brave, and that makes him rare in the world of politics. I’m not born British, only naturalised British. But I do defend Britain’s values and British culture, that many people take for granted. I’m not a Londoner to vote for Laurence but would urge all around me to.
ps: ‘decriminalise’ and not ‘decrimalise’ in your text.
I think it show that the label “childlike” applies to the author is she thinks that history is made up of people that tried an idea once and succeeded rather then we remember the small number who stood on the work of so many who first failed.
Failure is the first step to success, it doesn’t always lead to success but I can’t think of someone or some idea that succeeded with out at some point failing.
I like that. Thank you for it.
De Blasio is a similar Mayor to Khan, both have destroyed their cities.
Sheesh. We get it. The author doesn’t like Fox. “Sad and silly.” Expecting your reader to mindlessly go along that is just that: sad and silly, cringe-inducing, almost pathetic.
I have had a few perfectly reasonable and polite comments removed from this thread.
Comments on here are disappearing quicker than I can refresh the page.
Yes, I too can’t find stuff I posted 30 minutes ago. Not sure why.
Someone with a nefarious agenda is super busy. It is very disturbing.
Sadly it usually spells the beginning of the end for a website. The Guardian was the same.
I’m finding that. To be fair, some of them are pretty racist – but not all. Has the mod-robot gone rogue?
I have contacted them to ask why….
My comment was also removed, I had the audacity to say that I read this article because I actually wanted to know what Laurence Fox stood for and it was a waste of time as it turned out to be just an attempt to smear the man. I said something about how sad it was that opinion and snide comments have replaced facts or any attempt at objectivity and that this sort of ‘journalism’ was puerile and pointless as most people see right through it.
My comment stating this was a spiteful piece was also removed.
I made a similar comment and likewise mine was removed.
Spoken like the truly amoral. Things are not good or bad, right or wrong. They are to be judged only on whether they appear int eh Telegraph so you can march in the opposite direction, feeling better and superior
i think if he ran a more professional campaign he might do better because surely most white londoners will agree with his statements.of course khan has the thing stitched up which will surely sicken any right thinking londoner.
“of course khan has the thing stitched up which will surely sicken any right thinking londoner”
Translation: Londoners will vote by a large majority for Khan to continue running their city. They know his track record over several years and they broadly approve of it.
Your translation is entirely risible. You obviously don’t live in London.
Actually, it is widely held amongst the woke that the flag is redolent of all that is wrong about Britain. And as for ‘attention seeker,’ there are many better candidates for that description amongst those who damage public property and bait the police for a photo opportunity.
Or, maybe, the anti-lockdown extremists who injured two police officers in Saturday’s march?
A typical stump speech is: “I want to reclaim your freedom to speak. To cherish your history rather than rewrite it. And to teach our children to be confident, not ashamed of who they are and where they come from.”
Well he’s got my vote.
Freedom is slavery etc. The “progressive” left projects all day long.
I liked the article despite it being poorly written and researched. It pays to consider all sides ..to look with both eyes rather than just using the left or right. Yes it was more like a Guardian hatchet jib ..but then a lot of other pieces on here are Tegraph hatchet jobs.
Fair play to Unherd for publishing it.
“fled drama for a decade for a Christian cult.” Tanya, which cult did James Fox join?
Any self-effacing practising heathen such as myself may well describe the Navigators as a cult in its purest definition. It’s hardly a point worth hanging your hat on.
Can someone explain the link between hate and his stump speech? I get the race-baiters bit, but what’s hateful (or race baiting) about cherishing history, free speech, and confident children?
Short answer: none of that conforms to the absolutist, self-aggrandising, opinions of this ghastly, unformed, bigoted author.
It could also publish articles advocating flat earth ideas, but would that be worthy of commendation? The issue isn’t the criticism of an idea or person (there is room for that in everything) the issue is: was there something new or interesting in understanding to take away?
I can’t see it. An actor who isn’t good on details of law and public policy? Wow I’s so surprised! An anecdote about his school matron? fine. But what is there here that adds to anything?
I think they found one Sikh soldier who may have fought with a Midlands regiment,but nobody was,sure. Of course, vast numbers of troops from,India fought in Europe during the 1st World War, but they had their own regiments.
in WW2 A lot of Indians fought with Japanese, Chandra bose, does that make them ”Fascists” ..
This is a terrible ill informed rant by Tanya Gold ..What a relief that others think the same
Laurence Fox may be an English answer to James Stewart’s Mr Smith goes to Washington. He is not an ideologue and he fell into politics in the way Alice went through the looking glass. He spokes from instinct rather than following any party line.
If this article and the discussion that follows suggest one thing, it is that we should scrap the whole idea of a Mayor for London. Let’s have less of the politics of personality. The booklet with briefings on all the candidates hit my mailbox at the weekend. What a thin and unimpressive lot! Where is any vision for this great city of ours. We are being offered a vote to scrap the Mayor of Tower Hamlets in favour of a committee with a range of views. I shall vote for that. As for the GLA circus, it looks like being another spoiled ballot paper from me.
As he’s running for Mayor of London, I should imagine he’s speaking to Londoners. If they’re from immigrant backgrounds, why did they (or their parents/grandparents) come here if it’s so terrible, or why haven’t they returned or gone elsewhere?
A rambling article for a rambling political candidate. Very creative. I think the best actors anong the Foxes are Emilia and what I suspect is Freddy, her son (?) who plays the narcissistic murderer in The White House. Many view his father as a National Treasure but I don’t; he only ever plays himself. The woke establishment, particularly the Arts, banished Laurence for his unwoke views (thought he ought to ramp up their epistemological foundations) and I commend him for choosing the world (or at least Blighty) as his stage instead. If I lived in London I would vote for him, if only because he is the only unwoke candidate, excepting Binface who is unwoke by default. Politics ain’t what it used to be.
More than 100 years ago a journalist and writer wrote a letter to his government. A national newspaper had the courage to print it on the front page. It is what inspired many of my generation to attempt to communicate important issues to the ‘public’ – the people. Zola still had in mind that there was a forum for this democratic debate and discussion, and he felt confident that he could communicate through the media. He began his letter, “J’Accuse!…” and excoriated one of the most famous cases of institutional racism of modern times. The so-called media today too often, it seems to me, to treat these issues with trivialising anecdotes overlain with clumsy attempts at sarcasm, underpinned by unexamined and simplistic attitudes and prejudices dressed up as political wisdom. I ask each new cohort of my Journalist Students what is meant by the term The Fourth Estate, and they have not a clue. I ask them if they have heard of the Dreyfus Affair and Zola’s letter. Not a clue. Laurence Fox may be wrong, for all I know, about many important issues, but this article says nothing substantial about any issue of importance, let alone what Fox thinks about it. Luckily, Fox has access to social media, so we can judge for ourselves. And though many of us on the Left may disagree with some of his politics, what he is saying needs to be debated seriously as he is attempting to be serious about a serious subject, – something the ‘journalist’ here does not seem to remember is the proper function of the Fourth Estate. Perhaps they remember this quote,”The supposed right of intolerance is absurd and barbaric. It is the right of the tiger; nay, it is far worse, for tigers do but tear in order to have food, while we rend each other for paragraphs.”?
The pushback is needed. Go Fox.
He’s not a bad bloke but one suspects he would get massacred in the hen house.
At this rate Fox is more likely to retain an audience than Unheard
Or the Times on Jordan Peterson.
Are you saying there should only be articles here from one perspective?
“Usually sensible”??? Good grief.
I agree with most of what you say. But why is Fox (or anyone) less qualified than Khan to run London?
L Fox is a bit Naive,if he stood for A Non-Job Overpaid mayor of A Kent City or surrey he might get in..but Khan’s london looks increasingly, like 1981 sci-fic classic ”Escape from New York” ??
Tanya Gold’s efforts seem more like a hit job on Laurence Fox than a real effort to understand him. I wish him well.
What does Laurence Fox stand for? Bizarrely he seems to think he has not yet sufficient of an idiot of himself and this will do the trick? Or is it an attempt to make Brian Rose look credible? Who knows – but he is an easy target for ridicule. Not that impressed by his acting.
Here’s an interesting point someone raised elsewhere:
“I also understand he was expelled from Harrow. As someone who went to a public school in the late 99s/early 00s I would like to point out it’s quite difficult to achieve this. One is normally asked to leave by consent.
Things at my school which DIDN’T warrant expulsion included: i) dealing class A drugs as a 15 year old to 13 year olds (suspension), ii) 18 year olds selling weapons to 13 year olds (suspension), iii) 18 year old helping 15 year old carry out suicide attempt (asked to leave), iv) cheating in GCSEs/A-levels (detention) v) punching fellow student in face (detention) and vi) bullying fellow student to the point that he tried to kill himself (detention).
Interestingly an instance of consensual sexual activity between boys DID lead to expulsion. Of the older boy – the younger boy got told if he repented and said the older boy led him on then he could stay and do his GCSEs.
So I am genuinely curious to know what Mr Fox did to get expelled. Did he kill a teacher or something?”
Back circa 1930, Patrick Leigh Fermor was expelled by King’s School, Canterbury when he was caught, kissing a girl near the school.
And Fermor turned into one of the greatest Englishmen of a generation.
And, yes, I know he is Anglo-Irish.
In fact, had PLF been the sort of boy that towed the line at school rather than kissing girls in town, he might never have been the man who would later walk across Europe and then kidnap a German general (with whom he exchanged lines from Virgil).
‘Toed the line’. As I’m sure the German General would have pointed out.
She writes for the Guardian, or at least she used to.
She also writes for The Spectator, not known for its left wing tendencies
She’s a journalist, she writes for money not idealogy.
It’s certainly not talent
My money would be on the second to last speculation.
The hack that wrote this has had a spell at the graun… and all the other MSM “broadsheets” IIRC. Pretty sure she plays the alcy card too like mitchellnwebb was the other say. I do not believe either have been addicts because survivors of addiction are most often generous, humble and not given to the snide nastiness of the wokist MSM.
Yes and that notorious lefty rag The Spectator!
No. It was this Tanya Gold.
Some similarity in tone to her article on Jeremy Corbyn, I thought.
If you are going to arbitrarily remove comments, even two day old ones, from another article, don’t expect to retain members (including this one).
This article reads like it was written in a hurry at 3am after two and a half bottles of rosé.
Because almost everything on Unherd is aimed at pleasing the Right?
It is.
Because you are so conditioned that anything approaching independent thought appears “Right” (with a capital letter I note) to you.
No. Because it is badly written. It’s full of hopeless attempts at verbal flourish which obscure rather than illuminate or entertain- and it’s deliberately misleading. It is, in fact, more damaging to its author than its subject.
How have the rights gay people to exist, marry and work ever impacted you?
Most anti-woke people are not against gay and trans rights. After all many gay people are anti-woke. However the trans rights movement is now too extreme – to the extent that they are on a collision course with both feminists and gays. Figure it out?
It seems that too many movements are eventually hijacked by extremists. Feminism is a good case in point where the more extreme elements expound on what women should say, do and think. All this ultimately does is scare people off and many now simply avoid the term.
Gay rights means rights for gay people. If you say you’re anti-gay rights then that could mean you’re against gay people’s right to marry or work. I disagree with trans-women moving into hard won female spaces but what does that have to do with gay rights? Words matter!
Unherd is Guardian friendly. I come here to get a jist of what the Guardian is saying. I refuse to give the Guardian (BBC) clickbait. I very rarely agree with the articles. They like sneering
The phrase you are looking for is ‘Guardian adjacent’, although I wouldn’t accuse UnHerd of that particular crime.
Don’t get your hopes up. 90% is from people who regard the Telegraph as centrist.
Whereas you know that it’s The Guardian that represents the centrist point of view eh Chris?
Same here.
That certainly was the inference. But, I think you know that. Your comment is disingenuous.
Laurence Fox may be a kind of English version of the James Stewart Mr Smith goes to Washington in the 1930s.
I didn’t find this article very interesting or enlightening. I think it was supposed to create a mood but I’m not sure what I am meant to take from it. I can easily imagine a good article that was very positive about Fox, or one that was negative about him, or one that was mixed. This was not any of those articles.
Indeed. By now, everyone of any intelligence believes in an ineffable spirit of the ages moving through history and advancing us to the sunlit uplands of sweet reason. Don’t they?
Hardly a hit piece. It conveyed a certain sadness, didn’t mock. What is your (and everyone else’s) problem with it?
I liked the article.. but she should also do one on Khan… to keep the balance.but she won’t.. because she’d lose any opportunity for a lucrative “communications” role inside Khan’s empire intje next year or two. In.tne context… not a bad resume piece.
‘the others’ …. oh dear
“Racist, sexist, homophobe, anti-Semite” and the plethora of identitarian and politically correct newspeak is a tyranny. And politics is a thoroughgoing speciousness as we are governed by an imperial corporatocracy. So it appears James Hathaway has written himself into a rather pointed play. Thank you.
Surely it’s his very amateurishness that makes him unsuitable to be mayor?
I don’t think he expects to be mayor, I think he just wants the conversation to be had and being in politics allows him to express that as part of a political manifesto, with some protection.
Yeah. Cos what we need for mayor is another self serving professional politician isn’t it?
What made Khan suitable? The colour of his skin?
“People should be able to have control over their own bodies” but I don’t know if we should decriminalise drugs basically sums Fox up.
A good article. Perfectly sums up his lacklustre campaign by not answering the question posed at the beginning, who knows what he actually stands for. His campaign also lacks reach and will only appeal to a very small minority. I’m disappointed with the negative comments on here about the article and really do highlight that many don’t like to hear from any journalist with a different point of view. The main reason I read and subscribe to Unherd is to broaden my understanding of topics/issues from writers of all sides. I don’t think name calling or discrediting someone because of their stance is befitting a debate at all.
“the (perhaps) hundreds of thousands who marched in London on Saturday“
I doubt if you have any evidence that it was anything like as large as that.
The Met stopped providing estimates of demonstration numbers years ago, but Reuters describe it as “several thousand” https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/anti-lockdown-protesters-defy-restrictions-central-london-march-2021-04-24/
while Euronews said “up to ten thousand” https://www.euronews.com/2021/04/25/six-arrests-after-massive-anti-lockdown-protests-in-london
and Sky said “at least 10,000”.
Your evidence that it was “(perhaps) hundreds of thousands” is what?
And yours is the establishment media. Good job Chris.
An excellent article Tanya – you’re a talented writer & keen observer – a very nuanced and well written analysis. I watched some Laurence Fox on YouTube interviews and he is not too sophisticated with his ideology, to say the least – quite underwhelming actually. A politician? I hope not! He should stick to what he knows, and perhaps that’s acting. I’m neither English nor living in England, but I have many English and British friends and colleagues in Australia, and Fox is most certainly not ‘the best of the English’. He is not at all ‘unassuming’ either, as per the comment immediately below. And what on earth does ‘Tanya Gold stand for’ as per comment by J. Redman below??
When I first became aware of him, he appeared to be someone desperately striving to be the British William F Buckley Jr but without his panache or facility with the language.
Go to the Telegraph, then. The point of being here is that is neither Guardian or Telegraph.
He’s got a good point though. That hit job could have come straight out of the Guardian or Independent.
And most of the articles here could have come from the Telegraph or Spectator.
Untrue… there are a wide range of left and right articles.
Mark.. as I have said before. You read with just one eye. Unherd has a wide range of views ( as evidenced by today’s spectrum of articles) but you only see one side… though fair play for giving it a go at defending your slanted viewpoint in the comments on a regular basis.
It was certainly a strange article, and I’m not sure I have a much better picture of Mr Fox as a result.
But if you agree with everything a man stands for it’s unlikely you have understood everything he stands for. I suspect we’re all wrong about something, but it might be a bit of a coincidence if (in addition to all the stuff you’re both right about) you and he also happened to be mistaken about exactly the same things too.
Childish. Why not use Twitter, if that’s the kind of comment you want to make?
You deserve an award for services to wokeness, Clem. You’ve just disproved the Foxian claim that “you can’t say what you think about Race any more.” It seem you can, even if it’s borderline r*cist, or worse.
You may not be aware that the Right Honourable Sadiq Aman Khan was born in London, and is British. His family are of Pakistani extraction, but he has every right to be here.
Do you have any evidence at all that he wants Sharia law in the UK? You described him as a Sharia Lawyer – his specialism was in fact human rights, which is (I’m sure you’ll agree) not the same thing.
Indeed not the same thing, but a comparably irrational belief system. There’s no such thing as “human rights” – they are a make-believe set of arbitrary dogmata, much like sharia.
There is a Human Rights Document that defines the Human Rights , which we studied at school. It was so long ago I can’t remember what it was called or who put it together.
Yes, there is such a document. Which does not mean that Human Rights as a concept exists any more than the Loch Ness Monster or the Lizard People, even though there are a number of publications printed about them.
Human Rights are a make-believe dogma.
Laurence Fox would be better advised to drop the anti-lockdown nonsense and stick to defending statues and opposing wokery. While endorsing anti-lockdown may have appeared politically clever by addressing a demographic which doesn’t have a well-established player representing it, it saddles him with every variety of fruitloopery ranging from the vaccine deniers and the we-just-need-Vitamin-D crowd to those who just won’t accept scientific facts.about the transmission of infectious diseases….. taking in en route those who believe the vaccines are a way for Bill Gates to microchip them, those who believe the Bilderberg group created the virus as part of a plan to take over the world, and those who believe that it’s all a conspiracy by a three-headed green lizard If Fox stuck to opposing wokery, he would have most people agreeing with him (though probably still not voting for him – it’s too narrow an issue especially considering the London electorate). As it is, he is damaging the anti-woke cause by tying it in with the loony fringe.
Alarmingly high’ vitamin D deficiency in the United Kingdom – News and events – University of South Australia
Yes, a deficiency is bad for our bones.
When is someone with clout going to address the elephant in the room?
That is, questioning the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s domination of global vaccination policy.
It’s Bill Gates who has led the race for Covid-19 vaccines, to vaccinate the global population against a virus which isn’t a serious threat for most people, see for example his article on GatesNotes: What you need to know about the COVID-19 vaccine, 30 April 2020.
It’s way past time that ‘philanthropists’ such as Gates were subject to investigation for the enormous power they are wielding over global policy.
For instance, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the top funder of the WHO, along with the BMGF-founded Gavi Alliance, and vaccine producing countries such as the UK, US and Germany and the European Commission.
In other words, the WHO is a front for the vaccine industry.
And according to this September 2020 report, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is a major investor in vaccine companies, i.e. Pfizer, BioNTech, CureVac and Vir Biotechnology.
People such as myself and others have been trying to raise the alarm about the influence of Gates for years, but we have been ridiculed and marginalised by the mainstream media, and on comments forums such as UnHerd. And now here we are, with the Gates running the show, and buying the unquestioning support of media such as the Telegraph, BBC and the Guardian and others.
We are in a really bad situation, and with no effective fourth estate to blow the whistle…
For example, Neil Ferguson, the architect of society and economy destroying lockdowns around the world, with his Imperial College Report 9, is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, as noted in the SAGE COVID-19 Register of Participants’ Interests.
There’s a massive web of influence to investigate…
The disproportionate and ill-targeted response to SARS-CoV2/COVID-19, and it being used as a Trojan Horse to destroy liberal democracies, is the biggest scandal in history!
When is the lid going to blow off this thing?!
Marvellous.
You are still pushing the discredited Vitamin D line about preventing Covid. (Though that doesn’t stop me taking it each day – for my bones.)
You are still pushing Bill Gates conspiracy theories.
And you support Laurence Fox.
Bingo!
Clearly your Vit D knowledge only extends to the constipated info coming out of the gov/NHS and the BBC. I am truly sorry you have failed to update your knowledge.
Yes, Bill Gates is running the show.
Gates has world leaders at his beck and call, meeting with UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson in November 2020 to discuss rolling out coronavirus vaccination[1], and pursuing vaccine financing with other world leaders such as French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission, and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayued of the United Arab Emirates[2].
References:
1. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson meets Bill Gates to discuss COVID-19 vaccine. WION, 12 November 2020.
2. Inside Bill Gates’ high-stakes quest to vaccinate the world against COVID-19. The Seattle Times, 23 November 2020
You are not alone. I too have thoroughly researched and investigated this whole scam, and the mind boggles at just how stupid the majority of the public are. I cannot understand why so-called intelligent people believe the lies being spouted by this government, and the media. however, there is light at the end of the tunnel because their false narrative is falling apart fast.
BBC, Sky news,ITV I never saw Any coverage of April 24 Anti-lockdown march?..500,000 took part presumbly of All or no political bent?
Think it was more like 75-100k but brilliant turn out nontheless. And yes they want all the main media watchers to think that everyone is behind their narrative.
Although Each cause has ”nutjobs,” SARS2 pandemic,iS Not fake but ineptitude,croneyism for contracts,Not acknowledging Kate Bingham’s success &Army Logistics,fans the flames of Conspiracy
Thanks Russ. Re Gates’ influence, see for instance:
Philanthropic Power and Development Who shapes the agenda?
I am an investor in Marks and Spencer, but it does not mean I am trying to control the worlds food supply. Elizabeth, this really is nonsense
To be fair, as with all these things conspiracy of type there is often more than a grain of truth about them plus a few Chinese whispers thrown in for good measure.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2014/06/commentary-case-against-gain-function-experiments-reply-fouchier-kawaoka
The Gates foundation was heavily involved in funding the rightly highly controversial so called Gain of Function viral research at The University of Wisconsin in 2012 that eventually led to a moratorium on it under the Obama administration and that ended in 2017.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/03/scientists-seek-ethics-review-h5n1-gain-function-research
Upon restarting, some of that widely acknowledged potentially highly risky research was ‘farmed out’ to the very few disease research centres with optimal safety clearance across the globe by the US, including to one specialising in bats located in a little known place called Wuhan in China.
https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741
It is likely the labs were not optimal enough – accidental escape. The alternative is far more horrific.
I agree, this was what has been long feared and there were regular doubts voiced about the bio-security measures taken at the Wuhan laboratory prior to this..
Not only that, it helps to tick some of the boxes in terms of the names that keep cropping up in the conspiracy theories.
Finally, and it’s purely anecdotal granted, a customer of mine who works for Surrey University was in China in September 2019 on business and she noted that state security personnel were testing everybody at the airports with Infrared thermometers three months before the country officially told the world about covid 19.
I wish Someone other than Paul James Watson, would address Bill&melinda Gates,Carbon hypocrisy, 24GT cars,private jets, grass reared” Steak’ cows’.Jeff bezos,George soros equally guilty…Carbon is life giving,necessary for farmlands,grass growth,Forests etc…
Spot on with some omissions – there are several other globalists on the make in this and on the ‘idealist’ mission front – which BTW will backfire badly on them. It’s a complex web – ideals and vested interests coalesced (or rather planned) on the back of a not very fatal virus (in most countries). Our own gov and advisors (four horsemen of the apocalyse) have made and stand to make more millions out of this while improverishing the UK – spending tax payers money. Thank goodness there are on-going international criminal cases happening – lets hope they succeed or there will be a civil war.
I think that is a fair criticism. But so few people speak out anyone who does becomes a magnet for all the crazies – that is another reason why we need MORE people like him not fewer. We can’t leave it to Laurence Fox, Charlie Hebdo and a few others to hold the line for the rest of us.
Well stand like myself as An Independent or join ”Reform ”Right of Centre or ”SDP ”Left of centre on economics parties? Moaning Wont get it done..remember UKIP, Brexit Party were ridiculed when they were formed in 1993,2018
Vote Freedom Alliance – by the people for the people, you know how Labour used to be and is no more.
They are standing in many places..Unfortunately SDP or Reform are not standing near me..I also Cant vote for myself (Different Ward) so I may get Null point!
Wake up. It’s not nonsense. I’ve been investigating everything to do with this “rona” crap for the last year. There is not a single piece of scientific evidence (anywhere) that supports this criminal hoax. The whole thing is a lie from start to finish, and people like you are going to wonder how you could be so easily hoodwinked, and duped, when the truth comes out. I promise you Chris, you will have a lot of egg on your face. You read it here first Chris.
I can’t even work out what you mean by stating “There is not a single piece of scientific evidence (anywhere) that supports this criminal hoax“.
Which “criminal hoax” exactly?
I think he’s talking about the hoaxers who claim that vaccines have microchips in them, and that Covid is caused by 5G radio waves. There is no evidence for that – worse, there is no plausible mechanism by which it could even happen.
Really? Incredible how many ill informed people follow this blog.
https://news.mit.edu/2019/storing-vaccine-history-skin-1218
Isn’t it!
Interesting article, Jeannette – but applying a dye pattern to someone’s skin via a vaccine patch (so you can scan the spot later to detect whether they were vaccinated) is not the same as putting microchips into an injection, and ensuring they remain powered for an indefinite period, and being able to track the people at a distance via these fictional microchips.
The criminal hoax that has international lawyers on the myriad arms of this humanitarian crime. If you had told me this 2 years ago I would have said you were crazy- but like others starting with the gut feeling of ‘something not right’ good research makes it clear. Many professionals in health and other fields being silenced. If you have nothing to hide you don’t have to silence people.
Public enquiry will be Whitewash beanfeast …..Culprits,like Ferguson,Whitty,Vallance,Gove..& lack of opposition will Escape/..
Only it’s going to be multiple court cases – not relying on a public enquiry which are always white-washed.
Hope so,but Not J shyster Flywheel,Pricipled barrister, if there is such a thing?..Remember Courts refused to even entertain,Restauranteur who tgook Government Lockdowns illegal?..
it is NOT a hoax,the Draconian measures ”Lockdowns” Forbidden to gossip meet in Pubs,Theatres,Cinemas etc fans the flames of Conspiracy,see my other posts.. Ineptitude seems like Conspiracy but it isn’t..
Whether rightfully or wrongfully, it’s certainly been an opportunity for governments to propose ever stringent measures and controls over their constituents with no end in sight.
Sadly, you are right regarding Fox widening his message beyond anti-woke to include Covid and vaccination regulations. We start to assume he feels more comfortable with non-conformists for non-conformists sake.
A Poundshop Lord Haw Haw, someone described him as. Which I think is generous.
I’m trying to work out whether it would be more embarrassing for you not to know who Lord Haw Haw was or to know who he was and still think the analogy fits.
He is beyond embarrassment.
We know Mr Fox voted for Corbyn and we also know he was, and probably still is, a fervent remainer. He also has strong views on the pervasive woke and cancel culture. Anyone who followed him on Twitter also know him as anti-lockdown, anti-mask and a vaccine-sceptic. I blocked him when I couldn’t take any more. He talks about race-baiters, freedom of speech, the right to choose blah blah blah yet would appear to be a socialist and a supporter of a party with, shall we say, a few problems around anti-Semitism and race-baiting MP’s itself.
Confused?
London needs a can-do mayor with a range of talents across a broad spectrum not a nightmare hamming it up at City Hall, making policy on the hoof. Fortunately he has zero chance of office.
Shame on the Tories though for putting up a lightweight in Shaun Bailey.
As far as I’m aware, Shaun Bailey is still the Tory candidate for mayor. Fox’s party has comes to some sort of accommodation Reform UK, but the anti-Khan vote is still split and he will romp home and given free rein to do more damage to London,
Fox’s belief system is, as you suggest, and as I point put below, somewhat inchoate. This is only to be expected of someone who hadn’t really thought about things until about 18 months ago. I would imagine he is now very much pro-Brexit, and very much embarrassed by his vote for Corbyn.
My own belief is that Fox would be much more effective as a public face and PR outrider for Reform UK, or for David Kurten in the London mayoral race.
A vote for Johnson would be far more embarrassing.
That would be the David Kurten who opposes vaccination?
How irresponsible and ignorant do you have to be to take a position like that? Oh, sorry, this is the fringe right, ’nuff said.
Because any discussion or dissent makes you fringe right eh Chris.
Address the issue. Vaccination is saving lives and David Kurten opposes it.
Covid deaths in Gibraltar, UK and India shot up after vaccination program started.
but Kurten is caribbean descent,ex UKIP ,surely you are ”Racist” for calling him out, if caribbean people have blood disorders,like leukaemia or Anaemia,they would be right to be dubious of vaccination
Maybe that explains why Tanya doesn’t like him.
I’ve only heard of Mr Fox relatively recently. But I suspect that actors, much like journalists/writers only really ever ‘stand for’ their own egos, and whatever it is that buoys that ego. It always seems to be them telling us that someone or something is dreadful or foolish, or worthy of being mocked, merely because they do not think like them. Whatever it is that they really think is, perhaps, irrelevant. Thoughtful people who like to consider all aspects of a problem before not applying an ideological solution seem to never take up those trades.
But I suspect that actors, much like journalists/writers only really ever ‘stand for’ their own egos. You forgot politicians in your rather superficial analysis.
!!
Perhaps people objecting to ‘woke tyranny’ appear aimless because they are tilting at windmills? Perhaps Khan will win in London because people in London thinking he is doing the best he can for them?
When Boris won London, one of his first acts as Mayor was to cut the scheme giving cheap/free travel on public transport to people on low incomes.
When Sadiq Khan won London, one of his first acts as Mayor was to ensure that when people who take multiple buses to get to work (such as cleaners) buy a ticket, it covers all their journeys within an hour, rather than them having to buy two or three tickets.
That’s the difference between an entitled Old Etonian who described the £275,000 pa he received for writing a weekly column in the Torygraph as ‘chickenfeed’, and the son of a bus driver. No wonder Sadiq Khan is cruising it.
Well said.
You are clearly not a resident of London. To write what you have here is preposterous. It simply reveals that you are woefully ignorant of the deterioration in all areas of mayoral responsibility where Kahn has failed abysmally.