Why did the British media smear Nigel Farage as a stooge of Putin?

You could tell that, ahead of the UK’s general election on July, 4 Nigel Farage, the leader of the upstart “populist” Reform UK Party, had leaders of the more established political outfits rattled. Rather than debating him about his actual policies head-on, such as his idea of swapping around Net Zero on carbon emissions for Net Zero on mass immigration, his rivals decided to begin smearing him as an agent of Russian President Vladimir Putin instead.

How so? Because, on June 21, Nigel went onto the BBC and traitorously told his interviewer the West had “provoked” Putin into invading Ukraine back in 2022. Or did he?

According to outgoing PM Rishi Sunak, Farage’s comments “play into Putin’s hands” and were “completely wrong” – as in, “wrong morally”, rather than “wrong factually”. Sunak’s opposite number, Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer, labelled them “disgraceful” and “disgusting”. John Swinney, head of the Scottish National Party, called Farage a “traitor to the interests of these islands” – most unlike the SNP themselves, who wish to denude the UK of its current submarine-launched nuclear deterrent, a policy Putin would welcome much more warmly than a few words of lukewarm apparent support during a 30-minute BBC interview. 

Yet examination of Farage’s comments, as opposed to his rivals’ hyperbolic disparagement of them, reveals he actually spoke as follows:

“We provoked this war. Of course it’s his [Putin’s] fault, [but] he has used what we’ve [the West] done as an excuse … It was obvious to me that the ever-eastward expansion of NATO and the European Union was giving this man a reason to [go to] his Russian people to say ‘they’re [the West] coming for us again’, and to go to war.”

Farage was not defending Putin’s invasion whatsoever. He clarified he was not a supporter of the Russian strongman, although he did admire him as a “political operator” – i.e., he felt Vlad had been running rings around the West for decades. Admitting this unfortunate fact should more accurately be labelled “honesty”, not “treachery”.

Yet opponents suggested otherwise. Christopher Steele, who ran MI5’s Russia Desk from 2006 to 2009, saidFarage was simply “spouting the speaking lines of our adversaries in Moscow”, almost as if he had been paid to do so, declaring he was “not at all sure Nigel Farage is a sound supporter of NATO.” “This is the true face of Nigel Farage,” an unnamed Conservative MP told The Sunday Times. “He … seems to have the hots for strongmen all over the world.” “The virus of Putinism, unfortunately, infects people,” further lamented the office of President Zelensky.

Context is everything – or nothing

But none of this is plausibly maintainable if you actually examine Nigel Farage’s full verbatim words. In a subsequent newspaper article, Farage clarified further:

“I am not and never have been an apologist for Vladimir Putin. His invasion of Ukraine was immoral, outrageous and indefensible. As a champion of national sovereignty, I believe that Putin was entirely wrong to invade the sovereign nation of Ukraine … I have never sought to justify Putin’s invasion in any way and I’m not now … [But] the expansion of NATO and the European Union was giving Putin a pretext he would not ignore.”

This is simply a debatable geopolitical and military opinion. All Farage said was that the West had helped give Putin “an excuse” to invade by NATO and the EU moving ever-eastwards – not a valid one, just “an excuse to do what he wanted to do anyway”.

It is perfectly legitimate to dispute this viewpoint. Other politicians, if their response had been rational, not rhetorical, could simply have replied that, even without NATO and the EU’s eastwards expansion, Putin would just have confected different excuses to invade Ukraine regardless. Either side may then have won or lost the subsequent debate, but at least this would have resulted in a rational exchange of views, rather than simply a string of wholly undeserved abuse for something Farage never even actually said.

East is East, but West Is best

The whole invented row was nothing more than the usual self-interested electioneering disguised as a defence of the national (and international) interest. No major UK politicians reacted anything like as strongly to the following Ukraine-related words, delivered to the European Parliament in 2023, by another prominent Western geopolitical figure:

“The background [to the war] was that President Putin declared in autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement [in return for peace] … And [it] was a pre-condition not to invite Ukraine [into NATO] … The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO … We rejected that. So, he [went to] war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite”.

So, here’s another person openly arguing Putin only went to war – or at least said he only went to war – to counter NATO expansion in the East. And who was this dangerous quisling? None other than General Jens Stoltenberg … the current Secretary-General of NATO.

Was Stoltenberg, too, a traitor against NATO, the West, and the geopolitical and security interests of Great Britain? No, because Stoltenberg was never standing for direct election to the UK Parliament, unhelpfully stealing away large numbers of disaffected voters from the Conservative/Tory and Labour Parties, unlike Nigel Farage.      

Another critic of Farage was former Tory PM Boris Johnson, who mocked him as Putin’s parrot for supposedly regurgitating Vlad’s own geopolitical views unquestioningly. Amusingly, Farage then immediately dug up some old comments of Johnson’s own, blaming the EU’s eastwards expansion for provoking Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, as shown by this 2016 newspaper front-page

Why was it OK for Johnson to make precisely the same point about EU hubris here as Farage later did, but not for Farage to do so himself? Reform UK’s leader was doing nothing more than advance an honest, if contentious, personal opinion upon foreign affairs. Isn’t that what candidates for high office are supposed to do come election time?

Taking the rap

It isn’t just Farage himself who had his words distorted to discredit him ahead of the election. Malcolm Cupis, Reform UK candidate for Melksham & Devizes, had apparently called black women “gutter sluts”, or so an appalled BBC informed us. Yet, when you read his actual social media words, he had merely commented on two specificscantily-clad black females gyrating sexually in a rap video to the effect that “Why would any self-respecting young woman aspire to behaving like a gutter slut in this way?” His specific problem was that the video was available to young children to view easily online. Cupis refused to apologise, saying “people want politicians who speak plainly, who are not constrained by political correctness, who speak their minds and represent their views,” like he does.

A fair point, I would have said?

We will shoot them on the beaches

The main front-page headline on The Times for June 28, meanwhile, was “Shoot illegal migrants, said Reform campaigner”. How appalling! Was that how Reform actually planned to achieve their Net Zero immigration pledge – genocide? Not really. 

The headline was a reference to unvetted low-level Reform UK canvasser Andrew Parker, who had been filmed undercover by journalists for UK TV station Channel 4, for their notably left-wing nightly news bulletin, obviously showing off by saying this as a crude joke, not as an actual genuine policy suggestion, to a potential voter on their doorstep: “Get the young recruits there, yeah, with guns on the beach, target practice. F***ing just shoot them.” This was simply an unwise and intemperate way to say “Unlike the other parties, we will actually deport illegal immigrants”, rather than a literal promise to massacre them all. Likewise, Parker was also recorded saying “We’re f***ing kicking all the Muslims out of the mosques and turning them into Wetherspoons” [a popular national chain of UK pubs], and telling a paramedic to deny oxygen to any patients if they are “any of that f***ing lot” [i.e., Muslims]. The paramedic’s response was to laugh. Because he knew Parker was clearly joking.

Mr Parker also inaccurately called the Conservative Party’s then-PM Rishi Sunak a “f***ing Paki”, despite his Indian Hindu heritage. Not very nice, maybe, but this fact led the news agenda the following day; Sunak himself was all over the TV, complaining that this slur was wholly unacceptable, and may even make his small children cry.

So, that was the most important news story a week before a General Election – that one man had just called another man a rude word. Shouldn’t media coverage of an important election be focusing rather more on the actual policies of the parties and their leaders?

Furthermore, earlier this year, an eerily similar row had erupted when a major Conservative Party donor, Frank Hester, was revealed to have speechified that the (admittedly highly annoying) prominent black Labour Party MP Diane Abbott “should be shot”, as her general irritating actions made him “want to hate all black women”. Hester’s subsequent apology, and excuse that he was only joking and didn’t hate black people at all, was fully accepted by Rishi Sunak, who consequently refused to return his £10m-plus in donations. Andrew Parker’s own subsequent apology, and excuse that he too was only joking, having had Muslim girlfriends in the past, was not quite so forgivingly accepted by Rishi Sunak, however.

Beyond all Reform?

Whatever Labour or the Tories do, they are allowed to apologise and move on, whereas with Reform UK, it is taken as indisputable proof they are forever unfit for office as a bunch of loony neo-fascist SS men: Farage’s direct Tory electoral opponent in the constituency of Clacton, Giles Watling, described Nigel’s campaign events as being “reminiscent of Nuremberg”. Only in the sense that, unlike Mr Watling’s, they were actually well-attended.

Farage has further been alleged to have wound up his left-wing teachers by pretending to be a Nazi as a teenage schoolboy, by making play out of the fact his initials were “NF”, as in “National Front”, an old UK neo-Nazi group – but, again, if true, this was all meant in jest. The following tweet, however, from fishwife-voiced left-wing media rent-a-mouth Narinder Kaur (who has happily been a guest on Nigel’s TV chat-show in the past), was apparently meant in all seriousness: 

No, it’s just you. You can’t even spell “Hitler-esk” properly, never mind recognise such a quality in others.

One video put out by Farage’s team online, meanwhile, featured as background music L’Amour Toujours, a 1999 Italian disco song. This video was then quickly taken down, after someone pointed out this same song had recently been co-opted by German ethnonationalists who had altered its chorus to “Germany for the Germans, foreigners out!”, being filmed making “Heil Hitler!” salutes whilst dancing to it. Farage called this a “mistake”, the staffer who had used it having no idea of its new meaning.

I guess you can believe this or not.

Definitely not a mistake, however, was that at a recent meeting of Warwick University Conservative Association, the 1938 song Erika, written by an actual Nazi stormtrooper, had been played, whilst Tory partygoers had chanted “Kill the Jews/Hughs!” in reference to the name of their local Conservative ex-chairman, Herr Hugh Herring. Again, I would tend to interpret this as merely juvenile offensive student humour rather than a genuine endorsement of genocide. But, if we’re going to treat everyone the same here, shouldn’t the Conservatives now be considered a rabble of unelectable brownshirts too? 

Perhaps the most egregious treatment of a Reform UK figure was of George Jones, an event campaigner, who was secretly filmed reacting to a passing police-car with a Gay Pride flag painted on it by saying “You see that f***ing degenerate flag on the front bonnet? What are the Old Bill doing promoting that crap? They should be out catching nonces [i.e., gay paedophiles/child groomers], not promoting the f***ers.”

When it comes to organisers of obscenities like Drag Queen Story Hour, then I quite agree – and so would millions of ordinary people. Knowledge of Jones’ words will probably have made many voters much more inclined to vote for Reform UK, not less so, as the know-nothing mainstream media seem to have wrongly presumed when splashing them about all over the place and publicly lynching him. Jones also went on to imply that officers dancing about like idiots at gay parades was also a pointless waste of police time and resources – which it is. The police later investigated (and subsequently cleared) Jones for daring to criticise them and their big fat gay-car, on the grounds it may potentially have been a “hate-crime”. Doesn’t this rather make Jones’ whole point for him?

 

icon

Join Mercator today for free and get our latest news and analysis

Buck internet censorship and get the news you may not get anywhere else, delivered right to your inbox. It's free and your info is safe with us, we will never share or sell your personal data.

Faraging bull

There are some Reform UK candidates out there who have done genuinely dodgy things: one called a disabled voter a “vegetable” online. Even Nigel Farage admits this is so. But he blames this regrettable fact on Reform UK being a small new start-up party with not enough resources to vet all its candidates properly yet, and has threatened to sue the firm he employed to do so for being completely useless.

Maybe so. After all, even the larger parties in the UK have somehow allowed demonstrably unsuitable candidates to slip through the net and become MPs in recent years.

Consider the former Labour Party MP Jared O’Mara, who said one gay musician should be “sodomised with his own piano” – sounds painful. After being unexpectedly elected to parliament in 2017, O’Mara accumulated a long list of allegations against himself, including sexual harassment of staff, setting up a fake charity to fund his own drug addiction, falsely claiming £52,000 of taxpayers’ money, doing next to no casework for his constituents, and generally being “disgustingly morally bankrupt”. Swearing about gay flags on police cars, joking about shooting immigrants, or calling someone a Paki are small beer indeed by comparison.

When recently confronted about O’Mara’s antics after he had received a four-year prison sentence, current Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer apologised, and blamed the inadequate candidate-vetting policies his party had in place at the time … you know, exactly as Nigel Farage has just done!

Furthermore, if Labour’s vetting is now suddenly so incredibly infallible, as Starmer claims, how come the candidate they carelessly chose to stand directly against Farage in Clacton, a radical black leftist and self-styled member of the “Wakanda diaspora” named Javin Owusu-Nepaul, was outed by Farage as having claimed that his “favourite drink” was “white men’s tears” on social media? Ironically, when Owusu-Napaul was later allegedly told by Labour high-ups never to set foot in the constituency again, he was said to be “in tears” himself; wonder how good they tasted to Nigel? 

So, what was the end result of all this double-standards media monstering of Farage and his party, once the General Election finally occurred? Reform UK won four MPs (including Mr Farage himself), around four million votes, and a 15 percent share of the overall ballot. That’s very impressive for a brand-new party in a first-past-the-post system; by comparison, the UK’s traditional third party, the Liberal Democrats, got an inferior 13 percent vote-share, yet won over 70 seats.

Whilst far away from actually forming a Government, measured purely by number of ballots cast, Reform UK actually came third, and racked up a large number of second place finishes in individual constituencies, where they may have a good platform to win next time around. In other words, the more media and politicians exposed them as “extremists”, the more people wanted to vote for them. Maybe, just maybe, they’re not very “extreme” at all? Maybe their views are actually just fairly ordinary? If wanting to control your own borders, abandon Net Zero nonsense, stand up for free speech, and dismantle the gay and trans cults currently grooming our susceptible youth count as being “Hitler-esk”, then Heil Nigel all the way, say I! 


What's your reaction to the British election?  


Steven Tucker is a UK-based writer with over ten books to his name. His latest, “Hitler’s and Stalin’s Misuse of Science”, comparing the woke pseudoscience of today to the totalitarian pseudoscience of the past, was released in 2023.

Image credit: Sir Keir Starmer fronts the media after his party's overwhelming victory.  


 

Showing 18 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • mrscracker
    Thank you Anon Emouse for providing that link. I’m not familiar with the publication but I always appreciate learning new things.
    I don’t know if Donald Trump has any particular foreign policy or not but he’s not a politician nor a diplomat. He’s a businessman associated with the entertainment industry. I wouldn’t really expect him to have much in the way of foreign policy except perhaps to keep us out of foreign entanglements as much as possible. Which I’m grateful for.
  • mrscracker
    “But instead of trying to conquer the unconquerable swiss mountains, Germany would one minute after the war declaration surrender unconditionally to the brave Swiss militia-army.”


    More likely they’d have realized the Swiss hold their money. And some of that from a previous war.
    :)
    And it’s not just the Germans.
  • Jürgen Siemer
    commented 2024-07-10 04:19:04 +1000
    I have enthusiastically supported the European Union for decades. Later I became a sceptic and now I believe it either needs a fundamental reform or, if reform is not coming, just should be left.

    The European Union has become a beaurocratic monster, which works and grows without democratic checks and controls, where deals are made behind doors, that would never have been approved by the people’s. Latest example: the 100 bln Euro EU-debt that Mrs van der Leyen was able to get approval for from the governments of the states.

    Germany is obliged to repay appr. A quarter of that loan plus interest (assuming that the French and Italians and Greeks will pay their shares). The EU-debt is clearly a violation / circumvention of German law that sets strict debt limits, and, I am rather certain, a violation of the Maastricht-/Lissabon-treaties signed for the Euro-currency-establishment.

    Furthermore, the 100 bln were originally marketed to the people as a climate friendly economic transformation facility. I bet it is now a climate unfriendly facility that transforms the landscape of Ukraine into a warzone.

    Is the EU a guarantor for peace in Europe? I doubt that, and point out that EU-nations – Merkel has admitted that- have lied when they guaranteed the Minsk-agreements which were signed to end the civil war in Ukraine.

    The Minsk-agreement was instead used to arm Ukraine and continue the civil war, which later, amongst other factors, provoked Russia to attack Ukraine. So, here the EU was not a force for peace but for war!

    My dream is that Germany leaves the EU, and then attacks Switzerland. But instead of trying to conquer the unconquerable swiss mountains, Germany would one minute after the war declaration surrender unconditionally to the brave Swiss militia-army.

    I personally would be very happy to be under Swiss rule. I trust the Swiss direct democracy more than the beaurocracy in Brussels, even if I am not allowed to vote.

    Mr Farage is a true British patriot.
  • Tom Mullaly
    commented 2024-07-09 17:16:20 +1000
    @Steven Meyer.
    Indeed! There are plenty of flaws with the European Union, but overall it has enabled almost a century of peace in western Europe. There are of course elements in Russia, Britain and even some in the US who are resentful, and would like to see that unity destroyed. That should not surprise anyone. Both Brexit and the Russian invasion of Ukraine are ‘back to the future’ projects, attempting to resurrect past nationalist ‘glories’. What is disappointing is that social conservative voices across the world, including sadly Mercatornet, who are in many areas of life bravely fighting the good fight, are sometimes unwittingly enabling these elements. It’s a another sad example of where common sense is being cancelled by the US ‘culture war’ thinking of “my enemies enemy is my friend”. That’ll end well. Not!
  • Tom Mullaly
    commented 2024-07-09 17:16:18 +1000
    @Steven Meyer.
    Indeed! There are plenty of flaws with the European Union, but overall it has enabled almost a century of peace in western Europe. There are of course elements in Russia, Britain and even some in the US who are resentful, and would like to see that unity destroyed. That should not surprise anyone. Both Brexit and the Russian invasion of Ukraine are ‘back to the future’ projects, attempting to resurrect past nationalist ‘glories’. What is disappointing is that social conservative voices across the world, including sadly Mercatornet, who are in many areas of life bravely fighting the good fight, are sometimes unwittingly enabling these elements. It’s a another sad example of where common sense is being cancelled by the US ‘culture war’ thinking of “my enemies enemy is my friend”. That’ll end well. Not!
  • Steven Meyer
    commented 2024-07-09 16:05:21 +1000
    Umm, let me see.

    Hmm, here’s a thought.

    Maybe he is a “stooge of Putin”.
  • Jürgen Siemer
    commented 2024-07-09 15:32:56 +1000
    Dear Mrs Anon,

    The US foreign policy has been a total Desaster: Military bases all over the world, many wars, most of which the US has lost, meddling in foreign elections, starting and supporting coup d’etats in foreign countries, and I might add as an economist: undermining the economies and financial systems of and stealing resources from foreign countries with huge amounts of printed fake money.

    All this is also toxic for the US itself. Just look at the exploding US debt on all levels, the high inflation, and I mean the true not the manipulated one, and the moral decay in the US elites, that inevitably comes when Mammon is worshipped and God is forgotten.

    If you want to strengthen the US economically, the solution is clear: bring all your soldiers home, cut the military spending by 90% and develop a peace economy that would substitute the current war economy, rebuild an economy that produces goods people need in peace times.

    Your weapons industry is a threat also to the US itself, because it destroys the US from within.

    The military industrial complex together with the financiers from Wall Street and the imperialists from Washington have corrupted the US, deeply.

    You need to get these demons off your back.
  • Anon Emouse
    Mrs Cracker,

    Donald Trump abandoned our Kurdish allies in Syria, allowing them to be slaughtered. His withdrawal from the agreement with Iran regarding nuclear refinement undercut the US diplomatically, as now many nations have no reason to believe the US will honor treaties President-to-president. Most of the western world acknowledges the threat that Donald Trump poses to alliances like NATO with his threats of withdrawal. He has repeatedly said he’d end the Ukraine war on day one without offering up any substantiative plans as to how to achieve this.

    And that’s just scratching the surface. Foreign policy, a non-partisan, non-political journal on international relations, offers up a more scathing review here, and I would encourage you to read it.

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/05/trumps-final-foreign-policy-report-card/
  • David Page
    commented 2024-07-08 10:44:58 +1000
    Mrs Cracker, would you leave a female child alone with Donald Trump? Especially if that child resembled his own daughter?
  • David Page
    commented 2024-07-07 09:33:59 +1000
    A distinction without a difference. Russia’s neighbors have always had to fear Russian aggression.
  • Tom Mullaly
    commented 2024-07-07 03:03:20 +1000
    You too @mrscracker
  • mrscracker
    Thank you Mr. Tom. That’s a decent and civil way to end a conversation. I appreciate that. You have a blessed day.
  • Tom Mullaly
    commented 2024-07-07 01:22:44 +1000
    We should perhaps leave it there, and agree to disagree. You were doing OK until you got to:

    ‘And colonialism brings about good as well as bad.’
  • mrscracker
    Mr. Tom, this was about Nigel Farage, not Donald Trump but I can’t think of anything in President Trump’s administration that was damaging to national security or alarming. At least to me. On the contrary, Mid East peace accords were made, no foreign wars were entered into, and praise God, Pres. Trump nominated Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe.
    I suppose to be fair, the Establishment GOP spent their entire energy those four years undermining and working against Trump . Minus that GOP sabotage perhaps Pres. Trump would have gone on to do more. I suppose we will have a chance to find out the next time around. But I was quite pleased about his first administration.
    And colonialism brings about good as well as bad. I’m old enough to remember how things were in a British colony and how they compare today decades after independence. It’s a shame.
  • Tom Mullaly
    commented 2024-07-06 23:49:08 +1000
    @mrscracker
    I agree with you up to a point and truly sympathize with our working-class communities in England. My dad too fought Nazism in the Second World War. This, however, is to ignore the wider context. Britain became one of the world’s wealthiest countries through a 300+ year empire that exploited vast areas of the globe and their people, imposing their will, language and draining those regions of their resources.

    All that is of course ancient history now, thank God. My point was that the descendants of those same people who did the exploiting, a tiny % of the whole population of the UK, are still very much in control of the wealth and the power in Britain, and Nigel Farage is one of them.

    The UK is a largely service economy now, hugely dependant on the descendants of people from their former colonies to ‘keep the show on the road’ at all costs as the native population ages and declines, and hugely dependant on good relations and trade with their closest neighbours in Europe.

    People vote for Trump and Farage because they lie to them, ‘externalize’ their grievances (“the foreigners are to blame”) and make them feel that they are ‘victims’. They deliberately try to distract us, so that our attention is not directed where it should be. Vote away, but don’t say you weren’t warned. Farage and Trump are merely the ‘asset strippers’ of late consumer capitalism. You can’t eat a flag! It’s a great tragedy that the abuse of Ukraine by the bully next door is now being made into another culture war ‘issue’ in the West. It’s particularly sad to see decent social conservative sites like Mercatornet, who otherwise fight the good fight, falling for this trick.
  • mrscracker
    What Mr. Farage related about the Ukraine makes perfect sense. If it didn’t you wouldn’t see these sorts of over reactions.
    I have family in the UK who have records of living in the same community for hundreds of years. They served their country and defended their homeland in countless wars. Their town had been a particular victim of Nazi bombs but had been repaired and rebuilt through great effort.

    Their community was publicly dismissed by some woke power that be as lacking in "diversity ". The message my family member got was that there were too many people like them and they weren’t of any great value. Having lived and died, worked, built, and defended a town for centuries wasn’t good enough.
    People who feel demeaned and ignored vote for Farage and Trump.
  • Tom Mullaly
    commented 2024-07-06 22:00:23 +1000
    I have always thoroughly enjoy Steven Tucker’s contributions to Fortean Times.

    This article however is a new level of fantasy entirely. It’s pretty straightforward really, if one lives, as I do, in the UK. Nigel Farage was not in anyway affected by what he had to say about Russia. Most of his fans would have a hard time pointing out Russia on a map. Channel 4 did produce a pretty shocking ‘exposé’ of some of Reform’s members a few days before the general election, but he immediately appeared on ITV’s ‘Loose Women’ (8 million viewers) the day after the exposé to ‘explain’ that his party members filmed were really ‘plants’

    Farage is NEVER off the mainstream media in the UK. He is popular and ‘everywhere’ because his barely disguised views, which are indeed intolerant and xenophobic, are agreed with by many English people. The constant attempts by some to portray Farage as some kind of noble, contrarian outsider are truly dishonest and are a bit tiresome at this stage. He is a privately-educated stockbroker and hardly one of the hoi-polloi.

    The UK is a country with an archaic electoral system, by modern western standards (first-past-the-post), that ensures that no matter how many people or parties run in a general election only one of the ‘big two’ can ever win. The victorious Labour Party – who under Sir Keir Starmer have had to move considerably to the right just to get elected – have just won 412 seats in Parliament against the Conservative’s 121 with just over 30% of the vote. The UK’s mainstream media is 70-80% right wing, and much of it controlled by a certain Australian.

    Nigel Farage is simply a right-winger of the kind that the British establishment find publically ‘distasteful’ but also very useful, especially where many of the electorate ‘discreetly’ agree him. He is a rightwing rabble-rouser and therefore has his uses, keeping the British working-class distracted and above all in ‘their place’. His Reform ‘party’ is not even a party but a ‘limited company’ under his name: an omission from this OP, one would have thought was relevant.

    He was elected as a ‘disrupter’ MEP to the European Parliament, to articulate
    English disdain at their neighbours’ ‘inferiority’. He successfully pulled the Conservative Party further rightwards over Europe (Brexit) and immigration. He is merely the latest representative of a long tradition of blaming ‘foreigners’ for England’s own mistakes, that began with the ‘dissolution’ of the monasteries for the ‘crime’ of ‘taking ’our’ cattle, money and women’, ‘talking funny’ and for their ‘foreign allegiance’.

    Farage has had his uses. With the UK now in a far worse position than it was 10 years ago, internally and externally, those uses are now becoming surplus to the requirements of the establishment. The Conservatives tried to ‘absorb’ him and his movement by ‘embracing’ his ideas on Brexit, immigration, etc. His movement (UKIP) stood aside in the election of 2019 to give total control to Boris Johnson, who proceeded to turn a national disaster into a national catastrophe by ‘getting Brexit done’, Boris-style.

    They failed because Farage’s ‘solutions’ are not the answer to the country’s problems. The recent general election was noticeable for the fact that no party (the Scots excepted) were ‘allowed’ to even mention the word, never mind discuss the consequences of Brexit; a truly impressive level of national conformity! Instead the Tories have destroyed their own party for now. Farage now takes a seat in the House of Commons so as to try to remain relevant. Unless the Tories can ‘buy’ him off, or make him a Lord, he will now be ‘disrupter-in-chief’ in the British Parliament, a fitting example of ‘karma’ for all those years he so proudly ‘represented’ his countrymen in insulting their neighbours in Brussels.
  • Steven Tucker
    published this page in The Latest 2024-07-06 14:55:41 +1000