The prospect of Boris Johnson becoming Britain’s new prime minister shows that political “leadership” in our current toxic paradigm only goes to the individuals who are able to court the most attention by their inflammatory rhetoric.
In an age where ‘success’ is ‘popularity’ and this is measured by retweets, Boris normalises the rise of far-right populism, which in turn paves the way for the widespread securitization needed to enrich and fortify the security sector and continue the failing ‘War on Terror’.
But Boris’ statements are more than just drama and entertainment. They create an environment that both reinforces and excuses the true intention of the counter-terrorism sector, which is to continue illegal foreign “wars” abroad, while crushing dissent at home, all the while pouring millions into their coffers and the wallets of those that conspire with them.
This continuing trajectory, which flies in the face of all humanity and logic, will happen as it has been happening, through due process violations in the courts and outside, spearheaded by the infiltration of Britain’s public sector (including education and health) as well as civil society by agents of PREVENT.
This modus operandi repeats itself in foreign countries under the guise of CVE and Britain’s “ongoing support” of puppet “democracies” in the name of the ‘War on Terror’.
The easy target: Muslim women face Boris’ juvenile attacks
While Johnson’s schoolyard bully charade entertains the masses – and may even elicit envy from his equally bleached and pliable cousin across the Atlantic – we must remember that his primary targets have been Muslim women, particularly those who wear the niqab.
These women are a minority within a minority – but they are also the main targets of anti-Muslim attacks on the streets of Britain.
Johnson’s stance is a neo-conservative one. It underpins the ‘War on Terror’ argument which at its root is one that removes the spotlight from the abusive state and says that “Islam is the problem”.
This is then used as an excuse and a lever to target communities, as policies and laws are slipped in under the radar while people are distracted by the personalities and their quips.
Although real issues facing ordinary Britons become worse (issues such as austerity), the whipped-up Islamophobia allows for discriminatory laws to be passed so that the government appears to “be doing something”.
In fact, it is only feeding money to the counter-extremism and security sectors, while tightening its grip at all levels of the executive and within the public sector, which should be apolitical.
A closer look at Boris’ trajectory of brutal rhetoric
Boris’ statements would be ridiculous if they weren’t startlingly similar to other historically hateful rhetoric, though his particular brand bursts through unrestrained from behind scripted pronouncements about “tolerance”.
His words echo similar rhetoric from prominent personalities preceding the Rwandan genocide (the Tutsis were termed as “cockroaches” by Hutu politicians) and the anti-Semiticism rife in Britain in the 1930s (which many in the Jewish community believe to be returning within the framework created by “leaders” like Boris).
Such statements have always been a precursor to mass violence.
This is because rhetoric can normalise the dehumanisation of a group. It does this in roughly three phases. Firstly, rhetoric can excuse or usher in a climate that makes it okay for one community to be denied equality under the law (cue Muslims in the ‘War on Terror’).
Secondly, blanket statements like his erase individual differentiation between members of a group.
Finally, at their hideous apex, they reduce members of the group to subhumans, often through the use of insect or animal metaphors.
All of this, Boris has done.
Let’s first consider the statements he has made about Islam, and the Holy Qu’ran. These have included calling for a widepread acceptance “that the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem” and calling for a “reform” of Islam.
He has referred to verses in the Holy Qu’ran as “widely supporting” a “disgusting arrogance and condescension” that leads to criminal behaviour.
Referring to the degeneration of the Ottoman Empire in the 18th Century and its violently overt and covert infiltration and colonisation by Europe, he has said: “What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?”
Lastly, to remove or distract any blame for the societal divisions from himself or the government that pays him, he has sought to bring about the mass dehumanisation of Muslims.
This he began by likening Muslims to insects: “You can’t claim to be draining the swamp in the Middle East when the mosquitoes are breeding quite happily in Yorkshire…,” he said.
Introducing the ideas that make removal of children legitimate
Rhetoric aside (if it’s possible), Boris’ vision of “Islamic reform” has not only drummed up the last desperate (often drunken) remnants of the Knights Templar on Britain’s streets, but it reveals a very real and clear intent to introduce ideas that otherwise would be seen for what they are: an attempt to tear at the fabric of Muslim life in Britain.
He demonstrated this by suggesting five years ago that the removal of Muslim children from their biological parents was needed to “counter extremism”, seeding the idea more carefully than was characteristic of him, in the mind of the public at the time.
As our report entitled Separating Families shows, this process is now in full swing.
Everything Boris says and stands for is destructive not only to individuals and families, but to the fabric of society.
When the rule of law becomes Boris’ target then so does the country
His statements imbibe individuals at a state level to run on assumptions put forward by him, to introduce legislation they would never have otherwise been able to do had the public been at a level of intelligent debate (as opposed to simply retweeting his latest howler or joining the fray).
In fact, it appears he is also useful to introduce new ideas that lead to increasing violations to the rule of law. Take his recent suggestion that those travelling to war zones, even if they were aid workers, should be automatically presumed under the law to be “terrorists”:
“The law needs a swift and minor change so that there is a “rebuttable presumption” that all those visiting war areas without notifying the authorities have done so for a terrorist purpose,” he said. (A rebuttable presumption is an assumption made by a court that is taken as true unless the defendant can contest it and prove otherwise).
In other words, our future “leader” has actually called for the dissolution of one of Britain’s founding legal principles, the presumption of innocence, a pillar of justice.
All of this at a time when we have documented that “secret evidence” – evidence that a defendant can not see or challenge – is often the norm in “terrorism” cases against legitimate aid workers.
He has targeted a sector that perhaps most embodies what for the general British public is a dearly held value: that of helping the most destitute, regardless of their beliefs or affiliation.
And besides charities and aid workers, the new targets of Boris’ rhetoric now include those who are often, terribly, bearing the full brunt of the British arms industry and “security sector” abroad, industries he supports.
These people are now being carefully choked of assistance from those willing to give it, at home. It is outrageous and cruel and illogical, and it will backfire.
It is up to ordinary people, now more than ever, to unite and resist in a manner that is most reasonable and good for all of us.
(NOTE: CAGE represents cases of individuals based on the remit of our work. Supporting a case does not mean we agree with the views or actions of the individual. Content published on CAGE may not reflect the official position of our organisation.)