Tag Archives: Caroline Criado-Perez

Diary Blog, 7 January 2023, with the latest on the “Jack Monroe” scandal

Morning music

On this day a year ago

Saturday quiz

Well, this week brings another victory over political journalist John Rentoul, trumping his 4/10 with my 7/10. I did not know the answers to questions 6 and 10, and I just could not recall the answer to question 1 even though I “really” knew it.

The “Jack Monroe” juggernaut rolls on

[https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/07/jack-monroe-interview]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/07/jack-monroe-interview

I suspect that some hurried rewriting had to be done by the Guardian’s scribbler.

That Guardian piece was evidently planned to be part of the launch of Thrifty Kitchen, the latest book by “Jack Monroe” (and at the end has a link via which enables any “mug” unaware of the full “dodginess” of the book and its authoress to buy a copy).

The interviewer mentions “Jack Monroe’s” Patreon “grift” but not the crowdfunder launched by “Jack Monroe”, ostensibly to sue the MP for Ashfield, Lee Anderson, the proceeds of which have gone straight into the bank account of the “Bootstrap Cook”. Certainly no legal action has been launched, not even a “letter before action”, and Ms. Monroe’s favoured solicitor, Israel-based Mark Lewis, has not emerged from his kennel since the Twitterstorm etc around “Jack Monroe” gained strength several months ago.

That Guardian piece gives the impression of sitting uncertainly on the fence after the more recent revelations, neither wholeheartedly endorsing the woman and her book (the recipes from which seem to have been lifted from a number of different Internet sites such as BBC Food), nor making an all-out hatchet attack on her. More the former than the latter, arguably.

The interviewer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Hattenstone.

More tweets

The “Bootstrap Cook” is not alone in wanting to join the world of fake “celebrity” while still pretending to “stick up for the poor”. Look at the pseudo-revolutionary and pseudo-Marxist poseur, Owen Jones, who has made a career out of being a kind of “licensed Bolshevik” while still doing fashion shoots for glossy magazines on occasion, attending receptions with the “rich and famous”, and making a rather large income in various ways.

Another? What about Chuka Umunna, the half-caste one-time “Labour” MP, who whined about not being allowed into the VIP area of some louche nightclub?

All fakes.

Notes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuka_Umunna; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_Jones; https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/01/04/a-brief-word-about-owen-jones/.

More tweets

Of course. “Jack Monroe” might like to ask advice on that from her one-time solicitor, Israel-based Jew-Zionist Mark Lewis, who admitted or claimed a few years ago at the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal (that found him guilty on several charges) that at times he did not know what he was doing because his mind was affected by prescription drugs (etc).

[Update, same day: “Jack Monroe” has swiftly deleted her tweet threatening (making empty threats of) “libel” action].

“Jack Monroe” once again snarling at people and threatening “libel” action. Ha ha!

I should imagine that her lawyer (if any) is well aware that a defamation action, though it has to be be brought within one year, should all the same be brought as expeditiously as possible within that 1-year window. In the case of Lee Anderson and Martin Daubney, the alleged “libel” (in fact the totally true assertion that “Jack Monroe” has made a living off the backs of the genuinely poor) occurred in early May or even April 2022. No libel case will be brought by the “grifter” against Lee Anderson now, in my opinion. Let’s see.

As for stray tweeters or, indeed, me, “Jack Monroe” will be unable to bring legal action successfully (certainly not against me) for a number of reasons, including the fact that I would have a number of arguable defences (including what the English law now terms “Truth”). Also, having no capital and a very low income now, even a successful libel action against me would leave the claimant about £500,000 out of pocket; in reality, no claim could even be launched against me, and I apprehend that the same would be true of many tweeters critical of “Jack Monroe”.

That would tend to explain, if true, where much of the money “earned” by “Jack Monroe” has gone…

Like many liars, “Jack Monroe” ties herself in entangled knots of her own fabrication.

So tweeter “@JanetAnscombe” thinks that “Jack Monroe” cheats her Patreon donors because her life was or is “in chaos“? “Jack Monroe” never seems to fail to take the money, or to set up ways of taking more. Well-organized in that sense, anyway.

Opinions are OK, but should be based on evidence…

I note that, like many “Jack Monroe” fans, “@JanetAnscombe” is (judging from her photo) retired, seems to live comfortably (in Tenerife), and according to her Twitter profile, is “Doctor, ancient historian, “leftie elitist”, mother of chickens, hermit-ish, trauma & neurobiology wonk, Celt, European, MBE.” (and a facemask zealot as well).

So not exactly “poor” or “working class“. Again.

As blogged previously, I have not myself seen even one present “Jack Monroe” fan who is actually poor, or “working class”, or for that matter from any ethnic minority; as I opined yesterday, few of the blacks, browns, Chinese etc would eat the swill that the “Bootstrap Cook” makes or pretends to make.

I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that anyone still defending “Jack Monroe” should not be listened to on any subject…

Ha ha! “@sitebadger”, another “Jack Monroe” defender. Once again, not poor, not someone who claims to have been: “Environmental Manager / planning compliance. BA(Hons) Landscape Design. MSc Conservation Management.”

Rhetorical questions: Where are the poor? Where are the “working class”?

…and of course, another one who “stands with Ukraine” (on Twitter), and is almost certainly a facemask fanatic, like most of the rest.

More “Jack Monroe” lies, in other words.

Other tweets seen

No-one can rule guiltlessly” [Saint-Just].

“Dr.” Louise Raw

So far no news about “Dr” Raw’s doomed and ostensible attempt to sue Jeremy Clarkson for making rude remarks about Meghan Mulatta.

Surely Ms. Raw is not going to use the money she has raised via GoFundMe for other, or even personal, purposes? She has almost hit her financial target of £15,000 (£13,787 as at time of writing), but no news from her about the supposed upcoming legal action. What a surprise.

Mike Stuchbery (notorious Twitter “grifter”) and Roanna Carleton-Taylor (former “antifa” cheerleader who is now keeping very quiet…) claimed, a few years ago, that they were going to sue “Tommy Robinson”. Raised ~£12,000 for that ostensible purpose. No legal action ensued. I wonder what happened to the money of the 700+ mugs who donated?

See also: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/10/23/a-few-words-about-mike-stuchbery/; https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/11/27/mike-stuchbery-and-tommy-robinson-legal-dispute/.

Stuchbery was also (he claimed) going to sue me (never heard from him or his —non-existent— lawyers), and he was going to sue various other people, including several Danes. Never happened. A man of straw.

More tweets

Exactly, and the tweeted typo (?), “cause celeb“, is actually —and ironically— more accurate than the correct “cause celebre“.

Indeed. In fact, she has had a good run, bearing in mind the easily-disprovable lies, at times reaching heights of absurdity only achieved by Monty Python, The Goodies, The Good Life, or maybe The Goon Show.

Next? Maybe “Jack Monroe” will turn and turn about, and become a pseudo”Conservative” social commentator with a column in the Daily Mail. Hard to see, but in the madness of the UK in 2023, not actually impossible.

“Jack Monroe” has been mocking her mug donors for years, but usually only in private. Now she does it openly, “telling the truth to shame the Devil” (?).

Still, as of today, no less than 624 utter mugs are still signed up with Patreon to send her between £3.50 and £44 every month! Hard to believe how stupid people can be.

At last! A “poor” or “working class” “Jack Monroe” fan!

Oh no, wait…— “Director: @Air_Cover_PR | #HR PR | ‘James Staunton is a PR faster than Muhammad Ali’ –@guardian. Once part of @InstinctifPtnrs, @wriglesworth and @PwC_UK“…

The absurdity becomes surrealistic…

I suppose that, were Katie Hopkins still scribbling for the Daily Mail, she would be wondering aloud in print how much of the £324,000 she had to pay “Jack Monroe” after the libel action (£24,000 to “Jack Monroe” herself as an award, £300,000 for the legal costs of “Jack Monroe”) went up the nose or down the throat of the “Bootstrap Cook”.

More seriously, I cannot see that “Jack Monroe” offers anything much to the truly poor or struggling. She has some way to go, however, before she reaches the rock-bottom uselessness of other “one-trick-ponies” such as the crazed feminist trustafarian, Caroline Criado-Perez [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Criado_Perez].

As blogged, most of the supporters of “Jack Monroe” are middle-aged if not elderly. Not sure why. Not all aged lesbians, either. Men of 60+ as well. Why? I do not know; and, as already said, I have yet to see anyone under 40, let alone under 30, supporting her; also, no non-whites (are they too practical when short of cash?). A conundrum.

Just look at that Adrian Hilton idiot! Doesn’t know his **** from his elbow, yet purports to teach at university level [“Adrian Hilton is a conservative academic, theologian, author and educationalist. He has spent more than 20 years in secondary and university education, teaching, writing and lecturing in politics, jurisprudence, philosophy and theology in the UK and the US.“].

Typical.

Tweets on other subjects

Rachel Reeves: Labour Friends of Israel member, and quite possibly part-Jewish.

When you look at Starmer’s Israel-lobby Shadow Cabinet, there would seem no point in replacing the similar Con Party government with that.

Only a social-national government or rulership will or could save the British people, but there is not even a social-national party worthy of the name.

I do.

Afternoon music

[Berlin Wall, 1960s, from the Western side]
[street scene, East Berlin, 1970s]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_John_Moeran]
[BBC TV Centre, White City, under construction, early 1950s]

Late music

Diary Blog, 30 September 2022, including an assessment of “Jack Monroe”, aka the “Bootstrap Cook”

Morning music

[Volegov, Morning at St. Remy de Provence]

On this day a year ago

“Jack Monroe”, the “Bootstrap Cook”: an assessment

I have blogged (briefly) previously a few times about the person known as “Jack Monroe” (originally Melissa Hadjicostas, half-Greek Cypriot), whose rather clever nom de plume is “Bootstrap Cook”.

The name Jack Monroe is now her official name, it having been adopted by deed poll.

In the past, I was content to be at least neutral towards “Bootstrap Cook”, in that I felt that anyone putting almost anything into the public domain that might help the millions of financially-struggling people in the UK deserved at least a chance.

This is what Wikipedia has to say: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Monroe; her own website is here: https://cookingonabootstrap.com/.

Incidentally, this blog is written in the English language, and therefore does not refer to a woman (whatever her views or proclivities) as “they” or “them”.

“Ideological” criticism of “Bootstrap Cook” has come mainly from two directions. The first group would be those connected to or supportive of the “Conservative” regimes of 2010-present. They tend to say that there is no justification for the campaigning of “Bootstrap Cook” to raise State benefits etc, and that any food poverty that exists exists because the individuals subject to it cannot “budget” properly, or do not know how to cook cheap wholesome food.

An ignorant point of view (though not without a small kernel of truth, as with many basically lying narratives), which infuriates many, especially when expressed by the likes of Iain Dunce Duncan Smith, the MP who has also been a huge expenses blodger and fraudster, and who claimed vast amounts on his Parliamentary expenses (even a £39 hotel breakfast) while —as Secretary of State for the DWP— taking money away from people living in real poverty.

The second group who tend to criticize “Bootstrap Cook” are those who agree with much of her campaigning on benefits etc, but who say that she actually “enables” attacks on benefit recipients by reason of her claims that a family of 4 can be fed well on £20 a week or less.

Now, however, a third group has joined the fray, being those who claim that they and/or others have been taken for a ride by “Bootstrap Cook”, and that she is a “grifter”, or even an outright fraud, who has sold goods and services which were never delivered. These critics also claim that much of the “Bootstrap Cook” back-story is untrue, or embellished.

For example, it is said that “Bootstrap Cook” was either never in poverty herself, or was so for no more than 18 months. It is said that at least part of her financial difficulties were caused by her own (apparently past) alcohol and/or drug abuse. It is said that she makes up implausible stories about her past financial predicament, such as “having to” sell her little son’s beloved dinosaur toy to raise money (really? How much money would that raise? £1? £2? And how cruel is that, assuming the story to be true?).

It is also said that her parents are not badly-off financially, that they own buy-to-let property, and that her paternal grandfather was a millionaire. In other words, that “Bootstrap Cook” always had a financial lifeline. I have no idea whether, or to what extent, that may be, or may have been, the case.

Recently, following a storm of criticism on Twitter, “Bootstrap Cook” deleted her Twitter account, though others claim that she is merely taking a 40-hour “rest” from Twitter, and will return. Why 40 hours and not (as with Jesus Christ) 40 days, or whatever, I have no idea.

One of my few blog posts which mentioned “Bootstrap Cook”: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2022/08/25/diary-blog-25-august-2022-with-a-few-thoughts-about-poverty-and-living-through-hard-times/.

One aspect that interested me, as a former barrister, was the tendency of “Bootstrap Cook” to threaten some of her critics with legal action. A few years ago, “Bootstrap Cook” sued Katie Hopkins in libel.

Ms. Hopkins had libelled “Bootstrap Cook” entirely mistakenly as to the facts, had no defence whatever, and should have backed down and got out with minimal damage when she could have but, like many maximalisti, found sorry the hardest word, and so was hammered: £24,000 in damages, and very large legal costs. Ms. Hopkins had to sell her house in St. Leonard’s (the best residential district in Exeter) in order to pay those legal costs.

“Bootstrap Cook” retained as her solicitor Mark Lewis, the Zionist Jew who now lives in Israel, though he has also a professional foothold in London. His no-win no-fee cases have often been controversial.

I have blogged about Lewis in previous years, most recently in 2019: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/01/11/update-re-mark-lewis-lawyer-questions-are-raised/.

I have to wonder how nice a person “Bootstrap Cook” is, if she is on friendly terms with someone such as Lewis.

As soon as people started suggesting, a month or two ago, that “Bootstrap Cook” was somewhere between “grifter” and fraudster, out came the Twitter threat that Mark Lewis and libel would be wheeled out (frankly, not so much of a threat— by no means have all of Lewis’s cases been brought to a successful conclusion, and when he was censured and fined by the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority about 4 years ago, his Counsel said that his fine should be reduced because his only possessions were his clothes, a mobility scooter. and a private pension worth £70 a week).

In fact, when “Bootstrap Cook” threatened libel action against Conservative Party MP Lee Anderson [Con, Ashfield] (in May of this year), nothing ever came of it, as far as I know:

Food journalist and activist Jack Monroe hinted at legal action against Anderson after he commented in an interview that “She’s taking money off some of the most vulnerable people in society and making an absolute fortune on [sic] the back of people”.[36] [Wikipedia].

It may be that Anderson will face legal action, but I have certainly not seen any news about an action having been launched. See https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/may/15/food-writer-jack-monroe-sues-tory-mp-claims-she-makes-fortune-poor-lee-anderson; and https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/20141345.southends-jack-monroe-sue-lee-anderson/.

The Guardian says “sues“, but the Independent said “hints at suing“, and I have seen nothing on the Mark Lewis Twitter output to the effect that he ever was “instructed” (the Guardian, again) on the matter. He may have been, he may not have been. I might add that all the news reports are from 15-16 May 2022; nothing since then.

Was Anderson right, though? As I have said, I was willing to cut “Bootstrap Cook” some slack, because in recent years, the past ~15 years, the social security system has become inadequate, pay for work has also become generally inadequate, and millions are struggling both to eat and keep sheltered and warm. My view was that any useable advice was, well, useful.

I still think that (despite the fact that, to me, many of the recipes of “Bootstrap Cook” do look like a dog’s dinner, and despite the fact that many disagree with her costings etc).

More serious criticism is that she has actually been making a pretty good living out of Patreon donations, while never or rarely providing the extras offered in exchange.

When I last looked, “Bootstrap Cook” had at least 800 Patreon donors giving a minimum of £1 a month. £800 a month. In itself not bad. When you consider that the suggested minimum is £3 a head, the total increases to £2,400 a month (perhaps). I have seen a tweet where the tweeter claims, truthfully or otherwise, to have been donating £44 a month. Well, you see the point. “Bootstrap Cook” must have an income from Patreon alone of between £800 and (?) perhaps as much as £8,000 a month. Or more. That’s before one takes into account book sales, other donations, paid (?) TV appearances, other appearances etc. We do not know.

Not that “Bootstrap Cook” claims poverty, these days. No, she claims, as I understand it (and perhaps truthfully) a degree of “precariousness” in her life and finances, and she is certainly not alone in that. It is almost the norm in the Britain of 2022.

“Bootstrap Cook” has a number of defence mechanisms. One is to threaten defamation actions, but the more usual tactic is to claim the shield of disability, and she has about two dozen options there.

A further defence tactic is, I read, to set her fanatical fans (she apparently calls them “flying monkeys“) onto any critics, and I have certainly seen tweets where mentally-disturbed fans have come close to suggesting violence against anyone daring to utter critical words.

The problem here is that “Bootstrap Cook” has become a totem for a certain tribe of virtue-signallers. Not really “the poor” but more the sort of people who like to think that they are socially-progressive etc. Facts do not matter to those people, belonging to the “right” tribe does. cf. “Covid”, Ukraine, “Black Lives Matter” and, of course, “FBPE/Remain/Rejoin” etc.

When you consider that someone who claims to be able to feed a family of 4 for £20 a week might be said to be, arguably or in effect, saying that UK benefits are perfectly OK and need not be increased, is that really something positive or not?

Some tweets seen about the issues raised:

It is better to be a little naive than very cynical, but the world makes it hard…

As many have noted, this whole Bootstrap Cook thing is more like a creepy cult than anything. It’s as if a lot of fairly affluent or at least not poor people have decided that supporting “Bootstrap Cook” —right or wrong— validates their evenings of going out, their Netflix subscription, their holidays in Cuba or Costa Rica, their new cars, and in fact their whole comfortable existence.

In fact, it reminds me of the “indulgences” sold by the Roman Catholic Church before the Reformation.

Not that that is necessarily the fault of the “Bootstrap Cook” herself.

Look at the loonies below, believing what they want to believe:

Well, if you can believe that the “royal” Mulatta is a sadly-abused “princess”, then believing that a poverty campaigner, who seems to be making “a nice little earner” out of it and naive followers, is a modern Joan of Arc, must be easy enough.

Well, that’s enough. There are hundreds of other tweets in similar vein.

As blogged previously, my view is that Bootstrap Cook’s stuff may well be of interest to many, though —as already said— much of it looks to me like carbohydrate-heavy food often presented like a dog’s dinner.

I do not think that “Bootstrap Cook” set out to defraud anyone, and it may be that she has no such intention now, but it does seem that legitimate questions about her fundraising have been asked by a number of donors, but not answered by her.

If people think that they are somehow accomplishing something by subsidizing the not-uncomfortable lifestyle of that person, then that is their business, in a sense, but it is legitimate for others, arguably more clear-minded, to ask “where is the money going?“, “is any of this true?“, and “are people being tapped for money under false pretences?“.

I can also see that her fans seem to be, almost entirely, not the truly poor but more those who are not “poor” but who support her “non-binary” profile, the “gender bender” aspects, and the general “government must do more for the poor” activism aspect.

I think that it is legitimate to question, not only “where the money went” (or goes), but also, whether in reality Bootstrap Cook has actually influenced government, or large enterprises such as ASDA (it seems that one or two supermarket chains were actually paying her for advice or consultancy or something).

Poverty is a huge problem in the UK now. Anyone claiming to be expert in it must expect searching inquiry.

Is this all really just a morning TV virtue-signal writ large? After all, at the end of the day, the decisive question is what government does or fails to do.

I personally have no animus against “Bootstrap Cook”, but my view of her has certainly become far less positive over the years since I first heard of her.

I do think, also, that if you claim that a person can feed healthily on £5 a week, you are really playing into the hands of swine such as Dunce Duncan Smith, Esther McVey, Therese Coffey etc.

I think that anyone wanting to help “the poor” could probably do so more effectively via GoFundMe or local foodbanks than by subsidizing the lifestyle of “Bootstrap Cook”. Perhaps I am mistaken, but that is my firm view and opinion.

On a wider point, we have in the UK this msm thing whereby TV channels or shows like to have a “go-to” list. Brexit discussion? Call Farage. Free speech discussion? Call Toby Young. Poverty discussion? Call Jack Monroe. And so on.

Thus you get “activists” who are really just “famous for being famous activists”. The Caroline Criado-Perez phenomenon. A hundred thousand or a million Twitter followers but, outside Twitter etc, really unknown and without real influence.

Of course, the msm now like to feature (supposed) “experts” who are, if possible, young, female, and black. “Bootstrap Cook” is not black, but as “Meatloaf” once opined, “two out of three ain’t bad“…

Well, there it is. I prefer to concentrate on other and larger issues really, but felt that I should examine the above first, after the recent Twitter storm in a teacup.

[Update, same day: I happened to see an assessment by someone else. An investigative and/or opinion piece. https://katieroche.net/jack_monroe_investigation_main.html]

[nb: any further updates will be below or at the foot of this blog article]

[Update, 31 December 2022: https://twitter.com/AwfullyMolly/status/1609126960294236160?s=20&t=cet59hBPAokH_0Z40RURYg].

More tweets seen

All that the doomed “Conservative” Party had to do, to consign Labour to the bin, was select a leader to succeed “Boris”-idiot who was even slightly competent. It failed to do so. Endex.

The implications are clear: either the Con MPs get rid of Liz Truss as soon as they can, and put in someone who at least looks semi-competent, or the Con Party will be near-finished by next year. Same goes, of course, for Kwarteng, Cleverly, and Coffey.

More tweets

Ha ha. Yes, that ghastly little bastard Schofield is one of the worst people on TV in the UK; and, yes, it is peak contemporary Britain, just like…well, there are just too many examples around…

More tweets

TV detective drama

I, among others, including recently Peter Hitchens, have written about how NWO/ZOG propaganda is now embedded in TV dramas, “soaps”, ads etc. See https://ianrobertmillard.org/2018/12/10/tv-ads-and-soaps-are-the-propaganda-preferred-by-the-system-in-the-uk/.

A good example was seen the other night. A new detective drama called Karen Pirie.

Set partly a few decades ago, partly in the contemporary era, even the older setting, in St. Andrews, Scotland, decades ago, had a black character appear. In a small town in what seems to be a bleak part of Scotland (I have never been there). Then we are introduced to the two detectives now investigating the cold case. One a small Scottish woman, the other a black or half-caste…

I do not have a great deal of patience with films or TV shows. If they do not catch the interest after 15 mins, switch— OFF. I gave this one 20 mins. A bloody bore, poorly conceived and worse-acted.

This evening, I saw an old episode of Wycliffe [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wycliffe_(TV_series)]. All characters more or less credible, and what I like best about Wycliffe is that it manages to catch the atmosphere of Cornwall well, from what I recall from when I lived there. It does not rely on cliche (most of the time, at least).

Late tweets

One or two white children, out of over 30. Scotland’s future? In the centre of the photo, Scotland’s supposedly “nationalist” leader…

Late music

[icebreaker]

Update, 3 November 2022

In the month since I wrote about “Jack Monroe”, the “Bootstrap Cook”, the storm around her murky financial arrangements has become fiercer yet. A few tweets:

Her “free lawyer” is or was the egregious Mark Lewis, a Jew who lives in Israel, though he is connected to a small law firm in the UK.

I have blogged extensively about Lewis in the past:

He is sometimes described, inaccurately, as having become a “pro bono” lawyer who works for free, out of quasi-charitable motives, whereas he in fact seems to work on a “no win no fee” basis, which is not at all the same thing.

“Jack Monroe” has tweeted that she still has several/many months in which to sue the MP Lee Anderson and the politico Martin Daubney. In theory, up to a year after the alleged libel, but the relevant Practice Directions do say that the courts will still expect any claim to be made expeditiously, so not, e.g., 10 or 11 months after the alleged libel.

The courts may (probably will) penalize even a successful defamation claimant (“plaintiff”, as was) in both award and costs if the action is not brought expeditiously.

How do I know this? Because, though not now a barrister, I was one until a pack of Jews cobbled together a false complaint against me in 2014 (I was disbarred, wrongfully and illegally, in 2016): see https://ianrobertmillard.org/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/. I am rusty on the law here and there, but keep up to some extent (enough).

As my blog assessment said. Virtue-signalling Guardian/Observer readers for the most part.

https://awfullymolly.com/2022/11/03/jack-monroe-saint-or-scammer/

Twittering To The Birds

It has now been about three months since I was expelled from Twitter. Am I chafing under the restriction? No.

Most Twitter users regard removal from Twitter as akin to being cast into outer darkness, a phenomenon to be feared (if it happens to them), to be protested against (if it happens to those whom they regard as ideological friends), to be laughed at and celebrated (if it happens to those they dislike, hate, or oppose ideologically).

Twitter is in fact a habit akin to having a piece of chocolate with your morning coffee. I used to love posting my views and comments on the affairs of the day, as well as posting favoured music and art. Self-expression. I used to think also that I was, at least in a small way, influencing the national and even international debate. That might have been so, but only to a very limited degree.

My Twitter account had just under 3,000 followers when it was eliminated by the Twitter organization. The absurdity of imagining that you are much influencing society is shown when it is considered that –to take just one example and one which comes into my mind— a mentally-disturbed Jewess whose Twitter account is replete with long complaints about her illnesses, alcohol consumption, problems with the DWP, and those she dislikes politically (including me!), as well as pictures of her dogs and photographs of owls, actually has 500 more Twitter followers than had my account, with its –as I would like to believe, anyway!– intelligent, pithy views and comment on politics, strategy and society. She does follow thousands, though, whereas I followed only a few dozen accounts. The present Prime Minister, Theresa May, has 598,000 Twitter followers, while Jeremy Corbyn has no less than 1.84 million.  To extend the idea to absurdity, take the One Direction pop group: they have 31 million Twitter followers.

A superficial view might be to imagine that someone with many thousands (or, a fortiori, millions) of Twitter followers has huge influence or impact upon society, upon political views etc. A moment’s thought shows that even if that be true, the influence and impact comes out of what the tweeter does offline, certainly off Twitter, not what he or she posts on Twitter. Theresa May’s Twitter influence is a mere adjunct to her position as Prime Minister. As to such as “One Direction”, were they not well known as entertainers, their influence (whatever it may be) would be close to a zero point.

I keep in touch with comment on Twitter, read about this and that, largely out of habit, but am no longer fooled by the idea that those tweeting are influencing many outside their own existing circle (or “echo chamber”). I sometimes look at the tweets of the Jew-Zionist cabal on UK Twitter. The same few dozen idiots, mostly concentrated in parts of North London, still tweeting pretty much what they were tweeting five years ago— to as little effect.

Another example, that of the “Alt-Right”: “Prison Planet” Watson, meaning Paul Joseph Watson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Joseph_Watson, a young-ish (about 38-y-o) blogger and vlogger (and who does not accept the “alt-Right” label now), tweets to his 904,000 Twitter followers from (as I read somewhere) a basement flat in the Battersea area. Consider that: 904,000 followers, when the Prime Minister of the country only has 598,000… On the other hand, who of the two has more real influence, let alone real political power? That is not even a question.

Another point is that many “celebrity” or would-be celebrity tweeters buy huge numbers of followers, in an attempt to “big up” (in the inelegant phrase of the day) their Twitter profile and so (they hope) their real-world profile. To take one example, not entirely at random: a certain well-known Jew-Zionist solicitor, very vocal about “anti-Semitism” etc, (and who is or was wont to scream imprecations to me and others about how we should die and how he looks forward to our deaths) had about 5,000 Twitter followers when I became aware of the bastard’s existence (around 2012). That follower count increased to about 80,000 within one week! I wonder how much those “followers” cost him and whether the fake total helped him to pose as a hot-shot lawyer and almost a “public figure”? At any rate, he now has about 20,000 “followers”. His fakery does not stand alone, there are many whose “follower count” is hugely inflated, but I seriously doubt the utility of doing things like that.

There is another point. Many Twitter users follow literally thousands of accounts, so the influence of any one account on the follower is likely to be very small.

It might be asked why I am now on GAB if I think that being on Twitter is a waste of time. GAB has only 500,000 users, against Twitter’s 400 million. I am on GAB mainly because it is possible to communicate with others of similar views easily, either publicly or privately (as on Twitter). In addition, I want to support a genuine free-speech platform.

Mao opined (later printed in the “Little Red Books”) that “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun”:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_power_grows_out_of_the_barrel_of_a_gun

That may not be the whole truth, but political power certainly does not grow out of tweets on Twitter.

Further thoughts [22 August 2018]

I just saw that privileged, superannuated schoolgirl-type and politico-social one-trick-pony Caroline Criado-Perez has no less than 46,200 Twitter followers! There are innumerable similar examples on Twitter.

See also: https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-pseuds/

 

 

The Rise and Fall of the Pseuds

From 2005 through to 2008, I worked as a practising barrister in England, but spent about half my time in Brittany, commuting on a twice or thrice-monthly basis by sea and air. I did not keep in close touch with UK political affairs. I used my TV in France only for DVDs and videos and had no Sky service. The brief triumph of BNP candidates Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons in the European elections was heard by me via BBC World Service and Radio 4 (which can usually be picked up on or near the coast).

In mid-2009, having given up Bar practice in early 2008, I returned to the UK. I started to take great interest in British political life. One aspect surprised me particularly: the rise to –brief– prominence of persons whose connection to politics was slight. Not so much “commentators” (their usual self-styling) as pseudo-commentators and pseudo-“activists”. One of these was a young woman called Alexandra Swann (on Twitter, @alexandralswann, not to be confused with @alexandraswann, an American blogger). She was (for her “15 minutes of fame”) a UKIP spokesperson:

and the msm started to take an interest in her. For a few months she seemed to be on TV constantly, pontificating (albeit risibly) on social welfare, employment, all sorts of things. UKIP gave her 10 minutes in which to speak at its 2012 Conference:

The Guardian –of all outlets!– gave Alexandra Swann op-ed space, calling her “the new face of UKIP”. She was also called, by others,”the future face of UK politics”!

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/mar/06/leaving-tories-ukip-alexandra-swann

In fact, she described herself as “libertarian” and had been an office-holder at one time in “Conservative Future”, the more or less defunct Con youth wing (the Scottish section even had to cancel its conference, when only 6 people applied for tickets!). Like so many youthful “libertarians” (she was 23 years old in 2012), she had a wealthy father to help her out should she be unable to stand on her own two feet in the approved Ayn Rand manner. Indeed, she was, at the time, still a student, working on a politics-oriented PhD at Sussex.

In fact, it was around that time that UKIP started to split internally between the members who were basically pseudo-nationalist Conservatives (fiscal Conservatives who were anti-mass immigration) and the more social-national UKIPpers who might (and did, briefly) appeal to voters in the Labour heartlands of the North.

Two years later, Alexandra Swann had left UKIP:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rising-ukip-star-alexandra-swann-protests-her-own-partys-stance-on-immigration-9244746.html

She was so politically-unaware that she thought that UKIP should ditch its anti-immigration stance and become a party of Ayn Rand “libertarians” (liberty for the wealthy and austerity/repression for the poor, as I see it). She was not alone in holding such attitudes: some who held elected positions were not far from her in this; one could mention Daniel Hannan MEP, Douglas Carswell MP etc as “fiscally conservative, socially-liberal”. Those far more seasoned (not to say educated and intelligent) figures likewise at least pretended to think that a “small-state” national conservatism could be popular. Needless to say, the idea is anathema to me.

Since that time, Alexandra Swann has retreated into private life and (her tweets have recounted) has even had a job or two, as well as becoming, presumably on a small scale (via family money? I do not know, but how else?), a buy-to-let parasite or “residential real estate investor” if you prefer. I should add that the lady blocks me on Twitter, though I have never tweeted to her. She must have disagreed with a tweet of mine which was critical of her smug “entitled” attitudes…

What I am writing about here is not this one now-obscure person, Alexandra Swann, as such (she was, in the end, too silly and inconsistent a figure to be taken seriously even in Britain’s decadent political/msm milieu), but as a symptom of a time when the mainstream media promoted almost anyone, especially those thought to be travelling along the “welfare reform”, “austerity” line. A pretty face and youth helped but were not essential. There were others after 2010 who were trying to become media talking heads and/or political stars. Some even became MPs.

There was Louise Mensch, who caught the wave early. David Cameron-Levita-Schlumberger placed her on the “A” List, as a result of which she was briefly an MP, though she resigned for “personal reasons” later, by which time various stories about her behaviour had surfaced, not least the fact that (as she admitted), “hard drugs” had “messed with” her brain…

LouiseMenschDrugging

Louise Mensch could be seen on TV constantly in 2010-2011, supporting the evil policies of the “Conservative” government of Cameron-Levita (and not only on Sky News, but Newsnight, at the time still a programme of some weight).

Since her resignation as MP, Louise Mensch has tried and failed at various commercial social media and Internet activities and was for a few years a columnist for the Sun “newspaper”, until she “left” in 2017. I always wondered why Murdoch paid her (assuming that it was a paid job). It seemed bizarre that a woman who constantly gets basic facts wrong could be a columnist even for the Sun. She still tweets, though: prolifically and sometimes –though unwittingly– funnily. She blocks me on Twitter…

I should add that Louise Mensch has been gunning for me for years on Twitter and elsehow. She loved it when the Jew Zionists managed to get me disbarred in 2016 (I suppose that she thought that I was still in practice and that I would suffer as a consequence) and (together with or parallel to the same Zionists) tweeted directly to me that she was going to get me chucked out of the New York Bar too. She is married to a wealthy Jew. Her desire to extract the “pound of flesh” from me was patent!

For the record, the New York Bar does not police its members’ opinions on politics (there’s this thing called the U.S. Constitution…) and I never heard anything more about the complaint by Louise Mensch against me (if it was ever made) or that supposedly made by some London Jews (eg one Goldberg QC, who threatened me with the same in the newspapers). In fact, I have never practised in New York anyway, and whether I belong to the NY Bar is a matter of supreme unconcern to me.

There were many others around 2010 (in fact from 2009) and in the succeeding years who were to be seen on Sky News and BBC News newspaper reviews, on Question Time and BBC Daily Politics. Some found niche positions in small publications or online, but most have almost faded from view. One is the egregious Caroline Criado-Perez. Like several others of the type now under discussion, she seems to have come from a rather wealthy background, so it scarcely matters to her from an everyday point of view that she dropped out of university in the first year. Her Wikipedia entry –pretty obviously mainly drafted by her– mentions her “working in digital marketing for several years”…well, it may be true…(ha).

It seems that some silly and malicious people emailed or tweeted to Caroline Criado-Perez in a threatening way (three were even convicted), allowing her to claim a kind of pseudo-martyr status for a while. I personally have no objection at all to women of note (no pun intended) being depicted on paper money, but to agitate for that (which had already been done anyway) hardly counts as a career…

Caroline Criado-Perez had an OBE bestowed upon her by David Cameron-Levita for her “activism” in getting Jane Austen on a banknote (though Elizabeth Fry had been on banknotes for years). She has now agitated for a statue of a Suffragist in Parliament Square. She still seems to regard herself as a kind of full-time or other “activist” though her Wikipedia entry says that in 2013 she was “in process of completing” a Master’s degree in Gender Studies. Roll over,  Einstein! I have no idea whether she will now get a CBE for having asked that a statue be erected; maybe not.

I have never tweeted to Caroline Criado-Perez, but she must have seen me criticize her on Twitter or, more likely, not take her seriously on Twitter, because she too blocks me…I have only seen her a couple of times on TV and she seems quite pleasant in her interview manner, but “pleasant” alone just does not cut it in these times. She is a one-trick pony who is just not at all interesting.

What strikes me about the three women above is how adept, at least initially, they were at self-promotion. Also, how, in the end, self-promotion is not enough. 2010 and 2012 were different to 2018. Times are becoming serious. Yes, you could get on TV shows if you were a pretty girl willing to address (however shallowly) important issues; yes, you could maybe become an MP if you had the right help and image; yes, you could get an OBE for something like demanding that a certain type of person be put on a banknote. However, that’s where it finishes. The pretence of gravity is not the same, ultimately, as gravity. If you are shallow, or ignorant, or a one-trick pony, the more serious times will not carry you along but will dump you as irrelevant.

My intention in writing the above was not to criticize those mentioned but to characterize a time, a time that is pretty much gone now. The new time demands serious people with the ability to think and act seriously. This is no longer the time of the dilettante.

Later Note

[Louise] Mensch is diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, which made her realise she was “self medicating” with wine for stress….[103] She has also commented, on BBC Question Time during a debate on calls to decriminalise hard drugs, about taking hard drugs in her 20s; she subsequently told the press: “It is something that I regret incredibly, that, in my youth, I messed with my brain. I said ‘we all do stupid things when we are young’. It’s had long-term mental health effects on me.”

[Wikipedia]

Update, 25 January 2020

Nearly two years have passed since I wrote the above. The times have indeed become serious, but I have been astonished to note that System politics has founds niches for dilettantes almost as absurd as the three mentioned in the article. The Prime Minister is now Boris-idiot, dilettante sans pareil, and his top adviser is Dominic Cummings, another dilettante, who has asked that “weirdos and misfits” apply to “reform” the Civil Service. 35,000 have, we are told, applied. The UK is now going down so fast that it is dizzying.

Labour? Same: Jess Phillips for one, tipped (incredibly) as leader at some point (I doubt it, not if Labour is going to survive).