Category: Politics

Old School Hip Hopkins

Austin returns with more of his witty insights and off-key remarks, this time on the deportation of Katie Hopkins from Australia. Austin offers a potted history of Hopkins’ run-ins with just about ever faction of society and looks at what her future might hold.

By Austin

The Hopkins Headlines

Everyone’s favourite bigoted, racist, fat-shaming fool Katie Hopkins is to be deported from Australia for bragging about flouting hotel quarantine rules. That’s right, you heard me correctly; in the midst of a global pandemic, with millions dying each day, Hopkins shared an Instagram video of her in Sydney joking about putting frontline staff at risk.

Even by Hopkins’ standards, this is disgusting. However, given Hopkins’ track record, this will not come as a surprise to anyone.

Hopkins was in Sydney as a contestant on Celebrity Big Brother Australia. Since the footage she posted on Friday, her television contract was terminated after she breached visa conditions and brought the Seven Network into disrepute.

Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce, was not helping any of the Australian stereotypes when he commented:

Hopkins deported - comments from Barnaby Joyce
Barnaby Joyce

“I’ve got no problem sending home someone who wants to flout our laws. You want to flout our laws, then you pack your bongo and get out of the country.”

BARNABY JOYCE, AUSTRALIA’S DEPUTY PM

It would seem the Katie Hopkins’ bongo is not helping her to drum up any positive support (ba-doom-tsss). Her actions have been met with widespread condemnation and caused a great deal of pain to a great many people.

Hopkins and the Australian Celebrity Visa

Katie Hopkins is just one of a string of celebrities who have touched down in Australia during the pandemic. Zac Efron was the first, then Mark Wahlberg, Matt Damon, Julia Roberts and George Clooney just to name a few. It would seem that amid the pandemic, Hollywood best and brightest are fleeing down under to what they see as a Covid-free idyll.

Celebrity sightings in Australia (“Aussiewood”) have skyrocketed

In a country that has largely eradicated the virus, celebrities arriving are free to enjoy beaches, bars and nightclubs at their whim, all thanks to their celebrity visas.

Most of the celebrities are allowed entry to the country for work, with a view to stimulating Australia’s economy. The Australian government have used generous tax breaks to tempt over major film productions, like the next Thor film.

However, to many Australians, this is a kick in the teeth. While yes, there has been a dramatic increasing in celebrity sightings in what has been dubbed “Aussiewood”, there are still 40,000 Australian nationals that have been stranded overseas since the country shut its borders a year ago.

With Australians camped outside Heathrow and other major airports around the globe, Katie Hopkins’ remarks have highlighted the sheer hypocrisy of the Australian celebrity visa system. She has cemented any previous accusations of different treatment for the rich and famous compared to ordinary people.

Is this a first from Hopkins?

The short answer is, no. This is the woman who called immigrants “cockroaches”; the woman who said dementia patients shouldn’t be allowed to “block” up hospital beds; the woman who was prevented from leaving South Africa in 2018 for spreading “racial hatred”. The Mirror had the ingenious idea of blaming her racial hate speech on her having taken ketamine (Hopkins sued).

With someone as consistently outrageous as Katie Hopkins, some of her biggest offences often get swept under the carpet. So, because I am such a lovely person, I thought I’d compile some of her worst outbursts. In no particular order:

Manchester Bombings

Following the Manchester Arena bombings in 2017, a whole host of celebrity and media figures gathered around the city to show support to victims and their families. Katie, however, had other ideas.

She jumped on the event as an opportunity to spread Islamophobic hate speech, declaring that the country needed a “final solution” to terrorism. After the comment had reached the Metropolitan Police, she claimed the comment was a typo, and that she meant to say a “true solution”.

Hopkins on Muslim families

It would seem Hopkins has a penchant for Islamophobia. In December 2017, Hopkins was forced to apologise to the Mahmood family for completely arbitrarily calling them extremists. Hopkins thought she knew better than the US Border Force and published a story in the Daily Mail claiming that the reason they were denied entry to the US to go to Disneyland was because they were terrorists.

To make such an accusation with no evidence shows Hopkins up for the nasty piece of work she really is. Whatsmore, the Daily Mail were forced to pay out £150,000 in libel charges, so they were fuming as well (poor Jonathan Harmsworth boo hoo!).

Gaining and then losing weight

As part of the career-long war she has been waging against the overweight, Hopkins produced a documentary in 2014 in which she gained and then lost weight. She claimed that fat people were nothing but lazy. She said that she could not ever employ a fat person because “they look lazy”. God only knows what sort of opinions she holds on meal deals.

In a sneering, exclusively derogatory tone, the documentary (if you can even call it that) saw her put on three stone before losing it again. If you can move past the abhorrent prejudices that plague the footage, there are some frankly hilarious scenes where Hopkins attempts to act.

Hopkins on baby names

Probably her most famous comment was on baby names on ITV’s This Morning. She told presenters Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby that “you can tell a great deal from a name”. She went on to say that she would not allow her children to play with lower class children with names like Tyler or Chardonnay.

“For me, a name is a shortcut of finding out what class a child comes from and makes me ask: “Do I want my children to play with them? When I hear screeched across the playground: “Tyler! Come back ‘ere.” It’s the Tylers, the Charmains the Chantelles, the Chardonnays.”

Katie Hopkins, ITV’s This Morning, 2013

After admitting that she judges children based on their names, she reeled of a long spiel about her deep-rooted hatred of children with geographical names. It was then pointed out that one of her own children was called India. Needless to say, Schofield and Willoughby had the last laugh. (The first person to tell this reference is in the decablogs instagram dms wins an extra special prize!)

Conclusion

Katie Hopkins has made a career out of spouting drivel, yak and blether. Her abhorrent remarks, which the BBC has rather politely called “right-wing commentary” have landed a great deal of attention of social media platforms. And, despite being banned from Twitter, she continues to haunt news headlines.

Her cockup in explaining her philosohpy on baby names, I believe, show us what here raison d’etre really is. Her half-baked beliefs are contradictory and massively offences – they deserve no place in 21st-century society. Yet, it is by angering people that she remains in the limelight. She was being ratioed before there was a word for it. A beacon of hate, she radiates her cancerous opinions with the sole aim of accruing wealth and infamy.

From her earliest days as a contestant on The Apprentice UK in 2007, she has been followed by a wake of allegations and court cases. This blog is exactly the anger her comments are designed to provoke. One of the joys of writing for a blog that only has three or so readers is that I can write like without furthering her career.

I’d like to finish with a fun fact about Katie Hopkins. As it stands, Katie is the only person to have won the Campaign to Unify The Nation (CUNT) lifetime achievement award.

Thank you for reading! If you enjoyed this blog, check out some of our other posts, or get in touch via instagram.

P.S. Put your favourite Katie Hopkins quotes in the comments below.

Not Just a Whitty Face

Videos of “yobs” harassing England’s Chief Medical Officer, Chris Whitty, have gone viral. The gibberish chants of these “thugs” have set in motion a MET office enquiry into what our PM, Boris Johnson, described as a “despicable” act. Austin takes a sideways look at the impact of the incident and the broader trends in the British political landscape.

30th June 2021

By Austin

What Happened to Whitty?

If you haven’t come across the appalling clip of “yobs” harassing Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty, you must be living under a rock. The clip shows two male aggressors swarming Whitty, bellowing unintelligibly in a symphony of masculine idiocy. Pushing him from side to side, it is hard to work out what the pair wanted from the distressed Whitty.

Source: The Guardian

In the footage, Whitty is just able to duck beneath the arm of one of the men. His accomplice yells from behind, “Just one photo, please”. It would be wrong to trivialise the incident. But, there is something deeply amusing about the “yobs” demanding a photo with Whitty, whilst capturing the whole thing on camera.

Opening social media yesterday morning to see this was deeply concerning. Firstly, no human being (regardless of what Noah says about politicians) should have to endure such abuse. But secondly, it is the perfect illustration of the lack of respect the public has in the institutions of this nation.

MPs have condemned the incident in their droves – and rightly so; newly appointed Health Secretary Sajid Javid said the men “should be ashamed”. Priti Patel commented that she was “horrified” to see this “terrible” act, committed against a “remarkable public servant”.

Think what you like about Whitty. But, there are no logical grounds on which to support the acts of these men.

Is Whitty the First?

Sadly, this is not the first time such an attack has happened. It is not even the first time Whitty has experienced harassment. Just four months ago, a man followed Whitty around London branding him a “liar“, accusing him of making up Covid statistics.

Today’s footage coincided with the hearing of protestor Martin Hockeridge who, harassed journalist Nick Watt. Watt was forced to run the length of the Strand, wading through a sea of megaphone-wielding protesters chanting “that’s what you get for serving this filthy government” and “down with the monarchy”.

The alarming frequency of harassment cases against those in politics begs the question, why? What is driving people to hound individuals in this manner?

Why Whitty?

The footage of the “yobs” doesn’t reveal any political motive. But, this kind of action is a testament to the fact that the government isn’t being taken seriously. Given the government’s track record, this is hardly surprising!

In the space of the last few months, the Prime Minister used £60,000 in unmarked cash from Tory donors to pay for renovations of his flat at No.11 Downing Street. The £39 million ‘Track and Trace’ contract was handed out to Hancock’s Tory chums and proved completely inoperable. Patel has several counts of workplace abuse to her name and yet has not resigned. And most recently, Hancock was caught on camera conducting an affair with his aide.

The current Conservative government is lurching from scandal to scandal, plundering through the pandemic like a bull in a china shop. So, is it any wonder that the public has no faith in the government? The individuals who have prioritised lining their own pockets at the expense of millions of British lives?

I understand that the government makes it even harder to respect the British political system. However, the assault on Whitty illustrated a grave problem with the burgeoning “leftist” demagogy. The notion that harassing a journalist, or physically bullying England’s Chief Medical Officer is an acceptable course of action is utterly disappointing. And, in each of these cases, Whitty’s included, social media has greatly exacerbated the turn of events.

My Problem

Yes, it is important to hold the government to account. That is the basis of this country’s constitution. It is why Parliament exists, why the Queen installs an official opposition and why there has been an increased focus on e-petitions to allow more people’s views to be heard by the government. But, the increase in criminal acts against journalists and government officials is not “holding the government to account”. It is abuse.

Politically, we are trundling down a path towards a precarious tyranny of the majority. With crowds acting as they have been towards Whitty and other officials, there is no hope of positive change.

Instead, these acts give the government ammunition to clip the rights of protestors and non-conformists, reducing our capacity to actually hold the government to account. We have already seen this happen. Priti Patel’s proposed restrictions on protests as part of her policing bill earlier this year illustrate the intentions of this government to silence dissenters. So, what use is there is making the government’s desires easier to achieve?

It must be noted that I am by no means suggesting that the government is behaving in a corrupt way to invoke protests, with the ulterior motive of clipping protesting rights. To assert such an opinion would be to entirely misconstrue events and to descend into conspiracy theories. However, the violent minority is putting ever greater pressure on the government to legislate to reduce our right to protest.

Protests are a part of this nation’s vibrant past. Without protests, Patel would not have a seat in the Commons, let alone a position in Cabinet. As a nation we must safeguard our right to express our opinions and hold the government to account by not allowing ourselves to be caught up in this political aggression.

What is to be done?

I’m sure our high-calibre Decablogs readers will appreciate the Lenin reference in the subheading. But, you must understand I am not advocating some sort of Decablogs Blanquism and a mass overthrowal of government. No, no.

Instead of resorting to violence and playing right into the hands of those sleazy government officials, we must show a reverence for the constitutional process. It is impossible for serious political and social change to occur if the “thug” persona can be pedalled by the media. We cannot give way to atavistic instincts. We cannot lose sight of what really matters – the burning social injustices of our society.

While MPs were quick to rally around Whitty to condemn the atrocious act of violence against him, they have as yet failed to recognise that such violence is the lived experience for women across the globe – over half of the world’s population. They have as yet failed to remedy the vast social inequality, that has only been perpetuated by Covid.

In Sumamry

The assault on Chris Whitty was disgusting to watch – a shameful act of half-baked barbarism. Sadly, though, such instances of harassment are now very much commonplace. And yet, spurred on by a dangerous brand of vaguely socialist Instagram “leftism”, the course of activism has been hijacked by a intense breed of far-fetched revolutionaries. Such action makes a mockery of real concerns like inequality and achieving social justice.

Thank you very much for taking the time to read this blog. If you have found any of it interesting, I’d love to hear from you over on Instagram.

The Decablogs Sham-ifesto

We just beat Google. Now we can topple governments. Next, we can achieve world domination. First, however, we need our own manifesto. Introducing the Decablogs Sham-ifesto!

18th June 2021

Why a Sham-ifesto?

All serious organisations have manifestos. The Monster Raving Loony Party, Boris Johnson’s Conservatives, the Union of Goggle-Wearing Non-Swimmers, to name a few. So, in the wake of our victory over Google, we have decided that we are a serious organisation. What better way to establish ourselves than to create a Sham-ifesto and outline our aims for the next quintillion years?

Following a brief hiatus, our first meeting back, as always, descended into a frenzy. But, from the squawking and quacking emerged a plan; like a Phoenix from the ashes rose the Decablogs Sham-ifesto.

Now, in true Boris Johnson fashion, we can make vague promises which we likely won’t keep about what we will be up to in the coming months. 

The Sham-ifesto

We pledge to:

  1. Publish absolute nonsense purely for entertainment reasons with unwavering conviction to slander
  2. Get sued by – and then beat – Google at least once a month
  3. Release new content on all days that end in a ‘y’ – we are German speakers when we want to be from henceforth
  4. Measure groundswell with a slurry of truly pointless polls on our social media stories every single day
  5. Annoy enrich you all with endless emails and shameless attempts at publicising Decablogs
  6. Avoid the use of full stops at the end of bullet points and numbered lists in order to sustain the sanity of ourselves and our readers
  7. Make a complete mockery of this Sham-ifesto at every given opportunity.
  8. Reach the number 9 in every list we make
  9. Numbered like iPhones, we want these Sham-ifesto promises to be treated like iPhones; discarded each year to appear only in CEX shop windows 

Introducing Decablogs Parliament

Lastly, introducing our newest feature! If you have any issues regarding absolutely anything, pop us an email. Title the subject “Parliament” and include an offence and a proposed punishment/solution in the email, and we will deliberate over the matter with intense scrutiny and give you our verdict. Should your issue be taken to a court of law? Probably not, but it will receive either an email or a blog post in response.

Our email is decablogs10@gmail.com

P.S. Keep it PG if you want it to go on the website.

B. Irish Decablogs Clogs for the Sham-ifesto
B. Irish

Your Vote Probably Matters

To celebrate the holy London Mayoral Election Gavriel has dedicated an entire article to celebrating the best candidates. Featuring Count Binface, Lawrence Fox and Brian Rose, find out more about why your vote matters.

6th May 2021

By Gavriel

Ah, it is Election Day at last. Thursday 6th May was a date I had circled on my physical calendar for months, eagerly looking forward to this momentous election. My calendar, by the way, has a different picture of Brian Rose for every month: May, ironically enough, is the only one where he is not wearing his red tie but a bright red “mankini”. Or so I’m told – I have had the calendar flipped to May since I acquired it because why would I dare switch out that picture?

The Mayor of London is a very important role. With a rich, long, important history starting in 2000, the Mayor’s office has been occupied by some highly qualified baboons. There seems to be some genetic link between previous Mayors, and therefore whichever candidate gets the hereditary power to wrongly calculate and decide, much like Boris and Sadiq have over the last year, how long they wait until more people die. That is part of their manifestos, is it not? Lawrence Fox called the NHS ‘so sensitive it needs a round of applause just to finish work’ so if he becomes Mayor I’d put money on him letting as many people die as possible. 

Alas, here I am slandering a person advocating for free speech in my web-based blog. What sort of person does that make me? Well, I would like to encourage everyone who can to ensure they submit their vote for the Mayor of London today if they have not already. It is very, very important you do so. 

Why I hear you ask? The difficulty of today’s election is choosing between the amazing candidates. Fosh, Fox and the fantastic “Mr Foxy” Brian Rose all appear to be viable candidates for the Mayor’s office, yet they are not looking great in the polls. We must band together to rectify this. I shall henceforth propose my argument as to why you should vote for each.

Max Fosh has my vote. He appears to be intelligent, something which many of our previous Mayors have not impressed upon me. He is also amusing, in touch with the youth, learned and he took part in debating society. He can evidently organise things effectively, such as his famous debate with Lawrence Fox – the only lesson learnt from that is that Lawrence Fox is not as timely as you would like. He fulfils the posh bloke quota, yet he commands the respect of more than most. Who wouldn’t want a Mayor who is a confident speaker, a great organiser, and in touch with a significant proportion of the population?

Lawrence Fox is another perfect candidate, at least to the outside world. In London, admittedly, everyone is what the British like to call “a schmuck”. Therefore, by virtue Fox is the perfect candidate. Not only is he wholeheartedly a schmuck but he is the King of Schmucks. If any city in the world deserves to be ruled by a King, it is London, and Fox’s kingdom is essentially the entirety of London already. He truly is a terrible person who poses a threat to society, much like the guy sitting LITERALLY NEXT TO ME on the tube this morning. Talentless, nepotistic, and worldly-unwise, he is the definition of a Londoner. Also, he is advocating for free speech. I would very much like to keep my rights to that since it allows me to give him such charming compliments like ” he is a schmuck” and “Fox is a fascist meerkat”.

I met Brain Rose today, albeit from afar. Never before has a mayoral candidate been so excited by seeing a group of people that he proceeds to shout and wave with both harms punching the air as if he is Rocky or something. So, if I hadn’t already dedicated myself to Max Fosh I would have voted for him. He is, well, a man with youthful vigour.

Count Binface is an alien. Who wouldn’t vote for an alien? I can answer that. Anyone who voted for Fox, Fosh or Rose. He’s next in line, however. I mean, who even are the other candidates?

© 2022 Decablogs | Home

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑