Law and Order: keyboard warriors

By Richard North - August 11, 2024

“It’s justice, not revenge”, blares the lead item in the Sunday Times today, telling us that the “top prosecutor” – Stephen Parkinson, the director of public prosecutions – is warning that rioters could face ten years in prison.

Many of those charged so far, after the Southport and subsequent disturbances, have been prosecuted for violent disorder, which carries a maximum sentence of five years. But Parkinson has told the paper that more serious offences of rioting – which carry a maximum penalty of ten years – are now under consideration.

“We warned of the consequences, and we will deliver those consequences”, he tells the ST, at which point he adds the assertion that: “It’s not about exacting revenge, it’s about delivering justice”.

Given that, with only the slightest degree of effort, one can find endless examples of far more heinous crimes which have attracted relatively modest, even derisory sentencing, the obvious response to Parkinson is to reverse his claim. This is all about revenge and has little if anything to do with justice.

If one was to define more specifically what we are dealing with, the term “anarcho-tyranny” comes to mind, a concept where the state is argued to be more interested in controlling citizens so that they do not oppose the managerial class, rather than controlling real criminals. Laws are argued to be enforced only selectively, depending on what is perceived to be beneficial for the ruling elite.

But actually, it’s more than just revenge. This is really about control, in which context yesterday’s piece represented something of an epiphany for me. Following the riots and street protests, I had thought that the battle was going to be on the streets, but it turns out that I was wrong.

The decisive battle will not be there. This will be fought over the web, with social media users – the so-called “keyboard warriors”- in the front line, a fight for control of the narrative which will determine how we are governed and, indeed, if we can be governed.

Within their anarcho-tyrannical state, Starmer and his henchmen on the left are not content with mere obedience. They are determined to control what we think, the information to which we have access and how we express ourselves. They want total control, with nothing permitted outside the range of “right think” which his Regime has defined.

As a means to an end, the Muslims in their “communitees” (aka ghettoes) have been declared a protected species, but this is not because Starmer has any real concerns for them. No doubt, he finds them as tiresome and awkward as the rest of us, but their new status has a very special role in helping the prime minister smash the right.

TheMuslims have, in fact, become the tethered goat, designed to draw in those who are identified as being “Faaah Right” – i.e., anyone who does not agree with the Regime. This politico-religious group will be protected by the official designation of Islamophobia, which will define “wrong-think” statements that can be used as the excuse for punishing individuals.

One by one, the Starmer Regime aim to entrap and pick off individuals, so demoralising the natural opposition that they are cowed into submission and give up the fight – those who haven’t already been neutralised by long terms in prison.

The aim is that, by the 2029 election, Starmer aims to have completely smashed the right, leaving no coherent opposition to what will have become his multi-racial, socialist dictatorship. That will leave him clear at the general election to concrete in the foundations for his 1,000-year regime, where opposition parties will never again present a threat.

Weaponising the Muslims has already had an effect, in that this process has come close to knocking Farage out, seriously weakening his Reform party. Essentially, it has forced him to distance himself from his “Faaah Right” rival, Tommy Robinson, thereby undermining his stance on immigration and alienating a proportion of his fanbase.

Farage’s weak point – as always – is his own ego, this time reflected in his new-found yearning for respectability, which means that he cannot be associated with anything so uncouth as Islamophobia. His choice of Zia Yusef as party chairman has further undermined his stance.

As to dealing with Robinson, it seems that the Regime will be adopting the Al Capone strategy, using tax irregularities as a means of bringing him down, when all other attacks have so far failed. Bogged down by enforcement action initiated by HMRC, Robinson may find he has little time for campaigning, while the prospect of unlimited fines for alleged non-payment of taxes could limit his ability to fund his efforts.

This leaves the third institutional pillar of the Right – the Conservative Party. Here, it looks as if Starmer will have to devote very little effort, as the party seems intent on engineering its own final destruction.

Unable to settle on a new leader, this reflects an inner turmoil in the party, which cannot really decide what sort of party it is or what it want to be.

The real danger for Starmer is that the party splits, with the right-leaning segment joining with Reform to form a new, centre-right party which takes a strong line immigration and multiculturalism. But, with Farage so heavily compromised, it is hard to see how such a merger could take place.

That leaves the politically homeless, right-leaning core of voters, who form the natural opposition to Labour and which, through its access to social media – free from the controlling grip of the legacy media – can confront him on equal terms.

This amorphous, free-ranging and essentially leaderless group has found itself an unlikely champion in Elon Musk, who is actively taking on Starmer in a series of tweets which CPS director Parkinson finds “deeply unhelpful”.

With Musk himself untouchable, though, Starmer needs to tackle social media users individually, forcing them to tome down their criticisms of the Regime. Already, the prime minister is allocating considerable resources to tracking down users who can be accused of criminal offences relating to the recent disturbances.

In particular, so-called “influencers” are being targeted, using teams of specialist officers from the regional organised crime unit network, who are “monitoring content” and “working at pace” to identify candidates for prosecution.

This, however, will not be enough and the longer-term effect is limited. Starmer must have a more far-reaching weapon which effectively criminalises his critics. On the one hand, by favouring the Muslim “communitiees” – thereby provoking criticism – and, on the other, by criminalising that criticism, Starmer’s “goon squads” have potentially rich pickings.

By the well-practiced technique of picking off the more prominent posters, he will hope to be able to cow the rest of us into silence – if not submission – thereby giving the Regime control over the narrative.

For all that, Starmer’s quest for total control may be his undoing. Far from cowing the bulk of social media users – to say nothing of the active band of bloggers, podcasters and independent online broadcasters – the transparent power-grab may serve to stiffen resolve.

What in the end might defeat him is the sheer scale of the opposition. He may be prepared to lock up a thousand or two of his “wrong-think” criminals, but even he might quail at the prospect of jailing tens of thousands.

With the encouragement of Elon Musk – who seems a better leader of the opposition than he is a car-builder – refuseniks could even reach hundreds of thousands, leaving Starmer with no option but to climb down.

For the first targets, though, exposed to highly politicised show trials, it will be a nerve-wracking time and potentially very expensive. But, the battle is already joined, and it is one on which the freedom of society will depend.