Attempts to portray political issues as moral issues is Marxist stock-in-trade

John Bercow's recent outburst in the House of Commons concerning President Trump's proposed state visit to the UK gave his Marxist credentials a boost and made him look a fool at the same time, writes Christopher Goff.

It might come as a surprise to some, but the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, was actually elected to parliament as a Conservative, and in his younger life he was even reportedly a member of the ultra right-wing Conservative Monday Club. His position of Speaker of the House demands political neutrality, only Bercow's recent and spectacular failure in exactly this regard has led to the raising of serious doubts about his continued suitability for the role.

Responding to a point of order during a debate in the House of Commons on 6 February, 2017, Bercow said that he would be "strongly opposed" to US President Donald Trump addressing the Houses of Parliament during his state visit to the UK, and that "opposition to racism and sexism" were "hugely important considerations". Bercow added: "I would not wish to issue an invitation to President Trump to speak in the Royal Gallery" and "as far as this place is concerned, I feel very strongly that our opposition to racism and sexism, and our support for equality before the law and an independent judiciary, are hugely important considerations in the House of Commons". Comments which make me wonder whether John Bercow is actually of the belief that the laws of this land are dreamed up by some kind of unfailingly correct divine entity rather than formulated by a motley bunch of elected representatives each with their own set of biases and political axes to grind.

Many people have quite rightly viewed Bercow's remarks as being wildly at odds with his duty as Speaker of the House to remain neutral, amongst them former UKIP Leader Nigel Farage who said that he had "abused his position" and that to have expressed his opinions in the way he did "devalues this great office". Whilst plans are afoot amongst Tory MPs to have Bercow removed from his role, what is perhaps more interesting is the way in which some people have chosen to support him by saying that he had commented on 'moral and not political issues', as if anti-racism and anti-sexism were universal principles that all humankind was duty bound to subscribe to. In the aftermath of Bercow's outburst numerous articles have appeared in the controlled media claiming that he had merely espoused a number of 'human values', thereby implying that the likes of Donald Trump were somehow less human for not subscribing to that same set of 'values', or how some have put it, for not conforming to the same set of morals.

The very fact that US President Donald Trump has managed to stir up so much feeling on the issues of racial identity and sexual equality would seem to suggest that these things are very much political rather than moral issues, and indeed only an imbecile would have failed to notice that Donald Trump's campaign to become President was heavily influenced by what the controlled media was at one time quite fond of calling 'identity politics' – interestingly, a term which has for some reason fallen out of favour amongst media-types, presumably because of the resounding success of exactly this type of politics. And no-one on the left would want to be seen to be legitimizing identity politics, would they?

Having the jumped-up pipsqueak John Bercow say that US President Donald Trump cannot make an address in Westminster Hall during his state visit to the UK because he finds his views on certain issues objectionable has made him look a fool. If the convicted terrorist Nelson Mandela was allowed to speak in the Houses of Parliament one could argue that the moral high bar, if that's what you can call it, is in any case not set very high at all.

Copyright © Christopher Goff
Tag: Politics
Uploaded: 16 February, 2017.