Skip to main content

Who was that masked man?

I can't keep up with the culture war, it's completely exhausting. There we were arguing about statues, and before you know it we're arguing about defunding the police, and then we're arguing about precisely what Marxism means. Then, last week, we started arguing about cancel culture, and that argument was still rumbling on as of yesterday so I thought brilliant, a chance to draw breath.

Except no. The multi-faceted, multi-generational brouhaha in which our commentariat are lucratively engaged has opened up a new front, and it's not one that I saw coming (no job as a super-forecaster working for Dominic Cummings for me, which is just as well, I'm already doing French and Gaelic on Duolingo, I don't want to have to do Russian as well), though I suppose, in hindsight, I should have done.

Wearing masks. I mean, really.

As with so much else down the years, the Culture War is a US import. And as we in the UK always do when we anglicise something that we've imported wholesale from America, our version of it is a little bit crap. A Wimpy to their McDonalds. And one of the issues which has been exercising a particularly wingnutty type of Maga hat wearer has been the wearing of masks.

It's taken me a while to work this one out, as it's so patently a no brainer that I find it hard to understand the objections, but in America, mask-wearing has become a political act. Not to wear one is to assert one's right as a proud American, to keep one's mouth and nose free to inhale as many goddamn commie china virus particles as you want, because it's all a hoax by the deep state to control you anyway, whilst at the same time being a Chinese plot.

Yes, I know. It is quite difficult to follow.

And now we're at it over here. Arguing about masks. Arguing about a minor short-term inconvenience as though it's Magna bloody Carta. Anti-maskers bellow about freedom, they refer to them as "muzzles". HMG, as ever, tries to have it both ways, proclaiming their importance while sending out Gove to muddy the waters by talking about "common sense".

I'm not going to make the pro-mask case here, for much the same reason as I'm not going to make the pro-vaccination argument, or the argument that man-made climate change is a bad thing. The same reason that I'm pro-breathing. These are not positions which should be up for debate, the data is in. But there's a certain type of half-wit that seems to see it as a personal insult, and they want to keep on arguing. Because that's what we do these days. We just keep on arguing.

And it's yet another debate that's illustrative of the societal split which has become ever more apparent since that fateful day in June 2016, though with a few variations this time. Much as the statues argument broke neatly along Brexit lines, there's something a touch Brexity about the anti-mask brigade. Wilful self-defeating defiance in the face of overwhelming evidence is bang on-brand for Brexit types (and watching their increasing panic as reality slowly rises up to smack them is going to be one the choicest spectator sports of what's left of 2020, I haven't stopped laughing since I found out about the giant sodding lorry park in Ashford, a place that voted 60-40 for Leave. Churlish, I know. But still, you won, get over it) disingenuous cant about vague notions of "liberty" masking the fact that they just don't like being told what to do, and have yet to evolve an emotional toolkit to cope with it.

For the permanently aggrieved, this is yet another example of "them" trying to control "us", as opposed to a low-impact, easy fix to a modern crisis of spectacular proportions. It's just yet another example of the snowflake marxist liberal FBPE LGBTQI+ out of touch metropolitan elite forcing their values upon the poor down-trodden folk of the Home Counties, and pointing out that their position is slightly disproportionate is just yet further proof that You Can't Say Anything Nowadays. Someone wittier than I characterised them as the sort of people who'd refuse to turn their lights off during the Blitz, saying it was their right to do so.

This is, I suppose, both the joy and the curse of the modern age, everyone gets to have their say. Unfortunately, what a lot of people say is absolute cobblers, worse than that, it's demonstrably dangerous cobblers which is going to get people killed. But hey, that's freedom of speech for you. So wear a mask. It's not going to kill you. It's the running out of food in January that's going to do that.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Inedible

"He says it's inedible" said my front of house manager, as she laid the half-eaten fish and chips in front of me, and instantly I relaxed.  Clearly, I observed, it was edible to some degree. I comped it, because I can't be arsed arguing the toss, and I want to make my front of house's lives as simple as possible. The haddock had been delivered that morning. The fryers had been cleaned that morning. The batter had been made that morning (and it's very good batter, ask me nicely and I'll give you the recipe some time). The fish and chips was identical to the other 27 portions I'd sent out on that lunch service, all of which had come back more or less hoovered up, we have have a (justified, if I do say so myself) very good reputation for our chips. But it was, apparently, "inedible". When it comes to complaints, less is more. If you use a hyperbolic word like that, I'll switch off, you've marked yourself as a rube, a chump, I'm not g...

Creepy old men

I note, somewhat wearily, that creepy old men are back in the news, being creepy. Creepy old men, and their apologists and enablers, who argue that their creepiness is somehow the natural order of things. Old men would have you believe that it is difficult to not be a creepy old man. That it is a task of epic proportions. It is not that difficult. It is a matter of intention. As yet more of the grimness of Epstein unfolds, creepy old men are, sadly, a flaccid topic once again. Whether it be pursuing students thirty years their junior, or simply not asking too many questions about the background of the probably legal young woman who you've just been introduced to by your good pal Jeff. To be clear, I am not referring to criminal creepy old men, the ones who actually committed statutory rape, the ones who fucked trafficked hirls. That is not something which is allowed to get away merely with the contempt of the observer.  That deserves prison.  No , I'm referring to the hinterla...

Chop chop

I was completely ignorant of the fuss over the edited Trump speech in an edition of Panorama until, one moment later, I wasn't. And the reasons for my ignorance are instructive. I had no idea that the story was even brewing until the surprise Sunday night news of the resignations of Tom Davie and Deborah Turness. As I'm sure you are by now aware, this was occasioned by a clumsy edit in an old edition of Panorama, which has already been on the iplayer for a year. It's a non-story. Except people decided to make it a story. The reason I'd heard nothing of it until the resignations was that I'm not on X, where, apparently, it was all the media classes had been talking about for a week. It was an obsession of the unholy right-wing trifecta of the Mail, Telegraph and Times (who, given that they sent a bloke just last week to interview the wrong Bill di Blasio, you'd think would wind their necks in over factual inacccuracy). It was big news on GB news, all self-contain...