Mike Meredith

Nov 302025
 

Just recently my Twitter feed has seen any number of photographs of the past pretending to show how much better things were in the past.

It is all very well, but the past sucked. You can take historical photos that show how grand things were but like today we didn’t take photos of the bad things; and even if we did, we wouldn’t show them today. At least not in the posts claiming how great the past was.

For example. Bill Brandt amongst other things made images of really grim Durham miners slums – houses with no windows and built so shodily that they were horrendously damp. The great public housing boom of the 1950s and 1960s wasn’t just about repairing the damage of war but also making decent homes for the working class replacing swathes of slums.

And things we take for granted today – central heating, running water, inside lavatories and bathrooms, all of which were rare or non-existent not so long ago. And some places shared outside lavs.

We take health for granted these days. From the visit to the doctor or the visit to A&E which cost nothing, to vaccinations which prevent many of childhood’s terrorists – Polio, Measle, Rubella, Smallpox, Whooping Cough, … the number of folk who remember such an era where school friends would disappear dragged to an early grave by one of those lurgies is getting smaller.

And you don’t see a man coughing his lungs out in those smiling photos of the past; yet they were present. Coal miners with black lung, builders with asbestosis, those who worked with radium and phosphorus losing their jaws. Or crippled by dangerous machinery.

And so on.

You can’t have the good bits of the past without the bad bits. And there were plenty of those – this just touches the surface.

The Gap
Sep 142025
 

So some nutter has killed Charlie Kirk, the well known right-winger. This is obviously bad (and I’m a left-winger), but the reaction to his killing is interesting to say the least …

“He’s Not Right-Wing”

And in come the denials as if “right-wing” is something to be ashamed of – now I think it’s something to be ashamed of, but his fellow right-wingers would presumably think it’s fine. But they’re denying it. So let’s have a look at the signs :-

  1. Charlie Kirk addressed and acknowledged the Great Replacement.“. The “Great Replacement” is a white supremacist theory that there is some conspiracy to “replace” white folk. Charlie once claimed “If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified,” – plainly racist. Normally racist is a sign of a right-winger at least amongst reasonable folk.
  2. Raging misogynist: “Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge.”. Again most reasonable folk classify hatred of women as right-wing.
  3. Kirk on vaccine mandates: “a form of medical apartheid.”. Now this is isn’t right-wing; it’s just nuts. And evil nuts at that.
  4. Most ironically: “I think it’s worth having a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights,”.

And there’s more, far more.

Does this make him right-wing? Well yes, but more so – he was a toxic extremist holding views that effectively regarded “others” (women, black folk, homosexuals, etc) as sub-human with fewer rights than the classic rich white men.

Opposing such extremists is something folk should be celebrated for doing. But killing? No that’s just wrong.

The Left Killed Him

As we don’t currently know the motives of the killer, claiming that the left killed him is a bit premature.

One of the related strands is the strange notion that the left is violent whilst the right is peaceful. However a US government survey of political violence shows something very different :-

Ideology1,563Percentage
Islamist17.6
Left-wing23.4
Right-wing59

(source: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9335287/ )

So the 59% of all political violence is right-wingers – exceeding both left-wing and islamists.

Surprised? No wonder – the right-wing is very good at lying.

They (the right) were very quick to start blaming the left even claiming Democrats were effectively urging the murder of Kirk. Well, for a start, the Democrats aren’t leftist – they’re far too right wing for this leftist.

And even if the left in general (and Democrats) criticise Kirk for some of his positions, that isn’t encouraging political violence.

But ultimately we don’t know what motivated the killing of Charlie Kirk. There’s just as many hints that he was right-wing as hints that he was left-wing. But let’s stop pointing fingers until we know.

Even if that’s less fun.

Three Floating Boats