The lyin' and the unicorn

With apologies to George Orwell for the title, a summary of Brexit so far...

"We want a unicorn!"

David Cameron: You don't really want a unicorn, do you?

"Yes! We want a unicorn!"

Cameron: Are you sure you've thought through all the ramifications of getting a unicorn?

"Stuff thinking! Unicorn or GTFO!

Cameron: Alright, if you're very good and re-elect me, I'll hold a vote on whether you get a unicorn...

[Cameron re-elected]

Cameron: Okay, you can have your vote on whether you get a unicorn, which I am sure you don't really want.

"We want a unicorn!" 

Cameron: Look, I really don't think it's a good idea...

[referendum]

"WOOHOO! WE'RE GETTING A UNICORN!"

Cameron: I see. You have voted that you will get a unicorn and therefore I will... [car door slams, tyres squeal]

Theresa May: Fuck!

"Where's our unicorn?" 

May: Well, we have this horse. If we just affix this silver horn...

"That's not a unicorn!"

May: Alright, we have a silver horn. If we were to get, say, a donkey...

"No! Still not a unicorn!"

May: Okay, fine. I believe if we were to find a zebra...

"NOT A UNICORN!"

May: Look, I think we can all agree that a species of the Equus genus with a silver horn protruding from its forehead, is for all intents and purposes...

"NO! UNICORN NAO!"

May: Look, be reasonable.

Boris Johnson: I can make a unicorn.

May: You can't be serious.

"YAY BORIS! HE'LL GET US A UNICORN!"

[to be continued...]

Spoiler: Unicorns don't exist.
 
 

No more sympathy

Following the Australian federal election in May, there was a move on social media to stop donating to regions that regularly suffer drought, bushfire and flood. It may seem cruel and petty, but there is a certain logic to it.

You see, the regions which are suffering these events with increasing regularity due to climate change, are the ones that keep electing climate deniers to parliament.

It’s not a question of ‘punishing’ them for voting in the wrong people. No-one is suggesting they deserve the hardships of extreme weather. Nobody does. It’s simply a case of recognising that decisions have consequences. There is a direct connection between the way regional areas traditionally vote and successive governments’ inertia when it comes to mitigating climate change.

Why should people in areas that didn’t vote for climate deniers throw good money after bad? Why should we protect people from the consequences of their own decisions?

Which brings us, with extreme sadness, to El Paso.

Embed from Getty Images

Yet another mass shooting with depressingly familiar details. Yet more calls for gun control. Yet more offers of thoughts and prayers, and yet more mocking of those same offers. It’s all become clichéd.

This may sound callous, but as with the farmers who keep electing representatives who deny the real causes of their situation, perhaps the time has come for some tough love. America can wring its hands over this latest* slaughter all the way up to the next one, but if they keep electing representatives who are either beholden to the gun lobby or haven’t the spine to stand up to them, then this is going to keep happening.

In any democracy, however flawed, you get the government you deserve. I’m not going to make the case for gun control again. It’s been made. You can heed or ignore. It’s up to you. I’m sorry America, but you can have as many dead kids as your precious Second Amendment is worth to you. Your decisions have consequences. It’s just a pity everyone has to live with them.
  
 
*UPDATE: I posted this less than three hours ago, and El Paso is now no longer the latest mass shooting.

YES, it IS the GUNS and America's attitude towards them!