The Shame Game

Psychologist Paul Bloom does not seem to know quite what to make of it, but he is correct to see humiliation as a profoundly important motivation. Someone who loses face, whether by being publicly humiliated, of by failing at a responsibility, will often become consumed by the duty to save face,

It’s so important that I wrote a book about it. Its title was Saving Face: America and the Politics of Shame.

Bloom suggests that those who lose face will go to any lengths to save face. For example, consider the moment when, at a White House correspondents dinner, President Obama ridiculed one Donald Trump. Many people have suggested that this humiliation motivated Trump to run for president. 

Perhaps that is true. Perhaps it is slightly exaggerated. As Bloom puts it, in a Substack column:

The notion that we can explain human actions by single causes is silly….

Still, it’s notable how often humiliation comes up as a motivating force for certain big decisions. I’m a pluralist when it comes to motivation. I think there are all sorts of forces working on our psyches, and I’ll show them is only one of them. But it’s an important one.

We are social animals. We care intensely about how others perceive us. It feels great to be loved and respected by those we are close to and by members of the communities we identify with. It feels terrible to be maligned and disrespected, to feel that everyone we respect is laughing at us.

Drops in status occur all the time, but they’re usually gradual. In the sorts of acts of humiliation we’ve been talking about, it’s a shock—it happens all of a sudden. Now, in my examples, those who were humiliated were powerful men with good social support; they felt the blow, but they didn’t drop too far and were well-positioned to plan their comeuppance. 

If we are following Chinese thought, there are two ways to lose face. In the one, loss of face means loss of membership in a community-- being shunned, ostracized or rejected. In the other, loss of face means loss of status in a community, being treated as lesser than one is.

The most important point is that we are social animals. We are less concerned with developing our individuality than with belonging to a group and with having status within the group. 

One understands that you save face by recovering your status within a group or by reaffirming your membership within it. The tricky part is that face, your public reputation, involves how other people see you. As long as you do not have complete control over other people’s minds, you will have difficulty in influencing them.

Regardless of how you feel about yourself, you do not save face until and unless other people see you in a more positive light.

To state the obvious, the reason that cultures have emphasized face is that people identify you by seeing your face. Moreover, you are the only person who can never see your face directly. You can see your image reflected in a mirror or you can judge how you look to others by reading their reactions to you. But you can never look yourself directly in the eye. 

Face saving is not the same as self-actualization, self-creation, or self-narration. Psychology tends to see people as self-absorbed and self-involved monads. It considers group membership to be ancillary to an inner truth. 

Again, it is not sufficient to make a public spectacle of yourself. It is not sufficient to display your all-around wondrousness. These forms of self-assertion or even self-creation tend to affirm your being outside of all groups, impervious to the judgments of others.

In other terms, histrionics do not really count. Telling the world that you are the greatest does not make you the greatest. You only save face when you do something, when you succeed at something, despite it all. And when other people recognize your achievements, and see you as a member of the group. 

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

The Los Angeles Blame Game

As Los Angeles was being consumed by fire, the politicians were out and around explaining that it is not their fault. From Governor Gavin Newsom to Mayor Karen Bass, these political lightweights have refused to accept responsibility. 

Of course, California is the bluest of blue states. It is difficult to find a Republican with any power over local governance. So the political grandees have decided to blame it all on climate change.

Or should we say, global warming.

I will make an exception for one Jen Psaki, who has claimed that it’s all Donald Trump’s fault. Once a flack, always a flack. Pathetic.

The Democratic left has preferred in most cases to blame it on the climate. Then again, how does it happen that climate change is advancing so rapidly when the rulers of California have instituted policy after policy to control it. 

True green believers would have it that climate change is not merely responsible for the Los Angeles inferno; it is also responsible for the hurricanes that appeared in Florida and North Carolina recently.

And yet, we recall Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis taking charge of the recovery situation before the hurricane hit the west coast of his state. How does that compare to the dimwitted mayor of Los Angeles who chooses, at a time when she knows that the fire situation is about to become apocalyptic, to take off on a junket to Ghana?

John Nolte offers a point-by-point ironic refutation of the attempt to blame it all on climate change.

In his words:

 Climate Change failed to clear the brush. 

Climate Change failed to do controlled burns. 

Climate Change failed to build the reservoirs voters demanded in a referendum about a decade ago. 

Climate Change cut the fire department budget. 

Climate Change forgot to ensure the hydrants would pump water. 

Climate Change didn’t create a power grid that could be shut off in emergency areas. 

Climate Change stopped the city from hiring firefighters based on merit.

So, climate activists had their way with California. The result is only too evident.

Chris Martz argues that said environmentalists are not serious people. As though you did not know that.

Climate activists … never criticize China or India for emitting CO₂ without bound. 

They don’t support nuclear power.  

The only mitigation techniques they support is the decarbonization of western economies. 

They neglect urban planning, zoning / building codes, beach nourishment, better forest management and water resource management

Climate activism is a reconstituted Romantic attack on the Industrial Revolution and free enterprise capitalism. The notion that nature is pristine and fundamentally good, or was such before human beings got their hands on it, is a reactionary attack on modern economies. 

Nowhere is this belief held more fervently than in Hollywood, the creature of an alternative reality, dedicated to producing a fictional alternative to reality? One might recall the painting of an apocalyptic fire that animates Nathaniel West’s novel, The Day of the Locust.

Finally, Leighton Woodhouse has suggested that the fire was no one’s fault. Except, that is, for the people who chose to build in a place where they should not have built:

But the fundamental engine for these disasters is the simple, physical reality of California, which prevailed before any of us were born: We built a massive civilization in a place where fire is as much a part of the natural habitat as summer rains are in the east.

Back in the day one Donald Trump advised California Governor Newsom to take charge of fire prevention. He told Newsom that he should clear the underbrush and to assure the availability of sufficient water to fight fires.

Naturally, Newsom ignored the advice. He is so smart that he would never take advice from a Republican, no less a MAGA Republican.

It’s easier to blame the weather.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for fee.

Contributing Sunday

With a warm welcome to new subscribers. 

As has become habitual, I pause on Sunday. It’s that time of the week, a time for reflection and contemplation. It also allows my readers to catch up on posts that they might have missed during the week.

I would like to think that among the topics for deep reflection is this one. Considering the time and effort it takes to write these posts, one believes that they are worthy of compensation.

Thus, in place of a tithe, I make a humble request for donations. 

I have been posting on this blog and Substack for many years now. I could not have done it without the financial support of you, my readers.

If you would like to show appreciation and to encourage me to continue, a good way would be by making a financial contribution. Gratitude is a virtue. 

If you would like to donate please make use of the Paypal button on this page. If you prefer, you can mail a check to 310 East 46th St. 24H. New York, NY 10017.

I’m counting on you. 

If you have already donated, please pass the word along to your friends, family, neighbors, associates and colleagues.

Thank  you in advance.

Saturday Miscellany

First, as for what could possibly go wrong, consider this. The three leaders of the Los Angeles Fire Department are all lesbians named Kristen. Better yet, their background is as paramedics.

Second, Once-Great Britain has surpassed Russia in jailing people for incorrect speech.

There were 98 convictions for internet speech in Russia from 2007-2018.

During the same period, the UK had 1400 convictions for internet speech. —

Keep in mind, this predates the current Labour government’s effort to shut down any and all unnice words about Islam.

Third, keep in mind, Britain’s Parliament has just voted down a proposal to investigate the gang rapes and sex trafficking of British schoolgirls by Pakistani migrants.

But, it is going to investigate Elon Musk for drawing attention to the issue.

As for popular opinion, we read this:

76% of British people want a national inquiry into the rape gangs and 77% want to deport dual nationals who are convicted of grooming children 

In a democratic nation the will of the people would be respected. Not in Once-Great Britain.

Fourth, once upon a time the world’s large banks signed up for a Net Zero admissions goal. Nothing quite like tanking your economy in the name of climate change.

Convened by the UN Environment Programme finance initiative but led by banks, the NZBA commits members to align their lending, investment and capital markets activities with net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or earlier.

Now, the winds have shifted and the world’ largest banks are abandoning the Net Zero folly:

The six biggest banks in the US have all quit the global banking industry’s net zero target-setting group, with the imminent inauguration of Donald Trump as president expected to bring political backlash against climate action.

JP Morgan is the latest to withdraw from the UN-sponsored net zero banking alliance (NZBA), following Citigroup, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs. All six have left since the start of December.

“A few years ago, when climate change was at the front of the political agenda, the banks were keen to boast of their commitments to act on climate. Now that the political pendulum has swung in the other direction, suddenly acting on climate does not seem so important for the Wall Street lenders.”

Fifth, now they tell us. A study conducted in Sweden has discovered that when the female member of a marriage makes more than the male member, the result is-- worse mental health for the male member. 

The New York Post reports the shocking findings:

In their study, the team analysed the incomes and mental health of heterosexual couples in Sweden. 

They found that women becoming the breadwinner resulted in a higher risk of mental health issues for both members of the couple - but especially for husbands. 

'The share of couples where the wife outearns the husband is increasing globally,' the researchers said. 

'Crossing the threshold where the wife starts earning more significantly increases the probability of receiving a mental health diagnosis. 

'In the most restrictive specification, the likelihood increases by approximately 8% for the whole sample and by 11% for men.' 

Sixth, meanwhile in Argentina, everyone’s favorite libertarian president, Javier Milei,  is doing rather well. 

Mario Nawfal reports:

ECONOMISTS WHO PREDICTED MILEI'S 'DEVASTATION' NOW AWKWARDLY QUIET AS ARGENTINA REBOUNDS Turns out the "crazy" guy with a chainsaw knew what he was doing. After experts warned Milei would destroy Argentina, his 30% spending cuts and mass bureaucrat firings led to the first budget surplus since 2008. Even more shocking? His 50% approval rating suggests Argentinians prefer smaller government and 2.4% inflation over socialism's 118% interest rates. Who knew? 

Seventh, over at Facebook there’s a veritable cultural revolution going on. It’s not just about silencing the fact checkers-- point that has seriously upset our president-- but the company has put an end to its diversity programs:

Newsmax reports:

Meta Platforms is ending its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, including those for hiring, training and picking suppliers, it said in a memo to employees posted on an internal company forum Friday.

The move comes in the run-up to U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration, as the company attempts to mend relations with the leader who has criticized its political content policies and threatened its CEO with imprisonment.

"The legal and policy landscape surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the United States is changing," Janelle Gale, Vice President of Human Resources at Meta, said in the memo, which was seen by Reuters.

And that’s not all. Another report suggested that Meta is removing transgender and nonbinary themes from its Messenger chat app. 

In a final insult to Tim Walz, Meta has been removing tampons from the men’s restrooms.

A cultural revolution I call it.

Eighth, Americans are nothing if not neighborly. You don’t even have to live in the neighborhood. The New York Fire Department offered to help the LAFD with the Los Angeles fires. Mayor Karen Bass turned down the offer.

The New York Post reports:

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass rebuffed an offer by the FDNY to help try to contain the area’s deadly fires — even though California officials have said they don’t have enough firefighters themselves, The Post has learned.

New York City fire Commissioner Robert Tucker made the helpful overture to the embattled Bass in recent days, as five blazes rage around Los Angeles and its suburbs, killing at least 10 people and destroying thousands of homes and businesses, sources said Friday.

JetBlue even offered to pay for the city smoke-eaters’ flights across the country from the Big Apple to Los Angeles, sources said.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

Anti-Semitism on Campus

Just in case you were wondering how it happened that so many of today’s undergraduates have become anti-Semitic Hamas supporters, the answer is clear for all to see. The national association of history professors is about to proclaim itself champions of the Palestinian cause. 

What can we do about the rot that has infected the minds of humanities professors? One thing that students can do is to avoid these majors. When it comes to history, approximately 1.2% of American college students choose it as a major. This does not tell us how many students take history courses. And it does not tell us what is happening in other humanities courses.

That means, the history major is on life support. Tenure track and other jobs are disappearing. Could it be that the profession has sabotaged itself by allowing itself to be taken over by activist professors?

So suggests Pamela Paul, though she is far too kind to the professors who are now standing up to defend education in Gaza. One suspects that they thought it would be innocent to defend the effort to educate children. It’s a nice way to dissimulate their anti-Semitism.

You may or may not know that the Palestinian movement promotes anti-Semitic propaganda in the guise of education. But, surely the group of professional historians does not know it.

And, as Paul points out, they do not know that Hamas hides out in schools, the better to avoid the IDF. Using civilians as human shields is obviously a war crime, as you know.

And these historians do not seem to care that the so-called Palestinian movement began as a pro-Nazi movement, led by Yasser Arafat’s uncle. One would expect historians to know something about the history, but alas, such is not the case.

So, these ignorant historians have adopted a Neo-Nazi cause, the better to foster anti-Semitism. Paul writes:

But the most pressing question at the annual conference of the American Historical Association, which I just attended in New York, had nothing to do with any of this. It wasn’t even about the study or practice of history. Instead, it was about what was called Israel’s scholasticide — defined as the intentional destruction of an education system — in Gaza, and how the A.H.A., which represents historians in academia, K-12 schools, public institutions and museums in the United States, should respond.

What are these supposedly professional historians promoting:

First, a condemnation of Israeli violence that the group says undermines Gazans’ right to education. Second, the demand for an immediate cease-fire. Finally, and perhaps most unusually for an academic organization, a commitment to “form a committee to assist in rebuilding Gaza’s educational infrastructure.”

The resolution passed. It was not even close:

It’s perhaps not surprising, then, that the vote passed overwhelmingly, 428 to 88. Chants of “Free, free Palestine!” broke out as the result was announced.

There is something tone deaf and almost blatantly stupid about the historians taking a stand for Neo-Nazism:

Finally, the resolution substantiates and hardens the perception that academia has become fundamentally politicized at precisely the moment Donald Trump, hostile toward academia, is entering office and already threatening to crack down on left-wing activism in education.

One remarks that the titans of business, especially those who are involved in high tech, have reconciled themselves to the new Trump presidency. You might consider it good business. Or you might believe that Mark Zuckerberg of Meta has simply seen the light.

The associated historians have failed to read the room. They belong to a dying profession, one that is offering college courses that no one wants to take, and they have decided to compound their error by going all-in in favor of indoctrination.

They want to use their positions to militate for  free Palestine. They seem blissfully unaware of the fact that in a Palestinian state, one that is run according to Sharia Law, there is no freedom. Gays are executed; women are murdered in so-called honor killings. 

And yet, their consuming obsession is to blame their failures on Jews. The least we can say, as Paul suggests, is that they are damaging their own reputations and undermining their professional credibility.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

The Bonfire of the Vanities

Los Angeles is burning. The Daily Mail calls it the bonfire of the vanities, and  I cannot beat that headline. If you would like an alternative, try: Recipe for Disaster or The Fire This Time..

Let’s see. The mayor of Los Angeles, Karen Bass, is off in Ghana celebrating… who knows what. She put her own signature on the problem by cutting the budget of the fire department. Great job KB.

When journalists cornered her yesterday to ask whether she regretted cutting the fire department budget, Bass said nothing. 

And let’s not ignore the fact that the current head of the Los Angeles Fire Department is a woman, by the name of Kristen Crowley. Among her innovations has been changing the name of the girls’ youth recruitment program from “Girl’s Camp” to “Camp S.P.A.R. K.” Presumably the new name would create more gender inclusive space.

Among the inconvenient realities in today’s firefighting in L.A. is this: the hydrants are dry. This has happened because the city refused to fill the reservoirs.

California voters approved a plan to build water storage facilities. The state has failed to build anything and the runoff from mountains and streams goes straight into the ocean. It had something to do with the existential necessity to save the smelt.

As for the need to have planes to help the effort, the story is no better. Ari Hoffman reports:

States including California, Washington & Oregon refused to fund the Wildfire-fighting 747 Supertanker in 2021 so it stopped operating Gavin Newsom & Jay Inslee were governors at the time

And also, the Biden administration cancelled controlled burns, the kind that are crucial to preventing such fires.

We would like to think that the people whose homes and memories have been incinerated were at least covered by insurance. Not so fast. When the insurance companies tried to raise their rates a couple of years ago, the state government refused. So the companies withdrew from California. That means, many of the homes affected by the fires were not insured.

Laura Powell wrote:

Last year, State Farm canceled 1,600 policies in Pacific Palisades because the state would not allow them to raise premiums enough to cover their exposure. The affected homeowners would then likely have to rely on the state-run FAIR Plan, an expensive last-resort insurance program. But the FAIR Plan reportedly only had a surplus of $200 million as of April 2024 and was likely to become insolvent if a catastrophic event occurred.

We do not know what started the fires, but homeless encampments were responsible for more than 10,000 such fires in 2023.

The inimitable Libs of TikTok offers this summation:

Don’t you hate it when climate change appoints a DEI hire to run the fire dept, gives away fire equipment to Ukraine, stops critical controlled burns, defunds the fire dept, refuses to build more water reservoirs and store water, cancels fire insurance, mismanages forests and brush, and fires firefighters for refusing an experimental vaccine?

So, the LA FD is led by women. Evidently, the DEI program is not working out very well. Colin Wright recommends a return to sanity, to male firefighters:

Firefighters should be mostly male. The hoses & equipment are extremely heavy, and firefighting can involve carrying incapacitated people out of burning buildings. While some females are capable of doing that, the vast majority are not. Sex differences are real, and they matter.

And then there were the immortal words of California governor Gavin Newsom-- a man whose political future just went up in smoke:

April, 2021. Gavin Newsom explains that wildfire preparedness will be better now that Biden is in office instead of Trump.

Famous last words.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

Wednesday Potpourri

First, another sign that DEI initiatives are being rolled back by corporate America. The New York Post has the story:

In the aftermath of George Floyd’s killing in 2020, investor Mellody Hobson recalls frequent calls from directors at Fortune 500 companies for references to diverse candidates for boards. Now, she says, it’s “very sporadic.”

“During the George Floyd days there were dozens and dozens of them,” said Hobson, the co-CEO of Ariel Investments who also serves on the boards of JPMorgan and Starbucks. “Those requests have dramatically dropped.”

Over the past year, Reuters and other media have reported that a backlash against diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies by some conservative activists has sapped corporate enthusiasm for them.

Among Russell 3000 companies, the number of new black directors fell to 12% in 2024 from 26% two years ago, according to the study by business research group the Conference Board and data firm ESGAUGE. At the same time, the number of new white directors bounced back to 69%, up from historic lows of 52% in 2022.

Second, speaking of ineptitude, the Biden administration has achieved the highest level of foreign policy incompetence. Its effort to be even-handed in the conflict between Israel and Hamas obviously prolonged the warfare and the pain.

Legal Insurrection reports, via the New York Times:

U.S. Secretary of State Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, on Saturday made a stunning admission explaining how U.S. pressure on Israel emboldened the terrorist group Hamas and made it toughen its stance on the issue of hostage release.

Whenever there was open disagreement between the U.S. and Israel, Hamas backtracked on hostage release, the outgoing secretary of state acknowledged.

“Whenever there has been public daylight between the United States and Israel and the perception that pressure was growing on Israel,” he said an interview with The New York Times. 

“[W]e’ve seen it: Hamas has pulled back from agreeing to a ceasefire and the release of hostages.”

Now they tell us.

Third, Sean Davis of The Federalist offers some pithy commentary on the passing scene:

Fidel Castro’s bastard son was forced to resign as prime minister in Canada, America is about to snag Greenland in the transfer portal, and Donald Trump’s election victory was just certified in Congress. 2025 is going to be awesome!

Fourth, the educational apocalypse is upon us. American schoolchildren continue to fall behind. David Goldman explains:

Unbelievable. In 2009, 34% of US eighth graders tested at “proficient” (26%) or “advanced” (8%) on the National Assessment of Education Progress test. By 2020, that had fallen to just 24%, with 20% at “proficient” and 4% at “advanced,” according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

Fifth, in Once-Great Britain the debate over Pakistani rape gangs is proceeding apace.  Apparently, there is plenty of blame to go around.

June Slater offers this summary:

The Labour government under the leadership of Gordon Brown claimed that under aged girls who were the victims of degenerate Pakistani controlled child rape gangs had made a lifestyle choice. How does anyone at 11 or 12 choose to be gang raped, urinated in for refusing sex and raped with a broken bottle as a punishment for begging them to stop, leaving her unable to have children make a lifestyle choice? Votes matter more than ruined lives?

“We believe they have made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour and therefore it is not for your police officers to get involved"

The Home Office circulated this memo under Prime Minister Gordon Brown in respect to the victims of the rape gangs.

Sixth,  Martin Daubney offers this summary:

The scandal is already reshaping British politics. It’s not just about the heinous nature of the crimes. It’s that every level of the British system is implicated in the cover-up.

Social workers were intimidated into silence. Local police ignored, excused, and even abetted pedophile rapists across dozens of cities. 

Senior police and Home Office officials deliberately avoided action in the name of maintaining what they called “community relations.” 

Local councilors and Members of Parliament rejected pleas for help from the parents of raped children. Charities, NGOs, and Labour MPs accused those who discussed the scandal of racism and Islamophobia. 

The media mostly ignored or downplayed the biggest story of their lifetimes. Zealous in their incuriosity, much of Britain’s media elite remained barnacled to the bubble of Westminster politics and its self-serving priorities.

They did this to defend a failed model of multiculturalism, and to avoid asking hard questions about failures of immigration policy and assimilation. They did this because they were afraid of being called racist or Islamophobic. They did this because Britain’s traditional class snobbery had fused with the new snobbery of political correctness.

All of which is why no one knows precisely how many thousands of young girls were raped in how many towns across Britain since the 1970s."

Seventh, the blame also extends to the Tory party leadership.

Mario Nawfal reports:

Labour suppresses inquiries while Conservatives dodge responsibility. For 14 years, the Tories had power to investigate rape gangs targeting children. They didn't. 

Now Starmer, who was Director of Public Prosecutions during the crisis, blocks a statutory inquiry. This isn't incompetence - it's institutional cowardice. 

Eighth, as for Prime Minister Keir Starmer, he offered a series of rationalizations for his own delinquent behavior. Carl Benjamin reports:

This is Keir Starmer's response to @elonmusk calling out his part in covering up the rape gang scandal. Listen to it carefully and think about what he's saying here. 

1. Starmer doesn't seem to know why Tommy Robinson is in jail. He seems to be referring to a previous conviction from 6 years ago in Huddersfield, which in itself was certainly a politically motivated reason to put Tommy behind bars then. This happens so often it's easy to get them mixed up. 

2. Starmer dismisses these valid critiques as merely the "playbook" of the "far right". He did the same thing after the fear and frustration boiled over after the Southport Massacre, where a Muslim radical stabbed 8 children, killing 3. He has no sympathy whatsover for the English working class, and stigmatises them with the "far right" label as outside of the bounds of his consideration. 

3. Starmer plays the victim for both himself and Jess Phillips. Instead of accepting that he and his government have done wrong here, he instead claims that "threats" have been sent and this means he doesn't have to tolerate any criticism of his handling of the rape gangs. 

4. Starmer finishes by saying that the government will "will get on with the job of protecting victims, including child sexual abuse, mandatory reporting, accelerating the process", but this would not have been necessary if it wasn't for their own attempt to cover up the story and dismiss the victims in the first place, which is essentially an admission that Elon and Tommy are right, and if they hadn't kicked up a fuss about this, nothing would have changed. 

The entire way Starmer has handled this is disgraceful, in my view. He is acting as if preventing the rape of children, and bringing justice to those victims of rape gangs, is somehow a partisan issue that only the "far right" would be concerned about and that this is a "bandwagon", and not a legitimate crime that has happened against the British people. Utterly vile.

Ninth, as for a good summation, consider these words, by MP Robert Jenrick:

… to sustain order in multicultural Britain, the state considered it necessary to apply the law selectively. For decades the most appalling crimes from diaspora groups were legalised and actively covered up to prevent disorder. The rule of law was abandoned to sustain the myth that diversity is our strength, destroying the lives of thousands of working class white girls in the process. This scandal starts with the onset of mass migration. This appalling affair is the final nail in the coffin for liberals who cling to the argument that Britain is an integration success story. Mass migration must end immediately and the foreign nationals prosecuted for their monstrous crimes must be deported - no ifs, no buts”.

Naturally, many on the right have been suggesting that Jenrick should be expelled from the Tory party.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.