The Scottish Tory who has perfected the art of 'vice-signalling'

The Herald Scotland

19 hours ago

I believe Fraser, like myself, is straight. Being straight, I tend to leave it to the LGBT community to decide what's homophobic. Fraser, however, seems to believe that including trans people is a homophobic act.
It rather bewildered Scotland's LGBT community. Certainly, when I asked friends who are gay - ranging in age from 25 to 82 - they were mystified by Fraser suddenly becoming a warrior against homophobia.
In 2014, when the Scottish Parliament voted for gay marriage, Fraser was one of just 18 MSPs opposed.
Last year, whilst running for leadership of the Scottish Tory Party, Fraser said he's still opposed to gay marriage. It's due to his religious beliefs, apparently.
Still, none of this stopped him shooting his gob off in a thoroughly attention-seeking fashion which seemed designed to both offend and be unnecessarily cruel. Which is vice-signalling in a nutshell.
Though maybe Fraser had different conversations than I with his own gay friends that justified his actions?
Anas Sarwar, realising that nothing matters so much as thirsting to be the centre of attention, got in on the vice-signalling act.
He accused John Swinney of running a 'disgraceful' campaign. That's the same John Swinney who defended Sarwar when Nigel Farage's Reform unleashed 'racist' attack adverts against him.
Now clearly, nobody needs to be thanked for calling out bigotry, but it's pretty difficult to see how Swinney ran a disgraceful campaign whilst simultaneously having Sarwar's back.
Perhaps, being raised rich and well-connected insulates Sarwar from silly notions like decency and courtesy?
Evidently, Scottish MSPs are mere minnows compared to the King and the Kong of vice-signalling: the politicians of London and Washington.
Reform's newest MP Sarah Pochin wasted no time getting straight to vice-signalling by resurrecting the 'ban the burqa' culture war.
Kemi Badenoch clearly felt left out of the cruelty derby so quickly told the world that she won't speak to women who wear burqas in her constituency surgery. How thoroughly democratic of her.
Badenoch has her work cut out though. One of the nastiest characters in British politics wants her job: Robert Jenrick, who as Tory immigration minister ordered the removal of cartoon murals in a centre for refugee kids in case they found it too welcoming.
Gleeful bullying, sneering mockery and spiteful grandstanding are everywhere you look these days. Among the New Right, dead-naming trans people seems to be a modern-day Olympic sport, and laughing at poverty positively required.
God help us, one American-Israeli "comedian" even seeks laughs from dead Palestinian babies.
Donald Trump (Image: Ap)
The entire Trump presidency - which seems rapidly shifting towards outright militarised authoritarianism - has turned vice-signalling into an art form. The White House puts out tweets designed explicitly to hurt, mock and humiliate.
One featured a group of handcuffed people being deported to the soundtrack "Na, na, hey, hey, kiss him goodbye" by Bananarama. It takes quite the talent to be both ghoulish and childish simultaneously.
I reckon there's a few psychological assumptions we can make about what's happening. First, some people are just nasty b******s and they like wearing the nasty b*****d badge.
They're like the kid you went to school with who had no friends but could sometimes be found torturing cats down by the riverbank.
Most vice-signallers, though, probably aren't raving psychopaths. They're the more interesting, from a clinical point of view anyway. Why do they act in ways that many of us never would?
Well, for a start, more and more people are beginning to act like this. The anonymity and immediacy of social media both protects the goon squad and encourages their behaviour. It's like the old adage: "If everyone is doing it, then why can't I?"
Monkey see, monkey do. The more blood-soaked the online world becomes the more people want blood. Sometimes literally. I rarely use Twitter today, but when I do I'm stunned by the levels of actual, physical violence on display.
Then there's the fact that a large minority of people are rather pathetic and attracted to bullies and thugs. It's likely a sign of their own psychological and physical weakness.
They see someone kicking the daylights out of an innocent person and reckon it's much safer to cheer on the attack than step in and do the right thing. To step in requires courage and risks them becoming the target.
On a deeper level though, perhaps humanity is simply subconsciously at the end of its tether? We can all behave appallingly when we're tired and scared. Who amongst us hasn't had a terrible day and then acted like a petty idiot to someone who didn't deserve it, taking our misery out on the innocent?
Just look at this sulphurous world. We're living on a planet that's nuked up to the eyeballs with wars of profound brutality raging and the people in charge either don't care or seem out of their minds.
The Earth is being destroyed, as we level rain forests and gobble up resources. We're wilfully allowing climate change to ruin the future for our children. We know the next virus could decimate us. We've no clue how to fix poverty, but each day there's more billionaires.
Is it any wonder that cruelty is in fashion? Being a b*****d is the new black because as a species we're terrified of the future and hate our failures and what we've become.