Why Rachel Johnson Sweats
The Walls Are Closing In For The Queen of Bad Takes.
Sigh.
How does she keep getting away with it?
Listen.
I’m all for freedom of expression.
I’m all for contrarianism.
But.
Johnson’s statements about Ghislaine Maxwell have a deeply, deeply unsettling quality… they display a myopic ignorance about the suffering of others, a poisonous moral indifference typical of a self-serving elite, the very people who run our world.
What I see is someone who has plenty of pity for members of her caste, while sparing none at all for ordinary people throughout the years of her brother’s austerity.
I’ve written before about how far she’ll go to defend impropriety when it comes to members of her own family, including her father’s ‘‘spot of bother.’’
I’m going to get on to her recent, very telling comments on The Daily Heretic, in which she goes over her role in the Neil Gaiman allegations. I’m going to then try and make sense of how someone can have such a generous attitude to one Ghislaine Maxwell, while obviously scraping the bottom of the barrel to cast judgement on Neil Gaiman.
There is far more to it at play than meets the eye.
Regarding Maxwell she wrote in the Spectator article:
As a fresher I wandered into Balliol JCR one day in search of its subsidised breakfast granola-and-Nescafé offering and found a shiny glamazon with naughty eyes holding court astride a table, a high-heeled boot resting on my brother Boris’s thigh.
To Johnson she’s not a predator, someone who profits off child molestation, a human trafficker - she’s ‘naughty’, glamorous, a cheeky minx who breaks all the rules. Rachel is in fact deferring to Oxford Royalty, as Ghislaine’s father even left his namesake in the Robert Maxwell Fellowship in Politics.
She digs her hole ever deeper:
It’s hard not to feel a batsqueak of pity for Ghislaine Maxwell — 500 days and counting in solitary confinement.
And Rachel Johnson and Ghislaine Maxwell have a lot in common.
