Archived version: https://archive.ph/enAye
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20231104201944/https://www.euronews.com/2023/11/04/uk-home-secretary-wants-to-ban-homeless-people-from-living-in-tents-calling-it-lifestyle-c
It's really confusing that a soulless husk like Suella Braverman can actually get voted into parliament.
What kind of psychopath looks at this lady and says "yeah she's got my best interests in mind and totally wouldn't sell me as pig food if she could get away with it"?
Or is "would sell me as pig food" a selling point as an English politician? Like she can make the hard choice required by the office or something?
At this point, for the needless cruelty to make sense to me, it has to be a sex thing. They have to be getting off on it. It doesn’t make sense otherwise.
I get that under capitalism a underclass of people living truly miserable destitute lives has to exist to scare the working class into accepting worse conditions. As all those worse conditions have to be is just good enough to keep the worker out of the underclass to be attractive.
But creating a system where these people have to exist as a societal tool for discipline and then calling the people forced by the system into this misery as taking a ‘lifestyle choice’ as an excuse to take away what little shelter they have is beyond cruel.
How is it a lifestyle choice? Boomers really think housing is just for free and waiting to be claimed, and huge swathes of people are saying "no thanks, I'd rather sleep on the street."
It’s a lifestyle choice to live in a tent and not invade some rich persons mansion.
