The Wild, Wild World of Tabloid Hate

I swear to God that the UK's right-wing press are just getting stupider.  Just the other day I saw headline in one of that amorphous group of reactionary tabloids which, for ease of reference, we'll just refer to as the 'Daily Hate', trying to stir outrage at the idea of British down and outs sleeping rough, while immigrants were being temporarily housed in a nearby hotel.  I mean, really?  Do they honestly think that if such hotels weren't full of asylum seekers and the like, they'd be happily opening their doors to the homeless?  (Although, of course, local authorities do put up some local families in damp-ridden, cockroach infested and filthy cheap hotels).  Yeah, I'm sure if some unkempt homeless guy rocked up to reception, stinking of piss and booze, they'd be offering him the keys to the Bridal Suite.  Let's not forget that these newspapers suddenly concerned for the plight of the homeless are the self same newspapers who have spent a lot of time vilifying the poor, condemning the amount of benefits they supposedly claim.  But hey, at least they are British homeless, rather than foreign loafers come here to leech off of our system.  Because xenophobia always trumps contempt for the poor in the tabloids' hierarchy of hate.  That said, asylum seekers and immigrants are both foreign and poor, so combine both traits into one group that the right-wing press can utterly despise.  Which means, in the twisted thinking of these tabloids, everything is their fault, except of course the stuff that is the fault of the homeless, benefit claimants, students, single mothers or the Labour party.

But when it comes to right-wing media idiocy, there can be little doubt that GB News represents the ultimate distillation of their rancid, hate-driven stupidity.  Before I managed to block them as a source on the news aggregator that is the MSN homepage, I recall one of their screaming headlines being along the lines that the Labour government was planning to give away more territory in the Chagos deal than was being lost to coastal erosion in mainland Britain.  What!?  I mean, honestly, what the fuck does this even mean?  That we should somehow retain an overseas territory whose native population we evicted so that we could lease it to the US in order to compensate for coastal erosion?  How would that even work?  Perhaps they thought that those homeless people sleeping rough while asylum seekers were being put up in hospitals could be relocated to the Chagos islands?  Or that the people who saw their homes fall into the sea as the result of coastal erosion could be compensated with land in the Chagos islands?  Maybe they could all be allocated plots of land there where they could build new houses.  Either that, or we could erect entire housing estates there - albeit on a different bit of the islands to that homeless hostel.  Better still, why not just send all those asylum seekers occupying those hotels there?  Then the people who lost their homes to the sea could move into the hotels and the homeless people, well, maybe we could send them to areas where there is coastal erosion and hope that they fall into the sea.  Because, believe me, in the wild, wild world of GB News, all of these are ideas which could become the subject of serious discussions by the likes of Nigel Farage or Jacob Rees-Mogg.  Sometimes, I despair at the state of British journalism...